Alternatives to traditional repeater systems

[MTS2000des]

Good to hear there is activity on simplex.
Here in metro atlanta, there is definitely more activity on select simplex frequencies than any given repeater.

We are building out a simulcast split simplex system using Echolink on the west side of town, while it won't give that body worn portable coverage so many crave (something about walking around like the po-po with their walkie talkies and RSM's...), it will provide mobile coverage over a wide area without the need for costly duplexers, those hard to get (and expensive) exclusive repeater sites, or costly repeater hardware. There is light at the end of the tunnel, of course the success of such a system requires all to participate and be on the same page.

Getting the latter, well...I'll get back to you on that. :wink:

That's not to say there's a lot considering there's something like 6 million people living here and a lot of hams.

From what I see on these forums, repeaters are dead even in places where one CAN use a 2 watt portable and get in from anywhere in the city. There are a few exceptions like SoCal, but they are the exceptions. The days of every repeater being full up from sunup to sundown in this town ended about 10-15 years ago.

I am glad I was around back then (and even before) to remember when VHF/UHF was king in this town.

Repeaters have a specific purpose but with good sites diminishing and all this "mic shyness" and gods & presidents of the repeater, it's easy to see why there's a migration away from them.

The lack of good AFFORDABLE sites is the key problem in many cases. Now that most rooftops are professionally managed, unless you have a wad of cash or your email address ends in .gov, you are SOL.

Still doesn't excuse the deaf turdboxes owned by clubs with a couple hundred members and five figure budgets. There is one system in this town that sits on the tallest building in Atlanta and unless you have a 50 watt mobile with a 5/8 wave antenna, it is a total BOCA box. All mouth, no ears, and it has a real problem with it's transmit deviation going into ultra wideband mode. Maybe they are experimenting with that new ultra wide HD voice emission designator some of those new Chinese radios have been FCC certified for?

Unfortunately, it makes their system incompatible with many modern subscriber radios. Maybe that's another reason why no one uses it. See my YouTube video for a demonstration of this anomaly:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c9W7DfbQflE

The baofeng generation seems to be under the impression that there is portable in-vehicle coverage anywhere they go but when they find out that's not how it works here, instead of investing in a real radio...

That is why it is up to us to Elmer the new "Baofeng generation" in by showing them how to build a cheap but effective antenna (e.g. J-Pole) for fixed use, or invest in a $20 mag mount antenna for mobile use. It's also up to us to explain WHY these feeble little radios cannot get into a repeater system that is engineered to work with 25-50 watt MOBILE radios, or how our diverse terrain makes any land mobile or cellular system coverage a tremendous challenge for those who provide infrastructure. We have a big part to play in steering the new folks towards the right path.

Some may drop off, that surely will be the case. But are they really cut out for ham radio anyway? They'll just go back to Facebook or take up that new craze of erotic leaf blowing.

they just give up and take up the popular new hobby of endless hours of leafblowering.

That seems to be the case here too. One of the drawbacks to the endless droning is the RFI they also produce when trying to work weak simplex stations. Those engines output tons of hash and trash in addition to noxious exhaust fumes, and high levels of "the brown note" noise pollution.

But in today's world of "it's all about me" mentality that is common, the users seem to get much personal enjoyment from their endless hours of self-pleasuring leaf blowing.

 

[rapidcharger]

We are building out a simulcast split simplex system using Echolink on the west side of town,)))

As you know, I am intimately familiar with that project but it isn't simplex and simplex is what this topic is about. The goal of the RAVwin project is to extend the coverage area of "your" repeater. It is also a privately owned network with a growing list of banned users as well as users who have been reprimanded for using the RAVwin name. People have grown tired of club politics and repeater gods & repeater presidents and control ops. For a change, people want to be their own control op and they don't want to be reminded of the rules of the system. I'm not saying that happens on RAVwin, but I'm just pointing out why a lot of people move to simplex. Nobody owns it. Everyone is responsible for their own station and builds out their station to meet their needs. It is also not dependent on Echolink or any other such infrastructure. It is precisely those reasons that a single frequency transmit and receive is so appealing to me as well as other people who use simplex.

As for echolink, I guess now everyone on the forum knows where to reach you. :lol:

((( while it won't give that body worn portable coverage so many crave (something about walking around like the po-po with their walkie talkies and RSM's...), it will provide mobile coverage over a wide area without the need for costly duplexers, those hard to get (and expensive) exclusive repeater sites, or costly repeater hardware. There is light at the end of the tunnel, of course the success of such a system requires all to participate and be on the same page.

