From wang!elf.wang.com!ucsd.edu!info-hams-relay Tue Jan 1 18:44:24 1991 remote from tosspot Received: by tosspot (1.63/waf) via UUCP; Tue, 01 Jan 91 19:49:55 EST for lee Received: from somewhere by elf.wang.com id aa05045; Tue, 1 Jan 91 18:44:23 GMT Received: from ucsd.edu by uunet.UU.NET (5.61/1.14) with SMTP id AA11927; Tue, 1 Jan 91 08:31:22 -0500 Received: by ucsd.edu; id AA10429 sendmail 5.64/UCSD-2.1-sun Tue, 1 Jan 91 04:30:22 -0800 for claris!netcom!teda!fester.dnet!rideout Received: by ucsd.edu; id AA10414 sendmail 5.64/UCSD-2.1-sun Tue, 1 Jan 91 04:30:19 -0800 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oc -odb -oQ/var/spool/lqueue -oi -finfo-hams-relay info-hams-list Message-Id: <9101011230.AA10414@ucsd.edu> Date: Tue, 1 Jan 91 04:30:15 PST From: Info-Hams Mailing List and Newsgroup Reply-To: Info-Hams@ucsd.edu Subject: Info-Hams Digest V91 #2 To: Info-Hams@ucsd.edu Info-Hams Digest Tue, 1 Jan 91 Volume 91 : Issue 2 Today's Topics: FCC Rumor -- (But what if it is true?) Ham clubs 'n such (was Re: Rumors of ARRL ) N8EMR BBS INFO Open Letter to ARRL Pres. Larry Price RF and the outer limits... Strange interference (2 msgs) 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: 1 Jan 91 05:09:20 GMT From: zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!unix.cis.pitt.edu!dsinc!wells!k3tx@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (Dave Heller) Subject: FCC Rumor -- (But what if it is true?) To: info-hams@ucsd.edu In article <895.277F609A@w8grt.fidonet.org>, jim.grubs@w8grt.fidonet.org (Jim Grubs) writes: > And I repeate the same. > > > What does Frank Spicer - totally blind and deaf, and no youngster either > > - thinkof it? Ask him. He EARNED his Extra. > > Do you remember Clif Korne, K9EAB, now S.K., the ultra proficient ham in > > the > > iron lung? He didn't need a waiver; probably couldn't have got one > > because > > he could pass the test without. > > So did I, remember? That still doesn't justify the disgusting jokes about > druggies and being dropped on the head. > so did I. And somewhere I heard a comment that the proportion of higher-class licensees from the Courage Center in MN is higher than the overall ham population. Is this significant? > > The real answer is: It's true that -maybe- some handicapped persons > > can't pass > > the code test because of some physical failing. > > Maybe? What about dyslexics who can't tell the difference between dots and > dashes no matter how they are transmitted - sound, light, vibrations, etc. And because they're dyslectic they're automatically entitled to something - ham ticket or whatever? That's sort of extreme. What if they're just plain not smart enough to pass the test? The line has to be drawn somewhere. > > > And the whole thing started because Pres. Bush got a bug up his ass and > > sent > > a memo to FCC. > > Bush got bugged because it took a Arab king to make him aware of the > insensitivity of his own administration. This leads directly to the comment (sort of out of context) that now the A-rabs are running this country. But - *insensitivity of his own administratio>???* Bush seems to have stuck his nose into things without thinking first. > > > What credentials does the average MD or DO have for deciding whether you > > or I > > can't pass the CW test "because of ***"? > > Depends on how well they have the problem explained to them, I guess. If you > tell a neurologist you're having trouble telling the difference between short > tones and long tones, he'd probably be able to handle that. If you tell him > you can't tell the difference between .-.. and ..-. he'd understand that. > > > I will repeat: it's a farce. Is your muscular distrophy > > limiting you > > more than Frank Spicer's blindness/deafness? Or maybe K3KTH. I haven't > > Ding bust it, we're not talking about sensory or motor handicaps. We're > talking about neurological handicaps that make PERCEPTION and INTERPRETATION > of sensory input difficult or impossible. > Repeating: everyone should be given a license? If he can pass the test, fine. If he can't, find a friendly quack. About the full >30 privileges for n/c Techs: I haven't seen anything specific about ARRL fighting it -- all I've heard from where I sit is that the directors wanted to see the actual ruling before commenting. Sorta makes sense. If everyone (possibly excepting you and me) did that there would be a lot less misinformation circulated. But if any class of newcomers is not mainstreamed we have the makings of a disruptive mess. F.E., the Novices on CW always have had their own distinctive language. 10M N/T phone sounds quite a bit different from the other phone bands. How about the item (1 Jan W5YI report) about putting a stop to re-taking a test element at the same session over and over again. We don't allow it at our sessions, but there are some "easy" VE groups around who consistently pass those who've failed the same test at every other session in the area. Case in point: WA3xxx made a 35% on an element, and went to X VE session the very next day and passed. About the MD/DO contingent giving waivers: The FCC (via W5YI report) used the certifying for handicapped parking as an example; this has proven to be a trace better than self-certification, but not much better. You didn't like my examples (which were taken from real life locally)? Just watch what ends up getting waivers. ------------------------------ Date: 1 Jan 91 06:41:50 