Alan wrote:
"KØHB" writes:

I travel a lot, to large cities like Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Louis, Tu
cson,
Kansas City, Indianapolis, Detroit, OKC, DFW, Tucson, Phoenix, Denver,
El
Paso/Las Cruces. It's the same everywhere. Just a scattering of sign
als on the
bands, but EVERY PAIR spoken for.

True. 10 - 15 years ago, they were busy. Now --- silent. It seems
that way
everywhere.

It's certainly that way in rural Minnesota. There are repeaters in many
of the small towns, and they're alive in the sense of being technically
there, but they're dead in the sense of anyone using them on a regular
basis. Sometimes there's a regular group who gets together in the
morning, but for our local repeater even that custom has faded away.

We lost our UHF repeater almost a year ago when the elevator it was on
was destroyed by lightning. [For you city slickers, the word "elevator"
out here in the sticks is used to describe a large structure in which
grain is stored.] That repeater is still silent. A new location was
secured, and funding for it was provided by the local emergency
management agency, but the antenna still hasn't been erected.

So I have to wonder, in metro areas where all the slots are "full", how
many of those repeaters actually exist and would respond if presented
with a correctly-toned signal on their published input frequency.
Perhaps more important, how many of them are used regularly? It might
actually make more sense to shut down several repeaters that don't have
a critical mass of users and move those small groups to the remaining
repeaters so that there was actually someone there to talk to. Better
to have two or three active repeaters in a metro area than a dozen dead
ones.

I don't know what took the interest away for everyone else. However,
with
nobody on to talk to, I am less interested in solving the problems in t
he car
to get on, so if others are in the same boat, we all contribute to the
silence.

It's a chicken and egg problem. I know that I'm contributing to the
problem; my 2-meter equipment consists of an HT, and I've considered
that I need to buy a "real" 2-meter rig and put up an antenna . . . but
it's difficult for me to justify the time and expense to do so when
there's no activity.

73, Steve KB9X

In article ,
Steve Bonine wrote:
Better
to have two or three active repeaters in a metro area than a dozen dead
ones.

Until there is an emergency and those two or three repeaters aren't
sufficient to support the emergency services operations going on.

Mark Kramer wrote:
Steve Bonine wrote:
Better
to have two or three active repeaters in a metro area than a dozen dead
ones.

Until there is an emergency and those two or three repeaters aren't
sufficient to support the emergency services operations going on.

If there are a dozen repeaters with zero activity, most will go dead in
any disaster because it takes real human interest and work to provide
emergency power. I'd rather have two or three solid repeaters than a
dozen where the maintenance is hit-and-miss and there's no one who
really cares whether they are up or not.

73, Steve KB9X

On Fri, 6 Jun 2008 23:05:49 EDT, Steve Bonine wrote:

If there are a dozen repeaters with zero activity, most will go dead in
any disaster because it takes real human interest and work to provide
emergency power. I'd rather have two or three solid repeaters than a
dozen where the maintenance is hit-and-miss and there's no one who
really cares whether they are up or not.

You assume that those repeaters do not have backup power. I found
that this was not the case in the ham communities of San Francisco and
Portland (OR) areas, the two places that I have had extensive
experience with VHF/UHF repeaters. Backup power is relatively easy to
get at those sites where ham and commercial facilities are co-located,
which are most of the places where the ham repeaters are.

Similarly, you assume that because a repeater is silent that "the
maintenance is hit-and-miss and there's no one who really cares
whether they are up or not". Again, my experience does not bear this
out. Most of the repeaters that are reported "silent" are because
they are kept alive by a small group of people whose activity is not
always observed by the casual ham. I'm the trustee of two club
repeaters maintained by one of the other members who is a 2-way radio
tech. Our 2 meter machine is used all the time by ham-licensed
truckers driving up and down the Interstate. The other is used only
by the few club members who have the 223 MHz band in their radios. The
casual listener would consider that one "unused", which is not the
case.

Similarly, during the many hours each day that I spend in my Comm
Center at home - a cross between a home office, a library, and a ham
shack - I maintain a speaker watch on the UHF repeater that my other
local club uses for commute-hour rag chews and is available for use
for hospital disaster communications. Except for the commute hours,
it is "silent" but I'm there to answer any calls and to join in the
rag chews. That seems to be the norm for the "silent" repeaters in
this "no pairs available" area. We do have several where there's
pretty frequent use, though.

