We need more GMRS Repeaters Deployed

[KAF6045]

6 hours ago, Gearhead said:

I obtained a Class D license in 1969.  I've witnessed a lot of changes over the years, some good some bad.  The majority of the time I worked sideband.  Now, when I switch to AM all I hear is crickets...dead as a door nail in my area.  All the older cb'ers have passed on and most folks can't get off social media long enough to talk on a radio, cb or otherwise.

Could never justify a sideband unit...

If I set mine on "scan" I do get traffic in the afternoon/evening (when the ionosphere starts to set up skip possibilities)... From what I can only describe as southern rednecks who like the sound of their voices (FCC regs still specify a limit of 5 minutes per conversation followed by a minimum of 1 minute quiet time before transmitting again). I suspect they are the type using illegal amplifiers with massive antennas (Georgia to Michigan, I don't think I can get that with a 100W 10m SSB mode, much less 25W [carrier] AM, so 11m shouldn't be much better). They never seem to have anything to say -- sound like an Amateur contest where the only thing they are doing is counting how many others they can contact.

[marcspaz]

2 minutes ago, KAF6045 said:

I don't think I can get that with a 100W 10m SSB mode, much less 25W [carrier] AM, so 11m shouldn't be much better).

 

During solar minimum, 10m with 100 watts, I've worked most states and 8 countries... mostly mobile.  As the solar cycles move to maximum, you can work the world on 10m with just a few watts.  Actually, during the last solar cycle, one of my 10m contacts in Ohio was with only 0.5 watts out of my IC-746 Pro.  I also worked Mexico with 0.5w with my IC-7300.

[Gearhead]

KAF6045, Most of the guys you're talking about are running repurposed ham gear and beam antennas.  Yeah, a lot of them are contesting just like the hams.  One of my neighbors ran a Yaesu 101 driving a Drake L4B into another amp.  He built a 14 element yagi (yes, 14) and mounted it on a homemade 100 foot tower.  He was fond of saying "when I key down, EF Hutton listens".  It was an audio monster.

[Gearhead]

12 minutes ago, marcspaz said:

 

During solar minimum, 10m with 100 watts, I've worked most states and 8 countries... mostly mobile.  As the solar cycles move to maximum, you can work the world on 10m with just a few watts.  Actually, during the last solar cycle, one of my 10m contacts in Ohio was with only 0.5 watts out of my IC-746 Pro.  I also worked Mexico with 0.5w with my IC-7300.

Twenty years ago I worked Germany and the UK almost every day with a HR2510 in my truck.  That was a lot of fun.  When conditions are right. you can work the world on 10/11 with 100 watts.

[KAF6045]

No argument on the "when conditions are right" -- just that I don't think those conditions are really "here" yet in this solar cycle. At least, not every afternoon. And yes, 15 or so years ago, I did pick up a lot of 10m stuff in my Jeep with FT-100 and ATAS-100 antenna (my commute, though, was too short to attempt a reply -- about 7 miles in heavy traffic). Seemed that short loaded whip had better reception than anything I could rig at my apartment (I once had one of those "dipole" adapters for a pair of "HamStick" antennas on a frame work of plastic piping straddling a fence with coax running out my window and across the driveway under a length of "CordWay" [the vinyl stuff for offices that gives a shallow bump over cords]).

 

[marcspaz]

1 hour ago, KAF6045 said:

just that I don't think those conditions are really "here" yet in this solar cycle.

 

For sure.  We are only a year and a half into the new solar cycle and expected to peak in about 3 years.  I have see some SFI number in the 180's recently, though.  I'm optimistic this cycle won't be as bad as the predictions are.

[WRKC935]

On 8/5/2022 at 9:12 AM, Blaise said:

I absolutely think we need more repeaters.  I'd have put my own up already, but for the fact that once I got out the topo maps and found the best place within thirty mile,  I discovered that a) the whole hilltop is owned by the water company, b) it has a large water tower on it that's already covered with ham repeaters, c) a local ham group convinced the water company to let them manage all antenna placement, and d) the ham group won't even discuss details like access/rent/maintenance/etc. unless you're a licenced ham who's joined their group.

