> "Jim Miller WB5OXQ in Waco" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I am curious why anyone in modern times wants to use 
> carrier squelch? 

Simple Answer... If you can operate Carrier Squelch without 
gremlins and alpha-hotel operators causing too much grief the 
repeater will tend to attract more visitors, users and become 
a more open meeting place. 

> All radios I have seen for years had ctcss standard.  

ZZzzzzzzzz...... 

> Also I am in Texas and the Texas VHF-FM society our 
> coordinator agency frowns on carrier squelch on vhf and 
> does not allow it on uhf.  

If your repeater has as a live control operator around, have 
him or her flip it into carrier squelch while they monitor the 
repeater operation. If there's no interference or co-channel 
operational problems you won't go to jail (Well, I'm not so 
sure about Texas these days...) you "probably won't go to jail". 

> I find ctcss much more sensitive than carrier squelch. 

Might be... but CSQ is more appealing to the casual general 
public. Is every Amateur Radio repeater frequency in Texas 
paired with a nearby co-channel box that none would operate 
in carrier squelch without grief?

> Just wondering?
> WB5OXQ

So am I ... have been for years. 

cheers,
s. 

Reply via email to