Date: Thu, 22 Sep 94 02:01:11 PDT From: Info-Hams Mailing List and Newsgroup Errors-To: Info-Hams-Errors@UCSD.Edu Reply-To: Info-Hams@UCSD.Edu Precedence: Bulk Subject: Info-Hams Digest V94 #1050 To: Info-Hams Info-Hams Digest Thu, 22 Sep 94 Volume 94 : Issue 1050 Today's Topics: 147.555 Repeater 9K6 Bd Packet w/o TNC! [WANTED] Manual for Allied SX-190 A kind of amusing story I am a Ham! (Re: wait time) kenwood TH-79A License turnaround ti Military surplus info wanted Radio Shack Plays Historical Role (2 msgs) Repeater on 147.555 Restrictive Covenants: I can't have *any* antenna? (2 msgs) The City and Tower Installations Tower construction info Why is aviation COM VHF *amplitude* modulated? (2 msgs) Wuoff hong Send Replies or notes for publication to: Send subscription requests to: Problems you can't solve otherwise to brian@ucsd.edu. Archives of past issues of the Info-Hams Digest are available (by FTP only) from UCSD.Edu in directory "mailarchives/info-hams". We trust that readers are intelligent enough to realize that all text herein consists of personal comments and does not represent the official policies or positions of any party. Your mileage may vary. So there. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 22 Sep 1994 03:38:33 GMT From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!nntp.msstate.edu!olivea!koriel!newsworthy.West.Sun.COM!abyss.West.Sun.COM!usenet@network.ucsd.edu Subject: 147.555 Repeater To: info-hams@ucsd.edu In article g76@crcnis1.unl.edu, mcduffie@unlinfo.unl.edu (Gary McDuffie Sr) writes: >Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc >Subject: Re: (Getting long) Re: A Repeater on 147.555?!? >Distribution: world >References: <2989098691.0.p01613@psilink.com> > >"phil reed" writes: > >->Jeffrey Herman writes: >->> >->>In article <2988751409.3.p01613@psilink.com> "phil reed" writes: >->>>>DATE: 14 Sep 1994 07:29:58 GMT >->>>>FROM: Gary McDuffie Sr [bunch o' stuff deleted] hey, folks, this belongs on rec.radio.amateur.policy..... --- * Dana H. Myers KK6JQ, DoD#: j | Views expressed here are * * (310) 348-6043 | mine and do not necessarily * * Dana.Myers@West.Sun.Com | reflect those of my employer * * "Sir, over there.... is that a man?" * ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 Sep 1994 02:10:22 GMT From: psinntp!gdstech!bat@uunet.uu.net Subject: 9K6 Bd Packet w/o TNC! To: info-hams@ucsd.edu In article <35juda$2e3k@info2.rus.uni-stuttgart.de> moritz@ipers1.e-technik.uni-stuttgart.de () writes: >Hi! > >The inventors of the BAYCOM modem, also known as poor man's >packet, have just come up with a 9K6 modem. It connects to >the printer port and costs aroune 150 $ or so. > >May become a good alternative to a TNC. > >73, Moritz Moritz, Baycom was created by a clever team of German Hams. But, the Poor Man's Packet was a similar device by 2 American Hams, and appeared as a feature article in 73. These 2 packet modems are a bit similar, but not the same. -pat -- *-----------------------------------------------------------* * Pat Masterson D12-25 | KE2LJ@KC2FD * * Grumman Data Systems | 516-346-6316. * * Bethpage, NY 11746 | bat@gdstech.grumman.com * ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 15 Sep 1994 16:59:14 GMT From: att-out!pacbell.com!well!miwok!pacific.net!north.pacific.net!sequoia.northcoast.com!scott@RUTGERS.EDU Subject: [WANTED] Manual for Allied SX-190 To: info-hams@ucsd.edu Hello - A friend of mine is trying to locate a copy of the manual for the old Allied Radio Shack SX-190, and I told him I would post a message here on his behalf....so if anyone can help me out, I would be happy to pay copying/shipping for said manual....Thanks in advance! 73 from Humboldt County, CA ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Scott W. Binder, AB6TR / / / / Packet: AB6TR@K7WWA.#NORCAL.CA.USA 1000 7th #8 /-/-/---/-/-/ FidoNet: 9@1:125/37 Arcata, CA 95521-6172 / / ||/ / BBS - The Eagle's Lair Citadel (707)826-7473 || running Novucivitas (707)826-0747 Finger for PGP Public Key || Internet: scott@sequoia.northcoast.