QRZ! Ham Radio 5/QRZ Ham Radio Callsign Database - Volume 5.iso/digests/infoham/941061.txt

Internet Message Format | 1994-11-13 | 23.0 KB

Date: Sun, 25 Sep 94 16:38:59 PDT
From: Info-Hams Mailing List and Newsgroup <[e-mail]>
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Precedence: Bulk
Subject: Info-Hams Digest V94 #1061
To: Info-Hams


Info-Hams Digest            Sun, 25 Sep 94       Volume 94 : Issue 1061

Today's Topics:
                AM Sensitivity Problem with TM-241A ??
                Car warantees and 2-way radio: Summary
                        DOES ANYONE USE 2M AM?
               J pole antenna program, IBM PC, twinlead
                     Question on Kenwood TM-733A
                         Repeater on 147.555
          Restrictive Covenants: I can't have *any* antenna?
                               testing
               The repeater operating on simplex freqs
                         Wouff Hong (2 msgs)
                      YOUTH AMATEUR RADIO CLUB?
           ZAPPING dead Nicad Packs with my quick charger??

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: 25 Sep 94 21:44:00 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: AM Sensitivity Problem with TM-241A ??
To: [e-mail]

Deane,
its interesting you have this problem. I bought a TM241A about a year ago,
and AM receive is really bad. However, reading in an article ( I think it
was in CQ) they said that AM sensitivity is bad thus you can only use it
 near airports etc.
Now you say your second 241A does not have this problem and I realised that
there may be a change someone can do to improve AM sensitivity (perhaps
Kenwood did the change for later models). I looked in the schematics and
found nothing.
If you get answer on your question,please forward it.
Thanks,
Peter Vekinis, KC1QF
[e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 21 Sep 1994 11:58:30 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!ucsnews!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv![e-mail]
Subject: Car warantees and 2-way radio: Summary
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Greg Dolkas) writes:
>
>I plan on mounting the rig (Kenwood 733 is current favorite, not purchased
>yet) in the dash where the CD player would have gone.  It's right under the
>radio.

Be careful with in dash mounting that there is sufficient air circulation
around the radio (you may have to add a fan and a bit of fabricated ducting
as a friend of mine did). That little Kenwood gets real hot during transmit,
and the heat has to be carried away or it goes off frequency (and eventually
burns up).

>The biggest problem I have is what to do about an antenna.  The car has a
>sunroof and is a hatchback.  There isn't a lip anywhere that is the right
>shape to handle a lip-mount.  A mag-mount might work at the bottom of the
>rear window but there isn't enough gap between the hatch and the car for the
>wire to snake through.  I'm not yet brave enough to Drill The Hole, either.
>Glass mounting an antenna on a side window was suggested, and shot down as
>beaming RF right into the car (and me!), not to mention the problems with
>feed line radiation that those things tend to have.  Any suggestions on this
>topic would be appreciated.

Take a key and go along both sides of the car making big scratches. Now
it's not pristine any more, so you can get out the Black and Decker and
DRILL THAT HOLE. (The keying is optional, but if that's what it takes to
get your nerve up, do it, someone will anyway sooner or later.)

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | uunet!rsiatl!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     | [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 25 Sep 94 01:42:00 -0500
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!dog.ee.lbl.gov!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.infi.net!grouper.exchange.com!exchange![e-mail]
Subject: DOES ANYONE USE 2M AM?
To: [e-mail]

From: [e-mail]
To  : [e-mail]
Subj: Re: Does anyone use 2M AM?

Patrick,

P>  Yes, this is a serious question :-). In October '92, I became the proud
 >owner of a Hallicrafters 2M AM radio (I forget the exact model number). At
 >any rate, the price was good, and I needed something to play with :-)

        (deleted)

P>  Obviously, I'm not planning to get a "lot" of use out of the thing,
 >but I would like to know if anybody else has any experience with VHF AM.
 >Anybody want to confess?

        I just bought a Hallicrafter SR-46 6M AM rig at the Virginia
Beach Hamfest.  It says it puts out 65 Watts, but I have been told that
a previous owner only got 10 watts out of it.  I won't say how much I
paid for it, but I will say, it does light up and the knobs turn!  What
can I say, it looked lonely, and I thought I might as well use all my
limited band privileges I can get.  I now have 2M FM phone and packet,
440 FM phone, and 6M AM phone.  Only 23 cm and 220 left to go.

