[Repeater-Builder] Re: Wouxun Radio
It is very funny to me that the cheap Wouxun and Puxing radios have features found on commercial gear. Such a simple thing as reverse burst is added into this cheap radio, but yet our over priced ham rigs don't even offer DPL half the time. --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Ralph Mowery ku...@... wrote: Just about anything around $ 100 or less is a 'throw-away' when it quits on you if you can not fix it yourself. It will often cost that much for any repair. A few years back a local called about getting the dial lights replaced on a transceiver and that was around $ 50 not counting the shipping. Several in the local club have the dual band (144/440) versions and like them. Only negative thing I have seen is that while you are transmitting on one band, you can not receive on the other band at the same time. They do say to get the softwear programming and cable to make it easy. From: James Lee moto_t...@... To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sun, August 29, 2010 7:47:52 PM Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Wouxun Radio I had one in my hands last week at a Hamfest in Gainsville, Texas. They are quite impressive. I have a strong hunch they are throw-away in nature when they die. Time will tell. If I needed a dual bander for ham use, I would give one a try. Jim WB4GWX/AAV6UX
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Wouxun Radio
Glen, Seems that this may be dependent on the radios manufacture date What is the production number of your Vhf/220 unit? Regards. Steve --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Glenn Little WB4UIV glennmaill...@... wrote: Mine will do 5.00, 6.25, 10.00, 12.50, 25.00, 50.00 and 100.00 KHz. 73 Glenn WB4UIV At 09:35 PM 8/29/2010, you wrote: John (et all) - Is the 1.25M version capable of 20 kHz steps? The spec sheet makes it look like it can only do 12.5 or 25 kHz steps. - JimF K6IYK At 8/29/2010 06:06 PM, k7ve wrote: 3e. Re: Wouxun Radio Posted by: John D. Hays j...@... k7ve Date: Sun Aug 29, 2010 2:29 pm ((PDT)) I bought the 2m/1.25cm version from http://wouxun.us/ at Dayton this year to give me a 222 mHz handheld, it has been working great, including surviving a 3 foot drop to concrete :) --- it operates 5W on 2m and 4W on 1.25m. (I prefer dealing with a US distributor vs. an Ebay Hong Kong dealer.) -- John D. Hays Amateur Radio Station K7VE http://k7ve.org PO Box 1223 Edmonds, WA 98020-1223 VOIP/SIP: j...@... sip:j...@... mailto:j...@... James T. Fortney j...@... Yahoo! Groups Links
[Repeater-Builder] (unknown)
The CH751 key is a generic cabinet key used by many manufacturers including Square D, Soundolier, and other non-radio manufacturers. The 2135 and 2553 are pure Motorola, reserved by Chicago Lock (the manufacturer) for only Motorola. The BF-10A key is pure GE as is the GE1000 key. THere are others for some of the other radio folks, but all of them used variations depending on the purchaser (Fed Govt was sometime different keying). All in all, a tech neeeds a very large key ring to open everything.
Re: Re: [Repeater-Builder] dumb question: what is purpose of lock on Mitrek?
I was able to have a couple made at Lows. I can't remember the number of the key but they did find one that came very close and it worked ok. Aug 30, 2010 01:06:54 AM, Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com wrote: Ah yes...the old BF-10aI have one.. a little beat up, would love to have a pristine one, just in case. KM3W From: MCH To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sun, August 29, 2010 4:52:58 PM Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] dumb question: what is purpose of lock on Mitrek? GE = BF10A RCA = CH751 Joe M. Pointman wrote: Like most of the commercial stuff of that era, the unit was locked into a car or truck instead of bolted in. It made for an easier repair to just unlock it rather than unbolting everything. It sat in a cradle with the locking mechanism that WAS bolted to the car body. GE and RCA also had their keys...GE's was a B210/810? Maybe..? its been a while since I handled any of that old stuff KM3W -- *From:* Chuck Kelsey wb2...@roadrunner.com *To:* Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Sun, August 29, 2010 12:50:18 PM *Subject:* Re: [Repeater-Builder] dumb question: what is purpose of lock on Mitrek? It simply locks the cover in place. You'll want a key anyway. Chuck WB2EDV - Original Message - From: KP3FT kp...@yahoo.com To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, August 29, 2010 12:09 PM Subject: [Repeater-Builder] dumb question: what is purpose of lock on Mitrek? Hi, I know it's a dumb question, but after scouring the internet for info, I find everything about locks and replacement keys for Motorolas and other radios, but I still don't know what locking the Mitrek actually does. Does it kill all power to the radio, or disable certain functions? I'm asking because I just acquired a low-band Mitrek that I need to power up and verify its working condition. It doesn't have a control head, so I need to use the front panel pins, but if the radio is locked, I may end up getting nowhere and still not know if it's either the radio that is bad, it is locked out, or I wired it wrong. This is the first Mitrek I've had. Thanks for any help. Jeff KP3FT Yahoo! Groups Links -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com http://www.avg.com Version: 9.0.851 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3100 - Release Date: 08/29/10 02:34:00
[Repeater-Builder] Metering with Digital and Analog Multi-Meters.
Metering with Digital and Analog Multi-Meters. Re: MSR-2000 Alignment Metering Mike Morris wa6i...@... wrote: I heard it on TV as If it works it must be a Fluke. I was quoting a friend from my old days at Motor-head (Moto) Service. Don't know where he (Jeff) got it from... Mine is a Fluke 73 type III. Should work fine on the MSR-2000 Micor metering points. I normally use an original Fluke 77 or 85 model. Fluke DMM's have never really given me a false value although many brands of DMM's including a number of Fluke models do sometimes freak out when looking at certain reactive loads... like some transformer windings, when trying to measure the DC resistance, which is why I also keep a trusty low cost dumb as a rock Analog Movement Multi-Meter standing by. What wording would you suggest? Don't run with scissors maybe? Advisory: Inexpensive lower cost Digital Multi-Meters can provide erratic or inaccurate meter test-point indications. I wrote that the way I did because I have always had better results with either a Moto test set or a analog VOM (i.e. Simpson 260 or Triplett 630). Mike Some of the fairly small value change metering-point measurements are a lot easier to identify with a Fluke (or any well designed) DMM using the milli-volt range position/scale. Especially during an initial from scratch default alignment. Your results should vary... cheers, s. Re: MSR-2000 Alignment Metering Probably looks a lot like the one at the top of the web page at http://www.repeater-builder.com/msr2000/msr2000-index.html There's an error on the above mentioned web page. In other words, YOU CANNOT USE A MODERN DVM TO PROPERLY TUNE AN MSR2000. I don't agree, in fact it's much easier for me to use my Fluke DMM to detect some of the very small meter peaks and dips. There is no rule or requirement the metering points have to be loaded by a 50uA movement. Erratic metering with low cost Digital Multi Meters is probably the result of the price you paid. If it's a good meter, it must be a Fluke. cheers, s.
