Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Down

Author Topic: 146.52  (Read 61734 times)

N3IDG

  • Member
  • Posts: 118
RE: 146.52
« Reply #15 on: February 18, 2016, 06:09:36 PM »

I have the opinion of a repeater on 146.52 should be cross band to either 6,10 ,220,440 simplex frequency. My lowly opionion of course.
Logged

NK7Z

  • Member
  • Posts: 2525
    • Amateur Radio: RFI help, Reviews, Setup information, and more...
RE: 146.52
« Reply #16 on: February 18, 2016, 11:51:34 PM »

I have the opinion of a repeater on 146.52 should be cross band to either 6,10 ,220,440 simplex frequency. My lowly opionion of course.
All interesting ideas for the coordination people to look at...
Logged
Thanks,
Dave
Amateur Radio: RFI help, Reviews, Setup information, and more...
https://www.nk7z.net

KX4OM

  • Posts: 533
    • HomeURL
RE: 146.52
« Reply #17 on: February 24, 2016, 04:48:54 PM »

Remote base 146.52 transmit-receive stations used to be fairly common, using 440 links and converted Motorola HTs. So was whistling up the local 34-94 repeater from a trunk-mount 41V.

Ted, KX4OM
Logged

KK5DR

  • Member
  • Posts: 631
    • homeURL
RE: 146.52
« Reply #18 on: February 29, 2016, 05:05:22 PM »

It is nationally accepted that 146.520mhz simplex, is a national call frequency for simplex FM only.
Put your repeater on coordinated repeater freqs.
Leave simplex alone, where us old farts can chat in peace, away from the stupid repeater garbage.
Logged

ONAIR

  • Member
  • Posts: 3823
RE: 146.52
« Reply #19 on: March 09, 2016, 06:23:40 PM »

It is nationally accepted that 146.520mhz simplex, is a national call frequency for simplex FM only.
Put your repeater on coordinated repeater freqs.
Leave simplex alone, where us old farts can chat in peace, away from the stupid repeater garbage.
  Has anyone noticed noticed that there is something about talking simplex that seems to have an appeal over talking via a repeater?
Logged

K7OFG

  • Member
  • Posts: 22
RE: 146.52
« Reply #20 on: March 13, 2016, 04:42:18 PM »

I monitor 146.520 whenever I'm on the road traveling about in my RV and wouldn't mind getting a bit more reach with a repeater link. Have been through Las Vegas and listened in to their net use of the freq. Thought it was great, actually. So, my vote is link it up but don't hog it and leave it as an open calling freq.
Just my two cents worth.
Steve, K6OFG
Logged

K9RZZ

  • Member
  • Posts: 36
RE: 146.52
« Reply #21 on: March 24, 2016, 07:51:37 AM »

Repeaters are great for  those who love to use the smallest hand helds, smallest antennas, and lowest power possible. That's great. 146.52 simplex requires real power (10 watts) and real antennas (mobile whips or outdoor home antennas) That's great too, but a dying trend I'm afraid.
Logged

ONAIR

  • Member
  • Posts: 3823
RE: 146.52
« Reply #22 on: March 25, 2016, 03:47:34 PM »

Repeaters are great for  those who love to use the smallest hand helds, smallest antennas, and lowest power possible. That's great. 146.52 simplex requires real power (10 watts) and real antennas (mobile whips or outdoor home antennas) That's great too, but a dying trend I'm afraid.
  Well we have to revive it!  There was a time (over half a century in fact) when there was no such thing as a "repeater", and Hams had loads of fun just talking to all of their locals via simplex!  How do we get Hams to break the repeater habit, and go back to the basics of radio communication??
Logged

AB1LT

  • Member
  • Posts: 105
RE: 146.52
« Reply #23 on: March 30, 2016, 10:42:23 AM »

Pretty stupid idea.  '52 is for simplex CALLING only.  Not for repeaters or ragchewing.
Yup.  We have band plans for a reason and we should be following them.
Logged

AF6D

  • Member
  • Posts: 530
    • AF6D
RE: 146.52
« Reply #24 on: March 30, 2016, 11:21:31 PM »

I regularly travel the desert between Bakersfield and Palm Springs; Las Vegas and Kingston and even Boulder. I use .52 to call for HELP. That means someone is listening to it instead of a noisy repeater that they may have been turned down or off. There are numerous machines I can hit along the path including my own that blankets the desert. But even on my own repeater someone may not be listening or we're being jammed or whatever. I can use IRLP or Allstar or even EchoLink (we have all of them) and link to another machine that has traffic. THAT'S what IRLP and Allstar and EchoLink are for. To link.

