QRZ! Ham Radio 3/QRZ Ham Radio Callsign Database - Volume 3.iso/digests/infoham/940010.txt

Internet Message Format | 1994-06-04 | 25KB

Date: Fri,  7 Jan 94 13:29:08 PST
From: Info-Hams Mailing List and Newsgroup <[e-mail]>
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Precedence: Bulk
Subject: Info-Hams Digest V94 #10
To: Info-Hams


Info-Hams Digest            Fri,  7 Jan 94       Volume 94 : Issue   10

Today's Topics:
                        A3-S 40-mtr add on kit
                          Address for OK1DWX
                        Cordless phone freqs?
                     DEP May Impose Fees On YOU!
                             Ham Software
                  Help finding: BPQAX25.EXE (2 msgs)
                          help with antennas
                          How does it work?
                           Kits and quality
              Making the Ramsey FX-146 work well.  How?!
                                 QHH
     Ramsey kits not too good -- what about Down East Microwave?
                     Repeater database? (2 msgs)
                         TOYOTAS AND HAM RIGS
                           tr-7800 problem

Send Replies or notes for publication to: <[e-mail]>
Send subscription requests to: <[e-mail]>
Problems you can't solve otherwise to [e-mail].

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: 7 Jan 94 18:18:45 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: A3-S 40-mtr add on kit
To: [e-mail]

I'm considering the Cushcraft A3S tri-bander, along with the 40-mtr add on
kit. Does anyone have positive/negative feedback on the 40-mtr kit? Does
it affect the bandwidth of the other 3 bands? Does it deliver the equivalent
performance of a rotary dipole on 40, or better?

      Thanks and 73,
      Scott
--
Scott Ginsburg            Voice: 508-436-3836                  | too much DX,
Wellfleet Communications  Internet: [e-mail]     | too little
2 Federal St.             Amateur Radio: WA2CJT                | time...
Billerica, MA 01821

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 6 Jan 1994 21:08:47 GMT
From: dxis![e-mail]
Subject: Address for OK1DWX
To: [e-mail]

I'm looking for the address for OK1DWX, who is now listed as the
QSL manager for the OL1A operation in recent contests.  Thanks.

73,
Bob K2PH

--
------------------------------------------------------------
| Bob Schreibmaier K2PH | UUCP:     uunet!dxis!k2ph        |
| (a.k.a. "The QRPer")  | INTERNET: [e-mail] |
| Kresgeville, PA       | ICBM:     40o55'N 75o30'W        |
------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: 7 Jan 1994 14:54:03 GMT
From: swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.ans.net!malgudi.oar.net!mailhost.interaccess.com!interaccess.com![e-mail]
Subject: Cordless phone freqs?
To: [e-mail]

Could someone send me a list of the 10 most common base
frequencies, or an ftp site for these freqs?

Thanks

------------------------------

Date: 7 Jan 94 14:43:51 GMT
From: ogicse!uwm.edu!fnnews.fnal.gov![e-mail]
Subject: DEP May Impose Fees On YOU!
To: [e-mail]

In article <2gih9o$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Scott Dorsey) writes:
>...
>What?  You won't tax it because it doesn't radiate enough?  Well what
>about Joe QRP over here, who is running a few miliwatts with a transmitter
>powered by rotting tomatoes?  How can you tax him?
>
>It just gets so difficult to devise a law to do what everybody expects it
>to do that it either gets thrown away or turns into an unenforceable mess.
>And hey, maybe it'll encourage QRP operation?  We can always hope...
>--scott
>--
>"C'est un Nagra.  C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Don't underestimate the ability of zealots and lawyers to ignore practical
matters.

Paul, wa9vyb

------------------------------

Date: 7 Jan 94 14:48:38 GMT
From: sdd.hp.com!hpscit.sc.hp.com!hpubmaa.esr.hp.com![e-mail]
Subject: Ham Software
To: [e-mail]

I recently got active again after being off the air for a few years.
I have been looking around at the ham-related software that is available
and it seems to be pretty minimal, especially Windows based software.
I just got the QRZ! CD-ROM yesterday which includes most of the archives
and I didn't find a lot of interest, at least to me, on there.