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Can a Master 3 narrowband
On 8/27/2010 1:56 PM, Tom Manning wrote: Hello Jim I note your message about narrowbanding and the comment about the MSR2000. I have seen no info on doing so but it seems to me that the MSR200 could be narrowbanded. The MSR is very similar to the Mitrek and it can be narrowbanded by using a kit by a company that slips my mind. Therefore I feel narrowbanding would be possible. I will be attempting this in six months or so. 73 de Tom Manning, AF4UG - Original Message - From: Jim in Waco WB5OXQ Except that the MSR is NOT type-accepted for narrowband operations, and the kit does NOT make it such, therefore the kit is NOT acceptable for Part 90 narrowbanding!!! This has been hashed out and answered on many lists, by people who are VERY MUCH in the know, people who are directly involved in the FCC narrowbanding proceedings in DC. So far, the only narrowbanding kit I have seen that is actually acceptable is the real Kenwood kit for the TKR-820 (not the 720), as supplied BY KENWOOD. This of course doesn't include radios made after the 1996(?) deadline that required all mfgs to include a 12.5 KHz mode. This includes the versions of the MastrIII that were made after that date. And when you say Mastr 4, I am assuming you mean the newer DSP audio based units that have been made in the last several years (I was told by M/A-Com that the DSP based MastrIII's were called MastrIV's in house.) That should be narrowbandable with a software change. I have a uhf master 4 that has been used for years as a paging exciter. Now the pager business is in the tank I would like to make the master 3 into aq repeater for commercial needs to replace a msr2000 because the msr cannot narroband. If the ge can't either I dont want to waste time and just buy a new repeater that can narroband. wb5...@grandecom.net
Re: [Repeater-Builder] (unknown)
Including all the different site keys John Doug Dickinson wrote: The CH751 key is a generic cabinet key used by many manufacturers including Square D, Soundolier, and other non-radio manufacturers. The 2135 and 2553 are pure Motorola, reserved by Chicago Lock (the manufacturer) for only Motorola. The BF-10A key is pure GE as is the GE1000 key. THere are others for some of the other radio folks, but all of them used variations depending on the purchaser (Fed Govt was sometime different keying). All in all, a tech neeeds a very large key ring to open everything. -- John Mc Hugh, K4AG Coordinator for Amateur Radio National Hurricane Center, WX4NHC Home page:- http://www.wx4nhc.org
[Repeater-Builder] Interfacing RLS1000 to Rc210 Controller
Good Morning to the Group. I have a new RLS1000 Hub and a RC210 and have read where Skipp and others have been successful in interfacing the hub with the controller for more ports, but don't see how the connections are made. Does Skipp or anyone else have any notes on hooking the two together? Would much appreciate the information and help. Thanks in advance. JIM KA2AJH
Re: [Repeater-Builder] ariels
On 8/29/2010 1:15 PM, Doug Hutchison wrote: Ariel? Antenna maybe? C'mon guys. Be careful Doug. The poster is from the United Kingdom, where they use the term Ariel, not Antenna. You know what it means, so let it go. This list is not just for Americans, as we have many members from other Countries. Kevin Custer List Owner
[Repeater-Builder] DB212-3
Took down a set of DB212-3 dipoles in good shape with harness. I want to use them on 6m for a repeater antenna. I also want to add one additional dipole. I guess I will need to modify the harness and the dipoles as they are marked for 35.960 mhz I will be mounting all four (or 3) on one leg of a tower that is 4 feet on a face. Is it worth my while to go for the 4th dippole? The loops are 155 inches from tip to tip now. Looks like they need to be about 105 inches. Anyone with any tips, pointers or advise? Thanks
Re: [Repeater-Builder] DB212-3
I'd suggest using four if you have the tower real estate. Adjust each element individually on the tower up in the clear (not necessarily in the final location, but away from obstructions). I don't know how the harness was designed for three elements, but making one for four is easy. Each pigtail from the element must be the same length. Two elements combine with a tee, then a 35-ohm 1/4 wave matching section is needed. Do this for both halves of the antenna. Then take two equal lengths of 50-ohm cable to a final tee, then another 35-ohm matching section. From there it's 50-ohms. Chuck WB2EDV - Original Message - From: NORM KNAPP nkn...@twowayradio.net To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 11:51 AM Subject: [Repeater-Builder] DB212-3 Took down a set of DB212-3 dipoles in good shape with harness. I want to use them on 6m for a repeater antenna. I also want to add one additional dipole. I guess I will need to modify the harness and the dipoles as they are marked for 35.960 mhz I will be mounting all four (or 3) on one leg of a tower that is 4 feet on a face. Is it worth my while to go for the 4th dippole? The loops are 155 inches from tip to tip now. Looks like they need to be about 105 inches. Anyone with any tips, pointers or advise? Thanks
Re: [Repeater-Builder] ariels
How true Kev, Iam from the UK and it is spelt AERIAL. But I do know that others use ant, Ae, but it is common sense really 73 Steve - Original Message - From: Kevin Custer kug...@kuggie.com To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 4:27 PM Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] ariels On 8/29/2010 1:15 PM, Doug Hutchison wrote: Ariel? Antenna maybe? C'mon guys. Be careful Doug. The poster is from the United Kingdom, where they use the term Ariel, not Antenna. You know what it means, so let it go. This list is not just for Americans, as we have many members from other Countries. Kevin Custer List Owner Yahoo! Groups Links
[Repeater-Builder] Re: DB212-3 (Low-Band Antenna Systems)
Re: DB212-3 (Low-Band Antenna Systems) Hi Norm, NORM KNAPP nkn...@... wrote: Took down a set of DB212-3 dipoles in good shape with harness. I want to use them on 6m for a repeater antenna. I also want to add one additional dipole. I guess I will need to modify the harness and the dipoles as they are marked for 35.960 mhz If the loops are assembled with dimples in the metal, it's a bit of a pain to disassemble them for size reduction to 6 meters. I've also seen the same antenna assembled with rivets. 35.960 MHz up to 52 MHz is quite a distance... If you have a chance, please record the measurements of the original loops at 35.960 MHz... and the length of the coax phasing harness. I will be mounting all four (or 3) on one leg of a tower that is 4 feet on a face. Is it worth my while to go for the 4th dippole? The loops are 155 inches from tip to tip now. Looks like they need to be about 105 inches. Anyone with any tips, pointers or advise? Thanks As Kevin would say... the only free lunch regarding system gain is at or starting with the antenna. So an assumption would be to go for all the antenna gain you can muster. And there's something (often positive) to be said for the shear amount of antenna surface area. However, interference, noise and the site effective sensitivity are a side dish often served cold (often not very helpful to the system performance). Some juggling of the antenna system can be used to deal with really serious problems. You might first drag a single 52MHz dipole up to the repeater site and measure the effective sensitivity. cheers, s.
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Ariels (Antenna Motorbike)
Ariel? Antenna maybe? C'mon guys. Be careful Doug. The poster is from the United Kingdom, where they use the term Ariel, not Antenna. ... and for motorcycles http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ariel_Square_Four Myself... I was also a Matchless and Triumph fan because of the funny Metric and Whitworth tools. Would an Antenna on an Ariel also be called a Double Ariel? :-) cheers, s.
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Ariels (Antenna Motorbike)
Thought she was a mermaid. Or perhaps an ariel atom, open motoring in the u.s.a. ;) Ahh, the joys of spelling and grammar police on a multi-national list. Xtra ;) Kb0wlf -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Repeater- buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of skipp025 Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 11:19 AM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Ariels (Antenna Motorbike) Ariel? Antenna maybe? C'mon guys. Be careful Doug. The poster is from the United Kingdom, where they use the term Ariel, not Antenna. ... and for motorcycles http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ariel_Square_Four Myself... I was also a Matchless and Triumph fan because of the funny Metric and Whitworth tools. Would an Antenna on an Ariel also be called a Double Ariel? :-) cheers, s. Yahoo! Groups Links No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.441 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3093 - Release Date: 08/30/10 06:35:00
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Msf5000 Low Power alarms
Ok, I'll ask the easy question, why not let it be happy with the proper input to the sscb input for the pa...I think it may be only one wire. . bill w4oo . . --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, jimmylpowell jpow...@... wrote: I originally posted this on the MSF5000 board but got no response. I thought I would broaden my search. Does anyone know a way to get a non trunking MSF with out an internal power sensor to stop giving the 7 beeps? I have tried going back to a default codeplug and starting from scratch. This did not work. It seems that once the bit is set it won't go away. I'm sure that it happened when someone went into the screen to adjust the alarms. I know this is a common problem and they tell you not to do it. I have the alarms disabled over the air, but it annoys me on the local audio. I would like to enable the over the air alarms, but I can't until I can clear this one. My MSF has version 4.07 SSCB and 5.04 TTRC. Maybe there's some bit banging that can be done. Jimmy, K5JCT
Re: [Repeater-Builder] 450 Mitrek to 420 MHz
Just for starters you will get to change the coils in the RF Deck. Now that means desassembling the deck. There are other changes in the IF section also. I would forget this project and find a Range I UHF Mitrek. There were quite a few built for the FEDS but they would be rare now...Jim WB4GWX/AAV6UX
Re: [Repeater-Builder] ariels
Actually the correct spelling of the UK term for Antenna is Aerial not Ariel. Ariel was the name of a now defunct UK Motorcycle maker which closed around 1967. Ex Brit. On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 11:27 AM, Kevin Custer kug...@kuggie.com wrote: On 8/29/2010 1:15 PM, Doug Hutchison wrote: Ariel? Antenna maybe? C'mon guys. Be careful Doug. The poster is from the United Kingdom, where they use the term Ariel, not Antenna. You know what it means, so let it go. This list is not just for Americans, as we have many members from other Countries. Kevin Custer List Owner
Re: [Repeater-Builder] DB212-3
Might take a little while, but 4 is what we will shoot for. If things go as planned, we will have all the tower space we want above 675' on an 850' tower. The legs are 4 solid steel and the face is at least 4' across. We still got to come up with the feedline and cans. I am building a 100watt mastr II for the task now. 73 - Original Message - From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Mon Aug 30 10:53:43 2010 Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] DB212-3 I'd suggest using four if you have the tower real estate. Adjust each element individually on the tower up in the clear (not necessarily in the final location, but away from obstructions). I don't know how the harness was designed for three elements, but making one for four is easy. Each pigtail from the element must be the same length. Two elements combine with a tee, then a 35-ohm 1/4 wave matching section is needed. Do this for both halves of the antenna. Then take two equal lengths of 50-ohm cable to a final tee, then another 35-ohm matching section. From there it's 50-ohms. Chuck WB2EDV - Original Message - From: NORM KNAPP nkn...@twowayradio.net mailto:nknapp%40twowayradio.net To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com mailto:Repeater-Builder%40yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 11:51 AM Subject: [Repeater-Builder] DB212-3 Took down a set of DB212-3 dipoles in good shape with harness. I want to use them on 6m for a repeater antenna. I also want to add one additional dipole. I guess I will need to modify the harness and the dipoles as they are marked for 35.960 mhz I will be mounting all four (or 3) on one leg of a tower that is 4 feet on a face. Is it worth my while to go for the 4th dippole? The loops are 155 inches from tip to tip now. Looks like they need to be about 105 inches. Anyone with any tips, pointers or advise? Thanks
Re: [Repeater-Builder] ariels
correct, wasn't he also a greek god ? Steve(M1SWB) UK - Original Message - From: petedcur...@gmail.com To: Repeater-Builder Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 6:44 PM Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] ariels Actually the correct spelling of the UK term for Antenna is Aerial not Ariel. Ariel was the name of a now defunct UK Motorcycle maker which closed around 1967. Ex Brit. On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 11:27 AM, Kevin Custer kug...@kuggie.com wrote: On 8/29/2010 1:15 PM, Doug Hutchison wrote: Ariel? Antenna maybe? C'mon guys. Be careful Doug. The poster is from the United Kingdom, where they use the term Ariel, not Antenna. You know what it means, so let it go. This list is not just for Americans, as we have many members from other Countries. Kevin Custer List Owner
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Interfacing RLS1000 to Rc210 Controller
On 8/30/2010 11:28 AM, ka2ajh wrote: Good Morning to the Group. I have a new RLS1000 Hub and a RC210 and have read where Skipp and others have been successful in interfacing the hub with the controller for more ports, but don't see how the connections are made. Does Skipp or anyone else have any notes on hooking the two together? Would much appreciate the information and help. Thanks in advance. JIM KA2AJH It will be the same as for a CAT, an S-Com, or most any other ham controller. The only difference will be the exact pin numbers on the connector. It should be a simple matter to correlate COS on one controller to COS on another, etc.
