QRZ! Ham Radio 3/QRZ Ham Radio Callsign Database - Volume 3.iso/digests/infoham/940173.txt

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

Date: Thu, 17 Feb 94 23:58:45 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 #173
To: Info-Hams


Info-Hams Digest            Thu, 17 Feb 94       Volume 94 : Issue  173

Today's Topics:
                    Article in Popular Electronics
                      Coax minimum-loss impeance
                      Data connection by radio?
                 Frequency doubler design, help, VFO.
                         Iambic keyer paddles
                             John Ramsey
                Looking for Sigma Design Associates...
                    RAMSEY FX TRANSCEIVER (2 msgs)
                  SBPMORSE - Morse to Text w/SB(Pro)
             Why I've been posting the FCC Daily Digests
                            Yaesu  Jacket

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: 17 Feb 1994 00:28:17 GMT
From: news.uiowa.edu!icaen![e-mail]
Subject: Article in Popular Electronics
To: [e-mail]

Dunno whether this has been noted yet, but in the latest issue
of Popular Electronics there's an article about Ham Radio in the '50s.
Pretty decent article, actually.

--
__  /|  | Doug Renze, N0YVW       | Don't believe what your eyes are telling
\'o.O'  | [phone]         | you!  All they show is limitation.  Look
=(___)= | [e-mail]  | with your understanding, find out what you
   U    | [e-mail] | already know, and you'll see the way to fly.

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

Date: 18 Feb 1994 03:04:59 GMT
From: agate!howland.reston.ans.net!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!col.hp.com!news.dtc.hp.com!hpscit.sc.hp.com![e-mail]
Subject: Coax minimum-loss impeance
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>, Tom Bruhns <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>OK, carrying this one step further, the outer-diameter/inner-diameter
>ratio for min loss under these conditions is 3.59112:1.  With air
>dielectric, this is the 77 ohm  cable.  But if the dielectric is
>polyethelene, commonly used in WWII vintage cables, the impedance
>is ... 51.02 ohms!  By the way, doing the same thing for solid
>Teflon gives 52.9 ohms, still really close to 50.

I stand corrected (77 vs. 74 ohms).

This is correct, technically, but my recollection of the MIT Rad
Labs book discussion was that 50 ohms was historically chosen in
relation to air coax, and the fact that it happened to be
minimum loss with polyethylene was a lucky accident.  But my
memory or the Rad Lab books may be wrong on historical details.

Now for a follow up question:  where did the idea for 92 ohm coax
come from?

Rick N6RK
[e-mail]

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

Date: 18 Feb 1994 03:09:55 GMT
From: agate!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!odin![e-mail]
Subject: Data connection by radio?
To: [e-mail]

In article <2k0nto$[e-mail]>, W. Robert Nelson <[e-mail]> wrote:
>I am not a ham now, but would be interested in haveing a
>system by which I could keep in contact with the net in my car with a
>laptop.

It's possible, but restrictions on the type of traffic that can be
carried over ham radio make this less useful than one might think.
Prohibitions that affect this include no business traffic and no
obscene or indecent language.  Since there's no telling what will
come in over the net, it's not a good idea to do this unless you have
someone else providing tight control over what is forwarded through.

A cellphone doesn't have these restrictions.

         Stephen

--
Stephen Trier  KB8PWA         "What's the human race going to do next?
Other: [e-mail]      Grind up clarinets and smoke them?"
Home: [e-mail]                   - narcotics agent Greg Elam,
                                          quoted on Clarinet

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

Date: Fri, 18 Feb 1994 03:22:26 GMT
From: agate!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!sdd.hp.com!col.hp.com!srgenprp![e-mail]
Subject: Frequency doubler design, help, VFO.
To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] ([e-mail]) wrote:

: ... I have also built a 40 meter VFO from the QRP tranceiver designs in
: the 1994 ARRL Handbook and they work. But when I use the VFO with the freq.
: doubler circuit from the September 1993 issue of CQ, I found the output to
: be too weak and fundamental frequency rejection is insufficient.

I'm not familiar with either the VFO or doubler design, but how about
this idea:  Build another VFO, but with all the frequency-determining
coils and capacitors 1/2 the value.  You would end up with a VFO that
tunes 14-14.6, assuming the 40 meter version tunes 7-7.3.  You could
reduce the tuning capacitor size even further (i.e. make it about 1/4
the size instead of 1/2) to reduce the tuning range.