GMT From: att!emory!rsiatl!jgd@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (John G. DeArmond) Subject: Ham clubs 'n such (was Re: Rumors of ARRL ) To: info-hams@ucsd.edu allbery@NCoast.ORG (Brandon S. Allbery KB8JRR) writes: >As quoted from <1759@ke4zv.UUCP> by gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman): >+--------------- >| One of my favorite groups specifically >| eschews Robert in our charter, and we don't charge dues. We find that passing >| the hat when we need to do something works very well. We don't have a >| President either, preferring a Lord of Chaos as our leader. >+--------------- >Unfortunately, I belong to one of those moribund clubs --- there being few >alternatives. Fortunately, however, there is a growing split in the club and >I suspect no-code will cause it to come to fruition --- those many of us who >want to embrace the future will likely end up splitting off and forming our >own club, leaving the "Retirees on Radio" (my name for the current mess) to go >to hell in their own handbasket. Brandon, Let me suggest an alternative. The favorite group that Gary mentioned is the one that he and I started about a year ago centered around our new 443.65 repeater here in atlanta (where the REAL hams hang out :-). We had gotten fed up with the degraded condition of our old club, repeater and general conversation and decided to do something about it. So we started brainstorming and looked around at what had worked in other areas. One of the most successful enthusiast/professional groups in Atlanta is the Atlanta Unix Users' Group. There is no club, no officers and no structure. One person, Lindsay Cleveland, handles planning the programs and scheduling the room. Whenever he needs postage money or whatever, he announces it at the meeting and we all pass the hat. Conspicuously absent is the political bickering, the power plays, the cliques and all the other bad stuff traditionally associated with enthusiast associations. We decided to take the same approach. I scrounged up a power supply and chassis, Gary scrounged some duplexers, KM4BA came up with radios suitable for conversion to repeater service, I fabricated the antenna mount, KI4XO came up with a network analyzer to tune the assembly with and a host of others contributed the other misc items. We passed the hat in order to buy the controller, crystals, antenna and misc hardware. Since I'm physically the largest of the group :-), I took charge of fundraising. We pulled off the whole process in a few months and are now looking toward remote receivers and/or linking with another repeater on the other side of town plus having a hot standby repeater on the ground. Decisions get hashed out on the air or over coffee at the local Waffle House. We consider the system to be totally open. We'll give a copy of the repeater control codes to just about anyone who asks. But since there is no patch or bleeps, boops or squeeks on the repeater, there is little to control. This system is working marvelously. We have a nice, well engineered repeater with a very collegial environment. Our biggest problem so far has been the weather which has made it rough finishing the tower work. Since there are no club meetings or officers, there is no opportunity for anyone to get mad or to play politics. If someone wants to make a change in something, we say fine! If we all like the idea, we'll help out. If not, well, try it and see what happens. if it's good, it stays otherwise we talk you out of it. On the other hand, if you get pissed off at the way things are, there is no organization to direct your anger at. The nice thing about this non-organization is that when people are motivated, there are no impediments in their way. And when people get burned out as I did awhile back, others migrate in to fill the void. And when the burn- out is over, you can migrate back in again. This scheme is quite similiar to the Usenet and it works for the same reasons Usenet does. The other thing that this non-organization does is plainly recognize the fact that most things get done by a handful of people. There is no pretense of a non-producers being a part of the group because the group by definition consists at any moment of those that are actually doing something. Consider giving it a shot. John -- John De Armond, WD4OQC | "Purveyors of speed to the Trade" (tm) Rapid Deployment System, Inc. | Home of the Nidgets (tm) Marietta, Ga | "To be engaged in opposing wrong offers but {emory,uunet}!rsiatl!jgd | a slender guarantee of being right." ------------------------------ Date: 1 Jan 91 06:00:33 GMT From: n8emr!root@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (Root) Subject: N8EMR BBS INFO To: info-hams@ucsd.edu The N8EMR Ham bbs is online to serve the needs of the amateur radio operators.. 12/5/90 Columbus and HBBS are now available via PC pursuit dialout. 