Re: [Repeater-Builder] Antenna Gain (WAS antenna question - Dip It and Scotch Kote)
On May 10, 2008, at 11:16 AM, Eric Lemmon wrote: The international communications engineering organizations have decreed that dBd shall be used for antennas below 1 GHz, and dBi shall be used for antennas 1 GHz and above. And why would the Marketing/Sales department care about what the communications engineering standards people want? :-) -- Nate Duehr, WY0X [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Antenna Gain (WAS antenna question - Dip It and Scotch Kote)
On May 10, 2008, at 5:44 PM, wb8art wrote: --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Kevin Custer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Steve Bosshard wrote: Aluminum gives directivity and pattern - GAIN comes from EIMAC. Now THIS guy knows his stuff. 4CX250R (Eimac) and 2 metersYea! Yeah 8877 Now your talking 5000' HAAT and I'll be at home with a cold 807 instead. :-) Of course, gain on an antenna should be gain to the horizon versus other directions, for most omnidirectional antennas (if you mount them properly... grin)... just ask the satellite guys if they always want the antenna gain pointed at the horizon. (BIG GRIN) (Hmmm... MIC-E packets from all the repeater's user radios with GPS lat/long data embedded in them, a way to decode that at the mountain and point the antennas az/el rotor and medium-sized yagis, mounted vertically... hahaha now that I've said it, some nut will TRY it.) -- Nate Duehr, WY0X [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Best coax for short jumpers in repeater cabinet?
On May 11, 2008, at 9:52 AM, n9wys wrote: Looks like you and I are in the minority, Brent. I mentioned this same cable about a week ago, and it went virtually “unnoticed”… :-( Mark – N9WYS From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com On Behalf Of KF4TNP RG-393/U M17/127 I use this cable in most runs in the transmitter buildings to and from each station since it has the dual silver shields, I don’t have dissimilar metals to worry about. And can handle 1.8kw @950Mhz it works out great. Brent KF4TNP I noticed, and want to get my hands on some for a future project... (GRIN). Just had nothing to say about it... other than perhaps, Thanks for sharing! -- 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] FCC Denies Petition to Utilize 2m Sub-Band for Digital Repeater Operation
On May 11, 2008, at 10:13 PM, wd8chl wrote: That's what I was headed towards. The original post of the FCC answer (the part I quoted) seemed to lead that the petitioners were requesting additional repeater spectrum partially based on D-Star users not being able to determine if a frequency was in use by another mode. That is decidedly NOT a legitimate concern! There needs to be means to determine that there is other traffic on the frequency, somehow. No there doesn't... unless analog systems are going to start doing it also. Coordination is key. (And if that means there are no suitable pairs, then there are no suitable pairs. I have no problem with that.) And the analog systems are also monitoring their outputs in carrier squelch too? Your assertion that ALL P25 rigs do busy channel lockout, is flat out wrong. I never said that. I said that they all have some means of monitoring the channel for activity. Most have the 'dual-mode' feature I mentioned, most DO have BCL (but MOST don't have it programmed), and all at least have either a hangup clip function for mobiles, or a monitor button next to the PTT for handhelds. Ahh, okay. I guess that's where we're disagreeing, or missing each other. Even if the repeaters, rigs, and what-have you... HAVE a busy-channel- lockout feature, no one is using them. So there's really no need to add it to D-STAR rigs, if no one else using the spectrum needs the feature. So the whole thing is a moot point, and it was a misguided way for the petitioners to argue their case. (One of the many reasons it went down in flames, I'm sure.) I think we both definitely agree on THAT! (GRIN) -- Nate Duehr, WY0X [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Repeater-Builder] FCC Denies Petition to Utilize 2m Sub-Band for Digita
On May 11, 2008, at 9:40 PM, wd8chl wrote: Ron Wright wrote: Jim, I tend to agree more spectrum is not needed on 2 meters just to accommodate D-Star or any other mode, digital or analog. Many analog boys are also starving for space for their repeaters. D-Star does look for the proper D-Star format to unsquelch as one might say. It does not simply turn on with signal like many analog rigs do. The repeaters and rigs do this. Right. I'm looking at provisions to monitor the frequency for NON D* activity before transmitting. Most P25 radios can be set up in dual-mode where it will also respond to analog FM with or without a CTCSS/DCS code, as programmed. D* should have that, or a commercial- type hangup clip arrangement, or a busy-lockout that keeps the radio from transmitting if there is other activity...or the choice to program one of the above. If the D-STAR repeater is receiving a signal, it's going to be sending serial data up from itself through the serial cable to the controller. I haven't (and probably won't) looked at that data on the serial cable (unless I buy my own D-STAR repeater... I don't feel good hacking on the club system like that) but I hear some folks in California have. It would be an indication of whether or not there's *receivable* D-STAR signal on any module. This is why, as you very well know, we use CTCSS...to unsquelch the rcvr when the proper tone rcv'd. The petition to the FCC was an attempt to gain more repeater pairs mainly for D-Star. I am sure the petitioners would have wanted the expansion to go for digital only. I am sure the FCC saw thru this. Yeah...nope-they're just gonna have to live alongside the rest of us that can't spend $1000 on a radio...|cP The repeaters are far over $1000 for the band module and the controller, but the user radios (other than the ID-1) are all quite a bit below $1000, unless you have your heart set on the IC-2820. You can buy TWO IC-800H's for just over the price of the signal 2820 with D-STAR/GPS board (the D-STAR board is included in the price of the IC-800H) and have true dual-digital receive. Just stack 'em. :-) The comment makes it sounds like USERS can't get into D-STAR for less than $1000, which just isn't true. And the rigs will do analog too, so they're still quite usable for other purposes, generally. The Kenwood D-710 with all the APRS features costs a LOT more than an IC-800H, and all Gateway-equipped D-STAR systems should have the DPRS/ APRS gateway software installed by default these days, or the Gateway admin can add it with three commands and answering a few simple questions on-screen... so... a cheap $60 GPS plugged into the ID-800H will handle the APRS-like chores... kinda. It's different, but it's a reasonable comparison. -- Nate Duehr, WY0X [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Repeater-Builder] FCC Denies Petition to Utilize 2m Sub-Band for Digit
On May 10, 2008, at 7:26 AM, Dan Blasberg wrote: Since in some instances D-Star is an add on board, I wonder why ICOM wouldn't do the same thing for a P25 add on board? Because they already make P25-specific rigs that are priced at roughly 4x the price (or more, your mileage may vary depending on who you are and what they quote you) of the D-STAR Amateur gear, and the Amateur gear isn't certified for commercial use, but people would use it as cheap public safety gear, which causes Icom and the users all sorts of problems... You won't ever see Amateur grade P-25 gear from any of the manufacturers making Commercial grade P-25 gear. The only way you'll see that is an Amateur-only manufacturer who can hide behind the shield of We label it Amateur only! when someone dies because their gear used by some cheap public safety person, contributes to someone's death. -- Nate Duehr, WY0X [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Best coax for short jumpers in repeater cabinet?
