RE: [Repeater-Builder] I need some advised.

[Barry C']

A dedicated radio link , possibly on 70cm ? will do the job perfectly 

To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2007 00:28:15 +
Subject: [Repeater-Builder] I need some advised.
















  



Hi,

First, I like to mention that I tried the search option first 

and I did not find any information that will help.

At out local club, XE2CRT, are in the process of adding an IRLP node. 

Our repeater is located in a remote location in a tower putting the 

system about 300' about the rest of the city giving us with a very 

decent coverage, the problem is that we don't have internet connection 

available, no cable or telephone service in the area. Our approach is 

to add a link to the repeater. The node will be sitting in our club. 

How or what will be the best way to link this two. Our repeater is made 

of two Motorola radius using an external COR unit to build the repeater.

Any help will be greatly appreciated.



Julio

XE2WI



Ps please forgive any grammar errors.




  



















_
What are you waiting for? Join Lavalife FREE
http://a.ninemsn.com.au/b.aspx?URL=http%3A%2F%2Flavalife9%2Eninemsn%2Ecom%2Eau%2Fclickthru%2Fclickthru%2Eact%3Fid%3Dninemsn%26context%3Dan99%26locale%3Den%5FAU%26a%3D30288&_t=764581033&_r=email_taglines_Join_free_OCT07&_m=EXT

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Usage of Linked Repeater Systems vs. Stand Alone Repeaters

[Nate Duehr]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> At 11/23/2007 09:17, you wrote:
> 
> 
>> On Nov 22, 2007, at 12:31 PM, Paul Plack wrote:
>>
>>> For long-term monitoring, a repeater with inconspicuous CWID,
>>> minimalist courtesy tones and delays to kill squelch tails gets my
>>> vote every time.
>>>
>> We built a machine that CTCSS TX from the repeater follows user input
>> (user CTCSS in) -- the original reason was to do in-band linking for
>> an EchoIRLP node.
>>
>> As an interesting side-effect, we've had a number of pleased reports
>>from hams who've used commercial systems (and many who have commercial
>> radios that have proper "Reverse Burst" or "STE") who really like the
>> SOUND of a dead quiet repeater where they don't even hear the repeater
>> ID if it goes off in-between transmissions.
> 
> ...OTOH we reconfigured a system that was CTCSS encode at all times to 
> encode only when the squelch was open so as to accommodate an IRLP node, & 
> some of the users complained that they couldn't hear the courtesy tone 
> anymore.  They still wanted to use decode so as not to hear IMD yet still 
> hear the courtesy tone, so we had to set up the repeater so that encode is 
> always on when the node is not in use.  To each his or her own, I guess.
> 
> Bob NO6B

An interesting thing we noticed is that most ham rigs are SO slow to 
close, we could put the courtesy-tone right up against the time it would 
take for our link radio (with STE) to close, and most ham rigs can still 
hear it.

It's sad that the ham manufacturers can't spend another $5 to add 
STE/Reverse Burst after all these years, but it kinda comes in handy in 
this particular case that they don't.  :-)

Nate WY0X

[Repeater-Builder] Re: TK-705D problem - slightly OT ?

[n3dab]

keith - I've looked at the jack on the front and there is nothing 
obvious shorting any og the pins.  Checked pins against each other 
and against chassis grd  with vom and no continuity between any 2 
pins.  Only continuity is @ pin 2 and 4 to chassis which should be 
normal as Pin 2 is a direct grd (E)and Pin 4 is Mic. grd (ME).  Any 
other thoughts ?  

--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "Keith McQueen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> Did you check for a shorted pin in the mic connector?
>  
>  
> Keith McQueen
> 801-224-9460
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>  
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of n3dab
> Sent: Friday, November 23, 2007 3:56 PM
> To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Repeater-Builder] TK-705D problem - slightly OT ?
> 
> 
> 
> I am using a TK-705D for the receiver side of a low power 2mtr. 
rptr. 
> The 705 was working fine (Tx and Rx) and was sitting on the 
workbench 
> idling in Rcv. mode ,with no mic. attached and no signal being fed 
into 
> it thru the antenna port, and suddenly went into the TX mode. I 
have 
> powered it on and off, removed it from the rptr. and powered it up 
> indepndent of anything else but it remains locked up in the Tx 
mode. I 
> cannot even do a reset on it as it won't accept the program when I 
> power it up. 
> 
> I have been able to disable the power module and the IC-6 chip that 
> preceeds it and disable the diode Tx/Rx antenna switch to eliminate 
any 
> RF output, but something else inside the circuitry is telling the 
radio 
> to stay in the TX mode. Can anyone advise me how to completely 
> disable the Xmit side, so I can get it back in the Rx mode and 
continue 
> to use it for the rptr. rcvr.? 
> 
> Thanks in advance for any assistance.
> 
> Doug
>

[Repeater-Builder] Icom gives 5 more D-Star repeaters to the WIA

[Mark Thompson]

Icom gives 5 more D-Star repeaters to the WIA
 
 Just over a month ago, the WIA announced the gift from Icom (Australia)
 Pty Ltd of a D-Star repeater to be located at Olinda in the Dandenong ranges,
 to serve the greater Melbourne area.
 
 D-Star is a digital protocol developed by the Japanese Amateur Relay League
 (the JARL) and stands for Digital Smart Technologies for Amateur Radio.
 