        No Antenna yet so I haven't pressed the PTT.  Is 6M AM vertical
or horizontal?

73 de Bob KD4ARD


 * QMPro 1.0 94-6871 * Eagles may fly but weasels aren't sucked into jets

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

Date: Sat, 24 Sep 1994 05:49:51 GMT
From: ucsnews!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!zip.eecs.umich.edu!yeshua.marcam.com!charnel.ecst.csuchico.edu!csusac![e-mail]
Subject: J pole antenna program, IBM PC, twinlead
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Laurence Gene Battin) writes:
>> If you have a PC, the below uuencoded files will do any VHF and
>> UHF freq you want.  Jpole.exe is the program, Jpole.pif if you
>
>Nice program! One question though (maybe I'm dense or something):
>Which part of the 300 ohm line does the center conductor of the
>coax attach to, the part with the 1/4" gap or the other side, or
>does it matter?
>Tnx.

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

Date: Wed, 21 Sep 1994 11:37:22 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!ucsnews!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv![e-mail]
Subject: Question on Kenwood TM-733A
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>This may be a stupid question, but I am new to the game.  I have a Kenwood
>TM-733A which I plan to use in my car with a dual band antenna.  The radio
>has a separate output for each band, and the manual does not address the
>use of a dual band antenna.  Do I have to spring for a duplexer?  If so
>it may be more cost effective to just buy an additional 440Mhz antenna,
>and use it along with the dual bander operating on 2 meters only.
>
>Any advice from the net?

Yep. Either spring for a duplexer, or run two antennas. It's likely to
be better to use the duplexer and a single centrally mounted antenna
than to try to use two antennas mounted in non-optimal positions.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | uunet!rsiatl!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     | [e-mail]

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

Date: 25 Sep 1994 08:11:25 -0500
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!dog.ee.lbl.gov!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!news.uh.edu!oac4.hsc.uth.tmc.edu!admin5.hsc.uth.tmc.edu![e-mail]
Subject: Repeater on 147.555
To: [e-mail]

(This discussion belongs on .policy; followups redirected.)

Ken, don't tar all coordinating bodies with your broad brush. The Texas
VHF-FM Society does not allow transfer of coordinations except from an
individual to a club, and that only because many clubs had their repeaters
coordinated by the individual trustees in the days when coordinations were
always issued to individuals. We do not allow the practice you're
complaining about. We also require trustees to renew coordinations annually,
and have procedures in place for revoking a coordination if the repeater is
in fact not on the air for over 90 days - but someone has to complain first.

I have no direct experience with coordinators in other areas, but we're not
all bad.
--
Jay Maynard, EMT-P, K5ZC, PP-ASEL | Never ascribe to malice that which can
[e-mail]   | adequately be explained by stupidity.
              The US Constitution: 1789-1994. RIP.

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

Date: Tue, 20 Sep 1994 12:18:11 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!ucsnews!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv![e-mail]
Subject: Restrictive Covenants: I can't have *any* antenna?
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]> Michael R. Dow <[e-mail]> writes:
>
>My wife and I are looking at a new house... Its a nice house... Nice
>neighborhood, nice neighbors... You know, the kind of house that's
>just... well..... Nice.  EXCEPT!
>
>There's this one little clause in the deed restrictions:
>
>GENERAL RESTRICTIONS:
>
>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, except by
>Declarant, without the prior written approval of the architectural review
>committee.
>
>
>Pardon me, but I thought this wasn't legal?  Can someone post, email or
>point me to relevant legal precedent which makes the clause invalid?

Sorry, it is legal. Private contractual agreements aren't overturned
by PRB-1, or any other radio related statute. Your only recourse is
to not agree to such restrictions at the time of purchase. Be sure
to tell the seller *why* you won't buy their nice house as well. The
only way to beat these restrictions is to make builders who insist
upon them lose enough business so they'll quit including them in
their deeds.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | uunet!rsiatl!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     | [e-mail]

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

Date: Sat, 24 Sep 1994 14:57:43 +8
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!ucsnews!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!cs.utexas.edu!csc.ti.com!tilde.csc.ti.com!barracuda.dadd.ti.com!wasmir.tipi.ti.com![e-mail]
Subject: testing
To: [e-mail]

testing...testing...JVFAX 7.0 is found in ftp.funet.fi:
/pub/ham/misc/jvfax70.zip

