W5KGT wrote:
> And make sure that the coordinator has the correct PL
> tone in his data base.
The only problem with that is they have a tendency to publish it. Then
suddenly the repeater isn't closed anymore. It's happened here. Access
codes/tones were published in the ARRL directory when they w
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> There is no 'reverse burst decoder' per se in a tone decoder - it is
> just driven with the out of phase energy long enough to cause it to
> close very quickly. All tone decoders react to the reverse burst, not
> just one that is specially configured to react to a rev
Eric Lemmon wrote:
> 1 - Narrow Band
Note that narrow-band in this case is the 'old' narrowband, ie, 15Khz
spacing, not the current narrowband that's half that.
--
Jim Barbour
WD8CHL
skipp025 wrote:
> I'm heading toward the question of "is it better to reduce
> or remove (mute) the ctcss after the phase shift or just
> not worry about it?". As mentioned in one reply... there
> might be enough time for some fast decoders to "re-lock" on
> the inverted ctcss before the tx d
Rick & Charlotte wrote:
> xc73gs81105b
>
> Info on this model # please
>
> Thanks
>
> Rick
That'll be XC73GSB...
All Motorola radio model numbers are in the format
xnnxxxxx
where x is a letter and n is a number
except the Canadians, eh, that sometimes put extra letters in front or
at th
Tina wrote:
> Hello all, this is my first post to the group here, so here goes.
>
> I just acquired a Micor repeater with a CSI 32 Tone Panel, I am also
> almost done with the ICS Basic contoller that I am building from a
> kit.
> My query is: can I use both? I need the CSI for PL tones and
STeve Andre' wrote:
> On Tuesday 23 January 2007 13:13, Dan Blasberg wrote:
>> Anybody have any opinions on LMR-1200 as feedline?
>>
>> I have access to about 100' with N connectors at both ends, that I am
>> thinking of using for feedline.
Won't that still suffer from the foil/braid noise problem
Laryn Lohman wrote:
>> Now that I think about it, with all the wireless stuff (cell
> antennas) that I have seen mounted around a water tower single legs
> (the modern towers), on buildings at each face, etc. , I bet there is
> info out there that you can tailor for your needs using the phased
> a
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Really! I noticed some decay problems with an RLC-MOT we have on an SCom
> 7k. I've always attributed it to COS line propagation delay in the
> controller, but perhaps the 2.2 µF cap is the major culprit. We solved the
> problem by using the onboard audio gating, w
skipp025 wrote:
> Which reminds me that I should have mentioned the available scan
> of club using a series of yagi antennas around a wide tower to
> obtain a quasi omni pattern. You can probably find the info
> on the repeater builder antenna page along with the mounting offset
> paper I men
Kevin Custer wrote:
> Their stuff has flooded eBay for several months.
> I'd say it's made in China
> No further comment,
>
> Kevin
>
Just wait till we start seeing Chinese cars...you thought the Yugo was
bad...
--
Jim Barbour
WD8CHL
Dave VanHorn wrote:
>> I would suggest 1/2 wave away from the surrounding metal as a
> minimum, but try and get as far away as you can.
>>
>
> Yes, but what's bugging me is that I'm sure there are BAD distances,
> especially up close within 1-2 wavelengths
Normally for side-mounting on a nor
Ken Arck wrote:
> <---Then you shouldn't use it. It's not up to the Gov't to tell you that
> you CAN'T use it.
>
> By the way, my understanding is that after NYC put their cell phone ban
> in place, it had ZERO effects on accidents. Leave it to politicians to
> enact crap that doesn't work
Kevin Custer wrote:
> Kevin Custer wrote:
>> I'd say it's made in China
>
> Scratch that, you are correct, Taiwan
> http://www.temwell.com.tw/BS%202+2%20size.htm
>
> Kevin
Didn't China take over Taiwan back in the 80's or something?
