sniff sniff
Hmmm... I smell a Part 97 debate on the horizon.
I'll just say it can be done with almost
any controller made in the last 20 years.
Joe M.
Mike wrote:
I talked to the ARRL regulatory department and inquired about doing
this. They told me that it was illegal because
snip
bill Croghan wrote:
It might be stretching the rules a bit, but after changing the
courtesy tone, maybe the controller could be set to ID every ten
minutes until acknowledged.
Beacon ID issues. (another issue most people do but is debatable)
Joe M.
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is
Yes, it has one, but is it being used? If JU201 (base models) is still
in, it bypasses the filter. This jumper is located on the audio squelch
board. You have to remove the jumper to use the filter. This is the same
jumper that has to be in when not using the PL board (when using the
stock
to be removed or is that a problem for you?
Neil
mch wrote:
Yes, it has one, but is it being used? If JU201 (base models) is still
in, it bypasses the filter. This jumper is located on the audio squelch
board. You have to remove the jumper to use the filter. This is the
same
JOHN MACKEY wrote:
I guess you won't need any more advice from us!!
On the contrary. I think we will be answering a lot of questions...
What duplexer gives me the most off-freq rejection?
What can I do to reduce TX noise
Does anyone have a spectrum analyzer for sale?
Etc.
ac0y5 [EMAIL
I think much of the problem is in the
tuning caps on both the exciter and PA.
Joe M.
ac0y5 wrote:
It seems a lot of the complaints are from oscillator drift and
tuning drift. I have a few questions Does anyone know if the main
problem resides in the exciter, or the power amp? My plan would
Kevin Custer wrote:
mch wrote:
I think much of the problem is in the tuning caps on both the exciter and PA.
The Spectrum equipment seems worse than any other, and the
problem *may* stem from the quality of the original parts used.
That certainly is the case with Hamtronics (at least
First of all, you missed the third digit
that indicates the frequency range.
Otherwise,you have a: Trunk-mounted, 100W (maybe 110W - depending on the
band), Micor Mobile, 12VDC Negative Ground, PL, 4 CH, Wide-spaced TX,
Rev B that came with Accessories.
Band is likely either 3 (VHF) or 4 (UHF),
Didn't the guy say he had two 2M pairs, though? (read: Not UHF)
Joe M.
Chuck Kelsey wrote:
That's the exception, not the rule. Typically UHF (non tripler) MII's go for
$75 - $100. But even at that price, you are looking at the RF being the
cheapest part of the equation. The antenna will
Adam, you have the right idea. IF you call the FCC, and they contact
Verizon, and Verizon says you never contacted them directly, that will
not look good in the FCC's eyes. The FCC Will consider hams to be a
bunch of whiners who can't do anything for themselves. Now, if you do
contact verizon and
I for one have never heard of it. Motran, yes. Mocom, yes. Mocan, no.
Do you by chance have a model number? (Or did I miss a joke?)
Joe M.
Neil McKie wrote:
Any one familiar with the Mocan?
Neil
Lee Williams wrote:
The noise level is getting pretty high on this list,can we get
Bill,
The 'accessory plug' is 'available' on any MVS. The plug that comes out
of the radio is straight through wire to the set of pins inside the
radio. The inside pins are the dual inline type.
BTW, if you want to run it low power (10W), just unplug the PA and plug
the exciter in to the same
Sounds like a modern day trick. Take parts from both Motorola and GE,
put them in a new radio, and neither can sue because it can be equally
argued that it was a takeoff of a different brand.
Of course, I'm most on here know that Bendix was bought by (or merged
with) King and were collectively
If you're 'tired' of him, why are you egging him on?
Joe M.