RE: [Repeater-Builder] DB212-3
In a previous life I managed the communications for a state police agency. We used 45 MHz for our main system and had forty some odd tower sites, almost all running DB212-3 antennas. Two of the sites were on 1000+ towers and used a single DB-212 element due to the large tower face and the great height. One was a repeater using a receive antenna at 1450' and a transmit antenna at 1350'. The other was a remote base station with the single loop at about 850'. As we were an investigative agency, almost all of the mobiles were using AM/FM disguise antennas. (Yeah, I know, but we were stuck with the band that the State Division of Communications had dictated...) Despite the radiating dummy load antennas, we had excellent mobile coverage in virtually all of the state. A consideration for DB212 antennas is that lining them up on one leg can make them pretty directional. For towers that were very close to the coast, I would put all three elements on a single leg, but skew them so that only one was pointed directly off of the leg. This seemed to give me a somewhat cardioid pattern, but with a little better pattern to the back than if all three elements were in line. Another consideration is that they were designed to be used on Rohn 45/55/65 sized tower. If you put them all on one leg, a larger tower face doesn't matter much except that the rearward pattern will likely have a larger null. Mounting them on all three legs of a larger face tower will result in reduced gain and a pretty messed up pattern. I don't know if I'd worry a whole lot about adding a fourth element- the three element antenna will deliver excellent results. Doug K4AC (Running for ARRL Southeastern Division Director- please check out my website at www.k4ac.com)
Re: [Repeater-Builder] DB212-3
Doug - Do you know how the phasing harness was constructed for the three-element version? I don't, and that's why I suggested to Norm that he go with four - the phasing harness is easy. Or, he could use two elements for transmit and one for receive. I don't know how much isolation he'll need, but he might just get away without a duplexer if there's enough tower. Chuck WB2EDV - Original Message - From: Doug Rehman d...@k4ac.com To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 2:28 PM Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] DB212-3 In a previous life I managed the communications for a state police agency. We used 45 MHz for our main system and had forty some odd tower sites, almost all running DB212-3 antennas. Two of the sites were on 1000+ towers and used a single DB-212 element due to the large tower face and the great height. One was a repeater using a receive antenna at 1450' and a transmit antenna at 1350'. The other was a remote base station with the single loop at about 850'. As we were an investigative agency, almost all of the mobiles were using AM/FM disguise antennas. (Yeah, I know, but we were stuck with the band that the State Division of Communications had dictated...) Despite the radiating dummy load antennas, we had excellent mobile coverage in virtually all of the state. A consideration for DB212 antennas is that lining them up on one leg can make them pretty directional. For towers that were very close to the coast, I would put all three elements on a single leg, but skew them so that only one was pointed directly off of the leg. This seemed to give me a somewhat cardioid pattern, but with a little better pattern to the back than if all three elements were in line. Another consideration is that they were designed to be used on Rohn 45/55/65 sized tower. If you put them all on one leg, a larger tower face doesn't matter much except that the rearward pattern will likely have a larger null. Mounting them on all three legs of a larger face tower will result in reduced gain and a pretty messed up pattern. I don't know if I'd worry a whole lot about adding a fourth element- the three element antenna will deliver excellent results. Doug K4AC (Running for ARRL Southeastern Division Director- please check out my website at www.k4ac.com)
Re: [Repeater-Builder] DB212-3
I'm glad somebody brought this up. I've got 2 of the DB212 antennas, without any phasing harness. The tower that the repeater is going up on is 90', wide spaced triangular tower (about 20' at the bottom 8' at the top). I'm just wondering if the work in building the harness, building the supports (the tower is not vertical, so I will have to 'make' a vertical support for them) is really worth the effort for an additional element. Seems I saw that with the 2 element configuration you only get about 2dB out of it. Doesn't seem like all the work is worth it. The reduced coverage off the back of the tower is not a concern. Just thought I'd throw this up into the wind. Thanks, Tim W5FN
RE: [Repeater-Builder] DB212-3
Unfortunately it’s been so many years since I handled one that I’m pretty foggy on the phasing harness. The manual on Repeater Builder http://www.repeater-builder.com/db/pdfs/db-212-assembly-and-mounting-instructions-(andrew).pdf shows the feeds from all three elements coming together, but doesn’t give a hint as to the length or impedance of each leg. If the original harness was retained, he should be able to reverse engineer it or shorten it if it’s still in good shape. I’ve got a DB212-1 sitting beside the house now to use on our clubhouse tower for a 6m PropNet beacon antenna. Too many projects… Doug K4AC (Running for ARRL Southeastern Division Director- please check out my website at www.k4ac.com) From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Chuck Kelsey Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 2:35 PM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] DB212-3 Doug - Do you know how the phasing harness was constructed for the three-element version? I don't, and that's why I suggested to Norm that he go with four - the phasing harness is easy. Or, he could use two elements for transmit and one for receive. I don't know how much isolation he'll need, but he might just get away without a duplexer if there's enough tower. Chuck WB2EDV - Original Message - From: Doug Rehman d...@k4ac.com mailto:doug%40k4ac.com To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com mailto:Repeater-Builder%40yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 2:28 PM Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] DB212-3 In a previous life I managed the communications for a state police agency. We used 45 MHz for our main system and had forty some odd tower sites, almost all running DB212-3 antennas. Two of the sites were on 1000+ towers and used a single DB-212 element due to the large tower face and the great height. One was a repeater using a receive antenna at 1450' and a transmit antenna at 1350'. The other was a remote base station with the single loop at about 850'. As we were an investigative agency, almost all of the mobiles were using AM/FM disguise antennas. (Yeah, I know, but we were stuck with the band that the State Division of Communications had dictated...) Despite the radiating dummy load antennas, we had excellent mobile coverage in virtually all of the state. A consideration for DB212 antennas is that lining them up on one leg can make them pretty directional. For towers that were very close to the coast, I would put all three elements on a single leg, but skew them so that only one was pointed directly off of the leg. This seemed to give me a somewhat cardioid pattern, but with a little better pattern to the back than if all three elements were in line. Another consideration is that they were designed to be used on Rohn 45/55/65 sized tower. If you put them all on one leg, a larger tower face doesn't matter much except that the rearward pattern will likely have a larger null. Mounting them on all three legs of a larger face tower will result in reduced gain and a pretty messed up pattern. I don't know if I'd worry a whole lot about adding a fourth element- the three element antenna will deliver excellent results. Doug K4AC (Running for ARRL Southeastern Division Director- please check out my website at www.k4ac.com)
Re: [Repeater-Builder] DB212-3
Given what you need to do, I'd probably use a single element. The mast needs to extend above and below the ends of the element, the further you can, the better. I'd probably use a 20' schedule 80 aluminum pipe and center the element on it. Chuck WB2EDV - Original Message - From: Tim tahr...@swtexas.net To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 2:51 PM Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] DB212-3 I'm glad somebody brought this up. I've got 2 of the DB212 antennas, without any phasing harness. The tower that the repeater is going up on is 90', wide spaced triangular tower (about 20' at the bottom 8' at the top). I'm just wondering if the work in building the harness, building the supports (the tower is not vertical, so I will have to 'make' a vertical support for them) is really worth the effort for an additional element. Seems I saw that with the 2 element configuration you only get about 2dB out of it. Doesn't seem like all the work is worth it. The reduced coverage off the back of the tower is not a concern. Just thought I'd throw this up into the wind. Thanks, Tim W5FN Yahoo! Groups Links No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.851 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3102 - Release Date: 08/30/10 02:35:00
Re: [Repeater-Builder] DB212-3
Doug, what were the State Police using for mobile radios back when you were involved? I'm finding that the newer, wider front end, radios don't hear as well as the old 0.5-1 MHz wide receivers did. I can hit my 6-meter repeater full quieting, yet sometimes can hardly hear it due to mobile environment noise that you can't avoid driving past (computers, LAN equipment, etc., etc.) Chuck WB2EDV - Original Message - From: Doug Rehman To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 3:00 PM Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] DB212-3 Unfortunately it’s been so many years since I handled one that I’m pretty foggy on the phasing harness. The manual on Repeater Builder http://www.repeater-builder.com/db/pdfs/db-212-assembly-and-mounting-instructions-(andrew).pdf shows the feeds from all three elements coming together, but doesn’t give a hint as to the length or impedance of each leg. If the original harness was retained, he should be able to reverse engineer it or shorten it if it’s still in good shape. I’ve got a DB212-1 sitting beside the house now to use on our clubhouse tower for a 6m PropNet beacon antenna. Too many projects… Doug K4AC (Running for ARRL Southeastern Division Director- please check out my website at www.k4ac.com)
RE: [Repeater-Builder] DB212-3
When I first started, the existing radios were GE Mastr II’s. They actually had two receiver decks to cover the 800 KHz or so of our channel spread. When the system was finally phased out, we were using Motorola Maratracs with the handheld controllers. I had mine programmed with six meter channels as well; it was around 1 uV or so in the ham band as I recall. I was very impressed with the performance we got out of the Maratracs. With the exception of the repeater at 1400’ which was a Mastr III, all of the stations were Mastr II’s. Doug From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Chuck Kelsey Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 3:08 PM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] DB212-3 Doug, what were the State Police using for mobile radios back when you were involved? I'm finding that the newer, wider front end, radios don't hear as well as the old 0.5-1 MHz wide receivers did. I can hit my 6-meter repeater full quieting, yet sometimes can hardly hear it due to mobile environment noise that you can't avoid driving past (computers, LAN equipment, etc., etc.) Chuck WB2EDV attachment: winmail.dat
