home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
QRZ! Ham Radio 4
/
QRZ Ham Radio Callsign Database - Volume 4.iso
/
digests
/
infoham
/
940698.txt
< prev
next >
Wrap
Internet Message Format
|
1994-11-13
|
25KB
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 94 14:33:29 PDT
From: Info-Hams Mailing List and Newsgroup <info-hams@ucsd.edu>
Errors-To: Info-Hams-Errors@UCSD.Edu
Reply-To: Info-Hams@UCSD.Edu
Precedence: Bulk
Subject: Info-Hams Digest V94 #698
To: Info-Hams
Info-Hams Digest Thu, 23 Jun 94 Volume 94 : Issue 698
Today's Topics:
"73's"
Anyone USE DTMF Paging ? (2 msgs)
Bitching and Moaning (2 msgs)
Mobile Antenna Help!
new HAMCOM interface with optical isolation
New licensee (3 msgs)
On-line repeater database
Tech. Question Pool
Waiting for License? Wait some more (2 msgs)
Send Replies or notes for publication to: <Info-Hams@UCSD.Edu>
Send subscription requests to: <Info-Hams-REQUEST@UCSD.Edu>
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: 23 Jun 1994 04:36:51 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!wupost!bigfoot.wustl.edu!cec3!jlw3@network.ucsd.edu
Subject: "73's"
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
Cecil A. Moore -FT-~ (cmoore@ilx018.intel.com) wrote:
: Which reminds me of how you just misused CW. "73" _cannot_ be sent over a
: Continuous Wave, i.e. unchanging frequency, phase, and amplitude. But
: everybody knows what you mean when you say CW even if you are misusing it...
: same with 73.
Well, actually, it is a continuous wave--unchanging frequency phase and
amplitude--the only thing that is changed is the actual presence of the
wave--um I think, at least. There is no modulation of the cw, suppsoedly,
except maybe for the rise and fall times of the signal maybe. . .
--jesse
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 1994 15:49:31 GMT
From: ncar!csn!col.hp.com!news.dtc.hp.com!hpscit.sc.hp.com!cupnews0.cup.hp.com!uppal@ames.arpa
Subject: Anyone USE DTMF Paging ?
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
I thought initially that the DTMF Paging feature was a useful one.
(Enter your 3-digit code, that of the callee too and then your
handie rings when your code is recognized. The handie also tells
you who called). However, I am experiencing the following problems:
1. The alternate to getting paged is either sitting glued to your
handie, or setting up some time aforehand for a QSO. If you
do the latter, you conserve battery power since your handie
is not on most of the time. In the paged mode, you get the
extra convenience of not having to pre-setup a qso time.
You do have to leave the handie on all the time and you would
expect that current drain would be minimal until you are paged.
Unfortunately the current drain in receive with page mode
on is the same as normal receive regardless of who is
on the air (your callee or Joe Q. Random).
2. The two repeaters I have tried do not pass DTMF codes. So while
the paging works fine simplex, I have not been able to get it to work
thru a repeater. Is there a list available of the repeaters that are
DTMF page friendly ? (actually if I find just a couple in the Bay Area
I'd be happy).
So how do you folks use DTMF page ? Do you find it useful ?
Sanjay Uppal
NN9T
------------------------------
Date: 23 Jun 1994 17:54:45 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!usc!math.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!csn!col.hp.com!fc.hp.com!paulc@network.ucsd.edu
Subject: Anyone USE DTMF Paging ?
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
Sanjay Uppal (uppal@cup.hp.com) wrote:
On DTMF paging...
: Unfortunately the current drain in receive with page mode
: on is the same as normal receive regardless of who is
: on the air (your callee or Joe Q. Random).
But, the battery saver should still work when no one is talking. And
since there's no audio, the current drain should be somewhat less even
when someone is talking.
: 2. The two repeaters I have tried do not pass DTMF codes. So while
: the paging works fine simplex, I have not been able to get it to work
: thru a repeater. Is there a list available of the repeaters that are
: DTMF page friendly ? (actually if I find just a couple in the Bay Area
: I'd be happy).
