[RVRC] Fw: Two-meter repeater, Reply

[Marvin Bronstein]

Yes, that is a valid point and the change need only be ''temporary'' if so 
desired.  OR it's a very simple matter to apprise members and ''good users'' 
to change the CTCSS (PL).  The alternative makes the two meter repeater 
UNUSABLE in any case!

We can't simply 'allow' this condition to continue with constant repeater 
key-up and retransmissions of noise. In this mode the repeater is otherwise 
unusable and is being ''stressed''.

There is the strong possibility that the perpetrator will eventually 
determine the ''new'' tone and return to this 'folly' but changing the tone 
is the lesser of any other efforts to return the use of the two meter 
repeater to club members and friends.
The few 'Transient' users would hear the activity on the repeater and know 
that it is still active.

73,
Marv
K2VHW
.......................
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mark" <mpmski at verizon.net>
To: "Marvin Bronstein" <marvbrons at verizon.net>
Cc: "RVRC Distribution" <rvrc at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Sunday, December 28, 2014 11:49 AM
Subject: Re: [RVRC] Two-meter repeater


Hi Marv,
     While the suggestion of changing the PL code might be a temporary fix, 
it would not be a permanent one. The useability for members would be great, 
but what about all the "good" users that come within range of the repeater 
per our listing in the ARRL Repeater Book? They wouldn't have the proper PL 
code to use the machine, which could lead people to believe it no longer 
exists unless they actually hear "chatter" ....... and then, how do we 
inform persons of a new code without this malicious person getting it ???
     Just my 'two cents' for what it's worth .......

Mark - K2MPM


Sent from my iPhone

> On Dec 28, 2014, at 11:19 AM, Marvin Bronstein <marvbrons at verizon.net> 
> wrote:
>
> Members,
>
> I have been closely monitoring the events ongoing with our two meter 
> repeater.  It has become obvious to me that this is an intentional and 
> malicious act of interference.
> After careful investigation, I find NO repeaters in the #1, #2, #3, #4 
> call areas that are operating in ''reverse'' frequency split!  Also, if 
> this were a case of an '' intermod.'' condition, the result would be a 
> ''howl or oscillation'' of our audio feeding back into the receiver; 
> Instead, we hear the 'delay' of the audio as a result of our signal being 
> ''repeated'' back.
>
> I listened carefully to the possibility that this is emanating from our 
> local idiot in New York City but even with my 5 element beam I can not 
> detect a signal coming from that direction.
>
> I would like to suggest to the membership and to our technical committee 
> that we change the CTCSS (PL) of the repeater to eliminate the constant 
> repeater activity.  I suggest this in lieu of reducing power because that 
> will reduce our usability among ourselves while not really stopping the 
> activity. Because no matter how low we lower the power it is likely the 
> perpetrator will still be able to continue with this activity!
>
> I am still searching for the direction and source of this nonsense but 
> until we find it, the repeater is unusable and is being stressed 
> unnecessarily.
>
> 73,
> Marv
> K2VHW
> ______________________________________________________________
> RVRC mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/rvrc
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:RVRC at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html