1. Repeater-Builder
  2. Повідомлення
Розширений Теми Повідомлення Опитування
Дата
Re: Motorola CM300 Antenna Connector

 

I replaced one a couple of years ago. I can’t remember if there was any retainer but it is fairly easy to remove the covers and look.

Milt
N3LTQ

On Dec 31, 2024, at 00:12, Teton Amateur Radio Repeater Association (TARRA) <tarra@...> wrote:

Yes, I have seen them on eBay. I just wasn't sure if something needed to be held on the inside of the radio while they were unscrewed. A while back I bought three CM300 radios. The seller thought the BNC connectors were a modification. A little research at that time showed the BNC option. One of the BNC connectors is a little bent and I want to replace it. I also just got a radio to give to someone else. It will be better to make it a BNC instead of having to make an adapter cable for him. Over all, I prefer the BNC. To be able to change the connector on the radio seems like one of Motorola's better ideas.

Also, for anyone wanting to use a radio with a Raspberry Pi for something, the CM300 uses 3.1 VDC on the COR & PTT lines. Makes for an easy interface!

Mick - W7CAT


----- Original Message -----
From: "Milton Engle via groups.io"
To: repeater-builder@groups.io
Sent: Monday, December 30, 2024 09:52:24 PM
Subject: Re: [repeater-builder] Motorola CM300 Antenna Connector


Yes they unscrew. The other side is a SMA, or something very close.
Look on e-bay for BNC replacements, try searching for CM300 and you should find them. The Mini-UHF version is of course available thru Mother M.

Milt
N3LTQ



On Dec 30, 2024, at 19:43, n6lrv@... via groups.io wrote:

?
Yes, it just unscrews. Motorola used to sell both mini UHF and BNC replacements but dropped the BNC option years ago. They were made by Amphenol but begging and pleading to buy them direct fell on deaf ears. Last I checked the mini UHF replacements where still available but that's was in 2022. The part number is shown in the BSM.

Gary
From: repeater-builder@groups.io on behalf of Teton Amateur Radio Repeater Association (TARRA)
Sent: Monday, December 30, 2024 4:29 PM
To: Repeater-Builder
Subject: [repeater-builder] Motorola CM300 Antenna Connector
Hello Group,

I'm looking for help to change a Motorola CM300 antenna connector. I
would appreciate knowing how to do it. Seems like it just unscrews, but
not brave enough to trying it without knowing.

Mick - W7CAT

--
Untitled Document



--
Untitled Document
Re: GE Delta/Rangr programming

 

Last time I've programmed a GE Delta was from a commodore vic 20 before the shop closed. The DELTA was a great radio in it days and very reliable units

----- Original Message -----
From: Tyler- WZ5TX via groups.io <wz5tx@...>
To: repeater-builder@groups.io
Sent: Mon, 30 Dec 2024 21:03:16 -0700 (MST)
Subject: [repeater-builder] GE Delta/Rangr programming

I have several Deltas and Rangrs that I need to program to eventually use as link or node radios. They both use the X2212 that stores the frequencies. I seen in years past there were a few different devices that people have made up along with software. However most of the links online don’t work. The only 2 things I have found online is one made by KG4LNE and he has a GitHub with the schematic. But I have no idea what software that uses??
The second one I saw was built by NHRC. It’s called the PXP and it also has a GitHub that has the software and schematic and hex file to load into the pic microcontroller. I built the PXP from scratch and for the life of me can’t get it to read or write to the X2212…the software does recognize the pic controller to be correct. Not sure what I’m doing wrong. I rebuilt it 3 different times with the same result.
Are there any other ways to program the x2212 that I’m not seeing?

(I have the basic control head not the smart one)
Re: Motorola CM300 Antenna Connector

 

Yes, I have seen them on eBay. I just wasn't sure if something needed to be held on the inside of the radio while they were unscrewed. A while back I bought three CM300 radios. The seller thought the BNC connectors were a modification. A little research at that time showed the BNC option. One of the BNC connectors is a little bent and I want to replace it. I also just got a radio to give to someone else. It will be better to make it a BNC instead of having to make an adapter cable for him. Over all, I prefer the BNC. To be able to change the connector on the radio seems like one of Motorola's better ideas.