I am currently developing a Windows-based Graphical User Interface for
TNC 2 compatibles that I plan to make available as shareware. It will
be a lot more than just another terminal program. It will provide menu
and forms access to all the TNC parameters and settings as well as menu
driven interfaces for accessing popular BBS, Mail Systems and Network Nodes.
For all those like me who can't remember all those #&*$#@ commands.

I would be interested to know how many hams are using Windows on the PC
in their ham-shack and do you use it to control your TNC? Also, do you
have any suggestions for ham software you would like to see for Windows?

Please send me e-mail directly at [e-mail].

--

Garry Howard - KE0SH - Cambridge, MA - [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: 7 Jan 94 01:03:16 -0700
From: swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!cyber2.cyberstore.ca!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!mala.bc.ca![e-mail]
Subject: Help finding: BPQAX25.EXE
To: [e-mail]

Hiya folks.  Posted for a ham w/o net access:

He's looking for a file called BPQAX25.EXE.  I've looked through the
net and come up with naught, so I can only assume that its some part
of an archive or something.  I'm the new ham on the block and I'd dearly
like to solve this little problem for one of the oldsters :).

Anyone give me a point in the right direction?

Thanks!
Dale Babiy,
VE7XDB

------------------------------

Date: 7 Jan 94 18:34:05 GMT
From: ogicse!uwm.edu!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!moe.ksu.ksu.edu!crcnis1.unl.edu!unlinfo.unl.edu![e-mail]
Subject: Help finding: BPQAX25.EXE
To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (DALE BABIY) writes:

 >Hiya folks.  Posted for a ham w/o net access:

 >He's looking for a file called BPQAX25.EXE.  I've looked through the
 >net and come up with naught, so I can only assume that its some part
 >of an archive or something.  I'm the new ham on the block and I'd dearly
 >like to solve this little problem for one of the oldsters :).

 >Anyone give me a point in the right direction?

I would be curious to know what it is. I've been a BPQ user for years
and haven't heard of it. Please post.

Gary, AG0N

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 7 Jan 94 00:50:34 EST
From: bloom-beacon.mit.edu!noc.near.net!news.delphi.com![e-mail]
Subject: help with antennas
To: [e-mail]

   Gary: Receiving, only, is not very critical at all, so don't sweat
   the small stuff. If you run it around in the attic, that will make it
   non-directional enough. Actually, all the patterns they print in the books,
   are based on being in free space, not around wires, a garage, etc.
   As for a ground...don'tknock any holes nad don't worry about it.
   Just run any old wire from the ground connection to anywhere you can run it.
   Hide it under the rug or whatever. A window screen can make a good ground or
a a windowscreen can make a good antenna. The fancy stuff in the books is for
  transmitting antennas. Such can be critical down to a few inches differen ce.
   For just receiving.......anything you can do will be just fine.
    N6WR

------------------------------

Date: 7 Jan 94 19:51:11 GMT
From: ogicse!cs.uoregon.edu!sgiblab!rtech!ingres![e-mail]
Subject: How does it work?
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>
>On a semi-related topic, I am curious about the card-key system that our
>workplace has recently installed.  The trade name is CardKey, and the
>supplier told our executive that it was the "latest state-of-the-art"
>equipment.
>
>The cards do not need to be passed through a reader, just within 6 inches
>of the box on the wall.  The system records the time, date, door, and
>the serial number of the card (read employee.)
>
>I am curious how this technology works if anybody out there in cyber-space
>would like to share this info.  Perhaps I am being paranoid, but I also
>suspect that the device can read a card much farther away, i.e., it
>could track an employee's movements even if the employee did not use
>it to operate the door.  Does anybody want to comment on this?
>

My understanding is that the card reader/plate generates a small AC field
which is sufficient to power the card and have it radiate its serial number
back to the plate.  I don't have any clue on frequencies, data formats,
or whatnot.

It is doubtful that such technology is used to track employee movements.
Since the field drops off at the inverse of the distance squared, you
would probably need a field powered n^4 to make your card work.  In addition,
the sensor net would probably be cost prohibitive.  Last I heard, these
systems run a few thousand dollars for 4 or 8 card plates.  Imagine if
you wanted thousands of detectors.