RE: [Repeater-Builder] DB212-3
I'm doing this from memory - I have the docs at home and can verify later. The DB lowband dipoles are 50 ohm feed Z due to the close spacing to the tower leg. 1 dipole - fed directly with 50 ohm coax (VB-8) 2 dipoles - fed with equal legs of 50 ohm coax (VB-8) to a tee, match 25 ohms from tee to 50 ohm feedline with quarter-wave transformer (35 ohm VB-83) 3 dipoles - fed with equal legs of 50 ohm coax (VB-8) to two mated tees (two mated tees give you four ports - three to bays, one for input) yielding 17 ohms. First transform 17 ohms to 72 ohms via a quarter-wave of 35 ohm VB-83. Then transform 72 ohms to 50 ohms with a 'twelfth-wave' transformer (1/12 wave of 50 ohm cable then 1/12 wave of 72/75 ohm cable) to result in 50 ohms to feedline. 4 dipoles - same as 2 dipole case, but add another tee, two more equal-length 50 ohm cables from the added tee to the 35 ohm matching sections on the bay pairs described above, and another final 35 ohm Q section from the new tee to the feedline These dipoles couple a lot of energy to the tower - you'll likely need even more vertical isolation than what free-space curves might otherwise predict. --- Jeff WN3A -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Chuck Kelsey Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 2:35 PM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] DB212-3 Doug - Do you know how the phasing harness was constructed for the three-element version? I don't, and that's why I suggested to Norm that he go with four - the phasing harness is easy. Or, he could use two elements for transmit and one for receive. I don't know how much isolation he'll need, but he might just get away without a duplexer if there's enough tower. Chuck WB2EDV - Original Message - From: Doug Rehman d...@k4ac.com mailto:doug%40k4ac.com To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com mailto:Repeater-Builder%40yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 2:28 PM Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] DB212-3 In a previous life I managed the communications for a state police agency. We used 45 MHz for our main system and had forty some odd tower sites, almost all running DB212-3 antennas. Two of the sites were on 1000+ towers and used a single DB-212 element due to the large tower face and the great height. One was a repeater using a receive antenna at 1450' and a transmit antenna at 1350'. The other was a remote base station with the single loop at about 850'. As we were an investigative agency, almost all of the mobiles were using AM/FM disguise antennas. (Yeah, I know, but we were stuck with the band that the State Division of Communications had dictated...) Despite the radiating dummy load antennas, we had excellent mobile coverage in virtually all of the state. A consideration for DB212 antennas is that lining them up on one leg can make them pretty directional. For towers that were very close to the coast, I would put all three elements on a single leg, but skew them so that only one was pointed directly off of the leg. This seemed to give me a somewhat cardioid pattern, but with a little better pattern to the back than if all three elements were in line. Another consideration is that they were designed to be used on Rohn 45/55/65 sized tower. If you put them all on one leg, a larger tower face doesn't matter much except that the rearward pattern will likely have a larger null. Mounting them on all three legs of a larger face tower will result in reduced gain and a pretty messed up pattern. I don't know if I'd worry a whole lot about adding a fourth element- the three element antenna will deliver excellent results. Doug K4AC (Running for ARRL Southeastern Division Director- please check out my website at www.k4ac.com)
[Repeater-Builder] Trip lite
Anybody out there in radio land have schematics for Trip-lite power supplies. I have two PR 25A with different regulator boards. One works the other doesn't. Good ps 14vdc no load 13 vdc full load Bad ps 15.8 vdc did not try a load yet. Bad unit has an updated regulator board so I can't compare apples to apples. Ralph, W7HSG
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Trip lite
Swap the 723 chip and go from there. You might not need anything more. Chuck WB2EDV - Original Message - From: Ralph S. Turk To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 3:48 PM Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Trip lite Anybody out there in radio land have schematics for Trip-lite power supplies. I have two PR 25A with different regulator boards. One works the other doesn't. Good ps 14vdc no load 13 vdc full load Bad ps15.8 vdc did not try a load yet. Bad unit has an updated regulator board so I can't compare apples to apples. Ralph, W7HSG -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.851 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3102 - Release Date: 08/30/10 02:35:00
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Trip lite
They don't provide schematics, but they will be more than happy to sell you a new power supply. After that conversation I swore off buying Tripp Lite anything. Pretty much replace all the semi-conductors and any electrolytics that have exploded. On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 1:26 PM, Chuck Kelsey wb2...@roadrunner.com wrote: Swap the 723 chip and go from there. You might not need anything more. Chuck WB2EDV - Original Message - *From:* Ralph S. Turk w7...@comcast.net *To:* Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Monday, August 30, 2010 3:48 PM *Subject:* [Repeater-Builder] Trip lite Anybody out there in radio land have schematics for Trip-lite power supplies. I have two PR 25A with different regulator boards. One works the other doesn't. Good ps 14vdc no load 13 vdc full load Bad ps15.8 vdc did not try a load yet. Bad unit has an updated regulator board so I can't compare apples to apples. Ralph, W7HSG -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.851 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3102 - Release Date: 08/30/10 02:35:00
Re: [Repeater-Builder] DB212-3
On 8/30/2010 2:08 PM, Chuck Kelsey wrote: Doug, what were the State Police using for mobile radios back when you were involved? I'm finding that the newer, wider front end, radios don't hear as well as the old 0.5-1 MHz wide receivers did. I can hit my 6-meter repeater full quieting, yet sometimes can hardly hear it due to mobile environment noise that you can't avoid driving past (computers, LAN equipment, etc., etc.) Chuck WB2EDV I'll bet 99-44/100% of this is the lack of an effective noise blanker. I was running a LB SyntorX 9000 at the peak of the last cycle and it ran rings around everything else. It ran FULL band 10 and 6. Bench sensitivity of all the radios were pretty close, but the moto mobile noise blankers were a major ( 10 dB) advantage. I'll bet those 'old' radios have good noise blankers. -- mailto:o...@ozindfw.net Oz POB 93167 Southlake, TX 76092 (Near DFW Airport)
Re: [Repeater-Builder] DB212-3
The radio I'm using in the mobile is a GE Orion with a noise blanker. However, a noise blanker is designed to help with impulse-type noise. Microprocessor hash and similar noise sources are continuous, so I doubt a blanker is very effective. The problem, in my mind, is the huge increase in this type of noise compared to 20 or 30 years ago. Chuck WB2EDV - Original Message - From: Oz-in-DFW To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 5:00 PM Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] DB212-3 On 8/30/2010 2:08 PM, Chuck Kelsey wrote: Doug, what were the State Police using for mobile radios back when you were involved? I'm finding that the newer, wider front end, radios don't hear as well as the old 0.5-1 MHz wide receivers did. I can hit my 6-meter repeater full quieting, yet sometimes can hardly hear it due to mobile environment noise that you can't avoid driving past (computers, LAN equipment, etc., etc.) Chuck WB2EDV I'll bet 99-44/100% of this is the lack of an effective noise blanker. I was running a LB SyntorX 9000 at the peak of the last cycle and it ran rings around everything else. It ran FULL band 10 and 6. Bench sensitivity of all the radios were pretty close, but the moto mobile noise blankers were a major ( 10 dB) advantage. I'll bet those 'old' radios have good noise blankers. -- mailto:o...@ozindfw.net Oz POB 93167 Southlake, TX 76092 (Near DFW Airport)
Re: [Repeater-Builder] DB212-3
Noise blankers also target broadband noise. If some computer is dumping right on your intended receive frequency, you're out of luck. 73, Paul, AE4KR - Original Message - From: Chuck Kelsey To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 3:10 PM Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] DB212-3 The radio I'm using in the mobile is a GE Orion with a noise blanker. However, a noise blanker is designed to help with impulse-type noise. Microprocessor hash and similar noise sources are continuous, so I doubt a blanker is very effective. The problem, in my mind, is the huge increase in this type of noise compared to 20 or 30 years ago. Chuck WB2EDV - Original Message - From: Oz-in-DFW To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 5:00 PM Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] DB212-3 On 8/30/2010 2:08 PM, Chuck Kelsey wrote: Doug, what were the State Police using for mobile radios back when you were involved? I'm finding that the newer, wider front end, radios don't hear as well as the old 0.5-1 MHz wide receivers did. I can hit my 6-meter repeater full quieting, yet sometimes can hardly hear it due to mobile environment noise that you can't avoid driving past (computers, LAN equipment, etc., etc.) Chuck WB2EDV I'll bet 99-44/100% of this is the lack of an effective noise blanker. I was running a LB SyntorX 9000 at the peak of the last cycle and it ran rings around everything else. It ran FULL band 10 and 6. Bench sensitivity of all the radios were pretty close, but the moto mobile noise blankers were a major ( 10 dB) advantage. I'll bet those 'old' radios have good noise blankers. -- mailto:o...@ozindfw.net Oz POB 93167 Southlake, TX 76092 (Near DFW Airport)
[Repeater-Builder] Running a Mastr II Repeater QRP
I'm working on a UHF ham repeater project for installation some time next year, and was getting set to build one based on 35-watt Mitreks. I've just been offered a 100-watt Mastr II UHF repeater, complete including the cabinet, just taken out of service in a switch to narrow-band equipment. I helped maintain a VHF Mastr II repeater for a club years ago, and once built a UHF repeater out of a converted mobile, so I know the beast a bit, but have two questions... I don't know the current frequency, but suspect it's in the 460/465 MHz range. Will it move down into the 440s without a lot of grief? Also, I don't need anywhere near 100 watts, and need to avoid abusing the good nature and power bill of my landlord. (Also hope to have battery backup.) Can the 100-watt UHF PA be jumpered from an intermediate stage to the filter, bypassing the final? I seem to recall these would run at something in the 10-25-watt range with such a mod. Or, is this just gross overkill for a local repeater, and the Mitrek-based idea more appropriate? Now, where's my hand truck... 73, Paul, AE4KR
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Kenwood TKR-750 (VHF repeater)
IF you have a ver 2, you can do a mod detailed in the service manual by switching the position of some cap's to make it work on one port without a antenna relay. On Sat, Aug 28, 2010 at 3:11 PM, Ken Arck ah...@ah6le.net wrote: At 01:47 PM 8/28/2010, Juan Tellez wrote: For simplex use, you have to have an external antenna relay. -Yup. You need an external relay. Checkout RF Parts as they have fairly reasonably priced ones Ken -- President and CTO - Arcom Communications Makers of repeater controllers and accessories. http://www.arcomcontrollers.com/ Authorized Dealers for Kenwood and Telewave and we offer complete repeater packages! AH6LE/R - IRLP Node 3000 http://www.irlp.net We don't just make 'em. We use 'em! -- Jeff Ackerman Peninsula Communications 6 Rossi Circle, Suite C Salinas, Ca 93907 j...@peninsulacom.com