Also, for anyone wanting to use a radio with a Raspberry Pi for something, the CM300 uses 3.1 VDC on the COR & PTT lines. Makes for an easy interface!

Mick - W7CAT

----- Original Message -----
From: "Milton Engle via groups.io"
To: repeater-builder@groups.io
Sent: Monday, December 30, 2024 09:52:24 PM
Subject: Re: [repeater-builder] Motorola CM300 Antenna Connector


Yes they unscrew. The other side is a SMA, or something very close.
Look on e-bay for BNC replacements, try searching for CM300 and you
should find them. The Mini-UHF version is of course available thru Mother M.

Milt
N3LTQ



On Dec 30, 2024, at 19:43, n6lrv@... via groups.io wrote:

?
Yes, it just unscrews. Motorola used to sell both mini UHF and BNC
replacements but dropped the BNC option years ago. They were made by Amphenol but begging and pleading to buy them direct fell on deaf ears. Last I checked the mini UHF replacements where still available but that's was in 2022. The part number is shown in the BSM.

Gary
From: repeater-builder@groups.io on behalf of Teton Amateur Radio
Repeater Association (TARRA)
Sent: Monday, December 30, 2024 4:29 PM
To: Repeater-Builder
Subject: [repeater-builder] Motorola CM300 Antenna Connector
Hello Group,

I'm looking for help to change a Motorola CM300 antenna connector. I
would appreciate knowing how to do it. Seems like it just unscrews, but
not brave enough to trying it without knowing.

Mick - W7CAT

--
Untitled Document



--
Untitled Document
Re: TX/RX Vari-notch tuning

 

At 12/30/2024 07:47 PM, you wrote:
On 12/30/2024 8:40 PM, Bob Dengler wrote:
> All I'm saying is that it's not impossible to tune those duplexers to
> meet their specifications using only a spectrum analyzer & tracking
> gen.  Would it be easy?  No.  Is tuning them with a VNA the
> "preferred" method?  Absolutely.  I'm just hung up on this notion that
> tuning them with only a tracking gen is "wrong".

Please refer to the attached VNA graph that I made.  This was a
split-screen taken of the Sinclair Q2330 VHF duplexer where S21 is the
upper graph and S11 is the lower one.

This duplexer?
< https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0531/8970/5898/t/7/assets/Q2330E-Spec-Sheet.pdf >

Bob NO6B

Re: Motorola CM300 Antenna Connector

 

Yes they unscrew.  The other side is a SMA, or something very close.
Look on e-bay for BNC replacements, try searching for CM300 and you should find them.  The Mini-UHF version is of course available thru Mother M.

Milt
N3LTQ



On Dec 30, 2024, at 19:43, n6lrv@... via groups.io <n6lrv@...> wrote:


Yes, it just unscrews. Motorola used to sell both mini UHF and BNC replacements but dropped the BNC option years ago. They were made by Amphenol but begging and pleading to buy them direct fell on deaf ears. Last I checked the mini UHF replacements where still available but that's was in 2022. The part number is shown in the BSM.

Gary
From: repeater-builder@groups.io <repeater-builder@groups.io> on behalf of Teton Amateur Radio Repeater Association (TARRA) <tarra@...>
Sent: Monday, December 30, 2024 4:29 PM
To: Repeater-Builder <repeater-builder@groups.io>
Subject: [repeater-builder] Motorola CM300 Antenna Connector
 
Hello Group,

I'm looking for help to change a Motorola CM300 antenna connector. I
would appreciate knowing how to do it. Seems like it just unscrews, but
not brave enough to trying it without knowing.