At 04:50 PM 5/11/08 -, you wrote: Are you sure you don't mean 'RG-223' there, Skipper-doo? I use a lot of this on my bench and home equipment, for the same reasons the Skipp points out - it's cheap and effective. It's the same size (approximately) as RG-58, and uses mostly the same connectors (occasionally I'll get a crimp connector collar that's a little snug...) One doesn't have to go high dollar overkill spec all the time. I'm also a fairly big fan of RG-233 Coax for many repeater system/equipment applications. RG-233 seems to be the ignored step child of the coax family, which means it's not instant shark bait every time it pops up on Ebay and the surplus radio world market. I found a fairly decent price on some pre-made RG-233 Coax runs on Ebay: Cable Assembly RF Coax 7 ft RG-223/U N-Fe to SMA Male Ebay Item number: 190175957842 My offer to the seller for 2/3 the asking amount was accepted and I now have a fair number of those lines in my collection at a much better than the $3.10 (Tessco) list price per foot. Not a bad deal if you want to take the plunge... cheers, skipp skipp025 at yahoo.com www.radiowrench.com See you at Dayton! I'm the short chubby guy with red hair. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Brent, I agree with Skipp, the LMR is not the cable i would recommend in a duplex repeater install. If you want jumper coax, I only use RG400 and it is a plenum rated silver plated with double shield braid silver. Both Motorola and Kenwood systems use this coax for there internal cableing inside the cabinet. I yet have seen them use LMR coax. Spend the little extra for good coax and you will find yourself much happier and not searching for weird site problems. For the main feed line, you can't get any better then Andrew's LDF coax for repeater installs. Yahoo! Groups Links - Adam -
Re: [Repeater-Builder] FCC Denies Petition to Utilize 2m Sub-Band for Digita
Nate, I should have said a repeater radio cost over $1000, but then again I thought the discussion was about repeaters on D-Star. I paid $400 for the IC91AD. This is about the cheapest one can do unless they get used like on e-bay. An equivlant analog is $180...dual band 2m/440 HT. Decoding the D-Star data from the controller, not D-Star from radio, can be done without much effort. Ths is garage tech. The first thing is to determine the start characters. I did EDACS over 10 years ago and once you get the data it is often easy to decipher. Does take time, hardware and software, and a PC won't do it...at least running Windows, etc. One can buy the chips, just need a controller to assemble/disassemble the data. ICOM made the system pretty much closed...have to use their equipment for most. Few Hams have the knowledge to do any differently. From the front end to the back end ICOM pretty much locked up their system. As time goes on some will be 3rd party, but for the past 4-5 years since D-Star little has been done. I think ICOM purposely formated it for this. I would probably have done the same thing. They want to make money, no problem with that, but Hams want the world for free. Life don't work that way, hi. 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. On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 4:46 AM, Nate Duehr wrote: On May 11, 2008, at 9:40 PM, wd8chl wrote: Ron Wright wrote: Jim, I tend to agree more spectrum is not needed on 2 meters just to accommodate D-Star or any other mode, digital or analog. Many analog boys are also starving for space for their repeaters. D-Star does look for the proper D-Star format to unsquelch as one might say. It does not simply turn on with signal like many analog rigs do. The repeaters and rigs do this. Right. I'm looking at provisions to monitor the frequency for NON D* activity before transmitting. Most P25 radios can be set up in dual-mode where it will also respond to analog FM with or without a CTCSS/DCS code, as programmed. D* should have that, or a commercial- type hangup clip arrangement, or a busy-lockout that keeps the radio from transmitting if there is other activity...or the choice to program one of the above. If the D-STAR repeater is receiving a signal, it's going to be sending serial data up from itself through the serial cable to the controller. I haven't (and probably won't) looked at that data on the serial cable (unless I buy my own D-STAR repeater... I don't feel good hacking on the club system like that) but I hear some folks in California have. It would be an indication of whether or not there's *receivable* D-STAR signal on any module. This is why, as you very well know, we use CTCSS...to unsquelch the rcvr when the proper tone rcv'd. The petition to the FCC was an attempt to gain more repeater pairs mainly for D-Star. I am sure the petitioners would have wanted the expansion to go for digital only. I am sure the FCC saw thru this. Yeah...nope- they're just gonna have to live alongside the rest of us that can't spend $1000 on a radio...|cP The repeaters are far over $1000 for the band module and the controller, but the user radios (other than the ID-1) are all quite a bit below $1000, unless you have your heart set on the IC-2820. You can buy TWO IC-800H's for just over the price of the signal 2820 with D-STAR/GPS board (the D-STAR board is included in the price of the IC-800H) and have true dual-digital receive. Just stack 'em. :-) The comment makes it sounds like USERS can't get into D-STAR for less than $1000, which just isn't true. And the rigs will do analog too, so they're still quite usable for other purposes, generally. The Kenwood D-710 with all the APRS features costs a LOT more than an IC-800H, and all Gateway-equipped D-STAR systems should have the DPRS/ APRS gateway software installed by default these days, or the Gateway admin can add it with three commands and answering a few simple questions on-screen... so... a cheap $60 GPS plugged into the ID-800H will handle the APRS-like chores... kinda. It's different, but it's a reasonable comparison. -- Nate Duehr, WY0X [EMAIL PROTECTED] com mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Wacom Duplexer Desense Problem - Mystery
s A number ask the question if it was LMR400 or 9913 or any double shielded dissimilar metals shield. Sounds as if this was not an issue. Your statements are worth saying again. WACOMs I've worked with did use RG214 for cavity-to-cavity cables. 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. On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 12:18 AM, skipp025 wrote: One of the things I never saw asked... are any of your Jumpers the LMR-400 type coax? One of my LMR-400 train wreck stories started with a Wacom Duplexer and a jumper of the mentioned. The story ended when I replaced the jumper with rg-214 just curious... s. blisswheeler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I really appreciate all of the comments on my duplexer mystery. I made sure everything was tuned properly and took it back to my friends home location. We put it back on the air and experienced 2db of signal desense with an output of 15 watts. That still doesn't duplicate the results of the dummy load test, but that's a far cry from the 30db I was experiencing here at my home shop. Some of the things I did learn from the experience was that: 1. Though an antenna may only have a 1.5 SWR doesn't mean that the antenna is a 50 ohm match. Using my MFJ (Mighty Fine Junk which, by the way work pretty darned good, but not in a high RF environment) antenna analyzer, the antenna that gave me the most difficulty presented an 80 ohm load. The SWR was 1.5. A discone antenna worked the best and it presented a 55 ohm load with a 1.2 SWR. 2. Double shielded coax is a must in repeater operation. I experienced this first hand. I had one short jumper I thought was double shielded and was not which caused an intermittent such that one time it worked into a dummy load and the next it went flaky. Moving the coax with the repeater transmitter keyed revealed the culprit. Use hardline or double shielded coax. Hardline to the antenna is very important. 3. Bench testing duplexers into a dummy load may not duplicate the results experienced with the antenna. 4. In theory isn't necessarily the same as reality. I suppose if you know all the variables the problem can be calculated and identified, but there are a lot of unknown variables when working with RF. 5. The environment your repeater is in can cause you to loose your hair. Yes it is related to the rf generated, no not because of the health effects but because it makes you tear your hear out trying to identify a problem. 6. I learned about whiskers in GE Mastr II receivers... I experienced their effects and how to fix the problem, though maybe for only a year or two, but I learned to to disassemble and retune the receiver. 7. Your experienced Techie RF friends are a great help. I have three good friends that gave me a lot of ideas and helped me trouble shoot this problem. The folks here on Repeater-Builder gave me some good tips which pointed in the right direction as well, for that I thank you all. Respectfully, Bliss
Re: [Repeater-Builder] MSF5000 Service Manual For Sale
Givan, If you wouldn't mind replying to me off list- I am interested. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thanks, Bill Sent via BlackBerry by ATT -Original Message- From: Givan George [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sun, 11 May 2008 08:57:53 To:Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: [Repeater-Builder] MSF5000 Service Manual For Sale Hi Guys, I do have a service manual for Motorola VHF MSF5000 (68P81092E75-O)Digital Capable And Analog Plus Stations. This manual is surplus to my needs. Any body interested? Just make an offer. Cash or trades will be entertained. Will be at Dayton. Regards Givan
[Repeater-Builder] Duplex coax types
After reading all of the recent post about different types of coax that are acceptable in duplex service, I made my self a list. Then, I thought that this might be helpful to others. Here's what I came up with so far. Please add any that I have missed. RG-142 Be careful that it will not move around much. RG-400 RG-214 Be sure it is the double silver braid stuff. RG-233 RG-393 Any of the Andrews Superflex/Heliax sizes. I have always used the RG-142 and RG-214 in the past, now I have others to look for. There must be others that meet the specs of double silver braid or solid outer conductor. This list will help me when shopping hamfest, etc. Jimmy Powell, KS4KX Roanoke, VA Repeaters 443.675, 443.200, 224.780 Maintain RVARC 146.985 and 442.500
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Feedlines In and Out of Repeater Cabinet
Bob, A PL259 or SO239, a good one, is good to 500 Mhz although at UHF, 440, I would recommend N connectors as you suggested. One problem with UHF connectors, PL259, etc, so many are made for CB. The cheap 10/$10. Good for HF, but that is about it. Guess ok on 6. Motorola and GE used UHF connectors for VHF and UHF for years, but they used the good ones. An Anphenol is good. Just another case one gets what one pays for, hi. 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. On Sun, May 11, 2008 at 10:43 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 5/11/2008 14:39, you wrote: I have followed with interest the thread treating feed line to use to connect repeater/duplexer/ antenna, and I think I should replace the cables that are now in use on my 2-m repeater. But now the repeater TX and RX and a remote base use short cables to a feedthrough on the top of the cabinet. There are 90 degree elbows on the feedthroughs. Would it be better to eliminate these feedthroughs and elbows by just cutting a hole in the cabinet and routing the cables directly to the radios? What is common practice? Feedthroughs are always better, provided they're N connectors. Among other things, they help keep the rodents out of the cabinet. N elbows are good up to a least a couple GHz, so they should work fine @ 440 lower. SO-239 feedthroughs are all bad @ 440, as are PL-259 elbows. I even had one cause desense @ 146 MHz (nothing but a dummy load on the other side; remove the elbow, desense gone!). Bob NO6B
