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

Sun Nov 22 08:04:40 EST 2020

Not a problem here. The interference might disappear when the equip is moved to its final location. One could wait to initiate the tones and see how it functions first. I understand that now days it is the “standard” requirement. 
mike 

From: "doc n janice" <lyhane at bluevalley.net> 
To: "mcarc" <mcarc at mailman.qth.net> 
Sent: Saturday, November 21, 2020 6:23:06 AM 
Subject: Re: [MCARC] 147.285--to tone or not to tone, that is the question! 

I’m not sure if it would be an issue with me.. I guess I’d have to get a rig up and running to find out.. hehe.. 

Doc 

From: mcarc-bounces at mailman.qth.net [mailto:mcarc-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Dave Crawford 
Sent: Friday, November 20, 2020 10:04 PM 
To: Marshall County ARC <mcarc at mailman.qth.net> 
Subject: Re: [MCARC] 147.285--to tone or not to tone, that is the question! 

Not an issue with me. 

73, 

Dave 

On Nov 20, 2020, at 8:19 PM, Farren Constable < [ mailto:farren at computershed.com | farren at computershed.com ] > wrote: 

BQ_BEGIN

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 < [ mailto:n0nb at n0nb.us | n0nb at n0nb.us ] > wrote: 

BQ_BEGIN

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/ | https://www.n0nb.us ] 
Projects: [ https://github.com/N0NB | 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 | http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/mcarc ] 
Help: [ http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm | http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm ] 
Post: mailto: [ mailto:MCARC at mailman.qth.net | MCARC at mailman.qth.net ] 

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

______________________________________________________________ 
MCARC mailing list 
Home: [ http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/mcarc | http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/mcarc ] 
Help: [ http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm | http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm ] 
Post: [ mailto:MCARC at mailman.qth.net | mailto:MCARC at mailman.qth.net ] 

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

BQ_END

______________________________________________________________ 
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/20201122/d3c5bbd8/attachment.html>