Repeater-based ham radio is alive and well in Webfoot Country.
--

73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

From a Clearing in the Silicon Forest
Beaverton (Washington County) Oregon

e-mail: k2asp [at] arrl [dot] net

Phil Kane wrote:
On Fri, 6 Jun 2008 23:05:49 EDT, Steve Bonine wrote:

If there are a dozen repeaters with zero activity, most will go dead in
any disaster because it takes real human interest and work to provide
emergency power. I'd rather have two or three solid repeaters than a
dozen where the maintenance is hit-and-miss and there's no one who
really cares whether they are up or not.

You assume that those repeaters do not have backup power. I found
that this was not the case in the ham communities of San Francisco and
Portland (OR) areas, the two places that I have had extensive
experience with VHF/UHF repeaters. Backup power is relatively easy to
get at those sites where ham and commercial facilities are co-located,
which are most of the places where the ham repeaters are.

I am assuming that a repeater with ZERO activity is a repeater with no
one who cares about it. In one of your previous posts you mentioned a
repeater in your area which is "only" used during commute times and FD;
this is not zero activity and indicates that there is a core group of
people who care about the repeater.

The kind of repeater I'm talking about is one that might have been quite
active a decade ago, but has been running on inertia for several years.
Maybe it still responds to a signal on the input frequency, but the
chance of it having usable backup power is extremely low. Another issue
is potential damage during the disaster; if there is not a group of
people who use the repeater, no one will be there to make the
perhaps-trivial repairs necessary to get it back on the air.

Similarly, you assume that because a repeater is silent that "the
maintenance is hit-and-miss and there's no one who really cares
whether they are up or not". Again, my experience does not bear this
out. Most of the repeaters that are reported "silent" are because
they are kept alive by a small group of people whose activity is not
always observed by the casual ham. I'm the trustee of two club
repeaters maintained by one of the other members who is a 2-way radio
tech. Our 2 meter machine is used all the time by ham-licensed
truckers driving up and down the Interstate. The other is used only
by the few club members who have the 223 MHz band in their radios. The
casual listener would consider that one "unused", which is not the
case.

The key word in your sentence is "used". "Zero activity" is
incompatible with "used".

I said, "I'd rather have two or three solid repeaters than a dozen where
the maintenance is hit-and-miss and there's no one who really cares
whether they are up or not." I did not imply that if a repeater is
silent that the maintenance is hit-and-miss. What I said is that if
there is not a group of people who care about the repeater, it's likely
to be useless in a disaster, and I stand by that statement.

Similarly, during the many hours each day that I spend in my Comm
Center at home - a cross between a home office, a library, and a ham
shack - I maintain a speaker watch on the UHF repeater that my other
local club uses for commute-hour rag chews and is available for use
for hospital disaster communications. Except for the commute hours,
it is "silent" but I'm there to answer any calls and to join in the
rag chews. That seems to be the norm for the "silent" repeaters in
this "no pairs available" area. We do have several where there's
pretty frequent use, though.

Any repeater that has a regular group that uses it during commute does
not fall under the category of "zero activity", and obviously there is a
group of people who care about it.

Repeater-based ham radio is alive and well in Webfoot Country.

Good. I think that perhaps you misinterpreted my initial comment to be
that a repeater needs to have constant activity to be viable, and that's
not what I was trying to say. I do stand by my initial statement that,
given the choice of a dozen zero-use repeaters or a couple of busy ones,
I'll take the lower number of busy ones because they will be more likely
to survive a disaster.

And again let me point out the difference between urban and rural
environments. The simple fact that you have a higher population density
almost guarantees that you have more people using the repeater(s). Of
course, if you have many repeaters, the person-per-repeater number may
be as low as ours.

Our situation here in rural Minnesota is rather marginal. We do have a
local club with a core group of people who care enough about the
repeater to keep it going. On the other hand, our UHF repeater has been
down for almost a year now, and somehow the group has not been able to
get it back on the air, primarily because one person has promised to
provide a new site for the repeater and has not followed through on that
commitment.