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Sep 1994 21:27:39 GMT From: rosevax!felix!scotbri@uunet.uu.net Subject: A kind of amusing story To: info-hams@ucsd.edu I thought I'd relate this amusing little sort-of-ham-radio-oriented story. I got a call at work from a woman I know from folk dancing who needed to get the phone number of the group's de facto social director to find out the last name of a guy who accidently left his keys at the last dance venue. She just knows him as "Bill the Pilot" and wonders if maybe I know his last name. Our conversation goes thus: Me: I'm not sure who you're referring to. J: You know him -- he always wears goofy t-shirts. Me: Oh, is he the guy with the "thank you for not projectile vomiting" t-shirt? J: Yeah, that's him. Me: Oh, I know him as Steve the banjo player, or Steve the ham radio operator. If N. doesn't know his last name, you can go to the library and look him up in the Callbook. His call is -----. (I know this because I saw it on his license plate when we were both attending a music jam.) So anyway, it turns out N. doesn't know Steve's last name so J. (who works for the local paper and is both close to and good at using the library) goes and finds the Callbook and finds Steve listed so now she can look up his phone # and return his keys. It did take her a while to figure out the ordering pattern in the Callbook. She knows nothing about ham radio and I neglected to tell her that the calls are listed by the number, then alpabetically by the letters AFTER the number. But she found it. She's going to see if Steve can guess how she found out his last name. I bet he won't. -- ============================================================================ scotbri@rosemount.com Scott Brigham (AA0HU) "When you start to feel you've been Rosemount, Inc. bit by an eel -- that's a moray..." Chanhassen, MN USA ============================================================================ ------------------------------ Date: 20 Sep 1994 04:52:19 GMT From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!library.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!nic-nac.CSU.net!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!news-feed-1.peachnet.edu!news.cc.emory.edu!dbarton@network.ucsd.edu Subject: I am a Ham! (Re: wait time) To: info-hams@ucsd.edu Greetings! After a seemingly neverending wait, I am now a licensed Ham operator! I passed my test on 23 July, and received my license this weekend, almost exactly 8 weeks. I am a lowly Technician, but I am working on the code, and now that I have a little motivation, it should go faster. I do have few questions: Any suggestions on a good first radio? Probably 2 meters because that seems to be the most active here in Southern California. (I've been listening in with my scanner for a while, in anticipation.) Any suggestions on study materials for General and above? I need at least a General license to do what I want to do, but what would like to move on in the hobby. I am interested in material that helps me learn the concepts, not just the answers. Any computerized material available on the net would be great. This leads me to my next question... I realize that this may sound vain, but I understand that even if I pass my General class test, I will still have the same call sign because all of the Group C call signs have been given out in District 6. Just wondering... Finally, I have been considering the purchase of a new scanner, and the ICOM AR-8000 in the new Grove catalog caught my eye. It seems to have a lot of features, so many that it seems too good to be true. I had my heart set on the Pro-2006, but I could use many of the features on the AR-8000, if it really is as good as it says (most notably, the ability to receive in th marine SSB/HF band). Thank you to all of the hams in the SD area, and those on the net who have helped me get to where I am. (Special thanks to the author of Super Morse.) Thank you in advance to those who respond th these questions. Any responses can be directed to bartdoug@teetot.acusd.edu And now my very first... 73, Douglas E. Barton KE6LZM (hoorah!) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Sep 1994 19:25:30 GMT From: news.encore.com!slightbo@uunet.uu.net Subject: kenwood TH-79A To: info-hams@ucsd.edu Has anyone had any experience with the TH-79A? Good, Bad or otherwise. I would like to know. I am seriously considering the purchase of one. I was ready to buy the FT-530, when I saw ads for the TH-79A. It looks like a new and improved version of the TH-78. I think I like the TH-79. What's your opinion? -- slightbo@encore.com Sam KI4JJ ------------------------------ Date: 19 Sep 1994 20:17:51 -0400 From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!ucsnews!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!mailer.acns.fsu.edu!freenet3.scri.fsu.edu!freenet3.scri.fsu.edu!not-for-mail@network.ucsd.edu Subject: License turnaround ti To: info-hams@ucsd.edu : Don't blame the government for YOUR mistakes. The new form 610 has been : around since March 1st 1994. If you took the time to study for the : exam, found the right place to take it, brought your pencils like you : are supposed to, you should of also read that the old 610s are no : longer useable. : Who's fault would it have been if you FLUNKED the test? YOU made the : mistake, no one ELSE!!! Time to take personal responsibility for your : Hans/N2YQG The FCC has accepted outdated forms for as long as I can remember. I think your overreacting a little there, Hans. -- *-------------------------------------------------------------* * Jeffrey M. Valley * * Amateur Radio- KE4AUT * *Internet:valleyj@freenet.fsu.edu* Florida State University * *Compuserve:72274,1514 * Go 'Noles * *-------------------------------------------------------------* ------------------------------ Date: 21 Sep 1994 18:04:09 GMT From: noc.near.net!bigboote.WPI.EDU!kedz@uunet.uu.net Subject: Military surplus info wanted To: info-hams@ucsd.edu Hell, I have a pair of RT1185/ gra 114 reciever trasmitters. I am looking for *any* information on these rigs. I am especially interested in getting the frequency plug ins for them. I have one and am unable to reproduce it bec its potted. it is marked: -------------------------------------------------- | | | 80063 smd 706552 | | | | mfr 541245 freq | -------------------------------------------------- and has 3 connectors (one if, lo, ant??) Also looking for a pair of handsets with the new style twist loc connector (nomenclature eludes me at this time) If you happen to know the address/ phone # for Fair Radio Sales in ohio? thanx a bunch! John@wpi.wpi.edu Wu3c ------------------------------ Date: 22 Sep 1994 00:26:05 GMT From: george.inhouse.compuserve.com!news.inhouse.compuserve.com!compuserve.com!news@uunet.uu.net Subject: Radio Shack Plays Historical Role To: info-hams@ucsd.edu Some people would bitch if you hung them with a new rope! Who gives a rats behind what brand they were? -- Hans Brakob, K0HB | EX-KG6AQI, WA0PQF, WB9DLL Vice Director | WB4GXH, WB0WFF Dakota Division ARRL | 73 from Minnesota ------------------------------ Date: 21 Sep 1994 19:33:32 GMT From: thecourier.cims.nyu.edu!longlast.cs.nyu.edu!jackson@nyu.arpa Subject: Radio Shack Plays Historical Role To: info-hams@ucsd.edu |> "...I'm sorry, Mister Clinton, I can't sell you those 10,000 AM/FM |> portable radios without the last four digits of your phone number." or a major credit card. You know as well as I do how the economy's been for 14 years, sir. -- Steven Jackson, Assistant to the Chair of Computer Science Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences, New York University 251 Mercer Street, NY NY 10012 +----IMPORTANT:-----+ |<-----------These 2 DEAD after 9/23/94--------->|<-starts 9/24/94-->| | Work <-- (forwarded) | | |jackson@cs.nyu.edu, jcksnste@acfcluster.nyu.edu,|jacksons@cs.nyu.edu| +------------------------------------------------+-------------------+ ------------------------------ Date: 22 Sep 94 04:28:52 GMT From: news-mail-gateway@ucsd.edu Subject: Repeater on 147.555 To: info-hams@ucsd.edu What people are not considering is that we in SoCal perhaps have the highest concentration of repeaters in the country. To compound the fact, the majority of repeaters on 70cm and to an extent, 1.2GHz are closed. To addinsult to injury, a good band for repeaters (900MHz) is already ferreted out to other service users, leaving us with precious little spectrum up there to work with. Without a doubt, FM operation is very popular out here, and most repeaters already cover each other 10-fold. While I applaud the efforts of