Date: Fri, 23 Sep 94 12:31:33 PDT From: Info-Hams Mailing List and Newsgroup Errors-To: Info-Hams-Errors@UCSD.Edu Reply-To: Info-Hams@UCSD.Edu Precedence: Bulk Subject: Info-Hams Digest V94 #1054 To: Info-Hams Info-Hams Digest Fri, 23 Sep 94 Volume 94 : Issue 1054 Today's Topics: 1.2GHz on an HT -- how far? (2 msgs) [Q] Installing 2m Amplifier in Car A kind of amusing story Camry Installation FCC Application Delays . . . Ham Radio mailing lists? Restrictive Covenants: I can't have *any* antenna? Route for TN6RR Tucker Electronics (2 msgs) Youth amateur radio club? 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: 23 Sep 1994 08:51:57 -0700 From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!dog.ee.lbl.gov!agate!barrnet.net!nntp.crl.com!crl4.crl.com!not-for-mail@network.ucsd.edu Subject: 1.2GHz on an HT -- how far? To: info-hams@ucsd.edu Greg Brush (gbrush@indy.net) wrote: : Hi! : A few of us with experience only in HF/VHF were discussing operation in the : 1.2GHz band and specifically just how far (or not) one could transmit with the : typical HT operating on 1 or 2 watts with a rubber duck style antenna. Expect performaces simulat to 2m or 440. The differances are more multipath, and a different group of people. Ron N5HYH ------------------------------ Date: 23 Sep 1994 08:56:03 -0700 From: agate!barrnet.net!nntp.crl.com!crl4.crl.com!not-for-mail@ames.arpa Subject: 1.2GHz on an HT -- how far? To: info-hams@ucsd.edu pouelle@uoft02.utoledo.edu wrote: : The physics involved suggest to me (a poor unfortunate Astrophysics grad : student) during the warm months on 1.2GHz (with leaves on the trees) you : might be lucky to get 100 feet with a rubber duck. Microwave ovens : operate (or operated) near 1.3GHz on the principle that the H2O in the : item to be heated is a strong absorber of energy at that frequency. : Personally I'd go with 6m but that's neither here nor there. Anyway, : 1.2GHz will be line of sight, and strongly influenced by any water containing : items in the path (might be an interesting experiment to see how much : the signal strength changes with humidity variations). Microwave ovens operate on 2470 Mhz. Water becomes a problem at 10Ghz and up with a peak somewhere around 24 Ghz. Ron N5HYH ------------------------------ Date: 23 Sep 1994 10:05:34 -0400 From: psinntp!JH.Org!not-for-mail@uunet.uu.net Subject: [Q] Installing 2m Amplifier in Car To: info-hams@ucsd.edu I have to install a RF Concepts 2m/440 Amp in my Toyota Camry. I have a bunch of questions: What guage wire do I use? The brick is rated at 6 amps. I plan to run cables from the battery to under the driver's seat. I will fuse the pos and neg leads at the battery. Do I use 6 amp fast-blo fuses or what? If you are familiar with '92 Camrys do you have any suggestion for routing these lines through the firewall? Should I create a chassis ground at the amplifier as well? Does this ground need to be a braid or is it sufficient to use the same guage wire as the power line? Thanks for your help. BTW I'm also going to post about the above installation with the subject "Camry Installation" -- %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% ss@jh.org Steve Steinberg Amateur Radio Callsign: KB2??? ------------------------------ Date: 23 Sep 1994 17:11:15 GMT From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!dog.ee.lbl.gov!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!everest.pinn.net!usenet@network.ucsd.edu Subject: A kind of amusing story To: info-hams@ucsd.edu >So anyway, it turns out N. doesn't know Steve's last name so J. >(who works for the local paper and is both close to and good >at using the library) goes and finds the Callbook and finds >Steve listed so now she can look up his phone # and return >his keys. It did take her a while to figure out the ordering >pattern in the Callbook. She knows nothing about ham radio >and I neglected to tell her that the calls are listed by the >number, then alpabetically by the letters AFTER the number. >But she found it. > >She's going to see if Steve can guess how she found out his >last name. I bet he won't. Good reason not to get a license if you ask me. Comforting to know anybody can figure out who youe are by your call numbers. ------------------------------ Date: 23 Sep 1994 10:07:01 -0400 From: psinntp!JH.Org!not-for-mail@uunet.uu.net Subject: Camry Installation To: info-hams@ucsd.edu I have to install a RF Concepts 2m/440 Amp in my Toyota Camry. I have a bunch of questions: What guage wire do I use? The amplifier is rated at 6 amps. I plan to run cables from the battery to under the drivers seat. I will fuse the pos and neg leads at the battery. Do I use 6 amp fast-blo fuses or what? If you are familiar with '92 Camrys do you have any suggestion for routing these lines through the firewall? Should I create a chassis ground at the amplifier as well? Does this ground need to be a braid or is it sufficient to use the same guage wire as the power line? Thanks for your help. BTW I'm also going to post about the above installation with the subject "[Q] Installing 2m Amplifier in Car" -- %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% ss@jh.org Steve Steinberg Amateur Radio Callsign: KB2??? ------------------------------ Date: 23 Sep 1994 11:21:53 -0400 From: psinntp!JH.Org!not-for-mail@uunet.uu.net Subject: FCC Application Delays . . . To: info-hams@ucsd.edu Just to let everyone know the status of my ticket: I passed my General on 7/24. Last week I saw some posts and heard that others were receiving their ticket in 5-7 weeks, so at week 8 (09/18) I decided to call the FCC. I was told that the license was received on 8/15 but that there was some problem and that it would be returned to the 'Amateur Group.' I called the ARRL VEC dept and a very understanding fellow, Peter Warner, explained that they had rec'd nothing back but it could take 6 weeks! He suggested that I could call back and try to get more info. The second time I called the FCC I relayed the previous conversations and was then told that the application was sitting in an error folder because data entry had some problem and it would have to be reviewed. She could not say if it would have to be returned to the ARRL or not. She could not give me any further information and told me that there was no way to expidite it or even to find out what is wrong with it. I spoke to Mr. Warner again he said that it could sit for a couple of weeks in the error folder. I wonder if I am alone (in this folder) or if there are other hams-to-be in there with me? I know that the current amateur application processing time quoted by the FCC is 8 - 10 weeks, but this is a very frustrating time. I hope that the people answering the phones are not the same ones doing data entry. If they are, I will limit my calling them. I considered asking for a supervisor, but this may make matters worse? Has anyone tried to speak to someone besides the clerk that answers the phone? I'd hate to make a fuss and have my 610 dropped in the circular file (or is that where it is now?). I am aware of the plans for electronic filing of applications and retrieval of new call signs, I just hope that those of us that are stuck in the current burocracy [sp?] aren't forgotten about. If others are not aware, the FCC new toll-free number is (800) 322-1117. -- %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% ss@jh.org Steve Steinberg Amateur Radio Callsign: KB2??? ------------------------------ Date: 23 Sep 1994 15:23:02 GMT From: news.columbia.edu!tintin.cc.columbia.edu!fuat@RUTGERS.EDU Subject: Ham Radio mailing lists? To: info-hams@ucsd.edu In article <35sf48$7ae@nntp.crl.com>, Jeff Jones wrote: >I am doing a talk at Pacific Con (Oct. 21,22,23 Concord,Ca) this fall on >the internet. I am going to talk about the internet and how it relates to >Amateur Radio. As part of this talk I want to mention the various Amateur >Radio mailing lists there are availble. If anyone knows of any could you >please post them here or email me? Thanks and 73! I'm currently working on such a list (just started, so it is incomplete). Like the lists of other Internet resources I maintain (WWW pages, Gopher, FTP sites, callsign servers, etc.) it is available from the Columbia Univ. ARC's World-Wide Web home page: http://www.cc.columbia.edu/~fuat/cuarc/ (Or go directly to http://www.cc.columbia.edu/~fuat/cuarc/mailing-lists.html) If you have any additions or corrections, please email them to me. [Jeff, if you don't have a WWW browser such as Mosaic or Lynx, let me know and I'll email you the info.] 73, --Fuat, N2YGN Columbia University fuat@columbia.edu 703 Watson Labs 212-854-4804 612 W115th Street 212-662-6442 (Fax) New York, NY 10025 N2YGN ------------------------------ Date: 22 Sep 94 01:51:44 -0500 From: tulane!wupost!news.miami.edu!usenet.ufl.edu!gnv.ifas.ufl.edu!climatol@ames.arpa Subject: Restrictive Covenants: I can't have *any* antenna? To: info-hams@ucsd.edu Michael R. Dow (R1156C@WACCVM.CORP.MOT.COM) wrote: : 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, [...] : 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? The FCC's PRB-1 only applies to restrictions imposed by government agencies. You are free to voluntarily enter into a private contract that puts restrictions on you, so it is a perfectly legal and enforcable contract, unless you live in Georgia. The Georgia legislature recently recognized that people often don't have a real choice about accepting deed restrictions, and passed a law which prohibits restrictions against Amateur Radio antennae, even in private covenants. I don't know if the law has taken effect yet, or any other details... I guess you probably aren't buying a house in Georgia. Oh well. You might try talking to your prospective neighbors and see how they feel about outdoor antennas. If they don't object you will probably have better luck with the review board. In particular, a not-too- obvious dipole is not very objectionable -- I have one in the yard now, despite a similar prohibition. It is almost invisible (well, it helps that it is in a oak tree big enough to completely contain a full size 20-meter dipole -- and possibly a 40 if I wanted to try!). Good luck! -- Bob, WB4JCM afn01750@freenet.ufl.edu ------------------------------ Date: 23 Sep 1994 15:28:19 GMT From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!dog.ee.lbl.gov!