Re: [Repeater-Builder] Repeater Kerchunk
Don, And?when are the?existing repeater owners are going to *SEE* new additions in programming to the?7330 SCOM controller? There has been a series?of?software?upgrades for the 7330 since its introduction,?and the latest will be coming out as soon as one last item is fixed. Be aware that?we have a separate list for?S-COM 7330 owners?for the purpose of discussing?the latest upgrades, improvements, and status --?just like the other controller companies have for their?newest products. 73, Bob, WA9FBO
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Repeater Kerchunk
And when are the existing repeater owners are going to *SEE* new additions in programming to the 7330 SCOM controller? Don, KD9PT - Original Message - From: scom...@aol.com To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, March 16, 2009 2:36 PM Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Repeater Kerchunk Hi Don, and where in the Heck did this Word KERCHUNK Originate from We all know what it means Early tube-type repeaters used large relays to key the transmitter. When someone keyed and unkeyed the repeater the result really was a loud kerchunk at the site. It led to what we now call courtesy delays -- the idea being if there was another transmission soon after the first the transmitter would not have to drop and pick up again. It saved tubes as well as relays. 73, Bob, WA9FBO -- A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy steps!
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Repeater Kerchunk
If you start to worry about the kerchunkers your going to drive yourself crazy. I've had several repeaters for years and have learned that the kerchunkers are usually someone who has just discovered your repeater and want to know how it covers an area. They'll drive around testing it in many areas. It usually goes away after a few days when they finish their testing. Other people just kerchunck the repeater to see if it's on the air, or that their radio is still working. As a repeater owner, you have to deal with many types of people and personalities. If you show that you are getting annoyed, the kerchunking can get worse. Many repeaters in my area have had problems with users, I haven't. The problem people usually go to a repeater where they get attention. I ignore them. 73, Joe, K1ike retiredcss01 wrote: We have some on our repeater frequency, that just like to kerchunk the repeater to hear it come back or ID. Is there any way we can eliminate this annoying situation? I suspect that we may have an unlicensed individual with a 2meter radio. Thanks
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Repeater Kerchunk
I agree with all the comments. What I do is listen to the signal, usually there is a distinctive sound from the mike being squeezed or noise on the signal, I'm almost certain who my kerchunker is, as he has used my repeater before! On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 8:13 AM, Joe k1ike_m...@snet.net wrote: If you start to worry about the kerchunkers your going to drive yourself crazy. I've had several repeaters for years and have learned that the kerchunkers are usually someone who has just discovered your repeater and want to know how it covers an area. They'll drive around testing it in many areas. It usually goes away after a few days when they finish their testing. Other people just kerchunck the repeater to see if it's on the air, or that their radio is still working. As a repeater owner, you have to deal with many types of people and personalities. If you show that you are getting annoyed, the kerchunking can get worse. Many repeaters in my area have had problems with users, I haven't. The problem people usually go to a repeater where they get attention. I ignore them. 73, Joe, K1ike --- Ken
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Repeater Kerchunk
At 05:13 3/16/2009, Joe wrote: If you start to worry about the kerchunkers your going to drive yourself crazy. I've had several repeaters for years and have learned that the kerchunkers are usually someone who has just discovered your repeater and want to know how it covers an area. I admit that on occasion I have thought of kerchunking because I check into several nets where I am at the limit of the repeater's coverage. I would kerchunk to see if I am in range or need to move a bit. I am attempting to take as little resource as possible. Would it be better for me to give my call, hope someone comes back, and ask for a signal report? -- Dave Gomberg, San Francisco NE5EE gomberg1 at wcf dot com All addresses, phones, etc. at http://www.wcf.com/ham/info.html -
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Repeater Kerchunk
My thoughts would be... let it be. Do NOT let anybody know it may bother you. If they know it bothers you, they will keep doing it. As a long time ham I do kerchunk repeaters, especially my local one. Why? To check the status and cycle of the I.D. If the repeater has been inactive for a while, when it first transmits it sends its I.D. Since I don't want to be 'washed out' by the I.D., I kerchunk the repeater. Once the I.D. has finished, or the I.D. has not been sent, I will then put out my call to see if anybody's on the air. On the road, traveling... I will kerchunk a repeater to see if I can reach it. There's also the other side of the coin to this. You think kerchunking is bothersome? How bothersome is it to be mobile, you bring up a repeater, and you try to use it. You try several times putting your call out there. Several miles later, several attempts later, you discover your audio wasn't getting through. The repeater's ears weren't as good as its mouth. Give me kerchunking any day over that. 73, Kim - WG8S
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Repeater Kerchunk
Legally, you should be identifying by giving your call. But, that is inviting a conversation with whoever hears you. One of the repeaters here has a ham who hangs around constantly. Sometimes I chose not to talk to him, but just want to check and see if the repeater is on the air and OK. (I help maintain the repeater). Yes, I am guilty of illegal kerchunking. An antikerchunk filter that shortens the repeater tail time can make things worse. The kerchunker does not hear the tail come back to him/her, so they keep on trying. All the other users hear many short bursts of carrier. Much more annoying than a single kerchunk. I actually like to hear kerchuncks. That means that there are users out there tuned to my repeaters. With so much dead air time on repeaters lately, it's nice to know there is someone home out there. When I hear a kerchunker I will usually key up and sign my call to see if they want to talk or get a signal report. Sometimes (alot) they don't come back to me. Maybe I too am one of those repeater trolls that no one wants to talk too! Oh well, such is life, I never built repeaters to win a popularity contest. 73, Joe, K1ike Dave Gomberg wrote: I admit that on occasion I have thought of kerchunking because I check into several nets where I am at the limit of the repeater's coverage. I would kerchunk to see if I am in range or need to move a bit. I am attempting to take as little resource as possible. Would it be better for me to give my call, hope someone comes back, and ask for a signal report?