 

Have to ask.  Is the water company in question a private business or a government agency?  Private businesses can basically do as they please.  Including allowing a bunch of hams to takeover their antenna tower.  A government agency doesn't have that ability and can be brought to task over it.  If they are showing preferential treatment to the hams, which it seems would be the case, then I would with documentation (certified letter) to both the government entity and the ham group managing access for the necessary request forms to gain access.  Ten days later, I would send a second certified letter to BOTH entities, making a SECOND request if they haven't provided you with the correct documentation.  After an additional ten days, I would write another certified letter to BOTH about the cost of tower rental in the current market being up to 20 dollars PER foot of height, which IS a factual statement, and that as a governmental entity showing preference to ANY group and not the community as a whole is illegal (search your local laws and provide reference to the code stating this).   Now THAT will NOT get you on the tower.  But it will get the hams a FAT bill or told to get their gear off the tower.  If neither happens, the next move is to get an attorney to write a letter to both informing them of legal action if you are not allowed to at least fill out a request for access.  The water company has NO IDEA the hams are doing this.  Requiring a ham license and membership to their ham club to access the tower that may well be taxpayer owned.  That is where the problem starts.  If the same water company had a backhoe and you ask to borrow it, let alone free use, they would laugh and tell you no and explain that it's NOT possible due to the regulations pertaining to publicly owned equipment.  A tower owned by a government entity is no different than a backhoe, automobile, building or structure, or any other tangible asset.  You can no more personally use any of those other things for your own private enjoyment than they can.  And if they argue that the hams are allowed access for ARES (emergency communications) then you can simply indicate that the repeater you would be installing is ALSO for EMCOMM on a different radio service and should fall under that same agreement. 

To tell the truth, some hams really irritate me with their 'we're important cuz we can communicate" crap.  And as an extension to that feel that they are entitled to free crap, tower access and anything else they desire based on ARES and EMCOMM. 

Of course, as mentioned, if it's a PRIVATE water company and has no connection to a local government entity, then you are basically out of luck.  You could write a letter to them requesting access directly and try to bypass the ham group, but I don't know how that would go. 

[marcspaz]

3 hours ago, WRKC935 said:

Have to ask.  Is the water company in question a private business or a government agency?  Private businesses can basically do as they please.  Including allowing a bunch of hams to takeover their antenna tower.  A government agency doesn't have that ability and can be brought to task over it.  If they are showing preferential treatment to the hams, which it seems would be the case, then I would with documentation (certified letter) to both the government entity and the ham group managing access for the necessary request forms to gain access.  Ten days later, I would send a second certified letter to BOTH entities, making a SECOND request if they haven't provided you with the correct documentation.  After an additional ten days, I would write another certified letter to BOTH about the cost of tower rental in the current market being up to 20 dollars PER foot of height, which IS a factual statement, and that as a governmental entity showing preference to ANY group and not the community as a whole is illegal (search your local laws and provide reference to the code stating this).   Now THAT will NOT get you on the tower.  But it will get the hams a FAT bill or told to get their gear off the tower.  If neither happens, the next move is to get an attorney to write a letter to both informing them of legal action if you are not allowed to at least fill out a request for access.  The water company has NO IDEA the hams are doing this.  Requiring a ham license and membership to their ham club to access the tower that may well be taxpayer owned.  That is where the problem starts.  If the same water company had a backhoe and you ask to borrow it, let alone free use, they would laugh and tell you no and explain that it's NOT possible due to the regulations pertaining to publicly owned equipment.  A tower owned by a government entity is no different than a backhoe, automobile, building or structure, or any other tangible asset.  You can no more personally use any of those other things for your own private enjoyment than they can.  And if they argue that the hams are allowed access for ARES (emergency communications) then you can simply indicate that the repeater you would be installing is ALSO for EMCOMM on a different radio service and should fall under that same agreement. 

