From: fletcher@moho.uwyo.EDU (Walter Reid Fletcher)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: cost of operating/maintaining a repeater
Date: 29 Dec 92 00:15:00 GMT
Organization: UCSD Usenet Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: daemon@ucsd.edu

First off, I run a 440 repeater.  It is NOT CLOSED or PRIVATE.  I have
been involved with running and using repeaters for 18 years.  That means
I got involved right at the start of the 2-meter repeater growth explosion.
I am aware of reasons why PRIVATE and CLOSED systems exist.  I agree with
them.

   Steve Kohlenberger writes: 
  >What is the phenomena here?  Will the trend continue and possibly
  >change 2m and 220 in the same direction (private and closed from
  >open)?

The phenomenon I recall was that back when 2-meter repeater growth really
exploded, the people wanting to construct "private" repeaters were
encouraged to do so using 70 cm.  That meant more effort for them because
it has only been recently that one could go by a 440 rig and actually have
a selection to chose from.  2 meters has been that way for a much longer
time.  Reserving 146 mhz for open systems meant the largest portion of the
repeater users would have to spend less money.  Those wanting PRIVATE or
CLOSED systems had to spend more due to the dearth of repeater equipment
and off-the-shelf appliances for 440mhz to implement them with.  Some 
actually liked the idea because fewer people could eavesdrop.  I remember
having to spend $500 (1977) on a Standard SRC730 commercial handheld for 70
cm.  Standard's 2-meter amateur offering (the SRC146) was only $200. 440
operators had to spend more with fewer choices, which made things more
difficult.  They were sincere when they did it.  They lived with it. 

Now 2 meters is full.  People have moved to 440.  The spectrum is crowded. 
The 440 operators were and still are committed to operating their systems. 
The systems that survived the first few years have endured.  Turnover seems
to be greater with 2-meter systems.  Newcomers examine 440 and see the number
of private systems and conclude that 440 attracts elitists.  Partly they
were pushed there. 

laUNChpad.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80 writes:
  >If one wants a private system, why not license for a different band?  
  >Something along the lines of GMRS, which is intended for private
  >communications.             

Because most of the GMRS does not allow rag-chew or non-business comms.  I
understand that RCC is the ONLY service in the VHF High-band that does.  I
don't know the whole story on UHF.  Rag-chew occurs on some PRIVATE or 
CLOSED systems between the authorized users.

Jay Maynard, EMT-P, K5ZC, PP-ASEL writes:
  >There's a term for transmitting on a repeater's input frequency, knowing that
  >there's a repeater there with users on it, and yet not intending to use the
  >repeater - willful interference.

You betcha.  Thats the way the FCC views it.

  John Rice -  K9IJ writes:
  >Give me a BREAK. $15 a month adds up to $190/user/year. An average repeater
  >has 100 or so users. That's $19,000/year. I've built and run a number of
  >repeaters and for $19,000 a year you can have a HELL of a repeater (and
  >ALOT of parties for the owner/operator).

  >UHF Repeater $2000 - ICOM
Not as immune to RF as for instance a decent Motorola or GE box.  Could
be a problem in a site hot with RF.
  >100W Amp     $ 350
Hmmm.  Must need to shove the 'trons through a combiner or something...
  >Pwr Supply   $ 250
  >Duplxr       $ 750
  >Antenna      $ 150 - 6db
An antenna this cheap won't last a winter around here.  Even the DB
Products, Celwaves, etc. have eventually broken.  At 11,000 feet,
100-200 mph winds plus 1-2 feet of rhime ice gets 'em every time.
No feedline mentioned here.  Decent LDF450 (1/2 in. Heliax) is $2.00
per foot.  LDF550 is $4.75.  RG-8 RG-214, and 9913, don't survive.
Ouch!
  >Controller   $1500 - Advanced  Controler with digitized Voice $ Voice Mail
  >             ______
  >             $5000
  >Add Misc     $1000 - Control Link Receiver, antenna, co-ax, etc

Reid,
WB7CJO