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Running a Mastr II Repeater QRP
I don't know the current frequency, but suspect it's in the 460/465 MHz range. Will it move down into the 440s without a lot of grief? Yes. Also, I don't need anywhere near 100 watts, and need to avoid abusing the good nature and power bill of my landlord. (Also hope to have battery backup.) Can the 100-watt UHF PA be jumpered from an intermediate stage to the filter, bypassing the final? I seem to recall these would run at something in the 10-25-watt range with such a mod. The driver is 40 watts, just bypass the final board. But if you're really trying to safe your landlord's electric bill, the ferro power supply is really what you should be eliminating. That's a real beast of a vampire. Or, is this just gross overkill for a local repeater, and the Mitrek-based idea more appropriate? I'd go with the M2, hands down. --- Jeff WN3A
Re: [Repeater-Builder] DB212-3
Plans are Chuck, to measure the harness and post results for group information and reference. While I really want 4 loops, I may end up settling for the set of 3. - Original Message - From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Mon Aug 30 13:35:16 2010 Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] DB212-3 Doug - Do you know how the phasing harness was constructed for the three-element version? I don't, and that's why I suggested to Norm that he go with four - the phasing harness is easy. Or, he could use two elements for transmit and one for receive. I don't know how much isolation he'll need, but he might just get away without a duplexer if there's enough tower. Chuck WB2EDV - Original Message - From: Doug Rehman d...@k4ac.com mailto:doug%40k4ac.com To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com mailto:Repeater-Builder%40yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 2:28 PM Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] DB212-3 In a previous life I managed the communications for a state police agency. We used 45 MHz for our main system and had forty some odd tower sites, almost all running DB212-3 antennas. Two of the sites were on 1000+ towers and used a single DB-212 element due to the large tower face and the great height. One was a repeater using a receive antenna at 1450' and a transmit antenna at 1350'. The other was a remote base station with the single loop at about 850'. As we were an investigative agency, almost all of the mobiles were using AM/FM disguise antennas. (Yeah, I know, but we were stuck with the band that the State Division of Communications had dictated...) Despite the radiating dummy load antennas, we had excellent mobile coverage in virtually all of the state. A consideration for DB212 antennas is that lining them up on one leg can make them pretty directional. For towers that were very close to the coast, I would put all three elements on a single leg, but skew them so that only one was pointed directly off of the leg. This seemed to give me a somewhat cardioid pattern, but with a little better pattern to the back than if all three elements were in line. Another consideration is that they were designed to be used on Rohn 45/55/65 sized tower. If you put them all on one leg, a larger tower face doesn't matter much except that the rearward pattern will likely have a larger null. Mounting them on all three legs of a larger face tower will result in reduced gain and a pretty messed up pattern. I don't know if I'd worry a whole lot about adding a fourth element- the three element antenna will deliver excellent results. Doug K4AC (Running for ARRL Southeastern Division Director- please check out my website at www.k4ac.com)
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Running a Mastr II Repeater QRP
I agree with Jeff 100%. Chuck WB2EDV - Original Message - From: Jeff DePolo j...@broadsci.com To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 5:53 PM Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Running a Mastr II Repeater QRP I don't know the current frequency, but suspect it's in the 460/465 MHz range. Will it move down into the 440s without a lot of grief? Yes. Also, I don't need anywhere near 100 watts, and need to avoid abusing the good nature and power bill of my landlord. (Also hope to have battery backup.) Can the 100-watt UHF PA be jumpered from an intermediate stage to the filter, bypassing the final? I seem to recall these would run at something in the 10-25-watt range with such a mod. The driver is 40 watts, just bypass the final board. But if you're really trying to safe your landlord's electric bill, the ferro power supply is really what you should be eliminating. That's a real beast of a vampire. Or, is this just gross overkill for a local repeater, and the Mitrek-based idea more appropriate? I'd go with the M2, hands down. --- Jeff WN3A
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Running a Mastr II Repeater QRP
Understood. IIRC, the MII could use a homebrew supply which provides ~13.6 VDC, so long as the voltage always stays high enough to keep the linear regulator on the 10V card in its happy zone, right? - Original Message - From: Jeff DePolo To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 3:53 PM Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Running a Mastr II Repeater QRP Also, I don't need anywhere near 100 watts... The driver is 40 watts, just bypass the final board. But if you're really trying to safe your landlord's electric bill, the ferro power supply is really what you should be eliminating...
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Running a Mastr II Repeater QRP
I inherited one of these with two of radios, one for the repeater, one for a link. On the link PA, the finals were taken out and only the driver was left. Worked fine. -Original Message- Date: Monday, August 30, 2010 4:48:49 pm To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com From: Paul Plack pl...@xmission.com Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Running a Mastr II Repeater QRP I'm working on a UHF ham repeater project for installation some time next year, and was getting set to build one based on 35-watt Mitreks. I've just been offered a 100-watt Mastr II UHF repeater, complete including the cabinet, just taken out of service in a switch to narrow-band equipment. I helped maintain a VHF Mastr II repeater for a club years ago, and once built a UHF repeater out of a converted mobile, so I know the beast a bit, but have two questions... I don't know the current frequency, but suspect it's in the 460/465 MHz range. Will it move down into the 440s without a lot of grief? Also, I don't need anywhere near 100 watts, and need to avoid abusing the good nature and power bill of my landlord. (Also hope to have battery backup.) Can the 100-watt UHF PA be jumpered from an intermediate stage to the filter, bypassing the final? I seem to recall these would run at something in the 10-25-watt range with such a mod. Or, is this just gross overkill for a local repeater, and the Mitrek-based idea more appropriate? Now, where's my hand truck... 73, Paul, AE4KR
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Running a Mastr II Repeater QRP
On 8/30/2010 6:01 PM, Chuck Kelsey wrote: I agree with Jeff 100%. Me three... Kevin
Re: [Repeater-Builder] DB212-3
Most of this is true, but good noise blankers only operate on impulse noise. More to my point is that noise blankers were a big factor in my observation, therefore the dominant problem still appears to be impulse noise. In a similar vein, many of the newer, inexpensive small wide band Low VHF radios have foregone noise blankers entirely. There is no question that there has been a rise in the urban noise floor at all frequencies. Computers and networks are a major contributor. But like any other radio source, path loss is a reality and when operating mobile other vehicles have the proximity advantage. The fact also remains that even if you presume that FE bandwidth is a factor, it's only likely a 15 or so dB factor with respect to broadband noise - and that's only.Adjacent vehicles on the road have a lot more impact than that, probably starting at 30+ dB. Oz On 8/30/2010 4:36 PM, Paul Plack wrote: Noise blankers also target broadband noise. If some computer is dumping right on your intended receive frequency, you're out of luck. 73, Paul, AE4KR - Original Message - *From:* Chuck Kelsey mailto:wb2...@roadrunner.com *To:* Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com mailto:Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Monday, August 30, 2010 3:10 PM *Subject:* Re: [Repeater-Builder] DB212-3 The radio I'm using in the mobile is a GE Orion with a noise blanker. However, a noise blanker is designed to help with impulse-type noise. Microprocessor hash and similar noise sources are continuous, so I doubt a blanker is very effective. The problem, in my mind, is the huge increase in this type of noise compared to 20 or 30 years ago. Chuck WB2EDV - Original Message - *From:* Oz-in-DFW mailto:li...@ozindfw.net *To:* Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com mailto:Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Monday, August 30, 2010 5:00 PM *Subject:* Re: [Repeater-Builder] DB212-3 On 8/30/2010 2:08 PM, Chuck Kelsey wrote: Doug, what were the State Police using for mobile radios back when you were involved? I'm finding that the newer, wider front end, radios don't hear as well as the old 0.5-1 MHz wide receivers did. I can hit my 6-meter repeater full quieting, yet sometimes can hardly hear it due to mobile environment noise that you can't avoid driving past (computers, LAN equipment, etc., etc.) Chuck WB2EDV I'll bet 99-44/100% of this is the lack of an effective noise blanker. I was running a LB SyntorX 9000 at the peak of the last cycle and it ran rings around everything else. It ran FULL band 10 and 6. Bench sensitivity of all the radios were pretty close, but the moto mobile noise blankers were a major ( 10 dB) advantage. I'll bet those 'old' radios have good noise blankers. -- mailto:o...@ozindfw.net Oz POB 93167 Southlake, TX 76092 (Near DFW Airport) -- mailto:o...@ozindfw.net Oz POB 93167 Southlake, TX 76092 (Near DFW Airport)
Re: [Repeater-Builder] ariels
The spirit of air is mentioned in the Ariel Motocycle on Wiki as the source of their name based on the fact they implemented very light (as air) wire spoked wheels on cycles in the late 1890's. In this case I think it seems to come from a character in Shakespeare's plays, notably The Tempest. This also seems to be the nearly same dictionary definition for Aerial (of the air) as well. So it seems we owe this UK term for Antenna to Shakespeare. Funny I didn't realize that until I was Wiki checking my reply to this thread. The other Ariel is a Hebrew name meaning Lion of God. ie. as in Ariel Sharon, Israeli General Politician. Peter On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 1:51 PM, Steve steve.m1...@tiscali.co.uk wrote: correct, wasn't he also a greek god ? Steve(M1SWB) UK - Original Message - *From:* petedcur...@gmail.com *To:* Repeater-Builder Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Monday, August 30, 2010 6:44 PM *Subject:* Re: [Repeater-Builder] ariels Actually the correct spelling of the UK term for Antenna is Aerial not Ariel. Ariel was the name of a now defunct UK Motorcycle maker which closed around 1967. Ex Brit. On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 11:27 AM, Kevin Custer kug...@kuggie.com wrote: On 8/29/2010 1:15 PM, Doug Hutchison wrote: Ariel? Antenna maybe? C'mon guys. Be careful Doug. The poster is from the United Kingdom, where they use the term Ariel, not Antenna. You know what it means, so let it go. This list is not just for Americans, as we have many members from other Countries. Kevin Custer List Owner