Mick - W7CAT

--
Untitled Document
GE Delta/Rangr programming

 

I have several Deltas and Rangrs that I need to program to eventually use as link or node radios. They both use the X2212 that stores the frequencies. I seen in years past there were a few different devices that people have made up along with software. However most of the links online don’t work. The only 2 things I have found online is one made by KG4LNE and he has a GitHub with the schematic. But I have no idea what software that uses??
The second one I saw was built by NHRC. It’s called the PXP and it also has a GitHub that has the software and schematic and hex file to load into the pic microcontroller. I built the PXP from scratch and for the life of me can’t get it to read or write to the X2212…the software does recognize the pic controller to be correct. Not sure what I’m doing wrong. I rebuilt it 3 different times with the same result.
Are there any other ways to program the x2212 that I’m not seeing?
 
(I have the basic control head not the smart one)
Re: TX/RX Vari-notch tuning

 

On 12/30/2024 8:40 PM, Bob Dengler wrote:
All I'm saying is that it's not impossible to tune those duplexers to meet their specifications using only a spectrum analyzer & tracking gen.  Would it be easy?  No.  Is tuning them with a VNA the "preferred" method?  Absolutely.  I'm just hung up on this notion that tuning them with only a tracking gen is "wrong".
Please refer to the attached VNA graph that I made.  This was a split-screen taken of the Sinclair Q2330 VHF duplexer where S21 is the upper graph and S11 is the lower one.  This duplexer was tuned to an operating frequency of 145.270 MHz (pass) and 144.670MHz notch.  The way is was tuned was for best return loss at the pass frequency, resulting in an insertion loss of approximately 2dB and a anti-resonant notch depth of more than 102 dB.

Marker 1 is located at the anti-resonant notch frequency of 144.670 MHz.
Marker 2 is located at the high-pass frequency of 145.270 MHz.
In the upper graph - the frequency of Marker 3 was determined by slowly / carefully manually scanning along the top of S21 in the upper display until I found the frequency of lowest insertion loss.
That frequency is 145.571 MHz.
There is a difference of 301kHz between best RL and lowest IL.

In the lower graph - Marker 2 reveals a return loss of 40.8dB at the intended pass frequency of 145.270MHz.
Marker 3 reveals a return loss of 14.71dB at the frequency of lowest insertion loss.

Someone tuning on insertion loss would choose 145.571 MHz as the pass - why wouldn't they, or why would they choose anything else? They would then simply move that frequency (response) of lowest IL to 145.270 MHz - making it the operating frequency.  Shifting the frequency down 301kHz so the lowest IL lands at 145.270 MHz also moves the notch down in frequency by the same amount.
When they did this, two things would result:

1 - The return loss at the frequency of lowest insertion loss would be degraded to 14.71dB as compared to 40.8dB.
2 - The anti-resonant notch now must be moved 301 kHz higher in frequency to maintain a 600 kHz transmit to receive frequency spacing.  Doing so will severely degrade the notch depth because the duplexer is now 'short frequency spaced'.  Any time you tune the anti-resonant notch closer to the pass - you quickly lose notch depth and ultimately isolation.  If you tuned this duplexer with only a tracking generator and spectrum analyzer, you'd be forced to operate the duplexer at a 300kHz spacing - because you wouldn't otherwise know any better.

Is 14.71dB of return loss terrible?  Maybe not, but it's nowhere near 40dB.  Put that compromised tuning at a site where the antenna's return loss is approximately the same as the duplexer, and the transmitter to duplexer cable could become "length critical".
Is losing many dB of isolation terrible?  Absolutely - isolation is tough enough to get, so we shouldn't tune the duplexer in a manner that results in less isolation.

In my book - neither is right, so I maintain that it's wrong.  I believe that anyone looking at this document and realizing what would result in tuning the pass for lowest insertion loss would believe it's wrong - very wrong.  You're not going to get the stated notch depths, so I stick by my statement that it's impossible to tune this duplexer using only a tracking generator and spectrum analyzer.  It will not meet the factory specifications for all parameters - and you wouldn't know why.  You can't see, what you can't see.

Kevin W3KKC

Q2330E-ResponseVSreturnloss.pdf
Q2330E-ResponseVSreturnloss.pdf

FS three CDM1550 220 MHz radios

 

Three of these radios no extras.  I had more but those are already doing repeater duty and these are extra to my needs.

 

$230.00 each or make an offer for all three.

