'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters
Created by on 2005-01-06As many hams know, there is a longstanding set of 2m simplex frequency pairs that some repeater coordination groups designate for use as coordinated repeater inputs and outputs instead of simplex.
These "odd-split" pairs use a 1 Mc split instead of the standard 600 kc split. Most coordination groups do not coordinate new 1 Mc split repeaters on 2 meters, but some have grand-fathered existing ones from years past before 600 kc was the norm. Though most don't coordinate new 1 Mc split repeaters, some coordination groups, mainly in CT, NY, NJ and PA will still coordinate new repeaters on these pairs.
There are usually 7 pairs:
- 146.415/147.415
- 146.430/147.430
- 146.445/147.445
- 146.460/147.460
- 146.475/147.475
- 146.490/147.490
- 146.505/147.505
- 146.595/147.595
In areas where a coordination group will not coordinate new machines on these pairs, some trustees have put up uncoordinated repeaters here since there were no 600 kc pairs available in their particular area.
I've heard many people talk about these "odd-split" machines. Some people have no problem with them. Others think that using what are generally accepted as simplex frequencies for odd-split repeaters is ludicrous. I'm just curious what the readers of eHam think!
I personally have no problem with 1 Mc split repeaters on 2 meters as long as they're contained in the commonly accepted pairs for them. Electrically speaking, it's actually more desirable to have a 1 Mc split machine because you get that extra 400 kc of isolation compared to a 600 kc split machine. That extra 400 kc of isolation gives you a little breathing room with your duplexers. There's less of a chance that you'll encounter desensitizing on your duplexers due to such a tight split.
So how about it? What do you think?
73
Shawn, K1VSR
| N1RIK | 2006-05-31 | |
|---|---|---|
| RE: 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| I know a local ham that has a 1 mhz split repeater that's been up for 15 years. Mostly his family uses it, but welcomes others. It's on 147.505 output / 146.505 input with a pl of 131.8 in Sanford, NC. It has about a 20 mile radius of coverage and can be heard into Fayetteville. It's not coordinated, however it doesn't bother anybody. If I went to setup my own personal 2m machine, I'd probably go with an input around 144.4 - 144.5 ish and output around 147.400 - 147.600 so I could use a smaller VHF mobile duplexer to avoid the mega costs of a 2 meter duplexer. Currently I'm looking into getting another 440 MHz repeater right now ~ 73 ~ Bill , n1rik Reply to a comment by : WA6BFH on 2005-01-07 That sounds rather imature. I blew-up and smashed things when I was a kid too. These systems are solid, or should be. They are 'cast in concrete', and should follow a prescribed band-plan that accounts for heterodyn inter-modulation mix frequencies, and all other of the myriad of difficulties that plague mountaintop remote repeating radios. To take any other viewpoint is foolish and simplistic! Think about it this way, would you rather, if forced to, be suspended from a 500 foot high cliff by a thread of string, or a 3/4 inch thick steel cable? Reply to a comment by : WB2WIK on 2005-01-07 My first "amateur" class hand held was an EF Johnson Personal Messenger, crystalled for 10m AM, circa 1966. First "phone" transmitter I ever owned, no suitable 10m antenna, so I made my first several contacts while standing on the roof of my parents' house (a split level!) after climbing out the bedroom window. Not bad. QRZ DX? First "amateur" 2m FM handheld for me was a Wilson 1402, 2W crystal controlled monster which I think cost $300 back in 1973 or so. Golly, that was a lot of money for something I smashed with a hammer to make me feel better a few years later.... WB2WIK/6 Reply to a comment by : N0TONE on 2005-01-07 WA2JJH, even in the days of the S-1, there was a $15 board available from CommSpec that gave you PL and would fit the S-1 just fine. Some DIP switches were exposed on the back of the rig that allowed you to select which PL tone to use. Actually the PL-coded repeaters ended up having the more interesting ops - the ones that were smart enough and resourceful enough to be able to manage to build a PL board and install it. As I wrote before, the downfall really began with the synthesized handheld. The early owners of the S-1, Yaesu's handheld, and the IC-2A were probably the only shack-on-the-belt hams who ever heard a reasonably intellectual QSO on two meters. Just because of this thread, I tried an experiment. I threw together a two meter ground plane, and hoisted it up to 60 feet on one of my masts. I do have a radio, kept just in case it might be handy in the event of an emergency. Had to rejuvenate the batteries (some emergency rig, eh?) but then I did a bunch of scanning. Despite common beliefs, I actually heard far more activity on simplex than repeaters. And some of it was marginally interesting. The guys were all running from home, on real antennas, with 25 to 100 watt rigs. The interesting topics all had to do with how they were using or improving their HF stations for the next contest or DXpedition. Seemed like the bulk of the activity was on 146.46 simplex. Any activity I heard on repeaters were faked-up "emergency preparedness" nets that did nothing to actually prepare for an emergency (they took check-ins but did not acknowledge hearing the stations, therefore the stations didn't even know if they made it into the repeater), or "honey please get some bread". In other words, QSOs better carried out on the cellular system. AM Reply to a comment by : WA2JJH on 2005-01-07 i cannot remember the names of the companies we bought xtal pairs. I think one company was kensco. what ever split cost you 10 bux in xtal. Took up to 3 weeks to get them. Believe it or not, it was like waiting for xmas. One repeater would be the "good" repeater for a few months. Then you had to plunk down another 10bux when that repeater went Pl. Many of the 2M H-TS HAD NO TONE GENERATOR. So it was cheaper to hang out on the next repeater. You could end up spending lots of bux for all the xtals and pls. Those were the good old golden days of 2M? The TEMPO s-1 was the first xtaless radio I had. | ||
| K0PP | 2005-03-26 | |
|---|---|---|
| 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| As a (Montana) frequency coordinator of 25+ years standing, I would NEVER coordinate an odd-split repeater ... but then I can't imagine anyone actually wanting to put one on the air. It would only "chop up" the "normal" pairs that I have available and would likely render (some of) them useless. | ||
| K4JF | 2005-01-19 | |
|---|---|---|
| RE: 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| <Leave the old rigs for APRS and get a DCS/PL dual, triple or quad band unit. I do not care what the separation is just give it Echolink compatibility. > What gives a rig "Echolink compatibility"? I work Echolink just fine on my non-PL non-DCS rigs - what do they have that I/we don't know about? ("old rigs" labeled: TH-22, TM-241A, TS-790A) Reply to a comment by : NJ6F on 2005-01-16 Why not (different splits)? Who said the appointed coordinators have to keep with 600Kc, it is just an old carryover from another era, the duplexers are more expensive as well. The only resistance I can see is hams with old rigs that do not want to update to a quad band handheld VX7 or compatible with DCS as well as normal PL. Idea...If two different repeaters are on, sometimes close enough to be on top of each other, one repeater should go to DCS. Why is DCS not used on repeaters much if at all. Is it the same old excuse...compatibility issue with the old rigs and (stubborn hams)....well get a newer one...they are a dime a dozen out there. That should not be an issue. Leave the old rigs for APRS and get a DCS/PL dual, triple or quad band unit. I do not care what the seperation is just give it Echolink compatibility. I have another parallel issue. Any existing repeater should have a ( use meter installed )for congested areas. What is causing this problem is all of these husband / wife repeater systems where no one else uses them..... I'm on my way home honey....OK dear dinner is ready....what bull. Give the little used husband wife repeaters the odd splits or the boot to 220, or we could use 220 a little more before the government takes it away. In case you are out of touch.... 6 meters is really active FM repeater wise with link systems as well here in San Diego to Bakersfield and Las Vegas. | ||
| K4JF | 2005-01-19 | |
|---|---|---|
| RE: 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| < <I never met an FM radio that couldn't handle a CTCSS encode board. To me that was all part of the fun: adding capability to a radio that it was never intended to have. > That fixes you up. For ONE repeater. Obviously you don't travel much. ----------------------------------------------------- Two years ago I drove to Dayton from SoCal, talking on PL'd repeaters on nearly all of the 4,850 mile trip. Bob ---------------------------------------------------- And they all had the same PL frequency? Pardon me, but I have serious doubts about that one. Reply to a comment by : NO6B on 2005-01-17 <I never met an FM radio that couldn't handle a CTCSS encode board. To me that was all part of the fun: adding capability to a radio that it was never intended to have. > That fixes you up. For ONE repeater. Obviously you don't travel much. ----------------------------------------------------- Two years ago I drove to Dayton from SoCal, talking on PL'd repeaters on nearly all of the 4,850 mile trip. Bob Reply to a comment by : K4JF on 2005-01-15 <I never met an FM radio that couldn't handle a CTCSS encode board. To me that was all part of the fun: adding capability to a radio that it was never intended to have. > That fixes you up. For ONE repeater. Obviously you don't travel much. Reply to a comment by : NO6B on 2005-01-15 ------------------------------------------------------- The 1 meg offset, and odd splits came about because of the crowding of the 2 meter band in ...I'd say....the early '80s. Then PL was required, and then the 70 cm band started filling up with the spillover. Well, I think things should be re-visited. The 2 meter band is no longer jammed with repeaters on every frequency, running autopatch! ------------------------------------------------------- It is here in SoCal. Just replace "autopatch" with "internet links". ------------------------------------------------------ Drop the PL, drop the 1 meg offset, and all would be fine! ------------------------------------------------------ About 90% of the 2 meter repeaters here are CTCSS access. Drop the PL here & we'd have a horrible mess. Drop the odd split & we'd have about 8 repeaters that would need a new home. Doesn't sound like much but believe it or not 2 of them are the two busiest repeaters in SoCal, so the need is there! ------------------------------------------------------ I could use my old IC2AT again!! Our local linked system had the PL crap out this summer. All was well without it...for weeks! Of course, it was hooked back up again! I had a ball while it was off using the old TR22! ------------------------------------------------------ I never met an FM radio that couldn't handle a CTCSS encode board. To me that was all part of the fun: adding capability to a radio that it was never intended to have. Bob NO6B Reply to a comment by : KD2E on 2005-01-10 The 1 meg offset, and odd splits came about because of the crowding of the 2 meter band in ...I'd say....the early '80s. Then PL was required, and then the 70 cm band started filling up with the spillover. Well, I think things should be re-visited. The 2 meter band is no longer jammed with repeaters on every frequency, running autopatch! Drop the PL, drop the 1 meg offset, and all would be fine! I could use my old IC2AT again!! Our local linked system had the PL crap out this summer. All was well without it...for weeks! Of course, it was hooked back up again! I had a ball while it was off using the old TR22! ....Dave | ||
| K3TD | 2005-01-18 | |
|---|---|---|
| RE: 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| This looks like a second generation product. I remember when it first became available in the 1970s - it was a LOT cheaper than buying one of those new "synthesized" rigs! http://www.com-spec.com/te32.htm Reply to a comment by : NO6B on 2005-01-17 <I never met an FM radio that couldn't handle a CTCSS encode board. To me that was all part of the fun: adding capability to a radio that it was never intended to have. > That fixes you up. For ONE repeater. Obviously you don't travel much. ----------------------------------------------------- Two years ago I drove to Dayton from SoCal, talking on PL'd repeaters on nearly all of the 4,850 mile trip. Bob Reply to a comment by : K4JF on 2005-01-15 <I never met an FM radio that couldn't handle a CTCSS encode board. To me that was all part of the fun: adding capability to a radio that it was never intended to have. > That fixes you up. For ONE repeater. Obviously you don't travel much. Reply to a comment by : NO6B on 2005-01-15 ------------------------------------------------------- The 1 meg offset, and odd splits came about because of the crowding of the 2 meter band in ...I'd say....the early '80s. Then PL was required, and then the 70 cm band started filling up with the spillover. Well, I think things should be re-visited. The 2 meter band is no longer jammed with repeaters on every frequency, running autopatch! ------------------------------------------------------- It is here in SoCal. Just replace "autopatch" with "internet links". ------------------------------------------------------ Drop the PL, drop the 1 meg offset, and all would be fine! ------------------------------------------------------ About 90% of the 2 meter repeaters here are CTCSS access. Drop the PL here & we'd have a horrible mess. Drop the odd split & we'd have about 8 repeaters that would need a new home. Doesn't sound like much but believe it or not 2 of them are the two busiest repeaters in SoCal, so the need is there! ------------------------------------------------------ I could use my old IC2AT again!! Our local linked system had the PL crap out this summer. All was well without it...for weeks! Of course, it was hooked back up again! I had a ball while it was off using the old TR22! ------------------------------------------------------ I never met an FM radio that couldn't handle a CTCSS encode board. To me that was all part of the fun: adding capability to a radio that it was never intended to have. Bob NO6B Reply to a comment by : KD2E on 2005-01-10 The 1 meg offset, and odd splits came about because of the crowding of the 2 meter band in ...I'd say....the early '80s. Then PL was required, and then the 70 cm band started filling up with the spillover. Well, I think things should be re-visited. The 2 meter band is no longer jammed with repeaters on every frequency, running autopatch! Drop the PL, drop the 1 meg offset, and all would be fine! I could use my old IC2AT again!! Our local linked system had the PL crap out this summer. All was well without it...for weeks! Of course, it was hooked back up again! I had a ball while it was off using the old TR22! ....Dave | ||
| NO6B | 2005-01-17 | |
|---|---|---|
| RE: 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| <I never met an FM radio that couldn't handle a CTCSS encode board. To me that was all part of the fun: adding capability to a radio that it was never intended to have. > That fixes you up. For ONE repeater. Obviously you don't travel much. ----------------------------------------------------- Two years ago I drove to Dayton from SoCal, talking on PL'd repeaters on nearly all of the 4,850 mile trip. Bob Reply to a comment by : K4JF on 2005-01-15 <I never met an FM radio that couldn't handle a CTCSS encode board. To me that was all part of the fun: adding capability to a radio that it was never intended to have. > That fixes you up. For ONE repeater. Obviously you don't travel much. Reply to a comment by : NO6B on 2005-01-15 ------------------------------------------------------- The 1 meg offset, and odd splits came about because of the crowding of the 2 meter band in ...I'd say....the early '80s. Then PL was required, and then the 70 cm band started filling up with the spillover. Well, I think things should be re-visited. The 2 meter band is no longer jammed with repeaters on every frequency, running autopatch! ------------------------------------------------------- It is here in SoCal. Just replace "autopatch" with "internet links". ------------------------------------------------------ Drop the PL, drop the 1 meg offset, and all would be fine! ------------------------------------------------------ About 90% of the 2 meter repeaters here are CTCSS access. Drop the PL here & we'd have a horrible mess. Drop the odd split & we'd have about 8 repeaters that would need a new home. Doesn't sound like much but believe it or not 2 of them are the two busiest repeaters in SoCal, so the need is there! ------------------------------------------------------ I could use my old IC2AT again!! Our local linked system had the PL crap out this summer. All was well without it...for weeks! Of course, it was hooked back up again! I had a ball while it was off using the old TR22! ------------------------------------------------------ I never met an FM radio that couldn't handle a CTCSS encode board. To me that was all part of the fun: adding capability to a radio that it was never intended to have. Bob NO6B Reply to a comment by : KD2E on 2005-01-10 The 1 meg offset, and odd splits came about because of the crowding of the 2 meter band in ...I'd say....the early '80s. Then PL was required, and then the 70 cm band started filling up with the spillover. Well, I think things should be re-visited. The 2 meter band is no longer jammed with repeaters on every frequency, running autopatch! Drop the PL, drop the 1 meg offset, and all would be fine! I could use my old IC2AT again!! Our local linked system had the PL crap out this summer. All was well without it...for weeks! Of course, it was hooked back up again! I had a ball while it was off using the old TR22! ....Dave | ||
| K4JF | 2005-01-16 | |
|---|---|---|
| RE: 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| <The only resistance I can see is hams with old rigs that do not want to update to a quad band handheld VX7 or compatible with DCS as well as normal PL. Idea...If two different repeaters are on, sometimes close enough to be on top of each other, one repeater should go to DCS. Why is DCS not used on repeaters much if at all. Is it the same old excuse...compatibility issue with the old rigs and (stubborn hams)....well get a newer one...they are a dime a dozen out there.> Maybe on your budget several hundred dollars each is "dime a dozen". I doubt that is true for most hams. Reply to a comment by : NJ6F on 2005-01-16 Why not (different splits)? Who said the appointed coordinators have to keep with 600Kc, it is just an old carryover from another era, the duplexers are more expensive as well. The only resistance I can see is hams with old rigs that do not want to update to a quad band handheld VX7 or compatible with DCS as well as normal PL. Idea...If two different repeaters are on, sometimes close enough to be on top of each other, one repeater should go to DCS. Why is DCS not used on repeaters much if at all. Is it the same old excuse...compatibility issue with the old rigs and (stubborn hams)....well get a newer one...they are a dime a dozen out there. That should not be an issue. Leave the old rigs for APRS and get a DCS/PL dual, triple or quad band unit. I do not care what the seperation is just give it Echolink compatibility. I have another parallel issue. Any existing repeater should have a ( use meter installed )for congested areas. What is causing this problem is all of these husband / wife repeater systems where no one else uses them..... I'm on my way home honey....OK dear dinner is ready....what bull. Give the little used husband wife repeaters the odd splits or the boot to 220, or we could use 220 a little more before the government takes it away. In case you are out of touch.... 6 meters is really active FM repeater wise with link systems as well here in San Diego to Bakersfield and Las Vegas. | ||
| N7MJW | 2005-01-16 | |
|---|---|---|
| RE: 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| Hey NJ6F Good luck man, I said something similar and I've been getting flamed for days. Some of these guys are stuck in least common demoninator thinking, others are just stuck in the past. They dont like PL, they dont like odd splits, they dont like anybodies ideas except their own. They have little grip on reality, and when challanged, your words get twisted into "the problem with amateur radio", your scaring the kids away. HAHAHA! Dave Reply to a comment by : NJ6F on 2005-01-16 Why not (different splits)? Who said the appointed coordinators have to keep with 600Kc, it is just an old carryover from another era, the duplexers are more expensive as well. The only resistance I can see is hams with old rigs that do not want to update to a quad band handheld VX7 or compatible with DCS as well as normal PL. Idea...If two different repeaters are on, sometimes close enough to be on top of each other, one repeater should go to DCS. Why is DCS not used on repeaters much if at all. Is it the same old excuse...compatibility issue with the old rigs and (stubborn hams)....well get a newer one...they are a dime a dozen out there. That should not be an issue. Leave the old rigs for APRS and get a DCS/PL dual, triple or quad band unit. I do not care what the seperation is just give it Echolink compatibility. I have another parallel issue. Any existing repeater should have a ( use meter installed )for congested areas. What is causing this problem is all of these husband / wife repeater systems where no one else uses them..... I'm on my way home honey....OK dear dinner is ready....what bull. Give the little used husband wife repeaters the odd splits or the boot to 220, or we could use 220 a little more before the government takes it away. In case you are out of touch.... 6 meters is really active FM repeater wise with link systems as well here in San Diego to Bakersfield and Las Vegas. | ||
| NJ6F | 2005-01-16 | |
|---|---|---|
| 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| Why not (different splits)? Who said the appointed coordinators have to keep with 600Kc, it is just an old carryover from another era, the duplexers are more expensive as well. The only resistance I can see is hams with old rigs that do not want to update to a quad band handheld VX7 or compatible with DCS as well as normal PL. Idea...If two different repeaters are on, sometimes close enough to be on top of each other, one repeater should go to DCS. Why is DCS not used on repeaters much if at all. Is it the same old excuse...compatibility issue with the old rigs and (stubborn hams)....well get a newer one...they are a dime a dozen out there. That should not be an issue. Leave the old rigs for APRS and get a DCS/PL dual, triple or quad band unit. I do not care what the seperation is just give it Echolink compatibility. I have another parallel issue. Any existing repeater should have a ( use meter installed )for congested areas. What is causing this problem is all of these husband / wife repeater systems where no one else uses them..... I'm on my way home honey....OK dear dinner is ready....what bull. Give the little used husband wife repeaters the odd splits or the boot to 220, or we could use 220 a little more before the government takes it away. In case you are out of touch.... 6 meters is really active FM repeater wise with link systems as well here in San Diego to Bakersfield and Las Vegas. | ||
| K4JF | 2005-01-15 | |
|---|---|---|