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Running a Mastr II Repeater QRP
I have a 40watt base PA ready to go if you would like to run that. -Kevin _ From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Jeff DePolo Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 5:53 PM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Running a Mastr II Repeater QRP I don't know the current frequency, but suspect it's in the 460/465 MHz range. Will it move down into the 440s without a lot of grief? Yes. Also, I don't need anywhere near 100 watts, and need to avoid abusing the good nature and power bill of my landlord. (Also hope to have battery backup.) Can the 100-watt UHF PA be jumpered from an intermediate stage to the filter, bypassing the final? I seem to recall these would run at something in the 10-25-watt range with such a mod. The driver is 40 watts, just bypass the final board. But if you're really trying to safe your landlord's electric bill, the ferro power supply is really what you should be eliminating. That's a real beast of a vampire. Or, is this just gross overkill for a local repeater, and the Mitrek-based idea more appropriate? I'd go with the M2, hands down. --- Jeff WN3A
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Running a Mastr II Repeater QRP
Kevin, I'll make a note and get back to you if we move forward, thanks! Is the base PA rated for continuous duty? - Paul, AE4KR - Original Message - From: Kevin King To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 4:49 PM Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Running a Mastr II Repeater QRP I have a 40watt base PA ready to go if you would like to run that. -Kevin -- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Jeff DePolo Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 5:53 PM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Running a Mastr II Repeater QRP
[Repeater-Builder] Ariels, Aerials, Antenna, Antennae?
Here down under, we are presently working through a District Planning exercise where the City Fathers think that the words Antenna and Aerial mean two quite different things. Should we lose, we may well be back to smoke signals. Gordon ZL1KL
Re: [Repeater-Builder] ariels
This will be good depending on the sensitivity of your receive radio and the hight or your coax should not be more than 30m --- On Sun, 8/29/10, Steve steve.m1...@tiscali.co.uk wrote: From: Steve steve.m1...@tiscali.co.uk Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] ariels To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Date: Sunday, August 29, 2010, 7:06 PM What freqs, and what tx pwr ? - Original Message - From: antony antonyebu...@hotmail.com To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, August 29, 2010 10:34 AM Subject: [Repeater-Builder] ariels using two radios as a repeator with two ariels. how far appart would the ariels be best. thanks antony Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: ariels
do u want to buy a duplexeur or u have a problem of a duplexeur? --- On Sun, 8/29/10, antony antonyebu...@hotmail.com wrote: From: antony antonyebu...@hotmail.com Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: ariels To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Date: Sunday, August 29, 2010, 10:59 PM So i realy need a duplexer to run my repeater. thanks antony
[Repeater-Builder] Duplexers
Our club was recently given a 220 repeater. We have two seperate antennas. We do not have a duplexer. My question is do we have to have a duplexer? How can we keep the transmitter from desensitizing the receiver? The antennas are apart but can be moved farther. Thanks Chris Kg4bek
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Ariels, Aerials, Antenna, Antennae?
That's easy. The first is my daughter's name. The others are transducers. grinning, 73 de Daniel KB3MUN BTW, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antenna_%28radio%29 and http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/Xplore/login.jsp?url=http%3A%2F%2Fieeexplore.ieee.org%2Fiel5%2F74%2F4454692%2F04455907.pdf%3Farnumber%3D4455907authDecision=-203 if you were looking for definitional help instead of sympathy. daniel On 30-Aug-2010 19:48, Gordon Cooper wrote: Here down under, we are presently working through a District Planning exercise where the City Fathers think that the words Antenna and Aerial mean two quite different things. Should we lose, we may well be back to smoke signals. Gordon ZL1KL
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Duplexers
Chris, You do not have to use a duplexer, but it makes building a repeater SO much easier! Keep in mind that antenna separation usually means vertical separation, not horizontal separation. Moreover, the same isolation provided by 1000 feet of horizontal separation might be provided by 10 feet of vertical separation. The amount of isolation you need is based generally on the transmit power, frequency separation between TX and RX, and the sensitivity of the receiver. The receiver bandwidth and antenna types also play a factor. 73, Eric Lemmon WB6FLY -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Mackey Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 4:44 PM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Duplexers Our club was recently given a 220 repeater. We have two seperate antennas. We do not have a duplexer. My question is do we have to have a duplexer? How can we keep the transmitter from desensitizing the receiver? The antennas are apart but can be moved farther. Thanks Chris Kg4bek
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Running a Mastr II Repeater QRP
On 8/30/2010 3:48 PM, Paul Plack wrote: I'm working on a UHF ham repeater project for installation some time next year, and was getting set to build one based on 35-watt Mitreks. I've just been offered a 100-watt Mastr II UHF repeater, complete including the cabinet, just taken out of service in a switch to narrow-band equipment. I helped maintain a VHF Mastr II repeater for a club years ago, and once built a UHF repeater out of a converted mobile, so I know the beast a bit, but have two questions... I don't know the current frequency, but suspect it's in the 460/465 MHz range. Will it move down into the 440s without a lot of grief? Yup yup yup. Never seen one that didn't, except one that had a dead stage in the receiver, which uhh... made it kinda deaf. ;-) Also, I don't need anywhere near 100 watts, and need to avoid abusing the good nature and power bill of my landlord. (Also hope to have battery backup.) Can the 100-watt UHF PA be jumpered from an intermediate stage to the filter, bypassing the final? I seem to recall these would run at something in the 10-25-watt range with such a mod. Driver board is 40W and on the UHF, it's easy to jumper out (or remove) the final board. VHF, due to having feedback circuitry for RF power control, is a different story. But UHF is a piece of cake. Or, is this just gross overkill for a local repeater, and the Mitrek-based idea more appropriate? They're bulky, but you can't find anything on the market that will outperform them today for SELECTIVITY. You may want a pre-amp on the receiver for SENSITIVITY, depending on other factors of your antenna system and site selection and how far out you want it to hear. You can start whole religious debates about WHICH pre-amplification system to use on them, here on RB. It can get quite entertaining. But they do work better with the RIGHT filtering and pre-amplification on the receive side of things. Now, where's my hand truck... LOL... we spent Sunday moving four MASTR II stations, two power supplies, 7 PAs, and boxes full of spare parts into the pickup truck of another person in the club who has more room for WORKING on all of it, than I did. I love MASTR II's, but I have learned to HATE storing them. :-) Other comments: When you get the station, post photos or look through the LBIs and see what (hopefully factory) configuration it's in. Some were repeaters, some were just stations (remote base, tone-remote, etc) but all can easily be reconfigured to repeater operation. If the PA has a T/R relay on it, you have to deal with that, and there's some articles here on how to do it... personally I just rip the T/R relay off the board completely and bypass the RF on over to the original RCA connector via a VERY short jumper. Others do other things. If it doesn't have a T/R relay on it, you might find that it has a Z-matcher that needs to be tuned. You can start large religious debates about how to do that properly here, too. Some folks disagree with the manufacturer's very simplistic tuning instructions. Your decision. A real repeater will have certain cards in the card shelf up on top. You have lots of options there... use the cards, rip out the cards and wire in an off-board controller, use the controller one manufacturer makes that slides into a card slot... etc. And there's other stuff... the tone boards (separate for exciter/TX and receiver/RX in a normal MASTR II station/repeater), may or may not be present... etc. A photo or three and/or the combination number are worth a thousand words... Post a couple photos of your new pride and joy, and we'll help you figure out which configuration it looks like it's in. The LBI's are also REQUIRED reading, after you've had a visual tour of the station. They're solid, solid, solid radios. Only thing I've come to learn to hate are the 110W VHF PAs. UHF, 100W and 75W are solid, radios are solid. Only other odd thing I ever saw happen to one of them *ever*, was the tone board worked it's way UP off of the pins in a station once, and keyed it continuously... a little double-sided foam tape above the tone board in the covers, takes care of that... if you're even worried about it. Happened once in a decade... to only one station... Anyway... you learn to love 'em and decide that the weight and bulk is worth it... :-) -- Nate Duehr, WY0X
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Wouxun Radio
I can't speak for any Wouxun radio, but I have tested at least a dozen Puxing VHF radios, and none of them had reverse burst encode or decode. Besides, the CTCSS tones were sloppy and nothing like a pure sine wave one should expect in a professional radio. The Puxing PX777, in particular, sets the low point in cheap radio quality. Check out my Technical Assessment in the Files section of the Puxing777 Group. 73, Eric Lemmon WB6FLY -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of kc7stw Sent: Sunday, August 29, 2010 11:37 PM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Wouxun Radio It is very funny to me that the cheap Wouxun and Puxing radios have features found on commercial gear. Such a simple thing as reverse burst is added into this cheap radio, but yet our over priced ham rigs don't even offer DPL half the time. --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com mailto:Repeater-Builder%40yahoogroups.com , Ralph Mowery ku...@... wrote: Just about anything around $ 100 or less is a 'throw-away' when it quits on you if you can not fix it yourself. It will often cost that much for any repair. A few years back a local called about getting the dial lights replaced on a transceiver and that was around $ 50 not counting the shipping. Several in the local club have the dual band (144/440) versions and like them. Only negative thing I have seen is that while you are transmitting on one band, you can not receive on the other band at the same time. They do say to get the softwear programming and cable to make it easy.