Jim wrote:
ac0y5 wrote:
WHAT GE C O P I E D the MICOR? The engineers that told you that
was on drugs! If the Micor was looked at it was on HOW NOT to build
a radio. The Micor works but not as well as the MASTRII. (boy am
under beacon rules then? Lets just say that
personnaly,I would not run a continuously transmitting link. My copy
of part 97 is so old,it fell apart when I pulled it out,and I KNEW you
would respond... 73,Lee
- Original Message -
From: mch [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Repeater-Builder
BUT, the Tracking Gen CANNOT be added to just ANY
IFR-1200Ss - only those after a certain serial number.
Joe M.
Eric Lemmon wrote:
Ken,
You can buy an IFR-1200S for less than $5,000 these days, and it is a
very capable service monitor. The S includes the spectrum analyzer as
standard,
Eric Lemmon wrote:
Since you must have two antennas and the equivalent of two duplexers to
make either system work, it is very likely cheaper to simply use two
antennas- one for each repeater.
Not necessarily. You can combine the combiner and multicoupler on one
antenna, but it's even more
. For the record, I think it was a Zetron. I prefer CSI, but that's
one reason why the Zetron was 'available' for ham use. :-) BTW, it was
wired per factory specs on a GE M-II station, so it wasn't a mickey
mouse job.
Maybe I should have tried it on a Spectrum? (couldn't resist)
Joe M.
Jim wrote:
mch
Yes. In fact, one system near me uses
such a setup with two simplex transceivers.
Joe M.
n1ofj wrote:
Has anyone ever used a Bandpass/reject duplexer as a transmit
combiner. As an example, using one port set up as a pass on Frequency
A, reject on frequency B, and the other port to reject
Derek B. McIntyre wrote:
I have acquired a Diamond X-500 which claims 8.3 dB on 144-148 MHz
and 11.5 dB on 440-450 MHz. The antenna is just over 17 feet tall,
making the gain claims ridiculous.. My guess is it's rated in dBi,
therefore, the claim may be a little closer to realistic.. 5
Daron J. Wilson wrote:
I have a GE Mastr II UHF repeater that has been doing pretty well for
me, last trip to the hill was a low power issue and I spotted a nice
blue spark where the coax attaches to the PA board on transmit, rather
easy fix.
How do you have it connected? On either the base
Daron J. Wilson wrote:
I have a GE Mastr II UHF repeater that has been doing pretty well
for
me, last trip to the hill was a low power issue and I spotted a nice
blue spark where the coax attaches to the PA board on transmit,
rather
easy fix.
How do you have it connected? On
Ahhh... but how many have 5-tone decode?
If your main 'fleet' is going to be mobiles and portables, go DTMF.
If pagers, go Quick Call II (AKA one plus one - standard paging).
Joe M.
Steve wrote:
Yes some of the older ham rigs had DTMF decode, BUT, my new TH-F6a does not
appear to have that
Well, I do know Europe uses a lot of 5-tone equipment, but the fact that
you had a lot of it was missing from your original post, so don't be
surprised that your replies were skewed based on that missing fact.
I'm not 100% positive, but I THINK you will find that there are two
5-tone formats -
Cable CH 24 - 223.250 MHz (video carrier - same as CH 18 on 145.250).
Only difference is that it's between repeater inputs (input to 224.840
and 224.860) and not on a repeater output (in most areas of the USA).
Joe M.
Adam T. Liette wrote:
Another good reason to look at 220. Good prop, little
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
To get it to move to 2-Meters with a 600 KHz split, we had to order three
new longer notch tuning capacitor brass tubes for one side
How far down did you go? I think that's the same model I have that went
to 146.37/.97 MHz fine. And I think it started life around 155
Make sure he calls the cable company to complain. That's the
one thing they do listen to - upset customers (well, sometimes).
That will make them clean up their system quick.
Where was it the strongest? From HIS house, perhaps? Wouldn't
it be ironic if the cable company found HE was the problem!
/145.39, and prior to that, to 147.74/147.14,
and all needed the new notch rods. TX-RX is familiar with the correct ones
to use, it's just that they're closed until Monday and we need the info
before then, if possible.
