VHFcontesting
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [VHFcontesting] Multi-op interferance on IF freqs

To: vhfcontesting@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [VHFcontesting] Multi-op interferance on IF freqs
From: w8zn@comcast.net
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2009 13:58:01 +0000 (UTC)
List-post: <vhfcontesting@contesting.com">mailto:vhfcontesting@contesting.com>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "John D'Ausilio" <jdausilio@gmail.com> 
To: "paul rollinson" <ke1li@sbcglobal.net> 
Cc: vhfcontesting@contesting.com 
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2009 8:38:18 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern 
Subject: Re: [VHFcontesting] Multi-op interferance on IF freqs 
Now here is a very interesting subject. This past contest when out for the 
first time in a long while as a rover, I experienced this issue somewhat with 
my partner, but only on 903. After building up K8GP for the last 10 years, I 
found that you can not maintian the same IF frequency for transverters, even at 
10m for 6 - 432. For my rover, 1296 and up all use a 146 MHz IF and I had no 
interference at all except for some harmonic trash just due to close proximetry 
of the antennas. On 903, I hadn't moved my transverter to 146 yet and 
interference was very bad. 



At K8GP, I had to move even the 10m IF's to keep folks from hearing our own IF 
signals. Since we used TS850's on all bands and they were all set for all band 
tx. I ordered special crystals for the DEM transverters and moved them around 
to avoid this issue. 6m stayed at 28 = 50, 2m went to 26 = 144, 222 = 27 and 
432 = 25 (using DEM's standard 28 = 437 crystal). For 903 and 1296, I moved the 
IF's to 147. Using a 2m intermediate IF transverter with 26 = 144, this moved 
my tuning range to around 29 MHz. For 2304 and above we used a 146 IF and the 
2m intermediate transverter was 26 = 144 which meant the tuning range was 
around 28 MHz. There was some issues with the 6m IF being heard on the 
microwave station but since we now use K3's for 6m natively, that issue has 
gone away. 



In most cases with a rover, I would suspect it's just close proximetry of all 
the antennas. My 2m station running 350w was only 6 feet away from the 903 and 
up stack of antennas, it hard to fight that! 



Terry 




I'm considering moving all my microwave IFs to 145Mhz to solve this 
problem in the Jitney (which is a 2-op rover) .. 

de w1rt/john 

On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 8:29 AM, paul rollinson <ke1li@sbcglobal.net> wrote: 
> Good morning all, 
> 
> During the last contest we expanded the bands we worked up to 10G from the 
> bottom 4. This created a huge problem. 
> 
> We had to shut down the 2, 220, and 432 stations to use the upper bands due 
> to interference from the lower, high power stations on the IF rigs for the 
> transverters. 6M had little effect but we only had 100W running. Murphy 
> reduced our power level. 
> 
> I speculate that a common patch panel and close proximity of the antennas may 
> be the culprit but I'm looking for other opinions and potential solutions. 
> Especially from the big multi-ops that run legal limit on 2 and 432 which we 
> use for IF's. 
> 
> June is coming and I'd like to start clearing this problem asap. We always 
> run out of time. 
> 
> 73 and thanks for the input, 
> 
> Paul, KE1LI 
> _______________________________________________ 
> VHFcontesting mailing list 
> VHFcontesting@contesting.com 
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting 
> 
_______________________________________________ 
VHFcontesting mailing list 
VHFcontesting@contesting.com 
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting 
_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>