| RE: 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| <I never met an FM radio that couldn't handle a CTCSS encode board. To me that was all part of the fun: adding capability to a radio that it was never intended to have. > That fixes you up. For ONE repeater. Obviously you don't travel much. Reply to a comment by : NO6B on 2005-01-15 ------------------------------------------------------- The 1 meg offset, and odd splits came about because of the crowding of the 2 meter band in ...I'd say....the early '80s. Then PL was required, and then the 70 cm band started filling up with the spillover. Well, I think things should be re-visited. The 2 meter band is no longer jammed with repeaters on every frequency, running autopatch! ------------------------------------------------------- It is here in SoCal. Just replace "autopatch" with "internet links". ------------------------------------------------------ Drop the PL, drop the 1 meg offset, and all would be fine! ------------------------------------------------------ About 90% of the 2 meter repeaters here are CTCSS access. Drop the PL here & we'd have a horrible mess. Drop the odd split & we'd have about 8 repeaters that would need a new home. Doesn't sound like much but believe it or not 2 of them are the two busiest repeaters in SoCal, so the need is there! ------------------------------------------------------ I could use my old IC2AT again!! Our local linked system had the PL crap out this summer. All was well without it...for weeks! Of course, it was hooked back up again! I had a ball while it was off using the old TR22! ------------------------------------------------------ I never met an FM radio that couldn't handle a CTCSS encode board. To me that was all part of the fun: adding capability to a radio that it was never intended to have. Bob NO6B Reply to a comment by : KD2E on 2005-01-10 The 1 meg offset, and odd splits came about because of the crowding of the 2 meter band in ...I'd say....the early '80s. Then PL was required, and then the 70 cm band started filling up with the spillover. Well, I think things should be re-visited. The 2 meter band is no longer jammed with repeaters on every frequency, running autopatch! Drop the PL, drop the 1 meg offset, and all would be fine! I could use my old IC2AT again!! Our local linked system had the PL crap out this summer. All was well without it...for weeks! Of course, it was hooked back up again! I had a ball while it was off using the old TR22! ....Dave | ||
| K4JF | 2005-01-15 | |
|---|---|---|
| RE: 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| <About 90% of the 2 meter repeaters here are CTCSS access. Drop the PL here & we'd have a horrible mess.> Then you have too many repeaters in one area. Reply to a comment by : NO6B on 2005-01-15 ------------------------------------------------------- The 1 meg offset, and odd splits came about because of the crowding of the 2 meter band in ...I'd say....the early '80s. Then PL was required, and then the 70 cm band started filling up with the spillover. Well, I think things should be re-visited. The 2 meter band is no longer jammed with repeaters on every frequency, running autopatch! ------------------------------------------------------- It is here in SoCal. Just replace "autopatch" with "internet links". ------------------------------------------------------ Drop the PL, drop the 1 meg offset, and all would be fine! ------------------------------------------------------ About 90% of the 2 meter repeaters here are CTCSS access. Drop the PL here & we'd have a horrible mess. Drop the odd split & we'd have about 8 repeaters that would need a new home. Doesn't sound like much but believe it or not 2 of them are the two busiest repeaters in SoCal, so the need is there! ------------------------------------------------------ I could use my old IC2AT again!! Our local linked system had the PL crap out this summer. All was well without it...for weeks! Of course, it was hooked back up again! I had a ball while it was off using the old TR22! ------------------------------------------------------ I never met an FM radio that couldn't handle a CTCSS encode board. To me that was all part of the fun: adding capability to a radio that it was never intended to have. Bob NO6B Reply to a comment by : KD2E on 2005-01-10 The 1 meg offset, and odd splits came about because of the crowding of the 2 meter band in ...I'd say....the early '80s. Then PL was required, and then the 70 cm band started filling up with the spillover. Well, I think things should be re-visited. The 2 meter band is no longer jammed with repeaters on every frequency, running autopatch! Drop the PL, drop the 1 meg offset, and all would be fine! I could use my old IC2AT again!! Our local linked system had the PL crap out this summer. All was well without it...for weeks! Of course, it was hooked back up again! I had a ball while it was off using the old TR22! ....Dave | ||
| NO6B | 2005-01-15 | |
|---|---|---|
| RE: 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| ------------------------------------------------------- The 1 meg offset, and odd splits came about because of the crowding of the 2 meter band in ...I'd say....the early '80s. Then PL was required, and then the 70 cm band started filling up with the spillover. Well, I think things should be re-visited. The 2 meter band is no longer jammed with repeaters on every frequency, running autopatch! ------------------------------------------------------- It is here in SoCal. Just replace "autopatch" with "internet links". ------------------------------------------------------ Drop the PL, drop the 1 meg offset, and all would be fine! ------------------------------------------------------ About 90% of the 2 meter repeaters here are CTCSS access. Drop the PL here & we'd have a horrible mess. Drop the odd split & we'd have about 8 repeaters that would need a new home. Doesn't sound like much but believe it or not 2 of them are the two busiest repeaters in SoCal, so the need is there! ------------------------------------------------------ I could use my old IC2AT again!! Our local linked system had the PL crap out this summer. All was well without it...for weeks! Of course, it was hooked back up again! I had a ball while it was off using the old TR22! ------------------------------------------------------ I never met an FM radio that couldn't handle a CTCSS encode board. To me that was all part of the fun: adding capability to a radio that it was never intended to have. Bob NO6B Reply to a comment by : KD2E on 2005-01-10 The 1 meg offset, and odd splits came about because of the crowding of the 2 meter band in ...I'd say....the early '80s. Then PL was required, and then the 70 cm band started filling up with the spillover. Well, I think things should be re-visited. The 2 meter band is no longer jammed with repeaters on every frequency, running autopatch! Drop the PL, drop the 1 meg offset, and all would be fine! I could use my old IC2AT again!! Our local linked system had the PL crap out this summer. All was well without it...for weeks! Of course, it was hooked back up again! I had a ball while it was off using the old TR22! ....Dave | ||
| K4JF | 2005-01-14 | |
|---|---|---|
| RE: 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| <Things are always changing with time and and so should Amateur radio.> I agree - and I've had great fun watching it change. And change it has, greatly. Some things for the better, some not. Just like the rest of the world. Reply to a comment by : WA2JJH on 2005-01-13 ok.ABOUT PEOPLE CHANGING. 1)only g-d can decide if that change is good, and not just another persons perception. My organic chemistry teacher told use about the NOBLE PRIZE WINNER; LINUS PAULING. No DR PAULINGS claim to fame was that we really need 2000mgs of vitimin C every day. His prize was the discover of sp1,sp2 sp3 hybridisation of atomic orbitals. This was about as revolutionary as E=mc^2. However DR PAULING said that our technology is getting to fast for our evolution. Everyday we are fighting a 30,000 year old cave man with the same limbic system in their brains as ours. LORENTZ the scientist/philosopher wrote much about inane aggression and social darwinism. Rather odd bifercation from the topic of 2m splits | ||
| WA2JJH | 2005-01-13 | |
|---|---|---|
| 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| ok.ABOUT PEOPLE CHANGING. 1)only g-d can decide if that change is good, and not just another persons perception. My organic chemistry teacher told use about the NOBLE PRIZE WINNER; LINUS PAULING. No DR PAULINGS claim to fame was that we really need 2000mgs of vitimin C every day. His prize was the discover of sp1,sp2 sp3 hybridisation of atomic orbitals. This was about as revolutionary as E=mc^2. However DR PAULING said that our technology is getting to fast for our evolution. Everyday we are fighting a 30,000 year old cave man with the same limbic system in their brains as ours. LORENTZ the scientist/philosopher wrote much about inane aggression and social darwinism. Rather odd bifercation from the topic of 2m splits | ||
| K4JF | 2005-01-12 | |
|---|---|---|
| RE: 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| No matter what the education some will not change 73 Actually I was referring to human nature - which has no relationship to education. In other words, people have always responded positively to positive approaches, and vice-versa. And always will. (And yes, there are exceptions, and always will be!!) Reply to a comment by : KF4VGX on 2005-01-10 quote ; ATTITUDE of 30 years ago. I believe that is not an outmoded concept. We are still dealing with human beings, who haven't changed in 30 years and won't in the next 300. ..................... I do agree with you ! No matter what the education some will not change 73 Reply to a comment by : K4JF on 2005-01-10 "I agree with most of JF's post ,I just think we need to keep our eyes open to new possibilities other than 30 year ago training. Things are always changing with time and and so should Amateur radio. " Can't disagree with that, except I was not talking about the training of 30 years ago. I was talking about the "welcome and help the newcomer" ATTITUDE of 30 years ago. I believe that is not an outmoded concept. We are still dealing with human beings, who haven't changed in 30 years and won't in the next 300. Reply to a comment by : KF4VGX on 2005-01-10 WA6BFH on January 10, 2005 JF, Don't worry about him, he obviously does not know how receivers work. Thank god he is not managing my site! ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, I'm the proud owner of two repeaters and use the 600 split. Perhaps I should have been more clearer in my post. I agree with most of JF's post ,I just think we need to keep our eyes open to new possibilities other than 30 year ago training. Things are always changing with time and and so should Amateur radio. no disrespect intended . Reply to a comment by : WA6BFH on 2005-01-10 JF, Don't worry about him, he obviously does not know how receivers work. Thank god he is not managing my site! Reply to a comment by : KF4VGX on 2005-01-09 I'd much rather say: "Here is how it is done, and this is why." That's the way I was taught, 30+ years ago. Why is it such a problem today? ............................ Today is not 30+ years ago. its TODAY ! Reply to a comment by : K4JF on 2005-01-09 "1: The first is partly address by my comment above, the people who manufacture radios for the ham consumer market make them with 600KC automatic splits. It appears, some of us, are willing to let manufactures of consumer electronics establish the technical parameters of our "systems". " You have that one backwards. The equipment is built with 600 offsets bvecause that is the standard we hams established and, years later, they programmed their equipment to match. The first years (I was there) there was no standard, and crystals had to be specifically ordered. Same as with the SSB standards. Hams established LSB below 10 MHz and USB above, and years later equipment manufacturers complied. Now with the facts established, here is an opinion: Teach people. Don't deride them because they don't know. Why do you think so many newcomers leave? Many have said because of the attitude seen that "If you don't know, then just go away." I'd much rather say: "Here is how it is done, and this is why." That's the way I was taught, 30+ years ago. Why is it such a problem today? Reply to a comment by : N7MJW on 2005-01-09 K4JF: This one is for you. >"THAT is the kind of attitude that is seriously damaging amateur radio today." I disagree. THAT is the kind of attitude that says we expect a certain fundemental basic competency in our people. How tolerant of ignorance should be become, that licensed people cannot program their own equipment??? Many people are lazy, and they wont learn to do certain things because it is not required of them. So as I read this there are THREE issues here: 1: The first is partly address by my comment above, the people who manufacture radios for the ham consumer market make them with 600KC automatic splits. It appears, some of us, are willing to let manufactures of consumer electronics establish the technical parameters of our "systems". 2: There is little room on the 2 meter band for attitional repeaters, or simplex operations. The narrow splits allow more to be packed in. Not sure I really buy this. Since 1995 commercial equipment had to be "narrow" band to be type accepted, that is it would work in a 11.2K channel compared to a 20K channel. After 2008 you wont be able to buy a radio that works in a 20K channel. Our neighbors in the bands just above us are dealing with their congestion. My point is simply we can deal with the overcrowding issue in more progressive ways. 3. The third issue is it is inconsistant with Coordination. Coordination is a interference issue. If these repeaters arent interfering, then whats the problem??? Everybody knows there are repeaters on 147.415. SO WHAT?? This is totally what we make of it. We can decide as a group to coordiante differently, but if the repeater isnt causing interference then there is little a coordiantor can, or should be able to do about it. Remember folks, this is a hobby, something you do on your spare time. Dont try to make everything and everybody fit into YOUR sandbox. Damaging amateur radio??? I dont think so. What is damaging amateur radio are hams with their head in the sand, who take themselves too seriously, and are afraid to pull their head out long enough to consider other options. Reply to a comment by : K4JF on 2005-01-09 "As for you guys who are having trouble programming your radio to an odd split... gosh I'm sorry, too bad for you. I guess appliance operators rule." THAT is the kind of attitude that is seriously damaging amateur radio today. Whatever happened to hams helping and actually working WITH each other?? I'm glad ARRL has instituted the Elmer rcognition - such people are extremely rare these days and deserve commendation. Reply to a comment by : N7MJW on 2005-01-08 Its kind of NO BIG DEAL about odd splits. Personally, I think its kind of silly we do 600KC on 2 meters, and even sillier we do 500KC on 6 meters. Seems to me we are making things harder to deal with. To do the narrow split, you need a bigger, more expensive duplexer, and need to keep higher technical tolerances. Lets get to reality, MOST ham repeaters I've seen are using a hand me down duplexer from commercial VHF service, that has been tuned outside of its range to the 2 meter band. The same is true of the repeater usually... there wernt many low split MASTR IIs out there but lots of mid or high split ones. The point is, any help these things can get will make them work better. Lets get to another reality, how many of these things to we really think are tuned with a spectrum analizer/tracking generator... I thought so, more like a watt meter right? How many of these things get yearly PM? So you think your going to get some happy site owner to let you have room for your repeater, and the big set of duplexers... or two antennas on his tower??? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! And all that for free. Get real. I manage 5 radio sites, all very desirable locations at very high altitude. I have so much room both on the racks and on the tower. Generally I dont let hams in, but where I have space is a huge issue (the other is security and accountability). I'd much rather they have a small duplexer than a big one. Needless to say, we dont have any 6 meter repeaters around. My repeater is on a 2 meg split. Its toned, fits in a small suitcase, and runs on batteries. Cant do that with a "standard" split. As for you guys who are having trouble programming your radio to an odd split... gosh I'm sorry, too bad for you. I guess appliance operators rule. | ||
| KD2E | 2005-01-10 | |
|---|---|---|
| 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| The 1 meg offset, and odd splits came about because of the crowding of the 2 meter band in ...I'd say....the early '80s. Then PL was required, and then the 70 cm band started filling up with the spillover. Well, I think things should be re-visited. The 2 meter band is no longer jammed with repeaters on every frequency, running autopatch! Drop the PL, drop the 1 meg offset, and all would be fine! I could use my old IC2AT again!! Our local linked system had the PL crap out this summer. All was well without it...for weeks! Of course, it was hooked back up again! I had a ball while it was off using the old TR22! ....Dave | ||
| KF4VGX | 2005-01-10 | |
|---|---|---|
| RE: 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| quote ; ATTITUDE of 30 years ago. I believe that is not an outmoded concept. We are still dealing with human beings, who haven't changed in 30 years and won't in the next 300. ..................... I do agree with you ! No matter what the education some will not change 73 Reply to a comment by : K4JF on 2005-01-10 "I agree with most of JF's post ,I just think we need to keep our eyes open to new possibilities other than 30 year ago training. Things are always changing with time and and so should Amateur radio. " Can't disagree with that, except I was not talking about the training of 30 years ago. I was talking about the "welcome and help the newcomer" ATTITUDE of 30 years ago. I believe that is not an outmoded concept. We are still dealing with human beings, who haven't changed in 30 years and won't in the next 300. Reply to a comment by : KF4VGX on 2005-01-10 WA6BFH on January 10, 2005 JF, Don't worry about him, he obviously does not know how receivers work. Thank god he is not managing my site! ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, I'm the proud owner of two repeaters and use the 600 split. Perhaps I should have been more clearer in my post. I agree with most of JF's post ,I just think we need to keep our eyes open to new possibilities other than 30 year ago training. Things are always changing with time and and so should Amateur radio. no disrespect intended . Reply to a comment by : WA6BFH on 2005-01-10 JF, Don't worry about him, he obviously does not know how receivers work. Thank god he is not managing my site! Reply to a comment by : KF4VGX on 2005-01-09 I'd much rather say: "Here is how it is done, and this is why." That's the way I was taught, 30+ years ago. Why is it such a problem today? ............................ Today is not 30+ years ago. its TODAY ! Reply to a comment by : K4JF on 2005-01-09 "1: The first is partly address by my comment above, the people who manufacture radios for the ham consumer market make them with 600KC automatic splits. It appears, some of us, are willing to let manufactures of consumer electronics establish the technical parameters of our "systems". " You have that one backwards. The equipment is built with 600 offsets bvecause that is the standard we hams established and, years later, they programmed their equipment to match. The first years (I was there) there was no standard, and crystals had to be specifically ordered. Same as with the SSB standards. Hams established LSB below 10 MHz and USB above, and years later equipment manufacturers complied. Now with the facts established, here is an opinion: Teach people. Don't deride them because they don't know. Why do you think so many newcomers leave? Many have said because of the attitude seen that "If you don't know, then just go away." I'd much rather say: "Here is how it is done, and this is why." That's the way I was taught, 30+ years ago. Why is it such a problem today? Reply to a comment by : N7MJW on 2005-01-09 K4JF: This one is for you. >"THAT is the kind of attitude that is seriously damaging amateur radio today." I disagree. THAT is the kind of attitude that says we expect a certain fundemental basic competency in our people. How tolerant of ignorance should be become, that licensed people cannot program their own equipment??? Many people are lazy, and they wont learn to do certain things because it is not required of them. So as I read this there are THREE issues here: 1: The first is partly address by my comment above, the people who manufacture radios for the ham consumer market make them with 600KC automatic splits. It appears, some of us, are willing to let manufactures of consumer electronics establish the technical parameters of our "systems". 2: There is little room on the 2 meter band for attitional repeaters, or simplex operations. The narrow splits allow more to be packed in. Not sure I really buy this. Since 1995 commercial equipment had to be "narrow" band to be type accepted, that is it would work in a 11.2K channel compared to a 20K channel. After 2008 you wont be able to buy a radio that works in a 20K channel. Our neighbors in the bands just above us are dealing with their congestion. My point is simply we can deal with the overcrowding issue in more progressive ways. 3. The third issue is it is inconsistant with Coordination. Coordination is a interference issue. If these repeaters arent interfering, then whats the problem??? Everybody knows there are repeaters on 147.415. SO WHAT?? This is totally what we make of it. We can decide as a group to coordiante differently, but if the repeater isnt causing interference then there is little a coordiantor can, or should be able to do about it. Remember folks, this is a hobby, something you do on your spare time. Dont try to make everything and everybody fit into YOUR sandbox. Damaging amateur radio??? I dont think so. What is damaging amateur radio are hams with their head in the sand, who take themselves too seriously, and are afraid to pull their head out long enough to consider other options. Reply to a comment by : K4JF on 2005-01-09 "As for you guys who are having trouble programming your radio to an odd split... gosh I'm sorry, too bad for you. I guess appliance operators rule." THAT is the kind of attitude that is seriously damaging amateur radio today. Whatever happened to hams helping and actually working WITH each other?? I'm glad ARRL has instituted the Elmer rcognition - such people are extremely rare these days and deserve commendation. Reply to a comment by : N7MJW on 2005-01-08 Its kind of NO BIG DEAL about odd splits. Personally, I think its kind of silly we do 600KC on 2 meters, and even sillier we do 500KC on 6 meters. Seems to me we are making things harder to deal with. To do the narrow split, you need a bigger, more expensive duplexer, and need to keep higher technical tolerances. Lets get to reality, MOST ham repeaters I've seen are using a hand me down duplexer from commercial VHF service, that has been tuned outside of its range to the 2 meter band. The same is true of the repeater usually... there wernt many low split MASTR IIs out there but lots of mid or high split ones. The point is, any help these things can get will make them work better. Lets get to another reality, how many of these things to we really think are tuned with a spectrum analizer/tracking generator... I thought so, more like a watt meter right? How many of these things get yearly PM? So you think your going to get some happy site owner to let you have room for your repeater, and the big set of duplexers... or two antennas on his tower??? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! And all that for free. Get real. I manage 5 radio sites, all very desirable locations at very high altitude. I have so much room both on the racks and on the tower. Generally I dont let hams in, but where I have space is a huge issue (the other is security and accountability). I'd much rather they have a small duplexer than a big one. Needless to say, we dont have any 6 meter repeaters around. My repeater is on a 2 meg split. Its toned, fits in a small suitcase, and runs on batteries. Cant do that with a "standard" split. As for you guys who are having trouble programming your radio to an odd split... gosh I'm sorry, too bad for you. I guess appliance operators rule. | ||
| KE4SKY | 2005-01-10 | |
|---|---|---|
| RE: 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| Agree with you on the use of 220. I mentioned it in my comment, but it's hard to find amongst the others. In most areas the SNPs are seldom if ever used, especially on UHF. Groups who want repeaters should use them with appropriate DCS or CTCSS access control and quit their whining. Reply to a comment by : N0FPE on 2005-01-06 This would not bother me a bit. What does bother me is after reading all the posts on this topic I failed to see one person make a comment on the use of 220mhz!! If all the 2 meter pairs are used why not try a 220 repeater?? UHF is just about full in most places also but 200 is a wasteland in most areas, unless you get close to a large city. Just me thinking outloud.... Dan/NØFPE | ||
| K4JF | 2005-01-10 | |
|---|---|---|
