Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

[Kris Kirby]

On Mon, 19 Nov 2007, Paul Plack wrote:
> But if I hear one more salesman call 3 kHz / 8-bit digital sampling 
> "CD quality," I think I'll scream!

I wasn't aware there were that many salesmen that were hard of hearing 
or perhaps completely suckered in by whoever sold them thier stereo...

--
Kris Kirby, KE4AHR  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
But remember, with no superpowers comes no responsibility. 
--rly

[Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

[Paul Plack]

Interesting topic.

I'm alarmed at how quickly digital mobile phones have "dumbed down" consumer 
expectations for telephone audio quality. I figured Vonage would have tough 
going, but people were so used to crummy cellphone audio by then that they 
didn't even flinch. Now, Vonage is often better than PCS for audio.

I caught a YouTube demo of D-star from a ham club meeting in California, and 
everyone oohs and ahhs over the improved signal-to-noise ratio of the digital 
circuit. But it has that same, watery, low-grade MP3 sound that I find 
fatiguing in PCS calls. I hope there's always a home for analog narrowband FM 
repeaters.

Having said that, I feel a little like the diehard AM guys 40 years ago who 
protested SSB as "duck noise" on HF.

Maybe I'm now officially a dinosaur!

But if I hear one more salesman call 3 kHz / 8-bit digital sampling "CD 
quality," I think I'll scream!

73 - Paul, AE4KR

  - Original Message - 
  From: n9wys 
  To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 6:50 PM
  Subject: RE: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage


  No, Ron. I think it's more a factor of the "instant gratification"
  generation.

  If it doesn’t work perfectly - each time, every time - it's "no good." Cell
  phone technology has spoiled at lot of people out there - until cellular
  went all-digital. (Read: dropped calls and "under water" signals)

  Ah yes, the fun of repeater ownership/operation. 

  Mark - N9WYS

  -Original Message-
  From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com On Behalf Of Ron Wright

  Mark,

  Sounds as if these valley users are talking to a Motorola salesman. They
  promise 100% coverage. Of course once the system is in the truth comes out,
  hi.

  73, ron, n9ee/r

  ps I like Mot gear, just not their sales. Have uncle who is retired VP of
  sales of a company. He always noted that sales is 1/2 about the product and
  1/2 BS (not the degree). His sales record showed he knew what he was
  talking about, hi.

  >From: n9wys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
  >Date: 2007/11/18 Sun PM 09:46:48 CST
  >To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
  >Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

  > 
  >
  >I’ve got RM and used it for the pastseveral years. Quite a learning
  curve with it, but for a free piece ofsoftware it is very comprehensive and
  has served me very well!
  > 
  >Unfortunately, I need to attach thecoverage plots to a 2x4 so I can whack
  some of my users up-side the head withit in order to get the point across.
  They just don’t understand whythey can’t hear the repeater when
  they’re down in a river valley 25+miles from the repeater and there’s a
  ridge of land that rises above themin between the repeater and their
  location. I’ve tried to explainabout being in “the shadow of the
  repeater” but some just don’tseem to grasp the concept. (We’re
  talking UHF freqs here and FLATlands for the most part. The repeater
  antenna is 175 ft HAAT at the towersite…)
  > 
  >ARRRGH!!!
  > 
  >Mark – N9WYS
  > 
  >From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com On Behalf Of John Barrett
  >
  >
  >Propagation L something I’mlearned a lot about this last couple of weeks
  – neat app called RadioMobile I’ve been using to map out theoretical
  coverage at variouslocations where I may be asked to drop my portable
  repeater…. Makes me wishI had held out for a 60-75ft 3 section crank up to
  put on my trailer, or areally tall hill to park on J Unfortunately – not a
  lotta hills around this part of Texas L
  > 
  >Radio Mobileuses USGS topographical data and can do map overlays from
  several free sources– check it out if you want to get some ideas where
  your setup will haveproblems !!
  >From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com On Behalf Of n9wys
  >No, the complaints start when they can’t hear/access themachine
  everywhere with a full quieting signal… It’s amazingthat some amateur
  licensees still don’t understand signal propagation.  
  >But now I’m starting to get WAY off-topic…
  >73 de Mark – N9WYS
  >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Bill
  >I kinda agree. Get used to the infrastructuresystems and you can’t make
  a contact when it goes down, that’s whenthe complaining starts. i.e.
  cellphones and isp problems. Heck that’swhen real amateur radio can
  shine! Heck, the complaints start even when “therepeater” craps out.
  >William A. Collister
  >N7MOG 
  > 

  Ron Wright, N9EE
  727-376-6575
  MICRO COMPUTER CONCEPTS
  Owner 146.64 repeater Tampa Bay, FL
  No tone, all are welcome.

  Yahoo! Groups Links



   

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

[Paul Plack]

If we think amateurs are ignorant about propagation now, wait until digital 
takes over completely, and an entire generation of hams and commercial techs 
has never heard what fading or multipath actually sounds like over an analog 
circuit.

You may not realize how much you learn about propagation subliminally, from the 
normal sounds you hear on the edge of a repeater's coverage area, or the subtle 
changes in coverage when seasons change, etc.

If all that happened was a rise and fall in data rate, you might not even be 
aware.

This is already a problem for some cell/PCS companies...younger techs don't 
have this intuitive grasp of propagation.

73,

Paul, AE4KR

  - Original Message - 
  From: n9wys 
  To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2007 6:55 PM
  Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage



  No, the complaints start when they can't hear/access the machine everywhere 
with a full quieting signal.  It's amazing that some amateur licensees still 
don't understand signal propagation. 



  But now I'm starting to get WAY off-topic.



  73 de Mark - N9WYS




--

  From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com On Behalf Of Bill



  I kinda agree.  Get used to the infrastructure systems and you can't make a 
contact when it goes down, that's when the complaining starts.  i.e. cellphones 
and isp problems.  Heck that's when real amateur radio can shine!  Heck, the 
complaints start even when "the repeater" craps out.



  William A. Collister

  N7MOG 


   

RE: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

[Richard]

Yep... I've never done that on mine, but I'm also running an old version.
 
Richard
 <http://www.n7tgb.net/> www.n7tgb.net
 

  _  

From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Nate Duehr
Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2007 12:55 PM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage




On Nov 21, 2007, at 12:03 AM, JOHN MACKEY wrote:

> The sysops are probably not registering their information. That is 
> an option
> in echolink.

EchoIRLP node operators also have to go into the configuration files 
and set up AVRS support in tbd for that web page to work to find their 
EchoIRLP nodes.

--
Nate Duehr, WY0X
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:nate%40natetech.com> com



 

Re: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

[Ron Wright]

Nate,

It works both ways.  Knew there would be "doesn't tell the whole story" comment.

73, ron, n9ee/r



>From: Nate Duehr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Date: 2007/11/21 Wed PM 02:01:54 CST
>To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

>  
>
>On Nov 21, 2007, at 5:05 AM, Ron Wright wrote:
>
>> Anyone checked the number of Echolink vs IRLP stations???
>
>Yep, but it doesn't tell the whole story.  Millions of dead or not-set- 
>up-correctly EchoLink stations makes that network quite chaotic.
>
>Try listing the number of stations that are part of repeater systems  
>and available 24/7 as part of the local infrastructure.
>
>(And then realize that many of those "infrastructure" type EchoLink  
>stations are actually EchoIRLP stations, running both!  Example:  IRLP  
>node 3990 is also "W0CRA-R" on EchoLink, and IRLP node 3291 is "W0CRA- 
>L".)
>
>The numbers fall into the category of, "Lies, damned lies, and  
>statistics."  :-)
>
>--
>Nate Duehr, WY0X
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>


Ron Wright, N9EE
727-376-6575
MICRO COMPUTER CONCEPTS
Owner 146.64 repeater Tampa Bay, FL
No tone, all are welcome.