BTW, I used to keep the card in my wallet, but now I pull it out when I use
it.  I found that the magnetic stripes on my credit cards becoming less and
less reliable.  I am of the opinion that these cards, when activated,
do slowly affect the credit cards.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 7 Jan 1994 07:53:53 -0600
From: pa.dec.com!SALCIUS2.csg.mot.com![e-mail]
Subject: Kits and quality
To: [e-mail]

>People, you get what you pay for. As a very good friend of mine once
>said; "Pay shit. Get shit."

This attitude amazes me! I can only wonder when the people who have
attitudes like this will have their jobs move to Osaka! If a customer pays
money they should get the best that they are paying for. I am amazed at
what type of crap Americans will put up with from a manufacturer. I deal in
the international markets and let me tell you my customers demand the very
best and will not except an excuse when something does not work properly.


--

-------------------------
Scott F. Migaldi
Motorola
Asia Pacific Cellular Subscriber Division
Cellular Subscriber Group
600 N. U.S. Hwy. 45 Rm. A-S345
Libertyville, IL. 60048-1286
1-708-523-3851 FAX: [phone]
email: [e-mail] or [e-mail]
-------------------------

------------------------------

Date: 7 Jan 1994 13:32:18 -0500
From: cs.utexas.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!news.cic.net!condor.ic.net!grex.cyberspace.org![e-mail]
Subject: Making the Ramsey FX-146 work well.  How?!
To: [e-mail]

Dana H. Myers KK6JQ responded to a post with the following:

>The FX series of transceivers are poorly done in some critical
>ways.  In fact, I'm a little surprised at how needlessly bad some
>of the design appears to be....
>
>The front ends of the FX transceivers would really win if Ramsey
>tossed the multi-stage pre-amplifiers, saved the cost of the
>transistors, used a better input bandpass filter, a single stage
>of relatively strong pre-amplification (even a common-gate J310
>would be good up to UHF) and used a stronger mixer (i.e., a DBM
>diode mixer).  If they did this, they could probably achieve
>receiver performance comparable to a modern Motorola mobile....
>
>The VCO in the synthesizer is unshielded in every FX radio, and
>with the relatively large values of loop division encountered, are
>begging for microphonics and increased reference sidebands....
>How would the average kit builder who has no spectrum analyzer
>have noticed this?
>
>Don't get me wrong, I'm not anti-kit; I'm just really concerned
>that many naive amateurs are buying these cheesy radios and don't
>have the resources to make them work correctly.

Ahh!  Naive amateur!  You found me!  After reading the fantastic
claims from Ramsey and seeing a positive review in 73 Amateur Radio
Today, I plunked down my $'s and got a FX 146 kit.  I got the thing
to work and even programmed two old EPROMs so I could dial in the
frequency from the front panel via BCD thumb switches.  I had fun
putting this thing together and learned a bit in the process.  The
performance is, as I've been reading all over, disappointing.  The
only way I could get this thing to preform half way decently was to
put a small two cavity filter in the antenna feed line.  The
cavities are twice the size of the radio!

Ok, I have this FX 146 and now I would like to fix whatever needs
fixing to make it a decent radio.  Mainly improve the front end as
Dana has suggested above. (And unload the cavities!)  The problem
is that when it comes to RF, I'm a kit builder at this point.  I
don't have easy access to spectrum analyzers, 200MHz signal
generators, etc.  I do have a 100MHz scope, DIP meter, 600MHz
counter and a VTVM with RF probe though.

How do I couple the 50 ohm antenna input to a decent filter to an
amp to another filter to the receiver?  I've looked in the ARRL
Handbook on the subject, but it gets too intense too fast and I'm
lost after the second paragraph.  Would a diode DBM mixer really be
that easy to implement?  If so, how?  How about cutting up a tin
can and soldering up a shield around the VCO?  What is loop
division any how?  (=VCO freq./ REF Freq.?)  How about cleaning up
the RF output.  Is there some way to do this simply without a
spectrum analyzer?  How.

Has anyone done any of what Dana suggests?  I am seeing a lot of
complaining but no solutions.  I'd sure love to improve my FX 146
and I'll bet there are several other FX builders who would do the
same!  I'm not going to chalk this up to a lesson learned and run
out to buy some old Icom, Kenwood, Yeasu, etc.  I bought this kit
to learn about RF electronics.

