Exactly. This is ham radio, after all. Keep it simple and cheap. Why pay out a monthly fee? Use that money to save for a new antenna.
Chuck WB2EDV ----- Original Message ----- From: "Joe" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, January 17, 2010 4:35 AM Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Can a cell phone be used instead of a phone line for repeater control? > Since we lost our phone line for control of one of our repeaters we now > use a 440 control receiver. That fulfills the requirement of control on > a frequency above 222MHz. But. most of our control activity is done on > the repeater input frequency. 440MHz is our primary control, and 2 > meters is our secondary control. > > 73, Joe, K1ike > > MCH wrote: >> More reliable, but from far fewer locations due to limited coverage of >> the receiver (vs a nationwide Cell network) and the mandate of having a >> 440 HT or mobile on you (as opposed to a cellphone which is much >> smaller). I would also have to say the cell is more secure. >> >> Joe M. >> >> Chuck Kelsey wrote: >> >>> Why not just use a 440 control receiver? >>> >>> Chuck >>> WB2EDV >>>