To tell the truth, some hams really irritate me with their 'we're important cuz we can communicate" crap.  And as an extension to that feel that they are entitled to free crap, tower access and anything else they desire based on ARES and EMCOMM. 

Of course, as mentioned, if it's a PRIVATE water company and has no connection to a local government entity, then you are basically out of luck.  You could write a letter to them requesting access directly and try to bypass the ham group, but I don't know how that would go. 

 

@WRKC935 not trying to start an argument... but It will probably turn into one.  I don't think any of what you wrote is even close to accurate nor good advice. 

Nothing says any government agency must enter into a contract or MOU or deny entering into a contract or MOU with anyone.

The pricing method you listed on tower leases is completely wrong.

Most governemnt agencies already charge to have Amateur Radio towers or equipment on government property unless there is an MOU or contract to support that agency and those agreements includes land/property use.

I can promise you that there is ZERO chance the owner or management team (if government agency) of a water tower doesn't know what Hams are doing on their property.  Public Works facilities are highly monitored and heavily restrict access.

Government agencies, public works, hospitals, etc., don't just let you claim to be ARES/RACES and let you put up whatever you want.  There must be proof of association, a contract or MOU to provide a specific service must be executed.  Training and testing will be conducted regularly.  Depending on the agency, people involved need to get cleared for a Public Trust or possibly some type of addition security clearance, etc.

3 hours ago, WRKC935 said:

To tell the truth, some hams really irritate me with their 'we're important cuz we can communicate" crap.  And as an extension to that feel that they are entitled to free crap, tower access and anything else they desire based on ARES and EMCOMM. 

I think this gets to the root of your post.  The reality is that when no one else can communicate, Hams can, and that is why the government commits to MOU's and contracts relating to training and support.  Thankfully, Honor has its privilege.  My guess based on all the rest of your post is that you're jealous? 

[KAF6045]

11 minutes ago, marcspaz said:

I can promise you that there is ZERO chance the owner or management team (if government agency) of a water tower doesn't know what Hams are doing on their property.  Public Works facilities are highly monitored and heavily restrict access.

Government agencies, public works, hospitals, etc., don't just let you claim to be ARES/RACES and let you put up whatever you want.  There must be proof of association, a contract or MOU to provide a specific service must be executed.  Training and testing will be conducted regularly.  Depending on the agency, people involved need to get cleared for a Public Trust or possibly some type of addition security clearance, etc.

Also to be mentioned -- FCC RF Exposure evaluation.

For a single repeater on a tower/structure, this isn't too difficult. When one gets multiple repeaters on the same tower/structure, this becomes more complex and may require calibrated instruments to measure field strengths, etc.

Amateur's have text books on performing such evaluations. I doubt any non-Amateur GMRS users even KNOW about that requirement. Most are using HTs or mobiles which are either low-enough in power to only affect the user themselves (manuals have warnings to keep the unit/antenna a few inches away from one's body for HTs), or are transient enough that others won't be in the radiation range long enough to be a concern.

Putting up a GMRS repeater on a structure that is already occupied by other repeaters (or even broadcast -- low-power FM, say) will require a re-evaluation of the RF environment. The Amateur repeater owners are unlikely to do that for a non-Amateur repeater. That means the GMRS repeater owner may have to do the evaluation -- taking into account the presence of the Amateur equipment and RF! Also the mixing products of different frequencies (462 x 445 may generate 17MHz and 907Mhz).

 

[WRKC935]

2 hours ago, marcspaz said:

 

@WRKC935 not trying to start an argument... but It will probably turn into one.  I don't think any of what you wrote is even close to accurate nor good advice. 

  My guess based on all the rest of your post is that you're jealous? 

This is the tower I have access to that was bought and paid for by a ham.

I am gonna say that jealousy doesn't really play into it.  But I could be wrong.