 Now Icom and the WIA, concurrently with the official opening of the Olinda
 D-Star repeater VK3RWN, have announced the gift by Icom of 5 further D-Star
 repeaters to the WIA so that a D-Star repeater will be able to serve each of
 the other state capitals.
 
 The experience in Melbourne has been used as the basis of formulating what is
 really a cooperative effort between a club, its individual experts, the WIA
 and Icom.
 
 The WIA will consult with people in each state capital including the
 appropriate Advisory Committee to identify a club or group of clubs, supported
 by people with the necessary RF and computer skills, able to provide a
 suitable site and supply the ancillary equipment.
 
 Icom will provide the D-Star repeater and provide general assistance, and will
 maintain and repair the repeater on a warranty basis for 6 years.
 
 The WIA will licence the repeater and will meet the reasonable cost of
 broadband connection.
 
 It is hoped that the Amateur Radio Experimenters Group in Adelaide will be
 able to establish a D-Star repeater to serve Adelaide under these arrangements,
 as the AREG group were already exploring the establishment of D-Star repeater
 with Icom.
 
 The agreement between the WIA and Icom that forms the basis of these
 arrangements makes it clear that each D-Star repeater shall be open to all
 amateurs.
 
 The WIA acknowledges with gratitude Icom's generous support.
 (VK3KI President WIA Michael Owen)
 

 Are you interested in learning more about Dstar and what this exciting 
 new digital radio mode has to offer then visit the website 
 
 http://ww.dtsar.org.au
 
 And there is also a well established Australian Dstar news group, you 
 can join the group from the link provided on the Dtsar website or by 
 going directly to the following  
 
  http://lists.wia.org.au/mailman/listinfo/dstar


  

Get easy, one-click access to your favorites. 
Make Yahoo! your homepage.
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs 

RE: [Repeater-Builder] Repeater Antenna Choice

[Eric Lemmon]

Derek,

First and foremost, choose an omnidirectional antenna if the repeater is
centrally located, but consider an offset pattern antenna if the repeater is
at one side or end of the desired coverage area.  Second, don't go overboard
on the antenna gain, lest the pattern "go over the heads" of your intended
users.  Dipole antennas often perform much better than collinear fiberglass
antennas in this regard.  It is an excellent idea to use the lowest-loss
feedline you can afford, and if 1.625" Heliaz is available, use it.  My rule
of thumb is to use whatever feedline has less than 1.0 dB of loss at the
highest frequency used by the repeater.

73, Eric Lemmon WB6FLY
 

-Original Message-
From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Derek
Sent: Friday, November 23, 2007 2:55 PM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Repeater Antenna Choice

I'm looking for input on what kind of antenna to use for several 440 
MHz amateur repeaters.

Background: Suburban area surrounding metropolitan city of about 
700,000. HAGL for antennas range from 260' to 320' on 400' and 500' 
towers. I'm looking to maximize mobile and portable input, even 
possibly looking to use 1-5/8" heliax as I recently installed this size 
hardline on my repeater and have been very satisfied with the results.

I've used the DB-408 antenna and am happy with its performance, but am 
wondering about significant difference in using a DB-420 for future 
repeaters. Also considering the RFS 1151 (Tessco # 435830) fiberglass 
antenna. It is tuned for 440-450 MHz and has 8dB gain, but I've heard 
some say fiberglass is not the way to go for repeaters.

Any thoughts are appreciated.

Derek



 

RE: [Repeater-Builder] Micor Repeaters Available

[Eric Lemmon]

Where are these items located?

73, Eric Lemmon WB6FLY
 

-Original Message-
From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of bbfmrf
Sent: Friday, November 23, 2007 12:17 PM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Micor Repeaters Available

I am cleaning house and I have a number of UHF Micor repeaters that I 
need to move.

I believe they all worked when pulled from service, but I can no longer 
verify that fact so I am getting rid of them in AS IS condition. The 
cards have all been removed, but I do have a number of cards available 
and will include at least (2) cards w/ each repeater.

They are all unified chassis and most were either 460 or 470 boxes. I 
believe they all still contain the channel elements as well.

All I am asking is $25 each plus actual shipping costs.

I hope someone will be interested enough in taking these off of my 
hands, but if they are not spoken for within 2 weeks they will be 
disposed.

Pictures are available by requesting at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 

[Repeater-Builder] I need some advised.

[Julio Zapata]

Hi,
First, I like to mention that I tried the search option first 
and I did not find any information that will help.
At out local club, XE2CRT, are in the process of adding an IRLP node. 
Our repeater is located in a remote location in a tower putting the 
system about 300' about the rest of the city giving us with a very 
decent coverage, the problem is that we don't have internet connection 
available, no cable or telephone service in the area. Our approach is 
to add a link to the repeater. The node will be sitting in our club. 
How or what will be the best way to link this two. Our repeater is made 
of two Motorola radius using an external COR unit to build the repeater.
Any help will be greatly appreciated.

Julio
XE2WI

Ps please forgive any grammar errors.

[Repeater-Builder] Repeater Antenna Choice

[Derek]

I'm looking for input on what kind of antenna to use for several 440 
MHz amateur repeaters.

Background:  Suburban area surrounding metropolitan city of about 
700,000.  HAGL for antennas range from 260' to 320' on 400' and 500' 
towers.  I'm looking to maximize mobile and portable input, even 
possibly looking to use 1-5/8" heliax as I recently installed this size 
hardline on my repeater and have been very satisfied with the results.