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!prairienet.org!k9cw@network.ucsd.edu Subject: Route for TN6RR To: info-hams@ucsd.edu In a previous article, jfj@pacer1.usca.scarolina.edu (John F. Jarvis) says: >Any suggestions re a QSL route for TN6RR very greatly appreciated. > 73, John KE2WB > Save your money. This station showed shortly before TN0CW came on the air earlier this year. All indications are that it is a pirate. By the way, my TN0CW card came the other day! Quite good service. 73, Drew -- *-----------------------------*-------------------------------------* | Andrew B. White K9CW | internet: k9cw@prairienet.org | | ABW Associates, Ltd. | phone/fax: 217-643-7327 | *-----------------------------*-------------------------------------* ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Sep 1994 12:53:29 GMT From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!dog.ee.lbl.gov!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!math.ohio-state.edu!news.acns.nwu.edu!news.eecs.nwu.edu!tellab5!jwa@network.ucsd.edu Subject: Tucker Electronics To: info-hams@ucsd.edu In article marcbg@metronet.com (Marc B. Grant) writes: >Hi Gang >I'd like to know what kind of experiences you've had with Tucker >Electronics. I prefer email replies, but you may also follow up to this >thread. > >Thanks in advance! I purchased a Tektronics 465 oscilloscope from the them about two years ago for $900. It had some problems (that I fixed myself) but I saw the same model at local hamfest for $400 --- Jack Albert WA9FVP Fellow Radio Hacker ------------------------------ Date: 23 Sep 1994 15:54:10 GMT From: news2.near.net!cat.cis.Brown.EDU!pstc3.pstc.brown.edu!md@yale.arpa Subject: Tucker Electronics To: info-hams@ucsd.edu The one thing I have noticed is that on used equipment their prices seem very, very high. I routinely get a catalog from them and in it I see old computer systems with 64K, tape drive, and dinky monitors selling for $800. Even on new equipment their prices are nothing special. I suppose if they have a piece of equipment that you absolutely, positively need and cannot get anywhere else, buy from them. I never would, however. MD -- -- -- The best way for Bill Clinton to keep his legal -- fees down is to keep his pants zipped up. ------------------------------ Date: 23 Sep 94 16:56:35 GMT From: news-mail-gateway@ucsd.edu Subject: Youth amateur radio club? To: info-hams@ucsd.edu >I am 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 BROWNJEB@Delphi.com 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. is there a school radio club? and if so is there enough interest in the younger kids to get a legacy going? this usually runs counter to the strong "classing" of people that goes on in the school... bill wb9ivr ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 Sep 1994 22:11:36 GMT From: lll-winken.llnl.gov!enews.sgi.com!fido.asd.sgi.com!odin!jerber.sandiego.sgi.com!jerryb@ames.arpa To: info-hams@ucsd.edu References , , ryb Subject : Re: Why is aviation COM VHF *amplitude* modulated? In article , jeffrey@kahuna.tmc.edu (Jeffrey Herman) writes: |> jerryb@jerber.sandiego.sgi.com (Jerry Bransford) writes: |> |> >It's due to a simple fact that AM preceded FM and that AM is what was available when airplanes began using radios. |> |> Then why did the land-mobile services (which started our using AM) |> switch to FM? |> |> I think the best answer so far was that FM's capture effect would |> be detrimental, if not dangerous, to air-ground comms. |> |> |> Jeff NH6IL It still has little to do with FM capture effect. It's purely economic. How old is the average airplane? How old is the average car that uses land-mobile radio service? And how much $$ does an aircraft radio cost compared to one suitable for a car? And typically it's the government user that uses land-mobile radio services who can decide to spend the $$$ because it's only tax dollars they are spending, not their own personal dollars. Cars are replaced every few years, and end-users of land-mobile (typically government/taxi/police/fire) buying cars/trucks can make that switch to new radio technolgies with little or no economic impact. Not so with airplanes. Airplanes are NOT replaced regularily, and thus there is a huge economic cost for someone to mandate that airplanes *will* switch to the imcompatible FM mode. And it would have had to have been mandated for *everyone* to switch to FM due to the incompatibilities between AM and FM There are too many AM radios in airplanes, and when there was shortlived talk of FM for airplanes, it was thorougly trounced by a broad spectrum of airplane drivers/owners/operators for purely economic issues. -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Jerry Bransford Silicon Graphics (619) 546-0409 PP-ASEL - KC6TAY ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ------------------------------ Date: 23 Sep 1994 09:18:45 -0600 From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!dog.ee.lbl.gov!agate!library.