--
Jim Barbour
WD8CHL
wadeds2003 wrote:
> Hello everyone. I am a Icom, Vertex, HYT dealer out of Canada. I am
> looking at putting up a UHF trunking repeater in the 450-470 MHz
> range. I think I am leaning towards a LTR system however I do not
> have very much expirence with trunking repeaters as they are not all
Doug Dickinson wrote:
> You CAN run a Micor base station on 12VDC, but you
> have to arrange a switchover from the 12V supply to
> the regulator board in the Micor power supply. As was
> said, you need 9.7 or so volts to run much of the
> control and logic functions and the power supply
> derives t
Ken Arck wrote:
> but the morons who run our State are considering this (time to
> mobilize Oregon hams(coming to a State near you?)
>
> http://www.leg.state.or.us/07reg/measures/sb0200.dir/sb0293.intro.html
I cannot believe how incredibly stupid legislators are. The problem is
NOT with
Ken Arck wrote:
> At 08:04 AM 1/30/2007, you wrote:
>
>
>> Just wait till we start seeing Chinese cars...you thought the Yugo was
>> bad...
>
> <---Good point. One hour after you fill them, they're empty
>
> Ken
They'll run on fish-heads, though...
--
Jim Barbour
WD8CHL
gregmrfs wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I want to build my first repeater using 2 hand held radios mounted in
> a pelican case with a gel cell for power.
>
> I have no idea where to start or what is required to build the
> repeater. Can anyone give me some ideas on connecting the radios? So
> far I think I hav
Dave VanHorn wrote:
>> Didn't China take over Taiwan back in the 80's or something?
>
> Not on your life.
>
> A very tense armed standoff has been in place for many many years.
I was thinking Hong Kongnevermind...
--
Jim Barbour
WD8CHL
Mike Morris WA6ILQ wrote:
> 4freq 220 (2m Motran modified)
> and 6freq 440.
>
> Mike WA6ILQ
I think you mentioned that once before-it'd be interesting if there was
an article for that...I have a Motran in the garage with a M-70 DTMF
head and a GLB for it...have to change the offset oscillator-i
> I remember reading an article several years ago about a problem with LTR...
> Joe's trucking goes out and buys time on a trunked system and 5
> radios, then has one of them cloned into 10 more. Trunked operator now has
> 15 users and Joe is paying for 5 plus airtime. The article mentioned an
>
mch wrote:
> It depends how it was programmed. Each unit could have a unique ID. But,
> your system would be limited to 250 radios or so.
>
> Joe M.
There were group ID's, but no unit ID's. Maybe if you gave each unit a
group ID, and then set the radios to scan for all groups. But everyone
woul
skipp025 wrote:
>> If you're looking more towards public safety or 'critical
>> infrastructure' (basically utilites), you'll want something with
>> a faster access time.
>
> I'm doing all the above with LTR and it works very well. You're
> talking real world access time measured (most all trun
skipp025 wrote:
>> "Jim B." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Well, I know EDACS is around 100-150 mS, where LTR is
>> typically 300-500mS. The baud rate, and amount of data, are
>> the main factors in limiting access time.
>
> You are right on the
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Wed, 31 Jan 2007 9:35 PM
> Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Help CG Decoder Mastr ExecII
>
> Hello, anybody of you can tell me how can I retune the band pass filter
> on CG Decoder into Mastr ExecII?
> The most likely style will have a small white ceramic chip
> that has a tuned circuit in it.
It's called a 'Versatone' by the way...
--
Jim Barbour
WD8CHL
skipp025 wrote:
> I have a few repeaters made
> from EF Johnson Challenger Mobiles put back to back and they
> work pretty well.
>
> cheers,
> skipp
>
I guess the rx microphonics problem isn't much of an issue as a repeater
rx ;c)
More of a problem with noisy trucks...
--
Jim Barbour
WD8C
Bob M. wrote:
> I configured my Yahoo mailbox so it put spam into the
> BULK folder rather than immediately deleting it.
>
> I found this message between 1200 and 1226 EST.
>
> So nice of Yahoo to consider this SPAM ! I would
> surmise that this is why I'm not seeing any of Kevin's
> messages.
