HAM Radio 3/hamradioversion3.0examsandprograms1992.iso/news/inham89/1021.

Text File | 1979-12-31 | 17KB | 405 lines

INFO-HAMS Digest            Fri, 15 Dec 89       Volume 89 : Issue 1021

Today's Topics:
                         1200 baud PSK modem
                         FCC Processing time
                   Ground connection for antennas.
                        Mac vs. IBM:  IBM wins
                   Meaningless information in QSOs?
                         MFJ 1224 and Mac SE
                 Modifying Radios for out of band use
                Noise on the air and in rec.ham-radio
                    pro2005 cellular mod request?
                             rec.scanners
                          Source for 2SD845?
                 Squeaky Appeals do not get greased!
       The un-net on 10meters on Saturday (1600-1800Z) (2 msgs)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 15 Dec 89 15:44:18 GMT
From: eru!luth!sunic!tut!santra!kolvi.hut.fi![e-mail]  (Kaj Wiik)
Subject: 1200 baud PSK modem
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Has anyone compared the original JAS-1 modem designed by JAMSAT
with the TAPR PSK modem and DSP-232? I understand that all these
modems implement the Costas loop ( DSP-232 uses perhaps Kalman etc..).
It would be interesting to know how much there is implementation
loss in the good analog designs.

Kaj


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Helsinki University of Technology,       | [e-mail]              |
Metsahovi Radio Research Station         | [e-mail]              |
Otakaari 5A, SF-02150 Espoo, Finland     | oh6eh@oh2ti                  |

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

Date: Fri, 15 Dec 89 13:07:58 EST
From: "Mike Jordan  G4ASQ/KC1RP" <[e-mail]>
Subject: FCC Processing time

I just got my US license back from the FCC.  It took exactly 8 weeks
from my VE session on Oct 18, and arrived Dec 13.  Process date was Dec
5th.
HOORAY !  ( Now all I need is an antenna....

73 and Seasons Greetings de Mike  - G4ASQ / KC1RP

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

Date: Fri, 15 Dec 89 14:04:39 GMT
From: "Pete Lucas, NERC-TLC, Swindon U.K." <PJML@
Subject: Ground connection for antennas.
Message-ID: <15 Dec 89 14:05:07 GMT #[e-mail]>

Grounding - DO NOT use the three-prong mains ground! In my house, there
is a coil connected between the three-prong 'ground' and true  'ground' - this
is the coil of the ground-leakage trip.  It will hence present a high
RF impedance to 'true' ground.
Also, beware that any ground on your radio does not bypass the
'ground' (actually a current sensing trip)
or the safety protection provided by the ground leakage trip may be
bypassed too.
In my case, i disconnected the ground from the 3-prong mains plug on
my radio, and use a separate 'radio ground' of known low impedance. I had an
old water-boiler (actually a 55-gallon copper tank!) buried outside as the
RF ground.
Alternatively, if you use a balanced antenna (like a dipole) then theres no
need for a RF ground connection. (but you may still need one for static
protection and electrical safety - consult your local building regulations on
this - they may require a minimum cross-section of grounding conductor).

                                           ++Pete

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

Date: 15 Dec 89 02:36:19 GMT
From: wshb!mikebat![e-mail]  (Michael R. Batchelor)
Subject: Mac vs. IBM:  IBM wins
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

> Go with a 386 if you can afford it (Unix runs nicely on a 386). Go with
> a 286 system if the 386 breaks the budget.

If price is a big consideration (when isn't it) you should at least look
at the 386SX motherboards. No, they don't have a 32 bit data bus.
Yes, they do benchmark out as slower than a REAL 386. Yes, there are
286 motherboards based on the Harris 286 chips which are faster when
running 16 bit software. But, you knew this was coming, UNLESS you find
a great deal on a real 386, the 386SX is cheaper than the 386, and
it runs 32 bit software exactly as if it were a real 386.

> Unix runs best on a fast 386 with big harddisks, however, that said,
> Unix will run quite nicely on a 16Mhz 386 with a modest (80M) hard disk.

