[MCARC] 147.285--to tone or not to tone, that is the question!

[Farren Constable]

A CTCSS tone would cause me zero issues.

-Farren

The Computer Shed
Business Computer Services
785.747.8100





On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 8:13 PM Nate Bargmann <n0nb at n0nb.us> wrote:

> For a few days I had the TKR-750 repeater and the CAT-250 controller
> powered up but not connected to the duplexer or antenna though the
> transmitter was connected to a dummy load.  A couple of nights ago I
> found the repeater being keyed by local noise.  In the past the repeater
> has been carrier access only with no CTCSS tone required.  Mostly this
> was due to technical reasons as the RF hard didn't have tone capability.
>
> Since I have left just the TKR-750 on with the volume to the local
> speaker turned up a bit and the noise has come and gone infrequently.
> I'm sure it is local even though I don't hear it on the 2m frequencies I
> monitor.  This has gotten me to thinking that it would be a good idea to
> require a CTCSS tone just like the UHF repeater.
>
> A common drawback of doing so would cause owners of older gear to have
> to install a CTCSS board or buy a newer radio.  How many members have
> such a radio?  Is it the only 2m radio you have?
>
> Benefits would include being a good RF neighbor by not having the
> repeater keyed up by random noise or stations working another 147.284
> repeater elsewhere.  Also, as digital becomes more prominent, running
> with only carrier squelch will lead to digital QRM in the future.  Use
> of a CTCSS tone can help minimize these issues.
>
> The next question is what tone to use.  Years back the Kansas Repeater
> Council drew up some guidelines for tones to use in various parts of the
> state.  In this area 88.5 Hz is the assigned tone and that is why the 70
> cm repeater uses it (plus the previous radios had those tone reeds in
> them already!).  Looking at RepeaterBook the closest 147.285 repeater
> with an 88.5 Hz tone is located in Tulsa, OK.  There are two more in
> Colorado, one at Salida and the other at Winter Park, both of which, I
> suspect, would not be a problem for us.  I don't ever recall hearing the
> Tulsa repeater so the choice of 88.5 Hz for us should be safe.
>
> What are the thoughts of the group?  Would anyone have a hardship if the
> 147.285 repeater requires CTCSS access in the future?  That is, a
> hardship other than reprogramming memories!
>
> 73, Nate
>
> --
>
> "The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all
> possible worlds.  The pessimist fears this is true."
>
> Web: https://www.n0nb.us
> Projects: https://github.com/N0NB
> GPG fingerprint: 82D6 4F6B 0E67 CD41 F689 BBA6 FB2C 5130 D55A 8819
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> MCARC mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/mcarc
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:MCARC at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/mcarc/attachments/20201120/96dacb41/attachment-0001.html>