Thanks for the reply’s everyone. That cleared it up for sure. I will go
ahead and build the T to cavity cables to one electrical wave length for
the other band. And is that ¼ wave plus velocity factor of cable? Which
will be FSJ1. 
 
Here is some more detail on the system. It will go in stages. The final
stage will be this remote receive setup with a UHF link on the bottom of
the tower to the transmitter site. Also toying with a VOIP link with UHF
as a failsafe. At this point the receivers are on separate antennas at
the top of the tower, with 2 bandpass Sinclair 1-150-1S7 cavity’s on the
VHF, and one big Wacom cavity on the UHF receiver. The remote TX site
hasn’t been installed yet (waiting to find a MSR2000 UHF RX board for
this divorced VHF TX site) so the transmitter is temporally at this site
also. There are two bandpass cavity’s DB4001’s on this Mastr II
transmitter with the antenna 40-50 feet down from the receive antenna.
Sensitivity is shocking good right now with this setup. Very little RX
loss, and very little desens. 
 
Will the receivers stay on one frequency as in a repeater 
receiver or do you need to move around each band a bit?
 
Yes they will stay put.
 
How much other RF is around? ... Does the site have a lot 
of transmitters and are any of the high power monsters as 
in the case of paging or broadcast?
 
None in these bands! :-) But wireless ISP I’ve found to be very noisy
allover the place there. 50Mhz and up!
 
Thanks again everyone! 
 
 
 
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of skipp025
Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2010 4:29 PM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Dual receivers on one antenna for RX
only site
 
  

> "Ross Johnson" <kc7...@...> wrote:
> Hello to the group, 
> My name is Ross KC7RJK This is my first post. 

Hi Ross, 

My name is skipp and I'm a junkoholic... 

"hi skipp" 

and I %#*^&.... scuse me, lost my mind for a moment. 
Moving along 

> Most questions are answered from that amazing and up 
> to date web site! I thank you all involved very very 
> much for that. 

We don't play up the RB web site nearly enough... we also 
don't let Kevin, Scott or Mike run with scissors. 

> Well here's the question I've found little and conflicting 
> info on the web about. So feel free to point me the right 
> way here.

Simple, go west... better weather and less humidity. 

> Can a dualband antenna VHF/UHF for RX ONLY be fed to 
> two receivers one VHF, one UHF, without a quote "duplexer" 
> using a T instead? 

Of course, but it may not be the best situation. 

> Here's the idea. This is a remote RX site. The idea is 
> to run something like a beefed up X500 dualbander at tower 
> top, then 7/8 hardline 100 feet down to the receivers. 
> Both receivers will have one or two bandpass cavities
> inline before the T. Would a duplexer be necessary in 
> this case. Or could it be done with proper cable lengths 
> and a T?

Doesn't even need the special cable lengths.... but there is 
a reason for doing everything and here comes questions 101. 

Will the receivers stay on one frequency as in a repeater 
receiver or do you need to move around each band a bit? 

How much other RF is around? ... does the site have a lot 
of transmitters and are any of the high power monsters as 
in the case of paging or broadcast? 

If you don't have a lot of adjacent frequency operation 
going on there are two other options to consider. One is 
the Diamond or Comet type of band splitter, which actually 
would take the place of your T and be much better. 

Model CF-4160K 

http://www.universa
<http://www.universal-radio.com/CATALOG/hamantm/cduplex.html>
l-radio.com/CATALOG/hamantm/cduplex.html

And another very nice option would be the DCI dual band 
filter Model: DCI-146-444-DB. 

http://www.dci. <http://www.dci.ca/?Section=Products&SubSection=Amateur>
ca/?Section=Products&SubSection=Amateur 

And you can use the plain T, a more traditional signal 
divider and various combination of band-pass cavity layouts. 

> Thanks for your time and for the probably obvious 
> answer I'm not sure of.
> Regards
> Ross KC7RJK 

be more worried when you feel sure of yourself. 

cheers, 
skipp 

Reply via email to