| RE: 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| "I agree with most of JF's post ,I just think we need to keep our eyes open to new possibilities other than 30 year ago training. Things are always changing with time and and so should Amateur radio. " Can't disagree with that, except I was not talking about the training of 30 years ago. I was talking about the "welcome and help the newcomer" ATTITUDE of 30 years ago. I believe that is not an outmoded concept. We are still dealing with human beings, who haven't changed in 30 years and won't in the next 300. Reply to a comment by : KF4VGX on 2005-01-10 WA6BFH on January 10, 2005 JF, Don't worry about him, he obviously does not know how receivers work. Thank god he is not managing my site! ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, I'm the proud owner of two repeaters and use the 600 split. Perhaps I should have been more clearer in my post. I agree with most of JF's post ,I just think we need to keep our eyes open to new possibilities other than 30 year ago training. Things are always changing with time and and so should Amateur radio. no disrespect intended . Reply to a comment by : WA6BFH on 2005-01-10 JF, Don't worry about him, he obviously does not know how receivers work. Thank god he is not managing my site! Reply to a comment by : KF4VGX on 2005-01-09 I'd much rather say: "Here is how it is done, and this is why." That's the way I was taught, 30+ years ago. Why is it such a problem today? ............................ Today is not 30+ years ago. its TODAY ! Reply to a comment by : K4JF on 2005-01-09 "1: The first is partly address by my comment above, the people who manufacture radios for the ham consumer market make them with 600KC automatic splits. It appears, some of us, are willing to let manufactures of consumer electronics establish the technical parameters of our "systems". " You have that one backwards. The equipment is built with 600 offsets bvecause that is the standard we hams established and, years later, they programmed their equipment to match. The first years (I was there) there was no standard, and crystals had to be specifically ordered. Same as with the SSB standards. Hams established LSB below 10 MHz and USB above, and years later equipment manufacturers complied. Now with the facts established, here is an opinion: Teach people. Don't deride them because they don't know. Why do you think so many newcomers leave? Many have said because of the attitude seen that "If you don't know, then just go away." I'd much rather say: "Here is how it is done, and this is why." That's the way I was taught, 30+ years ago. Why is it such a problem today? Reply to a comment by : N7MJW on 2005-01-09 K4JF: This one is for you. >"THAT is the kind of attitude that is seriously damaging amateur radio today." I disagree. THAT is the kind of attitude that says we expect a certain fundemental basic competency in our people. How tolerant of ignorance should be become, that licensed people cannot program their own equipment??? Many people are lazy, and they wont learn to do certain things because it is not required of them. So as I read this there are THREE issues here: 1: The first is partly address by my comment above, the people who manufacture radios for the ham consumer market make them with 600KC automatic splits. It appears, some of us, are willing to let manufactures of consumer electronics establish the technical parameters of our "systems". 2: There is little room on the 2 meter band for attitional repeaters, or simplex operations. The narrow splits allow more to be packed in. Not sure I really buy this. Since 1995 commercial equipment had to be "narrow" band to be type accepted, that is it would work in a 11.2K channel compared to a 20K channel. After 2008 you wont be able to buy a radio that works in a 20K channel. Our neighbors in the bands just above us are dealing with their congestion. My point is simply we can deal with the overcrowding issue in more progressive ways. 3. The third issue is it is inconsistant with Coordination. Coordination is a interference issue. If these repeaters arent interfering, then whats the problem??? Everybody knows there are repeaters on 147.415. SO WHAT?? This is totally what we make of it. We can decide as a group to coordiante differently, but if the repeater isnt causing interference then there is little a coordiantor can, or should be able to do about it. Remember folks, this is a hobby, something you do on your spare time. Dont try to make everything and everybody fit into YOUR sandbox. Damaging amateur radio??? I dont think so. What is damaging amateur radio are hams with their head in the sand, who take themselves too seriously, and are afraid to pull their head out long enough to consider other options. Reply to a comment by : K4JF on 2005-01-09 "As for you guys who are having trouble programming your radio to an odd split... gosh I'm sorry, too bad for you. I guess appliance operators rule." THAT is the kind of attitude that is seriously damaging amateur radio today. Whatever happened to hams helping and actually working WITH each other?? I'm glad ARRL has instituted the Elmer rcognition - such people are extremely rare these days and deserve commendation. Reply to a comment by : N7MJW on 2005-01-08 Its kind of NO BIG DEAL about odd splits. Personally, I think its kind of silly we do 600KC on 2 meters, and even sillier we do 500KC on 6 meters. Seems to me we are making things harder to deal with. To do the narrow split, you need a bigger, more expensive duplexer, and need to keep higher technical tolerances. Lets get to reality, MOST ham repeaters I've seen are using a hand me down duplexer from commercial VHF service, that has been tuned outside of its range to the 2 meter band. The same is true of the repeater usually... there wernt many low split MASTR IIs out there but lots of mid or high split ones. The point is, any help these things can get will make them work better. Lets get to another reality, how many of these things to we really think are tuned with a spectrum analizer/tracking generator... I thought so, more like a watt meter right? How many of these things get yearly PM? So you think your going to get some happy site owner to let you have room for your repeater, and the big set of duplexers... or two antennas on his tower??? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! And all that for free. Get real. I manage 5 radio sites, all very desirable locations at very high altitude. I have so much room both on the racks and on the tower. Generally I dont let hams in, but where I have space is a huge issue (the other is security and accountability). I'd much rather they have a small duplexer than a big one. Needless to say, we dont have any 6 meter repeaters around. My repeater is on a 2 meg split. Its toned, fits in a small suitcase, and runs on batteries. Cant do that with a "standard" split. As for you guys who are having trouble programming your radio to an odd split... gosh I'm sorry, too bad for you. I guess appliance operators rule. | ||
| K4JF | 2005-01-10 | |
|---|---|---|
| RE: 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| "Today is not 30+ years ago. its TODAY ! " SO? Completely irrelevant to the subject and not a very intelligent statement. People do not learn in any different way today than yesterday. My point was, that one should be open and accepting to newcomers today, and help them, just as they were when we came along. If one considers that an outmoded concept, then one has more serious mental problems than can be addressed in this forum. Remember this self-evident truth: Newer is not better. It's just newer. Newer is not worse. It's just newer. That which is newer must be judged on its merits, not on its chronology. Repeat the above, substituting "older". Reply to a comment by : KF4VGX on 2005-01-09 I'd much rather say: "Here is how it is done, and this is why." That's the way I was taught, 30+ years ago. Why is it such a problem today? ............................ Today is not 30+ years ago. its TODAY ! Reply to a comment by : K4JF on 2005-01-09 "1: The first is partly address by my comment above, the people who manufacture radios for the ham consumer market make them with 600KC automatic splits. It appears, some of us, are willing to let manufactures of consumer electronics establish the technical parameters of our "systems". " You have that one backwards. The equipment is built with 600 offsets bvecause that is the standard we hams established and, years later, they programmed their equipment to match. The first years (I was there) there was no standard, and crystals had to be specifically ordered. Same as with the SSB standards. Hams established LSB below 10 MHz and USB above, and years later equipment manufacturers complied. Now with the facts established, here is an opinion: Teach people. Don't deride them because they don't know. Why do you think so many newcomers leave? Many have said because of the attitude seen that "If you don't know, then just go away." I'd much rather say: "Here is how it is done, and this is why." That's the way I was taught, 30+ years ago. Why is it such a problem today? Reply to a comment by : N7MJW on 2005-01-09 K4JF: This one is for you. >"THAT is the kind of attitude that is seriously damaging amateur radio today." I disagree. THAT is the kind of attitude that says we expect a certain fundemental basic competency in our people. How tolerant of ignorance should be become, that licensed people cannot program their own equipment??? Many people are lazy, and they wont learn to do certain things because it is not required of them. So as I read this there are THREE issues here: 1: The first is partly address by my comment above, the people who manufacture radios for the ham consumer market make them with 600KC automatic splits. It appears, some of us, are willing to let manufactures of consumer electronics establish the technical parameters of our "systems". 2: There is little room on the 2 meter band for attitional repeaters, or simplex operations. The narrow splits allow more to be packed in. Not sure I really buy this. Since 1995 commercial equipment had to be "narrow" band to be type accepted, that is it would work in a 11.2K channel compared to a 20K channel. After 2008 you wont be able to buy a radio that works in a 20K channel. Our neighbors in the bands just above us are dealing with their congestion. My point is simply we can deal with the overcrowding issue in more progressive ways. 3. The third issue is it is inconsistant with Coordination. Coordination is a interference issue. If these repeaters arent interfering, then whats the problem??? Everybody knows there are repeaters on 147.415. SO WHAT?? This is totally what we make of it. We can decide as a group to coordiante differently, but if the repeater isnt causing interference then there is little a coordiantor can, or should be able to do about it. Remember folks, this is a hobby, something you do on your spare time. Dont try to make everything and everybody fit into YOUR sandbox. Damaging amateur radio??? I dont think so. What is damaging amateur radio are hams with their head in the sand, who take themselves too seriously, and are afraid to pull their head out long enough to consider other options. Reply to a comment by : K4JF on 2005-01-09 "As for you guys who are having trouble programming your radio to an odd split... gosh I'm sorry, too bad for you. I guess appliance operators rule." THAT is the kind of attitude that is seriously damaging amateur radio today. Whatever happened to hams helping and actually working WITH each other?? I'm glad ARRL has instituted the Elmer rcognition - such people are extremely rare these days and deserve commendation. Reply to a comment by : N7MJW on 2005-01-08 Its kind of NO BIG DEAL about odd splits. Personally, I think its kind of silly we do 600KC on 2 meters, and even sillier we do 500KC on 6 meters. Seems to me we are making things harder to deal with. To do the narrow split, you need a bigger, more expensive duplexer, and need to keep higher technical tolerances. Lets get to reality, MOST ham repeaters I've seen are using a hand me down duplexer from commercial VHF service, that has been tuned outside of its range to the 2 meter band. The same is true of the repeater usually... there wernt many low split MASTR IIs out there but lots of mid or high split ones. The point is, any help these things can get will make them work better. Lets get to another reality, how many of these things to we really think are tuned with a spectrum analizer/tracking generator... I thought so, more like a watt meter right? How many of these things get yearly PM? So you think your going to get some happy site owner to let you have room for your repeater, and the big set of duplexers... or two antennas on his tower??? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! And all that for free. Get real. I manage 5 radio sites, all very desirable locations at very high altitude. I have so much room both on the racks and on the tower. Generally I dont let hams in, but where I have space is a huge issue (the other is security and accountability). I'd much rather they have a small duplexer than a big one. Needless to say, we dont have any 6 meter repeaters around. My repeater is on a 2 meg split. Its toned, fits in a small suitcase, and runs on batteries. Cant do that with a "standard" split. As for you guys who are having trouble programming your radio to an odd split... gosh I'm sorry, too bad for you. I guess appliance operators rule. | ||
| KF4VGX | 2005-01-10 | |
|---|---|---|
| RE: 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| WA6BFH on January 10, 2005 JF, Don't worry about him, he obviously does not know how receivers work. Thank god he is not managing my site! ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, I'm the proud owner of two repeaters and use the 600 split. Perhaps I should have been more clearer in my post. I agree with most of JF's post ,I just think we need to keep our eyes open to new possibilities other than 30 year ago training. Things are always changing with time and and so should Amateur radio. no disrespect intended . Reply to a comment by : WA6BFH on 2005-01-10 JF, Don't worry about him, he obviously does not know how receivers work. Thank god he is not managing my site! Reply to a comment by : KF4VGX on 2005-01-09 I'd much rather say: "Here is how it is done, and this is why." That's the way I was taught, 30+ years ago. Why is it such a problem today? ............................ Today is not 30+ years ago. its TODAY ! Reply to a comment by : K4JF on 2005-01-09 "1: The first is partly address by my comment above, the people who manufacture radios for the ham consumer market make them with 600KC automatic splits. It appears, some of us, are willing to let manufactures of consumer electronics establish the technical parameters of our "systems". " You have that one backwards. The equipment is built with 600 offsets bvecause that is the standard we hams established and, years later, they programmed their equipment to match. The first years (I was there) there was no standard, and crystals had to be specifically ordered. Same as with the SSB standards. Hams established LSB below 10 MHz and USB above, and years later equipment manufacturers complied. Now with the facts established, here is an opinion: Teach people. Don't deride them because they don't know. Why do you think so many newcomers leave? Many have said because of the attitude seen that "If you don't know, then just go away." I'd much rather say: "Here is how it is done, and this is why." That's the way I was taught, 30+ years ago. Why is it such a problem today? Reply to a comment by : N7MJW on 2005-01-09 K4JF: This one is for you. >"THAT is the kind of attitude that is seriously damaging amateur radio today." I disagree. THAT is the kind of attitude that says we expect a certain fundemental basic competency in our people. How tolerant of ignorance should be become, that licensed people cannot program their own equipment??? Many people are lazy, and they wont learn to do certain things because it is not required of them. So as I read this there are THREE issues here: 1: The first is partly address by my comment above, the people who manufacture radios for the ham consumer market make them with 600KC automatic splits. It appears, some of us, are willing to let manufactures of consumer electronics establish the technical parameters of our "systems". 2: There is little room on the 2 meter band for attitional repeaters, or simplex operations. The narrow splits allow more to be packed in. Not sure I really buy this. Since 1995 commercial equipment had to be "narrow" band to be type accepted, that is it would work in a 11.2K channel compared to a 20K channel. After 2008 you wont be able to buy a radio that works in a 20K channel. Our neighbors in the bands just above us are dealing with their congestion. My point is simply we can deal with the overcrowding issue in more progressive ways. 3. The third issue is it is inconsistant with Coordination. Coordination is a interference issue. If these repeaters arent interfering, then whats the problem??? Everybody knows there are repeaters on 147.415. SO WHAT?? This is totally what we make of it. We can decide as a group to coordiante differently, but if the repeater isnt causing interference then there is little a coordiantor can, or should be able to do about it. Remember folks, this is a hobby, something you do on your spare time. Dont try to make everything and everybody fit into YOUR sandbox. Damaging amateur radio??? I dont think so. What is damaging amateur radio are hams with their head in the sand, who take themselves too seriously, and are afraid to pull their head out long enough to consider other options. Reply to a comment by : K4JF on 2005-01-09 "As for you guys who are having trouble programming your radio to an odd split... gosh I'm sorry, too bad for you. I guess appliance operators rule." THAT is the kind of attitude that is seriously damaging amateur radio today. Whatever happened to hams helping and actually working WITH each other?? I'm glad ARRL has instituted the Elmer rcognition - such people are extremely rare these days and deserve commendation. Reply to a comment by : N7MJW on 2005-01-08 Its kind of NO BIG DEAL about odd splits. Personally, I think its kind of silly we do 600KC on 2 meters, and even sillier we do 500KC on 6 meters. Seems to me we are making things harder to deal with. To do the narrow split, you need a bigger, more expensive duplexer, and need to keep higher technical tolerances. Lets get to reality, MOST ham repeaters I've seen are using a hand me down duplexer from commercial VHF service, that has been tuned outside of its range to the 2 meter band. The same is true of the repeater usually... there wernt many low split MASTR IIs out there but lots of mid or high split ones. The point is, any help these things can get will make them work better. Lets get to another reality, how many of these things to we really think are tuned with a spectrum analizer/tracking generator... I thought so, more like a watt meter right? How many of these things get yearly PM? So you think your going to get some happy site owner to let you have room for your repeater, and the big set of duplexers... or two antennas on his tower??? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! And all that for free. Get real. I manage 5 radio sites, all very desirable locations at very high altitude. I have so much room both on the racks and on the tower. Generally I dont let hams in, but where I have space is a huge issue (the other is security and accountability). I'd much rather they have a small duplexer than a big one. Needless to say, we dont have any 6 meter repeaters around. My repeater is on a 2 meg split. Its toned, fits in a small suitcase, and runs on batteries. Cant do that with a "standard" split. As for you guys who are having trouble programming your radio to an odd split... gosh I'm sorry, too bad for you. I guess appliance operators rule. | ||
| WA6BFH | 2005-01-10 | |
|---|---|---|
| RE: 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| JF, Don't worry about him, he obviously does not know how receivers work. Thank god he is not managing my site! Reply to a comment by : KF4VGX on 2005-01-09 I'd much rather say: "Here is how it is done, and this is why." That's the way I was taught, 30+ years ago. Why is it such a problem today? ............................ Today is not 30+ years ago. its TODAY ! Reply to a comment by : K4JF on 2005-01-09 "1: The first is partly address by my comment above, the people who manufacture radios for the ham consumer market make them with 600KC automatic splits. It appears, some of us, are willing to let manufactures of consumer electronics establish the technical parameters of our "systems". " You have that one backwards. The equipment is built with 600 offsets bvecause that is the standard we hams established and, years later, they programmed their equipment to match. The first years (I was there) there was no standard, and crystals had to be specifically ordered. Same as with the SSB standards. Hams established LSB below 10 MHz and USB above, and years later equipment manufacturers complied. Now with the facts established, here is an opinion: Teach people. Don't deride them because they don't know. Why do you think so many newcomers leave? Many have said because of the attitude seen that "If you don't know, then just go away." I'd much rather say: "Here is how it is done, and this is why." That's the way I was taught, 30+ years ago. Why is it such a problem today? Reply to a comment by : N7MJW on 2005-01-09 K4JF: This one is for you. >"THAT is the kind of attitude that is seriously damaging amateur radio today." I disagree. THAT is the kind of attitude that says we expect a certain fundemental basic competency in our people. How tolerant of ignorance should be become, that licensed people cannot program their own equipment??? Many people are lazy, and they wont learn to do certain things because it is not required of them. So as I read this there are THREE issues here: 1: The first is partly address by my comment above, the people who manufacture radios for the ham consumer market make them with 600KC automatic splits. It appears, some of us, are willing to let manufactures of consumer electronics establish the technical parameters of our "systems". 2: There is little room on the 2 meter band for attitional repeaters, or simplex operations. The narrow splits allow more to be packed in. Not sure I really buy this. Since 1995 commercial equipment had to be "narrow" band to be type accepted, that is it would work in a 11.2K channel compared to a 20K channel. After 2008 you wont be able to buy a radio that works in a 20K channel. Our neighbors in the bands just above us are dealing with their congestion. My point is simply we can deal with the overcrowding issue in more progressive ways. 3. The third issue is it is inconsistant with Coordination. Coordination is a interference issue. If these repeaters arent interfering, then whats the problem??? Everybody knows there are repeaters on 147.415. SO WHAT?? This is totally what we make of it. We can decide as a group to coordiante differently, but if the repeater isnt causing interference then there is little a coordiantor can, or should be able to do about it. Remember folks, this is a hobby, something you do on your spare time. Dont try to make everything and everybody fit into YOUR sandbox. Damaging amateur radio??? I dont think so. What is damaging amateur radio are hams with their head in the sand, who take themselves too seriously, and are afraid to pull their head out long enough to consider other options. Reply to a comment by : K4JF on 2005-01-09 "As for you guys who are having trouble programming your radio to an odd split... gosh I'm sorry, too bad for you. I guess appliance operators rule." THAT is the kind of attitude that is seriously damaging amateur radio today. Whatever happened to hams helping and actually working WITH each other?? I'm glad ARRL has instituted the Elmer rcognition - such people are extremely rare these days and deserve commendation. Reply to a comment by : N7MJW on 2005-01-08 Its kind of NO BIG DEAL about odd splits. Personally, I think its kind of silly we do 600KC on 2 meters, and even sillier we do 500KC on 6 meters. Seems to me we are making things harder to deal with. To do the narrow split, you need a bigger, more expensive duplexer, and need to keep higher technical tolerances. Lets get to reality, MOST ham repeaters I've seen are using a hand me down duplexer from commercial VHF service, that has been tuned outside of its range to the 2 meter band. The same is true of the repeater usually... there wernt many low split MASTR IIs out there but lots of mid or high split ones. The point is, any help these things can get will make them work better. Lets get to another reality, how many of these things to we really think are tuned with a spectrum analizer/tracking generator... I thought so, more like a watt meter right? How many of these things get yearly PM? So you think your going to get some happy site owner to let you have room for your repeater, and the big set of duplexers... or two antennas on his tower??? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! And all that for free. Get real. I manage 5 radio sites, all very desirable locations at very high altitude. I have so much room both on the racks and on the tower. Generally I dont let hams in, but where I have space is a huge issue (the other is security and accountability). I'd much rather they have a small duplexer than a big one. Needless to say, we dont have any 6 meter repeaters around. My repeater is on a 2 meg split. Its toned, fits in a small suitcase, and runs on batteries. Cant do that with a "standard" split. As for you guys who are having trouble programming your radio to an odd split... gosh I'm sorry, too bad for you. I guess appliance operators rule. | ||