That's great and I support the idea but again, it's not simplex.
Simplex doesn't have lofty goals of portable or even mobile coverage. They are base station coverage. I just want to point out that there is a huge difference between simplex and your project. Your project even uses at least one dedicated and "coordinated" remote base frequency. That's not like calling CQ on an open simplex frequency. That's a repeater, or to use your phrase that pays, "ad hoc repeater."

 

[kayn1n32008]

@mts2000des: that was painful to watch and listen to. When I come across users/repeaters like that, I keep 'turning the dial'... No need to abuse my ears with that nonsense.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[rapidcharger]

When I come across users/repeaters like that, I keep 'turning the dial'... No need to abuse my ears with that nonsense.

They all pretty much sound like that around here.
That was Atlanta's flagship repeater.

 

[MTS2000des]

As you know, I am intimately familiar with that project but it isn't simplex and simplex is what this topic is about. The goal of the RAVwin project is to extend the coverage area of "your" repeater.

The project is also about cooperation and experimentation as well. Two of the basic principles of the amateur radio service.

It is also a privately owned network with a growing list of banned users as well as users who have been reprimanded for using the RAVwin name.

The only banned users are the ones who are lids. As far as being "privately owned", to my knowledge this is the case with ALL amateur radio systems/equipment, except those few stations/repeaters/networks funded by taxpayer money for RACES, AUXCOMM, etc.

People have grown tired of club politics and repeater gods & repeater presidents and control ops. For a change, people want to be their own control op and they don't want to be reminded of the rules of the system.

Everyone is already their own "control operator". We all have to follow the same rules. In our case, we are not a club. We are a private entity as you are. You can have any rules you wish. Just as you may refrain from contacting or speaking to certain station(s), so do I. That's a basic right. Don't like what someone is saying? QSY. With Echolink, you have the benefit of being able to make it so you don't have to hear them coming out of your radio if you don't wish to do so.

I'm not saying that happens on RAVwin, but I'm just pointing out why a lot of people move to simplex. Nobody owns it. Everyone is responsible for their own station and builds out their station to meet their needs. It is also not dependent on Echolink or any other such infrastructure

I don't disagree but I think in our area many are on simplex because of the lack of useable infrastructure. There is that network of crossband repeaters that are daisy chained together that has been up since the late 1990s. I am not sure why those users are on there and not repeaters, my guess is because the repeater infrastructure in this area is lacking for them to be able to cover the distance between them. Maybe they don't want to tie up someone else's repeater(s) with long rag chews? Maybe they just want to enhance the art of radio and try something that no one else (around here) has done?

To be clear, just as with our RAVWIN project, they aren't using a single frequency though. Two bands and a frequency pair essentially which creates an ad-hoc repeater over a large area.

It is precisely those reasons that a single frequency transmit and receive is so appealing to me as well as other people who use simplex.

Not to be argumentative, but it is my understanding that you don't use a single frequency, but in your setup, you run a crossband repeater as well which essentially also uses two frequencies across two different bands. That is not simplex by the letter definition of a single frequency operation. Just sayin...

As for echolink, I guess now everyone on the forum knows where to reach you. :lol:

Well, I cannot speak for others, but that is kinda the point of why I got into ham radio. To reach out and talk to other people. Hopefully exchange transmissions about a host of other topics other than "amateur radio and computers"

That's great and I support the idea but again, it's not simplex.
Simplex doesn't have lofty goals of portable or even mobile coverage. They are base station coverage. I just want to point out that there is a huge difference between simplex and your project. Your project even uses at least one dedicated and "coordinated" remote base frequency. That's not like calling CQ on an open simplex frequency. That's a repeater, or to use your phrase that pays, "ad hoc repeater."

We aren't doing anything that others are not. But what we are doing does require cooperation among participant station to be a success and have a fruitful result.

Otherwise, it would be just another Echolink node. Not to downplay the viability of that but we do have higher aspirations to move off of Echolink to a superior (and more flexible) backhaul. But that is coming in phase 3...
Ham radio is all about experimentation and pushing the envelope.

 

[MTS2000des]

@mts2000des: that was painful to watch and listen to. When I come across users/repeaters like that, I keep 'turning the dial'... No need to abuse my ears with that nonsense.

I wish I would have saved the QSO I had with their "repeater manager" where I kindly tried to advise him there was an issue with the system (which is what prompted me to make that video).

He proceeded to blast me and saying it "must be my equipment" and he "just left the site with his HP service monitor".

Another ham recorded the same conversation, he also spouted off at him for not identifying though I heard the other ham ID no less than 4 times during a ten minute exchange.

