[BVARC] 146.940 Repeater Problems and Repeater Operation
Eddie Runner
eddie.runner at yahoo.com
Sat Jun 17 14:48:50 CDT 2023
When something like this happens its pretty simple for EVERYONE to monitorthe 146.34 input to the repeater and forward signal reports.. Most folks have a revbutton... this is what its for.
Last night Suzanne (KF5GWZ) and I set out to find the problem and we did.
We had a few previous reports (Guesses??) like Mike forwarded, but that didn't match the results Suzanne and I were getting.. I think the area that was under suspicion WAS NOT the area we went to... All those calls would have been a waste..
We used the signal strength meter on a mobile rig (icom r7000) and a handheld with a signal strength meter as well, monitoring 146.34.
Took a little over an hour then after it was fixed,we stopped and had some good tx mex for dinner..
It was a fun Friday Date night.. ha haWish more folks were out there to join us, we had a blast..
Eddie (NU5K)PS - good subject for future BVARC training...
On Saturday, June 17, 2023 at 02:07:05 PM CDT, John Denison via BVARC <bvarc at bvarc.org> wrote:
I'm glad this issue was resolved, and for what its worth, there are at least 50 hams in the area which would have made it time consuming to contact each one. This was a good (not good) unplanned fox hunt, and it reminds me of the time there was interference on the 146.92 repeater years ago. At the time I had an Icom mobile which had an attenuator on the squelch control, so it was relatively easy to narrow the signal down to a few square blocks.
This is one of the things I like about ham radio the most... hams coming together to offer a service or resolve an issue.
73
John Denison
KD5YOU
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.bvarc.org/pipermail/bvarc_bvarc.org/attachments/20230617/8f3cf9d3/attachment.htm>
More information about the BVARC
mailing list