C4fm

[david self]

Hi John   what about A C4FM Repeater.  Aliison  has offered to host Iit and we have enough money in the Club to afford one???If fact lots  I'm realiably informe, so  how about one ?  Can we have one please???  since all the other repeaters are rarely used and a C4FM would be  regularly use not just 23 cms qsl??? Who the devil uses that  Freq  anyway John? and  Berks  and and Oxon  have nothing at all yet Devon has two and there are more in Soton etc...    .  Good for Older members no big big Ants and  enormous High  power Linears.....   and finally  they would before  older club member going  to care home etc.

Regards David Self  G0TKV

ri

[Russell Baker]

Do you think it would be widely used? What would the coverage be like?

Russell G4ZRZ

[Paul Mead]

I think if it were connected to the right room it would see a lot more activity than any of the analogue repeaters in the area. The nodes in the area use / used Southern Fusion which was always very quiet IMO. 

Paul - 2E0ITD

 --
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Reading and District Amateur Radio Group" group.
To post to this group, send email to rad...@googlegroups.com
 
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
radarc+un...@googlegroups.com
 
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.co.uk/group/radarc?hl=en-GB---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Reading and District Amateur Radio Group" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to radarc+un...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/radarc/CFC45C82-965C-4684-AF71-2F83AE6D7A01%40googlemail.com.

[Marnoch Standen]

The gateways in the area can be changed by the user to a network room by the user. 

The fusion gateways are set to default to Southern Fusion if not used and like a lot of repeaters users need to call and use them.

We have a good repeater coverage in the area but users just don't use them. So where are they?

I run the Sonning Common gateway on 433.650 and it does get used plus there are users on the Southern Fusion network.

If you don't know how to use it or don't know what a full repeater could do please ask..

Min G0JMS 

Sent from Outlook for Android

---

From: rad...@googlegroups.com <rad...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Paul Mead <paul....@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2024 8:15:30 PM
To: rad...@googlegroups.com <rad...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Fwd: Re: {RADARC Group Forum :2541} C4fm

 

To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/radarc/b3ea705f-3a4a-4a5b-bd0a-a939ceff1ea7%40Spark.

[Paul Mead]

My own theory for what it’s worth is that there is too small a catchment covered by 2/70 repeaters so people prefer HF to go further afield. But I’m no expert. 

I did sometimes use the central Reading node when it was still running and changed the room to ones with more traffic but always felt like I was being somehow selfish with it when I did that 😀 

I hardly ever hear activity on RU and RD, compared to for instance BN and AL they are pretty dead - I accept I might just have never found the busy period though. Maybe connecting them up to CQ-UK would give them a new lease of life. 

Paul - 2E0ITD

[Tom M0LTE]

I take it that project/vision to link some combination of RD, RU and BN never went anywhere?

Tom

To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/radarc/a4dae87a-4759-4794-8e00-9e4486a02bef%40Spark.

[Paul Mead]

I equate the situation to what in IT is known as the network effect - people don’t bother getting involved in a communication or social media technology unless there are lots of others to connect with. The shortish range of UHF/VHF repeaters covers many fewer operators than it used to since declining numbers means we’re all more spread out. Linking repeaters together or into digital ‘rooms’ would seem to me to be a sensible way forward to improve that calculus. 

Paul - 2E0ITD

On 20 Feb 2024 at 21:09 +0000, Marnoch Standen <mi...@talktalk.net>, wrote:

It my thoughts that some have the equipment for fusion but possibly unsure how to make the most out of it.

If it was being used by a couple of locals then there are other places and repeaters they could use, so worries of making changes if there is no qso going on should not be an issue. Common sense it the way they are used.

Linking to the Internet or linking together is an interesting challenge. But if they are not used why do it will it bring back the times when there was not a spare frequency in the morning and evening run.  

Times have changed and it seems few mobiles or home users coming on daily..

Just some thoughts.

Min Standen G0JMS
07917 830 410

[Ian P. G5IPX]

David TKV- Speaking only for myself, not on behalf of the committee, somehow I doubt that your penchant for publicly calling out committee members because you don't think they're supportive enough of your pet project is likely to endear anyone to your cause.