 

Brian
Re: TX/RX Vari-notch tuning

 

At 12/30/2024 01:30 PM, you wrote:
> On 12/27/2024 12:15 AM, Bob Dengler wrote:
>
> Yet the "expert" missed the |S21| peak on the RX side. Look at page 3:
> marker 1 on S23 appears to be ~200 kHz above the peak.  Since the TX
> side on page 1 looks radically different & the vertical scale is so
> coarse I can't really make any conclusions as to what's going on.

The expert didn't miss anything - you mis-read or misunderstood the
document.  Odd pages of that document plainly say *** BEFORE RETUNING
***.  Any pages that say that, have nothing to do with Jeff.  That is
the state the duplexer was received in from the owner.  A professional
shop attempted to tune the PD497 duplexer without a VNA, and yes - they
missed.  That's the point of the document.

I didn't misread anything.  The "expert" I was referring to is the same one you referred to in one of your replies:

And - even with the vertical resolution set to .5dB per division, it's still an increasing slope for hundreds of kHz, and that trace doesn't (ever) reveal the actual pass frequency concurrent with best return loss - never never never ever.  How do I know - let's look at another PD497 retuned by Jeff.  This duplexer was expertly (ahem) tuned by a 'professional' two-way shop on a SA/TG.  The document is pretty self explanatory, but

Maybe I should have said "professional 2-way shop" instead of "expert".  I think we all agree that anything Jeff touches leaves his hands in as perfect condition as is humanly possible.

>
> Maybe someday you'll come back to Dayton with a Q2330 or PD497 & we
> can settle this dispute.  I'd just be really surprised if the duplexer
> could not be tuned to meet the manufacturer's specifications by
> following their tuning instructions.

Because of many reasons - I'll likely never be able to come back to
Dayton with a VNA and one of those duplexers - but I shouldn't have to. 
Over the years - I've shared with you three VNA produced examples of
where certain VHF duplexers don't have concurrent S11 <> S21.

All I'm saying is that it's not impossible to tune those duplexers to meet their specifications using only a spectrum analyzer & tracking gen.  Would it be easy?  No.  Is tuning them with a VNA the "preferred" method?  Absolutely.  I'm just hung up on this notion that tuning them with only a tracking gen is "wrong".

Maybe Scott or Jeff has one of those non-concurrent duplexers that they could bring to Dayton.  I have a VNWA that would be adequate at 2 meters but only has 80 dB of dynamic range @ 440.  Of course I would tune the duplexer with only S21 displayed.

There are lots of filters out there that fall into this category, and
not just for two-way radio.  Just because you choose not to like it
doesn't mean it doesn't occur in the real world, or that it's flawed
engineering.

I believe you said most if not all of the duplexers that have the non-aligning S11/S21 are VHF and/or close spaced (<=600 kHz).  Unfortunately I don't do a lot on 2 meters these days so I don't see those duplexers very often.  I did tune a Q202G a couple of years ago but unfortunately didn't save the data, all I remember is that it met specs.

Bob NO6B

Re: Motorola CM300 Antenna Connector

 

Yes, it just unscrews. Motorola used to sell both mini UHF and BNC replacements but dropped the BNC option years ago. They were made by Amphenol but begging and pleading to buy them direct fell on deaf ears. Last I checked the mini UHF replacements where still available but that's was in 2022. The part number is shown in the BSM.

Gary

From: repeater-builder@groups.io <repeater-builder@groups.io> on behalf of Teton Amateur Radio Repeater Association (TARRA) <tarra@...>
Sent: Monday, December 30, 2024 4:29 PM
To: Repeater-Builder <repeater-builder@groups.io>
Subject: [repeater-builder] Motorola CM300 Antenna Connector
 
Hello Group,

I'm looking for help to change a Motorola CM300 antenna connector. I
would appreciate knowing how to do it. Seems like it just unscrews, but
not brave enough to trying it without knowing.

Mick - W7CAT

--
Untitled Document
Motorola CM300 Antenna Connector

 

Hello Group,

I'm looking for help to change a Motorola CM300 antenna connector. I would appreciate knowing how to do it. Seems like it just unscrews, but not brave enough to trying it without knowing.