Don't forget that some repeaters will have a sequence to turn on pass-thru
of DTMF tones.
There are a few people around here that consistently use paging, but only
a few (maybe 6 in all). They seem to find it useful...
-Paul C. KG0CZ
------------------------------
Date: 23 Jun 1994 18:12:34 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!noc.near.net!jericho.mc.com!fugu!levine@network.ucsd.edu
Subject: Bitching and Moaning
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
In article GAA18048@ucsd.edu, William=E.=Newkirk%Pubs%GenAv.Mlb@ns14.cca.CR.rockwell.COM () writes:
-->>wait for licenses. ARRL VEC is now saying 16 weeks from the
-->>time the FCC gets the paperwork. Egads! No wonder attracting
-->
--> some more bitching and moaning deleted for brevity....
-->
-->You add in about 10-15 days cycle time for the VE's and VEC'd to do their
-->thing and you are looking at about 18-20 weeks turnaround.
It's for free (the FCC/ARRL/VEs make no money from Ham applications)
and the service is provided by volunteers, yet the masses
continue to complain.
---
------------------------------------------------------------
Bob Levine KD1GG 7J1AIS VK2GYN formerly KA1JFP
levine@mc.com <--Internet email Phone(508) 256-1300 x247
kd1gg@wa1phy.ma <--Packet Mail FAX(508) 256-3599
------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 1994 11:46
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!library.ucla.edu!news.mic.ucla.edu!MVS.OAC.UCLA.EDU!CSMSCST@network.ucsd.edu
Subject: Bitching and Moaning
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
In article <2ucjai$3nj@jericho.mc.com>,
levine@mc.com (Bob Levine) writes:
>It's for free (the FCC/ARRL/VEs make no money from Ham applications)
>and the service is provided by volunteers, yet the masses
>continue to complain.
>
What many new hams don't realize is what it was like before
the volunteer (VE) system when availablity of amateur exams
had dwindled to (in many cases) 4 exams per year in a couple
of dozen cities -- back then, lots of hams had to travel
overnight to take their exams, etc. etc. Makes a couple of
extra weeks of waiting not such a big deal...
-- 73 de Chris Thomas, AA6SQ (ex-WA6HTJ) (CSMSCST@MVS.OAC.UCLA.EDU)
VE with GLAARG, ARRL
------------------------------
Date: 21 Jun 1994 13:34:10 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!wupost!bigfoot.wustl.edu!cec3!jlw3@network.ucsd.edu
Subject: Mobile Antenna Help!
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
In the continuing quest to be somewhat equipped when my license finally
comes and to continue my interest in ham radio before it wanes (I took the
test 6 mos ago, and I'm still waiting--yes there is a reason for the delay--
yes, I've upgraded to general and my code is nearly ready for the advanced/
extra upgrade, and I've not even gotten my first tech-plus license), I'm
trying to decide on a mobile antenna.
I'm not willing to punch a hole in the car. In fact, I'm still a college
student and the title is in my *parents'* name, not mine.
1) What kind of mount should I use? Mag mount? will that damage the paint
if I take it off (I will probably keep the antenna in the trunk when not
at use--I don't want it stolen or damaged) and put it on repeatedly? Trunk
mount? Mirror mount is out of the question--nothing to clamp it to. I have
a Toyota Camry. For the mag/trunk mount, how does the cable feed in? It
seems that if it goes through a door or trunk joint, the cable will be
pinched, at least a little, and after a while, quite a bit.
2) What kind of connector is better? NMO or UHF? What is the difference
(In performance, or strength, etc)?
3) What does spring/coil loading do in relation to performance? Broader
bandwidth? Is there lowered performance vs. a whip b/c of inductive losses
or anything like that?
4) Is there any experience with ANLI Antenna Corp? They have have Model
AT-2B Antenna "200W 1'10" Spring loaded 3/5.5 dBd. NMO (140-155/390-490 MHz)"
that is relatively (to comet, diamond, etc) low price--$40, no mount. No
gain reference was stated.