LJ
Original Message:
-
From: mch [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri
Now I HAVE to take exception to that statement. All of their
answers are right. They just may not match your question. ;-
You've got questions, we've got answers! (matches not guaranteed)
Joe M.
Mike Morris wrote:
You've got questions, we've got answers!
Yeah, most of them wrong, or it's
Hit the send button early before. Sorry.
L - Desktop
5 - 60W
3 - 136-174 MHz (not the entire split)
BB - Mocom 70 based
B - 120VAC
1 - CSQ
1 - 5 kHz narrowband
9 - T4-R4
0 - Controls (not sure exactly)
B - Rev. B
M - Mic Included
Joe M.
fish_497072000 wrote:
Hi- See a strange Moto desk
fish_497072000 wrote:
Hi- See a strange Moto desk model on E-bay this morning. Model #
L53BBB-1190BM. Havn't been able to find out what model/it fits
into .Any one have an idea?? TKS,Jerry W8KQ
Yahoo! Groups Links
To visit your group on the web, go to:
No it is not. In fact, there is no TX element
in most UHF Micor mobiles. (perhaps not in any)
The TX is synthesized based on the RX channel element.
However, I think the UHF base uses the
same TX element as a VHF Micor mobile.
Joe M.
Don wrote:
Before I go out in My unheated Garage at 14
Well, if you really have the 'anatomy' to do this: Sell it on eBay, take
the money, and buy something that will work much better. (such as a used
MASTR II or Micor)
Personally, I wouldn't do that to someone else, but it is your choice.
Joe M.
Kevin Bednar wrote:
I kinda figured that John
skipp025 wrote:
It's very disappointing to me reading most
of the replies to Kevin's request for help
repairing his Spectrum Repeater. Most of
you would rather fire off wise cracks about
Spectrum equipment than help him out.
To you, wise cracks. To most, relating experience.
While
After all the replies to your query a month ago, you still
thought you were the only one with a problem with S___? :-O
Joe M.
ac0y5 wrote:
It's nice to see I'm not the only one with a problem.
Yahoo! Groups Links
To visit your group on the web, go to:
Nope. Kenwood is a big promoter of fusing the negative lead. The reasons
have already been mentioned on the list. Most, if not all of their
radios, do not support traditional positive ground. I say traditional
because there are now positive to negative ground converters for use to
install negative
Looks complete to me, Dave. Frame, driver, final board, filter board,
power cables, and all. Looks like a base station model, too, as it has a
T/R relay.
With respect to what Mike is looking for, the power control circuit is
on the driver board, so I guess you're looking for one that's missing
You may be thinking of the wire needed if you use an EC ICOM in a base
station, as the compensation line is not in the base station as it is in
mobiles. I think I said that correctly. I've replaced PM exciters with
PLL exciters, and it was a plug-n-play matter. (plug, tune, set levels,
and play
Gary Bargholz wrote:
Hello group, first post.
Welcome. :-)
Joined and looked through the archives for info on DPL.
Anybody know the proper spec to set the level of DPL?
Using an external DPL encoder.
Motorola spec is +/- 750 Hz.
Joe M.
Yahoo! Groups Links
To visit your group on
It receives in one band and transmits in another.
Joe M.
sal90212 wrote:
hi all
i have q what dose crossband Repeater do ?
Yahoo! Groups Links
To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
(cough) eBay (cough)
Joe M.
Derek B. McIntyre wrote:
You will probably have to purchase the cable from a Kenwood dealer.
The same cable programs TK-880's as well. They have an IC in the
hood of the DB-25 connector. Would probably be difficult to
duplicate. The cable doesn't cost that
Mike Morris WA6ILQ wrote:
John:
You may want to keep that 286 for yourself. A lot of the Moto software that
is used to program the synthesized radios (like Maxtrac, MT-1000, Spectra,
Saber, etc) will not run on anything faster than 100mhz.