>
>> On 2/5/07, Bill Hudson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> If you have the high current model, it has a BUSS NON-35 AMP one-time
>>> FUSE (Class K5), and is 3 inches long.
>>>
>>> The 15 Amp fuse is a NON-15 (obviously), and is considerably smaller in
>>> size, and is 2 inches in length.
>>>
>>> It
Nate Duehr wrote:
> Your organization going to be selling off those VHF's? Always
> looking... had to ask.
>
> Nate
Don't know-we're storing them for the cust. till they decide what they
want to do.
Don't worry-this is the first place I think of if something is up for grabs!
--
Jim Barbour
WD
Ken Arck wrote:
> At 04:55 PM 2/6/2007, you wrote:
>
>> It is a noticeable loss when the leaves come out. I've pretty much noticed
>> that a fairly noisy signal with no leaves becomes unreadable when the leaves
>> are full. My opinion would be additional antenna height could be helpful
>> since th
Luke wrote:
> I have obtained several Motorola Syntor X's Radios and some Motorola
> Micor's and I want to set up a couple as 2 meter repeaters but I am not
> sure wich is the best to use for this operation. I have found small
> amounts of info on both but I want more power since I have some hil
Jack Taylor wrote:
> On the other hand Jim, the Syntor X's are a newer radio with less chance of
> component
> failure.
Not necessarily...the parts for a Syntor are harder to get, and harder
to get to, and will be more expensive. Micor's are just as reliable as a
Syntor X, more plentiful, and
ensemble953039 wrote:
>
> Hi,
>from the experiments carried out here in the U.K. on in-band and
>cross-band portable and mobile repeaters vertical separation is
>nowhere near as good as horizontal.This also offers the chance
>to get the recieve antenna in a "null" from the transmi
radiomog wrote:
> how does this group run?
>
> I've getting posts out of sequence... the "here's a weird one.." (~)
> post showed quite a few responses before the actual post showed up.
> I'm on yahoo, and its a yahoo group. How does this work, and what
> would it take to see that messages show
Maire-Radios wrote:
> Well I think there are 8 or 9 Vocom/Cresend amps I have in service
> all UHF. 1 Henry UHF, 1 TE systems UHF, 6 or so TPL 5 UHF and one
> VHF 2 meter high end grade amp.
>
> I have had one Vocom go back for repair and testing but no trouble
> found so no cost. had 2 or
Vincent McKever wrote:
> There is a COS point on the main board. A pair of midland radios will
> make a great repeater and one will make an easy remote. Much better
> that a GE or Motorola. Try it, you'll love it.
>
> Vincent N6OA
Well, I think that is exaggerating a bit, but yeah, they woul
Mike Morris WA6ILQ wrote:
> Recently I did some research on the membership statistics for this group.
>
> Here's some interesting info:
> 1,679 are on "No Email" - i.e. they read the mail via the YahooGroups
> web site and they have locked themselves out of special notices.
>
> That last tidbit
ocwarren2000 wrote:
> I've been watching this topic and cannot recommend the half
> wave dipole bay antennas as not really efficient gain wise for what
> one gets for the effort..
>
> The Station Master series has been mentioned, which has good
> omnidirectional gain, in the order of
Laryn Lohman wrote:
> --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "Barry C'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> I presume its some sort of stacked arrangment , in chich case it
> will make
>> that gain at resonance ,
>>
>
> Yes, the ASPB602 is four stacked dipoles, just like the DB224. My
> point aga
>> Right-slightly OT, for a mobile antenna, you will find that you can
>> squeak out a bit more gain by using a .64-wavelength whip instead of a
>> pure 5/8-wave (.625)
>> In the late 60's/early 70's, the NewTronics BBL series VHF gain antennas
>> were rated at an honest 4dB gain-and did it. The A/
Don wrote:
> I have a Friend who always Times out my Repeater and others , Not
> that this is a Bad thing, The Repeaters are being used, He has
> jokingly wondered why No one or I has sent Him a Time out Award. I
> looked on line and found nothing can anyone please let me know of one.
> I could
Mike Morris WA6ILQ wrote:
> And as of today we have 3402 members
>
> Mike WA6ILQ
Wow...pretty impressive!