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

Date: Mon, 19 Sep 1994 11:58:02 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!ucsnews!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv![e-mail]
Subject: The repeater operating on simplex freqs
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>With regard to the topic of a named repeater that has
>taken over two simplex channels, I submit the following
>article that appeared over on r.r.a.policy; this very
>important post states that the FCC recognizes the ARRL
>band plans as within the `Good Operating Practice'
>requirement as set forth in Part 97.
>
>Jeff NH6IL
[snip]
>Yes, the band plans "are generated within the amateur ranks, not from the
>desk of the FCC" (from 9th Edition, 1993, FCC Rule Book Guide to the FCC
>Regulations.  Published by the ARRL page 10-11).
>
>The FCC also stated in a letter to a major repeater council "The only national
>planning for the Amateur Radio service frequencies that has come to our
>attention is that done by the American Radio Relay League.......In view of
>this widespread acceptance of their band plans, we conclude that any amateur
>who selects a station transmitting frequency not in harmony with those plans
>is not operating in accord with good amateur practice."  (same source as
>before except on page 10-10).

This is what the ARRL says, but what they neglect to mention is the
firestorm that followed those statements. As most of you know, the
country is divided on 2 meter band plans with nearly half going one
way, and the others going the other way, IE 15 kHz inverted splits
versus 20 kHz upright splits. What's not reported here is how rapidly
the FCC backpedaled from this position that the ARRL plan is *the*
plan once that situation was made known to them. Now they understand
that band plans are *regional*, and not handed down from on high by
the ARRL. Of course you wouldn't expect to see that in a ARRL publication.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | uunet!rsiatl!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     | [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 19 Sep 1994 12:06:41 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!ucsnews!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv![e-mail]
Subject: Wouff Hong
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Bruce Pea) writes:
[snip]
>Well, during this conversation, one of these gentlemen mentioned
>something about a secret radio organization called the Wouff
>Hong <sp?>. Is there really such an organization or were these
>guys just pulling my leg??
>
>If such an organization does exist, what's the deal with it??

Yes, such a secret society exists within the ARRL. Like the
Illumini, the Trilateralists, and the New World Order, this
secret society's mission is to undermine freedom, truth, justice,
and the American Way by imposing a rigid tradition on amateur radio,
centered around worship of certain beeping sounds.



















:-) :-) :-)

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | uunet!rsiatl!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     | [e-mail]

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

Date: Sat, 24 Sep 1994 03:56:13 GMT
From: news.Hawaii.Edu!munnari.oz.au!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!ulowell!umassd.edu!mdcs.umassd.edu![e-mail]
Subject: Wouff Hong
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Bruce Pea) writes:
>I just got back from the Peoria, IL hamfest. While I was there
>I got into a very plesant conversation with three older, meaning
>late fifties early sixties age, hams. If I didn't do anything
>else except talk to these guys the trip would have been worth-
>while. It was a lot of fun talking with these guys and I guess
>we talked for a couple of hours all about ham radio.
>
>Well, during this conversation, one of these gentlemen mentioned
>something about a secret radio organization called the Wouff
>Hong <sp?>. Is there really such an organization or were these
>guys just pulling my leg??
>
>If such an organization does exist, what's the deal with it??
>
>Thanks -
>
>de Bruce N9WKE
>
>--
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------
>|        =      @                 |  email #1: [e-mail]         |
>|      =     _  \                 |  email #2: [e-mail]  |
Hi Bruce,
Name here is Sonny (Ka1esg) in New Bedford, Ma. Those guys were not pulling your
leg. There is such an organization, and they usually have them at the Ham Radio
Conventions. It's suppose to be like a horror story and if you sit through it
all at the end they will give you a secret password. The meetings are always
held at midnight in a very dark room. It was fun although I have only been once
and that was many years ago. If you get to Dayton I am sure they will have one
there, or if your in my area next weekend they have a Convention in Boxboro,
Mass. which is not too far from Boston, and I know for sure they will have it
there. Wish I could tell you more, but it's all a secret. Hi Hi. Take one in and
find out for yourself. 73 and if you care to respond my e-mail address is

[e-mail]
Bye Bye for now..  De Ka1esg Sonny now clear....