Mick - W7CAT

--
Untitled Document
Re: Looking for recommendations for Commercial Transceivers for VHF data communications (APRS, VARA FM, etc)

 

I've used Midland LMR Syntech II and XTRs as packet, etc. radios......the programming software is pubic domain, they are easy to move to the 2m ham band if a B range (A range is perfect!) but they do not have the accessory jacks like KW, Motorola, etc....ehhh not a big deal to me...the tap points are easily available...the radios are all over ebay, etc for $50-75. Great receivers in them and you can probably run 9600 baud using discriminator out and direct to the modulator...I made a GE MVP run 9600 on UHF (modified the exciter for FM) so the Midlands being true FM radios should be a snap.....They are wideband (25kHz channels) already.....I THINK the Titans went NB but they can do WB as well...I never dealt with the Titans personally, though they are getting plentiful on the used market as well.

My $0.02

Chris
WB5ITT

On Sun, Dec 29, 2024 at 5:37 PM ad7i RADIO via groups.io <ad7iRADIO=gmail.com@groups.io> wrote:
 
I'm looking for recommendations for a commercial transceiver to use for amateur data communications at VHF (144-146 MHz).  Some APRS, VARA FM, and probably other data uses as well.  Basically I'm looking for a 10W+ radio with flat audio input and flat audio output.  If the radio also offers pre and de emphasis audio ports then so much the better.   
 
I've seen here several people offer praise for the Motorola CDM1250, which looks great to me because of the 20 pin accessory jack on the back, using a readily available connector housing and pins ( https://www.repeater-builder.com/motorola/cdm/cdm-acc-conn.html ).  I see the CDM1250 on ebay for $100 to $125 (and more, of course). 
 
In reading the comments of others on this forum, trying to educate myself about this radio, it looks like if they are ever programmed for narrow band operation, that that's one-way street and there is no field programming that can restore them to standard (5 kHz deviation) bandwidth.
 
So my questions to the cognoscenti of this group are:
 
1.  If I buy a CDM1250 off ebay, I guess I only have the seller's assurance that the radio is still standard bandwidth.  And if he doesn't know the bandwidth status, to stay away from it.  Although, transmitting data tones at 2.5 kHz doesn't seem to be significantly worse than TXing with 3.3 kHz deviation.  Any thoughts on that?
 
2.  How do I get the Motorola CDM1250 programmed?  Is this something I can do myself with common tools (like free SW from the internet and a USB to Serial UART TTL converter) or would I need to take this to a Motorola shop near me and pay for programming?  Or is this radio model so old that most commercial shops are no longer going to have tools to program it?
 
3.  Are there Kenwood or other radios that might also be a good match for use as a VHF data transceiver?
 
I'd be grateful for any comments people here would care to offer.
 
Paul Newland, ad7i
Middletown NJ
 
Re: Looking for recommendations for Commercial Transceivers for VHF data communications (APRS, VARA FM, etc)

 

Thank you Jim Barbour for your suggestion about the Kenwood NX radios.  I'll take a look at them.  For data communications are they limited to Nexedge format?  Or is that just the modem that comes with the radio ?  Can I bypass that and use my own modem via the accessory jack?
 
Greetings Bob Dengler.  Thanks for that feedback.  I'll try the CPS program on my W10 computer.  I appreciate the pointer.
 
73, Paul, ad7i
Re: TX/RX Vari-notch tuning

 

On 12/27/2024 12:15 AM, Bob Dengler wrote:

Yet the "expert" missed the |S21| peak on the RX side. Look at page 3: marker 1 on S23 appears to be ~200 kHz above the peak.  Since the TX side on page 1 looks radically different & the vertical scale is so coarse I can't really make any conclusions as to what's going on.
The expert didn't miss anything - you mis-read or misunderstood the document.  Odd pages of that document plainly say *** BEFORE RETUNING ***.  Any pages that say that, have nothing to do with Jeff.  That is the state the duplexer was received in from the owner.  A professional shop attempted to tune the PD497 duplexer without a VNA, and yes - they missed.  That's the point of the document.