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Repeater Kerchunk
Anyone listened to the latest Gordon West, WB6NOA audio CDs for the tech class license? Happened to sit it on a tech licensing class a couple months ago... If I recall correctly, the verbiage he (WB6NOA) used while demonstrating repeaters was first, we'll key it up to see if it's on... I'll have to grab that particular CD and listen to it over again - the 90+ minutes on just repeater operation tends to make me glaze over... If Gordo is teaching that kerchunking is OK :) And from a legal standpoint, 97.119(a) states ... at the end of each communication, and at least every ten minutes during a communication While a communication is not clearly defined in 97.3(a), it could be surmised that it would be in the course of a conversation in which two Amateurs exchange information for as long as the communication continues until that communication comes to a close. Reading very loosely between the lines, if one kerchunks the repeater 7 minutes before a net starts, and subsequently properly identifies during the net check in prior to the elapsed 10 minutes, they *could* be fulfilling the identification requirements set forth in 97.119(a). HOWEVER... It is likely not good amateur practice or etiquette to do so. On the flip side of it, I'm not going to send a FSD-213 for someone that occasionally kerchunks the repeater prior to making a contact or verifying their radio is programmed correctly. I will, however, continue to treat malicious interference as a prohibited act as defined (loosely) in 97.101(d). 73s, AJ, K6LOR/R On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 8:39 AM, Joe k1ike_m...@snet.net wrote: Legally, you should be identifying by giving your call. But, that is inviting a conversation with whoever hears you. One of the repeaters here has a ham who hangs around constantly. Sometimes I chose not to talk to him, but just want to check and see if the repeater is on the air and OK. (I help maintain the repeater). Yes, I am guilty of illegal kerchunking. An antikerchunk filter that shortens the repeater tail time can make things worse. The kerchunker does not hear the tail come back to him/her, so they keep on trying. All the other users hear many short bursts of carrier. Much more annoying than a single kerchunk. I actually like to hear kerchuncks. That means that there are users out there tuned to my repeaters. With so much dead air time on repeaters lately, it's nice to know there is someone home out there. When I hear a kerchunker I will usually key up and sign my call to see if they want to talk or get a signal report. Sometimes (alot) they don't come back to me. Maybe I too am one of those repeater trolls that no one wants to talk too! Oh well, such is life, I never built repeaters to win a popularity contest. 73, Joe, K1ike Dave Gomberg wrote: I admit that on occasion I have thought of kerchunking because I check into several nets where I am at the limit of the repeater's coverage. I would kerchunk to see if I am in range or need to move a bit. I am attempting to take as little resource as possible. Would it be better for me to give my call, hope someone comes back, and ask for a signal report?