I've used the DB-408 antenna and am happy with it's performance, but am 
wondering about significant difference in using a DB-420 for future 
repeaters.  Also considering the RFS 1151 (Tessco # 435830) fiberglass 
antenna.  It is tuned for 440-450 MHz and has 8dB gain, but I've heard 
some say fiberglass is not the way to go for repeaters.

Any thoughts are appreciated.

Derek

[Repeater-Builder] OLD Power Amps

[bbfmrf]

I have about 8 Motorola Tube Type Power Amps.  I don't know the part #, 
but the chassis does have a TLE1062 stamped on it.

I need to dispose of these items, but I hate to just trash them if some 
one could use them or the parts.

Due to the transformers, they are very heavy and the shipping probably 
would be more than the vakue of the amp.

If anyone is interested in these amps,or simply specific parts, they 
may have them for the cost of shipping.  If you only need specific 
parts, I will gladly disassemble them, and ship just the parts.

All equipment is shipped AS IS.

Pictures of the amps are available by requesting at [EMAIL PROTECTED]

If these have not been spoken for within a week, I will be forced to 
dispose of them.

[Repeater-Builder] Micor Repeaters Available

[bbfmrf]

I am cleaning house and I have a number of UHF Micor repeaters that I 
need to move.

I believe they all worked when pulled from service, but I can no longer 
verify that fact so I am getting rid of them in AS IS condition.  The 
cards have all been removed, but I do have a number of cards available 
and will include at least (2) cards w/ each repeater.

They are all unified chassis and most were either 460 or 470 boxes. I 
believe they all still contain the channel elements as well.

All I am asking is $25 each plus actual shipping costs.

I hope someone will be interested enough in taking these off of my 
hands, but if they are not spoken for within 2 weeks they will be 
disposed.

Pictures are available by requesting at [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: [Repeater-Builder] TK-705D problem - slightly OT ?

[Keith McQueen]

Did you check for a shorted pin in the mic connector?
 
 
Keith McQueen
801-224-9460
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 

-Original Message-
From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of n3dab
Sent: Friday, November 23, 2007 3:56 PM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Repeater-Builder] TK-705D problem - slightly OT ?



I am using a TK-705D for the receiver side of a low power 2mtr. rptr. 
The 705 was working fine (Tx and Rx) and was sitting on the workbench 
idling in Rcv. mode ,with no mic. attached and no signal being fed into 
it thru the antenna port, and suddenly went into the TX mode. I have 
powered it on and off, removed it from the rptr. and powered it up 
indepndent of anything else but it remains locked up in the Tx mode. I 
cannot even do a reset on it as it won't accept the program when I 
power it up. 

I have been able to disable the power module and the IC-6 chip that 
preceeds it and disable the diode Tx/Rx antenna switch to eliminate any 
RF output, but something else inside the circuitry is telling the radio 
to stay in the TX mode. Can anyone advise me how to completely 
disable the Xmit side, so I can get it back in the Rx mode and continue 
to use it for the rptr. rcvr.? 

Thanks in advance for any assistance.

Doug 



 

[Repeater-Builder] Peet Brothers Question

[rrath]

Any one using the Peet Brothers model ULTIMETER 100? Would you 
contact
me off list. I would like to ask some questions about it. Thank you.

Rod kc7vqr

[Repeater-Builder] Re: AM interference on long cable run

[skipp025]

Hi Jim, 

Both ends of the pair should *need to) be balanced... 

There is a way to get the packets back from another 
location but it's well past the scope of this forum. 

cheers, 
skipp 


> Jim Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Skipp, I did have transformer coupling on the audio
> lines out at the repeater with both sides of the
> twisted pair isolated from ground, but did not try
> putting transformers in the line back at the computer.
>  That would certainly be easy enough to do if I ever
> hook it up again.  One side of the twisted pair was
> hooked to the ground of the computer.  (The repeater
> cabnet is bolted to the side of the tower out in the
> middle of a pasture)
> 
> We have a wireless ISP at this site, and the ISP
> provider decided to take away the public IP address
> and assign us a private IP address, which no one can
> reach from the internet.  We can do everything we need
> to do on the internet, but packets that were not asked
> for cannot find their way back to the router here . 
> UDP packets in particular have no way to reach us.
> 
> 73 - Jim  W5ZIT

[Repeater-Builder] TK-705D problem - slightly OT ?

[n3dab]

I am using a TK-705D for the receiver side of a low power 2mtr. rptr.  
The 705 was working fine (Tx and Rx) and was sitting on the workbench 
idling in Rcv. mode ,with no mic. attached and no signal being fed into 
it thru the antenna port, and suddenly went into the TX mode.  I have 
powered it on and off, removed it from the rptr. and powered it up 
indepndent of anything else but it remains locked up in the Tx mode.  I 
cannot even do a reset on it as it won't accept the program when I 
power it up.  

I have been able to disable the power module and the IC-6 chip that 
preceeds it and disable the diode Tx/Rx antenna switch to eliminate any 
RF output, but something else inside the circuitry is telling the radio 
to stay in the TX mode.   Can anyone advise me how to completely 
disable the Xmit side, so I can get it back in the Rx mode and continue 
to use it for the rptr. rcvr.? 

Thanks in advance for any assistance.

Doug   

RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: AM interference on long cable run

[Eric Lemmon]

Jim,

I think you have found the source of your interference- the grounded side of
the twisted pair!  Grounding either side of what should be a "balanced pair"
turns it into an antenna.