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Running a Mastr II Repeater QRP
Nate, I already know I'd love to have a MII, and the bulk won't be an issue getting it home or storing it, but the proposed site is on a rooftop. That part could get interesting. I may need to devise a truss...and something to hoist the repeater, too! (Rimshot.) This unit is very unlikely to be a modded station...it was originally spec'd for, and has been in, repeater service for years on a mountain top by the original owner. It is said to be spectacularly clean inside and out, and has never had an outage. (I know...two attributes which oddly seem to go together.) The ham repeater's purpose will be to support emergency prep nets and related ops in a couple of suburbs, and a high central point will be available, so a preamp may not be warranted. It may also get used in a crossband scheme during calmer times, and for other experiments in which the widest possible coverage would actually have some downside. Controller will very likely be my S-Com 7K. 73, Paul, AE4KR - Original Message - From: Nate Duehr To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 6:44 PM Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Running a Mastr II Repeater QRP They're bulky, but you can't find anything on the market that will outperform them today for SELECTIVITY. You may want a pre-amp on the receiver for SENSITIVITY, depending on other factors of your antenna system and site selection and how far out you want it to hear. ...Other comments: When you get the station, post photos or look through the LBIs and see what (hopefully factory) configuration it's in. Some were repeaters, some were just stations... Anyway... you learn to love 'em and decide that the weight and bulk is worth it... :-) -- Nate Duehr, WY0X
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Running a Mastr II Repeater QRP
On 8/30/2010 7:01 PM, Paul Plack wrote: I already know I'd love to have a MII, and the bulk won't be an issue getting it home or storing it, but the proposed site is on a rooftop. That part could get interesting. I may need to devise a truss...and something to hoist the repeater, too! (Rimshot.) LOL! Especially if you're using the MASTR II power supply. Be aware that the M2 PS will draw quite a bit of current even at idle... if you're paying the power bill, or care about someone who does... I have one on in my basement for a link all the time, and live with it... :-) This unit is very unlikely to be a modded station...it was originally spec'd for, and has been in, repeater service for years on a mountain top by the original owner. It is said to be spectacularly clean inside and out, and has never had an outage. (I know...two attributes which oddly seem to go together.) If in Amateur service, he probably already pulled all the cards out, etc... ours run with nothing but a 10V regulator card in them, and if we were lucky enough to find a station with a metering kit in it, the meter. Kinda nice for quick checks on tuning, etc... but most of the time we know better than to golden screwdriver a working repeater, and even if it has a metering kit, we leave it alone. The ham repeater's purpose will be to support emergency prep nets and related ops in a couple of suburbs, and a high central point will be available, so a preamp may not be warranted. It may also get used in a crossband scheme during calmer times, and for other experiments in which the widest possible coverage would actually have some downside. Makes sense. All of ours are on mountain-tops quite a distance from the intended coverage areas. Right now, one of them is QRP with the exciter temporarily jumpered to the antenna while the PA is being worked on. Yup... the math shows that after the hybrid combiner we're pushing a whopping 60mW to the 8-bay VHF antenna at 11,440' MSL, and we've had reports that the repeater is S7 and a little fluttery mobile... in the normal coverage area. I'm sure it isn't being heard halfway to Kansas right now, though... nor probably in Cheyenne, WY which it usually reaches just fine. I love our ridiculous HAAT! :-) So anyway, you see why we need the pre-amp. Heh. Hearing a 50W mobile from downtown Cheyenne, WY is kinda a stretch. But it works in the hot-spots/hill-topping. Haha. Even freakier, the UHF works even better up there. (Lower site noise.) Talked to someone on top of the hill East of Laramie, WY on it one night who had a 50W mobile. Me in my living room on an HT in South Denver, he in his big rig, with a very large UHF gain antenna on the mirror mount on the South side of the Westbound truck. That was cool. (Especially since we'd just put it up and wondered how well it would work in the real world after bench-testing the snot out of it.) Controller will very likely be my S-Com 7K. That's what all of ours use, but we're rollin' over slowly to the 7330... Nate
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Duplexers
Thank you for your response. The problem is that the repeater is located on top of a building and the tower on that building is only about 20 feet tall. We can move the two antennas apart horizontally, but only 20 feet vertically. Duplexers are way too expensive and hard to find for the 200 Mhz band. We are running about 20 watts and the frequency separation is 1.6 mhz. Sometimes a week signal comes in and sometimes the transceiver is desensitizing the receiver and covers it up. Any suggestions? Thanks Chris In a message dated 8/30/2010 8:36:53 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, wb6...@verizon.net writes: Chris, You do not have to use a duplexer, but it makes building a repeater SO much easier! Keep in mind that antenna separation usually means vertical separation, not horizontal separation. Moreover, the same isolation provided by 1000 feet of horizontal separation might be provided by 10 feet of vertical separation. The amount of isolation you need is based generally on the transmit power, frequency separation between TX and RX, and the sensitivity of the receiver. The receiver bandwidth and antenna types also play a factor. 73, Eric Lemmon WB6FLY -Original Message- From: _repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com_ (mailto:Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com) [mailto:_repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com_ (mailto:Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com) ] On Behalf Of Mackey Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 4:44 PM To: _repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com_ (mailto:Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com) Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Duplexers Our club was recently given a 220 repeater. We have two seperate antennas. We do not have a duplexer. My question is do we have to have a duplexer? How can we keep the transmitter from desensitizing the receiver? The antennas are apart but can be moved farther. Thanks Chris Kg4bek
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Duplexers
if you keep your eyes open you can find 220 duplexers at a good price .. Email Bob Morton and I am sure he can find you one at a good price .. I had 2 from him and love his work and the shipping cost of a 220 duplexer is not that bad either On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 8:44 PM, cmcclel...@aol.com wrote: Thank you for your response. The problem is that the repeater is located on top of a building and the tower on that building is only about 20 feet tall. We can move the two antennas apart horizontally, but only 20 feet vertically. Duplexers are way too expensive and hard to find for the 200 Mhz band. We are running about 20 watts and the frequency separation is 1.6 mhz. Sometimes a week signal comes in and sometimes the transceiver is desensitizing the receiver and covers it up. Any suggestions? Thanks Chris In a message dated 8/30/2010 8:36:53 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, wb6...@verizon.net writes: Chris, You do not have to use a duplexer, but it makes building a repeater SO much easier! Keep in mind that antenna separation usually means vertical separation, not horizontal separation. Moreover, the same isolation provided by 1000 feet of horizontal separation might be provided by 10 feet of vertical separation. The amount of isolation you need is based generally on the transmit power, frequency separation between TX and RX, and the sensitivity of the receiver. The receiver bandwidth and antenna types also play a factor. 73, Eric Lemmon WB6FLY -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.comRepeater-Builder%40yahoogroups.com [mailto:Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.comRepeater-Builder%40yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Mackey Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 4:44 PM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Repeater-Builder%40yahoogroups.com Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Duplexers Our club was recently given a 220 repeater. We have two seperate antennas. We do not have a duplexer. My question is do we have to have a duplexer? How can we keep the transmitter from desensitizing the receiver? The antennas are apart but can be moved farther. Thanks Chris Kg4bek
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Duplexers