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!nic-nac.CSU.net!charnel.ecst.csuchico.edu!xmission!xmission!not-for-mail@network.ucsd.edu To: info-hams@ucsd.edu References , <8g5Dc2j030n@cpzap.xs4all.nl>, <35uf24$mhr@cmcl2.nyu.edu>o. Subject : Re: Why is aviation COM VHF *amplitude* modulated? zap@cpzap.xs4all.nl (Martin Heffels) writes: >AM also suffers much from ignition noise, generated by cars, which makes >mobile comms very difficult. In article <35uf24$mhr@cmcl2.nyu.edu>, Roy Smith wrote: >Why should a gasoline piston engine in a car produce any more or less >ignition noise than a gasoline piston engine in an airplane? In fact, the >airplane has twice as much ignition stuff per cylinder, so I would expect it >to produce more. Shielding. In a typically automobile, ignition noise suppression efforts are pretty much limited to resistive plugs and plug wires, to take some of the sharp edges off the ignition pulse. Most all other filtering efforts are within the receiver portion of the car radio, and besides, we all know AM is dead these days... Aircraft ignition systems feature full shielding from magneto to plug electrode, with flexible metal braid covering the harness and fully shielded plugs. Receivers have noise suppression circuits on the power leads, and (relatively) complex noise blanking circuits. But ignition noise is still often a problem. (Prediction - when Slick's new electronic ignition system comes into wide-spread use, we'll see a rise in ignition noise complaints. Electronic ignition have a higher voltage spark with a faster rise-time, thus providing a lot more energy to radiate. Then we'll all have to get new resistive ignition harnesses and plugs. Slick's pretty smart, eh?) The reason we still have AM comms is purely economic - You'll never get a change through which will replace the AM system without a major squeal from aircraft owner groups. "Too expensive", they'll say. "Unfair to the little guy", will be the cry. Heck, we can't even legislate out the old 90 channel radios. -Mark ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Sep 1994 15:01:06 GMT From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!dog.ee.lbl.gov!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!news.moneng.mei.com!uwm.edu!mixcom.com!kevin.jessup@network.ucsd.edu To: info-hams@ucsd.edu References , , Subject : Re: Why is aviation COM VHF *amplitude* modulated? In jerryb@jerber.sandiego.sgi.com (Jerry Bransford) writes: >There are too many AM radios in airplanes, and when there was shortlived talk of FM for airplanes, it was thorougly trounced by a broad spectrum of airplane drivers/owners/operators for purely economic issues. What would an (FAA accepted?) FM radio cost? What is the total anual cost (hangar/ground space, inspections, maintenance, fuel) of operating a single engine plane? Is a radio upgrade going to break the bank? What is the cost of a new radio as a percentage of yearly (or even amortize it over 5 years) operating expenses? I'm not saying your wrong, just curious about yearly operating costs. I'd suspect the hobby of aviation has just as many people reluctant to "upgrade" as does the hobby of amateur radio. I still hear local repeater chatter regarding the "problem" of "upgrading" your HT to PL when one's favorite repeater moves from "carrier only access" to full-time "PL tone" access. As if PL is some high-tech luxury! ------------------------------ Date: 23 Sep 1994 14:59:22 GMT From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!dog.ee.lbl.gov!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!math.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!csn!col.hp.com!jwc@network.ucsd.edu To: info-hams@ucsd.edu References <1994Sep19.134053.4255@newsgate.sps.mot.com>, , gnus Subject : Re: Restrictive Covenants: I can't have *any* antenna? Be specific. Contracts can be modified before and at time of sale. If the selling agent accepts, your in. John, N0KIC Been there, done that. ------------------------------ Date: 23 Sep 1994 15:15:14 GMT From: news.columbia.edu!namaste.cc.columbia.edu!jbaltz@RUTGERS.EDU To: info-hams@ucsd.edu References <35mo2u$ff1@newsbf01.news.aol.com>, <35qiut$bgd$1@mhade.production.compuserve.com>, <35s6li$86s@xmission.xmission.com>.c Subject : Re: Radio Shack Plays Historical Role In article <35s6li$86s@xmission.xmission.com>, O. D. Williams wrote: >You know, I thought Wayne was being too hard on the ARRL until I joined >it two months ago. You get a free book when you join. I picked the Really? I joined in May and I didn't get a free book offered to me. Maybe I should complain? >O. D. Williams, N7OZH //jbaltz jerry b. altzman Entropy just isn't what it used to be +1 212 650 5617 jbaltz@columbia.edu jbaltz@sci.ccny.cuny.edu KE3ML (HEPNET) NEVIS::jbaltz ------------------------------ End of Info-Hams Digest V94 #1054 ******************************