| KF4VGX | 2005-01-09 | |
|---|---|---|
| RE: 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| I'd much rather say: "Here is how it is done, and this is why." That's the way I was taught, 30+ years ago. Why is it such a problem today? ............................ Today is not 30+ years ago. its TODAY ! Reply to a comment by : K4JF on 2005-01-09 "1: The first is partly address by my comment above, the people who manufacture radios for the ham consumer market make them with 600KC automatic splits. It appears, some of us, are willing to let manufactures of consumer electronics establish the technical parameters of our "systems". " You have that one backwards. The equipment is built with 600 offsets bvecause that is the standard we hams established and, years later, they programmed their equipment to match. The first years (I was there) there was no standard, and crystals had to be specifically ordered. Same as with the SSB standards. Hams established LSB below 10 MHz and USB above, and years later equipment manufacturers complied. Now with the facts established, here is an opinion: Teach people. Don't deride them because they don't know. Why do you think so many newcomers leave? Many have said because of the attitude seen that "If you don't know, then just go away." I'd much rather say: "Here is how it is done, and this is why." That's the way I was taught, 30+ years ago. Why is it such a problem today? Reply to a comment by : N7MJW on 2005-01-09 K4JF: This one is for you. >"THAT is the kind of attitude that is seriously damaging amateur radio today." I disagree. THAT is the kind of attitude that says we expect a certain fundemental basic competency in our people. How tolerant of ignorance should be become, that licensed people cannot program their own equipment??? Many people are lazy, and they wont learn to do certain things because it is not required of them. So as I read this there are THREE issues here: 1: The first is partly address by my comment above, the people who manufacture radios for the ham consumer market make them with 600KC automatic splits. It appears, some of us, are willing to let manufactures of consumer electronics establish the technical parameters of our "systems". 2: There is little room on the 2 meter band for attitional repeaters, or simplex operations. The narrow splits allow more to be packed in. Not sure I really buy this. Since 1995 commercial equipment had to be "narrow" band to be type accepted, that is it would work in a 11.2K channel compared to a 20K channel. After 2008 you wont be able to buy a radio that works in a 20K channel. Our neighbors in the bands just above us are dealing with their congestion. My point is simply we can deal with the overcrowding issue in more progressive ways. 3. The third issue is it is inconsistant with Coordination. Coordination is a interference issue. If these repeaters arent interfering, then whats the problem??? Everybody knows there are repeaters on 147.415. SO WHAT?? This is totally what we make of it. We can decide as a group to coordiante differently, but if the repeater isnt causing interference then there is little a coordiantor can, or should be able to do about it. Remember folks, this is a hobby, something you do on your spare time. Dont try to make everything and everybody fit into YOUR sandbox. Damaging amateur radio??? I dont think so. What is damaging amateur radio are hams with their head in the sand, who take themselves too seriously, and are afraid to pull their head out long enough to consider other options. Reply to a comment by : K4JF on 2005-01-09 "As for you guys who are having trouble programming your radio to an odd split... gosh I'm sorry, too bad for you. I guess appliance operators rule." THAT is the kind of attitude that is seriously damaging amateur radio today. Whatever happened to hams helping and actually working WITH each other?? I'm glad ARRL has instituted the Elmer rcognition - such people are extremely rare these days and deserve commendation. Reply to a comment by : N7MJW on 2005-01-08 Its kind of NO BIG DEAL about odd splits. Personally, I think its kind of silly we do 600KC on 2 meters, and even sillier we do 500KC on 6 meters. Seems to me we are making things harder to deal with. To do the narrow split, you need a bigger, more expensive duplexer, and need to keep higher technical tolerances. Lets get to reality, MOST ham repeaters I've seen are using a hand me down duplexer from commercial VHF service, that has been tuned outside of its range to the 2 meter band. The same is true of the repeater usually... there wernt many low split MASTR IIs out there but lots of mid or high split ones. The point is, any help these things can get will make them work better. Lets get to another reality, how many of these things to we really think are tuned with a spectrum analizer/tracking generator... I thought so, more like a watt meter right? How many of these things get yearly PM? So you think your going to get some happy site owner to let you have room for your repeater, and the big set of duplexers... or two antennas on his tower??? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! And all that for free. Get real. I manage 5 radio sites, all very desirable locations at very high altitude. I have so much room both on the racks and on the tower. Generally I dont let hams in, but where I have space is a huge issue (the other is security and accountability). I'd much rather they have a small duplexer than a big one. Needless to say, we dont have any 6 meter repeaters around. My repeater is on a 2 meg split. Its toned, fits in a small suitcase, and runs on batteries. Cant do that with a "standard" split. As for you guys who are having trouble programming your radio to an odd split... gosh I'm sorry, too bad for you. I guess appliance operators rule. | ||
| K4JF | 2005-01-09 | |
|---|---|---|
| RE: 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| "1: The first is partly address by my comment above, the people who manufacture radios for the ham consumer market make them with 600KC automatic splits. It appears, some of us, are willing to let manufactures of consumer electronics establish the technical parameters of our "systems". " You have that one backwards. The equipment is built with 600 offsets bvecause that is the standard we hams established and, years later, they programmed their equipment to match. The first years (I was there) there was no standard, and crystals had to be specifically ordered. Same as with the SSB standards. Hams established LSB below 10 MHz and USB above, and years later equipment manufacturers complied. Now with the facts established, here is an opinion: Teach people. Don't deride them because they don't know. Why do you think so many newcomers leave? Many have said because of the attitude seen that "If you don't know, then just go away." I'd much rather say: "Here is how it is done, and this is why." That's the way I was taught, 30+ years ago. Why is it such a problem today? Reply to a comment by : N7MJW on 2005-01-09 K4JF: This one is for you. >"THAT is the kind of attitude that is seriously damaging amateur radio today." I disagree. THAT is the kind of attitude that says we expect a certain fundemental basic competency in our people. How tolerant of ignorance should be become, that licensed people cannot program their own equipment??? Many people are lazy, and they wont learn to do certain things because it is not required of them. So as I read this there are THREE issues here: 1: The first is partly address by my comment above, the people who manufacture radios for the ham consumer market make them with 600KC automatic splits. It appears, some of us, are willing to let manufactures of consumer electronics establish the technical parameters of our "systems". 2: There is little room on the 2 meter band for attitional repeaters, or simplex operations. The narrow splits allow more to be packed in. Not sure I really buy this. Since 1995 commercial equipment had to be "narrow" band to be type accepted, that is it would work in a 11.2K channel compared to a 20K channel. After 2008 you wont be able to buy a radio that works in a 20K channel. Our neighbors in the bands just above us are dealing with their congestion. My point is simply we can deal with the overcrowding issue in more progressive ways. 3. The third issue is it is inconsistant with Coordination. Coordination is a interference issue. If these repeaters arent interfering, then whats the problem??? Everybody knows there are repeaters on 147.415. SO WHAT?? This is totally what we make of it. We can decide as a group to coordiante differently, but if the repeater isnt causing interference then there is little a coordiantor can, or should be able to do about it. Remember folks, this is a hobby, something you do on your spare time. Dont try to make everything and everybody fit into YOUR sandbox. Damaging amateur radio??? I dont think so. What is damaging amateur radio are hams with their head in the sand, who take themselves too seriously, and are afraid to pull their head out long enough to consider other options. Reply to a comment by : K4JF on 2005-01-09 "As for you guys who are having trouble programming your radio to an odd split... gosh I'm sorry, too bad for you. I guess appliance operators rule." THAT is the kind of attitude that is seriously damaging amateur radio today. Whatever happened to hams helping and actually working WITH each other?? I'm glad ARRL has instituted the Elmer rcognition - such people are extremely rare these days and deserve commendation. Reply to a comment by : N7MJW on 2005-01-08 Its kind of NO BIG DEAL about odd splits. Personally, I think its kind of silly we do 600KC on 2 meters, and even sillier we do 500KC on 6 meters. Seems to me we are making things harder to deal with. To do the narrow split, you need a bigger, more expensive duplexer, and need to keep higher technical tolerances. Lets get to reality, MOST ham repeaters I've seen are using a hand me down duplexer from commercial VHF service, that has been tuned outside of its range to the 2 meter band. The same is true of the repeater usually... there wernt many low split MASTR IIs out there but lots of mid or high split ones. The point is, any help these things can get will make them work better. Lets get to another reality, how many of these things to we really think are tuned with a spectrum analizer/tracking generator... I thought so, more like a watt meter right? How many of these things get yearly PM? So you think your going to get some happy site owner to let you have room for your repeater, and the big set of duplexers... or two antennas on his tower??? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! And all that for free. Get real. I manage 5 radio sites, all very desirable locations at very high altitude. I have so much room both on the racks and on the tower. Generally I dont let hams in, but where I have space is a huge issue (the other is security and accountability). I'd much rather they have a small duplexer than a big one. Needless to say, we dont have any 6 meter repeaters around. My repeater is on a 2 meg split. Its toned, fits in a small suitcase, and runs on batteries. Cant do that with a "standard" split. As for you guys who are having trouble programming your radio to an odd split... gosh I'm sorry, too bad for you. I guess appliance operators rule. | ||
| N7MJW | 2005-01-09 | |
|---|---|---|
| RE: 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| K4JF: This one is for you. >"THAT is the kind of attitude that is seriously damaging amateur radio today." I disagree. THAT is the kind of attitude that says we expect a certain fundemental basic competency in our people. How tolerant of ignorance should be become, that licensed people cannot program their own equipment??? Many people are lazy, and they wont learn to do certain things because it is not required of them. So as I read this there are THREE issues here: 1: The first is partly address by my comment above, the people who manufacture radios for the ham consumer market make them with 600KC automatic splits. It appears, some of us, are willing to let manufactures of consumer electronics establish the technical parameters of our "systems". 2: There is little room on the 2 meter band for attitional repeaters, or simplex operations. The narrow splits allow more to be packed in. Not sure I really buy this. Since 1995 commercial equipment had to be "narrow" band to be type accepted, that is it would work in a 11.2K channel compared to a 20K channel. After 2008 you wont be able to buy a radio that works in a 20K channel. Our neighbors in the bands just above us are dealing with their congestion. My point is simply we can deal with the overcrowding issue in more progressive ways. 3. The third issue is it is inconsistant with Coordination. Coordination is a interference issue. If these repeaters arent interfering, then whats the problem??? Everybody knows there are repeaters on 147.415. SO WHAT?? This is totally what we make of it. We can decide as a group to coordiante differently, but if the repeater isnt causing interference then there is little a coordiantor can, or should be able to do about it. Remember folks, this is a hobby, something you do on your spare time. Dont try to make everything and everybody fit into YOUR sandbox. Damaging amateur radio??? I dont think so. What is damaging amateur radio are hams with their head in the sand, who take themselves too seriously, and are afraid to pull their head out long enough to consider other options. Reply to a comment by : K4JF on 2005-01-09 "As for you guys who are having trouble programming your radio to an odd split... gosh I'm sorry, too bad for you. I guess appliance operators rule." THAT is the kind of attitude that is seriously damaging amateur radio today. Whatever happened to hams helping and actually working WITH each other?? I'm glad ARRL has instituted the Elmer rcognition - such people are extremely rare these days and deserve commendation. Reply to a comment by : N7MJW on 2005-01-08 Its kind of NO BIG DEAL about odd splits. Personally, I think its kind of silly we do 600KC on 2 meters, and even sillier we do 500KC on 6 meters. Seems to me we are making things harder to deal with. To do the narrow split, you need a bigger, more expensive duplexer, and need to keep higher technical tolerances. Lets get to reality, MOST ham repeaters I've seen are using a hand me down duplexer from commercial VHF service, that has been tuned outside of its range to the 2 meter band. The same is true of the repeater usually... there wernt many low split MASTR IIs out there but lots of mid or high split ones. The point is, any help these things can get will make them work better. Lets get to another reality, how many of these things to we really think are tuned with a spectrum analizer/tracking generator... I thought so, more like a watt meter right? How many of these things get yearly PM? So you think your going to get some happy site owner to let you have room for your repeater, and the big set of duplexers... or two antennas on his tower??? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! And all that for free. Get real. I manage 5 radio sites, all very desirable locations at very high altitude. I have so much room both on the racks and on the tower. Generally I dont let hams in, but where I have space is a huge issue (the other is security and accountability). I'd much rather they have a small duplexer than a big one. Needless to say, we dont have any 6 meter repeaters around. My repeater is on a 2 meg split. Its toned, fits in a small suitcase, and runs on batteries. Cant do that with a "standard" split. As for you guys who are having trouble programming your radio to an odd split... gosh I'm sorry, too bad for you. I guess appliance operators rule. | ||
| K3TD | 2005-01-09 | |
|---|---|---|
| RE: 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| Repeater band plans have evolved over the years, and in the case of 2 meters that eveolution sometimes took some unusual turns. Here is a little history of what happened in the PA/OH/WV tri-state area in the early through mid-1970s- forgive me if my memory has dimmed a bit! I understand that there were similarities to other parts of the US, and also differences! Back in the early 1970s when repeater popularity was really starting to take off in many parts of the country, many of the repeater owners and users were Technician class licenses and Techs had access to the 145 - 147 MHz range. Since there was some am and satellite activity below 146 MHz, the 146 - 147 MHz range seemed to be the best place for this "new" mode. 600 kHz was not the only offset around, there was really no band plan because people never conceived there would be so many repeaters in the same area. My first 2 meter FM rig had three channels: 146.34/94 146.34/76 146.94 simplex Since radios were all crystal (or TCXO) controlled, this had the significant advantage for me as a user that I only needed 2 transmit and 2 receive crystals to operate on 3 channels! As 2 meters grew more quickly and groups started to need to informally coordinate frequencies, the 600 kHz offset became a "standard" and folks on the 34/76 machine migrated to 16/76. The first "standard" bandplan I remember was 60 kHz channel spacing. The repeater pairs were: 146.04/64 146.10.70 146.16/76 146.22/82 146.28.88 146.34/94 Six repeater pairs would be enough for ANY area - right?! 146.52 became the simplex frequency to avoid interference to 34/94 repeaters. In short order, 30 kHz channels were added in between the 60 kHz ones, so we had 01/61, 07/67, 13/73, etc. More simplex channels were set up above/below 146.52 with 30 kHz spacing. However, even with 12 repeater frequency pairs it was not enough as repeater use exploded so there was a need to expand. 147 - 148 MHz came next, and the decision was made to use high-in, low-out offset in that part of the band because there were many users with commercial equipment and it was always easier to spread the transmitter than the receiver in commercial gear. Now the number of "standard' pairs increased to 25 with the addition of every 30 kHz between 147.63/03 and 147.99/39 - so far so good, but the number of repeaters kept growing and users groups and the ARRL started thinking about what to do next. Two things happened next - plans to move into the 145 MHz segment, and thoughts about how to "split" the 30 kHz channels at 146 and 147 MHz to get more capacity. There was a big debate at the time about whether channels should be spaced at 15 or 20 kHz. A big part of that debate at the time was whether available receivers could handle adjacent channels at 15 kHz. I remember these issues discussed in detail at sessions at the Dayton Hamvention. Instead of just splitting the existing 30 kHz channels and plugging a 15 kHz channel in between each two, some folks wanted to change the band plan at 146/147 MHz to 20 kHz instead of 15. That would allow more channels, but would require many existing repeaters to change frequency to come into compliance with the plan. Others wanted to go with 15 kHz to put a channel in between the existing ones, but use a "reverse split" method that would put high-in, low-out 15 kHz pairs in the 146 band in between existing low-in, high out 30 kHz pairs, and low-in, high-out pairs in the 147 band between high-in, low out pairs. In the end it was decided to go with 20 kHz in the new 145 MHz band and go with "regular" 15 kHz channels in the existing populated 146/147 MHz band, though I do remember a couple of reverse split repeaters in the 147 MHz band for a short time. Several other states, including Texas, decided to go with 20 kHz spacing everywhere in 2 meters, and migrated the existing 146/147 repeaters. Along the way there was plenty of heartburn around these issues, and I remember folks legitimately wondering why they needed to move off of their simplex channel on 146.94 MHz, or why everyone on the 34/76 repeater needed to buy new transmit crystals for 146.16 MHz just to make someone else happy. I guess some things will never change, although synthesized rigs certainly have eased the pain! Reply to a comment by : K4JF on 2005-01-09 "As for you guys who are having trouble programming your radio to an odd split... gosh I'm sorry, too bad for you. I guess appliance operators rule." THAT is the kind of attitude that is seriously damaging amateur radio today. Whatever happened to hams helping and actually working WITH each other?? I'm glad ARRL has instituted the Elmer rcognition - such people are extremely rare these days and deserve commendation. Reply to a comment by : N7MJW on 2005-01-08 Its kind of NO BIG DEAL about odd splits. Personally, I think its kind of silly we do 600KC on 2 meters, and even sillier we do 500KC on 6 meters. Seems to me we are making things harder to deal with. To do the narrow split, you need a bigger, more expensive duplexer, and need to keep higher technical tolerances. Lets get to reality, MOST ham repeaters I've seen are using a hand me down duplexer from commercial VHF service, that has been tuned outside of its range to the 2 meter band. The same is true of the repeater usually... there wernt many low split MASTR IIs out there but lots of mid or high split ones. The point is, any help these things can get will make them work better. Lets get to another reality, how many of these things to we really think are tuned with a spectrum analizer/tracking generator... I thought so, more like a watt meter right? How many of these things get yearly PM? So you think your going to get some happy site owner to let you have room for your repeater, and the big set of duplexers... or two antennas on his tower??? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! And all that for free. Get real. I manage 5 radio sites, all very desirable locations at very high altitude. I have so much room both on the racks and on the tower. Generally I dont let hams in, but where I have space is a huge issue (the other is security and accountability). I'd much rather they have a small duplexer than a big one. Needless to say, we dont have any 6 meter repeaters around. My repeater is on a 2 meg split. Its toned, fits in a small suitcase, and runs on batteries. Cant do that with a "standard" split. As for you guys who are having trouble programming your radio to an odd split... gosh I'm sorry, too bad for you. I guess appliance operators rule. | ||
| K4JF | 2005-01-09 | |
|---|---|---|
| RE: 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| Good point, Walter. There is a heckuvva lot more happening on 2m than FM repeaters. I say keep - and enforce - the 600 split. It ain't broke... don't fix it. Reply to a comment by : N9WB on 2005-01-09 146.400 – 146.600 147.400 – 147. 595 We tried coordinating 1 MHz repeaters several times. What we learned is that there is a lot more 2 meter simplex activity out there than we realized. The simplex people have the right to some frequency space too. Indiana no longer coordinates on these 1 MHz split pairs. Vy 73, Walter A. Breining N9WB Chairman, Indiana Repeater Council | ||
| N9WB | 2005-01-09 | |
|---|---|---|
| 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| 146.400 – 146.600 147.400 – 147. 595 We tried coordinating 1 MHz repeaters several times. What we learned is that there is a lot more 2 meter simplex activity out there than we realized. The simplex people have the right to some frequency space too. Indiana no longer coordinates on these 1 MHz split pairs. Vy 73, Walter A. Breining N9WB Chairman, Indiana Repeater Council | ||
| K4JF | 2005-01-09 | |
|---|---|---|