AL N1AL

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

Date: Fri, 18 Feb 1994 03:15:39 GMT
From: agate!howland.reston.ans.net!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!col.hp.com!srgenprp![e-mail]
Subject: Iambic keyer paddles
To: [e-mail]

Conway Yee ([e-mail]) wrote:
: ...  It seems to me that it would be much more convenient to send
: code with the left hand so that the right hand is kept free to copy
: incoming code.  This is the same logic that is used with baseball
: mitts.  Is it that strictly right handed people can not do this?

I learned on a left-handed bug (semi-automatic mechanical keyer) years
ago, even though I am right-handed.  To this day I can send with either
a bug or keyer with either hand.  But not with a straight key -- I can
only do that right handed.

ARRL General Manager Dave Sumner K1ZZ is an avid left-handed contester
who can send with either hand.  I have seen him sending right-handed
while simultaneously logging left-handed.  And his writing was neater
than mine is normally!

AL N1AL

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

Date: 17 Feb 1994 04:25:46 GMT
From: koriel!newsworthy.West.Sun.COM!abyss.West.Sun.COM!sunspot![e-mail]
Subject: John Ramsey
To: [e-mail]

In article [e-mail], [e-mail] (Cecil Moore) writes:
>Dana Myers ([e-mail]) wrote:
>
>: Keep in mind, Jeff's experience with Ramsey appears to pre-date your arrival
>: to the Internet.
>
>Then would you not agree that it's way past time to stop knocking kits that
>Ramsey stopped shipping two years ago? This whole mess is not about kits...
>it is about conflicting personalities, something that belongs in another
>group. I had exactly the same experiences as Jeff. But all the problems
>have been solved and documented. I have had as much fun with the FX kits
>as I had with the ICOM-22S and that's a hellava lot.

Well, Cecil, I certainly did not knock the FTR-146 in my posting.  I simply
said "John Ramsey bad-mouthed two individuals by name".  Jeff stepped forward
and said "Well, here's my side of the story".  Yes, Cecil, this is about
personalities, not kits.  No, Cecil, this is about the personalities of
the people at an amateur radio company that does business with amateurs and
is at least as reasonable for rec.radio.amateur.misc as anything else.  What
other newsgroup should we discuss this in?

>: Hang on, slamming your customers is not only not politcally correct, it is
>: bad business.  It doesn't matter if they call you a liar.  Anyway, why wouldn't
>: John appreciate his name being a line item on Internet?
>:  * Dana H. Myers KK6JQ
>
>Well, Dana, when one particular customer's biggest thrill in life is stabbing
>the owner in the back, it may be that the customer is not always right. This
>thing between Jeff and John is obviously personal. As such, it has no
>place here. Notice how carefully Jeff avoided telling us what product
>he was talking about. A new reader could infer that he was talking about
>a presently available product, which he was not. My only purpose here was
>to point out that he was talking about the FTR-146, not the present FX-146,
>and since he has not purchased anything from Ramsey in two years, is not
>a present authority on their products.

Oh, Cecil, please listen carefully:  only a few weeks ago did John Ramsey
bring up Jeff Gold by name and proceed to criticize him strongly.  It doesn't
matter which kit is being discussed.  Listen carefully, I'll summarize for you:
What is being discussed is Ramsey's way of doing business.  Is that clear
enough?  Now, carefully consider the implication of this: it doesn't matter
which kit Jeff built, since the issue was the way Ramsey does business.  Now,
carefully think about this item:  a good business does not berate customers in
the presence of other customers.  Are you suggesting this is not true?  Are
you suggesting a business should *ever* engage in insults and personal attacks
on other customers?

Look, for the record, I had a relatively pleasant chat with John Ramsey on
the telephone.  I don't dislike John Ramsey or Ramsey Electronics.  I just
had an experience which is very important and should not be trivialized; businesses
do not get better if they are not constructively criticized.  I warned the readers
of this group that Ramsey Electronics engaged in a tactic that I (and others) find
highly offensive.  At the time I asked John *not* to do it, but he insisted.  So,
I ended up bringing it here, several weeks later, when the same tactic appeared
on the Usenet.  Take it for what it is worth.