You guys all deserve a lot of congrats for putting this together and
making it the resource it is!
I remember Kevin making comments about how the list just passed 500,
800, then 1000...my
Paul Holm wrote:
> Reading the replies that mentioned gain specs, I can't help but think of our
> last ham club meeting. An older member persuaded the club to replace the
> VHF repeater antenna with a Diamond X500HNA rather than a DB-224 because the
> Diamond "has 8.3 dB gain".
And even worse
Gary Schafer wrote:
>> Measured on their range-they used to be based in Cleveland, and my
>> father was one of the designers.
>> (anybody here remember the PRO-27JR 27Mhz antenna? Or the original 4BTV?)
>> --
>> Jim Barbour
>> WD8CHL
>>
>
> With all due respect to your father Jim, I think that 4
Jeff DePolo wrote:
> There are a lot of unknown variables here, including, but not limited to the
> size of the ground plane the antennas were mounted on, their heights above
> the ground plane, the method of coupling to the ground plane (direct, mag
> mount, etc.), matching networks' efficiencies
Jeff DePolo wrote:
>> Oh, and 'mag mounts' didn't really exist much then...you
>> either mounted
>> the antenna in a hole, or you didn't have an antenna.
>
> Ah, the gold old days, when men armed with a drill and Greenlee punch
> thought nothing of putting holes in their roofs, fearing not the W
Gary wrote:
> I suggest checking with your local frequency coordination group(s) for
> the bands. Linking in the 440Mhz band is generally not acceptible
> however the 420-430Mhz portion of the amateur 70cm band is used for
> linking in some regions.
> Gary
Unless you live near the CDN border, wher
W8MIA wrote:
> There is one SMALL problem with your Hypothesis. RF is transmitted by
> Electrons. Light is transmitted by Photons. Science has a rather good
> handle on Electrons but Photons are still not fully understood!!!
>
> Apples & Oranges!!
>
> August
> W8MIA
Details, details...
--
Jim
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I see the same thing even in the big cities - Los Angeles, San
> Francisco, Chicago, Seattle, Vancouver B.C., etc. As you tune across
> 2-Meters, 220 and 440 MHz, most Repeaters are quiet, most of the
> time. You can often scan the entire band(s) from a clear location and
In a message dated 2/22/2007 11:40:17 A.M. Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> The number of active ham repeaters in my area is way, way down in
> comparison to levels of 10 years ago. It isn't uncommon to monitor a
> repeater frequency and hear no traffic for weeks. Some club
Ken Harrison wrote:
> Thanks for the recommendation, Don. Though I'm sure a MastrII would
> be a great conversion for 220, we (in the group sense) want to try to
> save some of our money to get a remote base setup going on our
> repeater, too. Our small savings would be wiped out to replace the
Tony L. wrote:
> What manufacturers currently have P25 capable repeaters on the market?
Motorola, M/A-Com, EADS, Daniels, EFJ, Tait, maybe Racal. Several others
are reselling Daniels, maybe other brands.
Also, Raytheon has a P25CC controller that is supposed to add P25 to an
existing base, like
Phil wrote:
> might take a look at a Quantar if you already have one, or even a
> Mastr III can be upgraded (if not already)
Not all of either can be upgraded-only the newer ones. Older Quantars
and MIII's don't have the hardware to accomodate it.
BTW-Kenwood, Icom, Vertex, and Relm are resellin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> For Scott:
>
> With respect to using the GE MII mobile frame for repeater applications:
>
> 1. Can you say categorically that there is sufficient TX/RX shielding to
> prevent any desense at any power level the conversion is capable of
> operating?
At UHF-c
Bob Dengler wrote:
> At 2/23/2007 12:50 PM, you wrote:
>> With respect to using the GE MII mobile frame for repeater applications:
>>
>>> 1. Can you say categorically that there is sufficient TX/RX shielding
>> to prevent any desense at any power level the conversion is capable of
>> operating?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> You laugh, but with the use of Time Division Multiplex it may be
> possible to transmit and receive on the same frequency in different
> time slots. It may not be that far fetched.