5) What is the opinion on Diamond's and Comet's and Larson's dualband
antennas (I have an Icom W21AT 440/2m ht)? What is the difference b/w
Comet's FL/SB/B series antennas? Between Diamond's SG/NR antennas? (I
don't know too much about Larson) Are the performance gains for the
"higher-end" antennas of a company worth the price difference for those
more "economical"--especially when they are rated in similar power ratings
and gain.
6) Recommendations? I am currently thinking to get the ANLI AT-2B + magmount
for indoor use on a filing cabinet/cookie sheet because of it's short height
--and I'd also use it as a scanner antenna when doing long (12 hour) drives.
I'd also get a "higher performance" Diamond or Comet antenna exclusively for
use on the car, as they are generally >3 feet long, plus mount. This would
have to be easily removable, as drunk college kids may want such a cute
antenna as a new addition to dorm decor! Or even sober ones. . .
Thanks in advance for any help you can give--oh yeah, is Diamond's mounts
worth the premium you pay for them?
Thanks again!
--jesse
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 1994 15:06:59 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!swrinde!howland.reston.ans.net!news.cac.psu.edu!news.pop.psu.edu!psuvax1!news.ecn.bgu.edu!feenix.metronet.com!copeland@network.ucsd.edu
Subject: new HAMCOM interface with optical isolation
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
Here are two opto circuit I've been playing with for HAMCOM/JVFAX.
They virtually eliminate all computer induced rfi. I've been using
a five foot serial cable and twenty foot audio cable with this
circuit and the results are truly remarkable with JVFAX.
I've used the first circuit successfully, but recommend using the second.
The first can be built with common Radio Shack parts. The second requires
a little more uncommon LM358 and TIL181. The Radio Shack opto RECEIVER
is only rated at 20v but used at 24v and could eventually burn out.
It also may introduced problems since the +9v is not regulated and induces
error into the reference op amp output ... even though it seems to work well.
Perhaps some engineers out there may have some advice.
===============================================================================
+9v
|-------- +9V ________ DTR
9 volt batt. --------- | 1uf | |
----- === | |
| | [ ] 1K [ ] 2.2K
|-------- | |________DSR
GND |C |
+9v ___ |/ - C
| \ / /\/ |
.1 uF |\ | ----- |\-> A
>------| |--*-----------------------|- \ |A |
| |741 \______| |
| | / --------RTS
| --------|+ /
| | |/ |
[ ] 100K [ ] 100K |
| | GND
*--------------*
| |
+9V | |\ |
| -----|- \ |
| |741 \___| +4.5 REFERENCE
100K [ ] | /
|-----------|+ /
100K [ ] |/
|
|
GND
===============================================================================
INFARED EMITTER INFARED DETECTOR
(clear) (dark)
---------- ----------
| | | |
| |__ | | | |__ | |
| | | | | | | |
| -- | | | -- | |
| | | | | | | |
---------- ----------
| | | |
| |
These are available at Radio Shack as a pair for $1.99 (#276-142).
This shows which is the Anode and which is the Cathode, not clear on
the package.
The LED and DETECTOR must be positioned right up against each other and
exactly aligned to get maximum light transfer. The sides with the little
lense like dots must be placed together.
===============================================================================
I'd recommend this second circuit for more stability and possibly accuracy.
RS232 connector size ----> 25 9
+9v -- --
|
o +9V ----o DTR 20
/ SPST SWITCH | |
o SW1 | |
| R1 [ ] 1K R2 [ ] 2.2K
9V *-------- | |
BATTERY | | | |----o DSR 6
--------- --- C1 |1 TIL181 |5
----- --- 1UF .......................
| | . |C U2 |C .
* ------- . ___ |/ - .
| . \ / /\/ | .
GND . ----- |\-> .
+9v . |A |A .
| .......................