| RE: 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| "As for you guys who are having trouble programming your radio to an odd split... gosh I'm sorry, too bad for you. I guess appliance operators rule." THAT is the kind of attitude that is seriously damaging amateur radio today. Whatever happened to hams helping and actually working WITH each other?? I'm glad ARRL has instituted the Elmer rcognition - such people are extremely rare these days and deserve commendation. Reply to a comment by : N7MJW on 2005-01-08 Its kind of NO BIG DEAL about odd splits. Personally, I think its kind of silly we do 600KC on 2 meters, and even sillier we do 500KC on 6 meters. Seems to me we are making things harder to deal with. To do the narrow split, you need a bigger, more expensive duplexer, and need to keep higher technical tolerances. Lets get to reality, MOST ham repeaters I've seen are using a hand me down duplexer from commercial VHF service, that has been tuned outside of its range to the 2 meter band. The same is true of the repeater usually... there wernt many low split MASTR IIs out there but lots of mid or high split ones. The point is, any help these things can get will make them work better. Lets get to another reality, how many of these things to we really think are tuned with a spectrum analizer/tracking generator... I thought so, more like a watt meter right? How many of these things get yearly PM? So you think your going to get some happy site owner to let you have room for your repeater, and the big set of duplexers... or two antennas on his tower??? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! And all that for free. Get real. I manage 5 radio sites, all very desirable locations at very high altitude. I have so much room both on the racks and on the tower. Generally I dont let hams in, but where I have space is a huge issue (the other is security and accountability). I'd much rather they have a small duplexer than a big one. Needless to say, we dont have any 6 meter repeaters around. My repeater is on a 2 meg split. Its toned, fits in a small suitcase, and runs on batteries. Cant do that with a "standard" split. As for you guys who are having trouble programming your radio to an odd split... gosh I'm sorry, too bad for you. I guess appliance operators rule. | ||
| N7MJW | 2005-01-08 | |
|---|---|---|
| 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| Its kind of NO BIG DEAL about odd splits. Personally, I think its kind of silly we do 600KC on 2 meters, and even sillier we do 500KC on 6 meters. Seems to me we are making things harder to deal with. To do the narrow split, you need a bigger, more expensive duplexer, and need to keep higher technical tolerances. Lets get to reality, MOST ham repeaters I've seen are using a hand me down duplexer from commercial VHF service, that has been tuned outside of its range to the 2 meter band. The same is true of the repeater usually... there wernt many low split MASTR IIs out there but lots of mid or high split ones. The point is, any help these things can get will make them work better. Lets get to another reality, how many of these things to we really think are tuned with a spectrum analizer/tracking generator... I thought so, more like a watt meter right? How many of these things get yearly PM? So you think your going to get some happy site owner to let you have room for your repeater, and the big set of duplexers... or two antennas on his tower??? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! And all that for free. Get real. I manage 5 radio sites, all very desirable locations at very high altitude. I have so much room both on the racks and on the tower. Generally I dont let hams in, but where I have space is a huge issue (the other is security and accountability). I'd much rather they have a small duplexer than a big one. Needless to say, we dont have any 6 meter repeaters around. My repeater is on a 2 meg split. Its toned, fits in a small suitcase, and runs on batteries. Cant do that with a "standard" split. As for you guys who are having trouble programming your radio to an odd split... gosh I'm sorry, too bad for you. I guess appliance operators rule. | ||
| WA2JJH | 2005-01-08 | |
|---|---|---|
| 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| I remember Wilson. They were really the only H-T you could buy for that price. I had a Genave for 2 months. The Genave claimed to be commercial quality. They even made a 2W HT-220 slim line like POS. The decommisioned police Vhf ht-220 was the status H-T to have. My pair of slim lines still work! | ||
| K4JF | 2005-01-08 | |
|---|---|---|
| RE: 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| I started on VHF a while ago when my first handheld rig was a surplus police (when the local town went to UHF) Motorola HT-220. A bear to retune, 8 crystal frequencies, and yes the crystals were expensive. Then I went to an IC2AT and the pleasure of synthesis. That had, I remember, ONLY a 600 offset, selectable on a panel on the back. No tone, of course. Now I have TH-22. Lots of frequencies, but I didn't need the tone board here, so it doesn't have it. As for odd offsets, it is a real problem with traveling, but with the proliferation of toned repeaters today, there is no real access for travelers. So odd splits are fine. Locals can take the time to program, and they don't want out-of-towners. As for the comments about no repeater activity, be sure to comment that you are talking only about your town. In my area, there is almost always a QSO going on on any 2 or 3 of the dozen repeaters I can hear, and most are interesting discussions about everything from HF stations, to old music, to cars, to sports. Everybody courteous and considerate and, especially on 146.01, listening for travelers. One other comment - I see 146.52 listed as a QSO frequency. Not! That is a calling frequency - move away as soon as you make contact. 146.55 is my favorite simplex frequency once the contact is made. But ".52" is not monitored in most of the areas I travel (most everything east of the Mississippi). I've called CQ on .52 on about every mile of I-75 and I-95 and have never gotten a response. And the only place I have heard traffic on that frequency was a QSO in Paducah, Kentucky. Reply to a comment by : WA6BFH on 2005-01-07 I find these comments about the 'DIP switch programable' CTCSS units interesting. I knew the guy that built them (his first units were analog). Just as a thought, what about the idea of 'tweaking up' (or dialing up) an analog signal -- that starts out as an analog signal in the first place! Reply to a comment by : WA2JJH on 2005-01-07 I can relate to smashing my own equipment. It was therapy. You would spend weeks trying to fix a "dog"(fix one problem, 3 more spring up) Hey time is money. You smash it, so there is no way you will waste more time fixing it! Otherwise your in for more hours/days of frustration. My worst and last destructo......about 6 years ago. I had just finished typing a 60 page report. The laptop crashed and I lost EVERYTHING!!!!!!!!! I should have video taped it. I did a reverse punch to the LCD screen. My fist came out of the back of the lcd screen and Pc board. I learned a great breathing/meditation process. I have not smashed electronics since! Yes, there was that dip switch Pl. I got it for the old MANHATTAN B.E.A.R.S machine. It had an autopatch!!! It was when celluar calls were only for the rich. $3.00/minute could be charged if you called during peak times. As soon as I was at a Tv station that put me in charge of the single ENG microwave truck the local had. We would get $900 cell phone bills. I wired the cell phone to the IFB. The talent liked it better too. Yeah, we were big shots with the company cell phone. They could never tell if I used the UHF Repeater or the cell phone. It was my call!!! If I deemed the UHF 450.XXXXX repeater was not good enough, I would do the live shot queing with the cell. Yup, I guess the repeater had a very limited range(hi-hi) | ||
| WA6BFH | 2005-01-07 | |
|---|---|---|
| RE: 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| I find these comments about the 'DIP switch programable' CTCSS units interesting. I knew the guy that built them (his first units were analog). Just as a thought, what about the idea of 'tweaking up' (or dialing up) an analog signal -- that starts out as an analog signal in the first place! Reply to a comment by : WA2JJH on 2005-01-07 I can relate to smashing my own equipment. It was therapy. You would spend weeks trying to fix a "dog"(fix one problem, 3 more spring up) Hey time is money. You smash it, so there is no way you will waste more time fixing it! Otherwise your in for more hours/days of frustration. My worst and last destructo......about 6 years ago. I had just finished typing a 60 page report. The laptop crashed and I lost EVERYTHING!!!!!!!!! I should have video taped it. I did a reverse punch to the LCD screen. My fist came out of the back of the lcd screen and Pc board. I learned a great breathing/meditation process. I have not smashed electronics since! Yes, there was that dip switch Pl. I got it for the old MANHATTAN B.E.A.R.S machine. It had an autopatch!!! It was when celluar calls were only for the rich. $3.00/minute could be charged if you called during peak times. As soon as I was at a Tv station that put me in charge of the single ENG microwave truck the local had. We would get $900 cell phone bills. I wired the cell phone to the IFB. The talent liked it better too. Yeah, we were big shots with the company cell phone. They could never tell if I used the UHF Repeater or the cell phone. It was my call!!! If I deemed the UHF 450.XXXXX repeater was not good enough, I would do the live shot queing with the cell. Yup, I guess the repeater had a very limited range(hi-hi) | ||
| WA2JJH | 2005-01-07 | |
|---|---|---|
| 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| I can relate to smashing my own equipment. It was therapy. You would spend weeks trying to fix a "dog"(fix one problem, 3 more spring up) Hey time is money. You smash it, so there is no way you will waste more time fixing it! Otherwise your in for more hours/days of frustration. My worst and last destructo......about 6 years ago. I had just finished typing a 60 page report. The laptop crashed and I lost EVERYTHING!!!!!!!!! I should have video taped it. I did a reverse punch to the LCD screen. My fist came out of the back of the lcd screen and Pc board. I learned a great breathing/meditation process. I have not smashed electronics since! Yes, there was that dip switch Pl. I got it for the old MANHATTAN B.E.A.R.S machine. It had an autopatch!!! It was when celluar calls were only for the rich. $3.00/minute could be charged if you called during peak times. As soon as I was at a Tv station that put me in charge of the single ENG microwave truck the local had. We would get $900 cell phone bills. I wired the cell phone to the IFB. The talent liked it better too. Yeah, we were big shots with the company cell phone. They could never tell if I used the UHF Repeater or the cell phone. It was my call!!! If I deemed the UHF 450.XXXXX repeater was not good enough, I would do the live shot queing with the cell. Yup, I guess the repeater had a very limited range(hi-hi) | ||
| KF4VGX | 2005-01-07 | |
|---|---|---|
| RE: 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| WB2WIK on January 7, 2005 My first "amateur" class hand held was an EF Johnson Personal Messenger, crystalled for 10m AM, circa 1966. First "phone" transmitter I ever owned, no suitable 10m antenna, so I made my first several contacts while standing on the roof of my parents' house (a split level!) after climbing out the bedroom window. Not bad. QRZ DX? .................................. First DX contact. What memories you have brought back to life . You might want to write an article on this . I know that I and others enjoy the memories. Article, First DX contact ! Share your first DX memories . Nice post! 73 Reply to a comment by : WB2WIK on 2005-01-07 My first "amateur" class hand held was an EF Johnson Personal Messenger, crystalled for 10m AM, circa 1966. First "phone" transmitter I ever owned, no suitable 10m antenna, so I made my first several contacts while standing on the roof of my parents' house (a split level!) after climbing out the bedroom window. Not bad. QRZ DX? First "amateur" 2m FM handheld for me was a Wilson 1402, 2W crystal controlled monster which I think cost $300 back in 1973 or so. Golly, that was a lot of money for something I smashed with a hammer to make me feel better a few years later.... WB2WIK/6 Reply to a comment by : N0TONE on 2005-01-07 WA2JJH, even in the days of the S-1, there was a $15 board available from CommSpec that gave you PL and would fit the S-1 just fine. Some DIP switches were exposed on the back of the rig that allowed you to select which PL tone to use. Actually the PL-coded repeaters ended up having the more interesting ops - the ones that were smart enough and resourceful enough to be able to manage to build a PL board and install it. As I wrote before, the downfall really began with the synthesized handheld. The early owners of the S-1, Yaesu's handheld, and the IC-2A were probably the only shack-on-the-belt hams who ever heard a reasonably intellectual QSO on two meters. Just because of this thread, I tried an experiment. I threw together a two meter ground plane, and hoisted it up to 60 feet on one of my masts. I do have a radio, kept just in case it might be handy in the event of an emergency. Had to rejuvenate the batteries (some emergency rig, eh?) but then I did a bunch of scanning. Despite common beliefs, I actually heard far more activity on simplex than repeaters. And some of it was marginally interesting. The guys were all running from home, on real antennas, with 25 to 100 watt rigs. The interesting topics all had to do with how they were using or improving their HF stations for the next contest or DXpedition. Seemed like the bulk of the activity was on 146.46 simplex. Any activity I heard on repeaters were faked-up "emergency preparedness" nets that did nothing to actually prepare for an emergency (they took check-ins but did not acknowledge hearing the stations, therefore the stations didn't even know if they made it into the repeater), or "honey please get some bread". In other words, QSOs better carried out on the cellular system. AM Reply to a comment by : WA2JJH on 2005-01-07 i cannot remember the names of the companies we bought xtal pairs. I think one company was kensco. what ever split cost you 10 bux in xtal. Took up to 3 weeks to get them. Believe it or not, it was like waiting for xmas. One repeater would be the "good" repeater for a few months. Then you had to plunk down another 10bux when that repeater went Pl. Many of the 2M H-TS HAD NO TONE GENERATOR. So it was cheaper to hang out on the next repeater. You could end up spending lots of bux for all the xtals and pls. Those were the good old golden days of 2M? The TEMPO s-1 was the first xtaless radio I had. | ||
| WA6BFH | 2005-01-07 | |
|---|---|---|
| RE: 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| That sounds rather imature. I blew-up and smashed things when I was a kid too. These systems are solid, or should be. They are 'cast in concrete', and should follow a prescribed band-plan that accounts for heterodyn inter-modulation mix frequencies, and all other of the myriad of difficulties that plague mountaintop remote repeating radios. To take any other viewpoint is foolish and simplistic! Think about it this way, would you rather, if forced to, be suspended from a 500 foot high cliff by a thread of string, or a 3/4 inch thick steel cable? Reply to a comment by : WB2WIK on 2005-01-07 My first "amateur" class hand held was an EF Johnson Personal Messenger, crystalled for 10m AM, circa 1966. First "phone" transmitter I ever owned, no suitable 10m antenna, so I made my first several contacts while standing on the roof of my parents' house (a split level!) after climbing out the bedroom window. Not bad. QRZ DX? First "amateur" 2m FM handheld for me was a Wilson 1402, 2W crystal controlled monster which I think cost $300 back in 1973 or so. Golly, that was a lot of money for something I smashed with a hammer to make me feel better a few years later.... WB2WIK/6 Reply to a comment by : N0TONE on 2005-01-07 WA2JJH, even in the days of the S-1, there was a $15 board available from CommSpec that gave you PL and would fit the S-1 just fine. Some DIP switches were exposed on the back of the rig that allowed you to select which PL tone to use. Actually the PL-coded repeaters ended up having the more interesting ops - the ones that were smart enough and resourceful enough to be able to manage to build a PL board and install it. As I wrote before, the downfall really began with the synthesized handheld. The early owners of the S-1, Yaesu's handheld, and the IC-2A were probably the only shack-on-the-belt hams who ever heard a reasonably intellectual QSO on two meters. Just because of this thread, I tried an experiment. I threw together a two meter ground plane, and hoisted it up to 60 feet on one of my masts. I do have a radio, kept just in case it might be handy in the event of an emergency. Had to rejuvenate the batteries (some emergency rig, eh?) but then I did a bunch of scanning. Despite common beliefs, I actually heard far more activity on simplex than repeaters. And some of it was marginally interesting. The guys were all running from home, on real antennas, with 25 to 100 watt rigs. The interesting topics all had to do with how they were using or improving their HF stations for the next contest or DXpedition. Seemed like the bulk of the activity was on 146.46 simplex. Any activity I heard on repeaters were faked-up "emergency preparedness" nets that did nothing to actually prepare for an emergency (they took check-ins but did not acknowledge hearing the stations, therefore the stations didn't even know if they made it into the repeater), or "honey please get some bread". In other words, QSOs better carried out on the cellular system. AM Reply to a comment by : WA2JJH on 2005-01-07 i cannot remember the names of the companies we bought xtal pairs. I think one company was kensco. what ever split cost you 10 bux in xtal. Took up to 3 weeks to get them. Believe it or not, it was like waiting for xmas. One repeater would be the "good" repeater for a few months. Then you had to plunk down another 10bux when that repeater went Pl. Many of the 2M H-TS HAD NO TONE GENERATOR. So it was cheaper to hang out on the next repeater. You could end up spending lots of bux for all the xtals and pls. Those were the good old golden days of 2M? The TEMPO s-1 was the first xtaless radio I had. | ||
| WB2WIK | 2005-01-07 | |
|---|---|---|
| RE: 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| My first "amateur" class hand held was an EF Johnson Personal Messenger, crystalled for 10m AM, circa 1966. First "phone" transmitter I ever owned, no suitable 10m antenna, so I made my first several contacts while standing on the roof of my parents' house (a split level!) after climbing out the bedroom window. Not bad. QRZ DX? First "amateur" 2m FM handheld for me was a Wilson 1402, 2W crystal controlled monster which I think cost $300 back in 1973 or so. Golly, that was a lot of money for something I smashed with a hammer to make me feel better a few years later.... WB2WIK/6 Reply to a comment by : N0TONE on 2005-01-07 WA2JJH, even in the days of the S-1, there was a $15 board available from CommSpec that gave you PL and would fit the S-1 just fine. Some DIP switches were exposed on the back of the rig that allowed you to select which PL tone to use. Actually the PL-coded repeaters ended up having the more interesting ops - the ones that were smart enough and resourceful enough to be able to manage to build a PL board and install it. As I wrote before, the downfall really began with the synthesized handheld. The early owners of the S-1, Yaesu's handheld, and the IC-2A were probably the only shack-on-the-belt hams who ever heard a reasonably intellectual QSO on two meters. Just because of this thread, I tried an experiment. I threw together a two meter ground plane, and hoisted it up to 60 feet on one of my masts. I do have a radio, kept just in case it might be handy in the event of an emergency. Had to rejuvenate the batteries (some emergency rig, eh?) but then I did a bunch of scanning. Despite common beliefs, I actually heard far more activity on simplex than repeaters. And some of it was marginally interesting. The guys were all running from home, on real antennas, with 25 to 100 watt rigs. The interesting topics all had to do with how they were using or improving their HF stations for the next contest or DXpedition. Seemed like the bulk of the activity was on 146.46 simplex. Any activity I heard on repeaters were faked-up "emergency preparedness" nets that did nothing to actually prepare for an emergency (they took check-ins but did not acknowledge hearing the stations, therefore the stations didn't even know if they made it into the repeater), or "honey please get some bread". In other words, QSOs better carried out on the cellular system. AM Reply to a comment by : WA2JJH on 2005-01-07 i cannot remember the names of the companies we bought xtal pairs. I think one company was kensco. what ever split cost you 10 bux in xtal. Took up to 3 weeks to get them. Believe it or not, it was like waiting for xmas. One repeater would be the "good" repeater for a few months. Then you had to plunk down another 10bux when that repeater went Pl. Many of the 2M H-TS HAD NO TONE GENERATOR. So it was cheaper to hang out on the next repeater. You could end up spending lots of bux for all the xtals and pls. Those were the good old golden days of 2M? The TEMPO s-1 was the first xtaless radio I had. | ||
| N0TONE | 2005-01-07 | |
|---|---|---|
| RE: 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| WA2JJH, even in the days of the S-1, there was a $15 board available from CommSpec that gave you PL and would fit the S-1 just fine. Some DIP switches were exposed on the back of the rig that allowed you to select which PL tone to use. Actually the PL-coded repeaters ended up having the more interesting ops - the ones that were smart enough and resourceful enough to be able to manage to build a PL board and install it. As I wrote before, the downfall really began with the synthesized handheld. The early owners of the S-1, Yaesu's handheld, and the IC-2A were probably the only shack-on-the-belt hams who ever heard a reasonably intellectual QSO on two meters. Just because of this thread, I tried an experiment. I threw together a two meter ground plane, and hoisted it up to 60 feet on one of my masts. I do have a radio, kept just in case it might be handy in the event of an emergency. Had to rejuvenate the batteries (some emergency rig, eh?) but then I did a bunch of scanning. Despite common beliefs, I actually heard far more activity on simplex than repeaters. And some of it was marginally interesting. The guys were all running from home, on real antennas, with 25 to 100 watt rigs. The interesting topics all had to do with how they were using or improving their HF stations for the next contest or DXpedition. Seemed like the bulk of the activity was on 146.46 simplex. Any activity I heard on repeaters were faked-up "emergency preparedness" nets that did nothing to actually prepare for an emergency (they took check-ins but did not acknowledge hearing the stations, therefore the stations didn't even know if they made it into the repeater), or "honey please get some bread". In other words, QSOs better carried out on the cellular system. AM Reply to a comment by : WA2JJH on 2005-01-07 i cannot remember the names of the companies we bought xtal pairs. I think one company was kensco. what ever split cost you 10 bux in xtal. Took up to 3 weeks to get them. Believe it or not, it was like waiting for xmas. One repeater would be the "good" repeater for a few months. Then you had to plunk down another 10bux when that repeater went Pl. Many of the 2M H-TS HAD NO TONE GENERATOR. So it was cheaper to hang out on the next repeater. You could end up spending lots of bux for all the xtals and pls. Those were the good old golden days of 2M? The TEMPO s-1 was the first xtaless radio I had. | ||
| WA2JJH | 2005-01-07 | |
|---|---|---|
| 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| i cannot remember the names of the companies we bought xtal pairs. I think one company was kensco. what ever split cost you 10 bux in xtal. Took up to 3 weeks to get them. Believe it or not, it was like waiting for xmas. One repeater would be the "good" repeater for a few months. Then you had to plunk down another 10bux when that repeater went Pl. Many of the 2M H-TS HAD NO TONE GENERATOR. So it was cheaper to hang out on the next repeater. You could end up spending lots of bux for all the xtals and pls. Those were the good old golden days of 2M? The TEMPO s-1 was the first xtaless radio I had. | ||