10/21/90 New version of the BBS is now online... New protocals now supported including ZMODEM!!!!!!! use ? for help on new commands 7/15/90: This BBS is now part of the AMSAT BBS network.. HOW TO ACCESS THE N8EMR HAM RADIO TELEPHONE BBS !!! System Name: N8EMR Phone: 614-895-2553 Login: hbbs Data Settings: 8 Bits, NO Parity, 1 Stop Bit Times: 24hrs IP Address: 44.70.0.1 Amateur radio annonymous ftp access is available via the ohio netrom/ip network. CMHIP is the Netrom node Id and is known by most of the nodes in ohio. (its slow but it works) This is only via the ohio packet network. This sytem is not available via the "INTERNET". To access the system via the dialup, at the login prompt type hbbs (lower case only), you will then enter the BBS program. Follow the directions from the bbs prompts. I attempt to keep the latest and greatest HAM software on-line, and encourage all to upload Here is some of software that is available for downloading. KA9Q TCP/IP Software for various computers, PC,atari-st,Mac, amgia, unix MORSE CODE Tutors Modifications for HAM Rigs and Scanners DX and contesting programs Various amateur Newsletters Packet Terminal programs AMSAT news and satellite keplerian elements Files and messages areas for AMSAT, GENERAL topics, PACKET, KA9Q, MODS to various rigs, TVRO,SCANNER and SWL. Many mb of of file of interest to the radio operator. Question or comments to Gary W. Sanders (gws@n8emr or ...!osu-cis!n8emr!gws), 72277,1325 N8EMR @ W8CQK (ip addr) 44.70.0.1 [Ohio AMPR address coordinator] HAM BBS (1200/2400/9600/V.32/PEP/MNP=L5) 614-895-2553 Voice: 614-895-2552 (eves/weekends) ------------------------------ Date: 1 Jan 91 05:05:16 GMT From: zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!emory!athena.cs.uga.edu!mcovingt@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (Michael A. Covington) Subject: Open Letter to ARRL Pres. Larry Price To: info-hams@ucsd.edu I got a reply from Larry Price today. He said that because the Report and Order had not yet been issued, the ARRL could not yet make a statement in support of the new move. This is a lot weaker than what the news release originally indicated he was saying. ------------------------------ Date: 1 Jan 91 07:44:40 GMT From: qualcom.qualcomm.com!fpa@ucsd.edu (Franklin Antonio) Subject: RF and the outer limits... To: info-hams@ucsd.edu karn@envy.bellcore.com (Phil R. Karn) writes: >rharel@fab8.intel.com (CAL-LAB (MS:JER2-85 TEL:7589)) writes: >>Ever wonder why after all the billions of dollars and countless man-hours >>spent on searching for extra-terrestrial RF signals that we've come up with >>NOTHING ! ? > >Actually, there's a simple explanation for having heard nothing: so >far we've only listened to a tiny fraction of the search space >(duration, frequency, spatial direction) with enough sensitivity to >detect other earth-like civilizations. Phil is exactly right. There is another dimension that Phil didn't mention that I have always thought to be important: signal structure. The SETI guys look for extremely narrowband signals. Often they talk about 1 Hz wide bins in their spectrum analyzers. I've seen them talk about 0.01 Hz wide bins! They don't have much choice really. They need the integration time afforded by the narrow bandwidth to make the link budget work at many light-years distance. The Carl Sagan novel "Contact" has an alien civilization receive ordinary broadcast television signals radiated from Earth. The information bandwidth in such a signal means that the rcv antenna required at the alien planet few light-years away from earth would have to be bigger than a typical planet. Maybe possible, but not likely to be likely. Information content is not the only thing that increases the bandwidth of an RF signal, of course. Here on Earth, advanced communications systems spread the bandwidth of signals for other reasons: to combat multipath, to share spectrum efficiently, to derive precise timing from a signal (as in navigation systems). These systems are known as "spread spectrum" techniques. My personal theory for why the SETI researchers have not detected alien RF transmissions is that the aliens are a few years ahead of us, and therefore are all using spread spectrum. ------------------------------ Date: 1 Jan 91 01:07:07 GMT From: amdahl!pyramid!athertn!steveh@ames.arc.nasa.gov (Steve Harding) Subject: Strange interference To: info-hams@ucsd.edu Here's one for the books, radio pals. Here in the San Francisco Bay area we have a hi-level repeater on 145.41. This repeater has spectacular coverage and is used for a nightly NTS net. As an NTS op, I try to check into the net on a regular basis. Lately I have been getting interference on 145.42; enuff that it wipes out 145.41. This interference comes from another repeater located about 60 miles north of me. No big mystery so far, right? Here's the strange part. The interfering repeater is in the 440 band. I can access it via simplex. Indeed, I have done so, and talked with the owner, who disclaims any interference (even tho he was talking with me at the time). In the midst of our conversation, he suddenly dropped away. When the interference first began, I set my radio into scan to try to find the primary frequency (thinking it was 2-mtr interference). I found the signal also in the 152 meg band. OK...two questions: 1. How can this be? 2. What can I do about it? 73 de Steve - KA6ETB.CA.USA.NA ------------------------------ Date: 1 Jan 91 07:10:36 GMT From: ogicse!emory!athena.cs.uga.edu!mcovingt@ucsd.edu (Michael A. Covington) Subject: Strange interference To: info-hams@ucsd.edu Well, for one thing, the 440-MHz transmitter probably has a tripler somewhere in it -- that is, it oscillates at a much lower frequency and then doubles and/or triples it several times. If the last step in all this is a tripler, then some of the un-tripled signal (at about 143 MHz) could also be getting through. ------------------------------ End of Info-Hams Digest ******************************