You'll need to reference the EVEN pages that say *** AFTER RETUNING *** to see how the duplexer was tuned by Jeff.  I recommend you print it out so you can do side by side comparison of the before and after.


Maybe someday you'll come back to Dayton with a Q2330 or PD497 & we can settle this dispute.  I'd just be really surprised if the duplexer could not be tuned to meet the manufacturer's specifications by following their tuning instructions.
Because of many reasons - I'll likely never be able to come back to Dayton with a VNA and one of those duplexers - but I shouldn't have to.  Over the years - I've shared with you three VNA produced examples of where certain VHF duplexers don't have concurrent S11 <> S21.

There are lots of filters out there that fall into this category, and not just for two-way radio.  Just because you choose not to like it doesn't mean it doesn't occur in the real world, or that it's flawed engineering.

Kevin W3KKC

PD497-145T250-144R650.pdf
PD497-145T250-144R650.pdf

Re: RDAC for Hytera Repeater

 

Thank you Scott,

 

Now I will try to find a source for this Hytera RDAC…

 

Best 73

Carl

VBA2CMB

 

De : repeater-builder@groups.io [mailto:repeater-builder@groups.io] De la part de N9AA via groups.io
Envoyé : 30 décembre 2024 15:27
À : repeater-builder@groups.io
Objet : Re: [repeater-builder] RDAC for Hytera Repeater

 

 

On Mon, Dec 30, 2024, 11:31 AM Carl Beaudry via groups.io <va2cmb=ve2reh.com@groups.io> wrote:

Hi to All,

 

I am familiar with RDAC for Motorola DMR Repeater but I was just told that Hytera has a version of RDAC for Hytera RD-982 DMR Repeater.

 

Is this a April fool joke or this is true?

 

If this is true any source for getting this Software?

 

Thanks’ to all in advance.

 

Best 73

Carl

VA2CMB

 

 

 
Re: Thoughts on New Old Stock Duplexers

 

  • Thanks for the responses so far.  To answer Jeff's question - the model out there now that I noticed is a DB4062-WOC-B.

 

If it’s a later-vintage DB-4062 painted Decibel “Tek Black” then chances are you’ll be OK.  If it is such a later unit, It should have an RG-214 harness.  However, I have had some DB-4060 series duplexers that came from the factory with a harness made of seemingly-generic coax; the cables had no markings other than “RG-214” or maybe “RG-214/U”, no manufacturer’s name or part number or anything else on the cables.  I’d be cautious of those; at the very least remove the connector from one end and inspect to braid to make sure it truly is silver-plated and not tin-plated as many non-Mil-spec RG-214 clones tend to be.  If there is any doubt, replace the harness.  The harness can become problematic as a duplexer ages, especially if they were low quality to start with or didn’t use mil-spec silver-braid cable.

 

Most problems I’ve had with older DB-4060 series duplexers is with the plating shedding on the center conductor plunger.  I’ve had them get noisy and regardless of what I tried to tame them, including a complete teardown, cleaning with solvent, applying DeOXit, etc., they never were completely quiet.  These were mostly from the earlier eras when Decibel painted them beige or brown, but I had (and still have) one newer black DB-4062 that behaved the same.  Note that is it not uncommon for them to make a scratching or squealing sound as you tune the center plunger as it rotates against the finger stock, so don’t confuse that with them being “noisy” in the RF sense. 

 

Even if they look pristine externally, I’d also suggest removing the coupling loop assemblies from each cavity one at a time (don’t mix them up!) by removing the screws attaching them to the top plate of the cavity.  Give the unpainted contact surfaces of the top of the cavity and the coupling loop assembly “box” a good inspection, burnish/clean as necessary.  25 years is a long time… those unplated surfaces are carrying RF current and can become a source of noise as well.