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Adding Control Receiver without Separate Antenna
I would recommend not using a 12.5 kHz spacing freq in this case of a control receiever, a receiver that is only 12.5 kHz away from your regular repeater input. With typical good FM analog receivers these would both have overlapping passbands and an input signal on the repeater input would interfer with the control input. With som many using IC type DTMF decoders any interference, just over lapping distorted voice would hender the decoder decoding. A typical UHF duplexer would have a notch wide enough for a freq +/-25 kHz away. Know this is going to be another repeaters input, but with some research could find is close in distance to you. I have used control UHF freq that are 6.25 kHz spacing, but these were in the 446 range and on separate antenna. Just had access to this. I used this freq to give some added security. 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. On Sun, May 11, 2008 at 10:24 PM, Laryn Lohman wrote: --- In Repeater-Builder@ yahoogroups. com mailto:Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com , John Transue [EMAIL PROTECTED] . wrote: Laryn K8TVZ, So, if I understand, I should put a splitter after the pre-amp, and the control frequency should be a split channel. Does this mean that I use half way between two channels? Right, one of the 12.5 kc. in-between channels would be less likely to have something on them. Another question, who makes a good splitter, and how can I know I am getting a good splitter? Well, I've seen 50 ohm splitters quite often at hamfests. I don't have a good brand name to point you to. I am, however, using a 75 ohm TV splitter. Purists will hate this, but especially, if you are after a preamp, I don't see this as a big deal. It works just fine here with no measured loss in repeater receiver sensitivity through the system. Use quality coax and fittings. I've found that RG142 works reasonably well with the TV splitters since it has a solid center conductor. If you are not using a preamp, then you really need to do things right, using a proper splitter, and still you may lose some sensitivity. Some of you are saying, where's the quality in that splitter scheme? Well, experimentally I've found it works well here, so after initial measurements showed me that things were still the same, I'll tend to stay with what works, but ready to ditch the whole thing if needed and go another route. Sometimes quality takes the form of performance, not looks or perfection. If system sensitivity had suffered it wouldn't be there for more than 15 minutes. Laryn K8TVZ mailto:Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
[Repeater-Builder] MSF5000 Error Code L06
I have a digital MSF5000 that normally works OK. From time to time it stops working and L06 is displayed. Resetting the station brings it back to operation. My service manual does not list error code L06. Does anyone know what it means? Randy WB0VHB
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Need some help
One can get push button switches that latch on when pushed/latch off when pushed again. IF you want just digital mode while switch is pressed then no problem. If you want to make sure the radio stays in analog until commanded requiring the op to hold during digital then a momentary switch can be used. A flip flop or D-Type latch like the 74LS74, a 30 years old part, can be made to work, but unless you are driving with some electronics to automatically change between digita/analog it would be over kill. Also sounds like the latch is still going to a switch to flip the flip-flop and with switch bounce one would need a de-bounce circuit. A 74LS123 one shot is good for this. However, still over kill. We could also do with a CPU like the PIC processors, etc. Fun to work with and would learn something, but WAY OVER KILL, hi. A switch is easy no brainer here unless there are othe issues. Requires no power, just some wiring and about every type and size of switch one can imagine is on the market. 73, ron, n9ee/r On Sun, May 11, 2008 at 8:22 PM, Rich Summers wrote: I can't use a toggle switch because the contact to enable the scramble board needs to be momentary to turn on the board and then a momentary contact to switch off the board. This contact will be using an enable wire from the board and another wire that is a ground. I think a flip flop MAY be the way to go. I was also wondering if there is a push button switch that has 2 spst contacts? Thanks. --- MCH [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For that matter, why not just a toggle switch? Joe M. Rich Summers wrote: I need to build a simple circuit to enable a voice scrambler in a radio. What I need is a momentary contact by pressing a button so that the activation lead goes to ground and when this happens I need an led indication that the unit has been activated. I also need the led to turn off when the button is pressed again. This deactivates the board and the radio returns to normal mode. I need this in a small box. Does anyone have a circuit I could build for this particular application? Thanks, Rich - - -- Yahoo! Groups Links _ _ _ _ _ _ Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile. yahoo.com/ ;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR 8HDtDypao8Wcj9tA cJ http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
Re: [Repeater-Builder] MSF5000 Error Code L06
According to my info, there is no set of error codes beginning with L. There's A, d, E, o, and U. The only 06 code is A06. When the station powers up, does it display 8.8.8.? This would be the way it does an LED test. Perhaps one or more segments are missing from the display. I suspect it's really trying to show a different code. There are some known bugs with the V4.xx firmware that could cause it to just lock up after several weeks. If you're not running V5.xx, you might want to consider upgrading the station's firmware. Bob M. == --- wb0vhb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have a digital MSF5000 that normally works OK. From time to time it stops working and L06 is displayed. Resetting the station brings it back to operation. My service manual does not list error code L06. Does anyone know what it means? Randy WB0VHB Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Adding Control Receiver without Separate Antenna
At 5/11/2008 14:33, you wrote: I would like to add a control receiver to a UHF (446 MHz) repeater. So, is there a way that I can use the repeater antenna for both the repeater and the control receiver? John AF4PD Sure, if your input control RX freqs. are close enough. I have 2 sites where the input link RXs are only ~600 kHz apart. Bob NO6B Not having done this before, I'm wondering if a control receiver operating close to the repeater's input as described could be a problem if in the case of a jammer or a stuck microphone. If the two rx's are operating that close, would the control rx be able to hear and provide capability to shut down the repeater if the input freq. was being jammed with a strong signal? 73 Paul - KC0HST
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Need some help
Couldn't you use a toggle/push-button switch if it was momentary (spring-loaded)? (i.e. push-on, push-off) Mark - N9WYS -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rich Summers Sent: Sunday, May 11, 2008 7:23 PM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Need some help I can't use a toggle switch because the contact to enable the scramble board needs to be momentary to turn on the board and then a momentary contact to switch off the board. This contact will be using an enable wire from the board and another wire that is a ground. I think a flip flop MAY be the way to go. I was also wondering if there is a push button switch that has 2 spst contacts? Thanks. --- MCH [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For that matter, why not just a toggle switch? Joe M. Rich Summers wrote: I need to build a simple circuit to enable a voice scrambler in a radio. What I need is a momentary contact by pressing a button so that the activation lead goes to ground and when this happens I need an led indication that the unit has been activated. I also need the led to turn off when the button is pressed again. This deactivates the board and the radio returns to normal mode. I need this in a small box. Does anyone have a circuit I could build for this particular application? Thanks, Rich Yahoo! Groups Links Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ Yahoo! Groups Links No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG. Version: 8.0.100 / Virus Database: 269.23.16/1427 - Release Date: 5/11/2008 1:08 PM
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Best coax for short jumpers in repeater cabinet?
Nate, I first became enlightened when someone gave me several lengths of RG-393 with type-N connectors already on it. I used them in my first homebrew 900 machine, and then in my converted 900 MHz MSF5000 (although photos of the station show RG-400 - taken during testing). Once I did some research about the cable, I decided this was the stuff I wanted in all my applications. I'll spend the extra bucks to get the lengths I need made up for me. Mark - N9WYS -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com On Behalf Of Nate Duehr On May 11, 2008, at 9:52 AM, n9wys wrote: Looks like you and I are in the minority, Brent. I mentioned this same cable about a week ago, and it went virtually unnoticed. :-( Mark - N9WYS From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com On Behalf Of KF4TNP RG-393/U M17/127 I use this cable in most runs in the transmitter buildings to and from each station since it has the dual silver shields, I don't have dissimilar metals to worry about. And can handle 1.8kw @950Mhz it works out great. Brent KF4TNP I noticed, and want to get my hands on some for a future project... (GRIN). Just had nothing to say about it... other than perhaps, Thanks for sharing! -- Nate Duehr, WY0X [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[Repeater-Builder] Available: 900MHz. MII Repeater + /\/\ Maxtrac Mobiles
Greetings, I have a GE MASTRII repeater which was removed from service in the upper 800 MHz. band available; perfect for moving to 900 amateur service available. It is in a 4' GE cabinet, with a base station power supply. I can test and deliver to Dayton Hamvention. I will sell the repeater alone if you're not interested in the cabinet or power supply. Also availalbe are four 900 MHz. Motorola Maxtrac mobiles which can be modified to the ham band. Several friends and I invested in this equipment a few years ago...the project isn't making progress so we'd like to liquidate it. Make an offer; this stuff needs to go. Since I don't know where I'll land in the flea market at Dayton, please contact me directly via email in advance if you're interested.
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Adding Control Receiver without Seperate Antenna
John, Ebay is your friend here. Look for Mini Circuits there and you will find dozens of suitable units. I've gotten several two-way splitters there. Typical and theoretical loss is 3 db, not usually a problem following a preamp. The TV type splitters do work as well but can be a bear to find decent connectors for. I'd rather have a spatter made by a reputable company designed for the application. 73, Al, K9SI . Re: Adding Control Receiver without Separate Antenna Posted by: John Transue [EMAIL PROTECTED] jtransue2000 Date: Sun May 11, 2008 4:09 pm ((PDT)) snip Another question, who makes a good splitter, and how can I know I am getting a good splitter? snip John AF4PD
[Repeater-Builder] Lot's of repeater Stuff
Hello, I will be at Dayton early Thursday morning with a lot of stuff for sale, need to finance the trip some way. $4.50 diesel is not helping matters. 444.850 +5MHz offset CTCSS of 110.9 Hz Spaces 903 and 904 Paul No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.16/1427 - Release Date: 5/11/2008 1:08 PM
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Best coax for short jumpers in repeater cabinet?
