• To anyone looking to acquire commercial radio programming software:

    Please do not make requests for copies of radio programming software which is sold (or was sold) by the manufacturer for any monetary value. All requests will be deleted and a forum infraction issued. Making a request such as this is attempting to engage in software piracy and this forum cannot be involved or associated with this activity. The same goes for any private transaction via Private Message. Even if you attempt to engage in this activity in PM's we will still enforce the forum rules. Your PM's are not private and the administration has the right to read them if there's a hint to criminal activity.

    If you are having trouble legally obtaining software please state so. We do not want any hurt feelings when your vague post is mistaken for a free request. It is YOUR responsibility to properly word your request.

    To obtain Motorola software see the Sticky in the Motorola forum.

    The various other vendors often permit their dealers to sell the software online (i.e., Kenwood). Please use Google or some other search engine to find a dealer that sells the software. Typically each series or individual radio requires its own software package. Often the Kenwood software is less than $100 so don't be a cheapskate; just purchase it.

    For M/A Com/Harris/GE, etc: there are two software packages that program all current and past radios. One package is for conventional programming and the other for trunked programming. The trunked package is in upwards of $2,500. The conventional package is more reasonable though is still several hundred dollars. The benefit is you do not need multiple versions for each radio (unlike Motorola).

    This is a large and very visible forum. We cannot jeopardize the ability to provide the RadioReference services by allowing this activity to occur. Please respect this.

It's really going up there!

Status
Not open for further replies.

MSR-Tillamook

Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2023
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
I live in a Canyon, drive truck and need to get out of this side of the state -here's the facts; 1000 feet of RG58 will need to be ran up the mountain and I'll buy whatever it takes but it's gotta work. How bad will 1000 Feet hurt me and will exposure make up for the run ?? anybody wanna tell me I'm nuts in a storm?
 

W9WSS

Retired LEO
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
1,192
Reaction score
722
Location
Woodridge, DuPage County, IL USA
If you were to use 7/8" heliax (hardline) which may still be lossy, the cost would be around $2100.00 for a 1000-foot run, and if someone has a calculation of this feedline I would be curious what the loss would be.
 

merlin

Active Member
Joined
Jul 3, 2003
Messages
3,960
Reaction score
1,903
Location
DN32su
For the cost of your plan, you could invest in a radio with remote capabilities.
Mount the radio in a weatherproof job box with a battery backup.
String RS232 remote cable up to the tranceiver.
Audio up and down, you will need a micro network with CAT6 cable or pair of Ubiquity dishes.
Some few transceivers can be found in the marine HF market.
Expensive ones even have network control. Everything on the network cable.
Choose coax, you need LMR600 or better.
That can get to $2 per foot. and still have loss.
 

mmckenna

I ♥ Ø
Joined
Jul 27, 2005
Messages
28,396
Reaction score
36,107
Location
United States
I live in a Canyon, drive truck and need to get out of this side of the state -here's the facts; 1000 feet of RG58 will need to be ran up the mountain and I'll buy whatever it takes but it's gotta work. How bad will 1000 Feet hurt me and will exposure make up for the run ?? anybody wanna tell me I'm nuts in a storm?

As pointed out, 1000 feet of RG-58 isn't going to work well. The cable losses work both ways, so the 30 milliwatts that would actually make it to the antenna from the radio would also translate into very little received signal actually making it back to the radio.

It's not going to work.

Higher grade cable would be the minimum option. W9WSS mentioned 7/8" Heliax. That would work pretty well, only about 1/3 of the signal lost. But it's 300 pounds of cable. It needs to be very carefully installed (can't kink it). It needs to be properly supported and protected. It cannot be buried and it is not designed for arial use (pole to pole). You'd also be looking at several thousand dollars for that much cable, the cost of installation (this isn't do-it-yourself-stuff). Connectors are $70 or more each, plus they require special tools and training to install correctly.