 

As far as the misappropriation of taxpayer assets. Gonna have to say that, yes, that tends to irritate me.  Now i am not gonna say that every ham group is full of idiots that would pull crap like the OP was talking about.  But those guys and groups are out there.  And I have seen where hams had gotten into agreements that were out of bounds.  If a ham repeater is in place for EMCOMM for a county or other served agency that is being hosted totally free of charge, no insurance, power bill or anything else, then that equipment, at least in the eyes of the state of Ohio is to be tested on a regular interval and NOT used for general communications.  There were two ham repeaters that were installed for an ARES group locally that were actually pulled from service because they were specifically paid for with a federal grant and then were used for general communications.  The tower access agreements were also written specifying emergency use only and were granted free tower access due to them being for that specific use.  

And like I said, we can't approach a street department and borrow their tractor, dump truck, put crap in their buildings for storage or any of that.  It ain't allowed.  Because they are government (taxpayer) assets.  A tower really should be no different.

 

Tower rental rates.

Have multiple customers on ATC sites.  Paying between 1000 and 1600 per site for two antenna's and a microwave dish.  Antenna's are at 130 and 150 and the dish is up at 200.  These prices are common in this area.  They are also on private sites and are paying less than that.  But if you are renting from any of the major players, then you are paying these sort of rates for relatively low mounting positions on the towers.  The pricing structure in your area may not be the same.  I can only speak to what I have first hand knowledge of.  This also applies to the way hams and ham clubs conduct themselves.  If what he's saying is 100% correct and you are REQUIRED to be a member of their club to access a tower that doesn't belong to them, they are not doing it right.  I have been to sites that hams were allowed full access to and they are typically a total mess.  Cable held to tower legs with electrical tape if at all, improper cables used in the radio hut to protect from interfering with other tenants at the site.  Skipping on proper grounding (of course I am R56 certified so I am a grounding and install NAZI and immediately notice such things). 

And I directly deal with it as a ham and a tower site manager.  I get requests, some that almost sound like a mandate, that some ARES group NEEDS access to a tower for EMCOMM for free.  I know better, the problem is that elected officials typically don't.  They hear it's for public safety and disaster preparedness and immediately agree without any actual research, or it was done years ago by some verbal agreement by a friend that was also an elected official that never really had the right to do it and now it's just in place. 

I am all for providing hams access within reason for both EMCOMM and hobby use.  And I don't believe they need to be made to pay the standard going rates that a cell phone company is required to pay.  But they need to install to the same standards, use good equipment and not mobiles screwed to a sheet of plywood and hung on a wall with wires going every which way.  But then again I have seen commercial radio companies that had install quality that made most ham install look good.  But that's another story.

And as far as the government being aware. 

The guy that owns that tower shown above is an IT admin and a ham.  Of course he also climbs towers, since he has that one, but is not a licensed bonded climber. 

I went at the request of a county EMA to oversee and test antenna's and lines once the climbing and work had been completed by the tower climber that the hams were bringing in.  The county had been told the guy was a TOWER PROFESSIONAL by the local ham group the work was being done for on a county owned tower at a city owned site.  The guy that showed up as the TOWER PROFESSIONAL was the guy that owned this tower.  They had told him little about what he was going to be doing, and I questioned what was gonna happen so I brought MY rigging equipment and tower winch in case it was needed.  We pulled 300 pounds of stuff off that day and replaced 4 antenna's and two feed lines.  He was totally unprepared for the job, because HE wasn't told what it was.  I had a feeling that something like that would happen and was prepared for it with equipment.  And the whole situation stuck me between my buddy and my customer that I HAD to tell them he wasn't a tower pro.  And I even had hams coming up to me trying to tell me how to rig the tower, tie proper knots, and all sorts of crap.  I ahve spent to last four years working all over that tower, rigging it, installing and removing antenna's and I was the one with the gear that was even gonna make the job possible.  And I am getting told I am using the wrong knots.  BTW, I was using bow-lines and figure 8 knots.  So yeah, my personal experience with hams has been questionable at times for the last 20 years I have been a ham.