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

[Nate Duehr]

On Nov 21, 2007, at 12:03 AM, JOHN MACKEY wrote:

> The sysops are probably not registering their information.  That is  
> an option
> in echolink.

EchoIRLP node operators also have to go into the configuration files  
and set up AVRS support in tbd for that web page to work to find their  
EchoIRLP nodes.

--
Nate Duehr, WY0X
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

[Nate Duehr]

On Nov 21, 2007, at 5:05 AM, Ron Wright wrote:

> Anyone checked the number of Echolink vs IRLP stations???


Yep, but it doesn't tell the whole story.  Millions of dead or not-set- 
up-correctly EchoLink stations makes that network quite chaotic.

Try listing the number of stations that are part of repeater systems  
and available 24/7 as part of the local infrastructure.

(And then realize that many of those "infrastructure" type EchoLink  
stations are actually EchoIRLP stations, running both!  Example:  IRLP  
node 3990 is also "W0CRA-R" on EchoLink, and IRLP node 3291 is "W0CRA- 
L".)

The numbers fall into the category of, "Lies, damned lies, and  
statistics."  :-)

--
Nate Duehr, WY0X
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Re: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

[Ron Wright]

Anyone checked the number of Echolink vs IRLP stations???

73, ron, n9ee/r



>From: JOHN MACKEY <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Date: 2007/11/21 Wed AM 01:01:57 CST
>To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: Re: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

>  
>That section of the Echolink web site has been there for at least 2 years.  It
>works well enough for me.
>
>-- Original Message --
>Received: Wed, 21 Nov 2007 12:28:10 AM CST
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: Re: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage
>
>> At 11/20/2007 21:23, you wrote:
>> 
>> >I did try it with Echolink, Bob!! It worked very well to find nodes in a
>> >specified area using this link on the Echolink web site:
>> >
>> ><http://www.echolink.org/links.asp>http://www.echolink.org/links.asp
>> 
>> That's an improvement; on my last trip there was no lat/lon info or 
>> location search capability.  Too bad you can't enter a search radius 
>> though.  The "description" field is rather useless with varying data - some
>
>> use it for their location, others for sponsoring club, still others for 
>> what they're connected to.
>> 
>> Just a little more organization would take Echolink a long way.
>> 
>> Bob NO6B
>> 
>> 
>
>


Ron Wright, N9EE
727-376-6575
MICRO COMPUTER CONCEPTS
Owner 146.64 repeater Tampa Bay, FL
No tone, all are welcome.

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

[JOHN MACKEY]

The sysops are probably not registering their information.  That is an option
in echolink.


-- Original Message --
Received: Wed, 21 Nov 2007 12:17:15 AM CST
From: "ldgelectronics" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

> Didn't work for me. There are two EchoLink nodes near me and it 
> didn't find either one. 
> 
> I'm sure that it works well for some areas.
> 
> Dwayne Kincaid
> WD8OYG
> 
> >
> > I did try it with Echolink, Bob!!  It worked very well to find 
> nodes in a
> > specified area using this link on the Echolink web site:
> > 
> > http://www.echolink.org/links.asp
> > 
> > 
> > -- Original Message --
> > Received: Tue, 20 Nov 2007 10:32:14 PM CST
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: Re: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage
> > 
> > > At 11/20/2007 00:49, you wrote:
> > > 
> > > >I find basically the same problem with eQSO, WIRES, and IRLP.
> > > 
> > > I can't speak for eQSO or WIRES, but there really is no 
> comparison between 
> > > IRLP & Echolink when it comes to locating nodes.  IRLP has a very 
> nice set 
> > > of web-based utilities that, for example, let you find all nodes 
> within a 
> > > specified radius.  Try that with Echolink.
> > > 
> > > Bob NO6B
> > > 
> > > 
> > > >-- Original Message --
> > > >Received: Mon, 19 Nov 2007 10:03:44 AM CST
> > > >From: <mailto:no6b%40no6b.com>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > >SNIP
> > > > > I personally find Echolink totally useless while on travel. 
> Too hard to
> > > > > find nodes because the locations aren't properly cataloged.
> > > > > Bob NO6B
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > 
> > >
> >
> 
> 
> 

Re: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

[JOHN MACKEY]

That section of the Echolink web site has been there for at least 2 years.  It
works well enough for me.

-- Original Message --
Received: Wed, 21 Nov 2007 12:28:10 AM CST
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

> At 11/20/2007 21:23, you wrote:
> 
> >I did try it with Echolink, Bob!! It worked very well to find nodes in a
> >specified area using this link on the Echolink web site:
> >
> ><http://www.echolink.org/links.asp>http://www.echolink.org/links.asp
> 
> That's an improvement; on my last trip there was no lat/lon info or 
> location search capability.  Too bad you can't enter a search radius 
> though.  The "description" field is rather useless with varying data - some

> use it for their location, others for sponsoring club, still others for 
> what they're connected to.
> 
> Just a little more organization would take Echolink a long way.
> 
> Bob NO6B
> 
> 

Re: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

[no6b]

At 11/20/2007 21:23, you wrote:

>I did try it with Echolink, Bob!! It worked very well to find nodes in a
>specified area using this link on the Echolink web site:
>
>http://www.echolink.org/links.asp

That's an improvement; on my last trip there was no lat/lon info or 
location search capability.  Too bad you can't enter a search radius 
though.  The "description" field is rather useless with varying data - some 
use it for their location, others for sponsoring club, still others for 
what they're connected to.

Just a little more organization would take Echolink a long way.

Bob NO6B

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

[ldgelectronics]

Didn't work for me. There are two EchoLink nodes near me and it 
didn't find either one. 

I'm sure that it works well for some areas.

Dwayne Kincaid
WD8OYG

>
> I did try it with Echolink, Bob!!  It worked very well to find 
nodes in a
> specified area using this link on the Echolink web site:
> 
> http://www.echolink.org/links.asp
> 
> 
> -- Original Message --
> Received: Tue, 20 Nov 2007 10:32:14 PM CST
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage
> 
> > At 11/20/2007 00:49, you wrote:
> > 
> > >I find basically the same problem with eQSO, WIRES, and IRLP.
> > 
> > I can't speak for eQSO or WIRES, but there really is no 
comparison between 
> > IRLP & Echolink when it comes to locating nodes.  IRLP has a very 
nice set 
> > of web-based utilities that, for example, let you find all nodes 
within a 
> > specified radius.  Try that with Echolink.
> > 
> > Bob NO6B
> > 
> > 
> > >-- Original Message --
> > >Received: Mon, 19 Nov 2007 10:03:44 AM CST
> > >From: <mailto:no6b%40no6b.com>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >SNIP
> > > > I personally find Echolink totally useless while on travel. 
Too hard to
> > > > find nodes because the locations aren't properly cataloged.
> > > > Bob NO6B
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > 
> >
>

Re: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

[JOHN MACKEY]

I did try it with Echolink, Bob!!  It worked very well to find nodes in a
specified area using this link on the Echolink web site:

http://www.echolink.org/links.asp


-- Original Message --
Received: Tue, 20 Nov 2007 10:32:14 PM CST
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

> At 11/20/2007 00:49, you wrote:
> 
> >I find basically the same problem with eQSO, WIRES, and IRLP.
> 
> I can't speak for eQSO or WIRES, but there really is no comparison between 
> IRLP & Echolink when it comes to locating nodes.  IRLP has a very nice set 
> of web-based utilities that, for example, let you find all nodes within a 
> specified radius.  Try that with Echolink.
> 
> Bob NO6B
> 
> 
> >-- Original Message --
> >Received: Mon, 19 Nov 2007 10:03:44 AM CST
> >From: <mailto:no6b%40no6b.com>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >SNIP
> > > I personally find Echolink totally useless while on travel. Too hard to
> > > find nodes because the locations aren't properly cataloged.
> > > Bob NO6B
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 

Re: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

[no6b]

At 11/20/2007 00:49, you wrote:

>I find basically the same problem with eQSO, WIRES, and IRLP.

