Re: Why use a purpose built repeater box as a repeater rather than a transmitter, receiver, and controller tied (lashed) together?
And speaking of Skipp... Wherefore art thou, oh Skipp? I hope he isn't having to fight off this dread dis-ease. Maybe he's been whisked off to some undisclosed location with Dick Cheney. Come out,
By
Gary - W6GVS
·
#183889
·
|
EVX-R70 repeater
A friend of mine just got a Vertex Standard EVX-R70 repeater. I've only had my hands on 2 or 3 of these things ever and I can't remember if you use regular MOTOTRBO CPS to program them or what. It
By
tony dinkel <td47@...>
·
#183888
·
|
Re: Why use a purpose built repeater box as a repeater rather than a transmitter, receiver, and controller tied (lashed) together?
That is how I use the term "desense": desensitization of the repeater RX as a result of the repeater TX being activated. Some also refer to this as "self desense". The causes can be many: TX noise, RX
By
Bob Dengler
·
#183887
·
|
Re: Why use a purpose built repeater box as a repeater rather than a transmitter, receiver, and controller tied (lashed) together?
By
Jim Barbour
·
#183886
·
|
Re: Why use a purpose built repeater box as a repeater rather than a transmitter, receiver, and controller tied (lashed) together?
Okay....after reading 97 messages I feel like I'm in a tornado with one side yelling Kenwood is great and Motorola sucks and vice versa. I have gleaned some useful information about dense but I feel
By
steven harvey
·
#183884
·
|
Re: Why use a purpose built repeater box as a repeater rather than a transmitter, receiver, and controller tied (lashed) together?
I¡¯m sorry, but Dino is right. You¡¯ve written: ¡°...I would bet the majority don't know the procedure for measuring desense...¡± ¡° If you put some engineering and common sense into things you
By
Matt Wagner
·
#183883
·
|
Re: MSF TX VCO issue
I also humbly recommend throughly cleaning and applying deoxit to the pins and sockets between the interconnect board and the uniboard, then work the pins in and out of the sockets over and over to
By
Sam Skolfield
·
#183882
·
|
Re: MSF TX VCO issue
Byron- I pulled the mainboard today and took a closer look, found at least 4 caps obviously leaked out. Good call! Caps are on order to do the whole station. Thanks again for the help! TomW9SRV
By
TGundo 2003
·
#183880
·
|
Re: MSF TX VCO issue
Yes... The VHF has a couple different values but all in all bad caps effect both UHF and VHF in a bad way. I have recapped 5 different stations 3 UHF and 2 VHF. I will say the VHF seem to smoke more
By
Bryon Jeffers K0BSJ
·
#183878
·
|
Re: Port-A-Peater M100A Documentation
I think that was the on in a older 73 mag I think. I found on for what I have that way. Have to remember where it is.The ID'er was diode in the article, and on the factory version it is a prom. Could
By
Mike Reed <n7zef@...>
·
#183877
·
|
Re: Help identifying external interference source to our repeater
Wayne, This was my initial thought as well but aside from a device drawing significant power in a repetitive pattern as observed I am not sure how this could be the case. Another possibility, though I
By
Dan Woodie
·
#183875
·
|
Re: Port-A-Peater M100A Documentation
I am fairly certain (85%) I have said documents.? I used to have one of those boards. They were advertised in one of the Ham rags back then, with some basic info and diagrams.? I bought one of their
By
[email protected]
·
#183874
·
|
Re: Help identifying external interference source to our repeater
It sounds just like a good old power line arc. I doubt it is more than a couple of miles away. It could be a tree limb touching the primary. Most likely it'd a defective bell or mushroom insulator. As
By
wa5luy
·
#183873
·
|
Re: Why use a purpose built repeater box as a repeater rather than a transmitter, receiver, and controller tied (lashed) together?
I'm assuming the purpose built box is built for a higher duty cycle... vs mobile rig never intended for a high duty cycle re-purposed into a repeater. Now, that being said... Once you open up some of
By
John Tetreault (WA1OKB)
·
#183872
·
|
Re: Port-A-Peater M100A Documentation
I found these 2 Porta-Peater Instant Repeater ads from 73 Magazine. Spent an hour searching with no success finding the manual. [image: image.png] [image: Porta-Peater 73 Magazine March 1982 page
By
Tony De
·
#183871
·
|
Re: Why use a purpose built repeater box as a repeater rather than a transmitter, receiver, and controller tied (lashed) together?
Skyler Fennell asked: Would anybody happen to have a figure here: What is the typical natural environmental noise floor ( for standard 5KHz deviation FM bandwidth) for the 2 meter band vertically
By
nj902
·
#183870
·
|
Re: Port-A-Peater M100A Documentation
According to their ad, it was VOX or COR. The ad can be seen here: https://worldradiohistory.com/hd2/IDX-Short-Wave/archive-73-idx/idx/80s/73-magazine-11-november-1982-OCR-Page-0141.pdf *Carl ¨C
By
Carl Reitz <n7dog1@...>
·
#183869
·
|
Re: Help identifying external interference source to our repeater
John, On initial listening it sounded like it could be a power line issue causing an arc - but the more I listened you can clearly hear it is data of some type, possibly TDMA data or similar due to
By
Dan Woodie
·
#183868
·
|
Re: Why use a purpose built repeater box as a repeater rather than a transmitter, receiver, and controller tied (lashed) together?
Yikes, take your audio response out to 5khz Bob? Maybe on a link where you are your own customer but in the mobile relay band I think you are pushing it. You guys have no guard band out there in socal
By
tony dinkel <td47@...>
·
#183866
·
|
Re: Why use a purpose built repeater box as a repeater rather than a transmitter, receiver, and controller tied (lashed) together?
What seems to be getting lost in this discussion is that everyone has a different perception of what makes a repeater "excellent", & as such may have a different set of priorities when evaluating the
By
Bob Dengler
·
#183865
·
|