That's odd... they run fine on my XP2500+ HP
mch wrote:
Hi, Scott.
Sorry about that. It was supposed to go direct. However,
if anyone on the list knows the answer, please let me know.
It is sorta on-topic.
Joe M.
Yahoo! Groups Links
* To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder
Hi, Scott.
I hope you, the XYL, and the new harmonic are doing well. I have a
question for which you might know the answer. Do you know of any way to
program ham repeaters in a 450-527 MHz split HT750? I would just change
the split to a low one, but I need to keep the 470-476 MHz segment, so
you're going to need two radios to
satisfy your wideband objectives. Yeah, I personally like the
DC-to-light capabilities of some wideband Amateur gear, but that
capability brings along a lot of limitations!
73, Eric Lemmon WB6FLY
mch wrote:
... Do you know of any way to program ham
I wonder if anyone using the high-out low-in method considered the
intermod concerns from having two high power transmitters 'beside' each
other while the receivers are on the 'ends'. Not only would the mixing
put both TXs on your receiver, but it would put it on the
commercial/public safety
Actually, I don't think .49 went on until the late 80s. I forget where
they were before that. Maybe it wasn't anywhere and 146.790 was the only
Washington (PA) repeater.
Joe M.
Kevin Custer wrote:
Tad Danley wrote:
That was back in the early-mid 1970s in
Washington, PA near Pittsburgh
. Well, back into the woodwork. :-)
73,
Joe M.
Tad Danley wrote:
mch wrote:
Actually, I don't think .49 went on until the late 80s. I forget
where they were before that. Maybe it wasn't anywhere and 146.790
was the only Washington (PA) repeater.
I think Sam was originally on 145.25
That would be the MOTRAN. They have a boat
load of round transistors in the final area.
They used the same accessories as the MOTRAC.
Or are you saying there really were MOTRACs with no tubes?
Joe M.
Micheal Salem wrote:
Matthew:
There are later versions of the Motrac which would be all
I don't think the AFM-24DA is made anymore. That was the 220 four pole
antenna made by Cushcraft. The G7-220 is still available for a little
under $200. Some of the commercial antennas should still be available,
too, since they make them for 220-222 MHz. No retuning should be needed.
Joe M.
Matt Bergum wrote:
Hello,
I just Joined the group, but don't plan to stay a member (since I am
not a HAM operator). I am just a fireman in Ohio looking for simple
answers to repeater questions. I expect to be online for about an
hour more...so you do not need to reply after that.
This
There are still a ton of MASTR II repeaters out there in 'part 90 land'.
The FCC now demands that you replace them even though the rules have not
changed??? (they still meet current specs).
I also have to admit that I never knew there was a 'list' of acceptable
equipment. I thought there were
Russ, you need to get hold of a spell checker. :-)
(or not have it automatically 'fix' all the things it thinks is wrong.)
Joe M.
russ wrote:
The problem was not price. In fact the Kenwood Systems stuff was more money.
When Motorola closed it's service (Factory) state wide service of there
Joe,
I think you forgot another likely reason: The HIGH PASS FILTER in the
mic circuit. Like the high frequency energy, there is also a lot of low
frequency energy (below 300 Hz) on simplex that is being stripped by the
high pass filter in the mic circuit that ensures CTCSS frequencies in
the
have not advanced in
the last 9 months.
They can keep us updated on the progress of building
them, etc.
Joe
--- mch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I would be interested in several. (as long as the
cost isn't too high)
Joe M.
__
Do you Yahoo
Kevin Custer wrote:
Yes, we drive on a parkway and park in driveways. We also use FM
radios on VHF and UHF and manufacturers build new ones every day.
Don't forget - few people actually use UHF connectors on UHF radios!
Yea, but it likely won't happen since it seems that FM modulators
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 4/6/2004 4:40:39 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Why not call it what it is FM and PM ?
Yup, I agree!