>
> 73, Joe, k1ike
Technically, it's not full duplex when you do that. You transmit a
p
skipp025 wrote:
> So would/should we actually call the below problem desense, blocking
> or capture of the repeater receiver?
> s.
>
>> Years ago an upside down repeater in New Mexico on the intertie using
>> PL access would regularly be de-sensed by one in Texas 300 miles away
>> in the spri
skipp025 wrote:
> Re: GM300 Repeater with Harris Duplexer
>
> Depends on which Harris Mobile Duplexer you're using. One version
> is almost plug and play into the ham bands while another is not
> such a great performer when used below say... 452MHz.
>
> Are you using the Black Celwave Flat-pa
Mike Mullarkey wrote:
> They will work but the Motorola SM-50 radio works much better and you don't
> have to modify the VCO.
What Kenwood radios do you need to modify the VCO on to get them to work
on the ham bands? Every Kenwood commercial rig I've played with since
the 705/805 series has gone
James wrote:
> Ok, one more thought here. Does anyone know if MOTOTRBO uses the
> IS-54/IS-136
> standard for TDMA? If so, I have found publicly available information on
> this
> standard which means that it could be put to use in the amateur bands.
>
> James
>
As far as I can tell, it's a
Ken Arck wrote:
> At 07:23 PM 3/1/2007, you wrote:
>> Were about to implement it on a site in Portland and from preliminary
>> testes it looks good.
>
> <---Has a lot of balls, eh?
>
> Ken
Oh, dear...
--
Jim Barbour
WD8CHL
George Henry wrote:
> I think Yahoo has been having hiccups the last couple of days... I
> see quite a few messages on the Yahoogroups site that I never got in
> my email, and other messages have been arriving out of order (replies
> before the originals...)
>
> Very weird.
>
>
> George
>
Rig
Bob M. wrote:
> Thank you for writing to Yahoo! Groups.
>
> I have read your email and understand that you are
> unable to received group messages since Feb. 28. I
> appreciate you contacting us and I'll be glad to
> assist you on this matter.
>
> As you've noticed, we were experiencing som
Tim and Janet wrote:
> Repeater BuilderWhat is the standard spacing for a VHF antenna side
> mounted on rohn 25 tower? I found a page on repeater builder that
> showed 1/4-1/2 wavelength with a null behind the tower. I don't want
> to mount it any further than 4' from the tower but of course I wo
skipp025 wrote:
> Well... to sell radios to Amateurs most mfgrs promise the moon and try
> to build it into the radio. Most hams use radios in locations where
> the excessive gain is desired (ie not on a mountain top). So a user
> outside most metro - busy areas really loves the red hot receiver
Daniel M LePage wrote:
> I have a Micor repeater that I can not get the CTCSS tone through the
> receiver. I can get a good 1Khz tone but when I try and put a CTCSS
> tone through the receiver it is broken up.
> I did not convert this Micor and it will operate as a repeater with out
> a CTCSS t
Stephen Reynolds wrote:
> On the North Fulton ARS Repeater (145.47) in North Atlanta we have
> Fred Flintstone and the End of the Work Day Whistle set for 5PM.
> Problem is the clock on the repeater is 10 minutes early so we all
> leave work early.
> Steve W4CNG
And the problem is?
Kris Kirby wrote:
> On Mon, 5 Mar 2007, Eric Lemmon wrote:
>> talkative. Most of these blabbermouths consider setting the TOT on
>> their own radios as "too restrictive."
>>
>> Every user radio in my commercial fleet has the TOT set for 30 seconds. In
>> my mind, that's more than enough time to
Richard wrote:
> My opinion is that a repeater should be used a lot, that way it's known to
> be reliable in case of emergency use. Plus, as you say, there'll be people
> listening.
hmph-the more a repeater is used, the less likely I am to want to listen
to it...
