[HCARC] "Big" repeater

[Bill Tynan]

Kerry:

Many good points, but the bottom line is that we cannot meet our obligation 
to the Red Cross with the facilities we now have. Whether a new, higher, 
site would do it, I don't know, but we can't do it now. My feeling is that 
with beams at the other Red Cross sites, it MIGHT be possible with a higher 
repeater antenna. Beams for 2 meters are quite small and easily 
transportable, so it should not be a problem to take a beam to a site when 
needed.

I don't see where the extra cost comes from. It sounds as if the new site 
might be less expensive. We could get rid of the phone line for one thing.

Also, the shed and I DO mean SHED in which the repeater is housed wouldn't 
even make a good outhouse. It's very cramped and not in great shape. It's 
not easy to get to, but, on the other hand, it's not at all protected from 
vandalism or whatever. Another site, housing a commercial radio station 
transmitter, should be much more secure and would have emergency power, 
which we don't have now.

On the other hand, you are right in worrying about abuse because of the 
wider coverage. I do believe, however, that the sort of thing that has 
plagued big city repeaters is diminishing. There is simply not the same 
interest in repeater operation
as there was. Most of the jerks are on the Internet these days.

Just my thoughts.

73,

Bill, W3XO
--------------------------------------------------
From: "SARA SANDSTROM" <kerryk5ks at hughes.net>
Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2013 3:43 PM
To: <hcarc at mailman.qth.net>
Subject: [HCARC] "Big" repeater

>
>
> Well, once again, I wasn't going to get involved in this repeater 
> discussion, but....
>
> Our club is a relatively small club with many diverse interests.  We have 
> a few members  who are quite involved with the repeater, perhaps half a 
> dozen.  We have about 20 more who manage to get on the Monday night Hill 
> country FM Net.  That is probably less than a quarter of our active 
> members.
>
> A wide area coverage repeater on a 400' tower is a very different animal 
> than the repeater we currently have.  It will take a lot more people to 
> support a "Big" repeater than the half dozen or so we have supporting the 
> current club repeater.  How many Austin and San Antonio area hams do we 
> think will be using a "big" repeater?  Right now our repeater is 
> underutilized because it has a small coverage area.  We really don't have 
> any problems with users because of this.  If we have a wide area coverage 
> repeater, do we really think we won't have a lot more problems?  Speaking 
> of problems, at times we have a fair amount of problrms with intermods and 
> spurious signals from other local VHF users (non-ham).  How much worse do 
> we think it will be on a 400' tower?  Do we have the technical people who 
> have the knowledge and interest to put together a repeater that won't be 
> overwhelmed by these intermods and spurs?
>
> Lets talk finances for a minute.  Lee kind of touched on this with the 
> requirements to get the repeater installed.  Right now our club dues are 
> $20.00 per yeasr.  We seem to be doing quite nicely at this level.  The 
> repeater costs are really quite minimal.  The biggest one being the need 
> for a new repeater a couple years ago and the only recurring ones being 
> phone and power.  Do we really think that a repeater on a 400' commercial 
> tower will be as inexpensive?  I doubt it.
>
> Finally, we need to think about the kind of club we are.  I can see with a 
> "Big" repeater, the repeater will come to dominate the club, both 
> financially and manpower.  Many of the clubs that have repeaters have 
> ended up splitting into two clubs, one for the repeater and one for other 
> ham activities with separate dues, meeting and officers..  I don't think 
> we have the people out here to do that.  I don't think there are enough 
> people really interested in the repeater that could maintain and operate 
> it for very long.  I also see most of the club not particularly interested 
> in a repeater and being less than willing to work on it and finance it.
>
> Incidently, while there are a few club members who are involved with 
> SKYWARN and the NWS and with the Red Cross and their emegency 
> communications, it is by no meaqns a majority.  The primary usefulness of 
> a "Big" repeater would be to support those activities, in my opinion.
>
> These are the things that an executive committee needs to think about. 
> One of the worst things that can happen, in my opinion, is open something 
> like this up to a popularity vote by the general membership most of whom 
> haven't been involved with this kind of operation nand have little idea of 
> what it entails.   It doesn't matter how great an idea something is if the 
> club doesn't have the people and finances to support it.
>
> Kerry
> ______________________________________________________________
> HCARC mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hcarc
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:HCARC at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html