Because if you ask John Q. Ham what his radio is, he
will say FM regardless of whether it is really PM or not.
. They might have all 16 of them built if
they're real go-getters :)
--- mch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'll be in Kevin's back yard next weekend (the
17th/18th,
I think). Any chance of getting a couple? :-)
Joe M.
Joe Montierth wrote:
Joe, Bob, etc:
I have sent the boards
Wow, do you have a dim view of hams. I think most WOULD, and DO know the
difference. After all, with all the multi-mode radios out there anymore,
I don't think I've ever heard anyone having problems selecting the
correct mode for repeaters. Most would not know FM from PM - I agree
there, but that
I'm also convinced that most of that problem is (micro)fractures in the
solder connections on collinear antennas. I really have come to believe
that 2M stationmaster type antennas are simply too heavy and flexible to
hold up. The 440 ones, on the other hand, are much more forgiving, as
the
I don't believe any definitions of PM and FM matter. PM is a Phase
Modulator, and FM is a Frequency Modulator. What is important is what
each does to the signal, or requires to maintain the 'status quo', or
integrity, of the signal.
If you're going to limit your range to 300-3000 Hz, there is
How are your poor soldering skills or poor practices (shorting 12V
across something and burning traces) examples of getting ripped off? I'm
not going to comment on the refund because both sides seem to conflict
on that issue, but you did not dispute the above causes for your
returning the unit as
Can't be. I say that because I've worked on Low Band Micors
with DPL. I don't recall if they were 30 MHz or 47 MHz.
Joe M.
Kevin Custer wrote:
I could be wrong, but I believe all low band
Micor exciters (including Stations) are PM.
Yahoo! Groups Links
* To visit your group on the
True, but were they members of this list? ;- (my original selection)
There are now over 2000 members. I suspect the number of repeater
trustees is still far greater - especially globally.
Joe M.
wd8chl wrote:
--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, mch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, I
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Joe,
Hi Bob.
Fact: PM does not reproduce DC well. Actually, it doesn't
reproduce DC
at all (beyond a spike) because in DC there is no change in
the phase of
the signal. The closer you get to DC, the worse PM will
perform. FM, on
Neil McKie wrote:
Low band Micor Station manual P/n 68P81013E60-F dated 2/11/77:
Exciter Model Series consiting of the following:
Channel Element Req'd
ModelFreq Range Carrier Digital
and PL (tone) PL
. Would
that help reduce the problem any? (although I still think the primary
problem is the connections)
Joe M.
Kevin Custer wrote:
mch wrote:
That I know of, not one 2M repeater using those have survived
without such static problems. The ones that have, I think, have flexed
to the point where
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The board being discussed on this list with the high-order filter and
the limiter, assuming it's designed right, would be an excellent
addition to the repeater builder's arsenal. Replace the 'blob' and get
around the soft limiting and the other problems. We talked
Read me last long reply on the subject, and my reply to Bob's points
just minutes ago. When it comes to links, the advantages are greater
because you have even more audio shaping/processing going on, and each
little bit sums. It doesn't take long until everyone notices it.
Take a glass of water,
with a different channel element than the PM models.
mch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Can't be. I say that because I've worked on Low Band Micors
with DPL. I don't recall if they were 30 MHz or 47 MHz.
Joe M.
Kevin Custer wrote:
I could be wrong, but I believe all low band
Micor
It appears it's also not a typical Mobile Repeater, but a full duplex
repeater (note the two antenna connectors - regular for the RX and one
on the heatsink for the TX.
I wonder what frequency range it was made for (maybe 136-144 MHz or
162-174 MHz?)
The 'comes with tone element for 131.8 Hz' is
I can't say I've ever heard of an R-100 not being used as a repeater.
The software, which as the most basic of any Motorola software, only
programs the frequencies from what I recall. Of course, there may be
custom units out there.
Joe M.