Who wants a radio tied up all da
Captainlance wrote:
> Anyone have any luck using a 450-470 Micor receiver below 440? I am
> considering using them as link receivers. Or, anyone use a 403-420
> model in 430-440 use? Lance N2HBA
>
Yes-I took one down to 438-something years ago, just to try it. (I just
retuned an existing element
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> This radio is doing LTR Trunking FM Right now .
>
> Steve. KB3FSR
> ** AOL now offers free
> email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at
> http://www.aol.com.
>
Hmmm-I don't think that radio's from around these
skipp025 wrote:
> which seems rather odd because most of the 220-220 Licenses I've
> seen are narrow band acsb type emissions. But I can't see a
> reason why nb fm wouldn't work or be allowed. Certainly be more
> practical in the commercial radio world than the acsb format.
>
> cheers,
> Most times when we hear or read about the term flat audio... our
> attention is normally directed toward the demodulated audio sections
> of the repeater hardware. Or at least our attention should normally
> be directed at the demodulated audio stages.
>
> When you look at the global repeate
Nate Duehr wrote:
> A...
>
> We haven't had a good "What kind of audio is it REALLY" mini-debate on
> the list in quite a while... good to see it again... heh. I agree
> with Bob that people keep mixing the term "flat" with "discriminator"
> and that's just downright confusing to new folks.
Nate Duehr wrote:
> Sure would be nice to see ARRL labs do a shootout of repeater
> controllers with tests like this one... they spend days and days (and
> page after page) testing out $10,000 HF rigs...
And people wonder why I don't join...
If I could afford to blow $10K on an HF pos rig, I wou
Eric Lemmon wrote:
> Nate,
>
> Several years ago, I chastised ARRL Labs for failing to report the basic
> 2-way radio performance parameters of 12dB SINAD sensitivity, voice
> deviation limit, CTCSS deviation limit, and center frequency accuracy. I
> did not get a satisfactory answer, but I suspe
skipp025 wrote:
>> mch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> In the real world, if someone's radio sounds crappy, it needs
>> fixed by someone or the radio will get a (well deserved) reputation
>> as a POS and people need to know to not buy that model.
>
> But an over deviated new radio doesn't sound c
mch wrote:
> 2.5 kHz channel spacing? Where is that used? It's not in the commercial
> USA market. Or did you mean 7.5 kHz?
>
> Joe M.
FWIW-He said channel steps, not spacing.
>> James wrote:
It even does 2.5 KHz channel steps to
>> comply with modern narrow band channel planning
--
Jim B
Jeff DePolo wrote:
>> Real world transmitters always have limiters. Those DO change
>> flatness.
That keeps throwing me. I hear 'limiter' and I go towards the receiver.
A limiter is a low IF amplifier that is biased to go into saturation
with very little input. This clips off amplitude peaks
'nj902' wrote:
Real world transmitters always have limiters. Those DO change
flatness.
>>
>> That keeps throwing me. I hear 'limiter' and I go towards the
>> receiver.
>
>
> Jeff DePolo wrote:
> Actually, it wasn't me that said "Real world transmitters always have
> limiters." I
Fred Flowers wrote:
> Eric,
> I understand all that. Any of them will have the shelf, the TX & RX, &
> system module. Beggars can't be choosers. I can get started with about
> anything.
> Fred
They're not all the same. There have been several different tx and rx
synth modules especially, and t
mch wrote:
> OK. Let me approach this from another angle. What is the deviation on
> your system that is not the standard 5.0 kHz or so (running 16K0F3E)?
>
> Joe M.
>
Deviation has nothing to do with it. He was talking about the minimum
channel step resolution, which is a function of the synth
> Oh, and one last comment, most every Amateur Radio potable is unable
> to do split Tone PL's. One Tone PL for TX and another Tone PL for RX.
> I don't know why that is so. It would just take a little extra code
> writing, but what do we expect, It's Amateur Radio Grade Equipment.
>
>
> Pa
James wrote:
> Yes, thank you Jim .. I did say channel steps not spacing. 2.5 Khz channel
> step
> tends to go with 12.5 KHz channel spacing. 7.5 Khz is a form of ultra narrow
> that I have yet to use for anything.