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Repeater Kerchunk
When I make a transmission on a repeater that hasn't been used for a while, I state my intent and call sign, and the repeater ids after I let go of the PTT. I have made a legal transmission, I gain the information that the repeater has been dormant, AND I know that my transmission held the COR/CTCSS for the entire duration of my transmission. That tells me more that just hearing the hang time of a maybe partial reception of my signal. New hams learn by the example of existing hams. If you are making unidentified transmissions, they will make unidentified transmissions. whensle...@comcast.net wrote: My thoughts would be... let it be. Do NOT let anybody know it may bother you. If they know it bothers you, they will keep doing it. As a long time ham I do kerchunk repeaters, especially my local one. Why? To check the status and cycle of the I.D. If the repeater has been inactive for a while, when it first transmits it sends its I.D. Since I don't want to be 'washed out' by the I.D., I kerchunk the repeater. Once the I.D. has finished, or the I.D. has not been sent, I will then put out my call to see if anybody's on the air. On the road, traveling... I will kerchunk a repeater to see if I can reach it. There's also the other side of the coin to this. You think kerchunking is bothersome? How bothersome is it to be mobile, you bring up a repeater, and you try to use it. You try several times putting your call out there. Several miles later, several attempts later, you discover your audio wasn't getting through. The repeater's ears weren't as good as its mouth. Give me kerchunking any day over that. 73, Kim - WG8S
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Repeater Kerchunk
Well said! de WM4B Mike Naruta AA8K a...@comcast.net wrote: When I make a transmission on a repeater that hasn't been used for a while, I state my intent and call sign, and the repeater ids after I let go of the PTT. I have made a legal transmission, I gain the information that the repeater has been dormant, AND I know that my transmission held the COR/CTCSS for the entire duration of my transmission. That tells me more that just hearing the hang time of a maybe partial reception of my signal. New hams learn by the example of existing hams. If you are making unidentified transmissions, they will make unidentified transmissions. whensle...@comcast.net wrote: My thoughts would be... let it be. Do NOT let anybody know it may bother you. If they know it bothers you, they will keep doing it. As a long time ham I do kerchunk repeaters, especially my local one. Why? To check the status and cycle of the I.D. If the repeater has been inactive for a while, when it first transmits it sends its I.D. Since I don't want to be 'washed out' by the I.D., I kerchunk the repeater. Once the I.D. has finished, or the I.D. has not been sent, I will then put out my call to see if anybody's on the air. On the road, traveling... I will kerchunk a repeater to see if I can reach it. There's also the other side of the coin to this. You think kerchunking is bothersome? How bothersome is it to be mobile, you bring up a repeater, and you try to use it. You try several times putting your call out there. Several miles later, several attempts later, you discover your audio wasn't getting through. The repeater's ears weren't as good as its mouth. Give me kerchunking any day over that. 73, Kim - WG8S
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Repeater Kerchunk
At 3/15/2009 22:15, you wrote: The duration-based anti-kerchunk filters are way more obnoxious than the kerchunkers IMHO, and they also block legitimate users who make quick calls. Not if it's implemented properly. A proper anti-kerchunk will key the repeater TX on any valid input activity but will suppress the hangtime unless the signal remains valid for a reasonable time period. That way the kerchunker doesn't see any response from the repeater. Bob NO6B
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Repeater Kerchunk
Hi Kim, If the repeater has been inactive for a while, when it first transmits it sends its I.D.? Since I don't want to be 'washed out' by the I.D., I kerchunk the repeater.? Once the I.D. has finished, or the I.D. has not been sent, I will then put out my call to see if anybody's on the air. The?controller's software algorithm?can take care of that. Ours wait?for the end of the?initial transmission?before sending the ID.?If?you kerchunk, you'll hear an?ID. But if you?identify?yourself instead, you'll make only one?transmission -- and there won't be another ID if there are no subsequent key-ups. 73, Bob, WA9FBO S-COM, LLC www.scomcontrollers.com
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Repeater Kerchunk
We've successfully used the S-COM variant of this for years, here. anti-kerchunk set up correctly, works fine. (That is, it's NOT active until the repeater has been IN-active for quite a while.) The reality though is that it just trains the kerchunkers to do longer kerchunks. The problem doesn't really go away, but at least you know it's a valid signal (with CTCSS decode on at the repeater site), and it gives you a longer transmission to DF, if you're really interested and care. most of the time, no one does. Mixing the activation of the anti-kerchunk with a voice ID from the repeater at least gives the kerchunkers something to listen to, since the majority of them are licensed hams looking to see if they can hear the repeater. This seems to minimize CONTINUOUS kerchunking. they do it once, get a very long voice ID back, and they're satisfied. Some people are