[Repeater-Builder] Re: Astron Rack Power Supplies or Motorola for new project
Thanks Bill for the reply. Just to be clear to everyone, I'm not going to swap-out the MSF5000 PS since it works great. I was thinking about the MSR if I consolidated it into to a different cabinet with other equipment. --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, William Becks wbe...@... wrote: Tony, I am not sure about the MSF-5000 but the MSR-2000 requires well filtered and regulated 9 and 12 volt supplies for the RF deck and control shelf while the PA has its own high current 14 volt supply. Some MSF-5000 models require 24-28 volts for the PA depending on power output. You would be hard pressed to fulfill the various supply voltages with the Astron. The cabinet and frame of both stations are similar and are designed for stacking through the use of the two auxiliary bolts that fasten the bottom plate of one cabinet to the top plate of the other. Bill, WA8WG - Original Message - From: kt...@... To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, April 29, 2009 1:31 PM Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Astron Rack Power Supplies or Motorola for new project Hi everyone, I just picked up a MSR2000 and MSF5000 recently. I'm wondering what the group thinks about using an Astron PS in place of the Moto back-breaker (sorry, mine still hurts) that came with these units? I've never seen a Moto fail, but for consolidating these two into a taller cabinet, would it make sense? I know it depends on the current consumption, but for a 40W station and a remote receiver application I'd hate to add 80lbs or more. What about how old is too old for a Moto PS (specifically the MSR2K unit)? Thanks, Tony Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Linking and interference problem
John, Haven't seen the Guru's jump in here so thought I'd make a comment. From what I gathered reading your post it appears you have a UHF RX TX operating with a 1.55 Mhz separation between the 2 units. Bad enough the small frequency spread but having the TX and RX antennas setting in the same horizontal plane 10 feet apart as the UHF repeater transmits (unknown power) into your link receiver has got to be a source of desense/feedback. You didn't comment on any existing filtering for the system ?? I am not a person who has the knowledge to advise about different options of filter/duplexer's available and their effects on your operation. However even with my limited experience I would seriously look at relocating one of the UHF antennas. Either to another location or at a minimum to a different vertical plane. Larry - N7FM John Godfrey wrote: I was hoping you can help our club with a repeater link problem. What we have are all GE master 2 stuff. Here is what we have going on. we have had for years a 147.270 + repeater that works great. Last year we added a link into a central state repeater system using a link radio on one of our ports. It transmits on 442.025 and receives on 443.2. For six months we have used the link fine without problems. Last week we installed on another port a uhf repeater to be used as a hub for the north central part of our state to also link to us and the central state system. The UHF Repeater receives on 449.750 and transmits on 444.750. We can link the 270 to either the link to central state or the UHF repeater hub with no problems, but when we link the 270 to both or just link the UHF repeater to the link radio, once the UHF repeater is keyed up, the input on the link radio is hearing it so we have an awful squeal and intermod back into the 270. There is also a pager at the location that I can hear when this happens but not any other time. Again they work fine as long as both UHF machines are not in use at the same time. When the 270 is linked into Central state, even if the UHF repeater is not linked in, if you key the UHF repeater you here the squeal on the 270. I can see how as the link input goes out over the 270 when they are linked. I am not sure why I can also here it on the UHF repeater when I unkey it, even if it isn't linked in. Other than the last part of that it would make since to ne that I have the two 440 antennas to close. We have them about 10 feet apart, but the one can't go higher and the other can't go lower and still serve the purpose needed. I am thinking I need some kind of filter, that I can put on the link radio, that will protect it from the transmit of the UHF repeater. In other words the 444.750 is coming in my receive on the 443.2. Changing freq is not an option due to several reasons. If I had a filter of some sort, that would either allow say 442-443.5 to pass and attenuate everything else that would be great. Or something that would pass 442-443.5 and attenuate everything above 443.5, then that would work. Guys, what am I looking for and where might I find it. Must I build something that is this custom, or can I buy it. If I must build it, where should I start. If I can buy it,, where from and what would they call it. If my thoughts are off base, please help me to know what other questions I need to answer to solve such a problem as this. I thought maybe the pager was just interfering, but why would the 270 work fine when linked to the link radio, or linked to the UHF repeater, and the only time we have the problem is when the 270 is linked to the link radio and the UHF repeater is keyed up, regardless of whether the UHF repeater is linked in or not. I know my question is long, but m hope was to explain the problem with enough detail that you might have an answer for me. Your help would be greatly appreciated by our Club. 73 de John Godfrey KE5NZY BARC Pres. DISTRICT B ADEC ASTEN NM Yahoo! Groups Links
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Linking and interference problem