I can't speak for eQSO or WIRES, but there really is no comparison between 
IRLP & Echolink when it comes to locating nodes.  IRLP has a very nice set 
of web-based utilities that, for example, let you find all nodes within a 
specified radius.  Try that with Echolink.

Bob NO6B


>-- Original Message --
>Received: Mon, 19 Nov 2007 10:03:44 AM CST
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>SNIP
> > I personally find Echolink totally useless while on travel. Too hard to
> > find nodes because the locations aren't properly cataloged.
> > Bob NO6B
>
>
>

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

[JOHN MACKEY]

I guess it just depends what you are wanting.

I use Internet connectivity to access my repeater which is approximately 2000
miles away from me.

I do understand what you are saying about not wanting to give out your exact
lat/long.  I now make it a practice to NEVER give out my exact lat/long or
other location information data to anyone, including the repeater coordination
counil.

-- Original Message --
Received: Tue, 20 Nov 2007 03:17:09 AM CST
From: Nate Duehr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

> 
> On Nov 20, 2007, at 1:49 AM, JOHN MACKEY wrote:
> 
> > I find basically the same problem with eQSO, WIRES, and IRLP.
> >
> > -- Original Message --
> > Received: Mon, 19 Nov 2007 10:03:44 AM CST
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > SNIP
> >> I personally find Echolink totally useless while on travel.  Too  
> >> hard to
> >> find nodes because the locations aren't properly cataloged.
> >> Bob NO6B
> 
> 
> As far as IRLP goes, garbage in, garbage out... we have the Lat/Long  
> of every single node who's provided it posted.
> 
> If that's not good enough, I don't know what is.
> 
> Not everyone wants you to know where their transmitters are, and some  
> are smart enough to offset them a bit so the Lat/Long numbers can be  
> used more than not... but we can't do much about it if they don't feel  
> like providing one at all.
> 
> Anyone can go to the status.irlp.net web page and sort by State/ 
> Province to find nodes in an area, and then click on them to see what  
> the deal is with them.
> 
> There's also an ASCII dump file you can grab to manipulate the data in  
> whatever way you want in Excel, etc.
> 
> We even have a way to have multiple lat/longs listed for linked/multi- 
> site repeater systems.
> 
> Here's an example of one that's "done right"... I suppose, since I did  
> it:
> 
> http://status.irlp.net/IRLPnodedetail.php?nodeid=3990
> 
> It would also appear that the new Kenwoods will auto-tune properly  
> crafted APRS packets (called AVRS) that show a repeater frequency in  
> an area... Bob has some screenshots and examples up on his website.   
> If someone in the area will beacon the appropriate systems (whatever  
> they are) via APRS and their frequencies, from a site with similar or  
> the same coverage as the system being put onto APRS, these new rigs  
> can tune it by just selectiing it in the message list, I guess.  I  
> haven't tried it.
> 
> As far as EchoLink goes... why bother finding a local RF node if  
> you're calling back home?   (Or anywhere else...)  Fire up the laptop  
> on broadband, connect back to your own EchoLink Proxy at home, and  
> then to anywhere on the network -- works on virtually any network,  
> firewalled or not.  Piece of cake.  It's more "network-centric" than  
> IRLP, whereas IRLP is more related to "infrastructure" build-outs...  
> and usually deployed on big repeater systems, if anyone in the area  
> has been bitten by the IP/RF linking bug.  You see a lot of simplex  
> and other non-repeater based EchoLink RF nodes... too much to weed  
> through.
> 
> --
> Nate Duehr, WY0X
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 
> 
> 

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

[Nate Duehr]

On Nov 20, 2007, at 1:49 AM, JOHN MACKEY wrote:

> I find basically the same problem with eQSO, WIRES, and IRLP.
>
> -- Original Message --
> Received: Mon, 19 Nov 2007 10:03:44 AM CST
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> SNIP
>> I personally find Echolink totally useless while on travel.  Too  
>> hard to
>> find nodes because the locations aren't properly cataloged.
>> Bob NO6B


As far as IRLP goes, garbage in, garbage out... we have the Lat/Long  
of every single node who's provided it posted.

If that's not good enough, I don't know what is.

Not everyone wants you to know where their transmitters are, and some  
are smart enough to offset them a bit so the Lat/Long numbers can be  
used more than not... but we can't do much about it if they don't feel  
like providing one at all.

Anyone can go to the status.irlp.net web page and sort by State/ 
Province to find nodes in an area, and then click on them to see what  
the deal is with them.

There's also an ASCII dump file you can grab to manipulate the data in  
whatever way you want in Excel, etc.

We even have a way to have multiple lat/longs listed for linked/multi- 
site repeater systems.

Here's an example of one that's "done right"... I suppose, since I did  
it:

http://status.irlp.net/IRLPnodedetail.php?nodeid=3990

It would also appear that the new Kenwoods will auto-tune properly  
crafted APRS packets (called AVRS) that show a repeater frequency in  
an area... Bob has some screenshots and examples up on his website.   
If someone in the area will beacon the appropriate systems (whatever  
they are) via APRS and their frequencies, from a site with similar or  
the same coverage as the system being put onto APRS, these new rigs  
can tune it by just selectiing it in the message list, I guess.  I  
haven't tried it.

As far as EchoLink goes... why bother finding a local RF node if  
you're calling back home?   (Or anywhere else...)  Fire up the laptop  
on broadband, connect back to your own EchoLink Proxy at home, and  
then to anywhere on the network -- works on virtually any network,  
firewalled or not.  Piece of cake.  It's more "network-centric" than  
IRLP, whereas IRLP is more related to "infrastructure" build-outs...  
and usually deployed on big repeater systems, if anyone in the area  
has been bitten by the IP/RF linking bug.  You see a lot of simplex  
and other non-repeater based EchoLink RF nodes... too much to weed  
through.

--
Nate Duehr, WY0X
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

[JOHN MACKEY]

-- Original Message --
Received: Mon, 19 Nov 2007 08:18:40 AM CST
From: Nate Duehr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
SNIP
> Your choice.  Back then, EchoLink wasn't even checking that people  
> downloading the software and getting registered even had licenses.   
> That changed that many years later, too.  Lots of people were nervous  
> about PC access to RF, including various regulatory agencies.  Most  
> have come around.


True, but then Ham Radio Outlet isn't checking for licenses and very few
repeater owners are checking for licenses, so it really isn't different than
operating on the radio!

Re: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

[JOHN MACKEY]

I find basically the same problem with eQSO, WIRES, and IRLP.

-- Original Message --
Received: Mon, 19 Nov 2007 10:03:44 AM CST
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
SNIP
> I personally find Echolink totally useless while on travel.  Too hard to 
> find nodes because the locations aren't properly cataloged.
> Bob NO6B
 

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

[Nate Duehr]

On Nov 19, 2007, at 7:50 AM, Ron Wright wrote:

> Our local IRLP systems would be repeatedly disconnected by IRLP  
> sysops when non-related subjects came up.  And these subjects were  
> not controversial, but more like how the beach was that day. It was  
> discouraging.
>
> We got reports from other IRLP users.
>
> 73, ron, n9ee/r


The only other "rule" I know about that *some* Reflector operators  
push is the "local conversation" rule.  Some Reflector owners find it  
annoying when a single node with two operators on a local repeater  
don't have the courtesy to unlink from the Reflector when they're  
having an extended local QSO.

Also, if the node owner puts correct e-mail contact information into  
the IRLP database...

http://www.irlp.net/owners/dbupdates.html

... block messages that state EXACTLY why the node was blocked/dropped  
from a Reflector are sent to that e-mail address.

Copies are sent also to the Reflector owner (some have trusted  
volunteers do their monitoring for them) and also to a core team that  
reviews them.  A LONG time ago, we had one Reflector owner who got in  
a political pissing match with someone and blocked their node or  
nodes.  Back then, there were very few Reflectors, and it kinda made a  
stir in the volunteers -- we didn't want to see blocks done for  
"political" reasons.