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

Date: Sun, 25 Sep 94 01:13:00 -0500
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!dog.ee.lbl.gov!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.infi.net!grouper.exchange.com!exchange![e-mail]
Subject: YOUTH AMATEUR RADIO CLUB?
To: [e-mail]

From: bob,[e-mail]
To  : all
Subj: Youth Amateur Radio Club

William E. Newkirk was replying to Todd Brown, when I butted in:

>m a 16 year old ham. I've had my license for 7 years, and have never
>>heard of a youth amateur radio club. Does anyone know of any? Any information
>>would be appreciated.
>>Todd  [e-mail]

>basically the problem is that everyone grows up.  and there has been a serious
>lack of recruiting for folks under the age of 30 for whatever reason for a
>long time.

>you could be the first in a new organization. then again, you'll be in QCWA
>when you are 34 (in 2012) whereas i'll be 41 (in 1997) when i'm eligible.

        Kenwood Radio had a program a few years ago to get youth
interested in ham radio called 'Kenwood Kids'.  There were free items
for the clubs that sponsored youth groups, and even a few large radio
donations to some lucky clubs.  The Virginia Beach Amateur Radio Club
(VBARC), in Va. Beach, Va. started a youth group at that time and it is
going strong! Many of the members are the sons and daughters of hams,
some had their calls before the group started, some got them after
joining the group. Some still don't have a call, but are trying.  One of
the youngest members of the group, David KC4ZHU, got his call in 1991
when he was eight.  I hope this helps a bit.

73 de Bob KD4ARD
[e-mail]


 * QMPro 1.0 94-6871 * Eagles may fly but weasels aren't sucked into jets

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

Date: Tue, 20 Sep 1994 12:34:22 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!ucsnews!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv![e-mail]
Subject: ZAPPING dead Nicad Packs with my quick charger??
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]> jwl@walter (James W. Lynch) writes:
>Here's a question on the same theme.  There appears to be a phenomenon
>associated with nicads that lets you charge them at a fairly high
>rate successfully, if you watch the voltage and disconnect the charge
>(or reduce it) when the voltage starts down.  I hooked up my slow charger
>to my BP-7 and watched the voltage.  It never peaked, it just kept going
>up.  Did I not leave it on long enough or does the phenomenon not work
>at a 0.1 C charge.  I was afraid to leave it on more than 30 hours...

You missed it. The dip is slight, a few millivolts, and you have to
measure it under load, not while charging voltage is present. The
dip is also short, continued charging will cause the surface charge
voltage to go higher after the dip occurs. Chargers using this method
of detecting charge status are generally pulse chargers that momentarily
apply a load and sample the cell voltage after each charging pulse.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | uunet!rsiatl!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     | [e-mail]

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

Date: Fri, 23 Sep 1994 12:50:47 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!ucsnews!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv![e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

References <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>ans.n
Reply-To : [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject : Re: Why is aviation COM VHF *amplitude* modulated?

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Jeffrey Herman) writes:
>I would think that SSB would be the perfect mode for VHF aviation comms
>since there's no capture effect when two stations xmt at the same time;
>HF aviation comms have of course been using SSB for decades.

No, for two reasons. First, air traffic centers have DF equipment that
depend on a steady carrier to work. This is used very often to find
"lost" general aviation aircraft. And second, keeping all those radios
on channel closely enough to be intelligble on SSB would be a major
chore. That's why ACSSB was invented, to allow a pilot carrier for AFC
(and compandoring). If a change were to be made, ACSSB would be the
logical choice.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | uunet!rsiatl!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     | [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 25 Sep 1994 07:24:16 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!usc!nic-nac.CSU.net!charnel.ecst.csuchico.edu!csusac!csus.edu!netcom.com![e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

References <35v377$[e-mail]>, <35v21v$[e-mail]>, <35vj0f$[e-mail]>us.edu
Subject : Re: Restrictive Covenants: I can't have *any* antenna?

The sad part about these covenants is that hams cannot seriously fight these
through market forces. For each ham that walks away from a home sale due to
antennae restrictions, there are plenty of non-hams who aren't bothered by
the restriction. What we need is what Georgia has- a law exempting hams from
any new covenants restricting amateur antennae.


Random thought:
Is antennas an acceptable substitute for antennae? I have to bite my tongue
to remember to use the latter. It just feels weird to me.

--
Bruce James Robert Linley  ----  [e-mail]  ----  Amateur radio: KE6EQZ

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

End of Info-Hams Digest V94 #1061
******************************