 

 

 

[WRKC935]

Oh, I almost forgot.  The above mentioned site was a water storage facility for the city that owned the site.

 

[marcspaz]

3 hours ago, WRKC935 said:

This is the tower I have access to that was bought and paid for by a ham.

I am gonna say that jealousy doesn't really play into it.  But I could be wrong.

 

That's a good looking tower.  Have to be honest.  I have access to a couple of commercial towers at 300'+ and at high ASL locations, too... but I still get jealous.  I wish I had the land and the money to put one up behind my house. LOL 

 

Not gonna deny corruption exist, but in your previous post, you make it sound like corruption is SOP for Hams and government relationships. 

[duckduck]

Seattle area has a pretty good amount of repeaters already. I don't know that we need MORE repeaters. Expanding coverage area into the boonies? Sure.

I don't really have a practical usage scenario for GMRS other than talking to Jr when he rides his bicycle over to his friends' houses. GMRS would be nice to use if the power goes out and the generator at the local cell tower runs out of go-juice.

I would love to see city/county/states put up some high quality GMRS repeaters covering major metro areas. I would also like a pony and a fairy godmother.

Repeater hardware isn't cheap. Seems like a possible way forward is to create a GMRS club and get everyone to put in some money to build a club repeater. Let's see, if you have 20 club members, and they each pitch in $200 ...hmmm. Maybe rob a bank?

* Note to the humor impaired: I do not support bank robbery as a way to fund GMRS repeater construction.

Edited August 8, 2022 by duckduck

[WRQY383]

What I would like to see is that everyone have the same pl tones in place on the same frequency. So no matter where anyone traveling could talk to anyone. 

[marcspaz]

45 minutes ago, WRQY383 said:

What I would like to see is that everyone have the same pl tones in place on the same frequency. So no matter where anyone traveling could talk to anyone. 

 

It's called the Open Repeater Initiative.  It failed. 

 

There was a nationwide group of repeater owners who participated with the Open Repeater Initiative to set their ch20 pair (462.675/467.675) to use tone 141.3 (known as 4a).  The idea was, to make the repeater open to the traveling public through common knowledge.  If you found a repeater on the rCH 20 pair with a 4a PL, the assumption was to be that you don't need special permission to use that repeater.

[axorlov]

47 minutes ago, marcspaz said:

It's called the Open Repeater Initiative.  It failed.

I wouldn't say it failed. Some ORI repeaters are around me that are not listed here, and there are also a plenty of ORI repeaters listed here. YMMV, as usual, depending on the area.

[marcspaz]

6 minutes ago, axorlov said:

I wouldn't say it failed. Some ORI repeaters are around me that are not listed here, and there are also a plenty of ORI repeaters listed here. YMMV, as usual, depending on the area.

 

Okay... I'll rephrase.  The two groups that founded and drove ORI are now both defunct.  I will definitely agree that there are owners who still honor the spirit of ORI, for sure, but I said it failed because the 2 groups are gone and no one is formally driving the initiative.  Hopefully that makes a bit more sense.

 

[WRKC935]

On 8/7/2022 at 8:58 PM, marcspaz said:

 

That's a good looking tower.  Have to be honest.  I have access to a couple of commercial towers at 300'+ and at high ASL locations, too... but I still get jealous.  I wish I had the land and the money to put one up behind my house. LOL 

 

Not gonna deny corruption exist, but in your previous post, you make it sound like corruption is SOP for Hams and government relationships. 