just morons who can't be bothered to take a moment to say their callsign once or even more politely, saying their callsign and testing, instead of just kerchunking illegally. You can't fix stupid. All you can do is set up your repeater controller to make being stupid, really annoying for the stupid guy. As someone else pointed out, if you build the repeater to act more like a commercial system with CTCSS only transmitted on real user input, no one hears the transmitter tail and kerchunks are really boring for anyone running CTCSS decode. you hear a click, and that's it. Kerchunkers are just a part of life when you run repeaters, basically. Nate From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Paul Plack Sent: Sunday, March 15, 2009 11:16 PM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Repeater Kerchunk The duration-based anti-kerchunk filters are way more obnoxious than the kerchunkers IMHO, and they also block legitimate users who make quick calls. 73, Paul, AE4KR
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Repeater Kerchunk
Your call + testing is fine. If a kerchunk is good enough for you to confirm that you have solid communications in the first place, just make the transmission legal and if someone replies, great. If they don't, fine too. I always reply to radio check requests that I have mine!, and when people say for ID I ask them what else they might be using their callsign for, and handle I tell them my handles are on the pots and pans in my kitchen, too... so I guess I'm turning into a repeater curmudgeon! (GRIN!) I do the above NICELY, of course... and have a real conversation with them anyway, tell 'em they sound fine, or that the wet noodle of a rubber duck that's on their HT just isn't going to cut it, or whatever... Nate WY0X -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Dave Gomberg Sent: Monday, March 16, 2009 8:24 AM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Repeater Kerchunk At 05:13 3/16/2009, Joe wrote: If you start to worry about the kerchunkers your going to drive yourself crazy. I've had several repeaters for years and have learned that the kerchunkers are usually someone who has just discovered your repeater and want to know how it covers an area. I admit that on occasion I have thought of kerchunking because I check into several nets where I am at the limit of the repeater's coverage. I would kerchunk to see if I am in range or need to move a bit. I am attempting to take as little resource as possible. Would it be better for me to give my call, hope someone comes back, and ask for a signal report? -- Dave Gomberg, San Francisco NE5EE gomberg1 at wcf dot com All addresses, phones, etc. at http://www.wcf.com/ham/info.html - Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Repeater Kerchunk
The only thing I've found effective against kerchunkers if to DF them, then, after a club meeting, get a dozen guys to park in his neighborhood and kerchunk him on the output of the repeater... ;^) I remember in the early days of my 440 machine in Orlando, before it got discovered, it was so quiet I actually found myself looking forward to the first kerchunkers. I'd answer with, Who's the station calling? This is AE4KR, Orlando. I actually made a couple new friends that way. 73, Paul, AE4KR - Original Message - From: Nate Duehr To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, March 16, 2009 12:24 PM Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Repeater Kerchunk Your call + testing is fine. If a kerchunk is good enough for you to confirm that you have solid communications in the first place, just make the transmission legal and if someone replies, great. If they don't, fine too.
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Repeater Kerchunk
._,___ Well I will have to admit I have got a New ant Mobile and Base really did not feel like Talking to anyone but Just Kerchunked a Distant Repeater to see if I was getting into it, I also think this was done more because a Lot of Hams including Myself actually had a Hard time understand the Fast CW Id . I think it is done less now that We will hear a Voice Id On a lot of Repeaters including My 224.740 , But CW Voice on My 444.750 at about 7 WPM A min some of the Old CW Hams laugh and ask why is it so Slow and I say because I know what its lol PS Most have at least done it once you know who you are , and where in the Heck did this Word KERCHUNK Originate from We all know what it means Happy Repeater Building Don KA9QJG
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Repeater Kerchunk
If you’re getting “washed out” by your repeater ID, you definitely bought the wrong controller or have it programmed wrong. :-) It shouldn’t be ID’ing as soon as it comes on the air, it should ID on the UNKEY event after the kerchunk. Some controllers are smart, some controllers are stupid… time to upgrade… Nate WY0X From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of whensle...@comcast.net Sent: Monday, March 16, 2009 8:37 AM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Repeater Kerchunk My thoughts would be... let it be. Do NOT let anybody know it may bother you. If they know it bothers you, they will keep doing it. As a long time ham I do kerchunk repeaters, especially my local one. Why? To check the status and cycle of the I.D. If the repeater has been inactive for a while, when it first transmits it sends its I.D. Since I don't want to be 'washed out' by the I.D., I kerchunk the repeater. Once the I.D. has finished, or the I.D. has not been sent, I will then put out my call to see if anybody's on the air. On the road, traveling... I will kerchunk a repeater to see if I can reach it. There's also the other side of the coin to this. You think kerchunking is bothersome? How bothersome is it to be mobile, you bring up a repeater, and you try to use it. You try several times putting your call out there. Several miles later, several attempts later, you discover your audio wasn't getting through. The repeater's ears weren't as good as its mouth. Give me kerchunking any day over that. 73, Kim - WG8S