Sometimes skipper-don't type so well... yes I meant RG-223 and the Ebay Auction Example I listed in that post should clearly indicate the coax to be RG-223. Great and thanks for catching the typo. cheers, s. Adam T. Cately [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 04:50 PM 5/11/08 -, you wrote: Are you sure you don't mean 'RG-223' there, Skipper-doo? I use a lot of this on my bench and home equipment, for the same reasons the Skipp points out - it's cheap and effective. It's the same size (approximately) as RG-58, and uses mostly the same connectors (occasionally I'll get a crimp connector collar that's a little snug...) One doesn't have to go high dollar overkill spec all the time. I'm also a fairly big fan of RG-233 Coax for many repeater system/equipment applications. RG-233 seems to be the ignored step child of the coax family, which means it's not instant shark bait every time it pops up on Ebay and the surplus radio world market. I found a fairly decent price on some pre-made RG-233 Coax runs on Ebay: Cable Assembly RF Coax 7 ft RG-223/U N-Fe to SMA Male Ebay Item number: 190175957842 My offer to the seller for 2/3 the asking amount was accepted and I now have a fair number of those lines in my collection at a much better than the $3.10 (Tessco) list price per foot. Not a bad deal if you want to take the plunge... cheers, skipp skipp025 at yahoo.com www.radiowrench.com See you at Dayton! I'm the short chubby guy with red hair. k7pfj@ wrote: Hi Brent, I agree with Skipp, the LMR is not the cable i would recommend in a duplex repeater install. If you want jumper coax, I only use RG400 and it is a plenum rated silver plated with double shield braid silver. Both Motorola and Kenwood systems use this coax for there internal cableing inside the cabinet. I yet have seen them use LMR coax. Spend the little extra for good coax and you will find yourself much happier and not searching for weird site problems. For the main feed line, you can't get any better then Andrew's LDF coax for repeater installs. Yahoo! Groups Links - Adam -
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Wacom Duplexer Desense Problem - Mystery
Yeah but folks should also keep in mind the problem source doesn't have to be specific to the duplexer coax harness. The mentioned last LMR-400 grunge generator was a section of cable from the circulator to the duplexer tx port. s. Ron Wright [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: s A number ask the question if it was LMR400 or 9913 or any double shielded dissimilar metals shield. Sounds as if this was not an issue. Your statements are worth saying again. WACOMs I've worked with did use RG214 for cavity-to-cavity cables. 73, ron, n9ee/r
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Adding Control Receiver without Separate Antenna
Thanks to all who have responded to my control-receiver question and my through-the-cabinet question. This includes at least Laryn, Ron, Bob, Adam, Paul, and Al. I think I know how to proceed now. I'll start looking for the proper connectors and cables. Thanks again, John AF4PD -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ron Wright Sent: Monday, May 12, 2008 9:35 AM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Adding Control Receiver without Separate Antenna I would recommend not using a 12.5 kHz spacing freq in this case of a control receiever, a receiver that is only 12.5 kHz away from your regular repeater input. With typical good FM analog receivers these would both have overlapping passbands and an input signal on the repeater input would interfer with the control input. With som many using IC type DTMF decoders any interference, just over lapping distorted voice would hender the decoder decoding. A typical UHF duplexer would have a notch wide enough for a freq +/-25 kHz away. Know this is going to be another repeaters input, but with some research could find is close in distance to you. I have used control UHF freq that are 6.25 kHz spacing, but these were in the 446 range and on separate antenna. Just had access to this. I used this freq to give some added security. 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. On Sun, May 11, 2008 at 10:24 PM, Laryn Lohman wrote: --- In Repeater-Builder@ mailto:Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com yahoogroups. com, John Transue [EMAIL PROTECTED] . wrote: Laryn K8TVZ, So, if I understand, I should put a splitter after the pre-amp, and the control frequency should be a split channel. Does this mean that I use half way between two channels? Right, one of the 12.5 kc. in-between channels would be less likely to have something on them. Another question, who makes a good splitter, and how can I know I am getting a good splitter? Well, I've seen 50 ohm splitters quite often at hamfests. I don't have a good brand name to point you to. I am, however, using a 75 ohm TV splitter. Purists will hate this, but especially, if you are after a preamp, I don't see this as a big deal. It works just fine here with no measured loss in repeater receiver sensitivity through the system. Use quality coax and fittings. I've found that RG142 works reasonably well with the TV splitters since it has a solid center conductor. If you are not using a preamp, then you really need to do things right, using a proper splitter, and still you may lose some sensitivity. Some of you are saying, where's the quality in that splitter scheme? Well, experimentally I've found it works well here, so after initial measurements showed me that things were still the same, I'll tend to stay with what works, but ready to ditch the whole thing if needed and go another route. Sometimes quality takes the form of performance, not looks or perfection. If system sensitivity had suffered it wouldn't be there for more than 15 minutes. Laryn K8TVZ mailto:Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com __ NOD32 2918 (20080303) Information __ This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system. http://www.eset.com
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Need some help
Yes I could but, I would need some sort of indicator light to let the person know that the board had been enabled. Rich --- n9wys [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Couldn't you use a toggle/push-button switch if it was momentary (spring-loaded)? (i.e. push-on, push-off) Mark - N9WYS -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rich Summers Sent: Sunday, May 11, 2008 7:23 PM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Need some help I can't use a toggle switch because the contact to enable the scramble board needs to be momentary to turn on the board and then a momentary contact to switch off the board. This contact will be using an enable wire from the board and another wire that is a ground. I think a flip flop MAY be the way to go. I was also wondering if there is a push button switch that has 2 spst contacts? Thanks. --- MCH [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For that matter, why not just a toggle switch? Joe M. Rich Summers wrote: I need to build a simple circuit to enable a voice scrambler in a radio. What I need is a momentary contact by pressing a button so that the activation lead goes to ground and when this happens I need an led indication that the unit has been activated. I also need the led to turn off when the button is pressed again. This deactivates the board and the radio returns to normal mode. I need this in a small box. Does anyone have a circuit I could build for this particular application? Thanks, Rich Yahoo! Groups Links Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ Yahoo! Groups Links No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG. Version: 8.0.100 / Virus Database: 269.23.16/1427 - Release Date: 5/11/2008 1:08 PM Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Adding Control Receiver without Separate Antenna
While that might work okay, here they have frequencies close to the repeater RX frequencies I might use marked as one way links or repeater inputs. My thought would be using a diplexer of some kind. Of course, I also thought of a diplexer to use the antenna for a low level 2 meter repeater as well as for 70 centimers (repeater and control rx). I have a GE Phoenix with the RR split (It doesn't like coming up much above 44 or 441 MHz) that could work as a control RX 440 repeaters here are on a 25 KHz split, and the only band plan shown does not include 420 to 440 MHz. My other option would be 25 KHz up, and there is a repeater on that frequecy about 165 miles north. OTOH, a separate RX antenna would not be a real problem, and I could put a filter on it. Wayne WA2YNE On Sun, 11 May 2008 17:39:55 -0500, Laryn Lohman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, John Transue [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I would like to add a control receiver to a UHF (446 MHz) repeater. If you can use a frequency for control that is within several channels of your input, you can split the receive coax from your duplexer to each receiver. Use a split channel for control if possible. If you use a preamp and split the output properly you'll experience no loss in sensitivity to your repeater receiver. It works great here. Laryn K8TVZ -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/ 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] Need some help
There must be some point on the device that will show power when enabled? Maybe pick off that point and either attach an LED, or maybe a relay connected to an LED... or maybe a DPDT switch, one side connected for your indicator. Just thinking out loud. Mark - N9WYS -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com On Behalf Of Rich Summers Yes I could but, I would need some sort of indicator light to let the person know that the board had been enabled. Rich --- n9wys [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Couldn't you use a toggle/push-button switch if it was momentary (spring-loaded)? (i.e. push-on, push-off) Mark - N9WYS -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rich Summers Sent: Sunday, May 11, 2008 7:23 PM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Need some help I can't use a toggle switch because the contact to enable the scramble board needs to be momentary to turn on the board and then a momentary contact to switch off the board. This contact will be using an enable wire from the board and another wire that is a ground. I think a flip flop MAY be the way to go. I was also wondering if there is a push button switch that has 2 spst contacts? Thanks. --- MCH [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For that matter, why not just a toggle switch? Joe M. Rich Summers wrote: I need to build a simple circuit to enable a voice scrambler in a radio. What I need is a momentary contact by pressing a button so that the activation lead goes to ground and when this happens I need an led indication that the unit has been activated. I also need the led to turn off when the button is pressed again. This deactivates the board and the radio returns to normal mode. I need this in a small box. Does anyone have a circuit I could build for this particular application? Thanks, Rich Yahoo! Groups Links Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ Yahoo! Groups Links No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG. Version: 8.0.100 / Virus Database: 269.23.16/1427 - Release Date: 5/11/2008 1:08 PM Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ Yahoo! Groups Links No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG. Version: 8.0.100 / Virus Database: 269.23.16/1428 - Release Date: 5/12/2008 7:44 AM