Rich wrote:
Can a Motorola R100 witch we use as a
RC is a Micor Unified Chassis according to my info.
Probably a 75W unit. All the other info is correct, too.
$200? Probably. Not a great deal, but not too bad either.
Narrow channel means +/- 5 kHz type (as opposed to +/- 15 kHz which used
to be the standard until the late 60s, I think)
It
Well, if nothing else, that page shows that even back then, people used
FM and PM interchangeably. In the beginning of the article, it touts
their frequency modulated (FM) system, but later it states success of
the system was due to choosing phase modulation.
Bob (S-Com Bob), would it be a fair
Of course, you're likely to key up the adjacent repeater. Make
sure you ID when you transmit on the frequency 5 or 10 kHz off.
Joe M.
Virden Clark Beckman wrote:
A good way to reset one that has gotten this is use a big signal 5 or
10kc low and fool the agc limiter circuit, the cas will drop
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
To further state the case, assume that there are two
parallel universes.
Que Star Trek theme music... ;-
In one universe, all hams use phase modulators and phase demodulators.
The terms 'preemphasis' and 'deemphasis' are unheard of. The whole
system has flat
For everyone's Info:
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-79A1.pdf
Yes, this means linking would be possible on 2M legally.
(above 144.500 MHz except 145.800-146.000)
Joe M.
_
Excerpts from NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING AND ORDER
Adopted:
While I would agree with that assessment, I too have stated on the
appropriate groups that KW should have included 220 and this entire
issue would be a moot point. Why didn't they? Because the 200 band isn't
a ham band in most of the world. However, if they could even provide for
receive only
Good point. I didn't think about the 'input' aspect of the matter.
Any word yet on those boards? :-)
Joe M.
Joe Montierth wrote:
Most HF bands do not support repeater operation, in
fact the only HF band allowing repeater operation is
the upper part of 10M.
So if you repeat audio coming
Hmmm... using that logic, you can have the most reliable repeater by not
putting it on the air at all. That way, it will last forever. :-)
(provided it's not using tubes)
Actually, I would tend to think that like us, periodic exercise isn't a
bad thing for a repeater. It will help keep the caps
I sit corrected. Actually, I'm almost laying down corrected. I've never
been so tired - even after Dayton. I had a really really busy weekend. I
thoutoughly enjoyed it, but it was still busy.
Anyway... I don't understand the intermod software's math that Ken
happened to be using. :-)
Joe M.
Ken
Michael Singewald N1PLH wrote:
First...Wow, you guys are FAST! I cannot believe how many responses
in 15 minutes! Thank you all very much.
The 147.225 has input 147.925 and the 146.925 has input 146.325.
Actually, your input should be 147.825 for 147.225 out.
To be honest, I didn't
Kevin,
Do I need to go there or do you have my order already on file?
Joe M.
Kevin Custer wrote:
Hi all,
You may remember the thread on audio quality a few weeks back. One
topic was a replacement module for the stock audio processing circuitry
which is a major cause of limited
Unless the problem ISN'T two signals occupying the same spectrum, and
it's just a matter of one receiver hearing outside its 'channel'.
Joe M.
Steve Bosshard wrote:
No amount of filtering will resolve 2 signals occupying the same
overlapping spectrum.
Yahoo! Groups Links
* To visit
Steve Bosshard wrote:
Unless the problem ISN'T two signals occupying the same spectrum, and
it's just a matter of one receiver hearing outside its 'channel'.
Joe M.
146R325 occupies from 146315 to 146.335
146.310 occupies from 146.300 to 146.320
They SHARE 146.315 to 146.320.
Oh
Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D) wrote:
Reply:
Please refer to modulation index and Bessel functions. The frequency
response is 300 to 3000 hz emphasized at 3db per octave. Transmitter
instantaneous deviation is supposed to be limited to +/- 5 kc deviation
from center. Significant sidebands in
Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D) wrote:
CARSON'S RULE
BANDWIDTH = 2 X (PEAK DEVIATION + HIGHEST MODULATING FREQUENCY)
Thank you for quoting what I've been saying the past two posts.