The remote radio solution would be a better idea, but I'm not sure there is a product made that will do that, and I'm not entirely sure a remote base like that is legal with the FCC.

Time to consider other options….
 

MSR-Tillamook

Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2023
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
I feel hurt- everything I know must be BS; like the idea of remote station but terrain wont let it happen. Help me with some simple physics- doesn't that copper core have like a 96% efficiency or power factor, and wouldn't more element surface make up for recieve loss? I'm not intending some A99, if I'm climbing this sucker (an sun up to sun down event) I'll put a beam up there - maybe a Laser 400 ???

As for regulations, I'd be okay running power to make up for the loss anyway right .
Here's a pic of the mountain:
2 Screenshot_20230410_054133_GOHUNT.jpg
 

mmckenna

I ♥ Ø
Joined
Jul 27, 2005
Messages
28,396
Reaction score
36,107
Location
United States
I feel hurt- everything I know must be BS; like the idea of remote station but terrain wont let it happen. Help me with some simple physics- doesn't that copper core have like a 96% efficiency or power factor, and wouldn't more element surface make up for recieve loss? I'm not intending some A99, if I'm climbing this sucker (an sun up to sun down event) I'll put a beam up there - maybe a Laser 400 ???

All wire has some amount of resistance. Same goes for coaxial cable.

For coaxial cable, as frequency goes up, losses go up. Also, as length increases, so does the loss.
A small coaxial cable like RG-58 is going to have a ton of loss over 1000 feet. Larger coaxial cable will have less loss, but will cost a lot more. It won't be a simple "amazon" type order, you would be looking at professional grade stuff and likely some level of professional installation. You wouldn't want to spend all that money on high grade coax cable, and then just leave it laying on the dirt running up the hill. It won't last long like that. Also, unless you own all that land up to the peak, there's challenges there. Running cable across someone elses land, or public land, has some rules involved.

"Laser 400"? Are you referring to Times-Microwave LMR-400? If so, it's a higher grade cable than RG-58, but it is still not enough to get useable performance over 1000 feet. Also, it's going to run you near $1.00 per foot at least.

To make this work, you need one (or a combination) of the following:
--Larger coaxial cable. Hobby grade stuff isn't going to cut it over 1000 feet. You are looking at hard line, measured in the dollars per foot range. It's going to get expensive quickly.
—Adding amplifiers/preamplifiers. You would need to send more power from the radio up towards the antenna to make up for the feedline losses. You'd also need to greatly amplify the received signal at the antenna end to send it back down to your radio if you want to be able to hear anything. Challenge here is that you'd need reliable power up at the antenna site. There are legality issues. I know you are willing to waive those, but others are not...
— Do what they do in the radio industry, you put the radio at the antenna and haul the audio back down the hill over twisted pair telephone wire. This gets a bit difficult as most CB's are not designed for this and it would take some custom fabrication. You would lose the ability to change channels, adjust squelch or other settings on the radio. Best you'd get would be audio and PTT up to the radio and audio down from the radio. It won't be an off the shelf consumer solution, it'll be a custom thing that will take knowledge, test equipment and money.


Is there a specific reason you need this on CB frequencies? CB radio has limited legal solutions that would make this work. If you can change to a different radio service, you'd have much more options.
 

mmckenna

I ♥ Ø
Joined
Jul 27, 2005
Messages
28,396
Reaction score
36,107
Location
United States
I'll put a beam up there - maybe a Laser 400 ???

"Laser 400"? Are you referring to Times-Microwave LMR-400? If so, it's a higher grade cable than RG-58, but it is still not enough to get useable performance over 1000 feet. Also, it's going to run you near $1.00 per foot at least.

Sorry, misread that part.

Yes, a beam antenna will give you more gain, and that will appear to increase the received signal strength, as well as increase your transmitted ERP.

But it won't be enough to overcome 1000 feet of RG-58, or any other consumer/hobby grade coaxial cable.