---
 * Dana H. Myers KK6JQ, DoD 466 | Views expressed here are *
 * [phone]   | mine and do not necessarily *
 * [e-mail] | reflect those of my employer *
 * This Extra supports the abolition of the 13 and 20 WPM tests *

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

Date: 16 Feb 94 16:45:54 CST
From: agate!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!news.umbc.edu!haven.umd.edu!cs.umd.edu!uchinews!cdsmail!timbuk.cray.com!walter.cray.com!renaissance![e-mail]
Subject: Looking for Sigma Design Associates...
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Yvan Dupont) writes:
|>
|> In a past article in the October 92 issue of 73 Magazine there was a
|> reference to a company named "Sigma Design Associates" located at 22150
|> Berkeley Court, Los Altos CA. They had a kit which can be used with
|> software to emulate a TNC at a very low cost.
|>
|> Does anyone have phone or fax number of that company?
|> Or does anyone know if that company still exists or has moved???
|> I tried directory assistance without success...

The address is (was?) the author's house.  He must have moved.
(I picked a kit up in person about a year ago.)

Walt
----
Walt Spector                             It usually takes more than three weeks
([e-mail])                  to prepare a good impromptu speech.
Sunnyvale, California                                   Mark Twain
_._ _._ _.... _. ._.

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

Date: Fri, 18 Feb 1994 02:43:44 GMT
From: agate!howland.reston.ans.net!math.ohio-state.edu!sdd.hp.com!col.hp.com!srgenprp![e-mail]
Subject: RAMSEY FX TRANSCEIVER
To: [e-mail]

David Stockton ([e-mail]) wrote:
: : [e-mail] wrote:

: : : Yes it did not meet the FCC specs for spurious - missing by about a db or
: : : two ( I'm at home and don't have notes handy). The ARRL missed the whole
: : : point of the kit which was to promote kit building, etc,etc.

:     Here in Britain, there are no required specs for spurious outputs,
: we're held responsible for any problems due to any at any level. I know
: that the US FCC has put actual numbers on required performance (sounds
: like an improvement on our requirements, to me). So, just from personal
: curiosity, what are the consequences to an amateur who puts a radio on
: the air that does not meet the FCC specs ?

As a practical matter, the FCC would likely never find out unless you
had an interference complaint, and probably not even then.  In the
unlikely event that FCC came to your shack with a power attenuator
and spectrum analyzer and found your rig out of spec, you would
receive a notice of violation with the requirement to correct
the illegal condition and respond in writing within XX days.

In the case of interference, you would probably also be ordered
off the air until the problem was fixed.

AL N1AL

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

Date: 18 Feb 1994 03:00:01 GMT
From: agate!howland.reston.ans.net!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!odin![e-mail]
Subject: RAMSEY FX TRANSCEIVER
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>, Alan Bloom <[e-mail]> wrote:
>As a practical matter, the FCC would likely never find out unless you
>had an interference complaint, and probably not even then.

On the other hand, there was recently a gentleman with a 1.25m repeater
who was fined lots of money for having a spur on a distress frequency.

I'd say it's just a matter of being a good citizen to care about spurious
emissions.

        Stephen

--
Stephen Trier  KB8PWA         "What's the human race going to do next?
Other: [e-mail]      Grind up clarinets and smoke them?"
Home: [e-mail]                   - narcotics agent Greg Elam,
                                          quoted on Clarinet

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

Date: 17 Feb 1994 04:46:12 GMT
From: ucsnews!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!sgiblab!cs.uoregon.edu!news.uoregon.edu!gaia.ucs.orst.edu!flop.ENGR.ORST.EDU!storm.cs.orst.edu!kayd@network.
Subject: SBPMORSE - Morse to Text w/SB(Pro)
To: [e-mail]

I've been working on source code from DSPMORSE/FFTMORSE and the SB Freedom
project for a few days and have come up with a better morse-to-text translating
program that seems to be more compatible than either of the two previous
versions.  I have yet to contact Rocco Caputo or the author of FFTMORSE about
the release of their source code, but the SBF kit is available via anonymous
FTP and the author has allowed me to release my modified portion of that kit.

Basically, SBPMORSE uses high-speed DMA transfers to get digitized sound from
the SB(Pro)'s microphone plug.  It then runs it through a fast fourier
transformation to create a 16 segment spectrum analyzer.  The user then slides
a window and a mask over the spectrum analyzer to pick the frequencies from
which to detect a tone.  The tone is then converted to dits & dahs and finally
to text.