| K1CJS | 2005-01-07 | |
|---|---|---|
| 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| Curiosity killed the cat--satisfaction brought him back. It may or may not be an issue--to me it isn't--that odd splits are not good because of the possibility of encroaching on the simplex section of the band. The 2 meter band (at least in my area) is underutilized at most times. Cell phones and the frs radios now in general use have taken a lot of the activity away from the 2 meter ham band around here to the point of this being a non-issue. I personally don't think there is a problem with them, but some of the repeater owners and trustees in the area may think differently. I think there is more of a problem with the undereducated, stubborn or plain stupid ham operators who think nothing of using the output frequency of the local machines to run simplex while the repeater is up and running. | ||
| NO6B | 2005-01-07 | |
|---|---|---|
| RE: 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| What these guys did was very fourthright and honorable because when they made the commitment to toss out their Rx and Tx CRYSTALS, they were also making that commitment for all of their "user base". All radios of the day were crystal controlled. Frequency Synthesizers came along in later years. The 146.400/147.435 MHz group was the only discenter at this 1972 meeting! ------------------------------------------------------- Back then it was 147.435 in/146.400 out. That repeater's owner did not was to move because his repeater had very expensive non-tunable filtering installed (Piezo Technology RF crystal filter) on it's RX. That combined with the severe interference potential at Mt. Wilson (90% of all Los Angeles TV stations broadcast from there along with many FM radio stations) dictated no unnecessary moves. When it was sold & moved to Santiago Peak in 1980, the pair was reversed due to a different interference problem at that crowded site. Reply to a comment by : WA6BFH on 2005-01-06 In California, a very forward thinking bunch of folks sought to insure "good operating practice" in repeater engineering for years and decades hence. I am speaking of the time period that WB2WIK/6 refers to in 1972 when the coordinating body of that time, SCARC" the Southern California Amateur Relay Council (Later to become SCRRBA, and now TASMA) asked the owners and users of the then in place system to modify their system to conform to the recently ratified Texas/California Bandplan. That plan established the 600 KHz offset that toaday is nation wide (146 system: Low in/High out, and 147 systems Low in/High out on 30 KHz rastor -- No 145 MHz systems were allowed). Prior to this time period, repeater owners simply put their receivers and transmitters on any frequency that seemed like a good idea. Such notable repeaters were the W6FNO repeater with a 146.820 MHz input, and a 146.700 MHz output. Others that came along were the Anaheim Amateur Radio Associatio with a 147.190 MHz input, and a 146.520 MHz output. What these guys did was very fourthright and honorable because when they made the commitment to toss out their Rx and Tx CRYSTALS, they were also making that commitment for all of their "user base". All radios of the day were crystal controlled. Frequency Synthesizers came along in later years. The 146.400/147.435 MHz group was the only discenter at this 1972 meeting! Reply to a comment by : WB2WIK on 2005-01-06 Yep, I'm referring to 147.435. It still uses a 1.035 MHz "split," and has for so many years almost nobody can remember when it didn't. Due to good site selection (although the repeater's at its fourth site that I know of), it has wide coverage and people just deal with the split. (Hey, in L.A. we started out with "AM" repeaters back in the 1950s. W6MEP on Mt. Lee was either the first or second 2m amateur repeater activated in the U.S., and was AM for years before switching to FM.) WB2WIK/6 Reply to a comment by : KJ7XJ on 2005-01-06 Way back when... when I was growing up in LA I recall a system (I think WIK is refering to) that was THE "ODD" split machine. I havnt been in LA in years so Im not sure if the 435 machine is still on the air, but I remember what a pain it was to program the split into my Kenwood TR-2600. I dont mind any machine that has a different offset than the norm as long as it doesnt interfere with simplex or weak FM communication Eric Reply to a comment by : K3ZS on 2005-01-06 There is a historical reason for the 600 KHz splits. At one time Technican class hams were restricted to only part of the 2M band. Repeaters were also licenses with the WR calls. The license limitations made it only practical to keep the inputs and outputs close. Technically, the 600KHz split was a compromise. If repeaters were just starting today on 2 meters I would think a 1 Mhz or larger split would have become the standard. | ||
| NO6B | 2005-01-07 | |
|---|---|---|
| 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| 1 MHz splits can be a bit problematic if your region uses a 15 kHz bandplan. The reason for this is simple math: 15 kHz does not divide evenly into 1000 kHz. So you end up with a "discontinuity" somewhere in your bandplan. For example, take the pair 146.415/147.415. In a 15 kHz bandplan, 147.415 would fall only 10 kHz away from the simplex frequency 147.405, making it unusable. So 1 MHz splits inevitibly "waste" a 3rd channel somewhere. Better to use a split that's a multiple of 15 kHz, i.e. 1.005 MHz. This is not a problem in areas that use 20 kHz channel spacing throughout the band, since 1 MHz is an integer multiple of 20 kHz. Having said that, I believe usage of non-standard splits makes sense in heavily congested areas where more repeater pairs are needed. If you look at the bandplans for 220 & 440 MHz & compare the ratio of repeater to simplex spectrum in those bands, you'll find a significantly higher percentage of repeater spectrum on those bands as compared to 2 meters. Also remember that under the current Part 97 rules, repeaters are already prohibited over 25% of the 2 meter band. Here in SoCal we have a few such non-standard split pairs in our bandplan. Most were added in an ad-hoc way so there is no "standard" odd-split in use. One pair (147.585 in/144.930 out) was recently added & was made as wide as possible specifically for portable repeaters. It's been found that many small VHF mobile duplexers can be tuned down to ~2.5 MHz spacing, so this pair enables the use of truly portable 2 meter repeaters. | ||
| WA2JJH | 2005-01-07 | |
|---|---|---|
| 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| WA6BFH, 1X3 is a decent person as are you. multiple choice 1)Rent the movie 'FIGHT CLUB'Then do only the Brad pitt stunts. The whats in the lobster bisque. 2)nEVER MIND THE PROBLEM, ALWAYS FIX THE BLAME FIRST! 3)Try operating on 532nM, everybody is coherent but highly polarized. 4)The real problem is the 2x3 from 2 land! In fact the dude is a #$%^** REAL PIP- MFCSSOBBOBJB! 5)LIVE AND LET LIVE 6)Send each other a jiffy bag filled with larks vomit. 7)QSY BOTTOM LINE.....We should all just lighten up and chill out. laugh more. I know it is hard. We all lost many friends since 9/11. This thread is about repeater splits. I am going to split. Too much anger here. | ||
| WA6BFH | 2005-01-07 | |
|---|---|---|
| RE: FM is dead, so this topic is silly. | ||
| Nice, and pretty accurate! I'll talk to YOU on 1282.925 FM, or 1296.100 USB. Also, 50.300 FM Simplex 50.360 FM Simplex 52.520 FM Simplex 146.46 FM Simplex 146.52 FM Simplex 223.50 FM Simplex 446.00 FM Simplex (maybe,) 50.125 USB 222.100 USB 73! Reply to a comment by : N0TONE on 2005-01-07 Basically, as I see it, the whole repeater love affair is flat-out over. Repeaters in ham radio started out as an interesting curiosity, for the die-hard technologists to play with. I was one of those die-hard technologists, and built several 220 MHz and 146 MHz machines out of GE pre-prog or Motorola two-way gear. Of course, the commercial guys had been doing it for years, so ham radio, as usual, was a late bloomer. In those days, we typically used separate antennas. If you inverted a vertical, and planted it below another vertical, the two would be reasonably isolated. We used dedicated pairs, rented from the phone company, sending DC control signals to the repeaters to enable/disable them. Those of us who knew the frequencies, and had crystals for them installed in the surplus Motorola/GE rigs in the trunks of our cars, enjoyed the crystal clarity of FM audio in mobiles that were as much as 200 miles apart. You see, in those days, unlike today, we took radio seriously, so our mobile installations were always at least 100 watts, with at least a 5/8 wave vertical, bolted into a hole drilled into the sheet metal roof or trunk of the car. There was, as yet, no such thing as an FM rig intended for ham frequencies, and there certainly weren't handheld radios, and very certainly not synthesized hand held radios. Our typical moble-to-moble simplex range was nearly 30 miles, because we were using good setups. Our "backward" brethren were using vibrator power supplies and AM rigs in their cars, typically using highly inefficient antennas and 30 to 50 watts on 160 or 80 meters, using AM. Of course, all of us were using vacuum-tube gear - the solid state transmitter had yet to be invented. Some time in the 1970s, VHF FM mobile rigs became available for the ham market. Most required crystals but some, including the semi-famous Clegg FM-27B (the Frog Masher) were pseudo-synthesized. The Big Deal about these radios was that they ran on 13.8VDC and did not require modification in order for a dumbed-down ham to use them. Suddenly, everybody in ham radio knew about repeaters, and being able to reliably QSO local hams, anywhere you might be driving. It was perfect. No matter where your car might take you on your daily commute, you'd be within ratchet-jaw distance of a repeater. Mobile rigs proliferated, hams seemed to increase their financial wealth, and more and more repeaters were put on the air. All repeater owners were private - no clubs - and they all wanted their repeater to be "busy" because that meant they had good enough coverage that people wanted to use the machine. If two guys wanted to have an extended QSO about a topic nobody else was interested in, they'd figure out how to be simplex distance apart (sometimes that was 100 miles if they could find hills to park on, and if you were using your home station, it was at least 100 miles, because no sensible ham would mount a VHF vertical below 50 feet) The evil started with the introduction of the hand-held FM radio. Now, you could effectively be a KMart ham, knowing nothing about installing a radio in a car or having to know anything about antennas other than plugging one into the BNC jack on the box. For a while, this was OK. Most hams still had "real radios" with antennas virtually welded to the cars, and 100 watts of power, so we tolerated the pipsqueak nuisance of the one watt handheld guys, who were usually noisy into the repeater. We never could figure out why someone would use a battery-powered low-power radio, and then add insult to injury by using a dummy load antenna - and think that this should, or could be, their main radio! The handheld proliferated. Soon, all the guys on the air were idiots. They had purchased a radio in a box, and all they had to do was attach the battery and punch some frequencies into it and it was "programmed". They didn't know a bloody thing about running high-current DC cables in their car, and they had never had the pleasure of pulling out the carpet to run the RG-8 coaxial cable to the trunk-mounted antenna, and they knew nothing about using common-mode chokes to reduce ignition or fuel pump noise. They weren't hams at all, they were licensees with KMart (e.g. Radio Shack) radios from a box. For some reason, the very dangerous ARES/emergency communications police seemed to proliferate at the same time. These guys have horrible operating habits, and seem to have no real on-air operating technique. They also seem to think that a handheld is a legitimate radio, therefore they also have very noisy signals into the repeater - but they don't alter their operating habits one bit to compensate for a signal that they SHOULD know is very poor. Well, they had such a hard time being noticed on the repeaters, because they were uninteresting and had lousy signals, that they started their own repeater organizations, the thus, the repeate club was born. But this time, there was a difference. Now, instead of wanting everybody in the world to use the repeater, they insisted that transmission be kept very short and if you wanted a longer QSO, please leave, and go to simplex, so that we can keep the machine open for a potential emergency. Of course, they were too dumb to realize that if you drive away all the casual users, there won't be anybody listening when a genuine need arises and so today we hear lots of stories of emergencie calls being made on repeaters, but nobody answers. The fault is the emergency comms types, for driving away the users. So what do we have today? Gobs of licensees who were falsely led to believe that a hand-held radio is some how an OK thing to have as their only radio. They have no idea how to connect it to a proper DC source and antenna in the car, and they have no idea how to put up a real vertical antenna at home. Therefore, their only hope of making a QSO is on a repeater, but since the emegency comms police have driven away all the casual users, there are no QSOs to be had on local repeaters. And these new licensees have no idea how to change any of this. They don't know that there's a whole world on SSB or on HF - they were misled into believeing that a technician license was good enough, and nobody's trying to fix this error in education, either. Nowadays, when someone mentions "mobile rig" you assume HF, not VHF FM. When I go to hamfests, conventions, even Dayton, and I see antennas on hams' cars, there are a LOT more HF antennas (Screwdrivers, Ham Sticks, etc) than there are VHF FM antennas. The FM craze is over. The handheld radio started the poisoning process; the ARRL doubled the dosage by claiming that an HT is "a complete station" in their stupid book "Now You're Talking" and the emergency comms police drove the nails into the coffin by reserving repeaters for emergencies, thus driving away anybody who might casually listen, and be there when the emergency really takes place. Odd split repeaters? Who the heck cares? Talk to you on 3.550 MHz. Hope your code speed is up to snuff. AM Reply to a comment by : WA6BFH on 2005-01-06 Steve, it was not your 1X3 callsign that I was refering to! I probably should have been better specific. 73! de John Reply to a comment by : W4CNG on 2005-01-06 Not many (odd splits) in the Southeast USA. There are too many "Paper Repeaters" listed that just are out there for someone to go apply for their not used frequency on both 2 meters as well as 440Mhz in EVERY large city in the SERA area. There are more than I can count on both hands in the Metro-Atlanta GA area right now, and I ought to know since I've been building repeaters here since 1971, and raised the issue with the SERA last year. Steve W4CNG Reply to a comment by : W3DCG on 2005-01-06 Here's my inane drivel: Unfortunately, I don't remember anyone's phone number anymore. Everyone I call, is in my cellphone memory. I remember them by single digit numbers (wife is 2 <send>, office backline is 3 <send>, Mom is 4 <send>, Uncle is 5, etc). Even at home, all dialed numbers are on the portable phone hand-set directory, just like a cell phone. So my take is, if it is programmable with my HT, fine. If not, it'll be a repeater not in my HT everything is pre-programmed memory bank, and hence, a repeater I'll never hear. So I guess it's actually okay. Maybe I should spend more time on 2 meters. Maybe if I didn't have to talk to people on the phone so much during the day I'd spend more time with it. Certainly if CW were done on 2m FM I'd have purchased a mini-palm paddle and leg strap the day I bought my HT's, and of course a built in keyer would be standard on all HTs! Like I said, inane drivel...73. | ||
| N0TONE | 2005-01-07 | |
|---|---|---|
| FM is dead, so this topic is silly. | ||
| Basically, as I see it, the whole repeater love affair is flat-out over. Repeaters in ham radio started out as an interesting curiosity, for the die-hard technologists to play with. I was one of those die-hard technologists, and built several 220 MHz and 146 MHz machines out of GE pre-prog or Motorola two-way gear. Of course, the commercial guys had been doing it for years, so ham radio, as usual, was a late bloomer. In those days, we typically used separate antennas. If you inverted a vertical, and planted it below another vertical, the two would be reasonably isolated. We used dedicated pairs, rented from the phone company, sending DC control signals to the repeaters to enable/disable them. Those of us who knew the frequencies, and had crystals for them installed in the surplus Motorola/GE rigs in the trunks of our cars, enjoyed the crystal clarity of FM audio in mobiles that were as much as 200 miles apart. You see, in those days, unlike today, we took radio seriously, so our mobile installations were always at least 100 watts, with at least a 5/8 wave vertical, bolted into a hole drilled into the sheet metal roof or trunk of the car. There was, as yet, no such thing as an FM rig intended for ham frequencies, and there certainly weren't handheld radios, and very certainly not synthesized hand held radios. Our typical moble-to-moble simplex range was nearly 30 miles, because we were using good setups. Our "backward" brethren were using vibrator power supplies and AM rigs in their cars, typically using highly inefficient antennas and 30 to 50 watts on 160 or 80 meters, using AM. Of course, all of us were using vacuum-tube gear - the solid state transmitter had yet to be invented. Some time in the 1970s, VHF FM mobile rigs became available for the ham market. Most required crystals but some, including the semi-famous Clegg FM-27B (the Frog Masher) were pseudo-synthesized. The Big Deal about these radios was that they ran on 13.8VDC and did not require modification in order for a dumbed-down ham to use them. Suddenly, everybody in ham radio knew about repeaters, and being able to reliably QSO local hams, anywhere you might be driving. It was perfect. No matter where your car might take you on your daily commute, you'd be within ratchet-jaw distance of a repeater. Mobile rigs proliferated, hams seemed to increase their financial wealth, and more and more repeaters were put on the air. All repeater owners were private - no clubs - and they all wanted their repeater to be "busy" because that meant they had good enough coverage that people wanted to use the machine. If two guys wanted to have an extended QSO about a topic nobody else was interested in, they'd figure out how to be simplex distance apart (sometimes that was 100 miles if they could find hills to park on, and if you were using your home station, it was at least 100 miles, because no sensible ham would mount a VHF vertical below 50 feet) The evil started with the introduction of the hand-held FM radio. Now, you could effectively be a KMart ham, knowing nothing about installing a radio in a car or having to know anything about antennas other than plugging one into the BNC jack on the box. For a while, this was OK. Most hams still had "real radios" with antennas virtually welded to the cars, and 100 watts of power, so we tolerated the pipsqueak nuisance of the one watt handheld guys, who were usually noisy into the repeater. We never could figure out why someone would use a battery-powered low-power radio, and then add insult to injury by using a dummy load antenna - and think that this should, or could be, their main radio! The handheld proliferated. Soon, all the guys on the air were idiots. They had purchased a radio in a box, and all they had to do was attach the battery and punch some frequencies into it and it was "programmed". They didn't know a bloody thing about running high-current DC cables in their car, and they had never had the pleasure of pulling out the carpet to run the RG-8 coaxial cable to the trunk-mounted antenna, and they knew nothing about using common-mode chokes to reduce ignition or fuel pump noise. They weren't hams at all, they were licensees with KMart (e.g. Radio Shack) radios from a box. For some reason, the very dangerous ARES/emergency communications police seemed to proliferate at the same time. These guys have horrible operating habits, and seem to have no real on-air operating technique. They also seem to think that a handheld is a legitimate radio, therefore they also have very noisy signals into the repeater - but they don't alter their operating habits one bit to compensate for a signal that they SHOULD know is very poor. Well, they had such a hard time being noticed on the repeaters, because they were uninteresting and had lousy signals, that they started their own repeater organizations, the thus, the repeate club was born. But this time, there was a difference. Now, instead of wanting everybody in the world to use the repeater, they insisted that transmission be kept very short and if you wanted a longer QSO, please leave, and go to simplex, so that we can keep the machine open for a potential emergency. Of course, they were too dumb to realize that if you drive away all the casual users, there won't be anybody listening when a genuine need arises and so today we hear lots of stories of emergencie calls being made on repeaters, but nobody answers. The fault is the emergency comms types, for driving away the users. So what do we have today? Gobs of licensees who were falsely led to believe that a hand-held radio is some how an OK thing to have as their only radio. They have no idea how to connect it to a proper DC source and antenna in the car, and they have no idea how to put up a real vertical antenna at home. Therefore, their only hope of making a QSO is on a repeater, but since the emegency comms police have driven away all the casual users, there are no QSOs to be had on local repeaters. And these new licensees have no idea how to change any of this. They don't know that there's a whole world on SSB or on HF - they were misled into believeing that a technician license was good enough, and nobody's trying to fix this error in education, either. Nowadays, when someone mentions "mobile rig" you assume HF, not VHF FM. When I go to hamfests, conventions, even Dayton, and I see antennas on hams' cars, there are a LOT more HF antennas (Screwdrivers, Ham Sticks, etc) than there are VHF FM antennas. The FM craze is over. The handheld radio started the poisoning process; the ARRL doubled the dosage by claiming that an HT is "a complete station" in their stupid book "Now You're Talking" and the emergency comms police drove the nails into the coffin by reserving repeaters for emergencies, thus driving away anybody who might casually listen, and be there when the emergency really takes place. Odd split repeaters? Who the heck cares? Talk to you on 3.550 MHz. Hope your code speed is up to snuff. AM Reply to a comment by : WA6BFH on 2005-01-06 Steve, it was not your 1X3 callsign that I was refering to! I probably should have been better specific. 73! de John Reply to a comment by : W4CNG on 2005-01-06 Not many (odd splits) in the Southeast USA. There are too many "Paper Repeaters" listed that just are out there for someone to go apply for their not used frequency on both 2 meters as well as 440Mhz in EVERY large city in the SERA area. There are more than I can count on both hands in the Metro-Atlanta GA area right now, and I ought to know since I've been building repeaters here since 1971, and raised the issue with the SERA last year. Steve W4CNG Reply to a comment by : W3DCG on 2005-01-06 Here's my inane drivel: Unfortunately, I don't remember anyone's phone number anymore. Everyone I call, is in my cellphone memory. I remember them by single digit numbers (wife is 2 <send>, office backline is 3 <send>, Mom is 4 <send>, Uncle is 5, etc). Even at home, all dialed numbers are on the portable phone hand-set directory, just like a cell phone. So my take is, if it is programmable with my HT, fine. If not, it'll be a repeater not in my HT everything is pre-programmed memory bank, and hence, a repeater I'll never hear. So I guess it's actually okay. Maybe I should spend more time on 2 meters. Maybe if I didn't have to talk to people on the phone so much during the day I'd spend more time with it. Certainly if CW were done on 2m FM I'd have purchased a mini-palm paddle and leg strap the day I bought my HT's, and of course a built in keyer would be standard on all HTs! Like I said, inane drivel...73. | ||
