Leaderboard
Popular Content
Showing content with the highest reputation on 12/10/24 in all areas
-
Being the south end of a north bound donkey?4 points
-
Midland Ghost Antenna
GrouserPad and 2 others reacted to OffRoaderX for a topic
Not long ago I tested a few antennas against the Midland Ghost antenna and it performed better than the Nagoya UT-72G .. and ALMOST as good as the Midland MXTA26..3 points -
Difference in ability to TX and RX on base station
WRUU653 and 2 others reacted to SteveShannon for a topic
If you can borrow an antenna analyzer capable of UHF hook it directly to the antenna. Then tune the antenna to the frequency you want. Tune it before adding coax. Coax will just make it look better unless the coax is damaged or the wrong impedance.3 points -
Need help or advice
WRXB215 and 2 others reacted to SteveShannon for a topic
When your radio is set to TSQL it sends a tone while transmitting and it remains quiet (squelched) during receive unless exactly the right tone is received. When it’s set to Tone, it sends the tone but it doesn’t require one when receiving.3 points -
Power and Line Of Sight is not straight forward enough for a blanket statement. Which is why so many answers are prefaced with "it depends."3 points
-
Difference in ability to TX and RX on base station
AdmiralCochrane and 2 others reacted to SteveShannon for a topic
I’ll correct my explanation to emphasize that the SWR is not actually going up, your measurement of reflected power is becoming more accurate. As a result the SWR value calculated at your radio will become higher, but in reality it has been the actual SWR hasn’t changed. You’re just seeing a more nearly accurate calculation. In other words, your SWR is higher than what you’re seeing and changing to the better cable will reveal that.3 points -
Difference in ability to TX and RX on base station
AdmiralCochrane and 2 others reacted to SteveShannon for a topic
One thing to be aware of is that SWR will appear to go up, possibly by quite a bit. Here’s why: SWR is calculated using forward transmitted power and reflected power. At your radio the forward transmitted power is the maximum. Attenuation in your cable reduces it as it travels along the cable until it finally arrives at the antenna. There, any mismatch in impedance causes a portion of the power to be reflected back towards your radio. Again, attenuation robs power from the reflected power as it travels back towards your antenna. Your radio or a SWR/wattmeter measures the forward and reflected power wherever it’s inserted into the feedline. So, any power measurement done at the radio will measure the lowest possible reflected power and utmost forward power, which results in a calculation of SWR that’s not accurate. Let me emphasize that the actual SWR of the antenna doesn’t change, but because forward and reflected power are being measured at the radio, the calculated value of SWR is incorrect. Replacing the lossy 7 mm cable with less lossy 10 mm cable will result in less attenuation both ways which will result in a higher (but more nearly accurate) calculation of SWR. Of course the most accurate place to measure power is right at the feedpoint of the antenna, where the actual forward power delivered to the antenna and the actual power reflected by the antenna can be measured most accurately, but it’s almost always inconvenient to do so.3 points -
No, it's a "me" thing. I've had issues in the past where I've had two identical radios and uploaded an image from one to the other and had that one not operate correctly.3 points
-
Need help or advice
WSDM599 and 2 others reacted to SteveShannon for a topic
Have you ever received anything on the RA-87? There are only four reasons your RA87 wouldn’t receive from your HT and MXT500: wrong tone, desense, wrong frequency, or broken receiver. You undid setting Tone Mode to Tone when you set the RX Tone to 123.00. Set Tone Mode to Tone and leave the RX tone clear. Setting the RX tone to something is the same as setting TSQL and filters your incoming signals. Leaving your RX tone clear and setting Tone Mode to Tone tells your radio not to filter on tones but to allow everything through.Red redemption. When you’re troubleshooting reception problems you want to start by let everything in. Setting Tone Mode to Tone tells your radio to send a tone on transmit, but to let everything through on receive. Most times when someone cannot hear transmissions from another transmitter it’s because they have the wrong tone set for RX. Another common reason not to receive from another radio is because you’re too close to the transmitting radio and your receiver is desensing. Make sure your transmitting radio and receiving radio have some distance between them. Finally, if you’re not too close and you’re not filtering on tones and you still don’t receive things on your RA-87 maybe the RA-87 doesn’t receive. Have you ever received anything on the RA-87?3 points -
Chances are pretty good that all those people you hear are using FRS radios, and traffic of that nature is explicitly permitted by Part 95B. FRS is licensed-by-rule, so no call signs. As of 2017, there are no "FRS" channels, since GMRS and FRS share the same frequencies with different max power and (in some cases) bandwidth. The only exception is that FRS radios cannot transmit on the repeater inputs since repeaters are not allowed on FRS. If the schools, construction workers, bus company and nursing homes are using FRS radios (on any channel 1-22) there is nothing to "enforce".3 points
-
Midland Ghost Antenna
SteveShannon and one other reacted to WRTC928 for a topic
Today I put a Midland Ghost Antenna on the NMO mag mount on my car. I figured a small black cylinder on the top of my small black car wouldn't attract a lot of attention. I was previously using a Nagoya UT-72G with its own mag mount. TBH, I didn't expect much from the Ghost Antenna, but I was quite surprised. I attached a Baofeng AR-5RM which emits 7-8 watts (even though it's nominally a 10 watt radio) and took a drive to check it out. I got about 15-17 miles from the Oklahoma City repeater and received a signal report from a kind GMRS user. I was at the extreme range I usually get, and he said my signal sounded like I had "a little strange interference" but he could understand me just fine. TBH, I was impressed. It didn't give up anything to the UT-72G, and in fact, may have been marginally better.2 points -
Ask your doctor if GMRS is right for you. Don’t use GMRS if you are allergic to GMRS.2 points
-
Difference in ability to TX and RX on base station
WRUU653 and one other reacted to Whiskey363 for a topic
Steve, that is the plan, I am just waiting for the coax so I don't have to take down the antenna twice.2 points -
Difference in ability to TX and RX on base station
WRUU653 and one other reacted to SteveShannon for a topic
By the way, here’s a video about tuning the Tram 1486:2 points -
Nope. Tuning step has no bearing as the channels are fixed./2 points
-
They are pretty impressive but they will peter out pretty fast on the long haul or when around hills and trees. On a trip up the calif/oregon cost last summer i had to switch over to my Midland whip to get some traction talking with friends along the redwoods.. Overall, the stuby does very well.2 points
-
Need help or advice
REBorn04 and one other reacted to SteveShannon for a topic
I agree; that’s completely different. “Tuning Step” sets incremental frequency change when you’re in VFO mode and press either the up or down arrow That’s really only important for VFO tuning. Because the bandwidth and the center frequency for all 30 channels are preordained by regulations, “Tuning Step” is immaterial to GMRS and can even cause problems. The channels in GMRS are not sequential and have differing bandwidths. Some channels are interstitial even. Here’s the list of GMRS channels: https://mygmrs.com/help/about-gmrs2 points -
May sound silly but there is a fifth reason, the volume could be turned down. It happens to the best of us. The back of the RA87 also has two plug ins, one for speaker and one for data. Is there anything plugged into the back of the radio? Are you using the radios speaker or an external one?2 points
-
Difference in ability to TX and RX on base station
WRUU653 and one other reacted to SteveShannon for a topic
Most modern radios can withstand an SWR well over 2.0:1 without damage. You can calculate the SWR at the antenna based on the losses you have calculated. Your SWR meter calculated 1.8:1 with the lossy cable, but that doesn’t include the losses for both forward power and reflected power. You calculated that 63% of the power is attenuated. I’m going to use 100 watts as the RF output just to make the calculations easier. With a 50 watts transmitter the values would be half. Your radio transmits 100 watts. You calculated 63% loss so 37 watts arrives at the antenna. So, this is why the measurement location matters. At the radio Forward Power is 100 watts and by the time it gets to the antenna Forward Power has been attenuated down to 37 watts. Due to an impedance mismatch some portion of the Forward Power reflects from the feedpoint and heads back towards the radio. That’s the Reflected Power. Again there’s a 63% loss before it arrives at the radio. Loss is loss for both Forward and Reflected power. Here’s an interesting article about SWR that correlates reflected power percentage to SWR in a table: https://www.arrl.org/files/file/Technology/tis/info/pdf/q1106037.pdf You measured an SWR of 1.8:1 (I assumed at the radio). That correlates to 8.2% reflected power. So, at your hypothetical radio, when transmitting 100 watts forward, 100 watts was seen as the Forward Power and 8.2 watts was seen as the Reflected Power and an SWR of 1.8 was calculated from those two values. But we know that 8.2 watts is the Reflected Power measurement after losing 63%, so 8.2 watts is really 37% of the actual Reflected Power (call that RP). As an equation 8.2 = 0.37 * RP. Rearranging, RP = 8.2/0.37. Solving, RP is 22.16 watts actually reflected at the feedpoint. But only 37 watts even made it to the feedpoint. So an accurate calculation of SWR at the feedpoint would be based on the Forward Power of 37 watts and Reflected Power of 22.16 watts. Again looking at the table in the ARRL article, the reflected power percentage is 22.16/37 or 59.9% and that calculates to an SWR of 7.85:1 (I used the online SWR calculator at https://www.aareff.com/en/calculating-swr/?srsltid=AfmBOoqd-GzPr7AeD9xpbmFecxHoSzzTGyKbeLlR00b78uweI9rYUxED) That doesn’t seem right to me if you’re using an antenna tuned for GMRS frequencies. Please check my math.2 points -
To a point you can. But GMRS limited to 50 watts it's not going to get you much farther.2 points
-
The UT-72G I would rate in the subpar area. That was my 1st mobile antenna and I wasn't impressed at all with it. The Midland MXTA26 is far superior and it's the antenna I currently run. I do have that ghost antenna in my wish list only because it's small profile keeps it hidden.2 points
-
Echolink
DeoVindice and one other reacted to DominoDog for a topic
Echolink is pretty neat if you have internet data access. I have an old Sonim XP8 that I have dedicated as a ham radio toy and it is my go to echolink device. Has a built in PTT and everything, works great. You can even get a handheld speaker/mic for them. Echolink will let you talk and hear all across the world, but it does have its limitations. The app is sorta sluggish and cumbersome. It does work, though. But the greatest inconvenience is the hang time it has and the repeater has to be completely silent before echolink users will get the "Transmit" button available. It's greyed-out any time there is activity and most RF users can jump right in but echolink users have to wait. Works good on repeaters that are not busy but on a busy repeater you might have a hard time getting in. Unless they specifically remember to give extra time for echolink ppls2 points -
Something to think about
Lscott and one other reacted to AdmiralCochrane for a topic
Stopped in less than 5 minutes of his hour long video when he said power can overcome line of sight. If you want to be taken seriously you just CANNOT tell people this.2 points -
License not populated yet
WRUU653 reacted to SteveShannon for a topic
It’s an extract, not a live lookup. You can’t speed it up. It could take anywhere between a day or two to a week.1 point -
Can you provide a definitive reference for the above comment?1 point
-
Difference in ability to TX and RX on base station
SteveShannon reacted to Whiskey363 for a topic
That's the plan, just waiting for the new coax!1 point -
Hampton VA Repeater is now in BETA Testing
SteveShannon reacted to tcp2525 for a topic
Kudos to you for deploying a repeater. It's always nice to see a new one on the air even though I'm to far away to use it. Good luck on getting it finalized the way you want it.1 point -
Who ever Midland has producing their antennae does a great job in producing a good antennae with good VSWRs on GMRS freqs. Unfortunately, the operating band range is very narrow and that is why they work great on GMRS freqs, if you have a good groundplane. And they do not require any tuning which is a good thing for a majority of the GMRS users. It is a great turn-key solution for most beginning GMRS users.1 point
-
Yeah, I don't expect it to perform as well as a whip in those circumstances, but for just running around doing errands in the city, it seems as if it will work well.1 point
-
1 point
-
MDC signalling on GMRS.
SteveShannon reacted to WQAI363 for a topic
I realize that my 2 or 5 cents is pointless now. However, I will my opinion on the use MDC signaling on GMRS Repeaters or simplex. Thinking about MDC signaling on GMRS, Mr. Shannon makes sense. MDC is forbidden on Amateur Radio and it's really unnecessary for GMRS, unless used in volunteer SAR or a CERT TEAM. Of course, I do enjoy the squawk sound of MDC tones, but MDC does have a purpose, just not for casual conversation or idle chat-chat.1 point -
Need help or advice
WSDM599 reacted to SteveShannon for a topic
It depends on the antenna, but for a single band whip antenna without a trap you “simply” adjust the length of the antenna until it matches the frequency you wish to transmit and receive. Connect an analyzer to your antenna and look to see where the dip is. If the dip is at a lower frequency than desired your whip is too long. Take off a tiny bit and check again. The dip should have moved to a slightly higher frequency. If taking off a half inch changes the resonant frequency by 2 MHz (I made that number up; you’ll have to figure it out for your situation. It could be less or it could be more!) and you only want to change 500 kHz then you’ll need to take off an eighth of an inch more. Approach it very carefully because it’s damned hard to make the radiator longer. Most antennas that are intended to be tuned will have some sort of instructions and maybe a cutting chart. Here’s a video on tuning the Tram 1486 to GMRS frequencies:1 point -
I use two of the Midland mag mounts on my Ford Escape without any issues. And a Melowave mag mount on the SxS. Both do well even with the Comet 2x4SRNMO.1 point
-
New Feature: Clubs
rdunajewski reacted to SteveShannon for a topic
I’ve reported this issue to Rich. He’s usually pretty fast about responding.1 point -
Yeah, outside sources got me thinking of a Kenwood TH-D75. lol1 point
-
I also have the Comet CA-2X4SR (PL259 mount) and have been very happy with it.1 point
-
You should be happy with the 2x4SR. They work well for 2m, 70cm, GMRS, MURS, and public safety frequencies. That is what I use on my SxS and it works well. I have to stick with antennas that are no taller than 20" on my Ford Escape in order to fit into the garage.1 point
-
Love my Midland Ghost Antenna, allows me to fit my truck in the garage. Works really well for GMRS and has some decent range for being so small, also really good in hilly areas. I also have the MXTA26 which is awsome if i need a little more reach. I always have both in my truck depending on needs. I recently purchased a Comet CA-2X4SRNMO for my handhelds with more bands. Haven't tried it out yet.1 point
-
You need to ascertain the tuned center frequency of the Antenna. Your antenna requires tuning. If your VSWR is 1.2 at 462 Megs and 1.8 at 467 megs it is obviously that your antenna needs to be snipped some more if your desire is only talk to repeaters. If you desire to transmit to both mobiles and repeaters you might want to consider tuning for 465 megs.1 point
-
Difference in ability to TX and RX on base station
Whiskey363 reacted to LeoG for a topic
This is where I got mine. And the paperwork says 9.8dBi gain.1 point -
I'm another that is not impressed with the Nagoya UT-72G. My Tram 1174 does a better job. I have a Melowave Shadow that I am going to try out on the wife's car to see how it does with my KG-XS20G.1 point
-
Difference in ability to TX and RX on base station
AdmiralCochrane reacted to SteveShannon for a topic
So the actual SWR of the antenna is almost certainly already higher than 1.8. No, I wouldn’t recommend not upgrading the coax. Lossy coax simply hides high SWR. The “right” thing to do depends on your resources. I would measure the SWR of the antenna right at the antenna feedpoint and adjust the antenna (tune it) until it’s as close to 1.0:1 as possible at the frequency you intend to transmit most often. I’ll have to go back and see what antenna you’re using and whether it’s one that can be tuned. Then, your reflected power will be reduced to the minimum and the attenuation of reflected power will have no effect on the apparent SWR.1 point -
Difference in ability to TX and RX on base station
LeoG reacted to Whiskey363 for a topic
I did not see that calculator, thank you.1 point -
Difference in ability to TX and RX on base station
Whiskey363 reacted to LeoG for a topic
M&P have their own calculator, it's not sophisticated though. But you can take that number and plug it into the other calculators to see the results.1 point -
Has anyone used the Radioddity DB25-G?
AndyOnTheRadio reacted to WRYS709 for a topic
I have no experience with the DB25-G, so I can't advise you on Chirp. I am also a Mac guy, so for years I have programmed my non-Chirp radios with Windows (first XP, then 10 and 11) using Parallels on my Macs. I do have the Radioddity DB25-D, which is like the DB20-G but with DMR and it also requires Windows to program. I am not sure why Radioddity chose to confuse two completely different radios with the "DB25" moniker!1 point -
1 point
-
Is that specifically a TD thing? I use a standard Chirp file for Baofeng and Retevis radios without any problems.1 point
-
MDC signalling on GMRS.
WQAI363 reacted to SteveShannon for a topic
No, I’m talking about GMRS legality. If MDC prohibited in amateur radio, it’s also prohibited in GMRS for the same reason; encoded communications are prohibited in GMRS in the same way they are in amateur radio You stated that MDC was legal in GMRS. If it is, then it’s legal for ham radio. It can’t go both ways.1 point