A good case in point:  Many years ago, the local cable company hooked up a
video camera and tapped into the sound system at the City Council chambers,
so that the citizens could watch and hear what was going on by watching the
public-access channel at home.  The problem was that there was a very
prominent 60 Hz buzz in the audio.  Dozens of citizens called in to complain
about the hum, but the cable company's engineer tried "every trick in the
book" (according to him) to eliminate the hum, without success.  It turns
out that the audio originated at the Bogen PA amplifier, and the cable guy
simply put an RCA audio plug on the end of his twisted pair, which meant
that one side of the circuit was grounded at the source end.  Even though
the load end at the cable company was fed into a balanced input on the
Blonder-Tongue audio channel modulator, the imbalance caused by the grounded
conductor in the telco leased line made a nice antenna which picked up the
AC hum by induction from the overbuilt power lines.

I suggested to the engineer that he purchase and install a Bogen "WMT"
transformer at the PA amplifier.  He did, and the audio became hum-free.  He
was very embarrassed to report that the instruction manual for the Bogen PA
amplifier contained a bold-print admonition that any input to or output from
the amplifier that was connected to distant equipment should be made over
balanced twisted pairs with a WMT (or equal) transformer at each end.  He
didn't read the manual first.  Duh!

73, Eric Lemmon WB6FLY




-Original Message-
From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jim Brown
Sent: Friday, November 23, 2007 11:04 AM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: AM interference on long cable run

Skip, I did have transformer coupling on the audio
lines out at the repeater with both sides of the
twisted pair isolated from ground, but did not try
putting transformers in the line back at the computer.
That would certainly be easy enough to do if I ever
hook it up again. One side of the twisted pair was
hooked to the ground of the computer. (The repeater
cabnet is bolted to the side of the tower out in the
middle of a pasture)

We have a wireless ISP at this site, and the ISP
provider decided to take away the public IP address
and assign us a private IP address, which no one can
reach from the internet. We can do everything we need
to do on the internet, but packets that were not asked
for cannot find their way back to the router here . 
UDP packets in particular have no way to reach us.

73 - Jim W5ZIT

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: AM interference on long cable run

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

Both ends need an isolation transformer and both send and receive
audio.  Also if there is a high Z circuit, you may try adding a 1K or so
shunt resistor to lower the impedance of the circuit.  I would
experiment with grounding only one end of the cable at first.  Of course
this is moot with the cable severed by the mower, but there is no reason
the circuit should not work.  Also the .001 line to line and line to
ground may help.  We had music on hold from an AM broadcast station into
a telephone patch years ago, and the .001 capacitors fixed that
particular problem.  Best luck,  Steve NU5D


Jim Brown wrote:
> Skip, I did have transformer coupling on the audio
> lines out at the repeater with both sides of the
> twisted pair isolated from ground, but did not try
> putting transformers in the line back at the computer.
>   

-- 
/Subscribe to dstar_digital/

Powered by groups.yahoo.com 

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: 2x RX's or 2x TX's on one Controller Port

[Jim Brown]

Well, strangely enough, when I got my message back,
the schematic was attached.  I got Bob's schematic
attachment also.  Take another look at the original
message and see if it is not attached, if you still
have it.  Guess it is in the archives in any case.

73 - Jim  W5ZIT

--- Jeff Kincaid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Hi Jim,
> 
> How 'bout posting your circuit to the Group's file
> or picture area so
> we all can enjoy it?
> 
> Jeff
> 
> --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Jim Brown
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Kevin, here is a circuit that I have used several
> > times to combine a control receiver with the main
> > receiver in a repeater controller.  It can be used
> to
> > provide a second frequency port to a repeater
> system
> > with one port having precidence over the other, ie
> > when one port has a signal, the other port is
> > inhibited.
> > 
> > I am sending this message direct since I don't
> think
> > that the Yahoo groups can include an attachment.
> > 
> > The circuit is for a positive going COS or RUS
> signal
> > input, and provides DC isolation for direct
> connection
> > to a discriminator output.  De-emphasis is
> provided by
> > adding the caps indicated when discriminator audio
> is
> > used.
> > 
> > It has also been used with an NHRC-4 to provide a
> > third port.  I use the fan output to control the
> > transmitter PTT on the third port and parallel the
> > audio to both transmitters.  The fan output can be
> > disabled to shut off the transmit on the third
> port.
> > 
> > The second port receiver always has precedence
> over
> > the third port, and both the second and third
> ports
> > can be disabled by disabling the second port in
> the
> > NHRC-4 and shutting off the fan control.
> > 
> > I hope this is what you were looking for - 
> > 
> > 73 - Jim  W5ZIT
> > 
> > 
> > --- Kevin & Natalia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > 
> > > Hi All,
> > > 
> > > I am looking for a simple circuit that I could
> use
> > > to connect either 2x RX's or 2x TX's onto 1 port
> of
> > > my controller.
> > > Reason, I am dealing with a split site repeater.
> So
> > > I don't want to waste a port for half a system,
> that
> > > I could use for another use.
> > > I was then thinking about using the linking port
> to
> > > run the radio as required, and include a switch
> to
> > > switch in or out the radio.
> > > I am using a Link Comm RLC-3 controller, ports
> are
> > > nearly all filled up, that's why I am trying to
> save
> > > the port.
> > > 
> > > Radio A (Link) RX ---   
>
> > > 
>
> > >    Radio A (Link) TX
> > >  |  
>
> > > 
>
> > >   |
> > > 
> |-Input
> > > to controller  / Output from Controller 
> > >  |  
>  
> > > from site 1  from site 2
>
> > >|
> > > Radio B (1/2 split) RX--X---
>
> > > 
>
> > > X- Radio B (1/2 split) TX
> > > 
> > > X = switch to switch out the Split site
> repeater.
> > > 
> > > Can I ask for some views on this, and any
> circuit/s
> > > that may help, even if I only get the audio
> lines
> > > working, this would be a help.
> > > 
> > > Regards
> > > 
> > > Kevin.
> > > 
> > >  
> > > Get Skype and call me for free.
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> >  
>

