Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net

   Home   Help Search  
Pages: [1] 2 Next   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Reverse Burst  (Read 25518 times)
KD9VV
Member

Posts: 26




Ignore
« on: November 19, 2013, 05:22:14 PM »

Been a amateur radio op for years, yet I've always wondered why (Reverse Burst) was never incorporated into repeaters and/or any stand alone amateur Xcvr?

The only reason I can think of is patents by Motorola?

Side note: I've noticed the Baofeng UV5R I recently purchased when used in DCS with "STE" turned on, acts alnost like reverse burst. Very nice for simplex ops.
Logged
K4JJL
Member

Posts: 491




Ignore
« Reply #1 on: November 23, 2013, 08:45:08 PM »

Can't be a patent thing. Both GE and Kenwood commercial radios have it built in, as well.
Logged
N2HBX
Member

Posts: 161




Ignore
« Reply #2 on: November 25, 2013, 07:39:55 PM »

I would venture to guess that most hams outside of the commercial two-way field aren't really familiar with reverse burst and what it does, thus the manufacturers don't see a need to incorporate it into their products.

73,
Larry, N2HBX
Logged
AA4PB
Member

Posts: 12854




Ignore
« Reply #3 on: November 26, 2013, 05:17:40 AM »

Is reverse burst still beneficial now that most decoding is done with solid state rather than mechanical reeds?

Logged
K4JJL
Member

Posts: 491




Ignore
« Reply #4 on: November 26, 2013, 08:02:33 AM »

Is reverse burst still beneficial now that most decoding is done with solid state rather than mechanical reeds?

Most definitely.  The electronic reverse burst signals the squelch to close even before the TX drops.  It will shave off the squelch tail nicely.

I use all commercial radios for both portable, base and repeaters.  All have reverse burst turned on.  No reason not to.  I usually laugh at repeaters with squelch tails.
Logged
KD9VV
Member

Posts: 26




Ignore
« Reply #5 on: November 26, 2013, 09:55:24 AM »

Can't be a patent thing. Both GE and Kenwood commercial radios have it built in, as well.

The operative word being "commercial"

I'm not aware (or convinced) that Kenwood or GE commercial radios are not licensing the rights (be it intellectual or technical) to PL technology from Motorola?

Essentially, I find it archaic that amateur (FM) radio does not incorporate such a wonderful feature as CO squelch IMO is annoying. With DSP technology now in full bloom, it would or should be a easy addition.
Logged
K4JJL
Member

Posts: 491




Ignore
« Reply #6 on: November 26, 2013, 11:33:12 AM »

Can't be a patent thing. Both GE and Kenwood commercial radios have it built in, as well.

The operative word being "commercial"

I'm not aware (or convinced) that Kenwood or GE commercial radios are not licensing the rights (be it intellectual or technical) to PL technology from Motorola?

Essentially, I find it archaic that amateur (FM) radio does not incorporate such a wonderful feature as CO squelch IMO is annoying. With DSP technology now in full bloom, it would or should be a easy addition.

The do use different names, and the technology does vary slightly.  GE's "Channel Guard" uses a 135 deg phase shift and a 160 ms delay in its "Squelch Tail Eliminator" circuit.  Motorola uses 120 deg shift.

Also, the patent for this technology are long expired.  While the name is trademarked, I'm sure the technology is not licensed now, since it's that old.
Logged
KD9VV
Member

Posts: 26




Ignore
« Reply #7 on: November 26, 2013, 01:27:15 PM »


Can't be a patent thing. Both GE and Kenwood commercial radios have it built in, as well.

Also, the patent for this technology are long expired.  While the name is trademarked, I'm sure the technology is not licensed now, since it's that old.
[/quote]

Fair enough..Then can anyone answer my initial question why it is not incorporated into FM amateur radio?
Surely the answer is not cost.
Logged
K4JJL
Member

Posts: 491




Ignore
« Reply #8 on: November 26, 2013, 03:02:24 PM »

Most people who ask me to program their FM radio are completely unaware that it even does CTCSS on the RX.  When I tell them I turned it on, they ask, "What's that supposed to do?"  After explaining that, the next question is, "Why doesn't it squawk when the repeater unkeys anymore?"  After I explain that, they ask, "Can you make it squawk again?  I like it that way."

