Pages: [1] 2 3   Go Down

Author Topic: 146.52  (Read 61732 times)

KY6M

  • Member
  • Posts: 128
146.52
« on: February 05, 2016, 11:57:15 AM »

When I was in Las Vegas one time, they had 146.52 linked (all of the time) to one of their very high repeaters. I thought this was one of the best ideas around. If we had a couple repeaters link to 146.52 in ever area you would never need to know which freq/pl in any town. Just come up on the simplex frequency and somebody would hear you. It worked very good for them. .
« Last Edit: February 05, 2016, 12:00:32 PM by KA6MLE »
Logged

SOFAR

  • Member
  • Posts: 1640
RE: 146.52
« Reply #1 on: February 05, 2016, 12:17:49 PM »

I transmit on .52 to operate simplex, not repeaters.
Logged

KY6M

  • Member
  • Posts: 128
RE: 146.52
« Reply #2 on: February 05, 2016, 12:22:11 PM »

I transmit on .52 to operate simplex, not repeaters.

Don't go to Vegas then  ;) ;D
Logged

AI7PM

  • Member
  • Posts: 14
RE: 146.52
« Reply #3 on: February 05, 2016, 02:45:41 PM »

When I was in Las Vegas one time, they had 146.52 linked (all of the time) to one of their very high repeaters. I thought this was one of the best ideas around. If we had a couple repeaters link to 146.52 in ever area you would never need to know which freq/pl in any town. Just come up on the simplex frequency and somebody would hear you. It worked very good for them. .

Who is "They"?  I've heard .52 cross banded or linked several times over the years. Usually someone learning their radio or experimenting. A couple of times just someone being problem for other operators.

No coordination group would approve of linking .52. Not the purpose or intent of that frequency.
Logged

KY6M

  • Member
  • Posts: 128
RE: 146.52
« Reply #4 on: February 05, 2016, 10:41:11 PM »

When I was in Las Vegas one time, they had 146.52 linked (all of the time) to one of their very high repeaters. I thought this was one of the best ideas around. If we had a couple repeaters link to 146.52 in ever area you would never need to know which freq/pl in any town. Just come up on the simplex frequency and somebody would hear you. It worked very good for them. .

Who is "They"?  I've heard .52 cross banded or linked several times over the years. Usually someone learning their radio or experimenting. A couple of times just someone being problem for other operators.

No coordination group would approve of linking .52. Not the purpose or intent of that frequency.

http://forums.radioreference.com/nevada-radio-discussion-forum/252056-146-52-las-vegas.html

Brings life to 146.52. I have a repeater that I link to it now and then though .52 is pretty much dead most of the time.
Logged

AI7PM

  • Member
  • Posts: 14
RE: 146.52
« Reply #5 on: February 06, 2016, 10:35:43 AM »

I went to your link. Seems the majority of hams disagree with the practice. I have to agree with them. it's not the agreed purpose, per band plans across the country.

I also don't understand the need to generate traffic on .52. If someone wants to talk on it, great. But link up a repeater to generate traffic? What? The frequency will die, be neutralized some how, or be stolen by FedEx if we don't trash it up with false traffic?

As for digital modes on .52 mentioned by someone else. I use 4 different digital modes, but would not on .52. Again, not it's agreed purpose. (Common courtesy?) I'd equate that to letting my dog crap on my neghbors lawn, then flipping my neighbor the finger when he mentions it.
Logged

SOFAR

  • Member
  • Posts: 1640
RE: 146.52
« Reply #6 on: February 06, 2016, 11:23:41 AM »

The stations that I have regular QSOs with on .52, I have never heard, nor spoken to them on a repeater. It seems odd to foist such an inane concept unto others.

I've been sitting on .52 the past hour, and only heard one call, but I'm OK with that. If I was hearing repeater chatter, I would switch the radio off.
Logged

KD8DVR

  • Member
  • Posts: 9
RE: 146.52
« Reply #7 on: February 06, 2016, 04:12:05 PM »

Pretty stupid idea.  '52 is for simplex CALLING only.  Not for repeaters or ragchewing.
Logged

KY6M

  • Member
  • Posts: 128
RE: 146.52
« Reply #8 on: February 06, 2016, 05:54:20 PM »

To each his own. ;D We'll try it out in our area. We have a friendly bunch of hams in our area who like to experiment. I have had some great chats via my repeater linked to .52. But your area may be different. We have some good email list to discuss these innovations and haven't found any  >:( on these list.  8)  ::)

Have blessed day!
« Last Edit: February 06, 2016, 06:20:40 PM by KA6MLE »
Logged

KY6M

  • Member
  • Posts: 128
RE: 146.52
« Reply #9 on: February 06, 2016, 06:35:30 PM »



I also don't understand the need to generate traffic on .52. If someone wants to talk on it, great. But link up a repeater to generate traffic? What? The frequency will die, be neutralized some how, or be stolen by FedEx if we don't trash it up with false traffic?