John, I agree with Larry that the problem is that you have transmitter and receiver too close in frequency and in separation distance. I am not an expert, but I think you might try using a couple notch filters; i.e. notch the receive frequency out of the transmitter and notch the transmitter frequency out of the receiver. Also, you could reduce the transmitter power to a minimum acceptable, and you could go to a highly directional antenna for the link receiver. Maybe you could orient the directional link antenna to put the transmit antenna in a null. Good luck, John T. -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Repeater- buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of John Godfrey Sent: Wednesday, April 29, 2009 5:42 AM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Linking and interference problem I was hoping you can help our club with a repeater link problem. What we have are all GE master 2 stuff. Here is what we have going on. we have had for years a 147.270 + repeater that works great. Last year we added a link into a central state repeater system using a link radio on one of our ports. It transmits on 442.025 and receives on 443.2. For six months we have used the link fine without problems. Last week we installed on another port a uhf repeater to be used as a hub for the north central part of our state to also link to us and the central state system. The UHF Repeater receives on 449.750 and transmits on 444.750. We can link the 270 to either the link to central state or the UHF repeater hub with no problems, but when we link the 270 to both or just link the UHF repeater to the link radio, once the UHF repeater is keyed up, the input on the link radio is hearing it so we have an awful squeal and intermod back into the 270. There is also a pager at the location that I can hear when this happens but not any other time. Again they work fine as long as both UHF machines are not in use at the same time. When the 270 is linked into Central state, even if the UHF repeater is not linked in, if you key the UHF repeater you here the squeal on the 270. I can see how as the link input goes out over the 270 when they are linked. I am not sure why I can also here it on the UHF repeater when I unkey it, even if it isn't linked in. Other than the last part of that it would make since to ne that I have the two 440 antennas to close. We have them about 10 feet apart, but the one can't go higher and the other can't go lower and still serve the purpose needed. I am thinking I need some kind of filter, that I can put on the link radio, that will protect it from the transmit of the UHF repeater. In other words the 444.750 is coming in my receive on the 443.2. Changing freq is not an option due to several reasons. If I had a filter of some sort, that would either allow say 442-443.5 to pass and attenuate everything else that would be great. Or something that would pass 442-443.5 and attenuate everything above 443.5, then that would work. Guys, what am I looking for and where might I find it. Must I build something that is this custom, or can I buy it. If I must build it, where should I start. If I can buy it,, where from and what would they call it. If my thoughts are off base, please help me to know what other questions I need to answer to solve such a problem as this. I thought maybe the pager was just interfering, but why would the 270 work fine when linked to the link radio, or linked to the UHF repeater, and the only time we have the problem is when the 270 is linked to the link radio and the UHF repeater is keyed up, regardless of whether the UHF repeater is linked in or not. I know my question is long, but m hope was to explain the problem with enough detail that you might have an answer for me. Your help would be greatly appreciated by our Club. 73 de John Godfrey KE5NZY BARC Pres. DISTRICT B ADEC ASTEN NM Yahoo! Groups Links __ NOD32 4043 (20090429) Information __ This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system. http://www.eset.com
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Linking and interference problem
I think some kind of filter like you mention is what I need. What I have done at this time is turned the squelch all the way tight on the link radio receiver, and we still have a strong signal from a constant source, and it has no problem breaking the squelch. This way when we unkey, the intermod or whatever it is will not hold the squelch open. Sometimes I still hear it for like 50ms after I unkey like a dirty courtesy tone. I can live with it as is for a little while, however because as long as there is audio, you can't here anything but clear audio. I will be on the lookout for such a filter as you describe, but I don't know where to start looking. 73 de John Godfrey KE5NZY BARC Pres. DISTRICT B ADEC ASTEN NM -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of John Transue Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2009 12:54 PM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Linking and interference problem John, I agree with Larry that the problem is that you have transmitter and receiver too close in frequency and in separation distance. I am not an expert, but I think you might try using a couple notch filters; i.e. notch the receive frequency out of the transmitter and notch the transmitter frequency out of the receiver. Also, you could reduce the transmitter power to a minimum acceptable, and you could go to a highly directional antenna for the link receiver. Maybe you could orient the directional link antenna to put the transmit antenna in a null. Good luck, John T. -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@ mailto:Repeater-Builder%40yahoogroups.com yahoogroups.com [mailto:Repeater- buil...