>
> James
If you do anything in the commercial spectrum from about 150 to 175
Milt wrote:
> Remembering of course that a PURC station was designed for PAGING service...
> If you have ever had to set levels in a paging or fire dispatch system that
> used the very low end tones just above the PL range you know real fast why
> the "flat audio board" was created.
>
> Milt
>
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> BTW, these things need not triple or even double the price of a new radio,
> as some have suggested. An extra pot for CTCSS deviation, decent CTCSS
> decoders, higher IP3 front-end amps & mixer & more front-end filtering
> would probably add $50-$100 to the cost of th
Gareth Bennett wrote:
> Interestingly we replaced the -750 with a Vertex VXR-9000 repeater
> and commissioning tests revealed about 3 dB better sensitivity than
> the 750's for 12dB Sinad.
Hmmm-you might check effective sensitivity with the antenna connected,
etc, and see what you get.
---
Jim Ba
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Question for the gurus: I am tuning up and donating an E.F. Johnson
> CR1100 repeater to the local Ham Club. They have asked me to install
> a talking, chirping, beeping type repeater controller (which they
> have offered to buy). I work with basic "repeater, one each" ty
Ken Arck wrote:
> At 08:25 AM 3/23/2007, you wrote:
>
>> Going back into history... I'm told the original RCA style connector
>> is one of the better early rf connectors. Heathkit used to drive hams
>> crazy with it... but it is/was the better animal.
>
> <---Everyone from Motorola to GE to Marco
Gotta be better then using one of those 'mini' or 'micro' earphone plug
style connectors!
You know where the center pin shorts to the outer contact briefly while
your inserting/removing?
ZAP!
--
Jim Barbour
WD8CHL
Robin Midgett wrote:
> Personally I don't like the RCA connector for power use.
nj902 wrote:
> The Pulsar mobile phone is not a 1969 product, they were produced from
> the late 1970's through the 1980's.
>
That would be a Pulsar II. The first Pulsar goes back to the late 60's,
and was made out of componentry from...I think a Mocom-30 or 35. The one
you're thinking of was
> --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "crackedofn0de" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>> I just interfaced one of these to an Arcom RC210 controller for
>> automatic announcement and broadcast of NOAA warnings in my county.
> If
>> you're interested, see below URL for a photo with the hookup p
skipp025 wrote:
> Re: 2007 IWCE Las Vegas
>
> So the big thing/buzz at the IWCE Las Vegas Convention is narrow
> bandwidth digital uhf radios.
>
> Both Motorola and Icom are trying to drive narrow bandwidth hype...
> both having working 6KHz radios demos.
>
> Nice idea until you pick up a p
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Jim, you may be my last hope. I have an HW-24 talkie and need to change
> the encode/decode tone frequency. Most functions are pretty straight
> forward, but for the life of me I can't remember how to set the tone
> frequency.
>
> If you could enlighten me, I would su
Mike Morris wrote:
> Would either of you two would like to contribute the info to the
> Standard page at www.repeater-builder.com ???
What would you want, Mike? About all I have is the basic op's, pretty
much available anywhere I would think.
And not very repeater-related...
--
Jim Barbour
WD8CH
achowalogen457 wrote:
> Gretings,
>
> I may be showing my inexperience, but has anyone ever used the Midland
> 70-0375c radios to build a repeater. I seem to find this model radio
> fairly common and it can be tuned to the 6m band. I'm just not sure
> that it would be a good choice for a repe
Doug wrote:
> I have just about completed setting up the MSR2000 as per the
> article by K4HAL and WA6ILQ
> and it appears to work just great. I have to interface it to the 7k
> and Doug Hall interface and
> it will be ready to go. All the cabling is done. The only option
> cards left in a
> That would be a Pulsar II. The first Pulsar goes back to the late 60's,
> and was made out of componentry from...I think a Mocom-30 or 35. The one
> you're thinking of was built from a Mocom-70, and the early version of
> that, plus the first one were not synthesized, but "crystal-plex"-two or
1 - 100 of 695 matches
Mail list logo
