Kevin,
Now that I understand what you are trying to do, be advised that just
because you have the link RXs co-located with the comparator your remote
site Link transmitters do not have to transmit all the time. Just an FYI. I
started to do exactly what you are attempting with the comparator but
Also, I have found a PA deck that is poorly tuned will oscillate
too.
Neil - WA6KLA
Bob Dengler wrote:
At 1/19/2006 08:17 AM, you wrote:
Ok guys I think I resolved the squeeling problem. I Got to the site
this morning while guys were using the rptr and the problem was
existing.
skipp025 wrote:
I've done it... you really need to make and install
the status tone generators.
What didn't you like about running it without the tone generators?
For a while adapter circuits
made for the task were available from a number of sources
like RCA and Cetec Vega. Back in days
Hi Dan, thanks for the reply,
Kevin,
Now that I understand what you are trying to do, be advised that just
because you have the link RXs co-located with the comparator your remote
site Link transmitters do not have to transmit all the time.
What keeps the Comparator from failing, then?
Just
Thanks for your thoughts, Tony.
It would appear that from your explanation, you used PL for signaling to
the SQM, since the link transmitters continued to transmit for a length
of time after the remote receiver lost signal. Or, did you still use
the status tone and simply not use constant
On Wed, 18 Jan 2006, Joe Montierth wrote:
I think you would be better off just getting a panel antenna with 12 dBi
of gain and the approx 70 degree horizontal beamwidth.
Well, that's certainly a nice thought except for a few things: I already
have several of the 902MHz 6dBi patch antennas
On Thu, 19 Jan 2006, Laryn Lohman wrote:
I think the spacing should be closer to .85-1.0 wavelength. As an
example, the DB224 and others similar in configuration, no matter what
the band, will use this spacing.
I'm inclined to agree; the total wave front from the antennas should be in
sync
On Fri, 20 Jan 2006, skipp025 wrote:
As a web reader to the group, I don't receive your entire email address.
So you'd have to contact me direct. But I think I found your address on
the web and have already sent you a copy. If you don't receive it,
please email me direct.
Consider
Hi All,
I am consiering buying a MASTR II Repeater Station, RX 806.7375 and TX
851.7375. My question is, will it tune up to the 902 /927 MHz area,
as I'm beginning to do some linking up inthat reqion.
Thanks,
Shorty, K6JSI
San Diego
Yahoo! Groups Links
* To visit your group on
Well, I done it on our repeaters. We run SpectraTac. Originally I ran link
transmitters constantly keyed. Some are still that way. I have also converted
SQM's to use cor from a link receiver. Required replacing the agc cap c9 with a
fixed resistor to maintain a constant agc level.
skipp025 wrote:
I've done it... you really need to make and install
the status tone generators.
What didn't you like about running it without the
tone generators?
It was just a lot easier to use the tone generators
adapters. Plus we were using a comibination of original
method
Kevin Custer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Dan, thanks for the reply,
Kevin,
Now that I understand what you are trying to do, be
advised that just because you have the link RXs
co-located with the comparator your remote
site Link transmitters do not have to transmit all
the time.
I am in need of a 162.2Hz (5B) reed like the KLN6209A for a Micor
station I am converting. Will eithr buy outright or swap.
Thanks
Henry
K4HAL (at) CHARTER (dot) NET
Yahoo! Groups Links
* To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/
* To
Have you tested it into a dummy load? If you were able to achieve a decent amount of isolation on a service monitor, then I wouldn't think you would need to go through the trouble of re-cabling itJust a thought..Andy
Yahoo! Photos
Ring in the New Year with Photo Calendars. Add
Kevin, when I wrote that I did not understand your full intent. I always
used the 2175 status tone, regardless of whether I had PL on the sat
receivers, links or both.
td
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 08:27:29 -0500
From: Kevin Custer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Operating a Spectra-TAC
Kevin Custer wrote:
I'm really not interested in installing the Motorola Spectra-TAC
receivers and encoders, since I already have these others installed.
Thanks,
Kevin Custer W3KKC
Isn't there an EM input to the voter? That's what I used on the GE
voter I just put together for a club
Seems I can get one or two things done today.
I dug out the mentioned aftermarket Spectra Tac tone
encoder (ComCenterCorp Voting Tone Encoder) and the
Spectra Tac Current Generator Upgrade information.
The paperwork has been scanned and sent to both Kevin
and Mike. Please ask Mike to put
This is great news... some of the mfgrs have long
since dropped support for prom based ID units.
I've also scanned in the circuit diagram with
basic pc board layout and sent the pdf to Mike
for the RB Web Page. Please contact Mike for a
copy.
cheers,
skipp
(still thinking about the
Skipp - Could you also send me a copy ?
Thanks,
Charles
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- skipp025 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have a pdf scanned page, which describes all the
basics
of spacing. I announced it last year on this group,
made
copies available to anyone who emailed me direct and
sent
The length of the jumper cables between the cans has a profound effect
upon the insertion loss at the pass frequency, and relatively little effect upon
the isolation at the notch frequency. Moreover, the isolation can be just
fine with the wrong jumper cables, but the insertion loss will
--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Kevin Custer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
hl31943 wrote:
That is one option, but I guess we should ask you where you are
getting the audio from?
Pin 1 of U403, I followed WA6ILQ's article for the most part.
I don't know how much audio
The length of the jumper cables between the cans has a profound
effect upon
the insertion loss at the pass frequency, and relatively little
effect upon
the isolation at the notch frequency.
Which brings up a fun question..
How do you know what the right length is, and where do you measure
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, I done it on our repeaters. We run SpectraTac. Originally
I ran link transmitters constantly keyed. Some are still that way. I
have also converted SQM's to use cor from a link receiver. Required
replacing the agc cap c9 with a fixed resistor to
Dave,
The vast majority of duplexers will work pretty well with the cables close
to the right length. After all, Sinclair offers only two cable harnesses
for their Q-202G BpBr duplexers- one for the 136-150 MHz split, and the
other for the 150-174 MHz split. I may not have the splits correct,
Several people responded about this being the right reed for a Micor,
so I looked in the book (DUH!) and what I really need is a TLN8381A.
Appararently someone had just stuck this reed in the socket. I dont
know if it would have worked or not.
Henry
--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com,
At 1/20/2006 19:16, you wrote:
The length of the jumper cables between the cans has a profound
effect upon
the insertion loss at the pass frequency, and relatively little
effect upon
the isolation at the notch frequency.
Which brings up a fun question..
How do you know what the right
If I can speak up at this point - I am currently in the process of adding
Spectra TAC receivers to a repeater system I administer. I'd really like to
take a look at those mod sheets that both Skipp and Dan refer to, especially
if it will improve receiver operation and voting.
Thanks in advance!
27 matches
Mail list logo
