Hi Cort,
Just something to keep in mind...
You can use a regular radio as a signal generator just as you
can use another for your receiver/detector function.
Duplexer adjustment is more easily done with some RF-Pads
(attenuators) placed on each coax port. I use some 3dB pads
fairly easy to
Hi Keith,
Do you have the equipment to check each location
for desense and effective sensitivity?
It would be very hard to make a notch cavity from Hard-line
with enough Q to allow a decent 100KHz split. Even placing a
band-pass cavities will help only so much...
A DCI Filter would not be
Keith,
Some of the local guys here had a similar problem and setup as you on
ten meters. It turned out that the transmitter, even though several miles
away, was saturating the extender (noise blanker). Turning off the extender
on the receiver solved the desense problem.
These were not
Thanks, yes, the split is too close to do much!
I recently had both sites equipment here to check it out, everything
looks good and plays (individualy) here with no problems.
With the transmitter turned off, weak signals can get in and sound
great on the UHF link.
I just learned that there is
I believe the Maxtrac noise blanker is a pulse type vs one that is
tuned to a nearby freq, but we can certainly disable it and give it a
try (push and hold monitor button until 3 beeps).
...Keith
--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Al Wolfe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Keith,
Some of the
I have found that the main problem in using a talkie
as the receiver for tuning the notch in a duplexer is
the possible leakage of RF between the signal source
directly into the talkie. Most talkies are not
shielded at all, and any leakage will cause you to
tune a combination of the signal
Jim
I have used double shielded coax and haven't had too much problem with
leakage.
73
Brian
Jim Brown wrote:
I have found that the main problem in using a talkie
as the receiver for tuning the notch in a duplexer is
the possible leakage of RF between the signal source
directly into the
This has me thinking in new ways handheld has an ultra-low 50mw
output...
On Dec 22, 2007, at 2:34 AM, skipp025 wrote:
Hi Cort,
Just something to keep in mind...
You can use a regular radio as a signal generator just as you
can use another for your receiver/detector function.
At 12/22/2007 08:19, you wrote:
Jim
I have used double shielded coax and haven't had too much problem with
leakage.
73
Brian
The problem with HTs is that the radio itself is not well shielded. Of
course some are better than others but I haven't found any that are good
enough to use for
Do an Ebay search for this item number
28018586872
Such a deal!!
Ken
--
President and CTO - Arcom Communications
Makers of repeater controllers and accessories.
http://www.arcomcontrollers.com/
Authorized Dealers for
Ken,
Can you verify the auction number? I don't get anything to come up. Whatever
it is, at this price, I may want to get 2 or 3 of them!
Dennis Bridgeman KCØFWN
Bridgeman Communications
202 Seventh Street
Carmi, IL 62821
http://bridgemancommunications.com
- Original Message -
Nothing found.
Ken Arck wrote:
Do an Ebay search for this item number
28018586872
Such a deal!!
Ken
--
President and CTO - Arcom Communications
Makers of repeater controllers and accessories.
Ooops, dropped a 2 from the Ebay item number. Here's the correct one
280185868722
Ken
--
President and CTO - Arcom Communications
Makers of repeater controllers and accessories.
http://www.arcomcontrollers.com/
The advice always is to turn off the extender/noise blanker in repeater
service, or find a receiver that does not have an extender/noise blanker.
-- Original Message --
Received: Sat, 22 Dec 2007 07:48:44 AM CST
From: Al Wolfe [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Oops. I forgot to mention double shielded cable for ALL
interconnects is an absolute MUST, at least with my duplexer - it
has notches in excess of 120 dB deep after refurbishing. It doesn't
take much leakage cause problems when you're dealing with notches
like that.
Paul N1BUG
Paul N1BUG
Probably more off topic, but refreshing none the less..
Looks like the NFCC has adopted a code of ethics.. I think this has been
a long time coming.
http://www.theNFCC.org
--
Jay Urish W5GM
ARRL Life MemberDenton County ARRL VEC
N5ERS VP/Trustee
Monitoring 444.850 PL-88.5
So what happens if a coordinator or coordination body violates the code of
ethics?
I've seen the Oregon Region Relay Council violate these ethics many times.
-- Original Message --
Received: Sat, 22 Dec 2007 02:14:30 PM CST
From: Jay Urish [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To:
You know what is interesting about that Old Motorola,You could probably
just plug it in and it would still Work, As You can tell I am Biased
Motorola Rocks.
I always like the Tax payers who Paid for the Maintenance Contract
for a Old Motorola Micor in the Trunk of a FD Or PD Veh that never
Had 2 of them that I had the trash man take after I could not even give them
away. John
- Original Message -
From: Ken Arck
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, December 22, 2007 2:10 PM
Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Wow!!! only $449
Ooops, dropped a
At 12:22 PM 12/22/2007, you wrote:
So what happens if a coordinator or coordination body violates the code of
ethics?
I've seen the Oregon Region Relay Council violate these ethics many times.
---Well in all fairness, only certain individuals who were Board
members (or Chairman) of the ORRC
Ken-
You are correct. It was/is not the ENTIRE ORRC board that is less than
ethical, but certainly several of the board members have been what you call
downright crooked!!
-- Original Message --
Received: Sat, 22 Dec 2007 02:31:35 PM CST
From: Ken Arck [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To:
I know it may sound to simple but how about splitting the repeater
sub-band. Put the repeater inputs at the top of the main band and the
outputs at the bottom of the main band. Or vice-versa.
