This brings up the question of how one actually does testing of a D-Star 
system.  So far it seems that trail and error is the only way things 
actually get  measured.  Having read that the D-Star boxes Icom sells are 
little more than mobiles in a box I am wondering if it is possible to set 
the internals to an analog state to do desense testing?

Milt
N3LTQ


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "atms169" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2009 11:28 PM
Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Desense on High Power Linear Repeater?


>I have opened both repeaters.  The VHF already had the blue hardline in it, 
>the UHF however I replaced with superflex.
>
> I may try something different.  Hardline up the tower and for a patch cord 
> (about 10 feet) up the mast I'll use superflex.  I'll have to play around 
> and see what I have still.
>
> The preamp has made a big impression on the RX without the amp.  I have 
> not tried the system without it and the amp at the same time.  Might be 
> worth a shot.
>
> I don't have any test equipment that would work for the digital dstar so 
> it's more of a trial and error thing.
>
>
> --- In [email protected], "wa1nh" <wa...@...> wrote:
>>
>> I am going to ask a question that might sound stupid but, based upon 
>> Icom's ignorance, I need to ask.
>> Did you ever open the repeater case on the 2m repeater and replace the 
>> rg-58 patch cables that are zip tied to each other to connect the rf 
>> modules to the rear of the case before adding your preamp?  Our local 
>> repeater guys had serious desense and ended up replacing the junk cables 
>> with rg393.........And you may find that the receiver sensitivity is 
>> closer to 0.6 uV.
>> IF you insist on using the preamp, I would suggest using a decade box to 
>> attenuate after the preamp.....changing the attenuation periodically to 
>> get it to a better level. +18dB is a little too much for any receiver.
>>
>> Jason, WA1NH
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

Reply via email to