county Repeater

[Guest]

can someone please explain to me how can a repeater site be so far away from the area where its suppose to be . WPYJ296 thats the call sign for the washington co sheriff . now how can a repeater be miles away from the area and still use it for radio comm's . those mobiles cant use that much power for radio traffic .

 

[INDY72]

Simple- The repeater site picks up the mobiles and relays vias iether radio freq, landline, or microwave to the base radio system at the dispatch center. Same thing for the output, only in reverse order. The repeater then also repeats the mobiles conversation on the output, unless talkaround is used. Repeaters are placed strategically in "most" instances so that they can recieve the mobiles at distances from the dispatch center. Most mobiles use anywhere from 45 or so watts, to 100 watts of power for broadcast. If you have a good set up of repeaters placed lets say at the extreme North, and extreme South of a county, then you have good coverage for the entire county. If I could draw a diagram and put it on here for ya I would as the diagram would help illustrate the point nicely.

 

[K5MAR]

Looking at the license, it appears to me that the locations are all well within the county coverage area: one is 4.9 miles east of B'ville, with an antenna height of 109 feet above average terrain; one is 1.7 miles south of Ramona, with a antenna height of 317 feet above average terrain, and the last is located at Copan, with an antenna height of 24 fet above average terrain (!). As flat as Washington County is, the first two sites have plenty of height to give adequate coverage for a county as small as Washington County. Now, I don't get the last one, in Copan. The code shows it's a FX! - Control station. Haven't been around B'ville in awhile, so i have no idea what this is supposed to be.

But the first two sites have plenty of height for reception even of handheld radios, given the local terrain. With a 300 foot antenna height on the local repeater, I can hit it with my HT from 20 miles away. Antenna height increases the radio horizon of the site, the higher the antenna, the better the coverage. Now, I imagine the coverage into Osage County to the west gets bad pretty quick.

Mark S.

 

[INDY72]

Mark, if the third is the Control Station, then its the one that sends signals out to the two repeater towers. It is most likely linked to the dispatch by one of the previously mentioned methods. Since those two repeaters are nice and high, they would pick up the control station nicely. I would assume its basically in between the two at around halfway?

 

[K5MAR]

Milf, sorry, you have to understand the layout of the county, Copan is a very small town (population 800) located at the north end of the county, 12 miles north of Bartlesville, the county seat, and about twice that far north of Ramona. Here's the database of Washington County:
http://www.radioreference.com/modules.php?name=RR&ctid=2201
Look at the layout of the county and the locations of the towns in question.
So my question is, why here? Logistically-wise, it's not a good site for a control station. It would make more sense to have a relay tower here, and the control point in Bartlesville.

As scaner_ant knows the county, I didn't bother to put this in my previous posting. Again, sorry for leaving the details out.

Mark S.

 

[GlacierClipper]

WPYJ296 Radio Service PW - Public Safety Pool, Conventional
5 Total Locations
10 Locations per Summary Page
Locations Displayed:
All | Fixed | Mobile | Itinerant | Temp Fixed | 6.1m



= Special Condition
Location Transmitter Address /Area of Operation Latitude, Longitude Status
1 - Fixed 420 S E JOHNSTONE AVE
BARTLESVILLE, OK WASHINGTON County 36-44-55.3 N, 095-58-36.9 W
P
2 - Fixed 4.9 MI E OF BARTLESVILLE
BARTLESVILLE, OK WASHINGTON County 36-43-39.0 N, 095-53-40.0 W
P
3 - Fixed 1.7 MI S
RAMONA, OK WASHINGTON County 36-29-47.0 N, 095-55-11.0 W
P
4 - Fixed County Road 39600 at County Road 7500
Copan, OK WASHINGTON County 35-54-11.0 N, 095-55-58.0 W
P
5 - Mobile Other

 

[fast2okc]

Scanner_ant--

The FCC license gives both the frequencies and their locations. If you assume the FCC data is correct (not at all a safe bet :wink: ), then there is only one repeater that repeats the moblies. The only FB2 frequency is 159.150 and it is only licensed at location #2-- 4.9 miles East of Bartlesville.

Location #1 is the Sheriff's Office itself -- 420 S E Johnstone Ave. It is the base for Mutal Aid (155.490MHz), the old Sheriff's frequency (155.415MHz) and the FX1 (control) for the repeater. It is on the repeater input frequency (155.985MHz).

That leaves the FX1 fixed locations in Ramona and Copan. These locations are on UHF. My guess (and it's just a guess) is that these are remote receive sites for the fringes of the repeater range. These would receive the mobiles (on 155.985MHz) and bring these signals strongly into the system.

My clue is that there is no FB2 or mobile repeater at location 3 or 4.

But that is just my opinion...............I could be wrong. Would be nice to speak with someone who was involved in putting tht ting together.

--FAST 2

 

[Guest]

repeater

i know where the repeaters are . just explain this to me ok . how can a repeater be way south of the county . and still be used way north . from the map im looking at the tower is SW of bixby . there is no way a signal be heard from that distance . that tower has to be at least 600ft tall to ge past tulsa .