 

                                                                                      --- Jeff WN3A

 
Re: Looking for recommendations for Commercial Transceivers for VHF data communications (APRS, VARA FM, etc)

 

At 12/30/2024 10:38 AM, you wrote:
 
Hello Matt --
 


Based on your comments, this morning I put the CPS R06.12.05-AZ-PMVN4034AA program on an XP laptop and connected it to one of my UPDI Half-Duplex programmers.  I was able to see that the CPS could send data out the serial port (9600 bps, 8N1), specifically a four byte string consisting of 0xF2 , 0x23, 0x05 and 0xE5.  It would then timeout in about 2 seconds and an error message would appear on the screen because it didn't get a response back from the radio, since I don't have a radio.

I've run that version of Pro CPS on my Windows 10 laptop to program CDM1550s with no problems.

Bob NO6B

Re: RDAC for Hytera Repeater

 


On Mon, Dec 30, 2024, 11:31 AM Carl Beaudry via groups.io <va2cmb=ve2reh.com@groups.io> wrote:

Hi to All,

 

I am familiar with RDAC for Motorola DMR Repeater but I was just told that Hytera has a version of RDAC for Hytera RD-982 DMR Repeater.

 

Is this a April fool joke or this is true?

 

If this is true any source for getting this Software?

 

Thanks’ to all in advance.

 

Best 73

Carl

VA2CMB

 

 

 
Re: Looking for recommendations for Commercial Transceivers for VHF data communications (APRS, VARA FM, etc)

 

John, I have a friend with a boatload of Tait 8000 series radios on different bands but especially VHF including some without the control head configured as “Data” radios that have or have had a TNC connected. They make great radios for a project you have. He is in the Fresno area of California, his name is Knox LaRue (209) 609-5627, he said it was OK to post his number.

I have them on VHF 150, 220 and UHF, great radio.

John N. Hudson III, Regional Emergency Communications Coordinator California, Governor’s Office of Emergency Services

Public Safety Communications

Tactical Communications Unit, Southern Region

1291 Pacific Oaks Place, Suite 100 Escondido, CA 92029

Cell          619-250-9063      Desk        760-738-7521

FAX         760-738-7529 

John.hudson@...


On Dec 29, 2024, at 16:02, John Huggins via groups.io <john.huggins.ee@...> wrote:


This Message is From an External Sender
This message came from outside your organization.


On Sun, Dec 29, 2024 at 6:53 PM Kevin Custer via groups.io <kuggie=kuggie.com@groups.io> wrote:
Paul,

I'll answer your question #3.

Consider a Yaesu FTM-6000.  This radio is a proven performer for digital data communications and has top speed capability with VARA FM Wide.  A cable that avoids the proprietary CT-164 adapter to connect this radio (and most other Yaesu FTM radios) to a Mini-DIN-6 equipped sound card is available here.

Kevin W3KKC

Kevin,

Does your cable and the FTM-6000 provide access to non-emphasis "9600" capable signal paths?

John, kx4o
WARNING: Do not click links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the email is safe.


Re: "The REAL Reason Repeaters Are Dead!"

 

Hi Chuck,
 
I hear a few repeaters that are linked to... heavens know how many repeaters, and on how many bands.  The conversations are from all over the place.  Those repeaters remind me of "Satellators."  It's neat technology, but not my thing, and not the thing of many of the folks on the W6MEP repeater who have voiced their thoughts.
 
W6MEP does have an AllStar node.  It's often connected to one other repeater, WB6FYR in Tehachapi, CA.  FYR and MEP's coverage overlap in the Antelope Valley.  FYR provides good fill in for MEP in shadow areas where, if the earth was flat, would be in good coverage range of MEP.  Not only that, but Tom, WB6FYR is a long time buddy who lives in Quartz Hill, a major shadow area from MEP. This allows Tom to keep in touch with the L.A. gang via his 220 repeater in Tehachapi.  The only other use the MEP AllStar node gets is by MEP users that for various reasons are not able to get on MEP direct via the 2-Meter input.  Some of those folks have moved out of the area and want to stay in touch with the friends they've made on MEP.  From a social standpoint, it works well and answers a need.
 
I really don't want to link to out of area repeaters.  I like keeping MEP as a stand alone, local repeater; local meaning within the coverage area of Mt. Wilson, not the world.
 
Burt, K6OQK
1 - 20 з 211531