Modifications I have done are:
------------------------------
eliminate need for ct-voice.drv
change switch to lookup table for code translation
reduce DMA overhead
set up auto-morse-speed tracking
added BT & SK prosigns
support for more "Sound Blaster" compatible cards
allow sampling up to 45KHz when using SBPro
reduced screen flicker
set maximum limit for spectrum analyzer levels

...and more I can't think of right now.

In any case, I'm going to upload the executable to:
 wuarchive.wustl.edu:/pub/msdos_uploads/ham/sbpmorse.zip

If you have any problems, send E-mail to me and I'll see what I can do.

Darrek Kay
[e-mail]
[phone]

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

Date: Wed, 16 Feb 1994 18:42:22 GMT
From: psinntp!pixar![e-mail]
Subject: Why I've been posting the FCC Daily Digests
To: [e-mail]

> From: [e-mail] (Steve Allen)
> [e-mail] (Bruce Perens) writes, and writes, and writes:
> [ cable-tv, broadcast FM, commercial microwave, satellite pager
> drivel omitted... ]
>
> Bruce: besides being 99.9% irrelevant to amateur radio, this is an
> incredible waste of bandwidth. If you feel a need to post this
> stuff, form your own newsgroup.
> -Steve N2WSA

Steve,

Since some of the logic behind my posting the FCC Daily Digest might not
be obvious, I'll take this opportunity to explain it.

First, I agree that 99.9% of the material is not directly relevant
to Amateur Radio. However, that material does teach some lessons
that I feel are very important to Amateur Radio at this moment.

First, look how small and unimportant Amateur Radio is in the FCC's
daily operations. Of course they'd be spending time on broadcasters,
but look how much importance is attached to common carriers, land mobile,
personal communication services other than Amateur Radio, etc. We
indeed do seem to take up only 00.1% of the FCC's operations. I feel this
gives us a feeling for the broad view of the FCC. It's certainly given
me some feeling for the importance they place on some of the competitors
for our frequency spectrum and their enforcement time.

You might also gain some insight into the way such things as enforcement
and rule-making are handled from the way they happen daily in other
services. Since I'm planning on filing an STA for an experimental use of
the amateur service, reading this material has been important to me. When
I need more in-depth information, the phone number for the FCC contact is
right there.

I have had some concern about the use of bandwidth and the appropriateness
of rec.radio.amateur.misc as a forum for this material. For that reason,
I surveyed the newsgroup readers, and the result was almost 100% approval
for the postings, with a few comments that I might edit the material, add
explanations to it, or cross-post it to different groups. By the way,
net readers who are concerned with constitutional issues in broadcasting,
etc. have been dropping by rec.radio.amateur.misc to get these articles.

Editing the FCC Daily Digest to remove material unrelated to Amateur Radio
would place unreasonable demands on my time and put me in the position of
possibly mis-representing the FCC. No way. I wish others would comment on
some of the material in the Digests, since there are some real experts
reading this newsgroup.

Fortunately, FCC.GOV is now online and they will soon start
distributing this material themselves, so the Daily Digest postings
will soon disappear from rec.radio.amateur.misc and come to those who
are interested in a more convenient form. The administrator at FCC.GOV
is busy configuring his system, and will post announcements when the
system is ready to provide you service. Please don't bother him until
then.

For the curious, until FCC.GOV is fully operational you can access the
FCC bulletin board directly this way:

 telnet fedworld.gov
 (set up your login, and get to a prompt)
 /GO FCCSTATE

I find that Fedworld is running at full capacity most of the time, and
thus it's easiest to get to the BBS late at night.

 Bruce Perens

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

Date: Mon, 14 Feb 1994 18:06:35 GMT
From: hearst.acc.Virginia.EDU!liberty![e-mail]
Subject: Yaesu  Jacket
To: [e-mail]

Hi , Can anyone tell me where might get one of those cool looking jackets
that Yaesu are giving away free with FT100's?  I saw this in QST last
month.  I can't afford the radio but I could probably afford one of the
jackets if anyone is willing to part with one!

73's De GI0SSA Keith.