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Duplex coax types
I'm a fan of the andrew 1/4 inch superflex. You can terminate them with standard PL259, using the UG176 reducer meant for use with rg59, soldering the shield at the top only. I've not swept them but feel sure they would be sufficient for any frequency you would feel comfortable using a PL259. This size superflex isn't real springy and will stay where it's put pretty well. Mark n2qt - Original Message - From: jimmylpowell To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, May 11, 2008 8:59 PM Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Duplex coax types After reading all of the recent post about different types of coax that are acceptable in duplex service, I made my self a list. Then, I thought that this might be helpful to others. Here's what I came up with so far. Please add any that I have missed. RG-142 Be careful that it will not move around much. RG-400 RG-214 Be sure it is the double silver braid stuff. RG-233 RG-393 Any of the Andrews Superflex/Heliax sizes. I have always used the RG-142 and RG-214 in the past, now I have others to look for. There must be others that meet the specs of double silver braid or solid outer conductor. This list will help me when shopping hamfest, etc. Jimmy Powell, KS4KX Roanoke, VA Repeaters 443.675, 443.200, 224.780 Maintain RVARC 146.985 and 442.500
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Need some help
Rich, Now you are talking about some power for the light. Best use an LED that draws low current, 5 ma. Not knowing what you are connecting to, it might have enough current to drive the LED. Are you simply grounding an input, appling power to an input, etc. Do you have details of what you are connecting to??? 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. On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 2:29 PM, Rich Summers wrote: Ron...That is exactly what I could use as long as it had some type of light to let the person know that the board has been enabled. Rich --- Ron Wright [EMAIL PROTECTED] net mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: One can get push button switches that latch on when pushed/latch off when pushed again. IF you want just digital mode while switch is pressed then no problem. If you want to make sure the radio stays in analog until commanded requiring the op to hold during digital then a momentary switch can be used. A flip flop or D-Type latch like the 74LS74, a 30 years old part, can be made to work, but unless you are driving with some electronics to automatically change between digita/analog it would be over kill. Also sounds like the latch is still going to a switch to flip the flip-flop and with switch bounce one would need a de-bounce circuit. A 74LS123 one shot is good for this. However, still over kill. We could also do with a CPU like the PIC processors, etc. Fun to work with and would learn something, but WAY OVER KILL, hi. A switch is easy no brainer here unless there are othe issues. Requires no power, just some wiring and about every type and size of switch one can imagine is on the market. 73, ron, n9ee/r On Sun, May 11, 2008 at 8:22 PM, Rich Summers wrote: I can't use a toggle switch because the contact to enable the scramble board needs to be momentary to turn on the board and then a momentary contact to switch off the board. This contact will be using an enable wire from the board and another wire that is a ground. I think a flip flop MAY be the way to go. I was also wondering if there is a push button switch that has 2 spst contacts? Thanks. --- MCH [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For that matter, why not just a toggle switch? Joe M. Rich Summers wrote: I need to build a simple circuit to enable a voice scrambler in a radio. What I need is a momentary contact by pressing a button so that the activation lead goes to ground and when this happens I need an led indication that the unit has been activated. I also need the led to turn off when the button is pressed again. This deactivates the board and the radio returns to normal mode. I need this in a small box. Does anyone have a circuit I could build for this particular application? Thanks, Rich - - -- Yahoo! Groups Links _ _ _ _ _ _ Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile. http://mobile. yahoo.com/ ;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR 8HDtDypao8Wcj9tA cJ http://mobile. yahoo.com/ ;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR 8HDtDypao8Wcj9tA cJ http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ http://mobile. yahoo.com/ ;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR 8HDtDypao8Wcj9tA cJ http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ _ _ _ _ _ _ Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile. yahoo.com/ ;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR 8HDtDypao8Wcj9tA cJ http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Adding Control Receiver without Separate Antenna
Wayne, If your repeater situation is like most, antenna not on 5000 ft mountain, a repeater 165 miles away would not be a problem for you. The users of it would be the interferring parties, but at 165 miles don't think a problem. I would simply chose a freq 25 kHz away for the control receiver, T off the receive side of the duplexer, CTCSS or PL the control rcvr and connects its output to the control input of the controller. Things on the ground are typically cheap and easy to come by. Things in the air is what gets you. If you have a 2 meter repeater at same site could also use this same UHF receiver for its control also. 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. On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 2:29 PM, Wayne wrote: While that might work okay, here they have frequencies close to the repeater RX frequencies I might use marked as one way links or repeater inputs. My thought would be using a diplexer of some kind. Of course, I also thought of a diplexer to use the antenna for a low level 2 meter repeater as well as for 70 centimers (repeater and control rx). I have a GE Phoenix with the RR split (It doesn't like coming up much above 44 or 441 MHz) that could work as a control RX 440 repeaters here are on a 25 KHz split, and the only band plan shown does not include 420 to 440 MHz. My other option would be 25 KHz up, and there is a repeater on that frequecy about 165 miles north. OTOH, a separate RX antenna would not be a real problem, and I could put a filter on it. Wayne WA2YNE On Sun, 11 May 2008 17:39:55 -0500, Laryn Lohman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, John Transue [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I would like to add a control receiver to a UHF (446 MHz) repeater. If you can use a frequency for control that is within several channels of your input, you can split the receive coax from your duplexer to each receiver. Use a split channel for control if possible. If you use a preamp and split the output properly you'll experience no loss in sensitivity to your repeater receiver. It works great here. Laryn K8TVZ -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/ Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Adding Control Receiver without Separate Antenna
Ron, I don't think anyone was proposing putting the control RX 12.5 kHz away. I think the intent was not .5 channel away, but at least 1.5 channels away, or 37.5 kHz. Some sensitivity could be lost, and there may be a little desense moving off the transmitter side's notch, but may be workable for control. Depending on who's on your adjacent pair, and how busy his repeater is, might it not be possible to go 25 kHz off, and each use the other's input frequency for control, simply with a different PL and different DTMF command structures? For that matter, could a very quiet 440 voice repeater with landline control be programmed with macros, accessible by landline or by DTMF on the input, that would spit out control codes for several other nearby repeaters on its output? Just have the control receivers at all the other repeaters listen to that machine's output, which would always be plenty strong enough to blast through marginal control receiver setups, intentional QRM, etc. Like a link hub, only used for control. (Or, both!) That might actually be a great use for some off-the-wall pair on 902 MHz or 1.2 GHz, a hub for both linking and control. Paul, AE4KR - Original Message - From: Ron Wright To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, May 12, 2008 7:34 AM Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Adding Control Receiver without Separate Antenna I would recommend not using a 12.5 kHz spacing freq in this case of a control receiever, a receiver that is only 12.5 kHz away from your regular repeater input. With typical good FM analog receivers these would both have overlapping passbands and an input signal on the repeater input would interfer with the control input. With som many using IC type DTMF decoders any interference, just over lapping distorted voice would hender the decoder decoding. A typical UHF duplexer would have a notch wide enough for a freq +/-25 kHz away. Know this is going to be another repeaters input, but with some research could find is close in distance to you. I have used control UHF freq that are 6.25 kHz spacing, but these were in the 446 range and on separate antenna. Just had access to this. I used this freq to give some added security. 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. On Sun, May 11, 2008 at 10:24 PM, Laryn Lohman wrote: --- In Repeater-Builder@ yahoogroups. com, John Transue [EMAIL PROTECTED] . wrote: Laryn K8TVZ, So, if I understand, I should put a splitter after the pre-amp, and the control frequency should be a split channel. Does this mean that I use half way between two channels? Right, one of the 12.5 kc. in-between channels would be less likely to have something on them. Another question, who makes a good splitter, and how can I know I am getting a good splitter? Well, I've seen 50 ohm splitters quite often at hamfests. I don't have a good brand name to point you to. I am, however, using a 75 ohm TV splitter. Purists will hate this, but especially, if you are after a preamp, I don't see this as a big deal. It works just fine here with no measured loss in repeater receiver sensitivity through the system. Use quality coax and fittings. I've found that RG142 works reasonably well with the TV splitters since it has a solid center conductor. If you are not using a preamp, then you really need to do things right, using a proper splitter, and still you may lose some sensitivity. Some of you are saying, where's the quality in that splitter scheme? Well, experimentally I've found it works well here, so after initial measurements showed me that things were still the same, I'll tend to stay with what works, but ready to ditch the whole thing if needed and go another route. Sometimes quality takes the form of performance, not looks or perfection. If system sensitivity had suffered it wouldn't be there for more than 15 minutes. Laryn K8TVZ