the three coordinating bodies we have out here, I cannot have more respect for them because one or more of them are simply "Billionaire Boy's Clubs" for the precious few amateurs that were lucky enough 20 years ago to get a repeater pair, or rich enough to go out and buy one. My recommendation for this repeater? Yank it off of the air. Unless it is going to do special things (ie: ACSSB, digital modes, etc.) We have too many now that do it already. We need the simplex frequencies for local comms. ============================================================================== Carl Swanson, KK6RV | "Sometimes you just run out of rocks." Broadcast Engineer | Air Personality | - Tom Hanks KHAY-FM, Ventura, CA | "Forrest Gump" INTERNET: cswanson@kaiwan.com | ============================================================================== ------------------------------ Date: 19 Sep 1994 10:35:13 -0700 From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!newshub.sdsu.edu!nic-nac.CSU.net!csulb.edu!paris.ics.uci.edu!not-for-mail@network.ucsd.edu Subject: Restrictive Covenants: I can't have *any* antenna? To: info-hams@ucsd.edu In yee@mipg.upenn.edu (Conway Yee) writes: >>Antennae: No exterior radio or television antenna or aerial or >>satellite dish receiver, or other devices designed to receive >>telecommunication signals, but not limited to radio, television, or ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >>microwave signals which are intended for cable television, network >>television reception, or entertainment purposes shall be erected or >>maintained, ... >It sounds like you an argue that a ham antenna is exempted since >it is not intended for cable TV, network TV, or entertainment. No, this won't work in any Court I have ever been in. The "not limited to..." clause clearly does not restrict the "antenna" provision. This is an easy case, you cannot erect any outside antenna. Sounds like indoor antennas are your solution..... OR you could go to the architectural committee - which is right there in your contract. Clark WA3JPG ------------------------------ Date: 21 Sep 94 23:42:52 GMT From: uswnvg!cjackso@uunet.uu.net Subject: Restrictive Covenants: I can't have *any* antenna? To: info-hams@ucsd.edu Michael R. Dow (R1156C@WACCVM.CORP.MOT.COM) wrote: : Declarant, without the prior written approval of the architectural review : committee. Well - at least you've got a CHANCE! In my community, there was even a clause which said: Operation of an amateur radio station within the development is prohibited. That, in the opinion of my lawyer, was illegal. It's since been removed. But, the ABSOLUTE BAN (ie, no "prior written approval" escape) on antennas of ANY sort has not yet been lifted. But, there is hope - do what I did: Get on your local "Homeowners Board", or whatever they call themselves. I volunteered to run (unopposed) for VP (a do-nothing job, EXCEPT that I'm in charge of all "covenant related matters" :-) ). Here's the kicker - last month, another homeowner came to the board and requested permission to put up a DSS dish (18" Direct Broadcast Sattelite dish). I let the other three board members stew for a while (they really are trying to be nice) and then "volunteered" that I knew a bit about radio and about these dishes (having just read my comp copy of Satellite Times). So, after some discussion, I got appointed to "investigate the situation" and come up with a proposal that will allow the SMALL dishes, as long as they're not visible from the street. Any bets that my proposal will just sorta "ease out" the restrictions on ALL antennas, as long as they're not visible from the street? Granted, it's not a 100' tower with a tri-band on top, but, even with my Isoloop (it was in my attic, it's now going outside behind a tree that's gotten big enough to block it) I've been able to work whoever I hear. 73! Clay/N7QNM ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Sep 1994 19:40:51 GMT From: fluke!chuckb@beaver.cs.washington.edu Subject: The City and Tower Installations To: info-hams@ucsd.edu In article hamed@netcom.com (Hammett and Edison Inc) writes: >Don Turner (don.turner@eabbs.com) wrote: >: (County wants engineering data.) >The definitive source for