It's really not a big deal. In MY area you are lucky to hear any traffic on any repeater at any time. There is one active repeater in the area that is active probably 5% of the time (great group of locals always friendly and helpful - rare in our society these days.) So with that in mind, linking a repeater to .52 is truly a NON-issue. Maybe in the LA area you have a different story, well that is probably a no-duh. . . 147.435 <-- classy --
It wasn't to generate traffic on .52, it's the opposite. It's to bring .52 to the general area. The way you could do it is not allow the repeater to broadcast over .52 until some traffic is heard on .52. It's not automated on my repeater, I have to hit an access key, but it could be automated.
« Last Edit: February 06, 2016, 06:54:31 PM by KA6MLE »
Logged

W2NAP

  • Posts: 312
    • W2NAP.COM
RE: 146.52
« Reply #10 on: February 06, 2016, 07:39:10 PM »

147.435 <-- classy --

best repeater in LA, it pulls in a 70 share in the ratings.
Logged
I AM THE VOICE OF THE VOICELESS!
https://www.w2nap.com User & Service manuals and more.

K1DA

  • Member
  • Posts: 744
RE: 146.52
« Reply #11 on: February 09, 2016, 06:48:15 PM »

How about leaving ONE frequency on 2 for those of us who know about  antennas, feedline loss and can solder a connector or two?   We don't need a repeater to talk across town.
Logged

K0RGR

  • Member
  • Posts: 145
RE: 146.52
« Reply #12 on: February 15, 2016, 02:43:43 PM »

Ages ago, it was common in mountainous terrain to find remote base stations on 146.94, and later 146.52, when that became the simplex calling channel. These remote bases were usually linked to a UHF repeater. Most of those were private repeaters, so, the user was effectively using a remote mountaintop radio to work 146.52. Note that under the rules, any amateur station can be remotely operated. It makes no difference if it's via radio. leased phone line like we used to do, or the Internet as so many do today.

I've long thought that we could use a system similar to the old 'LiTZ' system - or 'long tone zero', where you would get on a common frequency and use a touchtone pad to send a 1 second long 'zero' to activate a link to an active local repeater.
Today, pretty much everyone has PL capability, so just designating a common PL tone and simplex frequency would do the job.

Yes, there would be a definite benefit if such a system could be adopted on a wide-ranging basis.

Another thought I've had along those lines would be an increase in a common APRS feature. On some APRS rigs, if you receive a particularly coded information packet, with the frequency info for a local repeater, there is a button that will automatically QSY you to that frequency. This is very useful for visitors.
Logged

KY6M

  • Member
  • Posts: 128
RE: 146.52
« Reply #13 on: February 18, 2016, 11:07:12 AM »


I've long thought that we could use a system similar to the old 'LiTZ' system - or 'long tone zero', where you would get on a common frequency and use a touchtone pad to send a 1 second long 'zero' to activate a link to an active local repeater.
Today, pretty much everyone has PL capability, so just designating a common PL tone and simplex frequency would do the job.

Another thought I've had along those lines would be an increase in a common APRS feature. On some APRS rigs, if you receive a particularly coded information packet, with the frequency info for a local repeater, there is a button that will automatically QSY you to that frequency. This is very useful for visitors.
Works for me! Either of the above.
Unfortunately for APRS it was never utilized to it's full potential. I use to post local information (repeaters, nets, etc) to APRS via my fill-in digipeater.
Logged

NK7Z

  • Member
  • Posts: 2525
    • Amateur Radio: RFI help, Reviews, Setup information, and more...
RE: 146.52
« Reply #14 on: February 18, 2016, 01:03:05 PM »

When I was in Las Vegas one time, they had 146.52 linked (all of the time) to one of their very high repeaters. I thought this was one of the best ideas around. If we had a couple repeaters link to 146.52 in ever area you would never need to know which freq/pl in any town. Just come up on the simplex frequency and somebody would hear you. It worked very good for them. .
146.52 MHz., is the defined as the national simplex frequency, it is poor operating practice to link repeaters to it.  You should probably pick a different frequency, a frequency that is coordinated, then publicize that one...  If you can get 146.52 coordinated for that use, then I stand corrected in advance...
« Last Edit: February 18, 2016, 01:08:04 PM by NK7Z »
Logged
Thanks,
Dave
Amateur Radio: RFI help, Reviews, Setup information, and more...
https://www.nk7z.net
Pages: [1] 2 3   Go Up