[Repeater-Builder] TAPR Spring 2008 PSR Journal Available
TAPR Spring 2008 PSR Journal ftp://ftp.tapr.org/psr/psr105.pdf D-STAR Digital Voice Sensitivity vs. Analog FM Sensitivity article on pages 4 - 5 Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Adding Control Receiver without Separate Antenna
Hey Ron,How about setting your Font back to at least 10 for all the senior citizens who like to read your stuff :-)) 73 John VE3AMZ - Original Message - From: Ron Wright To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, May 12, 2008 9:34 AM Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Adding Control Receiver without Separate Antenna I would recommend not using a 12.5 kHz spacing freq in this case of a control receiever, a receiver that is only 12.5 kHz away from your regular repeater input. With typical good FM analog receivers these would both have overlapping passbands and an input signal on the repeater input would interfer with the control input. With som many using IC type DTMF decoders any interference, just over lapping distorted voice would hender the decoder decoding. A typical UHF duplexer would have a notch wide enough for a freq +/-25 kHz away. Know this is going to be another repeaters input, but with some research could find is close in distance to you. I have used control UHF freq that are 6.25 kHz spacing, but these were in the 446 range and on separate antenna. Just had access to this. I used this freq to give some added security. 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. On Sun, May 11, 2008 at 10:24 PM, Laryn Lohman wrote: --- In Repeater-Builder@ yahoogroups. com, John Transue [EMAIL PROTECTED] . wrote: Laryn K8TVZ, So, if I understand, I should put a splitter after the pre-amp, and the control frequency should be a split channel. Does this mean that I use half way between two channels? Right, one of the 12.5 kc. in-between channels would be less likely to have something on them. Another question, who makes a good splitter, and how can I know I am getting a good splitter? Well, I've seen 50 ohm splitters quite often at hamfests. I don't have a good brand name to point you to. I am, however, using a 75 ohm TV splitter. Purists will hate this, but especially, if you are after a preamp, I don't see this as a big deal. It works just fine here with no measured loss in repeater receiver sensitivity through the system. Use quality coax and fittings. I've found that RG142 works reasonably well with the TV splitters since it has a solid center conductor. If you are not using a preamp, then you really need to do things right, using a proper splitter, and still you may lose some sensitivity. Some of you are saying, where's the quality in that splitter scheme? Well, experimentally I've found it works well here, so after initial measurements showed me that things were still the same, I'll tend to stay with what works, but ready to ditch the whole thing if needed and go another route. Sometimes quality takes the form of performance, not looks or perfection. If system sensitivity had suffered it wouldn't be there for more than 15 minutes. Laryn K8TVZ
[Repeater-Builder] Power Supply Caps for Motorola R-1200 Service Monitor
I've exhausted the usual suspects (DigiKey, Mouser, Newark, etc.), so I'm turning to the world-wide bank of experts here for advice. I'm refurbishing my service monitor and need to replace one of the power supply electrolytics that squirted...actually, I'd like to replace all four, but I'm having a heckuva time finding suitable replacements. I need: (2) 3 MFD 15VDC capacitors 2 diameter X 2 long, 7/8 (0.875) spacing on the screw terminals No Motorola part # available (parts shown on schematic, but not listed) and, (2) 4500 MFD 40VDC capacitors 1-3/8 diameter X 2 long, 1/2' spacing on the screw terminals Motorola part # 23-80321A34 Yes, I could cook up some sort of work-around, but I would like to--if at all possible--stick to caps of the same physical size as the originals because the diode bridge circuit board mounts TO two of the caps and everything fits nicely in its little cage. Anybody got any bright ideas? Thoughts? Tnx 73 de K5IQ Bob
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Adding Control Receiver without Separate Antenna
Good idea, my provider gave me a new brouser or format and think things got changed. I'll look into this, but I really don't like messing with the Gates junk, but guess sometimes one has to, hi. 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. On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 5:56 PM, John J. Riddell wrote: Hey Ron,How about setting your Font back to at least 10 for all the senior citizens who like to read your stuff :-)) 73 John VE3AMZ - Original Message - From: Ron Wright mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Repeater-Builder@ yahoogroups. com mailto:Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com mailto:Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, May 12, 2008 9:34 AM mailto:Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re:Adding Control Receiver without Separate Antenna mailto:Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com mailto:Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com I would recommend not using a 12.5 kHz spacing freq in thiscase of a control receiever, a receiver that is only 12.5 kHz away from your regular repeater input. With typical good FM analog receivers these would both have overlapping passbands and an input signal on the repeater input would interferwith the control input. With som many using IC type DTMF decoders anyinterference, just over lapping distorted voice would hender the decoderdecoding. A typical UHF duplexer would have a notch wide enough for afreq +/-25 kHz away. Know this is going to be another repeaters input, but with some research could find is close in distance toyou. I have used control UHF freq that are 6.25 kHz spacing, butthese were in the 446 range and on separate antenna. Just had access to this. I used this freq to give some added security. 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. On Sun, May 11, 2008 at 10:24 PM, Laryn Lohmanwrote: --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups. com mailto:Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com , John Transue [EMAIL PROTECTED] . wrote: Laryn K8TVZ, So, if I understand, I should put asplitter after the pre-amp, and the control frequency should be a split channel. Doesthis mean that I use half way between two channels? Right, one of the 12.5 kc. in-between channels would be lesslikely to have something on them. Another question, who makes a goodsplitter, and how can I know I am getting a good splitter? Well, I've seen 50 ohm splitters quite often athamfests. I don't have a good brand name to point you to. I am, however,using a 75 ohm TV splitter. Purists will hate this, but especially,if you are after a preamp, I don't see this as a big deal. It worksjust fine here with no measured loss in repeater receiver sensitivitythrough the system. Use quality coax and fittings. I'vefound that RG142 works reasonably well with the TV splitters since it has a solidcenter conductor. If you are not using a preamp, then you really need to dothings right, using a proper splitter, and still you may lose some sensitivity. Some of you are saying, where's the quality in that splitterscheme? Well, experimentally I've found it works well here, so afterinitial measurements showed me that things were still the same, I'lltend to stay with what works, but ready to ditch the whole thing ifneeded and go another route. Sometimes quality takes theform of performance, not looks or perfection. If system sensitivity hadsuffered it wouldn't be there for more than 15 minutes. Laryn K8TVZ
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Adding Control Receiver without Separate Antenna
At 06:34 AM 05/12/08, you wrote: I would recommend not using a 12.5 kHz spacing freq in this case of a control receiever, a receiver that is only 12.5 kHz away from your regular repeater input. With typical good FM analog receivers these would both have overlapping passbands and an input signal on the repeater input would interfer with the control input. With som many using IC type DTMF decoders any interference, just over lapping distorted voice would hender the decoder decoding. A typical UHF duplexer would have a notch wide enough for a freq +/-25 kHz away. Know this is going to be another repeaters input, but with some research could find is close in distance to you. We did this years ago - and we just chatted with the adjacent channel systems owner at a coordination meeting, and made sure he didn't have a problem with it. He said just use a different PL tone that I do, no problem, I won't even know you are there So we DPL'd the control receiver. In fact it helped clean out the junk box - we had a cheap receive crystal that by the time it settled down (the new crystal aging problem) had drifted too far to bring back on channel, so we used it in the control receiver, on the adjacent channel... no, it wasn't Sentry or International... (anybody remember Cal Crystal, better known as Cal Driftal ?) Mike WA6ILQ
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Adding Control Receiver without Separate Antenna