So literally -- when a reflector owner goes to the blocking system,  
there's checkboxes for the "approved" reasons they can disconnect  
someone, and there's also a "other" reason where they can enter notes  
for those really strange situations -- but there's always a few of us  
reviewing those e-mails... just in case something gets out of hand  
that would make the whole IRLP group of volunteers look like idiots.

(Basically WAY back then, the nice folks who wrote/built the early  
Reflector blocking system stated that they would not support their  
code and hard work being used for a personal pissing match.)

Anyway, that's probably WAY too much background info -- but suffice it  
to say, there are plenty of Reflectors where you and your friend's  
ragchew would be welcome.  Feel free to pop on by on 9870 (main  
channel - the sub channels seem to be used by a number of groups for  
little mini-linking systems, and the sponsors of the bandwidth also  
use a sub-channel... they kinda like to be left alone, but the main  
channel is wide-open) anytime, and have your friends join you there.   
You won't get any complaints from me.  (Or Corey who also popped up.   
Hi Corey.)

I, like Corey, typically only block nodes for technical reasons...  
long TX tails passed in, CW ID's, etc.   The only MAJOR no-no on all  
Reflectors is "pulsing".  Pulsing is where your node keys back toward  
the Reflector briefly after someone else unkeys, and is usually an  
artifact of how it's linked into a repeater... CTCSS decoders and what- 
not take time to decide that tones have gone away, etc.  It can easily  
be fixed with the "pulsecheck" command and proper setting of the cover- 
up timer in the /home/irlp/custom/timing file.

The problem with those is that one node doing it is annoying, and it  
interrupts communications between two other nodes.  But if a second  
node just happens to join the Reflector while the first is already  
there, that ALSO has a pulseback problem, it creates a deadly-embrace  
ping-pong effect that can't be stopped that makes the entire channel  
unusable and makes it very hard for others to get DTMF into their  
nodes to disconnect.

It's the one "technical" thing that no Reflector owner has any remorse  
about dumping off ANY node that does it, and not even thinking twice.

Luckily, most folks follow the instructions in the node setup  
documentation and their nodes don't pulse, because they've set them up  
correctly.)

Well that e-mail got long... glad I type fast!  Seriously, if you ran  
across a Reflector owner who didn't like your conversations, just  
move... there's 22 reflectors and all have ten channels for traffic,  
so there's 220 channels out there to use to chat with your buddies.   
Well over half of those aren't in use as I look right now... plenty of  
"wide open spaces" to do pretty much whatever you want.

Heck, if you guys are interesting enough, I'll park my nodes on 9870  
with you!  (GRIN)  Might as well have something to listen to here on  
my little micro-node here at the house while I'm in the shack, huh?

--
Nate Duehr, WY0X
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

[n9wys]

No, Ron.  I think it's more a factor of the "instant gratification"
generation.
  
If it doesn’t work perfectly - each time, every time - it's "no good."  Cell
phone technology has spoiled at lot of people out there - until cellular
went all-digital.  (Read: dropped calls and "under water" signals)

Ah yes, the fun of repeater ownership/operation.  

Mark - N9WYS

-Original Message-
From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com On Behalf Of Ron Wright

Mark,

Sounds as if these valley users are talking to a Motorola salesman.  They
promise 100% coverage.  Of course once the system is in the truth comes out,
hi.

73, ron, n9ee/r

ps I like Mot gear, just not their sales.  Have uncle who is retired VP of
sales of a company.  He always noted that sales is 1/2 about the product and
1/2 BS (not the degree).  His sales record showed he knew what he was
talking about, hi.




>From: n9wys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Date: 2007/11/18 Sun PM 09:46:48 CST
>To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

>  
>
>I’ve got RM and used it for the pastseveral years.  Quite a learning
curve with it, but for a free piece ofsoftware it is very comprehensive and
has served me very well!
> 
>Unfortunately, I need to attach thecoverage plots to a 2x4 so I can whack
some of my users up-side the head withit in order to get the point across.
They just don’t understand whythey can’t hear the repeater when
they’re down in a river valley 25+miles from the repeater and there’s a
ridge of land that rises above themin between the repeater and their
location.  I’ve tried to explainabout being in “the shadow of the
repeater” but some just don’tseem to grasp the concept.  (We’re
talking UHF freqs here and FLATlands for the most part.  The repeater
antenna is 175 ft HAAT at the towersite…)
> 
>ARRRGH!!!
> 
>Mark – N9WYS
> 
>From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com On Behalf Of John Barrett
>
>
>Propagation L something I’mlearned a lot about this last couple of weeks
– neat app called RadioMobile I’ve been using to map out theoretical
coverage at variouslocations where I may be asked to drop my portable
repeater…. Makes me wishI had held out for a 60-75ft 3 section crank up to
put on my trailer, or areally tall hill to park on J Unfortunately – not a
lotta hills around this part of Texas L
> 
>Radio Mobileuses USGS topographical data and can do map overlays from
several free sources– check it out if you want to get some ideas where
your setup will haveproblems !!
>From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com On Behalf Of n9wys
>No, the complaints start when they can’t hear/access themachine
everywhere with a full quieting signal…  It’s amazingthat some amateur
licensees still don’t understand signal propagation.   
>But now I’m starting to get WAY off-topic…
>73 de Mark – N9WYS
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Bill
>I kinda agree.  Get used to the infrastructuresystems and you can’t make
a contact when it goes down, that’s whenthe complaining starts.  i.e.
cellphones and isp problems.  Heck that’swhen real amateur radio can
shine!  Heck, the complaints start even when “therepeater” craps out.
>William A. Collister
>N7MOG 
> 


Ron Wright, N9EE
727-376-6575
MICRO COMPUTER CONCEPTS
Owner 146.64 repeater Tampa Bay, FL
No tone, all are welcome.






 
Yahoo! Groups Links

RE: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

[n9wys]

Thanks, Nate!  ;-)

Mark - N9WYS

-Original Message-
From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com On Behalf Of Nate Duehr

On Nov 18, 2007, at 8:46 PM, n9wys wrote:

> Unfortunately, I need to attach the coverage plots to a 2x4 so I can  
> whack some of my users up-side the head with it in order to get the  
> point across.  They just don't understand ...

The Readysnitch and Wouff Hong are standing by for your use at your  
earliest opportunity.  :-) 

RE: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

[Corey Dean N3FE]

I am in the same place as Nate...  I also run a reflector (905X) on IRLP and
NCPENN (NCPENN and 9058 are crosslinked) and some nodes.  I don't ban
anything unless I hear bad language.  If I do hear a tail of any kind of
automatic ID without a valid user signal, I will also band for that.  I
unban within 10 minutes though

Corey  N3FE
  -Original Message-
  From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Nate Duehr
  Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 5:20 PM
  To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
  Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage



  On Nov 19, 2007, at 3:09 PM, wb6ymh wrote:

  > --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Ron Wright <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
  > wrote:
  >>
  >> Our local IRLP systems would be repeatedly disconnected by IRLP
  > sysops when non-related subjects came up. And these subjects were not
  > controversial, but more like how the beach was that day. It was
  > discouraging.
  >>
  >> We got reports from other IRLP users.
  >>
  >> 73, ron, n9ee/r
  >
  > IRLP like EchoLink is a peer to peer system. There is no way for the
  > "IRLP sysops" to have any idea what you are talking about let alone
  > disconnect you unless you are connected to one of their repeaters.
  > If, on the other hand, if you were connected to a reflector (a
  > conference room in EchoLink speak) and the sysop of the reflector
  > didn't like your traffic then he could certainly disconnect (and
  > possibly ban) you.
  >
  > It's very similar to local repeaters, some are not friendly to random
  > ragchews and some are. There's no need to abandon a band (or mode),
  > just because one repeater (reflector) isn't friendly to your
  > interests. Just find a place that is.
  >
  > 73's Skip WB6YMH

  100% agreed. As a Reflector owner/operator and operator of four
  nodes, I have no "topic" rules other than legal and perhaps not
  "utterly retarded". I wouldn't enforce even the "utterly retarded"
  conversation filter on any of our club's machines (we're a ragchew
  club) unless a LOT of "someones" complained.

