Ron, Nice to hear from you. Perhaps there is some middle ground. I have had repeaters that I built and managed in Cincinnati, Baltimore, and elsewhere. I did not go through everything that I have done in that regard in my letter, but I know that there are those with lots more experience than me. steve
On Oct 22, 2016, at 10:21 AM, mccrpt@tampabay.rr.com wrote:
Steve,
I read your letter with great interest. This last week one of your med students assisted, more observed, me getting a ultra-sound look at my heart. I have seen many of your students, now doctors, in action and I am so impressed with their knowledge. USF turns out very good medical people, especially the nurses. Being a patient one quickly see who makes the medical system work with doctors guiding it.
As to the FRC and repeater issue the FRC already has a very good policy and application for coordination. They were developed after years of work with Florida repeater builders/owners. However, the policy should not be so strict for many repeaters do not require such. Experience has shown this for years. Also the application now used is what is most needed to evaluate how a repeater will fit into an already crowded repeater world. A 10 line application would be worthless. Anyone experienced in putting up a repeater would recognize the application contains the questions needed. Sure there are some items one puts N/A and there are reasons for everyone.
I recognize your experience in your field although did not see much experience in electronics and little of it would be usable for building and putting up a repeater. I did not see your repeater building experience except you helped with one long ago. But with your education I know you could figure it out given some guide lines. Things like why is the spurious emission spec from the repeater xmtr is so important.
I don't wish to belittle you for I know you are very knowledgeable and hope you might take my words without malice, but I do see the FRC as a very well run organization. I have worked with them for many years, getting coordination for two repeaters in last year, and know where they come from and why they do as they do. One issue is timing, they can be slow, very slow. That is why I have found ways to help the process and see radical change is FRC is NOT needed, but as with anything it can be improved. In the last year I had two repeaters coordinated and the process went fast and complete. The FRC ask the right questions and I gave them the answers they needed for coordination. I took care of the technical side after that.
I hope this effort now being under taken will improve some issues in the FRC, but from most of what I've heard the changes would remove much of the experience that has been obtained by the FRC for a couple decades.
A repeater is a very technical animal, very different than the typical Ham station. And when it is put on it can produce problems, if not done correctly, for many others, not just other repeaters.
73, ron, n9ee/r a know code Extra
Ron Wright, N9EE/R BSEE Micro Computer Concepts 352-683-4476 mccrpt@tampabay.rr.com <mailto:mccrpt@tampabay.rr.com>
From: FRC-Info <frc-info-bounces@lists.keekles.org <mailto:frc-info-bounces@lists.keekles.org>> on behalf of Steve Liggett <sbliggett2@gmail.com <mailto:sbliggett2@gmail.com>> Sent: Friday, October 21, 2016 4:15 PM To: Florida Repeater Council Discussion Subject: Re: [FRC] Last chance for change 5am EST!
Brian,
Here you go. Two documents. One is the proxy, one is my letter.
Let me know if you get these intact, and, if there is anything else that I can do.
steve, W3RX _______________________________________________ FRC-Info mailing list FRC-Info@lists.keekles.org <mailto:FRC-Info@lists.keekles.org> http://lists.keekles.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/frc-info <http://lists.keekles.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/frc-info> Unsubscribe: <mailto:frc-info-unsubscribe@lists.keekles.org <mailto:frc-info-unsubscribe@lists.keekles.org>>