Hey ole man...how is this??? :) Also it is putting my sig just after my reply instead of at the end. 73, ron, n9ee/r On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 5:56 PM, John J. Riddell wrote: Hey Ron,How about setting your Font back to at least 10 for all the senior citizens who like to read your stuff :-)) 73 John VE3AMZ - Original Message - From: Ron Wright mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Repeater-Builder@ yahoogroups. com mailto:Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com mailto:Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, May 12, 2008 9:34 AM mailto:Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re:Adding Control Receiver without Separate Antenna mailto:Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com mailto:Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com I would recommend not using a 12.5 kHz spacing freq in thiscase of a control receiever, a receiver that is only 12.5 kHz away from your regular repeater input. With typical good FM analog receivers these would both have overlapping passbands and an input signal on the repeater input would interferwith the control input. With som many using IC type DTMF decoders anyinterference, just over lapping distorted voice would hender the decoderdecoding. A typical UHF duplexer would have a notch wide enough for afreq +/-25 kHz away. Know this is going to be another repeaters input, but with some research could find is close in distance toyou. I have used control UHF freq that are 6.25 kHz spacing, butthese were in the 446 range and on separate antenna. Just had access to this. I used this freq to give some added security. 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. On Sun, May 11, 2008 at 10:24 PM, Laryn Lohmanwrote: --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups. com mailto:Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com , John Transue [EMAIL PROTECTED] . wrote: Laryn K8TVZ, So, if I understand, I should put asplitter after the pre-amp, and the control frequency should be a split channel. Doesthis mean that I use half way between two channels? Right, one of the 12.5 kc. in-between channels would be lesslikely to have something on them. Another question, who makes a goodsplitter, and how can I know I am getting a good splitter? Well, I've seen 50 ohm splitters quite often athamfests. I don't have a good brand name to point you to. I am, however,using a 75 ohm TV splitter. Purists will hate this, but especially,if you are after a preamp, I don't see this as a big deal. It worksjust fine here with no measured loss in repeater receiver sensitivitythrough the system. Use quality coax and fittings. I'vefound that RG142 works reasonably well with the TV splitters since it has a solidcenter conductor. If you are not using a preamp, then you really need to dothings right, using a proper splitter, and still you may lose some sensitivity. Some of you are saying, where's the quality in that splitterscheme? Well, experimentally I've found it works well here, so afterinitial measurements showed me that things were still the same, I'lltend to stay with what works, but ready to ditch the whole thing ifneeded and go another route. Sometimes quality takes theform of performance, not looks or perfection. If system sensitivity hadsuffered it wouldn't be there for more than 15 minutes. Laryn K8TVZ
Re: [Repeater-Builder] FCC Denies Petition to Utilize 2m Sub-Band for Digita
Ron Wright wrote: Nate, I should have said a repeater radio cost over $1000, but then again I thought the discussion was about repeaters on D-Star. Yeah, I knew you were probably talking about the repeaters, especially here, but folks do lurk and could have gotten the incorrect impression that the only option for users was a $1000 rig. I paid $400 for the IC91AD. This is about the cheapest one can do unless they get used like on e-bay. An equivlant analog is $180...dual band 2m/440 HT. Yep, analog cell phones are real cheap now too. (GRIN -- Since there is no workable AMPS network anymore.) The cheapest way into D-STAR, but not highly recommended by anyone doing it, are the single-band V82 and U82 HTs with the add on D-STAR board, at roughly $300. But it's not the way I would go. (Just to show it can be done on the cheap for a brand-new radio. Decoding the D-Star data from the controller, not D-Star from radio, can be done without much effort. Ths is garage tech. The first thing is to determine the start characters. I did EDACS over 10 years ago and once you get the data it is often easy to decipher. Does take time, hardware and software, and a PC won't do it...at least running Windows, etc. One can buy the chips, just need a controller to assemble/disassemble the data. Yup. If it's sending the D-STAR protocol itself over the wire (likely) you can even hunt for things in the published protocol spec. Supposedly it wasn't too difficult for the group in California to find out what transmit with no voice/data packets looked like and they are sending some of those and buffering what comes down from the controller and then spitting the controller's data off of a circular buffer (after it fills) to key the PA longer prior to header transmission. Don't really know, just heard about this from a friend when we were talking about adding PAs to the systems and how to handle it if the PA was too slow, so the header wouldn't get missed. They also implemented COS and PTT indications by watching the serial traffic going back and forth. Kinda nice to have, I guess, since the repeater (annoyingly) doesn't even have a TX LED. ICOM made the system pretty much closed...have to use their equipment for most. Few Hams have the knowledge to do any differently. From the front end to the back end ICOM pretty much locked up their system. As time goes on some will be 3rd party, but for the past 4-5 years since D-Star little has been done. I think ICOM purposely formated it for this. I would probably have done the same thing. They want to make money, no problem with that, but Hams want the world for free. Life don't work that way, hi. Not really. There's already working prototypes of using an FT-817 as a D-STAR rig. Nothing locked about that at all. The protocol's open for anyone to copy and build. One ham from Japan, Satoshi Yasuda (7M3TJZ/AD6GZ) has done it, twice. Two different designs to use non-Icom rigs on D-STAR, both worked. His code is out on the web along with schematics for all to see/use. Real ham radio, there... so they say... He built a board that has an LCD and human interface to enter callsigns, etc... got a vocoder working (the only closed part... he was originally using the Icom D-STAR board itself out of convenience, but a number of folks are looking at using the raw AMBE Vocoder chip from DVSI in their designs), and set up all of it to be driven by a single microcontroller from assembly language that he's posted on his website. Plug his board into discriminator audio from the rig, and unfiltered mic audio to the rig... and it works. He will be visiting Dayton this year, or so I hear. Would have liked to seen his work and met him, but I can't make it this year. Nate WY0X
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Adding Control Receiver without Separate Antenna
Paul, Yes, going 37.5 kHz would be good and probably better than 25 and definitly better than 12.5. 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. On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 4:56 PM, Paul Plack wrote: Ron, I don't think anyone was proposing putting the control RX 12.5 kHz away. I think the intent was not .5 channel away, but at least 1.5 channels away, or 37.5 kHz. Some sensitivity could be lost, and there may be a little desense moving off the transmitter side's notch, but may be workable for control. Depending on who's on your adjacent pair, and how busy his repeater is, might it not be possible to go 25 kHz off, and each use the other's input frequency for control, simply with a different PL and different DTMF command structures? For that matter, could a very quiet 440 voice repeater with landline control be programmed with macros, accessible by landline or by DTMF on the input, that would spit out control codes for several other nearby repeaters on its output? Just have the control receivers at all the other repeaters listen to that machine's output, which would always be plenty strong enough to blast through marginal control receiver setups, intentional QRM, etc. Like a link hub, only used for control. (Or, both!) That might actually be a great use for some off-the-wall pair on 902 MHz or 1.2 GHz, a hub for both linking and control. Paul, AE4KR - Original Message - From: Ron Wright To: Repeater-Builder@ yahoogroups. com Sent: Monday, May 12, 2008 7:34 AM Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re:Adding Control Receiver without Separate Antenna I would recommend not using a 12.5 kHz spacing freq in thiscase of a control receiever, a receiver that is only 12.5 kHz away from your regular repeater input. With typical good FM analog receivers these would both have overlapping passbands and an input signal on the repeater input would interferwith the control input. With som many using IC type DTMF decoders anyinterference, just over lapping distorted voice would hender the decoderdecoding. A typical UHF duplexer would have a notch wide enough for afreq +/-25 kHz away. Know this is going to be another repeaters input, but with some research could find is close in distance toyou. I have used control UHF freq that are 6.25 kHz spacing, butthese were in the 446 range and on separate antenna. Just had access to this. I used this freq to give some added security. 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. On Sun, May 11, 2008 at 10:24 PM, Laryn Lohmanwrote: --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups. com, John Transue [EMAIL PROTECTED] . wrote: Laryn K8TVZ, So, if I understand, I should put asplitter after the pre-amp, and the control frequency should be a split channel. Doesthis mean that I use half way between two channels? Right, one of the 12.5 kc. in-between channels would be lesslikely to have something on them. Another question, who makes a goodsplitter, and how can I know I am getting a good splitter? Well, I've seen 50 ohm splitters quite often athamfests. I don't have a good brand name to point you to. I am, however,using a 75 ohm TV splitter. Purists will hate this, but especially,if you are after a preamp, I don't see this as a big deal. It worksjust fine here with no measured loss in repeater receiver sensitivitythrough the system. Use quality coax and fittings. I'vefound that RG142 works reasonably well with the TV splitters since it has a solidcenter conductor. If you are not using a preamp, then you really need to dothings right, using a proper splitter, and still you may lose some sensitivity. Some of you are saying, where's the quality in that splitterscheme? Well, experimentally I've found it works well here, so afterinitial measurements showed me that things were still the same, I'lltend to stay with what works, but ready to ditch the whole thing ifneeded and go another route. Sometimes quality takes theform of performance, not looks or perfection. If system sensitivity hadsuffered it wouldn't be there for more than 15 minutes. Laryn K8TVZ
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Adding Control Receiver without Separate Antenna
Ron Wright wrote: Hey ole man...how is this??? :) Also it is putting my sig just after my reply instead of at the end. 73, ron, n9ee/r For those having font issues... in most mail readers and browsers, holding down CTRL and pressing the + key on the numerical keypad, will take care of the problem. Press as many times as you like, in direct relationship with however blind you are. In browsers, and SOME mail clients, holding CTRL and scrolling your mouse wheel (if you have one, but who doesn't nowadays... not so easy on a laptop though) will do the same thing, for most default configurations. Nate WY0X
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Duplex coax types
