[HCARC] Need help understing Repeater option comments by Dennis KF5STP and Harvey K5HV

[Lee Besing]

>From my past experience with SARO in San Antonio, working to replace the heluax & antenna on the (former) 147.14 Canyon Lake repeater, some engineering / cost factors could include:

Unless there is a pre-existing feedline / heliax & suitable antenna on the proposed new site, the club would need to obtain the availability of an acceptable licensed / bonded tower climber crew to install new feedline / heliax & a new antenna.

That implies paying for the labor of such tower climber crew, if the tower lease holder won't let some agile hams with proper safety gear do the work. 

That also implies the club would need to purchase (or get donated) suitable feedline / heliax, connectors, mounting hardware, paint (to match tower per FCC / FAA regulations), and antenna(s) to mount on tower. With current copper costs, low loss feedline is quite expensive. 

And it probably implies the need to re-coordinate the frequency with the Texas VHF-FN Society (shouldn't be a big deal, just paperwork filed with them).

The SARO Canyon Lake 147.14 repeater project (at 600+ ft) died due to the cost of an acceptable (to the tower leasing company) tower climbing crew. With the spread of LTE installations by major cellular carriers, tower crews are able to charge premium rates because they are so busy. 

SARO was quoted $8,000 on their last bid. REACT had offered to donate the heliax & GVARC had offered to donate the mounting hardware. But the requirements for a professional tower crew killed it, due to that single expense factor. 

Either way, the cost factors alone should initiate a feasibility study by the club's board & engineering committee to determine the probable costs associated with such project & if the club can handle those costs. (I.e. raise the funds or have sufficient resources already on hand.)

The hosting cost at the proposed new site is quite reasonable and the availability of emergency backup power is a bonus. But those are minor factors in the decision to relocate or not.

Certainly I think the general membership ought to be informed of the option, but without knowing the total bottom line cost to the club up front, no reasonable decision could be made.

Just my unsolicited 2 cents worth....

I don't think anyone is particularly against the concept of trying to improve the coverage area & reach of the current  repeater. It has great coverage now. But if it can be improved to the point of enabling a stronger signal as far as the NWS office in New Braunfels, that would be a desirable end result in my book.


Lee Besing, N5NTG 
210-771-7075 ( voice/text)