AUDIO 100 nF 6|\ |8 |2 |4
o------| |--*------------|- \ | |
| | U1 \_7____| ----o RTS 4
| 5| /
| ----|+ / LM358 2|\
| | |/ |4 ---|- \
R3 [ ] R4 [ ] | | | U1 \_1___ (not used)
GND 100K | 100K| | | 3| /
o-----------*-------*--------*------------*---|+ / LM358
| |/
GND
===============================================================================
| ** NOTE** |
| After constructing, measure LM358 pin 7 with no audio on the input. |
| It should be high (~8v), if it is low (~0v) it will drain the battery |
| in only 20 hours or less. |
| |
| To correct this: Disconnect R1 from +9v and reconnect to U1 pin 7. |
| Disconnect U1 pin 2 and reconnect to GND. |
| |
===============================================================================
The LM358 is a single supply opamp and can be substituted with the LM2904,
LM158, or LM258. (The dual supply 741 can not be used as a substitute.)
The opto isolator IC can be substitued for many other types. The 4N35 has
been tested successfully. The discrete infared emitter/detector from
Radio Shack has been tested successfully.
I tried to use a darlington opto (TIL113), but couldn't get it to work.
A darlington opto circuit would only require 1.5ma average. That would
make battery life about 133 hours. Maybe I'll try again later.
===============================================================================
MORE NOTES:
The 9v battery could be substitued with a 9 or 12 vdc adapter. However I've
found the clearest pictures occur when both the radio and HAMCOM are running
off batteries ... at 6am 8).
A 9v battery should last about 50 hours while audio is present (assuming 200ma
hours for a battery). If no audio is present the battery will last 400 hours.
The battery life could be a problem for people who leave HAMCOM running
all night using the timed FAX option. Battery would only last a week.
If you have any advice or knowledge that could improve this, please let
me know.
copeland@metronet.com
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
| copeland@metronet.com |
----------------------------------------------------------------------
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
| copeland@metronet.com |
----------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: 23 Jun 1994 15:32:16 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!library.ucla.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!newsrelay.iastate.edu!news.iastate.edu!wjturner@network.ucsd.edu
Subject: New licensee
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
In article <2uc6nd$t9e@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu>, dhughes@prairienet.org (Dan Hughes) writes:
|>
|> I took my FCC technician test Sunday, March 20, and my license was issued
|> Tuesday, March 21 (should arrive in the mail tomorrow??). That's 13 1/2
|> weeks. ---Dan, N9XDK
|> --
WOW!! One day (20 March to 21 March) for the paperwork to go from the
VE team to the FCC!!! This must be a new record... :)
(I assume you meant Tuesday, 21 June...)
------------------------------
Date: 23 Jun 1994 16:30:43 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!swrinde!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!prairienet.org!dhughes@network.ucsd.edu
Subject: New licensee
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
I'm trying this again, this time with the correct months: Took my tech
test Sunday, March 20, and my license was issued Tuesday, June 21. Now
waiting anxiously each day for the mailman (or to be PC, the
personperson). Thirteen and a half weeks from test to call assignment,
and I have no idea when my paperwork actually arrived at Gettysburg.
---Dan N9XDK
--
------------------------------
Date: 23 Jun 1994 17:26:47 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!ceylon!news2.near.net!info-server.bbn.com!news!levin@network.ucsd.edu
Subject: New licensee
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
In article <2ucdbj$bse@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu> dhughes@prairienet.org (Dan Hughes) writes:
I'm trying this again, this time with the correct months: Took my tech
test Sunday, March 20, and my license was issued Tuesday, June 21. Now
waiting anxiously each day for the mailman (or to be PC, the
personperson). Thirteen and a half weeks from test to call assignment,
and I have no idea when my paperwork actually arrived at Gettysburg.
---Dan N9XDK
Congratulations! Don't wait too anxiously; I assume you discovered
your call by phone. Unless they've changed more than just the
computer program, the licenses are granted on Tuesday and printed and
mailed on Thursday. Don't be disappointed if it doesn't actually come
till Saturday or Monday.