Based on that, I'd attribute it to low demand.  Hams aren't even using CTCSS squelch, let alone even aware of what reverse burst does.  They actually like the squawks.  These are the same people who have the Chinese handhelds that spout out Engrish whenever a button is pressed.  Soooo annoying...
Logged
AA4HA
Member

Posts: 1451




Ignore
« Reply #9 on: November 26, 2013, 03:17:46 PM »

The only reason I do not use CTCSS on receive is for when I am traveling and run across another repeater on the same frequency but using a different CTCSS tone for access to the repeater input. I can at least listen in.
Logged

Ms. Tisha Hayes, AA4HA
Lookout Mountain, Alabama
K4JJL
Member

Posts: 491




Ignore
« Reply #10 on: November 27, 2013, 05:52:10 AM »

The only reason I do not use CTCSS on receive is for when I am traveling and run across another repeater on the same frequency but using a different CTCSS tone for access to the repeater input. I can at least listen in.

That's the beauty of a monitor button on a Motorola radio (or a hangup box).
Logged
KS4VT
Member

Posts: 141




Ignore
« Reply #11 on: November 28, 2013, 05:11:06 AM »

The only reason I do not use CTCSS on receive is for when I am traveling and run across another repeater on the same frequency but using a different CTCSS tone for access to the repeater input. I can at least listen in.

And not all repeaters transmit CTCSS (PL), so you might see activity with a signal strength meter or LED, but obviously you won't hear squat unless you are in carrier squelch.
Logged
KV4BL
Member

Posts: 76




Ignore
« Reply #12 on: December 10, 2013, 11:19:39 AM »

I'm one of those hams who actually likes the squelch tail at the end of a transmission.  For one thing, it sounds like a real radio did did back in the 60's, when I was first interested in them because of the ht's the local police were just getting.  For another, it sounds better than a lot of those annoying and dorky "courtesy tones" which let you know the other guy has quit transmitting, in case you didn't hear the faint click and were not watching the S-meter on the screen when he un-keyed.  I never understood why people move Heaven and Earth to eliminate the squelch tail from the end of transmissions through a repeater and then replace it with an even more annoying "courtesy" tone. 

Either way, if someone bothers to PL their repeater on the input AND output and leave it that way, rather than letting it blow noise across the air all day or night, endlessly key and un-key, or other signs of sloppy engineering, it is all good IMHO. 

73,

Ray  KV4BL
Logged
WB6DGN
Member

Posts: 619




Ignore
« Reply #13 on: March 24, 2014, 12:22:26 AM »

Quote
I never understood why people move Heaven and Earth to eliminate the squelch tail from the end of transmissions through a repeater and then replace it with an even more annoying "courtesy" tone.

1.  I don't "move heaven and earth to eliminate the squelch tail", I merely check one box in the programming while entering my data.  Hardly a strenuous endeavor.

2.  I have no control over those "dorky" courtesy tones, that's the purview of the repeater owner/trustee, not the individual user however I do agree that they are annoying and useless and more than a little "CBish".

3.  Almost equally annoying to me is that "also dorky" carrier drop out delay that, in the tube days, served a useful purpose but, in today's world of solid state base stations/repeaters no longer serves a useful purpose other than to encourage "kerchunking" endlessly on some repeaters.  That's another relic of a bygone era that needs to go away sooner rather than later.

4.  And, finally, there's voice ID and endless "announcements".  All repeater controllers that are capable of doing those need to be recycled for their precious metal content as soon as possible with NONE of the proceeds going to the repeater club that installed them.

So, there you have MY wish list.  Now, just wait 'till 'they' make me king!

Tom
Logged
NJ1K
Member

Posts: 329




Ignore
« Reply #14 on: March 24, 2014, 04:50:11 AM »

Dorky courtesy tones, hmmm...

Those dorky tones on my system actually have an important purpose.  My repeater is part of a linked system and call routing is done with different PL tones.  The "dorky" courtesy tones indicates from what part of the network the call originated from and to where it is routed.  Change PL tone, your call gets routed to a different path in the network and you get a different "dorky" courtesy tone.

If not for the networked system, I would have no courtesy tone or hang time.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 Next   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!