That might be another reason no one uses the repeaters around here.

 

[kayn1n32008]

They all pretty much sound like that around here.

That was Atlanta's flagship repeater.

Flagship??? WTF, that sounded like absolute ****. I am thankful we actually have decent repeaters where I live. Even our major linked system, albeit some sites are only 3 Maxtrac/GM300 mobiles to make a linked repeater, sound MUCH better than that.

I wish I would have saved the QSO I had with their "repeater manager" where I kindly tried to advise him there was an issue with the system (which is what prompted me to make that video).

He proceeded to blast me and saying it "must be my equipment" and he "just left the site with his HP service monitor".

Another ham recorded the same conversation, he also spouted off at him for not identifying though I heard the other ham ID no less than 4 times during a ten minute exchange.

That might be another reason no one uses the repeaters around here.

Ouch. He Sounds like a lid... Cause I would be doing everything I could to fix a problem like that.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[rapidcharger]

Not to be argumentative, but it is my understanding that you don't use a single frequency, but in your setup, you run a crossband repeater as well which essentially also uses two frequencies across two different bands. That is not simplex by the letter definition of a single frequency operation. Just sayin...

Hey, listen. I've got a mop and bucket. Trust me when I say you don't wanna mess with this.

Flagship??? WTF, that sounded like absolute ****. I am thankful we actually have decent repeaters where I live. Even our major linked system, albeit some sites are only 3 Maxtrac/GM300 mobiles to make a linked repeater, sound MUCH better than that.

That was a recording of the Atlanta Radio Club (W4DOC)'s Sunday night net. The recording actually sounded rather good to me compared to how it has sounded on many occasions where I have listened to it in the last year or so. It has has a problem with jammers too and really, really unusable. I used to listen to the net on the input as the control op featured in that video is within simplex range of here and so were a lot of people who checked in to it. By listening on the input, I'd escape the super painful noise.

 

[AK9R]

Guys, the topic of the thread you were posting in was "simplex activity". I've tried to carve out all of the posts that related to the RAVwin system and move them to a new thread. If I've mis-titled the thread, let me know.

 

[MTS2000des]

I think a more appropriate title would be "alternatives to traditional repeater systems" that way it would just not limit the discussion to our system here and allow others to pipe in with similar or different networks built out with other technologies (Asterisk, linked remote bases, etc).

 

[K4SVT]

Ill just throw a word that has killed VHF and UHF...Narrowband...

 

[jim202]

He proceeded to blast me and saying it "must be my equipment" and he "just left the site with his HP service monitor".
[/QUOTE]

The big problem with HP service monitors is that you can get screwed big time by them. If you don't know how to set them up correctly, you will get wrong readings. Been there and went down the tubes several times before I learned all the settings that had to be set to get a correct deviation reading.

It's easy to have the service monitor set wrong. It will give you the wrong deviation reading if that's the case.

My guess that someone was too proud of his big, expensive service monitor to take the time to read the user manual and write down how the filters and band width should be set.

 

[rapidcharger]

Ill just throw a word that has killed VHF and UHF...Narrowband...

I'm not understanding what that has to do with what is being discussed. Please explain because narrowbanding has led to an unbelievable surplus market of perfectly good radios for the ham band (and even part 90 since they many radios were narrowband capable all along). There should be a lot of repeaters and radios to make base stations for alternative repeater systems.

 

[K4SVT]

Nevermind...

 

[MTS2000des]

He proceeded to blast me and saying it "must be my equipment" and he "just left the site with his HP service monitor".

My guess that someone was too proud of his big, expensive service monitor to take the time to read the user manual and write down how the filters and band width should be set.

He should also understand how they are injecting their modulation. They are using a VXR-7000 and an external controller. Having worked with interfacing many of these, the instructions many aftermarket controller manufacturers give is WRONG. The method they are using bypasses the modulation limiter in the exciter, and thus, if the external controller does not have it's own modulation limiter, if a wideband audio is presented on the pin on the ACC connector, the transmitter will swing as wide as a 53 foot trailer.

I and many others in the Atlanta area have offered to assist, but apparently they know better. As it stands, to quote one of their former club VP's, they "can't even have a Sunday night net despite having spent $10,000 on a repeater system".

None the less, this and others are some of the reason many of us are working on a cooperative project to build a wide-area coverage repeater using a new approach.

It's a lot of fun and a work in progress, but hopefully the light at the end of the tunnel will be a wide area system, comprised of many pieces that work together to fill the gaps that a single site would never be capable of, using a single repeater pair.

 

[AK9R]

Guys, let's stay on topic.