Replies via email to [e-mail]
or ax25 : gi0ssa@gb7hmi.#63.gbr.eu

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

Date: 15 Feb 1994 00:55:42 GMT
From: mvb.saic.com!unogate!news.service.uci.edu!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!wupost!bigfoot.wustl.edu!cec3![e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

References <rohvm1.mah48d-030294075300@136.141.220.39>, <[e-mail]>, <2j63p1$[e-mail]>.edu
Subject : Re: A code speed question

Steven Jackson ([e-mail]) wrote:
: |> so I retyped the copy before sending it in to ARRL!)

: Question: I use SuperMorse 4.04 and I love the "Group" training under Learn.
: It looks like my first Amateur test is going to be at 20 WPM.

: How many people use typewriters or computers for copying code? Having learned
: to type a decade ago, I can now type at ~70 WPM.  If I ever thought I was going
: to copy code at an obnoxious (;-) rate, I would definitely prefer to have a
: typewriter next to my radio.  You don't even need an IBM Selectric..  even one
: from Naked Lunch will do.. it's a lot easier than writing, once you learn how
: to type.

: You can always practice with the "Solid" function on SuperMorse. It lets you
: type to code until you get a character wrong.
: --
: Steven Jackson                                              New York University
: Assistant to the Chair of Comp Sci       Courant Inst. of Mathematical Sciences
: [e-mail], jcksnste@acfcluster        251 Mercer St, Room 411,NY 10012
:          "Not in my head.. so I don't have to think.." --  Nik Fiend

Here's a question for you. . .after copying by keyboard, can you copy
by hand still????  That was my problem.  I worked my keyboard copying
up pretty well--onnly problem was that it became instinctive--and I
wouldn't be thinking what letter it was, rather, I'd just be typing.
So I did the copy thing and copied by hand.

--jesse

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

Date: 17 Feb 1994 04:57:57 GMT
From: ucsnews!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!math.ohio-state.edu!news.acns.nwu.edu!casbah.acns.nwu.edu![e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

References <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>s
Subject : Re: John Ramsey

>
>73, Cecil, [e-mail]
>

Even thought the current Ramsey thread is far more colorful, I'd like to
get a few basic questions answered.

I've never built a Ramsey kit and have not seen the manual.  I have
considerable respect for the integrity and accuracy of the ARRL product
reviews.

To those who are Ramsey proponents, DID YOU PUT THE THING ON A SPECTRUM
ANALYZER BEFORE PUTTING IT ON THE AIR?

If so, what did you see?  If not, what will the FCC see if they happen to
look?  Does the manual tell you to check the spectral purity before getting
on the air?

Tnx,

Greg Lapin KD9AZ

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

Date: Thu, 17 Feb 1994 04:02:32 GMT
From: agate!howland.reston.ans.net!news.intercon.com!udel!news.sprintlink.net!direct![e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

References <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>s.spr
Subject : Re: John Ramsey

Jeff Herman ([e-mail]) wrote:

: Jeff got his point across - we understood what he said quite
: clearly, and I don't think anyone (except you) cares how he said it:

Seems like a statement of what's wrong with this country... nobody cares,
(except me). I wonder if Elmering will survive?

: Oh, by the way: I am a mathematics lecturer - isn't `lecturer' a thing
: just like `liar'. Jeff NH6IL

Jeff, Sometimes 'lecturers' are like 'liars'. :-) I like teachers better.
If it makes you happy, please edit "thing" into "bad-thing" or "xxx".
How come I can't reply to you? [e-mail] bounced.

73, Cecil, [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 16 Feb 1994 18:26:40 GMT
From: psinntp!laidbak!tellab5![e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

References <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>
Subject : Re: HAMBLASTER INCORRECT STATEMENTS

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (John W. Albert) writes:
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Cecil Moore) writes:
>>John W. Albert ( Myself) ([e-mail]) wrote:
>>
>
>The Hamblaster has a 14 bit A/D.   The add-on (I don't have the details
>about this) may use a sigma-delta A/D.  There may even be a super fast
>sampler to do I.F. processing in the works.
>
I was wrong about the I.F. processing It will require a different
DSP like the SPROC processor.


>
>
>
>---
>   Jack Albert  WA9FVP          Fellow Radio Hacker
>         Tele [phone]
>   Tellabs Operations, Inc.     FAX  [phone]
>   1000 Remington Blvd.         [e-mail]
>   Bolingbrook, IL  60440
>
>  Why do they call them concetration camps?
>  When people go there, do they really concentrate?

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

End of Info-Hams Digest V94 #173
******************************
******************************