Lets NOT take it to a level of corruption.  That's using stronger wording than is necessary, or in truth even warranted.  The average elected official, or employee of a government entity is not even gonna understand that they CAN'T do what the OP has presented here.  Again, some group of ham operators (and voters) comes with the semi- hard sell of ARES and disaster communications.  The average city or town mayor is gonna know his police force uses radios for their communication.  Beyond that they know nothing.  You have a bunch of well meaning individuals in front of you describing how they can communicate with other states, agencies and even provide satellite communications with no 'direct cost' to the governmental entity.  They have no basis to form an opinion that if a tornado hits, that they are NOT gonna need to be able to communicate with the UK, or even 3 states away.  They may have previous experience with a communications outage that happened in the 60's and fear that again.  So they agree to allow things to happen that shouldn't, and in truth they may not even, from a legal standpoint, be allowed to have happen.  It's not corruption in the sense of taking a payoff or anything like that.  They just don't see a problem, think it may provide SOME solution to a non-existent problem so they agree. 

And I have raised these sort of issues to city leaders and county commissioners when an EMA director was going to use county taxpayer funds for antenna replacement on a ham repeater that wasn't in any disaster plan for the county in question.  It immediately got squashed.  That director retired, and the new guy did the very thing the last guy got called on the carpet for and was reprimanded for doing so. 

I know what you mean about having an agreement and MOU in place.  But that isn't very common place around here.  It's the exception rather than the rule in fact. 

Point is that with the OP and that situation, there is some shady stuff going on, if he's got the whole story and has conveyed it to us here.  It seems that the HAMS are the ones issuing the MOU's and managing the asset and have requirements that are restrictive beyond what is reasonable.  At least in my opinion.

 

[marcspaz]

 

@WRKC935, I think I am missing something.  You keep mentioning something the OP wrote, but I don't think I am reading something correctly.  What post are you referring to?

 

Also, you keep implying that the governments aren't allowed to integrate ARES/RACES into their emergency response plan, provide hardware, resources or access to resource.  However, that is not the case.  The process that is in place that allows ARES/RACES to exist and function along side the government is codified in many states  Also, ARES/RACES gets its jurisdiction/authorization directly from the the FCC under the Part 97 rules.  We are individually federally certified by FEMA and DHS as well.  We train side by side with federal, state and local government.  This isn't some setup where hams just kinda BS their way into a government Emergency Management team.

 

As far as incidents happening, I can tell you that my team has been activated several times since I have been working with ARES/RACES.  There are several states that I have worked in where we needed portable repeaters to service an affected area.  We also need things like NVIS to talk from an affected area to 100+ miles away, to the State Emergency Operation Center, as part of the logistics branch of the Incident Response team.  We cross technological boundaries, setting up portable networks for data, video and voice traffic for all agencies in a multi-agency response, allowing everyone to have common platforms.

 

The stuff we do (ARES/RACES in conjunction with local, state and federal government) is 100% legal, above board, and just as accountable to the People as the government agencies we serve.  In fact, the Shared Resources High Frequency Radio Program (which incorporates non-government entities into government communications operations) was approved by Ronald Reagan and other leadership in the Executive Office of the President in 1988.  My team in Virginia even trains as often as 6 times a year with the US Marine Corps. 

 

Unless I am just completely misreading your posts, that's why I keep disagreeing with what you're writing. 

[KAF6045]

10 hours ago, marcspaz said:

There was a nationwide group of repeater owners who participated with the Open Repeater Initiative to set their ch20 pair (462.675/467.675) to use tone 141.3 (known as 4a).  The idea was, to make the repeater open to the traveling public through common knowledge.  If you found a repeater on the rCH 20 pair with a 4a PL, the assumption was to be that you don't need special permission to use that repeater.

In the old days (late 90s and earlier), .675 was an FCC designated Emergency/Traveller Assistance frequency; If your license did not explicitly select .675 as one of the TWO frequency (pairs) assigned, you could ONLY use it for Em/TA (if you had a radio that could be used on more than two channels -- many HTs of the age just had a toggle switch between A and B channels *, which would have been programmed for the two frequencies on one's license). And, as mentioned, organizations like REACT attempted to standardize upon a CTCSS tone for that purpose.