FSJ1-50A works with N-type connectors, too. IF you get ones that fit the larger center conductor. Mark - N9WYS From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com On Behalf Of Mark I'm a fan of the andrew 1/4 inch superflex. You can terminate them with standard PL259, using the UG176 reducer meant for use with rg59, soldering the shield at the top only. I've not swept them but feel sure they would be sufficient for any frequency you would feel comfortable using a PL259. This size superflex isn't real springy and will stay where it's put pretty well. Mark n2qt - Original Message - From: jimmylpowell After reading all of the recent post about different types of coax that are acceptable in duplex service, I made my self a list. Then, I thought that this might be helpful to others. Here's what I came up with so far. Please add any that I have missed. RG-142 Be careful that it will not move around much. RG-400 RG-214 Be sure it is the double silver braid stuff. RG-233 RG-393 Any of the Andrews Superflex/Heliax sizes. I have always used the RG-142 and RG-214 in the past, now I have others to look for. There must be others that meet the specs of double silver braid or solid outer conductor. This list will help me when shopping hamfest, etc. Jimmy Powell, KS4KX Roanoke, VA Repeaters 443.675, 443.200, 224.780 Maintain RVARC 146.985 and 442.500
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Need some help
Ron...There will be 2 wires from the board 1 will be ground and the other will be the one that has to momentarily connect to the ground to enable the board. The led can be powered by any source that I will supply. Rich --- Ron Wright [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Rich, Now you are talking about some power for the light. Best use an LED that draws low current, 5 ma. Not knowing what you are connecting to, it might have enough current to drive the LED. Are you simply grounding an input, appling power to an input, etc. Do you have details of what you are connecting to??? 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. On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 2:29 PM, Rich Summers wrote: Ron...That is exactly what I could use as long as it had some type of light to let the person know that the board has been enabled. Rich --- Ron Wright [EMAIL PROTECTED] net mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: One can get push button switches that latch on when pushed/latch off when pushed again. IF you want just digital mode while switch is pressed then no problem. If you want to make sure the radio stays in analog until commanded requiring the op to hold during digital then a momentary switch can be used. A flip flop or D-Type latch like the 74LS74, a 30 years old part, can be made to work, but unless you are driving with some electronics to automatically change between digita/analog it would be over kill. Also sounds like the latch is still going to a switch to flip the flip-flop and with switch bounce one would need a de-bounce circuit. A 74LS123 one shot is good for this. However, still over kill. We could also do with a CPU like the PIC processors, etc. Fun to work with and would learn something, but WAY OVER KILL, hi. A switch is easy no brainer here unless there are othe issues. Requires no power, just some wiring and about every type and size of switch one can imagine is on the market. 73, ron, n9ee/r On Sun, May 11, 2008 at 8:22 PM, Rich Summers wrote: I can't use a toggle switch because the contact to enable the scramble board needs to be momentary to turn on the board and then a momentary contact to switch off the board. This contact will be using an enable wire from the board and another wire that is a ground. I think a flip flop MAY be the way to go. I was also wondering if there is a push button switch that has 2 spst contacts? Thanks. --- MCH [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For that matter, why not just a toggle switch? Joe M. Rich Summers wrote: I need to build a simple circuit to enable a voice scrambler in a radio. What I need is a momentary contact by pressing a button so that the activation lead goes to ground and when this happens I need an led indication that the unit has been activated. I also need the led to turn off when the button is pressed again. This deactivates the board and the radio returns to normal mode. I need this in a small box. Does anyone have a circuit I could build for this particular application? Thanks, Rich - - -- Yahoo! Groups Links _ _ _ _ _ _ Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile. http://mobile. yahoo.com/ ;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR 8HDtDypao8Wcj9tA cJ http://mobile. yahoo.com/ ;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR 8HDtDypao8Wcj9tA cJ http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ http://mobile. yahoo.com/ ;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR 8HDtDypao8Wcj9tA cJ http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ _ _ _ _ _ _ Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile. yahoo.com/ ;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR 8HDtDypao8Wcj9tA cJ http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
[Repeater-Builder] Times Microwave RT142 Cable - UPDATED
Wayne, My contact at Times Microwave Systems advised me that RT-142 is a triaxial cable in their REMIT specialty product line. The name refers to Reduced Electro Magnetic Interference. Although Times does claim that RT-142 is manufactured in accordance with the material requirements of MIL-C-17 it is not a QPL-listed product. Times will not mark the jacket unless specially requested by the customer. Here are the specs from the REMIT catalog page: Inner Conductor - 0.039 SCCS Dielectric OD - 0.116 Dielectric Material - Not specified Shield Braids - SC Shield Coverage - Not specified Jacket Material - FEP Jacket OD - 0.215 Nominal Impedance - 50 ohms Nominal Capacitance - 29.4 pF/ft Max Operating Voltage - 1,900 VRMS Max Attenuation at 400 MHz - 9.0 dB/100 ft Velocity of Propagation - Not specified If this cable is used in place of double-shielded coaxial cable such as RG-400, the insulating barrier should be trimmed back from the connector clamping or crimping area, so that there is positive metal-to-metal contact between the shields at both ends of the jumper. Care must be taken to select connectors that fit the dielectric without slop; otherwise, a significant impedance bump will occur at the cable/connector interface. 73, Eric Lemmon WB6FLY -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Wayne Sent: Sunday, May 11, 2008 8:34 PM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Best coax for short jumpers in repeater cabinet? I have some cable that I cannot find the true information for. it is labeled as follows: 68999, TIMES MICROWAVE SYSTEMS, RT142 It is not listed, at least not readily seen, on the Times microwave web site. It appears to be a version of RG142. It is tan outer cover Double shielded, high density silvered (or tinned) with insulation between teh two shields.. clear solid inner insulation, and stiff solid center conductor. I bought it to use as RG142 for jumpers. It looks virtually the same as some labeled RG142 that came with a Micor UHF duplexer, though less flexible than the RG142 seems to be. I now wonder if it is interchangeabe or not? I have never seen any cable labeled RT instead of RG... Wayne WA2YNE
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Times Microwave RT142 Cable - UPDATED
Wayne, That's interesting. I have some Times Microwave Systems cable that looks exactly like RG223. The numbers on the cable state 68999 AA-8338. I contacted TMS and got the following information. The 68999 is a Code Identification number the AA-8338 is the drawing number. The following provided specs are stated as. RG142 type with Polyethylene Jacket. Center Conductor: Solid Silver Plated Copper 0.037. Dielectric: Solid Polytetrafluoroethylene 0.116 (try saying that fast 10 times). First Shield: 36 Ga. Silver Plated Copper 0.139. Second shield: 36 Ga. Silver Plated Copper 0.162 Jacket: Black Polyethylene. Recommended minimum bend radius: 2.5 Weight per 1000 ft (Nominal) 40 lbs. Operating Temperature: -40 to +80 C. Impedance (Nominal): 50 Ohm. Velocity of Propagation (Nominal): 69.4 %. Capacity (Nominal): 29.3 pf/ft. Attenuation @ 400 MHz (Typical): 8.7 dB/100ft. Power rating @ 400 MHz (Typical): 375 Watts. Return Loss (50 MHZ - 2 GHz): 20 dB. 73, Tony VE3DWI * From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Eric Lemmon Sent: May 12, 2008 23:20 To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Times Microwave RT142 Cable - UPDATED Wayne, My contact at Times Microwave Systems advised me that RT-142 is a triaxial cable in their REMIT specialty product line. The name refers to Reduced Electro Magnetic Interference. Although Times does claim that RT-142 is manufactured in accordance with the material requirements of MIL-C-17 it is not a QPL-listed product. Times will not mark the jacket unless specially requested by the customer. Here are the specs from the REMIT catalog page: Inner Conductor - 0.039 SCCS Dielectric OD - 0.116 Dielectric Material - Not specified Shield Braids - SC Shield Coverage - Not specified Jacket Material - FEP Jacket OD - 0.215 Nominal Impedance - 50 ohms Nominal Capacitance - 29.4 pF/ft Max Operating Voltage - 1,900 VRMS Max Attenuation at 400 MHz - 9.0 dB/100 ft Velocity of Propagation - Not specified If this cable is used in place of double-shielded coaxial cable such as RG-400, the insulating barrier should be trimmed back from the connector clamping or crimping area, so that there is positive metal-to-metal contact between the shields at both ends of the jumper. Care must be taken to select connectors that fit the dielectric without slop; otherwise, a significant impedance bump will occur at the cable/connector interface. 73, Eric Lemmon WB6FLY -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@ mailto:Repeater-Builder%40yahoogroups.com yahoogroups.com [mailto:Repeater-Builder@ mailto:Repeater-Builder%40yahoogroups.com yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Wayne Sent: Sunday, May 11, 2008 8:34 PM To: Repeater-Builder@ mailto:Repeater-Builder%40yahoogroups.com yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Best coax for short jumpers in repeater cabinet? I have some cable that I cannot find the true information for. it is labeled as follows: 68999, TIMES MICROWAVE SYSTEMS, RT142 It is not listed, at least not readily seen, on the Times microwave web site. It appears to be a version of RG142. It is tan outer cover Double shielded, high density silvered (or tinned) with insulation between teh two shields.. clear solid inner insulation, and stiff solid center conductor. I bought it to use as RG142 for jumpers. It looks virtually the same as some labeled RG142 that came with a Micor UHF duplexer, though less flexible than the RG142 seems to be. I now wonder if it is interchangeabe or not? I have never seen any cable labeled RT instead of RG... Wayne WA2YNE