SCO XENIX runs adaquatly on a 386SX with one user. It's marginal with
two users. A ten user system would probably be useless. You can also get
by with a much smaller hard disk (40M) if you choose which parts of
the OS you install wisely. All in all, a 386SX system with a 40M
disk drive would make a great *NIX workstation for a hobbyist. (I assume
we are hobbyists here.)

--
Michael Batchelor    KA7ZNZ
uunet!wshb!mikebat!michaelb

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

Date: Fri, 15 Dec 89 14:33:35 GMT
From: "Pete Lucas, NERC-TLC, Swindon U.K." <PJML@
Subject: Meaningless information in QSOs?
Message-ID: <15 Dec 89 14:36:50 GMT #[e-mail]>

>Heard during the Ten Meter Contest last weekend:
>
>N3xxx:  "KH6xxx 59 Pennsylvania."
>KH6xxx: "You're 59 Hawaii. QSL?"
>N3xxx:  "QSL. Thanks for Hawaii!  How's my signal out there?"
>
>   :-)

Question: In the above exchange, does 'QSL?' mean 'I acknowledge receipt of
your message'  or 'I will send you a QSL card' ???

Hams have APPALLING operating procedure!

                                           ++Pete

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

Date: 15 Dec 89 05:27:00 GMT
From: arisia!cdp![e-mail]
Subject: MFJ 1224 and Mac SE
Message-ID: <241200004@cdp>

I have an MFJ 1224 that I would like to hook up to my mac and sony receiver.
Does anyone have tips or comments?  If this is not a good idea would you make
recommendations on an expensive system that would allow rtty, fax, packet (if
possible).  Many thanks, Dale in Stockton, Ca

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

Date: 15 Dec 89 15:12:19 GMT
From: sun-barr!newstop!texsun!pollux!ti-csl![e-mail]  (Mike Hoenig)
Subject: Modifying Radios for out of band use
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

      I know I posted a follow-on to this, yesterday...did it get "eaten" by
      the system or something?

    I was pointing out that I have modified my TH-75A by removing one
    green wire behind the front case of the radio.  This mod allows
    full coverage of the 420-450MHz band, and then some.  The display
    will read out from 147.000 to 511.995.  If anyone out there knows
    how to tune the PLL, I'd appreciate that information.  I'd like to
    see if the rig will operate in the 220MHz band.

    Also, I have modified my XYL's TH-25A, thanks to the posting of
    those instructions here.  I haven't yet tuned the PLL, but that's
    "in the queue."

            Thanks for the help here, folks.
            Hope to chat at ya when I get the HF station
            going again.

            Mike (N5LTL; that's "Need 5 Ladies To Love")

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

Date: 14 Dec 89 21:04:01 GMT
From: cadnetix.COM!cadnetix![e-mail]  (Rusty Carruth)
Subject: Noise on the air and in rec.ham-radio
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Alan Bloom) writes:
>"if you dont know how to send EMAIL", you probably also don't know what
>"RTFM" means.  I have figured out what BTW and IMHO mean, but RTFM is
>a new one for me????

Actually, don't feel too bad - I've been on usenet now for over 2 years, and
only just last month figured out what IMHO meant!  (I had even emailed a few
people asking them what it meant, with no reply received from them, and I
don't remember seeing it in the 'emily postnews' posts either)

So, don't feel to bad about it.

BTW - by the way
RTFM - read the 'fine' manual  (or whatever word you feel fits better than 'fine')
IMHO - In my humble opinion  (at least, thats what I *think* it means)

RTM (pretty rare) - read the manual

---Join the usenet un-net, 28.410 and/or 28.390(+-) 1600Z to 1800Z saturdays!
Rusty Carruth.                  Radio: N7IKQ                 ^^ or later :-)
DOMAIN: [e-mail]      UUCP:{uunet,boulder}!cadnetix!rusty
home: POB. 461, Lafayette CO 80026

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

Date: 14 Dec 89 17:52:34 GMT
From: attcan!utgpu!watserv1!watmath!ria!braille![e-mail]  (Brian Borowski)
Subject: pro2005 cellular mod request?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

HELLO net-users:

I know this has been dode before, but, would some kind person please
email me the necessary information to enable the cellular band on the
pro2005 scanner?