> > Get easy, one-click access to your favorites. 
> > Make Yahoo! your homepage.
> > http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
> >
> 
> 
> 




  

Be a better sports nut!  Let your teams follow you 
with Yahoo Mobile. Try it now.  
http://mobile.yahoo.com/sports;_ylt=At9_qDKvtAbMuh1G1SQtBI7ntAcJ

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: AM interference on long cable run

[Jim Brown]

Skip, I did have transformer coupling on the audio
lines out at the repeater with both sides of the
twisted pair isolated from ground, but did not try
putting transformers in the line back at the computer.
 That would certainly be easy enough to do if I ever
hook it up again.  One side of the twisted pair was
hooked to the ground of the computer.  (The repeater
cabnet is bolted to the side of the tower out in the
middle of a pasture)

We have a wireless ISP at this site, and the ISP
provider decided to take away the public IP address
and assign us a private IP address, which no one can
reach from the internet.  We can do everything we need
to do on the internet, but packets that were not asked
for cannot find their way back to the router here . 
UDP packets in particular have no way to reach us.

73 - Jim  W5ZIT

--- skipp025 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> I didn't see a post where he actually tried a
> balanced pair 
> connection with any type of xmfr, choke or hybrid.
> If he needs 
> DC Current signaling we could even show him how to
> wire up a 
> basic balanced hybrid with an optional DC Current
> Loop. 
> 
> In a poor mans method one could even use the low
> cost 
> audio transformers from Radio Shack. True split
> winding xmfrs 
> for hybrid aps are also cheap and easy to find. 
> 
> cheers, 
> s. 
> 
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 
> > Since the other remedies haven't worked
> completely, you might 
> > file  this away in case the situation arises
> again:
> >  
> > You might be experiencing a ground loop even with
> coupling 
> > transformers at each end due to the capacitance to
> ground 
> > of the transformers. A common mode choke, if it
> has sufficient 
> > reactance at the noise frequency, can eliminate
> the  noise.
> >  
> > A common mode choke is an inductor with a single
> core (toroidal 
> > is good) and two identical windings connected such
> that each 
> > winding is in series with one of the long lines.
> The choke 
> > goes at the input end with the phasing dots on the
> same side, 
> > i.e., either toward the line or toward the
> equipment input.
> >  
> > The "desired signal" current flows in opposite
> directions on 
> > the two lines and creates opposing magnetic fields
> in the choke, 
> > which cancel. The  desired signal never sees the
> choke and its 
> > waveform is  maintained.
>  
> > The "undesired signal" (common mode) current flows
> in the 
> > same  direction in both lines and sees a lot of
> reactance 
> > in the choke because the two magnetic fields add.
> Much of 
> > the noise is eliminated.
> >  
> > 73,
> > Bob  
> > 
> > Bob Schmid,  WA9FBO, Member
> > S-COM, LLC
> > www.scomcontrollers.com
> > 
> >
> 
> >  
> > Hi Jim,
> >  
> > >The cable I used was armored with a spiral copper
> > shield over 5  twisted pair lines. I did try
> grounding
> > the shield at one end, and at both  ends with no
> > results. Putting caps across the twisted pair and
> to
> > ground  also did not eliminate the problem, but
> did
> > reduce it. I used 600:600  isolation transformers
> in
> > the audio input and output lines at the  repeater.
> > 
> > >It all became a mute point when the cable got
> mowed  in
> > two during a grass cutting this last summer, and
> then
> > we lost the  public IP address and EchoLink was no
> > longer usable. So any more trouble  shooting
> exercises
> > will await the return (if ever) of the public  IP
> > address.
> > 
> > 
> 
> 



  

Never miss a thing.  Make Yahoo your home page. 
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs

[Repeater-Builder] Re: 2x RX's or 2x TX's on one Controller Port

[Jeff Kincaid]

Hi Jim,

How 'bout posting your circuit to the Group's file or picture area so
we all can enjoy it?