  On my own node, it might suffer a sudden and complete loss of Internet
  connectivity -- oh darn, the Ethernet plug fell out the back and won't
  get put back in until a few hours from now! (GRIN)

  But I'd never get on the air and tell you that you were off-topic.

  That's just one Reflector operator's opinion -- there are others, I'm
  sure. Avoid those that don't welcome you. And double check that you
  read their Reflector's policies before complaining. Perhaps they set
  aside certain channels for certain types of traffic. What Reflector
  and channel was it?

  Node to node, the only thing anyone could do to stop you from talking
  about something would be to block calls from your local node, just
  like EchoLink. Nothing different there.

  Perhaps what really happened was that you ran across a Reflector owner/
  operator who had a reason not to have ragchewing going on. One
  example of this might be the Reflector channel that has the large
  California linked repeater systems tied into them -- they're not
  friendly to long QSO's because they've got 40+ repeaters connected at
  a time.

  --
  Nate Duehr, WY0X
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]



  




I am using the free version of SPAMfighter for private users.
It has removed 174 spam emails to date.
Paying users do not have this message in their emails.
Try SPAMfighter for free now!

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.16.0/1136 - Release Date: 11/17/2007
2:55 PM

RE: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

[JOHN MACKEY]

That is exactly why I operate my own repeaters, with my own internet
gateways.

-- Original Message --
Received: Mon, 19 Nov 2007 06:39:18 PM CST
From: "Bill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

> Yep, the non-do-ers that want it all without lifting a finger for
> maintenance time or even donating to the repeater fund.  Others that are
> involved have my permission to gripe.  ;>}  Nuff said 'bout dat.
> 
> The real point that I wish to make is to not get to wild about building
even
> more infrastructure that has high failure rates.  I use the K.I.S.S. method
> mostly.  Ya, right.  Here I am on the computer again
> 
> William A. Collister
> N7MOG
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Repeater-
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Nate Duehr
> > Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 3:21 PM
> > To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage
> > 
> > 
> > On Nov 18, 2007, at 8:24 AM, Bill wrote:
> > 
> > > I kinda agree.  Get used to the infrastructure systems and you can't
> > > make a contact when it goes down, that's when the complaining
> > > starts.  i.e. cellphones and isp problems.  Heck that's when real
> > > amateur radio can shine!  Heck, the complaints start even when "the
> > > repeater" craps out.
> > >
> > > William A. Collister
> > > N7MOG
> > 
> > So you're complaining about the complainers?  ;-) :-)
> > 
> > --
> > Nate Duehr
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 

RE: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

[Bill]

Yep, the non-do-ers that want it all without lifting a finger for
maintenance time or even donating to the repeater fund.  Others that are
involved have my permission to gripe.  ;>}  Nuff said 'bout dat.

The real point that I wish to make is to not get to wild about building even
more infrastructure that has high failure rates.  I use the K.I.S.S. method
mostly.  Ya, right.  Here I am on the computer again

William A. Collister
N7MOG
> -Original Message-
> From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Repeater-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Nate Duehr
> Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 3:21 PM
> To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage
> 
> 
> On Nov 18, 2007, at 8:24 AM, Bill wrote:
> 
> > I kinda agree.  Get used to the infrastructure systems and you can't
> > make a contact when it goes down, that's when the complaining
> > starts.  i.e. cellphones and isp problems.  Heck that's when real
> > amateur radio can shine!  Heck, the complaints start even when "the
> > repeater" craps out.
> >
> > William A. Collister
> > N7MOG
> 
> So you're complaining about the complainers?  ;-) :-)
> 
> --
> Nate Duehr
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

[Nate Duehr]

On Nov 18, 2007, at 8:24 AM, Bill wrote:

> I kinda agree.  Get used to the infrastructure systems and you can’t  
> make a contact when it goes down, that’s when the complaining  
> starts.  i.e. cellphones and isp problems.  Heck that’s when real  
> amateur radio can shine!  Heck, the complaints start even when “the  
> repeater” craps out.
>
> William A. Collister
> N7MOG

So you're complaining about the complainers?  ;-) :-)

--
Nate Duehr
[EMAIL PROTECTED]







 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

[Nate Duehr]

On Nov 19, 2007, at 3:09 PM, wb6ymh wrote:

> --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Ron Wright <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  
> wrote:
>>
>> Our local IRLP systems would be repeatedly disconnected by IRLP
> sysops when non-related subjects came up.  And these subjects were not
> controversial, but more like how the beach was that day. It was
> discouraging.
>>
>> We got reports from other IRLP users.
>>
>> 73, ron, n9ee/r
>
> IRLP like EchoLink is a peer to peer system.  There is no way for the
> "IRLP sysops" to have any idea what you are talking about let alone
> disconnect you unless you are connected to one of their repeaters.
> If, on the other hand, if you were connected to a reflector (a
> conference room in EchoLink speak) and the sysop of the reflector
> didn't like your traffic then he could certainly disconnect (and
> possibly ban) you.
>
> It's very similar to local repeaters, some are not friendly to random
> ragchews and some are.  There's no need to abandon a band (or mode),
> just because one repeater (reflector) isn't friendly to your
> interests. Just find a place that is.
>
> 73's Skip WB6YMH

100% agreed.  As a Reflector owner/operator and operator of four  
nodes, I have no "topic" rules other than legal and perhaps not  
"utterly retarded".  I wouldn't enforce even the "utterly retarded"  
conversation filter on any of our club's machines (we're a ragchew  
club) unless a LOT of "someones" complained.

On my own node, it might suffer a sudden and complete loss of Internet  
connectivity -- oh darn, the Ethernet plug fell out the back and won't  
get put back in until a few hours from now!  (GRIN)

But I'd never get on the air and tell you that you were off-topic.

That's just one Reflector operator's opinion -- there are others, I'm  
sure.  Avoid those that don't welcome you.  And double check that you  
read their Reflector's policies before complaining.  Perhaps they set  
aside certain channels for certain types of traffic.  What Reflector  
and channel was it?

Node to node, the only thing anyone could do to stop you from talking  
about something would be to block calls from your local node, just  
like EchoLink.  Nothing different there.

Perhaps what really happened was that you ran across a Reflector owner/ 
operator who had a reason not to have ragchewing going on.  One  
example of this might be the Reflector channel that has the large  
California linked repeater systems tied into them -- they're not  
friendly to long QSO's because they've got 40+ repeaters connected at  
a time.

--
Nate Duehr, WY0X
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

[wb6ymh]

--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Ron Wright <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Our local IRLP systems would be repeatedly disconnected by IRLP
sysops when non-related subjects came up.  And these subjects were not
controversial, but more like how the beach was that day. It was
discouraging. 
> 
> We got reports from other IRLP users.
> 
> 73, ron, n9ee/r

IRLP like EchoLink is a peer to peer system.  There is no way for the
"IRLP sysops" to have any idea what you are talking about let alone
disconnect you unless you are connected to one of their repeaters. 
If, on the other hand, if you were connected to a reflector (a
conference room in EchoLink speak) and the sysop of the reflector
didn't like your traffic then he could certainly disconnect (and
possibly ban) you.

It's very similar to local repeaters, some are not friendly to random
ragchews and some are.  There's no need to abandon a band (or mode),
just because one repeater (reflector) isn't friendly to your
interests. Just find a place that is.

73's Skip WB6YMH

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

[Laryn Lohman]

Definitely not true.  I've been involved with the local node for a
number of years as a user and tech and never heard, or read about
anything like that.