As I mentioned above, there are technologies that will do what you want that doesn't rely on almost a quarter mile of coaxial cable. Trouble is, you'll need reliable power at the antenna site, and some integration between remote control equipment and the CB radio.
 

MSR-Tillamook

Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2023
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
and with that being said I guess I'm stuck down on the low end scrabbling my neighbors TVs every time I step on the key, I wish they'd move soon..
 

MSR-Tillamook

Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2023
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
Lets talk about signal deployment; its my understanding that radio waves are attracted by the Earth and have a predictable path that returns them back to the attraction -ground. With that being said right or wrong, could one expect a Radio transmission directed upward would arc back around to ground. That's skip right? transmissions bouncing off the Ionosphere aggravated by solar radiation?

The direction I'm going with this is, if I cant poke a element on top on my mountain, what kind of engineering is gunna bounce a signal out of this canyon. There's no way I'm doomed, and I don't believe I gotta burn a role a red hot tubes to get out.

I have room for a 200 foot element at a 73' angel, rock stand off 11 feet... just saying..
 

JethrowJohnson

I love P25
Joined
Sep 10, 2022
Messages
940
Reaction score
311
Location
Marietta OH
Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but I think only shortwave frequencies bounce off of the ionosphere and that's why they can reach thousands of miles. Those are really low frequency (I think about 1 to 10 MHz.) Anything higher than that can only reach by line of sight, and the higher the frequency, the shorter the range. CB is on 27 MHz, so they can reach pretty far without the help of a repeater or anything like that, but I don't think it works like shortwave.
 

mmckenna

I ♥ Ø
Joined
Jul 27, 2005
Messages
28,396
Reaction score
36,107
Location
United States
Lets talk about signal deployment; its my understanding that radio waves are attracted by the Earth and have a predictable path that returns them back to the attraction -ground. With that being said right or wrong, could one expect a Radio transmission directed upward would arc back around to ground. That's skip right? transmissions bouncing off the Ionosphere aggravated by solar radiation?

The direction I'm going with this is, if I cant poke a element on top on my mountain, what kind of engineering is gunna bounce a signal out of this canyon. There's no way I'm doomed, and I don't believe I gotta burn a role a red hot tubes to get out.

I have room for a 200 foot element at a 73' angel, rock stand off 11 feet... just saying..

There's a thing call NVIS, Near Vertical Incidence Skywave. That's where you can beam a signal nearly straight up and bounce it off the ionosphere. Problem is, it's frequency dependent, and usually only reliable between 2MHz and about 8MHz. It will not work reliably on the 27MHz CB frequencies. Under some specific conditions it may, but those will be rare and not reliable enough.

You can try skip, but again, it's dependent on the ionosphere. Sometimes it'll work, sometimes it won't.
 

MSR-Tillamook

Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2023
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
Just looked at Near vertical incidence skywave - Wikipedia , clearly not the best place to get the full picture but your point made. I don't like the feeling of total defeat and shame, but that's what up -I'm not knowledgeable enough to switch transmission or equipment type- if I could sneak onto a lower Frq it takes away from my fun, power and potty mouth- I just wanna be a power God off the top of the mountain. it's not gunna happen. Hey, thanks for the school- gunna keep reading..
 

MSR-Tillamook

Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2023
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
I hate to kick a dead horse here, but I wish somebody could help me with some Physics- electrons move thru the Valance shell of conducting molecules because of their Ionic balance and tightly packed segments, my transmission broadcasts thru open air and finds an element -then conducts the electromagnetic phenomena to my receiver. with that being said energy/shock moves quicker thru a solid if its molecular arrangement allows (how the electrons cluster), SO when a formula says I'll loose my 5watts down to .03w where is the transmission energy lose? Copper a .96 power factor or what ever it is, I'm doubtful that 5w of electromagnet force is dispersed in such a sort run.

is it prox to the shielding or package?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top