Jeff

--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Jim Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Kevin, here is a circuit that I have used several
> times to combine a control receiver with the main
> receiver in a repeater controller.  It can be used to
> provide a second frequency port to a repeater system
> with one port having precidence over the other, ie
> when one port has a signal, the other port is
> inhibited.
> 
> I am sending this message direct since I don't think
> that the Yahoo groups can include an attachment.
> 
> The circuit is for a positive going COS or RUS signal
> input, and provides DC isolation for direct connection
> to a discriminator output.  De-emphasis is provided by
> adding the caps indicated when discriminator audio is
> used.
> 
> It has also been used with an NHRC-4 to provide a
> third port.  I use the fan output to control the
> transmitter PTT on the third port and parallel the
> audio to both transmitters.  The fan output can be
> disabled to shut off the transmit on the third port.
> 
> The second port receiver always has precedence over
> the third port, and both the second and third ports
> can be disabled by disabling the second port in the
> NHRC-4 and shutting off the fan control.
> 
> I hope this is what you were looking for - 
> 
> 73 - Jim  W5ZIT
> 
> 
> --- Kevin & Natalia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> > Hi All,
> > 
> > I am looking for a simple circuit that I could use
> > to connect either 2x RX's or 2x TX's onto 1 port of
> > my controller.
> > Reason, I am dealing with a split site repeater. So
> > I don't want to waste a port for half a system, that
> > I could use for another use.
> > I was then thinking about using the linking port to
> > run the radio as required, and include a switch to
> > switch in or out the radio.
> > I am using a Link Comm RLC-3 controller, ports are
> > nearly all filled up, that's why I am trying to save
> > the port.
> > 
> > Radio A (Link) RX ---   
> > 
> >    Radio A (Link) TX
> >  |  
> > 
> >   |
> >  |-Input
> > to controller  / Output from Controller 
> >  |
> > from site 1  from site 2
> >|
> > Radio B (1/2 split) RX--X---
> > 
> > X- Radio B (1/2 split) TX
> > 
> > X = switch to switch out the Split site repeater.
> > 
> > Can I ask for some views on this, and any circuit/s
> > that may help, even if I only get the audio lines
> > working, this would be a help.
> > 
> > Regards
> > 
> > Kevin.
> > 
> >  
> > Get Skype and call me for free.
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
>  

> Get easy, one-click access to your favorites. 
> Make Yahoo! your homepage.
> http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
>

Re: [Repeater-Builder] 2x RX's or 2x TX's on one Controller Port

[Jim Brown]

I guess it depends on what you would call 'better'.  I
know this circuit works, and it uses the stockpile of
4011 chips I bought at a sidewalk sale in Dallas back
in the '70s from left over TI testing.  I don't know
what kind of tests were run on them, but I have not
found a bad one, and have had them in service as CW ID
oscillators, audio gates, bubble up 'beep' generators
(including timing) and squelch tail timers for many
years now.  Going out and buying a different chip when
I already have something that works kinda violates the
KISS principle, which I very much subscribe to - HI.

73 - Jim  W5ZIT

--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> Would quad bilateral switches like a CMOS 4066
> better for switching the audio lines?
> 
> Dave WB2FTX
> 
> - Original Message -
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Date: Friday, November 23, 2007 11:35 am
> Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] 2x RX's or 2x TX's
> on one Controller Port
> To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> 
> > At 11/23/2007 03:12, you wrote:
> > 
> > >Kevin, here is a circuit that I have used several
> > >times to combine a control receiver with the main
> > >receiver in a repeater controller. It can be used
> to
> > >provide a second frequency port to a repeater
> system
> > >with one port having precidence over the other,
> ie
> > >when one port has a signal, the other port is
> > >inhibited.
> > 
> > How much distortion do you get using those 4011
> NAND gates as 
> > audio amps?
> > 
> > Bob NO6B
> > 
> > 
> 



  

Never miss a thing.  Make Yahoo your home page. 
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs

[Repeater-Builder] Re: AM interference on long cable run

[skipp025]

I didn't see a post where he actually tried a balanced pair 
connection with any type of xmfr, choke or hybrid. If he needs 
DC Current signaling we could even show him how to wire up a 
basic balanced hybrid with an optional DC Current Loop. 

In a poor mans method one could even use the low cost 
audio transformers from Radio Shack. True split winding xmfrs 
for hybrid aps are also cheap and easy to find. 

cheers, 
s. 

> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 
> Since the other remedies haven't worked completely, you might 
> file  this away in case the situation arises again:
>  
> You might be experiencing a ground loop even with coupling 
> transformers at each end due to the capacitance to ground 
> of the transformers. A common mode choke, if it has sufficient 
> reactance at the noise frequency, can eliminate the  noise.
>  
> A common mode choke is an inductor with a single core (toroidal 
> is good) and two identical windings connected such that each 
> winding is in series with one of the long lines. The choke 
> goes at the input end with the phasing dots on the same side, 
> i.e., either toward the line or toward the equipment input.
>  
> The "desired signal" current flows in opposite directions on 
> the two lines and creates opposing magnetic fields in the choke, 
> which cancel. The  desired signal never sees the choke and its 
> waveform is  maintained.
 
> The "undesired signal" (common mode) current flows in the 
> same  direction in both lines and sees a lot of reactance 
> in the choke because the two magnetic fields add. Much of 
> the noise is eliminated.
>  
> 73,
> Bob  
> 
> Bob Schmid,  WA9FBO, Member
> S-COM, LLC
> www.scomcontrollers.com
> 
>

>  
> Hi Jim,
>  
> >The cable I used was armored with a spiral copper
> shield over 5  twisted pair lines. I did try grounding
> the shield at one end, and at both  ends with no
> results. Putting caps across the twisted pair and to
> ground  also did not eliminate the problem, but did
> reduce it. I used 600:600  isolation transformers in
> the audio input and output lines at the  repeater.
> 
> >It all became a mute point when the cable got mowed  in
> two during a grass cutting this last summer, and then
> we lost the  public IP address and EchoLink was no
> longer usable. So any more trouble  shooting exercises
> will await the return (if ever) of the public  IP
> address.
> 
> 

Re: [Repeater-Builder] 2x RX's or 2x TX's on one Controller Port

[no6b]

At 11/23/2007 09:20, you wrote:

>Would quad bilateral switches like a CMOS 4066 better for switching the 
>audio lines?
>
>Dave WB2FTX

Well, if you're asking me how I'd do it, see the attached.  It's a bit 
fancier than Jim's circuit, but it's untested because I determined that the 
resulting board wouldn't fit in the enclosure I planned to use.