My Usenet reader is a bit cheesy at the moment, so if you respond
to this, please also copy me at [e-mail].  Thank you!

Klaus (N8NXF), Ann Arbor,MI. "On the crumbling edge of technology."

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 6 Jan 1994 19:57:35 +0000
From: sdd.hp.com!sgiblab!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!pipex!uknet!demon!llondel.demon.co.uk![e-mail]
Subject: QHH
To: [e-mail]

In article <rohvm1.mah48d-030194155946@136.141.220.39> [e-mail] (John E. Taylor III) writes:
>
>Some of the Q signals are pretty obscure, as I recall--things like, "My
>present heading and altitude are..."  (Yes, Gary, people used to send Morse
>code from airplanes with a straight key strapped to their legs!)
>
I know a canoeist who uses a paddle keyer..........

Dave
--

*****************************************************************************
* G4WRW @ GB7WRW.#41.GBR.EU AX25     *    Start at the beginning. Go on     *
* [e-mail]  Internet *     until the end. Then stop.        *
* [e-mail]      Amprnet  *      (the king to the white rabbit)  *
*****************************************************************************

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 7 Jan 94 14:05:35 GMT
From: mnemosyne.cs.du.edu!nyx10![e-mail]
Subject: Ramsey kits not too good -- what about Down East Microwave?
To: [e-mail]

OK, everybody and his dog has run down Ramsey kits.  I also heard some
unfavorable comments about Hamtronics and their downconverter kits.  What
about Down East Microwave?  They have downconverters in kit form -- has
anyone tried tackling one of those?


Waiting for the frequency analyzer to get fixed before I put my FX-440
on the air, I am --
--
Larry Kollar, KC4WZK   | I like CW, but that doesn't mean I think every ham
[e-mail]  | should have to learn it.
               "On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog."

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 7 Jan 1994 18:23:55 GMT
From: world![e-mail]
Subject: Repeater database?
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Scott Turner) writes:
>In rec.radio.amateur.misc, [e-mail] (Jim Reese) writes:
>
>
>>I don't think the intent is to "hide" the link data from the casual user, but
>>that it is not relevent to the intended market of the ARRL Repeater Directory.
>
>Given that the repeater directory lists both repeater frequencies, and
>the recommended ARRL band plans for VHF & UHF, I guess I'd have to
>question that statement.  Even the ARRL in other publications point the
>reader to the repeater directory for detailed bandplans at the higher
>frequencies.

Control channel frequencies are typically PL protected and use a set of
touch tones for control, etc. There is NO NEED for you to know they
are there. The coordinators know about many of these just so they won't
put everyone on the same freq. Similar thing goes for split site repeaters.
The same freq can handle LOTS of these links, since they can be ultra
low power on very directional antennas. Attracting attention to these
frequencies results in people jamming these frequencies. I wish this
were not true, but there are idiots in every part of society.

>
>But the real point is that the casual FM simplex user really has no
>place to go to better understand where s/he might operate.  As an
>amateur radio operator, I find little justification for not having
>published information on coordinated activities in the allotted amateur
>bands.  You simply can't have it both ways, on the one hand telling me
>it's bad operating practice to interfere, and then not providing me with
>adequate information to assist me in finding open frequencies in my area
>on a crowded band.  With only *1* listed available FM simplex frequency
>on the published 450 band plan, I need more information!

THIS is a big issue. There needs to be 10 or 15 SIMPLEX VOICE channels
defined, and they need to be defined nationwide. A SEPARATE set of TEST
and experimental frequencies is also needed to provide a place for
people to play with their crossband repeating radios without interfering
with other people.

>
>>Not to mention the fact that the ARRL "band plan" printed in the directory
>>is NOT USED in much of the country.  Please join your local coordination
>>group and help them to make a reasonable band plan.  That's what is really
>>needed.
>
>Fine.  I might just do that, but what you've just stated here only
>reinforces the need to publish more comprehensive band usage
>information.  The average amateur doesn't know squat about the local
>coordinating body.
>
>Given how confusing and chaotic the VHF/UHF situation is in many areas,
>readily available information is critical.  I shouldn't have to do
>handstands, and join the coordinating body just to find available
>simplex frequencies in an area.  It also shouldn't be a big secret from
>me how my allocated amateur frequencies are being used.
>

Remeber also that the repeater directory is out of date a few months
before it gets published. For the most part this is not a big problem,
but in the case of trying to find empty frequencies, it is not a good
reference document. How many repeaters were put up since the data was
collected? You have no way of knowing.