Laryn K8TVZ


--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Ron Wright <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> 
> I use Echolink because IRLP was so picky about conversation content.
 Ham Radio topics only.  We talk a lot more than just Ham Radio
related topics.
> 

Re: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

[no6b]

At 11/19/2007 06:50, you wrote:

>Our local IRLP systems would be repeatedly disconnected by IRLP sysops 
>when non-related subjects came up. And these subjects were not 
>controversial, but more like how the beach was that day. It was discouraging.

Chances are you were connected to a reflector channel that was 
topic-specific. For example 9255 is used specifically for balloon flights & 
discussions.

I personally find Echolink totally useless while on travel.  Too hard to 
find nodes because the locations aren't properly cataloged.

Bob NO6B

Re: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

[Ron Wright]

Our local IRLP systems would be repeatedly disconnected by IRLP sysops when 
non-related subjects came up.  And these subjects were not controversial, but 
more like how the beach was that day. It was discouraging. 

We got reports from other IRLP users.

73, ron, n9ee/r


>From: Nate Duehr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Date: 2007/11/19 Mon AM 08:20:52 CST
>To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

>  
>
>On Nov 19, 2007, at 5:25 AM, Ron Wright wrote:
>
>>
>> I use Echolink because IRLP was so picky about conversation  
>> content.  Ham Radio topics only.  We talk a lot more than just Ham  
>> Radio related topics.
>>
>
>Not sure what you're talking about, there are no posted topic  
>restrictions anywhere except the IRLP mailing list, which like RB is  
>requested to stay on-topic.  Repeaters here, IRLP there.
>
>There might be one or two (?) Reflector operators who might have  
>topical restrictions on specific channels of their Reflectors.  I  
>haven't seen any, though -- and we certainly don't always talk ham  
>radio anywhere I hang out.
>
>Where did you hear this?
>
>--
>Nate Duehr, WY0X
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>


Ron Wright, N9EE
727-376-6575
MICRO COMPUTER CONCEPTS
Owner 146.64 repeater Tampa Bay, FL
No tone, all are welcome.

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

[Nate Duehr]

On Nov 19, 2007, at 5:25 AM, Ron Wright wrote:

>
> I use Echolink because IRLP was so picky about conversation  
> content.  Ham Radio topics only.  We talk a lot more than just Ham  
> Radio related topics.
>


Not sure what you're talking about, there are no posted topic  
restrictions anywhere except the IRLP mailing list, which like RB is  
requested to stay on-topic.  Repeaters here, IRLP there.

There might be one or two (?) Reflector operators who might have  
topical restrictions on specific channels of their Reflectors.  I  
haven't seen any, though -- and we certainly don't always talk ham  
radio anywhere I hang out.

Where did you hear this?

--
Nate Duehr, WY0X
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

[Nate Duehr]

On Nov 19, 2007, at 2:30 AM, JOHN MACKEY wrote:

> In the past Dave (VE7LTD) was completely unwilling to allow PC users  
> from
> accessing a repeater.  Has this changed?

Years ago, but your node owner has to install it, and the PC can  
connect to only one node at a time, not Reflectors.  Probably first  
demo'ed at the IRLP convention about four years ago?  I'd have to  
look.  Most node owners don't install it.

> Because of Dave's original actions, I have always avoided IRLP and  
> used
> Echolink
> and eQSO.

Your choice.  Back then, EchoLink wasn't even checking that people  
downloading the software and getting registered even had licenses.   
That changed that many years later, too.  Lots of people were nervous  
about PC access to RF, including various regulatory agencies.  Most  
have come around.

--
Nate Duehr, WY0X
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

[Ron Wright]

Mark,

Sounds as if these valley users are talking to a Motorola salesman.  They 
promise 100% coverage.  Of course once the system is in the truth comes out, hi.

73, ron, n9ee/r

ps I like Mot gear, just not their sales.  Have uncle who is retired VP of 
sales of a company.  He always noted that sales is 1/2 about the product and 
1/2 BS (not the degree).  His sales record showed he knew what he was talking 
about, hi.




>From: n9wys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Date: 2007/11/18 Sun PM 09:46:48 CST
>To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

>  
>
>I’ve got RM and used it for the pastseveral years.  Quite a learning curve 
>with it, but for a free piece ofsoftware it is very comprehensive and has 
>served me very well!
> 
>Unfortunately, I need to attach thecoverage plots to a 2x4 so I can whack some 
>of my users up-side the head withit in order to get the point across.  They 
>just don’t understand whythey can’t hear the repeater when they’re down 
>in a river valley 25+miles from the repeater and there’s a ridge of land 
>that rises above themin between the repeater and their location.  I’ve tried 
>to explainabout being in “the shadow of the repeater” but some just 
>don’tseem to grasp the concept.  (We’re talking UHF freqs here and 
>FLATlands for the most part.  The repeater antenna is 175 ft HAAT at the 
>towersite…)
> 
>ARRRGH!!!
> 
>Mark – N9WYS
> 
>From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com On Behalf Of John Barrett
>
>
>Propagation L something I’mlearned a lot about this last couple of weeks – 
>neat app called RadioMobile I’ve been using to map out theoretical coverage 
>at variouslocations where I may be asked to drop my portable repeater…. 
>Makes me wishI had held out for a 60-75ft 3 section crank up to put on my 
>trailer, or areally tall hill to park on J Unfortunately – not a lotta hills 
>around this part of Texas L
> 
>Radio Mobileuses USGS topographical data and can do map overlays from several 
>free sources– check it out if you want to get some ideas where your setup 
>will haveproblems !!
>From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com On Behalf Of n9wys
>No, the complaints start when they can’t hear/access themachine everywhere 
>with a full quieting signal…  It’s amazingthat some amateur licensees 
>still don’t understand signal propagation.   
>But now I’m starting to get WAY off-topic…
>73 de Mark – N9WYS
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Bill
>I kinda agree.  Get used to the infrastructuresystems and you can’t make a 
>contact when it goes down, that’s whenthe complaining starts.  i.e. 
>cellphones and isp problems.  Heck that’swhen real amateur radio can shine!  
>Heck, the complaints start even when “therepeater” craps out.
>William A. Collister
>N7MOG 
> 


Ron Wright, N9EE
727-376-6575
MICRO COMPUTER CONCEPTS
Owner 146.64 repeater Tampa Bay, FL
No tone, all are welcome.

Re: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

[Ron Wright]

>From: JOHN MACKEY <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Date: 2007/11/19 Mon AM 03:30:02 CST
>To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

>  
>In the past Dave (VE7LTD) was completely unwilling to allow PC users from
>accessing a repeater.  Has this changed?
>
>Because of Dave's original actions, I have always avoided IRLP and used
>Echolink
>and eQSO.
>

I use Echolink because IRLP was so picky about conversation content.  Ham Radio 
topics only.  We talk a lot more than just Ham Radio related topics.


>> 
>> > And for now, only an
>> > Icom D-Star radio can connect to a D-Star repeater (yes, I know  
>> > about the
>> > "dongle", but it's not commercially available yet nor easily  
>> > replicated),
>> > while any rig with a touchtone pad can dial up an IRLP link.
>> 
>> 
>> Heck, who needs DTMF when you have a PC with SSH?  :-)


It is hard to access IRLP or Echolink node with a PC in the mobile.  Echolink 
allows repeater/radio to echolink access with DTMF from the radio side.  Just 
DTMF the node number when the repeater is connected.

D-Star is a different type of modulation mode.  This is my interest.  Having a 
dedicated data link to other such systems is also a very positive direction.

73, ron, n9ee/r





Ron Wright, N9EE
727-376-6575
MICRO COMPUTER CONCEPTS
Owner 146.64 repeater Tampa Bay, FL
No tone, all are welcome.

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

[JOHN MACKEY]

In the past Dave (VE7LTD) was completely unwilling to allow PC users from
accessing a repeater.  Has this changed?