| WA6BFH | 2005-01-06 | |
|---|---|---|
| RE: 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| Steve, it was not your 1X3 callsign that I was refering to! I probably should have been better specific. 73! de John Reply to a comment by : W4CNG on 2005-01-06 Not many (odd splits) in the Southeast USA. There are too many "Paper Repeaters" listed that just are out there for someone to go apply for their not used frequency on both 2 meters as well as 440Mhz in EVERY large city in the SERA area. There are more than I can count on both hands in the Metro-Atlanta GA area right now, and I ought to know since I've been building repeaters here since 1971, and raised the issue with the SERA last year. Steve W4CNG Reply to a comment by : W3DCG on 2005-01-06 Here's my inane drivel: Unfortunately, I don't remember anyone's phone number anymore. Everyone I call, is in my cellphone memory. I remember them by single digit numbers (wife is 2 <send>, office backline is 3 <send>, Mom is 4 <send>, Uncle is 5, etc). Even at home, all dialed numbers are on the portable phone hand-set directory, just like a cell phone. So my take is, if it is programmable with my HT, fine. If not, it'll be a repeater not in my HT everything is pre-programmed memory bank, and hence, a repeater I'll never hear. So I guess it's actually okay. Maybe I should spend more time on 2 meters. Maybe if I didn't have to talk to people on the phone so much during the day I'd spend more time with it. Certainly if CW were done on 2m FM I'd have purchased a mini-palm paddle and leg strap the day I bought my HT's, and of course a built in keyer would be standard on all HTs! Like I said, inane drivel...73. | ||
| W4CNG | 2005-01-06 | |
|---|---|---|
| RE: 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| Not many (odd splits) in the Southeast USA. There are too many "Paper Repeaters" listed that just are out there for someone to go apply for their not used frequency on both 2 meters as well as 440Mhz in EVERY large city in the SERA area. There are more than I can count on both hands in the Metro-Atlanta GA area right now, and I ought to know since I've been building repeaters here since 1971, and raised the issue with the SERA last year. Steve W4CNG Reply to a comment by : W3DCG on 2005-01-06 Here's my inane drivel: Unfortunately, I don't remember anyone's phone number anymore. Everyone I call, is in my cellphone memory. I remember them by single digit numbers (wife is 2 <send>, office backline is 3 <send>, Mom is 4 <send>, Uncle is 5, etc). Even at home, all dialed numbers are on the portable phone hand-set directory, just like a cell phone. So my take is, if it is programmable with my HT, fine. If not, it'll be a repeater not in my HT everything is pre-programmed memory bank, and hence, a repeater I'll never hear. So I guess it's actually okay. Maybe I should spend more time on 2 meters. Maybe if I didn't have to talk to people on the phone so much during the day I'd spend more time with it. Certainly if CW were done on 2m FM I'd have purchased a mini-palm paddle and leg strap the day I bought my HT's, and of course a built in keyer would be standard on all HTs! Like I said, inane drivel...73. | ||
| WA6BFH | 2005-01-06 | |
|---|---|---|
| RE: 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| I probably would be wiser to not resond to this but, the idea that someone with a 1X3 callsign responds negatively to the idea of station engineering "of good engineering practice" just frosts my fern. If I were to make this pointed, I might ask this ham: What bands are you on (please list them all)? What modes can you cover on these bands? Is all of your equipment up to a "state of the art" standards? If this Ham came back to me with answers like, ' all of my equipment is state of the art, and I can work all modes on all bands from 1.8 MHz up to 1240 MHz., and I'm working on transverters for the rest, I would just shut up. I suspect though that this is far from the case! Further, the intermod, adjacent channel, non-quieting, poor engineering ideas that have come up in this thread are I suspect problem 'issues' that this ham is well aware of with his own station. Reply to a comment by : W3DCG on 2005-01-06 Here's my inane drivel: Unfortunately, I don't remember anyone's phone number anymore. Everyone I call, is in my cellphone memory. I remember them by single digit numbers (wife is 2 <send>, office backline is 3 <send>, Mom is 4 <send>, Uncle is 5, etc). Even at home, all dialed numbers are on the portable phone hand-set directory, just like a cell phone. So my take is, if it is programmable with my HT, fine. If not, it'll be a repeater not in my HT everything is pre-programmed memory bank, and hence, a repeater I'll never hear. So I guess it's actually okay. Maybe I should spend more time on 2 meters. Maybe if I didn't have to talk to people on the phone so much during the day I'd spend more time with it. Certainly if CW were done on 2m FM I'd have purchased a mini-palm paddle and leg strap the day I bought my HT's, and of course a built in keyer would be standard on all HTs! Like I said, inane drivel...73. | ||
| W3DCG | 2005-01-06 | |
|---|---|---|
| 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| Here's my inane drivel: Unfortunately, I don't remember anyone's phone number anymore. Everyone I call, is in my cellphone memory. I remember them by single digit numbers (wife is 2 <send>, office backline is 3 <send>, Mom is 4 <send>, Uncle is 5, etc). Even at home, all dialed numbers are on the portable phone hand-set directory, just like a cell phone. So my take is, if it is programmable with my HT, fine. If not, it'll be a repeater not in my HT everything is pre-programmed memory bank, and hence, a repeater I'll never hear. So I guess it's actually okay. Maybe I should spend more time on 2 meters. Maybe if I didn't have to talk to people on the phone so much during the day I'd spend more time with it. Certainly if CW were done on 2m FM I'd have purchased a mini-palm paddle and leg strap the day I bought my HT's, and of course a built in keyer would be standard on all HTs! Like I said, inane drivel...73. | ||
| GILLIAM_LINEBERRY_EX_N4VOX | 2005-01-06 | |
|---|---|---|
| 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| The old saying "IF IT AIN'T BROKE, DON'T FIX IT" certainly applies here. All of this talk about nothing. | ||
| WA6BFH | 2005-01-06 | |
|---|---|---|
| RE: 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| N0FPE, Actually KF4SKY, and KB7YOU made these appeals. This is probably the first thread that I have posted to in awhile now where I did not specifically encourage people to use our available spectrum -- all of it! That being said, it is interesting that you would single out the 135 centimeter band. This band, being allocated only in the U.S., has a certain disperity of available equipment. The 6 Meter band is available now to all Hams, very inexpensively, packaged within models of radio that are a bargain to purchase. About the only decent 220 FM radio on the market is a 3 band unit for 2 Meters and 70 centimeters -- and a 3rd band. This radio will sell for about $1200.00 Dollars when the 3rd transverter unit is installed. A very good, brand new, ALL MODE, MF,HF, 6, Meter, 2 Meter 70 centimenter radio can be purchased for about half that much -- and nobody uses 6 Meters! Don't take this the wrong way! I'm not throwing stones at you. I too would like to see better effective use made of the 135 centimeter band, as well as the rest of our spectrum. Your comment just gave me a good opening to make this point. Gee, if you divide the cost of an FT-100D or IC-706 by the number of wavelength bands it will work on, thats about $58.33 per band. If I devide that by 2 (FM/SSB) thats 29 Bucks! If I devide the $1200.00 that a TS-742 costs by the 3 bands it will cover, thats $400.00 per band. Reply to a comment by : N0FPE on 2005-01-06 This would not bother me a bit. What does bother me is after reading all the posts on this topic I failed to see one person make a comment on the use of 220mhz!! If all the 2 meter pairs are used why not try a 220 repeater?? UHF is just about full in most places also but 200 is a wasteland in most areas, unless you get close to a large city. Just me thinking outloud.... Dan/NØFPE | ||
| N0FPE | 2005-01-06 | |
|---|---|---|
| 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| This would not bother me a bit. What does bother me is after reading all the posts on this topic I failed to see one person make a comment on the use of 220mhz!! If all the 2 meter pairs are used why not try a 220 repeater?? UHF is just about full in most places also but 200 is a wasteland in most areas, unless you get close to a large city. Just me thinking outloud.... Dan/NØFPE | ||
| K2WH | 2005-01-06 | |
|---|---|---|
| RE: 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| The only reason they are called "Odd Splits", is because they go agaist historic splits or 600khz. This is old and out of date, and any split should be allowed as long as interference does not result. There is a repeater in north jersey that is using a 2.6mhz split. Seems to work just fine. K2WH Reply to a comment by : WA2JJH on 2005-01-06 NOTONE, yes to people like us that worked BCST TV it is not that hard. However not every ham has decent enough equipment to make it trivial. We had tons of IMD problems with the stations IFB/ENG 455.150/450.100 SPLIT. Yup we had a 5.05 split. This cleared up one problem. The CE gave in. So we ordered a new duplexer. Problem gone! | ||
| WA2JJH | 2005-01-06 | |
|---|---|---|
| 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| NOTONE, yes to people like us that worked BCST TV it is not that hard. However not every ham has decent enough equipment to make it trivial. We had tons of IMD problems with the stations IFB/ENG 455.150/450.100 SPLIT. Yup we had a 5.05 split. This cleared up one problem. The CE gave in. So we ordered a new duplexer. Problem gone! | ||
| N0FP | 2005-01-06 | |
|---|---|---|
| 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| I for one am not surprised that the local coordination would permit this to go on. Weird stuff was going on around here (in MN) until the general population of hams started putting pressure on the local coordinating board to clean up its act. Local coordination came about when the FCC wanted out of the frequency wars that were common (and still are frankly) on the 2M band. What a joke. Many of these boards were appointed back in the dark ages of FM and are managed by people who own repeaters, and only those who own repeaters. Non-repeater owners have no meaningful voice in the matter. This clear conflict of interest falls on deaf ears when pointed out. The ARRL could care less. The FCC could care less. And the local hams are often powerless to initiate changes. Around here, there has been a problematic use of simplex channels for repeater use. Some inputs fall on traditional simplex channels. 146.400 being most notable. And they are 'coordinated' as well. This is from the official MRC website for MN coordination: 146.415-146.595 Simplex - except where 147.XX repeaters use low inputs The problems only started to get resolved when the frequency police were forced to begin de-coordination procedings against repeater owners who had 'pairs in their pockets.' By that I mean they had been coordinated but were not using the pairs in any meaningful manner. Getting coordination is very difficult, if not impossible. Once coordinated, owners are very reluctant to give them up--even though they don't use the pair right now. Until the powers that be (frankly there are no powers) can generate some interest to strip these coordinating boards of their monopoly on frequencies, and begin doing the job they were originally intended to perform, the 2M band will continue to be stripped of any open space. Just try and get an allocation to operate Fast Scan TV on any band anywhere. The repeater owners will not allow it. Voted down every time. This little snip is also from the MRC website: A. Application for membership in the Council shall be open to all organizations or individuals (hereafter referred to as organizations), who operate a licensed repeating installation or have an interest in Amateur repeater operation and are in accordance with the purposes of the Council as set forth in Article II. So as you can see, there is exactly zero incentive for these councils to behave in accordance with the best interest of the general ham population. They typically behave like they own the frequencies. Funny...I guess they do. Ford-N0FP | ||
| N0TONE | 2005-01-06 | |
|---|---|---|
| RE: 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| I think that the real issue isn't whether the repaters are "odd split" or normal split, but instead, whether it makes sense to give up standard simplex channels for a repeater. If the geography of the area makes simplex unusable, then it makes some sense to put repeaters there. And, a 600kc (ah, the gold old days, before kHz) split, with one frequency being a standard simplex channel, will dump the other one ona some other repeater's input or output - no good. Engineering wise, 600kHz is trivial. If you can't get a duplexer to work with that split, you should be doing repeater work. In commercial broadcast, we routinely made 20kW FM transmitters only 200kHz apart share the same transmit antenna, using cavity type resonators such as are used on duplexers. I agree with the respondent who suggested that no new allocations in a given geographical area should be permitted, unless it can be demonstrated that the existing repeaters are overloaded with too many users. Spectrum is far too valuable to semi-permanently assign to an unused repeater. Realistically, whether this practice continues has a whole lot more to do with the politics and personalities in your area than any other factor. The opinion of eHam users won't change whatever decisions are being made. AM Reply to a comment by : WA6BFH on 2005-01-06 Looking again through some of these posts, I have an additional thought on engineering! You know I have tried tried 'programming into my HT' all kinds of things. Lets see here now, the 2 Meter wavelength band is 4 MegaHetz wide... thats 4 Million cycles or Hertz. That means I should be able to have AT LEAST 2 Million repeaters on the band right? I guess you could have more but, for some reason they seem to all use two frequencies each. Boy, thats inefficient! We should at least be able to have channels every 5 KHz! 2) Anybody know how to 'program' better selectivity on my fancy dancy wizbang VX$&9# Handi-talkie? Also, why don't they make these things to cover more frequencies? Around 2 Meters, mine only tunes up to about 170 MHz. It should tune a wider range but, it needs to be more selective too! 3) How do I program it to put out more signal? Mine seems to do about 5 Watts output maximum. Now I know that many Hams have radios that run 50 or even 100 Watts, so how do I program this thing to 'put-out' more? 3) It should also be programmable to work better with its antenna. I got rid of my Stubby Duck; shoot the antenna I have on it now is almost 12 inches tall! It should work better damn it! 6 Meters really sucks, I want my money back for that band! Its probably all these repeater builders fault! If they knew how to build their repeaters properly, I'm sure my wiz bang VX would be able to work some of that good 6 Meter DX I have been hearing about. I never hear anyone on the frequency I was told to monitor. I even stood out in front of a Hams house who is supposed to be a 'big gun' there, and all I heard was Woof-woof-woof! I even met a guy that has a handi-talkie thats about the size of a credit card. Shoot, he has more problems than me! I know its these guys that are building these repeaters, they should really get their act together! 73'zzzzzz good buddy! Joe Ham PS I really love Ham radio! I got my Tech on one weekend, and went back the next weekend and got my Extra. I'm now looking to get on all the bands 160 Meters right up to the top band at 440 MHz (although someone said we had a band in the GigaHertz spectrum but, I don't know what they meant). Anybody know of a good HT for 160 Meters? Reply to a comment by : WA6BFH on 2005-01-06 In California, a very forward thinking bunch of folks sought to insure "good operating practice" in repeater engineering for years and decades hence. I am speaking of the time period that WB2WIK/6 refers to in 1972 when the coordinating body of that time, SCARC" the Southern California Amateur Relay Council (Later to become SCRRBA, and now TASMA) asked the owners and users of the then in place system to modify their system to conform to the recently ratified Texas/California Bandplan. That plan established the 600 KHz offset that toaday is nation wide (146 system: Low in/High out, and 147 systems Low in/High out on 30 KHz rastor -- No 145 MHz systems were allowed). Prior to this time period, repeater owners simply put their receivers and transmitters on any frequency that seemed like a good idea. Such notable repeaters were the W6FNO repeater with a 146.820 MHz input, and a 146.700 MHz output. Others that came along were the Anaheim Amateur Radio Associatio with a 147.190 MHz input, and a 146.520 MHz output. What these guys did was very fourthright and honorable because when they made the commitment to toss out their Rx and Tx CRYSTALS, they were also making that commitment for all of their "user base". All radios of the day were crystal controlled. Frequency Synthesizers came along in later years. The 146.400/147.435 MHz group was the only discenter at this 1972 meeting! Reply to a comment by : WB2WIK on 2005-01-06 Yep, I'm referring to 147.435. It still uses a 1.035 MHz "split," and has for so many years almost nobody can remember when it didn't. Due to good site selection (although the repeater's at its fourth site that I know of), it has wide coverage and people just deal with the split. (Hey, in L.A. we started out with "AM" repeaters back in the 1950s. W6MEP on Mt. Lee was either the first or second 2m amateur repeater activated in the U.S., and was AM for years before switching to FM.) WB2WIK/6 Reply to a comment by : KJ7XJ on 2005-01-06 Way back when... when I was growing up in LA I recall a system (I think WIK is refering to) that was THE "ODD" split machine. I havnt been in LA in years so Im not sure if the 435 machine is still on the air, but I remember what a pain it was to program the split into my Kenwood TR-2600. I dont mind any machine that has a different offset than the norm as long as it doesnt interfere with simplex or weak FM communication Eric Reply to a comment by : K3ZS on 2005-01-06 There is a historical reason for the 600 KHz splits. At one time Technican class hams were restricted to only part of the 2M band. Repeaters were also licenses with the WR calls. The license limitations made it only practical to keep the inputs and outputs close. Technically, the 600KHz split was a compromise. If repeaters were just starting today on 2 meters I would think a 1 Mhz or larger split would have become the standard. | ||
| WA6BFH | 2005-01-06 | |
|---|---|---|
| RE: 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| Looking again through some of these posts, I have an additional thought on engineering! You know I have tried tried 'programming into my HT' all kinds of things. Lets see here now, the 2 Meter wavelength band is 4 MegaHetz wide... thats 4 Million cycles or Hertz. That means I should be able to have AT LEAST 2 Million repeaters on the band right? I guess you could have more but, for some reason they seem to all use two frequencies each. Boy, thats inefficient! We should at least be able to have channels every 5 KHz! 2) Anybody know how to 'program' better selectivity on my fancy dancy wizbang VX$&9# Handi-talkie? Also, why don't they make these things to cover more frequencies? Around 2 Meters, mine only tunes up to about 170 MHz. It should tune a wider range but, it needs to be more selective too! 3) How do I program it to put out more signal? Mine seems to do about 5 Watts output maximum. Now I know that many Hams have radios that run 50 or even 100 Watts, so how do I program this thing to 'put-out' more? 3) It should also be programmable to work better with its antenna. I got rid of my Stubby Duck; shoot the antenna I have on it now is almost 12 inches tall! It should work better damn it! 6 Meters really sucks, I want my money back for that band! Its probably all these repeater builders fault! If they knew how to build their repeaters properly, I'm sure my wiz bang VX would be able to work some of that good 6 Meter DX I have been hearing about. I never hear anyone on the frequency I was told to monitor. I even stood out in front of a Hams house who is supposed to be a 'big gun' there, and all I heard was Woof-woof-woof! I even met a guy that has a handi-talkie thats about the size of a credit card. Shoot, he has more problems than me! I know its these guys that are building these repeaters, they should really get their act together! 73'zzzzzz good buddy! Joe Ham PS I really love Ham radio! I got my Tech on one weekend, and went back the next weekend and got my Extra. I'm now looking to get on all the bands 160 Meters right up to the top band at 440 MHz (although someone said we had a band in the GigaHertz spectrum but, I don't know what they meant). Anybody know of a good HT for 160 Meters? Reply to a comment by : WA6BFH on 2005-01-06 In California, a very forward thinking bunch of folks sought to insure "good operating practice" in repeater engineering for years and decades hence. I am speaking of the time period that WB2WIK/6 refers to in 1972 when the coordinating body of that time, SCARC" the Southern California Amateur Relay Council (Later to become SCRRBA, and now TASMA) asked the owners and users of the then in place system to modify their system to conform to the recently ratified Texas/California Bandplan. That plan established the 600 KHz offset that toaday is nation wide (146 system: Low in/High out, and 147 systems Low in/High out on 30 KHz rastor -- No 145 MHz systems were allowed). Prior to this time period, repeater owners simply put their receivers and transmitters on any frequency that seemed like a good idea. Such notable repeaters were the W6FNO repeater with a 146.820 MHz input, and a 146.700 MHz output. Others that came along were the Anaheim Amateur Radio Associatio with a 147.190 MHz input, and a 146.520 MHz output. What these guys did was very fourthright and honorable because when they made the commitment to toss out their Rx and Tx CRYSTALS, they were also making that commitment for all of their "user base". All radios of the day were crystal controlled. Frequency Synthesizers came along in later years. The 146.400/147.435 MHz group was the only discenter at this 1972 meeting! Reply to a comment by : WB2WIK on 2005-01-06 Yep, I'm referring to 147.435. It still uses a 1.035 MHz "split," and has for so many years almost nobody can remember when it didn't. Due to good site selection (although the repeater's at its fourth site that I know of), it has wide coverage and people just deal with the split. (Hey, in L.A. we started out with "AM" repeaters back in the 1950s. W6MEP on Mt. Lee was either the first or second 2m amateur repeater activated in the U.S., and was AM for years before switching to FM.) WB2WIK/6 Reply to a comment by : KJ7XJ on 2005-01-06 Way back when... when I was growing up in LA I recall a system (I think WIK is refering to) that was THE "ODD" split machine. I havnt been in LA in years so Im not sure if the 435 machine is still on the air, but I remember what a pain it was to program the split into my Kenwood TR-2600. I dont mind any machine that has a different offset than the norm as long as it doesnt interfere with simplex or weak FM communication Eric Reply to a comment by : K3ZS on 2005-01-06 There is a historical reason for the 600 KHz splits. At one time Technican class hams were restricted to only part of the 2M band. Repeaters were also licenses with the WR calls. The license limitations made it only practical to keep the inputs and outputs close. Technically, the 600KHz split was a compromise. If repeaters were just starting today on 2 meters I would think a 1 Mhz or larger split would have become the standard. | ||
| WA2JJH | 2005-01-06 | |
|---|---|---|
| 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| 1 meg splits been around for a while. In the early 70's no repeater could get coordinated below 146mhz. If your using old used commercial phelps-dodge or motorola avities and duplexers and are not 100% hardline, a 1 meg split is worth considering. | ||
| WA6BFH | 2005-01-06 | |
|---|---|---|