I would be very greatful.  Thanks in advance.

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

Date: 14 Dec 89 20:14:33 GMT
From: cadnetix.COM!cadnetix![e-mail]  (Rusty Carruth)
Subject: rec.scanners
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Rusty Carruth) (thats me!) writes:

>Actually, some hams enjoy the non-ham-related postings, and welcome them.

I was thinking last night (yes, I know, I *really* should think more often :-), and
decided i needed to follow up on my last posting, so here it is)

Well, maybe I should not have said 'and welcome them' up there, as you could
argue that those sort of postings belong in the new radio newsgroup.  But
I still enjoy them anway....

In any case, I'll be sorry when the freq postings move to rec.radio.scanner
(or whatever it got called), since I doubt I'll have enough time to read
that newsgroup as well as this one.  Info overload strikes again!


---Join the usenet un-net, 28.410 and/or 28.390(+-) 1600Z to 1800Z saturdays!
Rusty Carruth.                  Radio: N7IKQ                 ^^ or later :-)
DOMAIN: [e-mail]      UUCP:{uunet,boulder}!cadnetix!rusty
home: POB. 461, Lafayette CO 80026

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

Date: 15 Dec 89 14:13:38 GMT
From: [e-mail]  (Ken Tindle)
Subject: Source for 2SD845?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Ed Ingraham         ) writes:
>At a hamfest last year, I found a bargain power supply which needed just
>a little repair work. Now I know why it was so cheap! I need to replace
>some 2SD845 power transistors in it. Unfortunately this device and its
>replacements are no longer manufactured and I can't find anything to

Call MCM Electronics at 1-800-543-4330 and tell 'em you want a 2SD845; they
have 'em.  You might have to buy more than one to jump over a minimum order.

--------------------------\ /-----------------------------------------------
INTERNET:[e-mail] | "Could you please continue the petty bickering?
BITNET: [e-mail] |  I find it most intriguing."   ---    Data,
Ken Tindle - Lexington, KY |  Star Trek, The Next Generation, "Haven"
--------------------------/ \-----------------------------------------------

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

Date: 14 Dec 89 21:10:23 GMT
From: cadnetix.COM!cadnetix![e-mail]  (Rusty Carruth)
Subject: Squeaky Appeals do not get greased!
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Warren W. Gay) writes:
>>Date: Tue, 5 Dec 89 10:30 CDT
>>From: "FEROZ GHOUSE, N9FJL/4S7FG" <[e-mail]>
>>Subject: PACKET-RADIO Digest V89 #259
>>Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
>>
>>IT IS SAD TO NOTE THAT THIS NET DOES NOT OFFER HELP TO ANYBODY WANTING
>>TO START OUT ON PACKET. INSPITE OF MANY MESSAGES FOR HELP, I HAVE NOT SEEN
>>A SINGLE MAIL MESSAGE OFFERING THE NEEDED ADVICE.
>
>    Sad when it happens, but this is NOT true.  ...

Another thing to consider - this was the first time I had seen your message,
and I'm pretty good about getting in and reading the articles here on
rec.ham-radio.  More than once I've heard of articles not making it off
the system from which they were posted, so that MAY be what happened to
yours.

Sorry about the fact that nobody replied.  (And see Warren's post for
some other ideas about things which may help improve your reply rate)
I generally email a reply to folks who post messages like that and ask
them if they got the help they needed, most have already been deluged
with replies by the time I get around to it....

And, for those who think that this should have been just an email message
rather than a posting - sure, but there is a good chance that others may
have asked for help and not gotten it, so I posted.  Thanks for your
forbearance (you *do* have forbearance, don't you? :-) ).