@yahoogroups mailto:Builder%40yahoogroups.com .com] On Behalf Of John Godfrey Sent: Wednesday, April 29, 2009 5:42 AM To: Repeater-Builder@ mailto:Repeater-Builder%40yahoogroups.com yahoogroups.com Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Linking and interference problem I was hoping you can help our club with a repeater link problem. What we have are all GE master 2 stuff. Here is what we have going on. we have had for years a 147.270 + repeater that works great. Last year we added a link into a central state repeater system using a link radio on one of our ports. It transmits on 442.025 and receives on 443.2. For six months we have used the link fine without problems. Last week we installed on another port a uhf repeater to be used as a hub for the north central part of our state to also link to us and the central state system. The UHF Repeater receives on 449.750 and transmits on 444.750. We can link the 270 to either the link to central state or the UHF repeater hub with no problems, but when we link the 270 to both or just link the UHF repeater to the link radio, once the UHF repeater is keyed up, the input on the link radio is hearing it so we have an awful squeal and intermod back into the 270. There is also a pager at the location that I can hear when this happens but not any other time. Again they work fine as long as both UHF machines are not in use at the same time. When the 270 is linked into Central state, even if the UHF repeater is not linked in, if you key the UHF repeater you here the squeal on the 270. I can see how as the link input goes out over the 270 when they are linked. I am not sure why I can also here it on the UHF repeater when I unkey it, even if it isn't linked in. Other than the last part of that it would make since to ne that I have the two 440 antennas to close. We have them about 10 feet apart, but the one can't go higher and the other can't go lower and still serve the purpose needed. I am thinking I need some kind of filter, that I can put on the link radio, that will protect it from the transmit of the UHF repeater. In other words the 444.750 is coming in my receive on the 443.2. Changing freq is not an option due to several reasons. If I had a filter of some sort, that would either allow say 442-443.5 to pass and attenuate everything else that would be great. Or something that would pass 442-443.5 and attenuate everything above 443.5, then that would work. Guys, what am I looking for and where might I find it. Must I build something that is this custom, or can I buy it. If I must build it, where should I start. If I can buy it,, where from and what would they call it. If my thoughts are off base, please help me to know what other questions I need to answer to solve such a problem as this. I thought maybe the pager was just interfering, but why would the 270 work fine when linked to the link radio, or linked to the UHF repeater, and the only time we have the problem is when the 270 is linked to the link radio and the UHF repeater is keyed up, regardless of whether the UHF repeater is linked in or not. I know my question is long, but m hope was to explain the problem with enough detail that you might have an answer for me. Your help would be greatly appreciated by our Club. 73 de
[Repeater-Builder] Taxes On Antennas Feedlines? What Next?
Maybe this is not new in other states but it appears to be gaining momentum here in Iowa. The county real estate assessors are charging taxes on all cables and antennas on commercial towers. This is whether there is any radio equipment connected or not. Currently I have a couple ham repeaters running on unused antennas on these towers owned by my employer. Nice tall towers too! Now my employer wants these antennas and feed lines removed so taxes won't have to be paid on non-revenue generating antennas. My current plans are to form a non-profit corporation and file for an exemption for the antennas and feed lines. I would like to hear how others have tackled another attempt by government to tax the things we enjoy. Randy WB0VHB
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Taxes On Antennas Feedlines? What Next?
At 04:46 PM 4/30/2009, ran...@farmtel.net wrote: I would like to hear how others have tackled another attempt by government to tax the things we enjoy. That pretty much covers anything and everything under this CHANGE and HOPE crap. (imagine how I feel. I drive a Corvette!) (oh yea, it does have a ham rig in it LOL) Ken
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Taxes On Antennas Feedlines? What Next?
Don't anyone tell New York State Governor Patterson about taxing feedline and antennas. I think that's about the only tax he didn't propose for this year's state budget. Chuck WB2EDV - Original Message - From: ran...@farmtel.net To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2009 7:46 PM Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Taxes On Antennas Feedlines? What Next? Maybe this is not new in other states but it appears to be gaining momentum here in Iowa. The county real estate assessors are charging taxes on all cables and antennas on commercial towers. This is whether there is any radio equipment connected or not.
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Taxes On Antennas Feedlines? What Next?
Ken, you've got it wrong... it's hope and change. You hope when they are done you at least have some change left in your pocket ;-) Chuck WB2EDV - Original Message - From: Ken Arck ah...@ah6le.net To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2009 7:53 PM Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Taxes On Antennas Feedlines? What Next? At 04:46 PM 4/30/2009, ran...@farmtel.net wrote: I would like to hear how others have tackled another attempt by government to tax the things we enjoy. That pretty much covers anything and everything under this CHANGE and HOPE crap.