Best / JBL
=
Nets: levin@bbn.com | "Oops."
pots: (617)873-3463 |
ARS: KD1ON | -- Lothos
------------------------------
Date: 23 Jun 1994 17:17:33 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!newsfeed.pitt.edu!dsinc!netnews.upenn.edu!netnews.upenn.edu!yee@network.ucsd.edu
Subject: On-line repeater database
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
What remains of the repeater database is availabl for ftp from
mipgsun.mipg.upenn.edu:/pub/yee/rptr01x.Z The current version is 0.10
I am trying to find time to put out version 0.11 It will containa a
few more entries. As always, I am hoping to get input for additional
entries.
Unfortunately, I am unable to distribute version 0.03 any more. I believe
that copies do exist out there though.
--
Medical Image Processing Group | 73 de Conway Yee, N2JWQ
411 Blockley Hall | EMAIL : yee@mipg.upenn.edu
423 Guardian Drive | TELEPHONE : 1 (215) 662-6780
Philadelphia, PA 19104-6021 (USA) | FAX : 1 (215) 898-9145
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 94 09:32:47 EST
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!dog.ee.lbl.gov!agate!iat.holonet.net!dbot.uu.holonet.net!sysop@network.ucsd.edu
Subject: Tech. Question Pool
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
I2>I'm looking for the most recent tech. question pool. If anyone
I2>can provide an electronic copy, or point me to a source
I2>for them in print, I'd be very appreciative. Also, does
I2>the tech no code exam include the novice exam?
I2>Thanks for the help,
I2>2575brooksr@vms.csd.mu.edu
You can get the latest questions and the study Program FCCSTUDY on my
BBS, Database of Tennessee, its free access, I have over 2100 ham
related files on-line. The number is 901-855-4124 for up to 14400 bps
or 901-855-4127
73 de Tim KD4PYN Sysop
* 901-855-4124 14400 BPS * 901-855-4127 28800 V.FC * Running MajorBBS v.6.2 *
* dbot.uu.holonet.net
------------------------------
Date: 23 Jun 1994 05:49:54 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!wupost!bigfoot.wustl.edu!cec3!jlw3@network.ucsd.edu
Subject: Waiting for License? Wait some more
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
George Guillory (guillory@blkbox.com) wrote:
: For those of you who are lurking in the group and waiting for
: your license, I have bad news.
: I just talked to the ARRL VEC and they said that the current
: wait is 16 weeks from the time that the FCC gets the paperwork
: from ARRL.
: The VEC manager reports that there are 16,000 license actions
: pending at the FCC. As reported previously there ar 1 or 2
: people processing the applications once a week.
: Perhaps I should have titled this message
: "DEATH OF A NEW HAM"
No doubt. Now is 16 weeks for starting now or ending now? That is,
Does it mean that if the 610 was submitted 12 weeks ago I have to wait
another 4, or that if I submit the 610 today I have to wait 16?
--jesse (27 weeks and counting)
------------------------------
Date: 23 Jun 1994 05:57:47 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!swrinde!gatech!howland.reston.ans.net!wupost!bigfoot.wustl.edu!cec3!jlw3@network.ucsd.edu
Subject: Waiting for License? Wait some more
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
I just (jlw3@cec3.wustl.edu) wrote:
: George Guillory (guillory@blkbox.com) wrote:
: : The VEC manager reports that there are 16,000 license actions
: : pending at the FCC. As reported previously there ar 1 or 2
: : people processing the applications once a week.
: : Perhaps I should have titled this message
: : "DEATH OF A NEW HAM"
: No doubt. Now is 16 weeks for starting now or ending now? That is,
: Does it mean that if the 610 was submitted 12 weeks ago I have to wait
: another 4, or that if I submit the 610 today I have to wait 16?
: --jesse (27 weeks and counting)
Oh yeah, before you start emailing that 27 weeks is too long and I should
complain, etc., I know. But I called about 2 weeks ago and the person I
talked to said they were processing 300 applications a day. I assumed that
was correct. Now, 16000 actions divided by 300 per day = 53.3 days, divided
by 5 business days a week = 10.7 weeks. I still like the 12 week quote,
but I guess reality reigns. The VEC told me (3 months ago) to call Today
(as in 23 June) and check on the status so I'll do that again and listen to
the recording to see the waiting time they say. . .
------------------------------
End of Info-Hams Digest V94 #698
******************************