We had an actual disaster a few months ago, not in this immediate area
but in rural Minnesota. There was a need for ham radio communications
because the incident was "down in a hole" where cellphones wouldn't
work. (Floods often happen in river valleys.) The response was not
what it should have been. Part of this is due to the low number of
hams, and part is due to the lack of organization.

73, Steve KB9X

In article ,
Steve Bonine wrote:
I am assuming that a repeater with ZERO activity is a repeater with no
one who cares about it.

Your assumption is just that, an assumption.

Similarly, you assume that because a repeater is silent that "the
maintenance is hit-and-miss and there's no one who really cares
whether they are up or not". Again, my experience does not bear this
out.

Ditto.

The key word in your sentence is "used". "Zero activity" is
incompatible with "used".

Unless you monitor a frequency 24/7/365, it is impossible to claim
"zero use". When most people say "zero use", they mean "I never hear
anything on it". There is a BIG difference.

I did not imply that if a repeater is
silent that the maintenance is hit-and-miss.

"I am assuming that a repeater with ZERO activity is a repeater with
no one who cares about it." Define the difference between "silent" and
"zero activity".

What I said is that if
there is not a group of people who care about the repeater, it's likely
to be useless in a disaster, and I stand by that statement.

(Mark Kramer) wrote:

[...]
Unless you monitor a frequency 24/7/365, it is impossible to claim
"zero use". When most people say "zero use", they mean "I never hear
anything on it". There is a BIG difference.
[...]


It would be far easier to connect a voice-activated tape recorder
(like a Sony TCM-37V recording walkman) to a scanner that was set to
scan just the frequencies that are suspected of being dead. Then, you
could document your results when claiming that the frequencies should be
reassigned.

--
Klystron

On Fri, 6 Jun 2008 23:05:49 EDT, Steve Bonine wrote:

Mark Kramer wrote:
Steve Bonine wrote:
Better
to have two or three active repeaters in a metro area than a dozen dead
ones.

Until there is an emergency and those two or three repeaters aren't
sufficient to support the emergency services operations going on.

If there are a dozen repeaters with zero activity, most will go dead in
any disaster because it takes real human interest and work to provide
emergency power. I'd rather have two or three solid repeaters than a
dozen where the maintenance is hit-and-miss and there's no one who
really cares whether they are up or not.

An emergency service organization should put up and maintain their own
repeaters. For example, in the last 3 years, the Southern Nye County (NV) ARES
group put up and maintain four repeaters (2 on 2M and 2 on 70cm) so we will have
them in emergencies. We make a point to talk on them at least once a day to
make sure they work. But 99% of the time they are idle, and thus may appear to
the casual observer to be unused.

73 de Dick, AC7EL

On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 20:01:28 EDT, Dick Grady AC7EL
wrote:

An emergency service organization should put up and maintain their own
repeaters. For example, in the last 3 years, the Southern Nye County (NV) ARES
group put up and maintain four repeaters (2 on 2M and 2 on 70cm) so we will have
them in emergencies. We make a point to talk on them at least once a day to
make sure they work. But 99% of the time they are idle, and thus may appear to
the casual observer to be unused.

If the area is urban enough. In rural Alberta we don't have a lot of
overlap between repeaters. But it's clearly understood by everyone
that emergency service has complete priority over all other traffic.

In Edmonton, a city of about 1 million yes they do have a repeater
dedicated to ARES without a lot of other chatter on it.

Tony

"Steve Bonine" wrote

It's a chicken and egg problem. I know that I'm contributing to the
problem; my 2-meter equipment consists of an HT, and I've considered
that I need to buy a "real" 2-meter rig and put up an antenna . . . but
it's difficult for me to justify the time and expense to do so when
there's no activity.

There used to be so much activity around here in Tucson a decade or more
ago, and I was active in it, but I suppose everyone migrated to the
internet... ? I thought about installing my 2m radio in my car so that I
have something to occupy part of my cross-country drive next year (I hope),
but maybe it's not worth it. If I knew there were folks along the way
regularly monitoring .52, I'd do it. If repeaters didn't have all these
different tone accesses, I'd do it. I'm not going to spend each night of the
trip programming the radio to accommodate what repeaters I may encounter for
any given upcoming 500 mile stretch.

Howard