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Taxes On Antennas Feedlines? What Next?
Good grief...
My first impression is that they are over-reaching a bit here, perhaps
farther than they can manage. They literally have no idea (or proof) of
whether any item they are observing is indeed a feedline or antenna. How do
they know for sure? yeah, I know, but how do they know for sure? Are they
going to insist on touring your equipment rooms with techs and test
equipment? ('sorry, we don't let unauthorized personnel in our equipment
shelters...'). I'm not advocating deception; just trying to make a point
about enforceablility and feasibility.
One idea that comes to mind is to contact one's State Legislators and talk
about exemptions for Hams for this sort of thing. Or a premptive State Law
against the whole thing.
Are they potentially coming after individuals too? or businesses only?
73 Paul
- Original Message -
From: ran...@farmtel.net
Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Taxes On Antennas Feedlines? What Next?
Maybe this is not new in other states but it appears to be gaining
momentum here in Iowa.
The county real estate assessors are charging taxes on all cables and
antennas on commercial towers. This is whether there is any radio
equipment connected or not.
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Taxes On Antennas Feedlines? What Next?
Sounds like an opportunity. There have to be thousands of abandoned antennas and feedlines on towers around the US. Till now, there's been no incentive for companies to let them go until they decayed to the point they fell off on their own. There are antennas you'd never get access to before. Put together a not-for-profit, or work through an existing ham club set up as a 501(c)(3), and provide commercial enterprises an alternative to the costs of having them torn down, with a donation tax credit to boot! Call me passive-aggressive, but figuring out strategies like this is way more fun than carrying picket signs! 73, Paul, AE4KR - Original Message - From: ran...@farmtel.net To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2009 5:46 PM Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Taxes On Antennas Feedlines? What Next? Maybe this is not new in other states but it appears to be gaining momentum here in Iowa. The county real estate assessors are charging taxes on all cables and antennas on commercial towers. This is whether there is any radio equipment connected or not. Currently I have a couple ham repeaters running on unused antennas on these towers owned by my employer. Nice tall towers too! Now my employer wants these antennas and feed lines removed so taxes won't have to be paid on non-revenue generating antennas. My current plans are to form a non-profit corporation and file for an exemption for the antennas and feed lines. I would like to hear how others have tackled another attempt by government to tax the things we enjoy. Randy WB0VHB
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Taxes On Antennas Feedlines? What Next?
This should not be surprising. It has been done for years with utilities. Go out and look at a power pole. For an investor-owned utility, everything on that pole is taxed - pole, insulators, hardware, crossarms, etc. If it's producing revenue it's being taxed. They have simply confused cell phone installations with others, but then a business system is doing the same thing - generating revenue (directly or indirectly). Amateur installations, however, should be exempt. 73, Kim - WG8S
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Taxes On Antennas Feedlines? What Next?
Now if they could tax for unused/held spectrum. JS From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Paul Plack Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2009 7:19 PM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Taxes On Antennas Feedlines? What Next? Sounds like an opportunity. There have to be thousands of abandoned antennas and feedlines on towers around the US. Till now, there's been no incentive for companies to let them go until they decayed to the point they fell off on their own. There are antennas you'd never get access to before. Put together a not-for-profit, or work through an existing ham club set up as a 501(c)(3), and provide commercial enterprises an alternative to the costs of having them torn down, with a donation tax credit to boot! Call me passive-aggressive, but figuring out strategies like this is way more fun than carrying picket signs! 73, Paul, AE4KR - Original Message - From: ran...@farmtel.net To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2009 5:46 PM Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Taxes On Antennas Feedlines? What Next? Maybe this is not new in other states but it appears to be gaining momentum here in Iowa. The county real estate assessors are charging taxes on all cables and antennas on commercial towers. This is whether there is any radio equipment connected or not. Currently I have a couple ham repeaters running on unused antennas on these towers owned by my employer. Nice tall towers too! Now my employer wants these antennas and feed lines removed so taxes won't have to be paid on non-revenue generating antennas. My current plans are to form a non-profit corporation and file for an exemption for the antennas and feed lines. I would like to hear how others have tackled another attempt by government to tax the things we enjoy. Randy WB0VHB image001.jpgimage002.jpg
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Rule Question
Thanks to all who replied! Short summary then: - Stations operating under 6.1m rules are designated as FX1 on the license. - If it isn't listed on the license, it doesn't and, more importantly, must not exist. - If it is an intentional emitter, it must be licensed unless operating under license-free rules; there is no such thing as license-free or doesn't need a license on part 90 (Public Safety) freqs. Now - - to convince the fire whackers with their eBay radios... Bill - WB1GOT --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Bill Powell w...@... wrote: I know it's off-topic but I needed a starting place. Please refer me to someplace appropriate instead of flames. I'm looking for clarification on 6.2m control stations. I'm being told (by a dealer) that, in the eyes of the FCC, they are treated the same as a mobile and do not need to be included in the license. I think I'm being shoveled a fresh load... Tkx, Bill - WB1GOT
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Taxes On Antennas Feedlines? What Next?
