[nrv-hams] repeater

[Russ Abbey]

Hi Cam,
I misunderstood what you where you were going with that.  Sorry.  But, if
all you want to do is send out our 147.180 and maybe take it a step further
and add the 444.650, it can? be done?  I have never gotten that deep into
antenna/ feed line theory so that will have to be looked at further. :)
My concern though is adding a six can set (3 reject/3 pass) [and yes we do
need them big time]  and then adding another set of 1, 2, or 3 for another
pass reject is getting very expensive!  I know it can be done, lets face it
the big boys do this with the 800 MHz systems all of the time.  I do worry
about the cost though.  A set of six cans (3 pass/3 reject) new from Tessco
is about $1800.  I expect that we can get them cheaper from a local company
in Blacksburg?
But you get my point here, it is going to take someone to sit down and
design the system and what is going on to make it work.  I don't want to
discourage you Cam, far from it.  Just want to maybe take a closer look.

For the groups information, The Floyd County Group is all set to put in an
APRS I-Gate for APRS at the same site as our repeater.  Since we are in
there alone it will work out well.  We will also (when the weather breaks)
start setting up our Wires-X site add on to the System Fusion repeater we
now have.  We now have 2 repeaters with System Fusion and will be adding a
third as soon as we can pass the hat. :)  With a lot of hope, we will be
able to link them with Wires-X.  At least that is the plan now.
Have a wonderful weekend!

73
Russ, KG4MAV

On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 11:10 AM, Cam Coble <cam at doubleclickdata.com> wrote:

> Russ,
> With our repeater being 147.180, we could conceivably run APRS on the same
> feed-line/antenna (see link in original email). It would however require
> another duplex unit, which is why I mentioned it while the subject was
> brought up by Danny.
> It would not require an internet connection if used to simply broadcast
> it's node information.
> It would require another radio.
>
> I wouldn't necessarily think that broadcasting a voice repeater frequency
> object would warrant the cost to deploy, but thought it would at least be
> something to consider for future growth. Broadcasting the repeater
> information is conceivably a way to also generate more use of the repeater.
>
> Like I said, something to consider ;)
> Thanks!
> 73
> --
> W4XXV
> Cam Coble
> <http://www.doubleclickdata.com>
>
> On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 2:09 PM, Russ Abbey <russ.abbey at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Cam,
> > With APRS we would need an extra radio, antenna, feed line, and above all
> > we would need to have internet access.  I do not believe the Club will
> want
> > to put a permanent expense of the phone/DSL/cable line into the site.
> Not
> > to mention if the owners would want or permit it. :)
> > 73
> > Russ Abbey, KG4MAV
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 1:27 PM, Cam Coble <cam at doubleclickdata.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Just a thought, if we consider duplexers, maybe APRS would warrant some
> > > discussion for integration as well?
> > > I think it would be great to integrate the APRS local frequency
> > information
> > > to "announce" the repeater is available, as well as the capabilities
> such
> > > as IRLP and EchoLink.
> > >
> > > See here under "Voice repeater frequency objects":
> > > http://www.aprs.org/localinfo.html
> > >
> > > Duplexer setup information:
> > > http://www.aprs.org/txt/digiduplexing.pdf
> > >
> > > Like I said, something to consider!
> > >
> > > 73
> > > --
> > > W4XXV
> > > Cam Coble
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 12:57 PM, Danny Wylam <dannywylam at gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Len,
> > > >     I realize the repeaters do not get enough use, however I believe
> > they
> > > > should operate as well as possible. I wonder if we should give some
> > > > thoughts to replacing the duplex cans at the  Cloyd site while we
> have
> > > > money. Also I agree with your suggestion to try IRLP/Echolink at our
> > > sites.
> > > > Mike Herring and Ben Hastings could give us the best insight into
> both
> > of
> > > > these projects. Mike has expressed in the past that we need a better
> > > > duplexer  at the Cloyd site.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >   Hope you are having a good week.
> > > >
> > > >         73
> > > >        Danny
> > > > ______________________________________________________________
> > > > nrv-hams mailing list
> > > > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/nrv-hams
> > > > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> > > > Post: mailto:nrv-hams at mailman.qth.net
> > > >
> > > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> > > > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> > > >
> > > ______________________________________________________________
> > > nrv-hams mailing list
> > > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/nrv-hams
> > > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> > > Post: mailto:nrv-hams at mailman.qth.net
> > >
> > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> > > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> > >
> > ______________________________________________________________
> > nrv-hams mailing list
> > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/nrv-hams
> > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> > Post: mailto:nrv-hams at mailman.qth.net
> >
> > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> >
> ______________________________________________________________
> nrv-hams mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/nrv-hams
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:nrv-hams at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>