Identification of enough simplex frequencies for people to work with
is the REAL solution.
>If you're going to ask me not to operate on a certain frequency in a

>very limited spectrum, you'd darned well better be willing to tell me
>why, and who it is that gets to and make that information easily and
>publicly available.  It's bad enough our government pulls this "need to
>know" garbage, worse yet when we do it to fellow amateurs.  You
>shouldn't be able to ask for and expect exclusivity on an amateur
>frequency without being willing to go public.
>
>And please, before anyone jumps on me, my solution is certainly *not* to
>blindly jump on a frequency and damn the consequences.  I want to know
>so I *don't* interfere, or so that if I see what I consider to be band
>inequities, I can complain and work to change the situation.  In other
>words, I want what we should all want.  Good access to information
>relevant to my and others usage of the amateur bands.
>
>
>Scott Turner  N0VRF  [e-mail]
>


--
---------------------------------------------------------------
Daniel Senie                 Internet:     [e-mail]
Daniel Senie Consulting                    [e-mail]
508-365-5352                 Compuserve:   74176,1347

------------------------------

Date: 7 Jan 1994 09:02:59 -0600
From: swrinde!menudo.uh.edu!uuneo.NeoSoft.com!sugar.NeoSoft.COM![e-mail]
Subject: Repeater database?
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>,
Scott Turner <[e-mail]> wrote:
>But the real point is that the casual FM simplex user really has no
>place to go to better understand where s/he might operate.  As an
>amateur radio operator, I find little justification for not having
>published information on coordinated activities in the allotted amateur
>bands.  You simply can't have it both ways, on the one hand telling me
>it's bad operating practice to interfere, and then not providing me with
>adequate information to assist me in finding open frequencies in my area
>on a crowded band.  With only *1* listed available FM simplex frequency
>on the published 450 band plan, I need more information!

This is a trap most coordinating groups fall into.  The big demand is from the
repeater owners, not the simplex users.  They are responding to their members,
good or bad.  I don't know what the answer is except to encourage more input
from simplex users to the coordinating groups.

>Fine.  I might just do that, but what you've just stated here only
>reinforces the need to publish more comprehensive band usage
>information.  The average amateur doesn't know squat about the local
>coordinating body.

I couldn't agree more.  One of the things the Texas VHF-FM Society has done
is to tell the ARRL repeater directory editors that band plans should be
published for EVERY STATE, not just what the ARRL thinks their "national"
band plan is.  Don't know if they'll do it, but...

--
   Jim Reese, WD5IYT     | "Reality is for those with no imagination."
[e-mail] |  --Jim McClellan

------------------------------

Date: 7 Jan 94 11:54:16 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: TOYOTAS AND HAM RIGS
To: [e-mail]

I note a recent posting, apparently from Toyota USA hams.

Number 1 on their list of requirements for installation of rigs in Toyotas,
in order for the warrantee to continue is:
   "The rig must be FCC Type Approved."

WHERE DO I BUY FCC TYPE APPROVED HAM GEAR ????????

I thought that ham gear was specifically NOT type approved.  But then again I
don't intend to buy a Toyota, so it's all academic.

73 de [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 7 Jan 1994 15:02:46 GMT
From: swrinde!sgiblab!pacbell.com![e-mail]
Subject: tr-7800 problem
To: [e-mail]

I have an old Kenwood tr-7800.  Recently I was asked on the air
about my alternator whine.  I was operating from home.  I have
powered the radio from a battery and I still get the noise.  It
sounds just like alternator whine, with maybe a little tick in
the background.  It starts about 3/4 of a second after I hit the
mike button.  In receive I hear nothing but clean audio, it is
only when I monitor my transmitted signal that I can hear the
whine.  I have checked all of the board ground in the radio and
I can see nothing wrong.  Has anyone got any thoughts about where
this might be comming from.  Thanks Steve Hawkins WV6U.

------------------------------

End of Info-Hams Digest V94 #10
******************************
******************************