Please leave 146.520 alone. Usually I am using my Motorola Astro Spectra that is shop programmed. I don't have a choice of frequencies! Sure, I can push the button I've programmed for high power (110 watts) but as per our rules we use the minimum amount of power necessary for effective communications. I like the Astro because I have the mobile extender on another band and my low power Motorola HT suddenly becomes 50/110 watts while giving first aid to a motorist out in the middle of nowhere. Get the free ARRL (the paid version is only $9.95) or The Repeater Book app for your cell phone that uses GPS to locate the closest machines to you. You have a choice!!! Besides, at 110 watts my signal may be on the input of more than one repeater and now I'm causing interference. Part of my point here is that you don't recognize .52 for its purpose. One purpose is as the emergency calling channel that many hams DO listen to around the country. Use the Big Bear machine that makes it to at least Stateline. My machine covers the entire high desert. Use Potosi. Use Ridgecrest. Use Ord or Rodman or any number of machines that cover out there.

I'm gonna piss you off when I say this but if you want to act like many CBer's running power and splattering wide and doing what you want buy a CB radio. But in fairness to you and the great CBer's that have moved on over to ham and are great operators do us all a favor and play by the rules. My intent here is not to piss you off but to be the voice of reason. I suspect it will fall on blind eyes. Most of the guys I know from Vegas (where my business is located and I travel to) don't link their machines to .52. They use IRLP and Allstar.
Logged

KD4YSH

  • Member
  • Posts: 99
RE: 146.52
« Reply #25 on: April 17, 2016, 07:45:26 AM »

I think this is a great idea to link the 52 freq. in todays world most repeaters are "toned" if you are in a city and need info the 52 without a tone would be great for info. The 52 simplex is not monitored that much anymore so the link would be a good idea but not for rag chew but info, great idea it might even expand our hobby.
Logged

AF6D

  • Member
  • Posts: 530
    • AF6D
RE: 146.52
« Reply #26 on: April 17, 2016, 10:12:10 AM »

Respectfully, .52 IS monitored as the CALLING FREQUENCY in southern California.
Logged

ND8M

  • Member
  • Posts: 79
RE: 146.52
« Reply #27 on: May 22, 2016, 08:14:58 PM »

146.52 is the national radio silence frequency I believe.  Whenever I make the trip from the upper peninsula of Michigan back to my hometown near Saginaw, I monitor and call on 146.52 the whole trip.  In that time I've made exactly one qso.  You could link a repeater to it or broadcast North Korean propaganda and I don't think anyone would notice.
Logged

ONAIR

  • Member
  • Posts: 3823
RE: 146.52
« Reply #28 on: May 23, 2016, 01:12:18 AM »

146.52 is the national radio silence frequency I believe.  Whenever I make the trip from the upper peninsula of Michigan back to my hometown near Saginaw, I monitor and call on 146.52 the whole trip.  In that time I've made exactly one qso.  You could link a repeater to it or broadcast North Korean propaganda and I don't think anyone would notice.
    It can be quiet in many areas.  I have found that on most of my road trips, 11 meters has been a lot more active than .52.
Logged

KY6M

  • Member
  • Posts: 128
RE: 146.52
« Reply #29 on: May 24, 2016, 09:55:21 AM »

146.52 is the national radio silence frequency I believe.

LOL!  ;D
I don't spend much time on UHF/VHF anymore, it's kind of a desert wasteland. The fact that this thread is still alive means there ain't much to talk about when it comes to this mode/band.  ::)
« Last Edit: May 24, 2016, 10:10:19 AM by KA6MLE »
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Up