On Thu, 30 Apr 2009 18:46:30 -0500, ran...@farmtel.net said: Maybe this is not new in other states but it appears to be gaining momentum here in Iowa. The county real estate assessors are charging taxes on all cables and antennas on commercial towers. This is whether there is any radio equipment connected or not. Haven't seen that one out here in Colorado yet. Don't give our newly-leftist State legislature any ideas. They want to buy lots of things without a budget to do so. What I *have* seen, is taxes for land use for Forest Service sites, passed along through the lessee of the site operating it for the USFS. There *is* a tax code for the USFS computers that indicates that a particular installation is Amateur Radio and thus not to be taxed, but we got a bill once when the site operator/lessee screwed up and entered our Amateur systems as Commercial into the Federal system and then wanted to pass-through (allowed on our contract) those USFS taxes/fees. I never saw the computer systems or the codes, but a nice stern letter to the commercial operator stating that we were both Amateur Radio and a State non-profit that the sales rep passed to the commercial operator's tax lawyers, got it all straightened out, and we were credited many months later. (Having to wait three months to see if the bill got credited properly, meanwhile the bill said we were overdue... says a lot about the organizational skills of this particular commercial operator -- but hey, it worked out all right in the end, and I sure wasn't going to send them the money... if I'd have done that, it would have taken six months to a year to get the refund, because I'm SURE they had no proper way to apply it to future bills!) The fun of commercial sites, eh? Love the coverage, hate the paperwork, process, procedures, and general Dilbert-style silliness... Nate WY0X -- Nate Duehr n...@natetech.com
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Taxes On Antennas Feedlines? What Next?
By law, my boat is non-commercial and does not generate revenue by providing boating recreation. Therefore, it is not exempt. It's a property tax, not a use tax. Same for ham radio. W6CBS _ From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of rert...@ix.netcom.com Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2009 5:23 PM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Taxes On Antennas Feedlines? What Next? By law, amateur radio is non-commercial and does not generate revenue by providing communications. Therefore, it's exempt. Dick -Original Message- From: ran...@farmtel.net Sent: Apr 30, 2009 4:46 PM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Taxes On Antennas Feedlines? What Next? Maybe this is not new in other states but it appears to be gaining momentum here in Iowa. The county real estate assessors are charging taxes on all cables and antennas on commercial towers. This is whether there is any radio equipment connected or not. Currently I have a couple ham repeaters running on unused antennas on these towers owned by my employer. Nice tall towers too! Now my employer wants these antennas and feed lines removed so taxes won't have to be paid on non-revenue generating antennas. My current plans are to form a non-profit corporation and file for an exemption for the antennas and feed lines. I would like to hear how others have tackled another attempt by government to tax the things we enjoy. Randy WB0VHB
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Taxes On Antennas Feedlines? What Next?
Randy How much is the site owner asking to cover one cable for a years tax? Just to put this discussion in perspective. Gran K6RIF At 04:46 PM 4/30/2009, you wrote: Maybe this is not new in other states but it appears to be gaining momentum here in Iowa. The county real estate assessors are charging taxes on all cables and antennas on commercial towers. This is whether there is any radio equipment connected or not. Currently I have a couple ham repeaters running on unused antennas on these towers owned by my employer. Nice tall towers too! Now my employer wants these antennas and feed lines removed so taxes won't have to be paid on non-revenue generating antennas. My current plans are to form a non-profit corporation and file for an exemption for the antennas and feed lines. I would like to hear how others have tackled another attempt by government to tax the things we enjoy. Randy WB0VHB
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Rule Question
Larry, The latest edition (2008) of part 90 can be downloaded here: http://www.repeater-builder.com/fcc/2008-part-90-rules.pdf The licensing of control (FX1) stations is found in paragraph 90.119(b) on page 85. 73, Eric Lemmon WB6FLY -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of larryjspamme...@teleport.com Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2009 7:29 AM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Rule Question Could you point me to the FCC section numbers that discuss control stations? We've been discussing this here in our office for some time, and could use some specific info. Thanks! LJ