that type of info is EIA Standard RS-222. I believe that that current revision is called RS-222-D, although there might be an "E" >revision out by now. You would have to purchase a copy of this Standard direct >from EIA in Washington, DC. EIA is an abbreviation for Electronics Industries >Association. > Before you invest time in EIA standards, check with the county. My county wanted nothing to do with EIA and demanded UBC calculations for 80 mph wind with radial ice. They also required a UBC soils study. UBC does not make a lot of sense for tower structures, but that was the requirement anyway. -- Chuck Bowden / WB7R / chuckb@tc.fluke.com / (206) 356-6228 Fluke Corporation / MS 232E / PO Box 9090 / Everett WA 98206-9090 ------------------------------ Date: 21 Sep 94 23:32:45 GMT From: news-mail-gateway@ucsd.edu Subject: Tower construction info To: info-hams@ucsd.edu Don WA6WRX asks about specifying tower structures, for the purpose of dealing with Zoning Boards, Building Permit folks, etc. Several standards apply -- National Electrical Code, Uniform Building Code, and perhaps the most relevant for Don, the Electronic Industries Association Standard RS- 222 (latest edition is E or F, I think). EIA RS-222 sets construction standards for all kinds of communications towers, including foundations, wind-load calculations, guying standards, grounding, attaching antennas and cabling, types of metal to be used, corrosion protection, etc. It is available from Electronic Industries Association, Washington DC (sorry I don't have address or phone number, but your public library can help). I'd also recommend contacting a local consulting engineer experienced in communications towers. A 20-minute session should cost less than $30, and that person can give you all sorts of advice on local practice, requirements, etc. He or she would likely know the way that the political winds blow, and how you might bend reeds rather than snap oaks. Paul Marsh N0ZAU Omaha pmarsh@metro.mccneb.edu ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Sep 1994 20:26:57 GMT From: lll-winken.llnl.gov!enews.sgi.com!sgigate.sgi.com!odin!jerber.sandiego.sgi.com!jerryb@ames.arpa Subject: Why is aviation COM VHF *amplitude* modulated? To: info-hams@ucsd.edu It's due to a simple fact that AM preceded FM and that AM is what was available when airplanes began using radios. Regards, -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Jerry Bransford Silicon Graphics (619) 546-0409 PP-ASEL - KC6TAY ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ------------------------------ Date: 20 Sep 1994 00:21:51 GMT From: dog.ee.lbl.gov!news.cs.utah.edu!cs.utexas.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!zip.eecs.umich.edu!yeshua.marcam.com!news.kei.com!@@ihnp4.ucsd.edu Subject: Why is aviation COM VHF *amplitude* modulated? To: info-hams@ucsd.edu >>> Julian Scarfe wrote: >>> Someone subsequently asked me *why* they are AM not FM >> Jay Maynard (jmaynard@nyx10.cs.du.edu) wrote: >> Another reason is the FM capture effect > Alan Bloom wrote: > Another reason is that AM has a small signal/noise advantage over FM > for weak signals. FM is better above a certain signal level threshold, > but AM is better for signals near the noise level. I think the real reason is historical. HF aircraft radio was AM, so when VHF operation started in WWII, AM was the natural choice over the still experimental FM. By the time the land mobile services adopted FM, aircraft VHF was well-deployed and the standard was set. Jim Bromley, W5GYJ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Sep 1994 16:45:18 GMT From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!dog.ee.lbl.gov!agate!iat.holonet.net!vectorbd!rkm@network.ucsd.edu Subject: Wuoff hong To: info-hams@ucsd.edu ecudhm@erigate.ericsson.se wrote: : Once upon a time, there was a picture of the (possibly existant) Wouff Hong : talisman. This was in QST, in the Fifties or early Sixties. Does anyone have : this picture? Does anyone remember what I am talking about? Does anyone know : what is going on? Yes, we do. Fnord. - Rich ( Apologies to any _Illuminati_ fans. :-) ------------------------------ End of Info-Hams Digest V94 #1050 ******************************