Because of Dave's original actions, I have always avoided IRLP and used
Echolink
and eQSO.

-- Original Message --
Received: Mon, 19 Nov 2007 02:44:28 AM CST
From: Nate Duehr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

> 
> On Nov 18, 2007, at 10:01 PM, George Henry wrote:
> 
> > Couple of big differences between D-Star, IRLP and Echolink:
> >
> > With Echolink, any licensed amateur with a soundcard-equipped  
> > computer and
> > an internet connection can connect to an Echolink-enabled repeater.   
> > With
> > IRLP and D-Star, you can only establish a connection between  
> > repeaters over
> > the air - there is no access from the internet side.
> 
> 
> Not 100% true.  IRLP node owners can install a web-server application  
> that also allows for connections from a PC running SpeakFreely for  
> Windows.  Not many do.  It's not popular since many node owners see  
> the "no PC access" prevailing thought in the network as a positive  
> thing.
> 
> But PC access *is* possible and has been discussed in public by Dave  
> Cameron VE7LTD, the system designer, at the IRLP conferences in Las  
> Vegas.
> 
> 
> > And for now, only an
> > Icom D-Star radio can connect to a D-Star repeater (yes, I know  
> > about the
> > "dongle", but it's not commercially available yet nor easily  
> > replicated),
> > while any rig with a touchtone pad can dial up an IRLP link.
> 
> 
> Heck, who needs DTMF when you have a PC with SSH?  :-)
> 
> Of course, you have to be a node owner (or have their permission) to  
> play with such things... log into the node via command line and type  
> "decode " for whatever DTMF command you would normally punch, and  
> it'll do it.
> 
> Some node owners also have customized web interfaces hiding behind  
> password protected web pages they allow users to control the nodes from.
> 
> It all depends on the node owner.  Right now I'm working on a web- 
> interface to control various Colorado nodes that wish to participate  
> for ARES/RACES.  If I ever find enough time to finish it...
> 
> --
> Nate Duehr, WY0X
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 
> 
> 

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

[Nate Duehr]

On Nov 18, 2007, at 10:01 PM, George Henry wrote:

> Couple of big differences between D-Star, IRLP and Echolink:
>
> With Echolink, any licensed amateur with a soundcard-equipped  
> computer and
> an internet connection can connect to an Echolink-enabled repeater.   
> With
> IRLP and D-Star, you can only establish a connection between  
> repeaters over
> the air - there is no access from the internet side.


Not 100% true.  IRLP node owners can install a web-server application  
that also allows for connections from a PC running SpeakFreely for  
Windows.  Not many do.  It's not popular since many node owners see  
the "no PC access" prevailing thought in the network as a positive  
thing.

But PC access *is* possible and has been discussed in public by Dave  
Cameron VE7LTD, the system designer, at the IRLP conferences in Las  
Vegas.


> And for now, only an
> Icom D-Star radio can connect to a D-Star repeater (yes, I know  
> about the
> "dongle", but it's not commercially available yet nor easily  
> replicated),
> while any rig with a touchtone pad can dial up an IRLP link.


Heck, who needs DTMF when you have a PC with SSH?  :-)

Of course, you have to be a node owner (or have their permission) to  
play with such things... log into the node via command line and type  
"decode " for whatever DTMF command you would normally punch, and  
it'll do it.

Some node owners also have customized web interfaces hiding behind  
password protected web pages they allow users to control the nodes from.

It all depends on the node owner.  Right now I'm working on a web- 
interface to control various Colorado nodes that wish to participate  
for ARES/RACES.  If I ever find enough time to finish it...

--
Nate Duehr, WY0X
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

[Nate Duehr]

On Nov 18, 2007, at 8:46 PM, n9wys wrote:

> Unfortunately, I need to attach the coverage plots to a 2x4 so I can  
> whack some of my users up-side the head with it in order to get the  
> point across.  They just don’t understand ...

The Readysnitch and Wouff Hong are standing by for your use at your  
earliest opportunity.  :-)

--
Nate Duehr, WY0X
[EMAIL PROTECTED]







 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

[George Henry]

Couple of big differences between D-Star, IRLP and Echolink:

With Echolink, any licensed amateur with a soundcard-equipped computer and 
an internet connection can connect to an Echolink-enabled repeater.  With 
IRLP and D-Star, you can only establish a connection between repeaters over 
the air - there is no access from the internet side.  And for now, only an 
Icom D-Star radio can connect to a D-Star repeater (yes, I know about the 
"dongle", but it's not commercially available yet nor easily replicated), 
while any rig with a touchtone pad can dial up an IRLP link.

George, KA3HSW


- Original Message - 
From: "Ron Wright" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2007 9:06 AM
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage


> Steve,
>
> I think this is what is misunderstood by most repeater owners and users is 
> that D-Star has set up a system that is not only digital voice, but a 
> gateway for interconnecting them for those who wish to connect into the 
> system.
>
> It is more like analog repeaters connected into a chat IRLP or Echolink, 
> but with better full duplex connectivity.
>
> My interest in D-Star is the digital voice.  From a number of commercial 
> and Ham users it seems digital has a much more fad/multi-path problem. 
> Know the world is going digital, but for mobile applications seems to have 
> some problems.  For fixed got the path digital offers a lot.
>
> 73, ron, n9ee/r

RE: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

[n9wys]

I've got RM and used it for the past several years.  Quite a learning curve
with it, but for a free piece of software it is very comprehensive and has
served me very well!

 

Unfortunately, I need to attach the coverage plots to a 2x4 so I can whack
some of my users up-side the head with it in order to get the point across.
They just don't understand why they can't hear the repeater when they're
down in a river valley 25+ miles from the repeater and there's a ridge of
land that rises above them in between the repeater and their location.  I've
tried to explain about being in "the shadow of the repeater" but some just
don't seem to grasp the concept.  (We're talking UHF freqs here and FLAT
lands for the most part.  The repeater antenna is 175 ft HAAT at the tower
site.)

 

ARRRGH!!!

 

Mark - N9WYS

 

  _  

From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com On Behalf Of John Barrett



Propagation :-( something I'm learned a lot about this last couple of weeks
- neat app called Radio Mobile I've been using to map out theoretical
coverage at various locations where I may be asked to drop my portable
repeater.. Makes me wish I had held out for a 60-75ft 3 section crank up to
put on my trailer, or a really tall hill to park on :-) Unfortunately - not
a lotta hills around this part of Texas :-(

 

Radio Mobile uses USGS topographical data and can do map overlays from
several free sources - check it out if you want to get some ideas where your
setup will have problems !!

  _  

From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com On Behalf Of n9wys

No, the complaints start when they can't hear/access the machine everywhere
with a full quieting signal.  It's amazing that some amateur licensees still
don't understand signal propagation.

But now I'm starting to get WAY off-topic.

73 de Mark - N9WYS

  _  

From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com On Behalf Of Bill

I kinda agree.  Get used to the infrastructure systems and you can't make a
contact when it goes down, that's when the complaining starts.  i.e.
cellphones and isp problems.  Heck that's when real amateur radio can shine!
Heck, the complaints start even when "the repeater" craps out.

William A. Collister

N7MOG 

 

RE: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

[John Barrett]

Propagation :-( something I'm learned a lot about this last couple of weeks
- neat app called Radio Mobile I've been using to map out theoretical
coverage at various locations where I may be asked to drop my portable
repeater.. Makes me wish I had held out for a 60-75ft 3 section crank up to
put on my trailer, or a really tall hill to park on :-) Unfortunately - not
a lotta hills around this part of Texas :-(

 

Radio Mobile uses USGS topographical data and can do map overlays from
several free sources - check it out if you want to get some ideas where your
setup will have problems !!

  _  

From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of n9wys
Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2007 8:55 PM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

 

No, the complaints start when they can't hear/access the machine everywhere
with a full quieting signal.  It's amazing that some amateur licensees still
don't understand signal propagation. 