Johnny
Jeff Kincaid wrote:
The band may be huge, but the FM sub band is smaller and the repeater
sub
The band may be huge, but the FM sub band is smaller and the repeater
sub band is smaller still. Just how wide of a split would you like to
use in a 200 kHz wide band?
Jeff W6JK
--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, kb1we6r [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why oh why did they pick 100KHz??? The
On Dec 16, 2007, at 11:57 PM, Mike Morris WA6ILQ wrote:
This is why I wish more repeater controllers had a user-accessible DVR
track (even if it was only 10 seconds), and macros to record, play and
erase it.
I saw a web page a while back on how to build one using a Hallmark
record/playback
On Dec 16, 2007, at 11:57 PM, Mike Morris WA6ILQ wrote:
This is why I wish more repeater controllers had a user-accessible DVR
track (even if it was only 10 seconds), and macros to record, play and
erase it
Sh, don't tell anyone but both our RC210 and RC810 provide
this
Ken, now you've gone and done it...that metallic clank was the sound of the
lid from the can of worms hitting the floor!
Well...let's start with the premise that any coordination board is probably
going to attract primarily existing repeater ops as members, and hand them a
sort of monarchy. Is
TOO ALL OF YOU WHERE EVER YOU ARE
WE WISH A HAPPY, SAFE,AND PEACEFUL
HOLIDAY.
SINCERELY
TED BLEIMAN K9MDM
Ted Bleiman K9MDM
MDM Radio If its in stock...we've got it!
P O Box 31353
Chicago, IL 60631-0353
773.631.5130 fax 773.775.8096
web
Certainly, my suggestion here isn't going to be a solution for your
immediate project but thought it might be useful for future applications for
others wanting to do the same thing.
As many may know Kenwood has a 2m monoband radio that is of commercial
quality - the TM-271A. I use many for
Yes,it's a tad expensive, but it is remote control...!
Lance
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, December 22, 2007 3:55 PM
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wow!!! only $449
It doesn't even have the Extender
A friend of mine gave me some surplus RG-400 from the place he
worked a few years ago. I got sold on the stuff, and with 50-75 feet
of 5 foot pieces, I've been fortunate enough to use it with reckless
abandon for some time :)
On Dec 22, 2007, at 1:27 PM, Paul N1BUG wrote:
Oops. I forgot
Just sent an e-mail as suggested. I would absolutely LOVE to see a
good, commercial grade amateur 70cm rig.
On Dec 22, 2007, at 4:49 PM, Richard Sharp, KQ4KX wrote:
Certainly, my suggestion here isn’t going to be a solution for your
immediate project but thought it might be useful for
I shouldn't get terribly excited
http://tinyurl.com/2ey9y2
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2007 13:10:46 -0600
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wow!!! only $449
Nothing found.
Ken Arck wrote:
OK, what is the difference in them and;
http://www.arrl.org/nfcc/
?
...Keith WE6R
--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Jay Urish [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Probably more off topic, but refreshing none the less..
Looks like the NFCC has adopted a code of ethics.. I think this has
This is NOT the official NFCC this is a group who claims that the
original NFCC was disbanded, and they have declared themselves the NEW
official NFCC http://www.thenfcc.org/press_release_12_18_07.pdf
Be interesting to see what the ARRL or the real NFCC has to say about
The one you quoted is supported nationally. The other one is not despite
their claims otherwise.
As for leadership, don't hold your breath. Most members are content with
the NFCC doing nothing.
Joe M.
OK, what is the difference in them and;
http://www.arrl.org/nfcc/
?
...Keith WE6R
While I agree that the Kenwood TM-271A is a fine radio, it is still designed
for the Amateur Radio market, and it lacks many of the features and
adjustments that are found in a true commercial-grade radio. When
compared to a Kenwood TK-760GK2, a 128-channel 25W radio that is designed
for 136-162
Uhhh... because the FCC only allows repeater operation between 29.5 and
29.7 MHz? [see 97.205(b)]
When you aren't given a choice, the decision is pretty easy.
Joe M.
Jeff Kincaid wrote:
The band may be huge, but the FM sub band is smaller and the repeater
sub band is smaller still. Just
Feel free to petition the FCC to allow this. ;-
Joe M.
Johnny wrote:
I know it may sound to simple but how about splitting the repeater
sub-band. Put the repeater inputs at the top of the main band and the
outputs at the bottom of the main band. Or vice-versa.
Johnny
Jeff Kincaid wrote:
Should be easy to do. All you need to do is get rid of the politics in
all the existing clubs.
Good luck with that, BTW.
Joe M.
Paul Plack wrote:
Ken, now you've gone and done it...that metallic clank was the sound
of the lid from the can of worms hitting the floor!
Well...let's start
At 12/22/2007 20:40, you wrote:
It's been tried many times since the 1970's.
LJ
The Commission has been a lot more flexible lately, so a petition for
rulemaking that asks for more 10 meter repeater spectrum may be a
worthwhile effort now. IMO, in order to have a reasonable chance of
At 12/22/2007 11:10, you wrote:
Ooops, dropped a 2 from the Ebay item number. Here's the correct one
280185868722
Ken
Yup, looks like the kind of stuff that ends up in the Dayton dumpster
Sunday afternoon.
Bob NO6B
41 matches
Mail list logo