Chris, There aren't many ways around the laws of physics. If you can't get adequate physical separation, and can't afford a duplexer...perhaps you just can't afford to operate a repeater. Can you gather enough interested users, and get everyone to chip in for a duplexer? If not, maybe your local user community isn't large enough to need a 220 MHz repeater! You might be able to gather a group adequate to fund and support a 220 repeater if you got closer to the Charleston area, linked into a hub in Charleston, etc. Your elevation might have some definite linking possibilities if folks in Charleston wanted a 220 MHz hub that could get them coverage farther west on US 26, for example. Generally, if you need to raise money to get a project done, you need to be able to cover a population center large enough to include a bunch of potential users. Given your area's population growth, if you have the connections, getting the town or county to help fund a sanctioned emergency repeater system might be an avenue, but you'd better have enough users on 220 to make it work if it's ever called up. The economy will be against you in this pursuit; your population growth will be an advantage. Remember, finding the money to get it built and installed is only the start of the financial fun. You'll need an ongoing budget for maintenance and repair, or the machine will spend too much time down, and the users will wander off to other pursuits. Good luck! 73, Paul, AE4KR - Original Message - From: cmcclel...@aol.com To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 6:44 PM Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Duplexers Thank you for your response. The problem is that the repeater is located on top of a building and the tower on that building is only about 20 feet tall. We can move the two antennas apart horizontally, but only 20 feet vertically. Duplexers are way too expensive and hard to find for the 200 Mhz band. We are running about 20 watts and the frequency separation is 1.6 mhz. Sometimes a week signal comes in and sometimes the transceiver is desensitizing the receiver and covers it up. Any suggestions? Thanks Chris In a message dated 8/30/2010 8:36:53 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, wb6...@verizon.net writes: Chris, You do not have to use a duplexer, but it makes building a repeater SO much easier! Keep in mind that antenna separation usually means vertical separation, not horizontal separation. Moreover, the same isolation provided by 1000 feet of horizontal separation might be provided by 10 feet of vertical separation. The amount of isolation you need is based generally on the transmit power, frequency separation between TX and RX, and the sensitivity of the receiver. The receiver bandwidth and antenna types also play a factor. 73, Eric Lemmon WB6FLY -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Mackey Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 4:44 PM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Duplexers Our club was recently given a 220 repeater. We have two seperate antennas. We do not have a duplexer. My question is do we have to have a duplexer? How can we keep the transmitter from desensitizing the receiver? The antennas are apart but can be moved farther. Thanks Chris Kg4bek
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Duplexers
Chris, I plugged your frequency separation and power level into CommShop, and assumed a receiver sensitivity of 0.3 microvolts. The program responded that at least 77 dB of isolation is needed for zero desense- which is the obvious goal of any repeater builder. CommShop calculated that 77 dB of isolation can be achieved by 112 feet of vertical separation or 5,681 feet of horizontal separation. I will readily admit that CommShop is not perfect, since it makes many assumptions that may or may not be valid in your particular case. That said, it has been remarkably close in its projections- in my personal experience, anyway. The reality of your situation is that you do not have sufficient real estate or tower height to construct a workable repeater with separate TX and RX antennas. I strongly suggest that you give up on the two antenna idea and start looking for a good used 220 MHz duplexer. My own 220 MHz repeater uses a Telewave TPRD-2254 duplexer, and has been desense-free. Although this duplexer is available new for about $1,120 with a Ham discount, I have seen this exact duplexer on the used market for less than $500. More info about the TPRD-2254 duplexer is here: www.telewave.com/pdf/TWDS-6026.pdf 73, Eric Lemmon WB6FLY -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of cmcclel...@aol.com Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 5:45 PM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Duplexers Thank you for your response. The problem is that the repeater is located on top of a building and the tower on that building is only about 20 feet tall. We can move the two antennas apart horizontally, but only 20 feet vertically. Duplexers are way too expensive and hard to find for the 200 Mhz band. We are running about 20 watts and the frequency separation is 1.6 mhz. Sometimes a week signal comes in and sometimes the transceiver is desensitizing the receiver and covers it up. Any suggestions? Thanks Chris In a message dated 8/30/2010 8:36:53 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, wb6...@verizon.net writes: Chris, You do not have to use a duplexer, but it makes building a repeater SO much easier! Keep in mind that antenna separation usually means vertical separation, not horizontal separation. Moreover, the same isolation provided by 1000 feet of horizontal separation might be provided by 10 feet of vertical separation. The amount of isolation you need is based generally on the transmit power, frequency separation between TX and RX, and the sensitivity of the receiver. The receiver bandwidth and antenna types also play a factor. 73, Eric Lemmon WB6FLY -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com mailto:Repeater-Builder%40yahoogroups.com [mailto:Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com mailto:Repeater-Builder%40yahoogroups.com ] On Behalf Of Mackey Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 4:44 PM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com mailto:Repeater-Builder%40yahoogroups.com Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Duplexers Our club was recently given a 220 repeater. We have two seperate antennas. We do not have a duplexer. My question is do we have to have a duplexer? How can we keep the transmitter from desensitizing the receiver? The antennas are apart but can be moved farther. Thanks Chris Kg4bek
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Duplexers
Since We are on the Topic of Duplexers, And some claim there is no such thing as a Dumb Question but at the Risk of Asking one I will take a chance , I have the Wacom 4 can on My 220 System, The Question I have in a non controlled environment such as No Heat or Air Will the Duplexer have any problems inside with Condensation from Heating up in use and Cooling down Thanks Don KA9QJG
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Wouxun Radio
I see from the manual that the TX RX CTCSS frequency settings are separate. I'm wondering if this HT can really run split tone (encode decode separate CTCSS freqs.). Simply having separate settings is by no means an indication that it can, since my Kenwood TM-G707 has separate settings but the RX CTCSS tone only affects what tone is used for BOTH encode decode when in CTCSS squelch mode (as opposed to encode only). Anyone here actually have one that they could try? Also saw a posting on e-ham that indicated only -30 dBc on harmonic spurious for the UHF side (I assume that's 2nd harmonic). Bob NO6B
Re: **Possible Spam** [Repeater-Builder] Re: Msf5000 Low Power alarms
I think that it is looking for an input on the RCA jacks on the SSCB. Mine does not have anything connected to these. I could be wrong. Jimmy On Mon, 2010-08-30 at 16:47 +, Bill wrote: Ok, I'll ask the easy question, why not let it be happy with the proper input to the sscb input for the pa...I think it may be only one wire. . bill w4oo . . --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, jimmylpowell jpow...@... wrote: I originally posted this on the MSF5000 board but got no response. I thought I would broaden my search. Does anyone know a way to get a non trunking MSF with out an internal power sensor to stop giving the 7 beeps? I have tried going back to a default codeplug and starting from scratch. This did not work. It seems that once the bit is set it won't go away. I'm sure that it happened when someone went into the screen to adjust the alarms. I know this is a common problem and they tell you not to do it. I have the alarms disabled over the air, but it annoys me on the local audio. I would like to enable the over the air alarms, but I can't until I can clear this one. My MSF has version 4.07 SSCB and 5.04 TTRC. Maybe there's some bit banging that can be done. Jimmy, K5JCT
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Wouxun Radio
Do not know the date. The serial number is J07-7405. I got mine a week ago. 73 Glenn WB4UIV At 09:25 AM 8/30/2010, you wrote: Glen, Seems that this may be dependent on the radios manufacture date What is the production number of your Vhf/220 unit? Regards. Steve --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Glenn Little WB4UIV glennmaill...@... wrote: Mine will do 5.00, 6.25, 10.00, 12.50, 25.00, 50.00 and 100.00 KHz. 73 Glenn WB4UIV At 09:35 PM 8/29/2010, you wrote: John (et all) - Is the 1.25M version capable of 20 kHz steps? The spec sheet makes it look like it can only do 12.5 or 25 kHz steps. - JimF K6IYK At 8/29/2010 06:06 PM, k7ve wrote: 3e. Re: Wouxun Radio Posted by: John D. Hays j...@... k7ve Date: Sun Aug 29, 2010 2:29 pm ((PDT)) I bought the 2m/1.25cm version from http://wouxun.us/ at Dayton this year to give me a 222 mHz handheld, it has been working great, including surviving a 3 foot drop to concrete :) --- it operates 5W on 2m and 4W on 1.25m. (I prefer dealing with a US distributor vs. an Ebay Hong Kong dealer.) -- John D. Hays Amateur Radio Station K7VE http://k7ve.org PO Box 1223 Edmonds, WA 98020-1223 VOIP/SIP: j...@... sip:j...@... mailto:j...@... James T. Fortney j...@... Yahoo! Groups Links Yahoo! Groups Links
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Duplexers
Theory: http://www.repeater-builder.com/antenna/thoughts-on-isolation.html Applications: http://www.repeater-builder.com/antenna/separation.html Mike WA6ILQ At 05:36 PM 08/30/10, you wrote: Chris, You do not have to use a duplexer, but it makes building a repeater SO much easier! Keep in mind that antenna separation usually means vertical separation, not horizontal separation. Moreover, the same isolation provided by 1000 feet of horizontal separation might be provided by 10 feet of vertical separation. The amount of isolation you need is based generally on the transmit power, frequency separation between TX and RX, and the sensitivity of the receiver. The receiver bandwidth and antenna types also play a factor. 73, Eric Lemmon WB6FLY -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Mackey Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 4:44 PM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Duplexers Our club was recently given a 220 repeater. We have two seperate antennas. We do not have a duplexer. My question is do we have to have a duplexer? How can we keep the transmitter from desensitizing the receiver? The antennas are apart but can be moved farther. Thanks Chris Kg4bek Yahoo! Groups Links No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.851 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3103 - Release Date: 08/30/10 11:34:00