 

But now I'm starting to get WAY off-topic.

 

73 de Mark - N9WYS

 

  _  

From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com On Behalf Of Bill

I kinda agree.  Get used to the infrastructure systems and you can't make a
contact when it goes down, that's when the complaining starts.  i.e.
cellphones and isp problems.  Heck that's when real amateur radio can shine!
Heck, the complaints start even when "the repeater" craps out.

 

William A. Collister

N7MOG 

 

RE: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

[n9wys]

No, the complaints start when they can't hear/access the machine everywhere
with a full quieting signal.  It's amazing that some amateur licensees still
don't understand signal propagation. 

 

But now I'm starting to get WAY off-topic.

 

73 de Mark - N9WYS

 

  _  

From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com On Behalf Of Bill



I kinda agree.  Get used to the infrastructure systems and you can't make a
contact when it goes down, that's when the complaining starts.  i.e.
cellphones and isp problems.  Heck that's when real amateur radio can shine!
Heck, the complaints start even when "the repeater" craps out.

 

William A. Collister

N7MOG 

RE: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

[Bill]

I kinda agree.  Get used to the infrastructure systems and you can't make a
contact when it goes down, that's when the complaining starts.  i.e.
cellphones and isp problems.  Heck that's when real amateur radio can shine!
Heck, the complaints start even when "the repeater" craps out.

 

William A. Collister

N7MOG

  _  

From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Barrett
Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2007 8:03 AM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

 

Ohhh geez - just get your general and work some HF !! Internet linking just
to make contacts is NOT ham radio. setting up regional repeaters and such..
there is a good use for internet linking.

 

The ARRL Phone Sweeps are running this weekend . made any contacts ??

 

  _  

From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steve S. Bosshard
(NU5D)
Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2007 8:51 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

 

Imagine your 2M or 70CM base station were on a tall, tall, tower and you 
can key and operate any one of 140 different repeaters world wide, no 
noise, static, etc.

Thats DSTAR today. From Hawaii to Alaska, to Vancouver to Ottawa, to 
Los Angeles, to London, to Berlin to Venice, to Darwin, AU. Today and NOW.

I know this is probably a bit off topic, and I appreciate your indulgence.

visit www.dstarusers.org and see who's talking.

Steve NU5D, /K5CTX B Temple, Texas US

-- 
/Subscribe to dstar_digital/

Powered by groups.yahoo.com <http://groups.
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dstar_digital/>
yahoo.com/group/dstar_digital/>

 

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

[no6b]

At 11/18/2007 06:50, you wrote:

>Imagine your 2M or 70CM base station were on a tall, tall, tower and you
>can key and operate any one of 140 different repeaters world wide, no
>noise, static, etc.
>
>Thats DSTAR today.

That's also IRLP & Echolink today, albeit with much greater coverage.

Bob NO6B

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

[Ron Wright]

Steve,

I think this is what is misunderstood by most repeater owners and users is that 
D-Star has set up a system that is not only digital voice, but a gateway for 
interconnecting them for those who wish to connect into the system.

It is more like analog repeaters connected into a chat IRLP or Echolink, but 
with better full duplex connectivity.

My interest in D-Star is the digital voice.  From a number of commercial and 
Ham users it seems digital has a much more fad/multi-path problem.  Know the 
world is going digital, but for mobile applications seems to have some 
problems.  For fixed got the path digital offers a lot.  

73, ron, n9ee/r



>From: "Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Date: 2007/11/18 Sun AM 08:50:31 CST
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], 
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, 
"Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com" 
>Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

>  
>Imagine your 2M or 70CM base station were on a tall, tall, tower and you 
>can key and operate any one of 140 different repeaters world wide, no 
>noise, static, etc.
>
>Thats DSTAR today.  From Hawaii to Alaska, to Vancouver to Ottawa, to 
>Los Angeles, to London, to Berlin to Venice, to Darwin, AU.  Today and NOW.
>
>I know this is probably a bit off topic, and I appreciate your indulgence.
>
>visit www.dstarusers.org and see who's talking.
>
>Steve NU5D, /K5CTX B  Temple, Texas US
>
>-- 
>/Subscribe to dstar_digital/
>   
>Powered by groups.yahoo.com <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dstar_digital/>
>
>


Ron Wright, N9EE
727-376-6575
MICRO COMPUTER CONCEPTS
Owner 146.64 repeater Tampa Bay, FL
No tone, all are welcome.

RE: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

[John Barrett]

Ohhh geez - just get your general and work some HF !! Internet linking just
to make contacts is NOT ham radio. setting up regional repeaters and such..
there is a good use for internet linking.

 

The ARRL Phone Sweeps are running this weekend . made any contacts ??

 

  _  

From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steve S. Bosshard
(NU5D)
Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2007 8:51 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

 

Imagine your 2M or 70CM base station were on a tall, tall, tower and you 
can key and operate any one of 140 different repeaters world wide, no 
noise, static, etc.

Thats DSTAR today. From Hawaii to Alaska, to Vancouver to Ottawa, to 
Los Angeles, to London, to Berlin to Venice, to Darwin, AU. Today and NOW.

I know this is probably a bit off topic, and I appreciate your indulgence.

visit www.dstarusers.org and see who's talking.

Steve NU5D, /K5CTX B Temple, Texas US

-- 
/Subscribe to dstar_digital/

Powered by groups.yahoo.com <http://groups.
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dstar_digital/>
yahoo.com/group/dstar_digital/>

 

[Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

Imagine your 2M or 70CM base station were on a tall, tall, tower and you 
can key and operate any one of 140 different repeaters world wide, no 
noise, static, etc.

Thats DSTAR today.  From Hawaii to Alaska, to Vancouver to Ottawa, to 
Los Angeles, to London, to Berlin to Venice, to Darwin, AU.  Today and NOW.

I know this is probably a bit off topic, and I appreciate your indulgence.

visit www.dstarusers.org and see who's talking.

Steve NU5D, /K5CTX B  Temple, Texas US


-- 
/Subscribe to dstar_digital/

Powered by groups.yahoo.com 

RE: [Repeater-Builder] Wide area coverage

[Juan Tellez]

My preference will be RLC-4 from Link-comm….

 

http://www.link-comm.com/controllers/about.htm  

 

Juan

 

  _  

De: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] En nombre de allenittiyavira
Enviado el: domingo, 07 de enero de 2007 11:56
Para: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Asunto: [Repeater-Builder] Wide area coverage

 

Hello all,
I am Allen, senior radio technician, working in Africa, new member.

I have extensive experience in trunking systems, but not very good 
with conventional.

I would like to know the best method to link 4 repeaters (conventional)
to work as one channel. Are link radios the best method? (no cabling 
is available). If so, which is the best repeater controller I can use 
to connect three link radios from master site?

Your replay is highly appriciated.

Regards

Allen

 

__ Información de NOD32, revisión 1963 (20070108) __

Este mensaje ha sido analizado con NOD32 antivirus system
http://www.nod32.com

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wide area coverage

[Steve Bosshard (NU5D)]

I have used Spoke and Hub system.  Several 146 Mhz repeaters cross connected
to 440 Mhz control stations, all looking at the same 440 repeater for
distrubution between the different 144 Mhz repeaters.  Steve NU5D


On 1/7/07, allenittiyavira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Hello all,
I am Allen, senior radio technician, working in Africa, new member.

I have extensive experience in trunking systems, but not very good
with conventional.




--
Ham Radio Spoken Here.NU5D

[Repeater-Builder] Wide area coverage

[allenittiyavira]

Hello all,
I am Allen, senior radio technician, working in Africa, new member.

I have extensive experience in trunking systems, but not very good 
with conventional.

I would like to know the best method to link 4 repeaters (conventional)
to work as one channel.  Are link radios the best method? (no cabling 
is available).  If so, which is the best repeater controller I can use 
to connect three link radios from master site?

Your replay is highly appriciated.

Regards

Allen