[K3PZN-List] Repeater Upgrades

[Curt Milton]

I am suspicious (but I don't know this for sure) that the 410 machine can be 
heard well all over Carroll County.  So a two-way link with 285 might be an 
overkill.  


A south county remote receiver for the 410 could have operational utility - 
although without analysis its hard to tell if it would be better sited at New 
Windsor where new EOC will be ?  


285 is a valuable asset to covering parts of Howard and Carroll County that are 
not covered by 410 or 135.  I sense it is strategically located, and both 
counties would be wise to include it in their drills at some point in the 
calendar.   

FYI - CARA's 390 machine is temporarily operating from Eldersburg (at the home 
of one of their members) as of a few weeks ago -- I heard they were evaluating 
different options for deploying it back into Howard County.  


In addition to the repeaters, hardware to support data links from Westminster 
area to New Windsor sounds like a critical need.  Voice can then use the 
repeater, and data can be exchanged on a link.  


----- Original Message ----
From: "wo3l at comcast.net" <wo3l at comcast.net>
To: CCARC K3PZN <k3pzn-list at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Thu, January 13, 2011 10:51:07 AM
Subject: [K3PZN-List] Repeater Upgrades





Along the same line as my last email as we evalutate options for repairing and 
impro ving our setup at the repeater site I'd like to gater information about 
what features you'd like to see on the repeater and packet nodes.  I will use 
this information to try and identify what you the users want and so  we can 
incorporate it or at least make good decisions to be able to implement in the 
future (o bviously we can't do everything and have an affordable and manageable 
project ).  My basic starting point is that the three voice repeaters 
(Westminster site) will operate independently but be command linkable to each 
other (ie - enter a code to tie 2 or all 3 together). 




Some items that have been discussed in the past : 

   1. WX alert - a receiver listening to NWS causes some change in the repeater 
behavior when alert is received. 


   2. A link to 147.285 

   3. A remote receiver at the 147.285 site to improove southern coverage 

   4. IRLP or other internet based linking 

   5. Linking to another repeater with a greatly different coverage area 



On the packet side of things I don't think we've given it a lot of thought and 
does not get significant use. So what do we want from that equipment? Is it 
worth the rack space and antenna slot it is using now or would we like to 
repurpose to something else? Is they a killer ap that would make it worthwhile 
to use again? 




Thanks for your input. 



Andy 




______________________________________________________________
K3PZN-List mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/k3pzn-list
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:K3PZN-List at mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html