Most 2M off the shelf radios I have seen lately in wide band FM hit at
least +/- 5kc peak deviation, and 6 to 6 ½ is
David Schornak wrote:
W=cg nb ?
my question is what is the opt. cg nb?
CG = Channel Guard (AKA CTCSS)
NB = Noise Blanker (if a single site duplexed repeater,
you will want to disable it)
Joe M.
Yahoo! Groups Links
* To visit your group on the web, go
They weren't designed for the 470-512 MHz band, were they?
Joe M.
Ken Arck wrote:
Hmmm, here's a kicker
At 3 megs above the pass frequency, I can adjust for a sharp, deep
null about centered in the slot. At 4 megs above, it starts to get
noticeably wider and almost to the outside
That may be a throwback to the old FCC interim designators. For example,
if you upgraded at the Buffalo (NY) FCC office, your call was W3ABC/BF.
We used to say Interim BullFrog. At least I did. :-) It indicated that
you had just upgraded so your class on file may be outdated, and to
check with
Are you still honoring the Dayton pricing on items that you had there?
(such as tone filters)
Joe, KR3P
Ted Bleiman K9MDM - MDM Radio wrote:
Since we were forced by conditions to leave we
are making some special offers on our website. so
take a look at www.mdmradio.com. we'll run these
I'm playing around with a GE MVP I picked up (well, picked up AND paid
for actually) at Dayton. It seems the DC supply has what appears to be
an OEM DC remote in it. It has a transformer (about 1.5 cubed) and two
yellow pots on it. Has anyone ever seen on of these? It is mounted along
the side
There have been several modules on eBay - even a few 1.2G ones!
Joe M.
Mark Tomany wrote:
I was trying to locate the 6m FEX-736 module for my FT-736R. They tell me
the radio no longer supported, and they're right. NOTHING online regarding
that radio, nor anything else that is not current
Why? I've done it for about 15 years. I can't use it within about 60 kHz
of the local repeater, but otherwise it's fine. I just used a cavity to
notch out the repeater TX. The loss of sensitivity near the repeater TX
frequency is overcome by the strength of the repeaters at the site.
Joe M.
Ken
About 8 generations down the MASTR line? :-)
Joe M.
Kevin Custer wrote:
The only thing that is worse is to see someone write Master 11, what
the hell is a master eleven?
Yahoo! Groups Links
* To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/
Syntor XX.
(one X too many).
LJ
Original Message:
-
From: mch [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 22 May 2004 13:16:48 -0400
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] GE Mastr II
About 8 generations down the MASTR line? :-)
Joe M.
Kevin Custer
Ronald Schiller wrote:
Now if its on tape and you play it back to them
are you divulging what you hear? Ron WA6UNM
It doesn't matter. You are doing so at THEIR request. That's your 'out'.
Joe M.
Yahoo! Groups Links
* To visit your group on the web, go to:
Although I have one myself, I don't recall if the CAT has any link
ports. If it does, drive the encoder off a link TX output (and don't
forget to put the link in TX mode). Otherwise, you will have to find a
way to pad the COS to drive both the controller and the encoder.
It appears you may be in
Or, you can just listen on a known good receiver. Program
in 160 MHz and scan between 148 and 150 MHz for the L.O..
Joe M.
Mathew Quaife wrote:
Here ya goIs all they tell ya
X1 11497989 CRYSTAL,TC-43 TYPE CX0551
X2 10592095
On all the units that I have, they either respond to the 1050 Hz tone,
or SAME, but not both. The SAME units ONLY respond to SAME codes. The
tone units only respond to tone.
This won't help you, but there is a code to program the SAME receivers
with so they will respond to ANY alert, but they
1 - 100 of 1021 matches
Mail list logo