The club's finances are not secret; in fact a full accounting is provided to all members in good standing (i.e. those who have paid their subs) at every AGM.  I can't say whether the club definitely has the funds to build and run a repeater, given that to my knowledge nobody has put forward a proposal with a cost breakdown.  But I imagine there would be more than just the costs of the radio, e.g. a site, a mast, an aerial, feedline, fittings and other hardware, the electricity, and a (presumably) 4G or 5G Internet connection to connect it to Wires-X if desired.  

As I understand it, the main reason the idea for a C4FM/Fusion repeater hasn't gained traction is not about the money.  It's that there is a non-trivial time commitment involved in negotiating with ETCC for a frequency, physically building out the site and installing the gear, and then being responsible for monitoring and maintaining the repeater on an ongoing basis.

The club is run by volunteers in our own time, and I'm not aware of anyone (including yourself, by the way) who has volunteered to take on the challenge of setting up and running a Fusion repeater.  If I'm wrong, please correct me.

However, TVRG already exists as an organisation with a primary mission to operate repeaters in and around Reading, so I think they would be best placed either to set up a new one or upgrade an existing one.  RADARC already makes a regular donation to TVRG, and if they were to come to RADARC with a funding proposal for a Fusion repeater I'm sure the committee would give it full consideration.

Taking on board the comments from Paul ITD and Tom LTE, if BN and AL have the bulk of the activity then perhaps there could be a case for linking the TVRG repeaters together and then piping that net into a DMR TG and/or a Wires-X room?  It's difficult because in order to justify the time and expense, there need to be users, but in order to attract the users the network needs to exist.  Maybe someone from TVRG could chime in to this thread?

Again speaking only for myself, I think it's an interesting idea if someone were to volunteer to put together a full proposal including the costs involved and who would be committing to build and maintain it.

All the best

Ian G5IPX

[Chris, G4CCC]

Having seen the post by Ian, G5IPX, I thought I should respond on behalf of the TVRG. However, I do not think that a thread on Google Groups is the appropriate place for discussion. You simply end up with “ping/pong” comments and replies, which go nowhere.

G0TKV wrote a letter to the RADARC Committee in October last year on this subject and has had a reply and I do not see what new information the post provides.

TVRG have run repeaters in the local area for over 40 years but have never wanted to hold a monopoly. We would welcome another group who wished to provide complementary and different type repeaters.

This has all been started by one post from one person wanting a C4FM repeater so they can work the world using a handheld radio. I would point out that there are currently two nodes, one in Woodcote and one in Sonning Common, which provide access to the Wires-X network. There was a third node in Reading itself (admittedly in a poor location), which has shutdown because of lack of usage. What does that tell you?

There is a C4FM repeater, GB7NT located at Greenham Common, near Newbury in Berkshire and recently another C4FM repeater, GB7NH near Aldershot. These are all usable from my location at 220ft ASL in Caversham using a dual band colinear.

What benefit would a local C4FM repeater provide? All it might do is to improve the local coverage area, but it would make no difference at all to the overseas “DX” stations that seem to be the reason for the suggestion. These can be worked using the nodes or the two existing repeaters.

I also think that a significant number of C4FM repeaters (as distinct from nodes) are not connected to the Internet, because otherwise they get monopolised by stations using the various rooms and it is difficult for other stations to break in.

Trying to unravel the original post, it appears that Alison Johnston, G8ROG in Caversham Park Village has agreed to “host” a C4FM repeater and that G0TKV is asking for RADARC to provide funds for the equipment.

Quite a few years ago we considered linking GB3AW and GB3RU, but this was before widespread use of internet linking and we decided not to proceed. Today, our DMR repeater GB7BK is linked to the DV Scotland Phoenix network and, whilst not linking as such, GB3BN offers good Echolink service enabling you to chat all over the world.

The TVRG view is that we are happy with our four analogue, one digital (DMR) and one APRS units and have no plans to make any major changes. Our personnel resources are regrettably less than they were a few years ago and we are concentrating on keeping the existing repeaters functioning properly.

 We however welcome any new repeaters that may appear in the locality and wish any applicants the best of luck. To obtain permission for a new repeater is now much easier, since the recent licence changes – how many of you realise that there are two new 2m repeater channels, RV46 (145.575MHz output) and RV47 for 5W units. Also, I am told there are now no delays with 70cm repeaters with an output power below 25W erp.

So, for clarification, TVRG are not getting involved with any new C4FM repeater around the Reading area.

Regards,

Chris Young, G4CCC.

On behalf of the Thames Valley Repeater Group.