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Repeater Kerchunk
Hi Don, and where in the Heck did this Word KERCHUNK Originate from We all know what it means Early tube-type?repeaters?used large relays?to key the transmitter. When someone keyed and unkeyed the repeater the result really was a loud?kerchunk at the site. It led to what we now call courtesy delays -- the idea being if there was another transmission soon after the first the transmitter would not have to drop and pick up again. It saved tubes as well as relays. 73, Bob, WA9FBO
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Repeater Kerchunk
At 3/15/2009 22:15, you wrote: The duration-based anti-kerchunk filters are way more obnoxious than the kerchunkers IMHO, and they also block legitimate users who make quick calls. Not if it's implemented properly. A proper anti-kerchunk will key the repeater TX on any valid input activity but will suppress the hangtime unless the signal remains valid for a reasonable time period. That way the kerchunker doesn't see any response from the repeater. Bob NO6B
[Repeater-Builder] Repeater Kerchunk
We have some on our repeater frequency, that just like to kerchunk the repeater to hear it come back or ID. Is there any way we can eliminate this annoying situation? I suspect that we may have an unlicensed individual with a 2meter radio. Thanks
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Repeater Kerchunk
___ Most of the time they are looking for an audience sometimes it is best to ignore them they will move to a bigger coverage Repeater, unless it is something personal against you or one of the users. Record, Including the Input, Times, Date, Signal on Input share this info with other Repeater Trustees in Your area in case the Jammer moves around. Don't always assume it is Intentional Sometime it is something else getting in Example on one of my repeaters 444.750 it is Cable TV Interference that kerchunks it at 3 Am Listen for the Voice, transmitter noise, Mic clicks Etc. And other Freqs when You are not being Interfered with, it is Sad to say but Sometimes it turns out to be a Ham that No one would ever suspect. Good Luck look in the Files in this Group I do recall info regarding this Don KA9QJG
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Repeater Kerchunk
On Sat, 14 Mar 2009, retiredcss01 wrote: We have some on our repeater frequency, that just like to kerchunk the repeater to hear it come back or ID. Is there any way we can eliminate this annoying situation? I suspect that we may have an unlicensed individual with a 2meter radio. If you're not using CTCSS or DPL/DCS, ignore it. Depending on where your system is located, it may be a power dropout as a result of a generator test. -- Kris Kirby, KE4AHR Disinformation Analyst
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Repeater Kerchunk
Your kerchunkers are most likely licensed hams. This is an issue as old as repeaters. It's illegal to kerchunk without ID-ing, but there's not much you can do about it. Is the repeater PL access? Use decode on your receiver, and all you'll hear is a quiet squelch break, no courtesy tones, IDs or squelch tails (if it's set up right.) The duration-based anti-kerchunk filters are way more obnoxious than the kerchunkers IMHO, and they also block legitimate users who make quick calls. 73, Paul, AE4KR - Original Message - From: retiredcss01 To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, March 13, 2009 9:29 PM Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Repeater Kerchunk We have some on our repeater frequency, that just like to kerchunk the repeater to hear it come back or ID. Is there any way we can eliminate this annoying situation? I suspect that we may have an unlicensed individual with a 2meter radio. Thanks
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Repeater Kerchunk
The duration-based anti-kerchunk filters are way more obnoxious than the kerchunkers IMHO, and they also block legitimate users who make quick calls. What Paul said :) One of the macros on our repeaters for special event/emergency comms use specifically turns OFF the anti-kerchunk filter for that same reason. 73s, AJ, K6LOR/R On Sun, Mar 15, 2009 at 11:15 PM, Paul Plack pl...@xmission.com wrote: Your kerchunkers are most likely licensed hams. This is an issue as old as repeaters. It's illegal to kerchunk without ID-ing, but there's not much you can do about it. Is the repeater PL access? Use decode on your receiver, and all you'll hear is a quiet squelch break, no courtesy tones, IDs or squelch tails (if it's set up right.) The duration-based anti-kerchunk filters are way more obnoxious than the kerchunkers IMHO, and they also block legitimate users who make quick calls. 73, Paul, AE4KR - Original Message - *From:* retiredcss01 tommy...@dfn.com *To:* Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Friday, March 13, 2009 9:29 PM *Subject:* [Repeater-Builder] Repeater Kerchunk We have some on our repeater frequency, that just like to kerchunk the repeater to hear it come back or ID. Is there any way we can eliminate this annoying situation? I suspect that we may have an unlicensed individual with a 2meter radio. Thanks