Bob NO6B<>

Re: [Repeater-Builder] 2x RX's or 2x TX's on one Controller Port

[Jim Brown]

I have never measured the distortion, but I do try to
keep the maximum voltage swing down to a tenth of the
supply voltage.  The CMOS logic will operate all the
way from 5 to 15 volts or so, and at the higher supply
voltages you can have more audio voltage swing.

I don't notice any distortion by listening to the
output by ear.  The CMOS gates have quite a bit of
gain and are operated with quite a bit of feedback, so
this helps keep the output linear.  They operate
pretty much like a single supply op-amp but the nice
thing is the built in audio gate using the other input
to control audio through the portion of the gate with
the feedback resistor.

73 - Jim  W5ZIT


--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> At 11/23/2007 03:12, you wrote:
> 
> >Kevin, here is a circuit that I have used several
> >times to combine a control receiver with the main
> >receiver in a repeater controller. It can be used
> to
> >provide a second frequency port to a repeater
> system
> >with one port having precidence over the other, ie
> >when one port has a signal, the other port is
> >inhibited.
> 
> How much distortion do you get using those 4011 NAND
> gates as audio amps?
> 
> Bob NO6B
> 
> 



  

Never miss a thing.  Make Yahoo your home page. 
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs

Re: [Repeater-Builder] AM interference on long cable run

[scomind]

 
Hi Jim,
 
>The cable I used was armored with a spiral copper
shield over 5  twisted pair lines. I did try grounding
the shield at one end, and at both  ends with no
results. Putting caps across the twisted pair and to
ground  also did not eliminate the problem, but did
reduce it. I used 600:600  isolation transformers in
the audio input and output lines at the  repeater.

>It all became a mute point when the cable got mowed  in
two during a grass cutting this last summer, and then
we lost the  public IP address and EchoLink was no
longer usable. So any more trouble  shooting exercises
will await the return (if ever) of the public  IP
address.




Since the other remedies haven't worked completely, you might file  this away 
in case the situation arises again:
 
You might be experiencing a ground loop even with coupling  transformers at 
each end due to the capacitance to ground of  the transformers. A common mode 
choke, if it has  sufficient reactance at the noise frequency, can eliminate 
the  noise.
 
A common mode choke is an inductor with a single core  (toroidal is good) and 
two identical windings connected such that  each winding is in series with 
one of the long lines.  The choke goes at the input end with the phasing dots 
on 
the same  side, i.e., either toward the line or toward the equipment  input.
 
The "desired signal" current flows in opposite directions on the two  lines 
and creates opposing magnetic fields in the choke, which cancel. The  desired 
signal never sees the choke and its waveform is  maintained.
 
The "undesired signal" (common mode) current flows in the same  direction in 
both lines and sees a lot of reactance in the choke because the two  magnetic 
fields add. Much of the noise is eliminated.
 
73,
Bob  

Bob Schmid,  WA9FBO, Member
S-COM, LLC
PO Box 1546
LaPorte CO  80535-1546
970-416-6505 voice
970-419-3222  fax
www.scomcontrollers.com




**Check out AOL's list of 2007's hottest 
products.
(http://money.aol.com/special/hot-products-2007?NCID=aoltop000301)

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Usage of Linked Repeater Systems vs. Stand Alone Repeaters

[no6b]

At 11/23/2007 09:17, you wrote:


>On Nov 22, 2007, at 12:31 PM, Paul Plack wrote:
>
> > For long-term monitoring, a repeater with inconspicuous CWID,
> > minimalist courtesy tones and delays to kill squelch tails gets my
> > vote every time.
> >
>
>We built a machine that CTCSS TX from the repeater follows user input
>(user CTCSS in) -- the original reason was to do in-band linking for
>an EchoIRLP node.
>
>As an interesting side-effect, we've had a number of pleased reports
>from hams who've used commercial systems (and many who have commercial
>radios that have proper "Reverse Burst" or "STE") who really like the
>SOUND of a dead quiet repeater where they don't even hear the repeater
>ID if it goes off in-between transmissions.

...OTOH we reconfigured a system that was CTCSS encode at all times to 
encode only when the squelch was open so as to accommodate an IRLP node, & 
some of the users complained that they couldn't hear the courtesy tone 
anymore.  They still wanted to use decode so as not to hear IMD yet still 
hear the courtesy tone, so we had to set up the repeater so that encode is 
always on when the node is not in use.  To each his or her own, I guess.

Bob NO6B

Re: [Repeater-Builder] 2x RX's or 2x TX's on one Controller Port

[wb2ftx]

Would quad bilateral switches like a CMOS 4066 better for switching the audio 
lines?

Dave WB2FTX

- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Friday, November 23, 2007 11:35 am
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] 2x RX's or 2x TX's on one Controller Port
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com

> At 11/23/2007 03:12, you wrote:
> 
> >Kevin, here is a circuit that I have used several
> >times to combine a control receiver with the main
> >receiver in a repeater controller. It can be used to
> >provide a second frequency port to a repeater system
> >with one port having precidence over the other, ie
> >when one port has a signal, the other port is
> >inhibited.
> 
> How much distortion do you get using those 4011 NAND gates as 
> audio amps?
> 
> Bob NO6B
> 
> 

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Usage of Linked Repeater Systems vs. Stand Alone Repeaters

[Nate Duehr]

On Nov 22, 2007, at 12:31 PM, Paul Plack wrote:

> For long-term monitoring, a repeater with inconspicuous CWID,  
> minimalist courtesy tones and delays to kill squelch tails gets my  
> vote every time.
>

We built a machine that CTCSS TX from the repeater follows user input  
(user CTCSS in) -- the original reason was to do in-band linking for  
an EchoIRLP node.

