VHFcontesting
[Top] [All Lists]

[VHFcontesting] VHFcontesting] 902 vs. 903

To: <vhfcontesting@contesting.com>
Subject: [VHFcontesting] VHFcontesting] 902 vs. 903
From: "Dan Michnay" <dfmich@comcast.net>
Reply-to: Dan Michnay <k9ea@arrl.net>
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 15:48:32 -0500
List-post: <vhfcontesting@contesting.com">mailto:vhfcontesting@contesting.com>
I have recrystaled my older DEM (no-tune variety) 902/3 xvter so that 902 in 
gives 144 out. This was mostly because there were more and more requests to 
go to 902 instead of 903 where I had always been. I just tune 144 or 145 
depending if I want 902 or 903.

Several people said that the noise from cell phone towers was lower at 902. 
I do not find it so here however.(Ft Wayne IN, EN71LE)

I have greatly improved the noise situation by putting a three pole BPF in 
front of the receiver. There is a small NF hit but not too bad. I have it 
arranged with a transfer switch so can see the noise with and without the 
BPF. Quite frequently the filter makes the band usable reducing a very high 
noise level down to the occasional bleep or blop (new technical terms).

I built the filter from plans in the Ham UHF/VHF conference proceedings 
literature which uses UT141 for the resonators. Can dig out the reference if 
anyone wants.

Dan K9EA 

_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • [VHFcontesting] VHFcontesting] 902 vs. 903, Dan Michnay <=