 

 

* which made the Maxon GMRS 210+3 rather desirable -- it had the seven interstitials locked into channels 1-7, .675 locked into channel 8, and channels 9&10 programmable for the frequencies stated on one's license

[sufusodak]

On 8/4/2022 at 8:58 PM, WRTZ231 said:

How much does a typical repeater cost?

 

We need more GMRS repeaters to be deployed and set up around the great USA!

I'd like to challenge everyone to set one up!

I'd love to hear everyones opinions on this

 

 

 

[WRKC935]

On 8/8/2022 at 11:22 PM, marcspaz said:

 

@WRKC935, I think I am missing something.  You keep mentioning something the OP wrote, but I don't think I am reading something correctly.  What post are you referring to?

OK, maybe I read it wrong. 

From what I understand of this situation.  The water company (which may or may NOT be a government entity at this point) has granted not only access but total control for antenna access to a water tower that is owned by the water company. 

Now again, if this is a private entity and NON-government, they are free to do what ever they want.  Except even a private water company has to have back ground checks done on ANYONE accessing a water tower, or potable water facility if that water is a source for public consumption.  But we aren't even going to go there.  But like you said, these places are HIGHLY regulated, even the private water systems. 

He further said that the ham group in charge of granting access for antenna/ equipment installation on the site requires a membership with their ham group (which no doubt has a fee THEY are collecting for that membership and no doubt a current ham license) in order to even be considered for access to the site to install antenna's and other equipment.  So this would be strike two on the crap you can't allow as a government entity.  A private entity CHARGING money to access a government asset.  And what do you suppose the chances are they are sending those access payments to the owner of the site? Can't go to the local court house and put up a barrier and require payment for access to a government building as a private citizen.  And that is sort of what they MAY be doing.... but with a water tower and not a court house.  At least that's what I understood from the original post. 

 

 

OK<<<<

NOT ORIGINAL POST

This was the post that was created by WRAM370  and NOT the original poster.

That might help a LOT.  Read what he had to say and then we might be on the same page.  Sorry brother,,, I kept sayin OP, and that was NOT the OP's post.

 

[marcspaz]

 

Oh, wow! Yeah, I did not see that post. That seems very sketchy, even if it's a private business. I fully agree with you in that context... I appreciate the info.

 

1 hour ago, WRKC935 said:

Sorry brother,,, I kept sayin OP, and that was NOT the OP's post.

 

No worries. I'm glad we were able to figure out the disconnect. It was a harmless mix-up on both our parts.  I'm glad everything stayed civil while we discussed the topic. I know it seems like a strange thing to say, but that doesn't happen often when people are in disagreement on the internet (pretty sure I am guilty of that myself, recently) . It makes it much easier to continue to enjoy the conversation. 

 

 

[WRKC935]

Yeah,  I am glad we figured that out.  And I hope the guy finds a location and gets a repeater on the air. 

I actually went back and read the first post and of course, NONE of what I was talking about was in there.  So I went down and found the post I was referring to.

I sort of figured it was something like that, since what you were saying didn't at all fit with what I was talking about.  I am really glad I did that so we could get clarification and on the same page.  I hate seeing stuff like that.  And unfortunately it's more common than folks might think. 

 

Since we were discussing MOU's.  I am actually getting ready to work on one with the county I live in for two repeaters I am housing on the tower.

Both are ham repeaters that will be general amateur use unless there is a specific need for EMCOMM.  I have a unique situation with the tower location and coverage foot print that allows access from both my county of residence and the county to my West that has the state capital and the State EMA office that is almost LOS to my tower.  The repeaters will be running from a battery plant and rectifier (150 AH will be the initial storage capacity) that will hopefully be solar and wind fed along with grid to the rectifier.  I plan on growing the battery plant as funds become available and getting it to at least 300Ah at 48 volt. 

 

 

[Chilango]

On 8/8/2022 at 5:30 PM, duckduck said:

* Note to the humor impaired: I do not support bank robbery as a way to fund GMRS repeater construction.

Thanks.  That made my day.