---Join the usenet un-net, 28.410 and/or 28.390(+-) 1600Z to 1800Z saturdays!
Rusty Carruth.                  Radio: N7IKQ                 ^^ or later :-)
DOMAIN: [e-mail]      UUCP:{uunet,boulder}!cadnetix!rusty
home: POB. 461, Lafayette CO 80026

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

Date: 15 Dec 89 17:18:10 GMT
From: vsi1!wyse![e-mail]  (Steve Wilson xttemp dept303)
Subject: The un-net on 10meters on Saturday (1600-1800Z)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Perry Scott) writes:
>I tried the un-net last Saturday, and got assaulted by contesters.  It
>also seems that each 5 KHz multiple is busier than the in-betweens.
>
>I do wish that contest organizers would set up band restrictions.  29.300
>through 29.600 was completely full.  I had to go all the way up to 29.650
>to find an un-contested frequency.
>
>Perry (Down with Contest QRM) Scott
>KF0CA

Only every 5 Khz, that wasn't much of a contest...it should be every 1.5 khz!

Oh yeah, it was the 10M contest, we have a little more room up there,
I forgot ;-)

Seriously though, if your a contester, especially a VHF contester, some
of the restrictions would drive you crazy.  The VHF contest rules are
so restrictive you wouldn't even know a contest was going on unless you
frequent off-the-wall areas of 2m like the lower SSB portion.  Yes
I know there are quite a few regulars on 2m SSB, but there the only
ones out for the contest!   Examples, your not allowed to get on
repeaters and tell people to come over and work you on the fm simplex
frequencies.  Your not allowed to be on the standard fm simplex frequencies
like 146.52.  They've gone so far as to completely eliminate any possibility
of getting more people interested in the activity by people being aware
that the activity is occuring.

There are some restrictions in place on HF freq use during contesting already.
Pretty common is no use of WARC frequencies.  When the contest is restricted
to specifically a single band like the one above, you have a whole range of
other choices also(like 15m, 20m, etc).

Yes, I admit that contests have a severe habit of disrupting normal net
operations.  I don't really have a good answer for that either.  Even
if you set up restrictions on where the contesters can play, there will
be a net in that particular portion that gets derailed, and thus people
get upset.  There are no restrictions on where nets can be set up after
all!  Gee, maybe net operations should be restricted to certain areas
of the bands. ;-)  Point is that depending on which activity your
playing at(which you nominally assume is the most important thing going ;-)
your going to be upset when someone else interferes with it.

The best answer seems to be to try to be as tolerant as possible of
all activities, and understand that what the other fellow is doing
is just as important to him as your pursuits are to you.

73's de Steve KA6S


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

Date: 15 Dec 89 17:02:03 GMT
From: victim.dec.com![e-mail]  (Jim -- LTN1-2/H03 -- DTN 226-6905 15-Dec-1989 1203)
Subject: The un-net on 10meters on Saturday (1600-1800Z)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Perry Scott) writes...

>I do wish that contest organizers would set up band restrictions.  29.300
>through 29.600 was completely full.  I had to go all the way up to 29.650
>to find an un-contested frequency.

I hope you mean 28.300 - 28.600.  The reason 10-meter contesters were
operating from .300-.500 was that Novices contacts give you more points
(right?) than non-novice contacts.  I'm amazed that you were able to find a
clear frequency *anywhere* on 10 meters!

Stu, KC1F, spent a lot of his time on 10 meters in one of the recent DX
contests *above* 28.800 (like around .888).  He had very high QSO rates,
probably because of the clear channel.  You don't need to operate in QRM
Alley to get a good score.

jim, AD1C

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

"The opinions expressed here in no way represent the views of Digital
 Equipment Corporation."

James J. Reisert                Internet: [e-mail]
Digital Equipment Corp.         UUCP:     ...decwrl!tallis.enet!reisert
295 Foster Street
P.O. Box 1123
Littleton, MA  01460

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

End of INFO-HAMS Digest V89 Issue #1021
***************************************