| RE: 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| In California, a very forward thinking bunch of folks sought to insure "good operating practice" in repeater engineering for years and decades hence. I am speaking of the time period that WB2WIK/6 refers to in 1972 when the coordinating body of that time, SCARC" the Southern California Amateur Relay Council (Later to become SCRRBA, and now TASMA) asked the owners and users of the then in place system to modify their system to conform to the recently ratified Texas/California Bandplan. That plan established the 600 KHz offset that toaday is nation wide (146 system: Low in/High out, and 147 systems Low in/High out on 30 KHz rastor -- No 145 MHz systems were allowed). Prior to this time period, repeater owners simply put their receivers and transmitters on any frequency that seemed like a good idea. Such notable repeaters were the W6FNO repeater with a 146.820 MHz input, and a 146.700 MHz output. Others that came along were the Anaheim Amateur Radio Associatio with a 147.190 MHz input, and a 146.520 MHz output. What these guys did was very fourthright and honorable because when they made the commitment to toss out their Rx and Tx CRYSTALS, they were also making that commitment for all of their "user base". All radios of the day were crystal controlled. Frequency Synthesizers came along in later years. The 146.400/147.435 MHz group was the only discenter at this 1972 meeting! Reply to a comment by : WB2WIK on 2005-01-06 Yep, I'm referring to 147.435. It still uses a 1.035 MHz "split," and has for so many years almost nobody can remember when it didn't. Due to good site selection (although the repeater's at its fourth site that I know of), it has wide coverage and people just deal with the split. (Hey, in L.A. we started out with "AM" repeaters back in the 1950s. W6MEP on Mt. Lee was either the first or second 2m amateur repeater activated in the U.S., and was AM for years before switching to FM.) WB2WIK/6 Reply to a comment by : KJ7XJ on 2005-01-06 Way back when... when I was growing up in LA I recall a system (I think WIK is refering to) that was THE "ODD" split machine. I havnt been in LA in years so Im not sure if the 435 machine is still on the air, but I remember what a pain it was to program the split into my Kenwood TR-2600. I dont mind any machine that has a different offset than the norm as long as it doesnt interfere with simplex or weak FM communication Eric Reply to a comment by : K3ZS on 2005-01-06 There is a historical reason for the 600 KHz splits. At one time Technican class hams were restricted to only part of the 2M band. Repeaters were also licenses with the WR calls. The license limitations made it only practical to keep the inputs and outputs close. Technically, the 600KHz split was a compromise. If repeaters were just starting today on 2 meters I would think a 1 Mhz or larger split would have become the standard. | ||
| WA1RNE | 2005-01-06 | |
|---|---|---|
| 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
I agree with KB7YOU..... Not sure if he will agree with this statement but how does one justify maintaining a 2 meter repeater these days? Other than Skywarn, they have become under-utilized play toys from the 1970's and 80's so what difference does it make if simplex repeaters are used? Maybe its only a problem where there's lots of 2 meter activity. It's certainly not in the Boston area. | ||
| WB2WIK | 2005-01-06 | |
|---|---|---|
| RE: 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| Yep, I'm referring to 147.435. It still uses a 1.035 MHz "split," and has for so many years almost nobody can remember when it didn't. Due to good site selection (although the repeater's at its fourth site that I know of), it has wide coverage and people just deal with the split. (Hey, in L.A. we started out with "AM" repeaters back in the 1950s. W6MEP on Mt. Lee was either the first or second 2m amateur repeater activated in the U.S., and was AM for years before switching to FM.) WB2WIK/6 Reply to a comment by : KJ7XJ on 2005-01-06 Way back when... when I was growing up in LA I recall a system (I think WIK is refering to) that was THE "ODD" split machine. I havnt been in LA in years so Im not sure if the 435 machine is still on the air, but I remember what a pain it was to program the split into my Kenwood TR-2600. I dont mind any machine that has a different offset than the norm as long as it doesnt interfere with simplex or weak FM communication Eric Reply to a comment by : K3ZS on 2005-01-06 There is a historical reason for the 600 KHz splits. At one time Technican class hams were restricted to only part of the 2M band. Repeaters were also licenses with the WR calls. The license limitations made it only practical to keep the inputs and outputs close. Technically, the 600KHz split was a compromise. If repeaters were just starting today on 2 meters I would think a 1 Mhz or larger split would have become the standard. | ||
| KE4SKY | 2005-01-06 | |
|---|---|---|
| RE: 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| These odd splits do not conform to the band plan and will cause adjacent channel interference for other users which DO follow the band plan, so they violate the tenets of what we like to call "good amateur practice." If people want to put up a 2m repeater and there are not enough 600 kHz frequency pairs available, they should use the SNP or "Shared Non-protected Pair" with CTCSS or DCS access control. That's what it's for. I would also encourage groups to put up repeaters on the 220 FM band, as there are lots of pairs available almost nationwide, and if we don't utilize this band more we might lose more of it. It is also up to the coordinating body to ensure that coordinations are revoked for machines which are off the air for an extended period, so that the pair is available to someone else. Some coordination groups to a better job at this than others. T-MARC still carries on its on-line database repeaters which have been off the air for years, under callsigns of people who haven't been licensees for several years either. But amateur coordination is "voluntary," and its a shame that we don't do a better job of it. Reply to a comment by : LNXAUTHOR on 2005-01-06 - is 600kHz too close? i'm not sure... from my limited experience the bigger problem for most repeaters in metro areas is intermod from pagers and other services that are not installed/functioning properly... - i'd have to check my HTs' manuals, but is programming a greater [non-standard] split possible? (too early for me yet, as i haven't finished my morning java)... - it'd be interesting to read some historical perspective in the replies! - tks for the article and questions! | ||
| KJ7XJ | 2005-01-06 | |
|---|---|---|
| RE: 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| Way back when... when I was growing up in LA I recall a system (I think WIK is refering to) that was THE "ODD" split machine. I havnt been in LA in years so Im not sure if the 435 machine is still on the air, but I remember what a pain it was to program the split into my Kenwood TR-2600. I dont mind any machine that has a different offset than the norm as long as it doesnt interfere with simplex or weak FM communication Eric Reply to a comment by : K3ZS on 2005-01-06 There is a historical reason for the 600 KHz splits. At one time Technican class hams were restricted to only part of the 2M band. Repeaters were also licenses with the WR calls. The license limitations made it only practical to keep the inputs and outputs close. Technically, the 600KHz split was a compromise. If repeaters were just starting today on 2 meters I would think a 1 Mhz or larger split would have become the standard. | ||
| WA6BFH | 2005-01-06 | |
|---|---|---|
| RE: 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| First, any decent receiver and duplexer should be able to work within a 600 KHz frequency offset(on the 2 Meter wavelength band). This is in fact wider than would be strickly possible. 2) Common or standard input/output frequency pair rastor is done to gain good control of intermodulation frequency mix products. When all inputs and all out puts are assuredly known, it makes the process of looking for such mathematical mixes a straightforward process. When folks just take it upon themselves to say, 'well I don't hear anybody on this frequency, and this other frequency over here seems to be quiet -- this is where problems come from to people who know how and why repeater systems should be organized! Strickly speaking this is also a violation of good engineering process, a long standing and noted requirement of Amateur (Part 97) licensing. We have though seen the cause of this problem many times. It results from the idea that: 'well, I know there are already 200 repeaters that cover the area but, I want to have my own'! I could offer such folks a good solution. Start using the satelite sub-bands! You will never hear any activity there anyway, and if you do, it can be fixed by putting some more cotton in your ears. Of course there are a variety of other frequencies to choose from. I mean, who really needs to think about frequency coordination and good engineering anyway? I just want to put up MY repeater -- and thats whats importent right? Reply to a comment by : W2SRH on 2005-01-06 There's a repeater located about 5 miles from me that uses one of these odd splits (146.46, +1MHz - N2RE). Wasn't a problem at all to program into my HT (VX-5R) or my mobile rig (FT-7800), but boy did it mess with me for setting up my new base station a week ago (TS-2000)! After programming in the local 2m and 440 repeater, I went to add the one with the odd split and had to change the offset in the menu. Unfortunately, I forgot to change it back after saving the frequency to memory, so all the other repeaters I programmed in had a 1MHz offset. Took a few minutes of trying to bring one up before I realized the display was showing the wrong transmit frequency (and two wouldn't key the rig at all, because transmit was now outside the amateur band). Then again, part of that could've been just new rig syndrome, the manual didn't' even have a crease in the binding yet :> | ||
| KT8K | 2005-01-06 | |
|---|---|---|
| RE: 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| I'd be surprised if the difference in de-sense potential is much better at 1 MHz split than it is at 600 kHz. What concerns me, though, is the notion that some of these systems are running inverted to others. I remember before Michigan went to the 20 kHz standard spacing on 2 meters, our 146.97 machine "locked up" with other machines that were inverted to us on several occasions. One of the machines was in Missouri, I believe, and another was just as far away (the other side of Ontario?). I have always resisted putting pl on the 2 meter machine for which I am trustee (W8PGW/r 146.36/96 Ann Arbor, MI) as I believe it excludes visitors - I'd like them to be able to use it if they can hear it -- but it would be absolutely necessary if we had to share the pair with an inverted machine, even at a great distance. I agree with the idea of eliminating "paper repeaters". Repeater coordination groups, being volunteer-staffed, have their hands more than full in the more populous states, however, and have a hard enough time just handling requests for new coordinations let alone tackling the deadwood. Most hams have a pretty good supply of available 2 meter repeaters on standard splits. Unfortunately, some hams want to have a repeater to play with, an "exclusive" club, or an "ego machine", in which case I'd say, there is plenty of space on higher bands than 2 meters. Good rx & 73 de kt8k - Tim Reply to a comment by : K3ZS on 2005-01-06 There is a historical reason for the 600 KHz splits. At one time Technican class hams were restricted to only part of the 2M band. Repeaters were also licenses with the WR calls. The license limitations made it only practical to keep the inputs and outputs close. Technically, the 600KHz split was a compromise. If repeaters were just starting today on 2 meters I would think a 1 Mhz or larger split would have become the standard. | ||
| N4ZOU | 2005-01-06 | |
|---|---|---|
| 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| Coordinated repeaters need to have an audit done every 2 or 3 years on usage. We have three repeaters in my area. Two use tone access and have a total of 6 users that use both for checking in on a net once a week on different days just to make sure there still alive (repeater and operators). The other repeater is operated by the local EMA with no tone access and no ties to any amateur radio club. It gets constant use day and night. Needless to say the two tone access repeaters need to be taken off the air and the two other repeaters out of this area forced to use tone access that are very active could remove the tone access requirement for interference free operation. Removing repeaters with little or no use only makes since in order to allow installing new repeaters that would get used. I am sure that the 6 people using the two little used repeaters could find room to operate on the local EMA repeater. | ||
| W2SRH | 2005-01-06 | |
|---|---|---|
| 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| There's a repeater located about 5 miles from me that uses one of these odd splits (146.46, +1MHz - N2RE). Wasn't a problem at all to program into my HT (VX-5R) or my mobile rig (FT-7800), but boy did it mess with me for setting up my new base station a week ago (TS-2000)! After programming in the local 2m and 440 repeater, I went to add the one with the odd split and had to change the offset in the menu. Unfortunately, I forgot to change it back after saving the frequency to memory, so all the other repeaters I programmed in had a 1MHz offset. Took a few minutes of trying to bring one up before I realized the display was showing the wrong transmit frequency (and two wouldn't key the rig at all, because transmit was now outside the amateur band). Then again, part of that could've been just new rig syndrome, the manual didn't' even have a crease in the binding yet :> | ||
| K3ZS | 2005-01-06 | |
|---|---|---|
| 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| There is a historical reason for the 600 KHz splits. At one time Technican class hams were restricted to only part of the 2M band. Repeaters were also licenses with the WR calls. The license limitations made it only practical to keep the inputs and outputs close. Technically, the 600KHz split was a compromise. If repeaters were just starting today on 2 meters I would think a 1 Mhz or larger split would have become the standard. | ||
| WB2WIK | 2005-01-06 | |
|---|---|---|
| RE: 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| I'm surprised anyplace has any frequency pairs left to be coordinated on two meters. Many places used up all the pairs 10-20 years ago. Here in L.A., one wide-coverage and somewhat notorious repeater has used 1.035 MHz as the TX/RX offset for decades. How's that for an "odd split?" WB2WIK/6 Reply to a comment by : K0RGR on 2005-01-06 I would not want to see this practice become wide spread. Before we start manufacturing more 2 meter repeater pairs we should first get rid of existing 'dead wood' - that is, repeaters that have done nothing but ID and generate QRM for the last 10 years, and those repeaters that have existed only on paper for years and years. I really believe that there are too many 2 meter repeaters out there now, and way too many of them are idle because the meager number of users are spread too thinly, trying to monitor too many frequencies. We can either solve the problem by linking everything in sight to form massive repeater networks - not at all a bad idea in low density areas - or by eliminating some machines and focusing on high level systems like we did back in the 70's. | ||
| K0RGR | 2005-01-06 | |
|---|---|---|
| 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| I would not want to see this practice become wide spread. Before we start manufacturing more 2 meter repeater pairs we should first get rid of existing 'dead wood' - that is, repeaters that have done nothing but ID and generate QRM for the last 10 years, and those repeaters that have existed only on paper for years and years. I really believe that there are too many 2 meter repeaters out there now, and way too many of them are idle because the meager number of users are spread too thinly, trying to monitor too many frequencies. We can either solve the problem by linking everything in sight to form massive repeater networks - not at all a bad idea in low density areas - or by eliminating some machines and focusing on high level systems like we did back in the 70's. | ||
| K0BG | 2005-01-06 | |
|---|---|---|
| RE: 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| This argument is all but moot. We have an odd split repeater about 90 miles away, and they've been given a time frame to change allocations. I suspect a lot of those back east will eventually be changed too. Alan, KØBG www.k0bg.com Reply to a comment by : KB7YOU on 2005-01-06 This is a funny thing to see considering the number of posts on this site that talk about the number of unused and underutilized repeaters floating around the country. I live in Utah which has a VERY active ham community and lots of popular and active repeaters and I have to say that even we have too many that sit idle most of the time. We also have lots of active simplex FM, SSB and weak signal digital ops in the area. Sometimes there is more going on in various simplex modes than on the repeaters. I don't think anyone should setup a repeater on a simplex frequency any more than someone should use simplex on a repeater input or output. If you MUST setup yet another repeater why not go to 70cm or 1.2 GHz or 6M or one of the other underutilized bands out there? When I'm looking for a simplex FM frequency I go by the band plan. I would not deliberately interfere with a repeater, even an uncoordinated one but unless I knew it was there I would not think twice about blasting out a 100w CQ call on someone’s non-standard input or output. And I'd never know a repeater was there unless it was in use (we all listen before transmitting, right?). Sounds like people who set these machines up are asking for problems. Finally, any radio I have ever seen can do non standard splits but in the case of most HT's I've used it's a pain in butt. Having said all of this, I have never heard of this before. From the original post it seems like a NE problem. 73 Chris KB7YOU http://radio.rocklizard.org Reply to a comment by : LNXAUTHOR on 2005-01-06 - is 600kHz too close? i'm not sure... from my limited experience the bigger problem for most repeaters in metro areas is intermod from pagers and other services that are not installed/functioning properly... - i'd have to check my HTs' manuals, but is programming a greater [non-standard] split possible? (too early for me yet, as i haven't finished my morning java)... - it'd be interesting to read some historical perspective in the replies! - tks for the article and questions! | ||
| K4III | 2005-01-06 | |
|---|---|---|
| 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| You would probably have less "desense" which would help if running high power (50+ watts with a 4 can pass/reject duplexer or 100+ watts with a 6 can pass/reject duplexer). However, the duplexers would still need to be pretty much the same ones used for 600khz. 1 Mhz is still a lot less than the 5 Mhz split on commercial units. 1 Mhz would probably be better if using 2 different antennas on a tower for receive and transmit without a duplexer using only pass or reject filters. Handheld and commercial radios in the area may not be capable of this 1 mhz split or may need reprogramming so you may lose a few users in this regard. Also many simplex users in areas may use one of these frequencies for a net or roundtable so I would ask around and do some listening for a few months before choosing a pair. In certain areas of FL, they have coordinations on 440 simplex but these repeaters have restrictions. They cannot be over 100ft high and must run less than 50 watts. Just wait around and a standard 2 meter pair may become available in the near future. If you are running a 4-can pass/reject duplexer under 50 watts on 2 meters and have desense, the cans have probably not been tuned properly. The notches MUST be tuned after installing it at the site on the antenna or else desense is normal! Another thing to do is to inquire about any "paper-repeaters". Maybe someone doesn't want one anymore and will either sell it with its coordination or transfer the frequency pair back to the council or over to you. Also, have you tried another band? 440 or 6m? 440 is a good band to try since it uses a 5 Mhz "commercial" split. There are tons of duplexers and they cost about $90 at hamfests compared to the $500 that 2 meter duplexers can be found at. Also there are now so many handhelds out there now with multi-band capabilities. I live in a town with a population of 6,857. There are about 6 active hams and since I put up a 440 repeater a few months back, 4 of them have since replaced their mobiles with dual-band radios to have the capability and a few have recently gotten dual-band handhelds. Actually Santa brought a few local hams a dual-bander. I got a 900 Mhz mobile! I guess this is the next project... Good Luck... Jon k4iii 147.0 / 443.0 Perry,FL | ||
| KB7YOU | 2005-01-06 | |
|---|---|---|
| RE: 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| This is a funny thing to see considering the number of posts on this site that talk about the number of unused and underutilized repeaters floating around the country. I live in Utah which has a VERY active ham community and lots of popular and active repeaters and I have to say that even we have too many that sit idle most of the time. We also have lots of active simplex FM, SSB and weak signal digital ops in the area. Sometimes there is more going on in various simplex modes than on the repeaters. I don't think anyone should setup a repeater on a simplex frequency any more than someone should use simplex on a repeater input or output. If you MUST setup yet another repeater why not go to 70cm or 1.2 GHz or 6M or one of the other underutilized bands out there? When I'm looking for a simplex FM frequency I go by the band plan. I would not deliberately interfere with a repeater, even an uncoordinated one but unless I knew it was there I would not think twice about blasting out a 100w CQ call on someone’s non-standard input or output. And I'd never know a repeater was there unless it was in use (we all listen before transmitting, right?). Sounds like people who set these machines up are asking for problems. Finally, any radio I have ever seen can do non standard splits but in the case of most HT's I've used it's a pain in butt. Having said all of this, I have never heard of this before. From the original post it seems like a NE problem. 73 Chris KB7YOU http://radio.rocklizard.org Reply to a comment by : LNXAUTHOR on 2005-01-06 - is 600kHz too close? i'm not sure... from my limited experience the bigger problem for most repeaters in metro areas is intermod from pagers and other services that are not installed/functioning properly... - i'd have to check my HTs' manuals, but is programming a greater [non-standard] split possible? (too early for me yet, as i haven't finished my morning java)... - it'd be interesting to read some historical perspective in the replies! - tks for the article and questions! | ||
| GHOSTRIDERHF | 2005-01-06 | |
|---|---|---|
| RE: 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| Makes no difference to me either way -- the only problem is that my HT and mobile is programmed for 600 offset and I have to go in there and manually change the default it I was going to use a 1Mhz offset instead ... so basically more pain the benefit.... Reply to a comment by : LNXAUTHOR on 2005-01-06 - is 600kHz too close? i'm not sure... from my limited experience the bigger problem for most repeaters in metro areas is intermod from pagers and other services that are not installed/functioning properly... - i'd have to check my HTs' manuals, but is programming a greater [non-standard] split possible? (too early for me yet, as i haven't finished my morning java)... - it'd be interesting to read some historical perspective in the replies! - tks for the article and questions! | ||
| LNXAUTHOR | 2005-01-06 | |
|---|---|---|
| 'Odd-Split' Repeaters on 2 Meters | ||
| - is 600kHz too close? i'm not sure... from my limited experience the bigger problem for most repeaters in metro areas is intermod from pagers and other services that are not installed/functioning properly... - i'd have to check my HTs' manuals, but is programming a greater [non-standard] split possible? (too early for me yet, as i haven't finished my morning java)... - it'd be interesting to read some historical perspective in the replies! - tks for the article and questions! | ||