 

[K5MAR]

Re: repeater

i know where the repeaters are . just explain this to me ok . how can a repeater be way south of the county . and still be used way north . from the map im looking at the tower is SW of bixby . there is no way a signal be heard from that distance . that tower has to be at least 600ft tall to ge past tulsa .

Better check your map again. The south tower is 1.7 miles south of Ramona. Certainly not SW of Bixby. Here is the lookup of the license on the FCC database:
http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/ws...db_id=19&link=WPYJ296&application_id=
You may need to paste this into your browser.

Mark S.

 

[Guest]

repeater

maybe you should go look at the map on this site and figure out why its down there instead of up in ramona

 

[K5MAR]

Re: repeater

maybe you should go look at the map on this site and figure out why its down there instead of up in ramona

So what you are saying is, if there is a discrepancy between the official FCC files and rr.com, that we should rely on rr.com?

BTW, I just checked the Lat/Long given on the FCC website (see the above link) and it comes out right by Ramona.

If there is a problem with the map display here, then you should mention it to Lindsay.

Mark S.

 

[K5MAR]

FYI, the Lat/Long given here on rr.com are incorrect, they do not match the FCC database. I know which one I accept as more likely to be accurate!

Mark S.

 

[OkRob]

Location #4 appears wrong in the FCC database

It appears that the latitude given in the FCC database (link above) for location #4 is incorrect. It should be N36.54.11 instead of N35.54.11. Using N36.54.11 does put it in Copan, with N35.54.11 putting it 300' north of the intersection of 181st St. South and South Yale or SW of Bixby.

- Rob

 

[K5MAR]

It appears that there are two (or three) problems here. The data submitted to the FCC may not be correct (or the FCC is not transferring it correctly), and rr.com isn't always transferring the FCC data correctly. The Ramona site is correct on the FCC website, but incorrect in the RR database. The Copan site is incorrect on the FCC website. No way of knowing what was on the actual paperwork submitted to the FCC.

I should have thought about this, as the FCC listings on the cityfreq.com website are full of misspelled names. I admit, though, I'm not sure why anybody cares about the actual physical location of the antennas. To each his own.

Mark S.

 

[GlacierClipper]

The Callsign, location and frequency may not be cross-referenced correctly in a database.

 

[loumaag]

It appears that there are two (or three) problems here. The data submitted to the FCC may not be correct (or the FCC is not transferring it correctly), and rr.com isn't always transferring the FCC data correctly. The Ramona site is correct on the FCC website, but incorrect in the RR database. The Copan site is incorrect on the FCC website. No way of knowing what was on the actual paperwork submitted to the FCC.

Actually it is quite easy to see that it was a simple mistake for the Latitude as was pointed out earlier. Replacing that 35deg with 36deg puts the site right in Copan where it is supposed to be. However, a look at the FCC data will also show it to be located at the intersection of two roads that have too many zeros in them. :lol:

As for the conversion, you are wrong. The Ramona site calculates exactly as it shows in RR.com, or at least it does when my calculator does the conversion from Deg, Min, Sec to Decimal degrees (with an allowance for a very small rounding difference). Maybe your calculator does it different?

 

[Guest]

repeater

oh well never mind . i guess im in the wrong as always . since i dont live there anymore . it just strikes me that the data base showed it in bixby instead of southern washington co .

 

[loumaag]

Re: repeater

oh well never mind . i guess im in the wrong as always . since i dont live there anymore . it just strikes me that the data base showed it in bixby instead of southern washington co .

Well, this comment confuses me. How are you wrong when plainly you are right. It is evident that the FCC data has a mis-typed number putting site #4 too far south by 1 degree. The RR database only reflects the FCC data. If the FCC data has a problem, the RR database can't do anything about it. Just accept the fact that data is entered by humans and humans make mistakes.

 

[K5MAR]

As for the conversion, you are wrong. The Ramona site calculates exactly as it shows in RR.com, or at least it does when my calculator does the conversion from Deg, Min, Sec to Decimal degrees (with an allowance for a very small rounding difference). Maybe your calculator does it different?

Nope, not my calculator, my eyes! I slipped up a line and read Bartlesville's 36.72 instead of Ramona's 36.49, and I knew 29 minutes didn't convert to .72! BTW, why the decimal degrees instead of degrees, minutes & seconds? If rr.com used the standard lat/lon format (the FCC does), I'd think there's be less confusion. Yeah, i know, I'm an old fart, still using stone age measurments, but that's what I learned.

Mark S.

 

[loumaag]

... BTW, why the decimal degrees instead of degrees, minutes & seconds? If rr.com used the standard lat/lon format (the FCC does), I'd think there's be less confusion. Yeah, i know, I'm an old fart, still using stone age measurments, but that's what I learned.

Actually that was discussed a while back when RR was in beta test with the Admins. I too am getting old and cannot remember the reason for sure, but I think it dealt with using them in various mapping programs where although all would accept DMS there were various formats for different programs like D:M:S or D-M-S or D, M, S, etc., which were all different but all took D.ddd basically the same. Of course then again, the FCC doesn't use the standard Lat/Lon either, so... :roll: