SteveShannon

Thanks for providing the PDF so nobody has to scan it. Can you tell us what has changed to make it so much larger?

I’m impressed with the quality of the Alpha Delta items that I have. I don’t have an antenna switch yet but I have several other items including their excellent lightning arrester. Having a second arc-plug in their switch adds another incremental amount of protection for the most common issues.

Tail setting won’t help. Deleting the Rx tone opens up your receiver so it will pass anything it receives regardless of the tone.

You would need to contact the Philippine National Telecommunications Commission to find out the process for requesting that. https://ntc.gov.ph/philippine-table-of-frequency-allocations/?doing_wp_cron=1663945203.0378279685974121093750 It appears that the entire range between 415 and 472 MHz is already used for Maritime Mobile. Edited to add (possibly correct): this web page indicates that 400-470 is available to radio amateurs: https://n2rac.com/pinoy-preppers-radio-faq-a36673619567 Good luck!

A picture is worth a thousand words, right? Look at page 3 in this document. They show the simplest solution for your situation: https://reeve.com/Documents/Articles Papers/Reeve_AntennaSystemGroundingRequirements.pdf It simply depicts a lightning arrester inserted into the feed line right where it enters the house and then connects the lightning arrester to your grounding bus. It’s a direct connection from the shield to building ground and a gas discharge tube to connect the inner conductor to ground to protect against static.

That’s what I thought he meant also.

I agree with your comment about range. I think the use of the phrase “short range” was simply intended to reflect that the useful range would be limited in practice because of the line of sight nature of UHF and because output power is relatively low. Saying that it’s a short range service doesn’t mean that it must only be used for short range communications; if it did the rules would need to define what is meant by “short range”.

Don’t satellite communications depend on earth side infrastructure which might be at risk in a large scale emergency?

Better to do 7-11. More power and it’s convenient! ? Plus you can find them everywhere.

https://vibroplex.com/contents/en-us/p3529.html The fiberglass Spiderpole linked above is what I got, and I like it, but the last segment is flexible enough that I would only use it for supporting a wire antenna. They make larger poles (I also bought the 41 foot one) which could be used to support a yagi as long as it was small and only if you clamped it to the third from top segment, which brings it down to about 30 feet. They’re both great for temporary use, field exercises using wire antennas, but if you want something permanent, spend the money and get something that’s built for the purpose. Solid Signal seems to have the best price (not including shipping ) on some of the telescoping permanent Rohn masts. These are steel masts that start at two inches diameter at the base and end at one and a quarter at the top (for the 30 foot mast). They’re built to be either bracketed or guyed and if you go very high at all you’ll need guys.

It was a joke.

I agree also. Actual masts designed for this application are available at reasonable prices. Here’s a ten foot Rohn antenna mast for $30, which isn’t much more than the ten foot top rail sold by the local box store: https://www.dxengineering.com/parts/roh-161005ghs This one was at DX Engineering, but if you’re near a Ham Radio Outlet you may be able to pick it up and save shipping (which is what makes the dance rails attractive).

I posted another source above, but the first place I ever found it was on the BLM’s site: https://www.blm.gov/sites/blm.gov/files/Lands_ROW_Motorola_R56_2005_manual.pdf

That’s one of my favorites. Here another source of it: https://s3.amazonaws.com/ngc-downloads/Motorola-Standards-and-Guidelines-for-Communication-Sites-R56-Manual.pdf Another source of information that is based on the National Electrical Code is this pdf from Mike Holt. I haven’t found aversion updatedfor NEC 2022: http://joshaven.com/resources/grounding/Radio_and_Television_2014NEC.pdf

The problem with standards or protocols is that everyone wants one of their own.

That question has been asked a few times. You would need to bypass the built in duplexer and replace it with a duplexer capable of withstanding the greater output power. Technically it might be done, but practically it probably isn't worth it.

It was the topic of the same question back in February: There was also some argument over on Radio Reference: https://forums.radioreference.com/threads/brc-hp-500-high-gain-460-470-mhz-gmrs-band-repeater-base-antenna-11-7db-gain.438247/

He has (or will have) a repeater with an SO-239 connector. He already has an antenna that has an SO-239 connector. He has LM-400 feedline that has PL-259 connectors that will mate directly to the antenna and repeater, no adapters needed. In terms of loss through connectors, that’s the least he can make it, regardless of whether he uses hardline or anything else. If he gets a jumper with N connectors on both ends he would have to add N to PL-259 adapters, which (using your numbers) would add 1 dB loss and negate the 0.75 dB difference (your numbers for the loss through 25’ of LM-400) in losses through the feedline. But what are the losses through 1/2 “Commscope? The losses per 100 ft (according to the Commscope website) are 2.342 dB or about 0.55 dB for 25 feet. So, by using Commscope Superflex and two adapters, the losses are 0.56 + 0.50 +0.50 or 1.56 dB So now he’s 0.8 dB negative compared to using what he already has. Yes, he might decide that he doesn’t have the coverage he wants and decide to buy an antenna with more gain. He still has that as an option. “But I digress I keep forgetting the hobby is about doing it as cheap as possible as hams do in this new age.” Way to lash out at both hams and those who have already stated they don’t have deep pockets.

First time I heard of it I felt the same way. How can that be? ?

TNRonin, Youre getting good advice from radio professionals about the best antennas and feed line. That’s great if you really want the best. If that’s the case simply ignore the rest of this post. If you’re still reading you might be a hobbyist who’s just interested in “good enough“ and the financial savings that implies. You already have LM400 feedline. I think you already have a J-pole. A short run of LM400 will have nearly no discernible incremental losses compared to hardline. Just make sure you seal the connectors against moisture. A better antenna will make a difference, but how much is that worth to you? Hook up what you have and try it. It won’t cost you anything but your time and I guarantee you’ll learn from the experience. Then, if it doesn’t work like you want, you can always try a different antenna (or perhaps raising the j-pole). You can always upgrade the feed line as well. I would hate to see your enjoyment of the hobby diminished because you’ve been convinced that what you have isn’t good enough when the actual incremental improvement is only measurable to professionals. Don’t let the best stand in the way of the good enough. Lots of people use LM400 and j-poles with inexpensive repeaters and do just fine. In the end elevation and location are the most important factors and all the money you have cannot overcome that.

An electrode encased in concrete is a valid grounding method. Concrete is frequently a better conductor than dry ground. See Ufer ground: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ufer_ground

Of the three you posted, only the first one, from KJD, says that it works as a GMRS radio with frequencies to 480MHz. And they say you have to contact them to get the location to download the software to enable that. Their price is $99.99. Both of the other two radios say they work up to 450 MHz, but can be set to receive up to 480. The one from the Anytone store is $105 and the one from Hesenate store is $102. There’s at least one more from Radioddity that claims to simply be a GMRS radio and to only scan and receive on any other VHF and UHF bands. It’s $109.99. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B096533TR6/ref=sspa_dk_detail_1?psc=1&pd_rd_i=B096533TR6&pd_rd_w=JlcFF&content-id=amzn1.sym.999c0877-3704-4f0f-9726-eebf80846a35&pf_rd_p=999c0877-3704-4f0f-9726-eebf80846a35&pf_rd_r=XMK6VF06HTWD674HY6SM&pd_rd_wg=Hrn7w&pd_rd_r=90fd0bac-1dd1-4270-814d-7bcde8096d73&s=car&sp_csd=d2lkZ2V0TmFtZT1zcF9kZXRhaWw Good luck.

An increase in outside diameter does result in slightly greater bandwidth (a wider band of low SWR). I doubt it’ll make a huge difference though.

Practically speaking, wall thickness matters only for resistance to physical damage.