As an interesting side-effect, we've had a number of pleased reports  
from hams who've used commercial systems (and many who have commercial  
radios that have proper "Reverse Burst" or "STE") who really like the  
SOUND of a dead quiet repeater where they don't even hear the repeater  
ID if it goes off in-between transmissions.

The interesting part about that kind of setup is the techies/geeks who  
want the courtesy tones and gadgets can have them, they just run their  
receivers without CTCSS.  Those things play, but aren't heard by  
anyone using CTCSS decoders.

Something to think about for those looking for something "new" to play  
with.

--
Nate Duehr, WY0X
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [Repeater-Builder] 2x RX's or 2x TX's on one Controller Port

[no6b]

At 11/23/2007 03:12, you wrote:

>Kevin, here is a circuit that I have used several
>times to combine a control receiver with the main
>receiver in a repeater controller. It can be used to
>provide a second frequency port to a repeater system
>with one port having precidence over the other, ie
>when one port has a signal, the other port is
>inhibited.

How much distortion do you get using those 4011 NAND gates as audio amps?

Bob NO6B

RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Receiver overload

[Eric Lemmon]

The instructions for constructing a simple, but very effective, stub filter
are found in General Electric Datafile Bulletin 10002-1, available for
download here:



I used the piston variable capacitor out of a bad channel element for
tuning.  Worked like a champ!

73, Eric Lemmon WB6FLY


-Original Message-
From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Morris WA6ILQ
Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2007 11:58 PM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Receiver overload

At 09:46 PM 11/22/07, you wrote:
>--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
 , "David Epley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> >
> > What is your opinion on a ¼ wave open stub installed in the receiver
>side
> > cut for 104.9?
> >
>

Re: [Repeater-Builder] 2x RX's or 2x TX's on one Controller Port

[Ron Wright]

Kevin,

If you are trying to have 2 repeaters on the same port then simply parrallel 
the radio I/O.  Should be able to directly connect the PTTs and TX audios, but 
need to isolate the COSs and RX audio with simple resistors.  The resistor 
values will need to be worked with due to not knowing the input/output 
impedances here.

Of course in this require both repeaters to operate at the same time and what 
is on one will be on the other.

73, ron, n9ee/r



>From: Kevin & Natalia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Date: 2007/11/22 Thu PM 08:12:43 CST
>To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: [Repeater-Builder] 2x RX's or 2x TX's on one Controller Port

>  
>Hi All, I am looking for a simple circuit that I could use to connect either 
>2x RX's or 2x TX's onto 1 port of my controller.Reason, I am dealing with a 
>split site repeater. So I don't want to waste a port for half a system, that I 
>could use for another use.I was then thinking about using the linking port to 
>run the radio as required, and include a switch to switch in or out the 
>radio.I am using a Link Comm RLC-3 controller, ports are nearly all filled up, 
>that's why I am trying to save the port. Radio A (Link) RX --- 
>  
> Radio A (Link) TX |   
>   |   
>  |-Input to controller  / Output from 
>Controller  | from 
>site 1  from site 2|Radio B (1/2 split) 
>RX--X---   
>   X- Radio B (1/2 split) TX X = switch to switch out the 
>Split site repeater. Can I ask for some views on this, and any circuit/s that 
>may help, even if I only get the audio lines working, this would be a help. 
>Regards Kevin.  
>Get Skype and call me for free.
>
>


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

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Receiver overload

[Mike Morris WA6ILQ]

At 09:46 PM 11/22/07, you wrote:
>--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "David Epley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
>wrote:
> >
> > What is your opinion on a ¼ wave open stub installed in the receiver
>side
> > cut for 104.9?
> >
>
>David,
> This is the first thing I'd try. I have much success using stubs
>to eliminate problems such as yours. However, it won't help much in
>the case of common mode problems which yours may very well be.
>Shielding and grounding may be your best solution in that case.
>
> I once had a Heathkit freq counter that picked up our FM
>transmitter when connected to anything. A 1/4 wave open stub and tee
>at the input cured the problem. I've also used them on FM receivers at
>the station to knock down our signal enough to listen to other stations.
>
> An open stub at the FM station's frequency hooked to your 900
>receiver will add some reactance to the line but that should not be
>too much of a problem unless it comes out as an even multiple of a
>half wavelength at your 900 freq.
>
>Al,
>K9SI

And if I remember Mr. Andreano, my electronics instructor correctly,
a 3/4 wave stub should do the trick, and not bother the 900mhz
frequency.  Just use high quality cable (i.e. heliax).

Make sure the shorted end is moisture proof, I've seen one with a
copper pipe cap with a hole drilled in the center to clear the center
conductor... The builder cut back the outer jacket, soldered the
center conductor to the outer surface of the cap, trimmed the
excess, then soldered the outer edge of the cap to the outer
shield of the heliax.

Mike WA6ILQ

[Repeater-Builder] Re: Receiver overload

[sgreact47]

What about one of those shorted stub type lightning arresters
for 900 mhz on the antenna side, and the stub to notch out the 104 
mhz on the receiver side of the duplexer.

For the 104 mhz comming in on the outside of the sheild/cable, some 
good ferrite chokes over the receiver cable.