HAM Radio 3/hamradioversion3.0examsandprograms1992.iso/news/inham89/1047.

Text File | 1979-12-31 | 12KB | 281 lines

INFO-HAMS Digest            Wed, 20 Dec 89       Volume 89 : Issue 1047

Today's Topics:
                            '727 and more
                                 ARRL
                           ARRL, and Email
                          Don't Jump Ship!!
           FCC License Turnaround Time, Recent Observations
In-reply-to: DAYTON '90 !!
                     morse code practice program
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 20 Dec 89 15:30 CDT
From: W K 9 M <[e-mail]>
Subject: '727 and more
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Hello net, this is my first posting so I hope that everyone gets it.

I have had the FT-727R for awhile, and it seems that every HT is 'born' with a
different receive range (after the "extended coverage" type-in).  Is there a
way to slide or change this range without affecting the performance of the
radio?  My radio goes up high enough to RX pretty much, but not a lot of the
"good stuff" like police.  I saw a mod for a Kenwood awhile back (from a friend
and it involved changing the PLL a little.  Is there a way to do this for the
'727?  Someone else on here asked for the same thing, so maybe someone has a
solution.  Note that the 70cm seems to have great coverage, but the 2M is
pretty thin...
Also on the subject of modifying radios and not using them out of their type
accpeted range (besides into a dummy load), what about rigs that we build
ourselves?  I am aware of the limits of harmonics, etc. on any radio
(built/bought) but the type-acceptance thing must apply only to
commercially-built radios?  I assume that that is the rule but some of these
rules start to get confusing after awile!
Any help on the top paragraph appreciated, which I hope should not be that hard
since the '727 is not exactly what you'd call new anymore!

Randy Kruszka, WK9M
Address: [e-mail]

"Sure, my dual-band HT does not have as many functions as yours, but mine is
heavier!"

P.S.  I will not be able to reply (going home for break) after the 21st of Dec.
but I will be back next month.  I probably need more than a DVM to do the PLL
mod anyway, so I'll have to do it here...

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

Date: 20 Dec 89 19:52:24 GMT
From: zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!wyse![e-mail]  (Steve Wilson xttemp dept303)
Subject: ARRL
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Clay Jackson) writes:
> Stuff deleted about League dropping Microwave coverage.
>
>IMHO, if you don't belong, you don't have the right to complain.
>
>Clay Jackson

Clay,

I've got two words for this...RIGHT ON!  If you can't guess by the previous
sentence, I'm pro-league.  However, I don't agree with every thing the
League does either.  I choose to voice my differences to the elected
officials, and they listen.  They don't necessarily agree with me all
the time, but still, they listen!   The league is a POLITICAL organization
folks.  You have elected officials that make policy.  Talk to them.
In that same line of reasoning, I don't agree with all of things they
are doing.  I'm a rabid  Keep-the-code type, but the league has
chosen to go another direction.  Ok, I guess I have to live with that.
Thats the way a democracy or a democratic organization is run.  This
is a case where I apparently hold a minority opinion so thats the
way it goes.  I didn't choose to give up my membership because of this
issue(besides it would be pretty stupid to throw away a paid-for
life membership ;-)

You can only effect the way the league is going to move if you
voice your opinions to the elected officials AND remain a member.

73's de Steve KA6S

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

Date: Wed, 20 Dec 89 12:45:28 -0800
From: Doug Faunt N6TQS 415-688-8269 <[e-mail]>
Subject: ARRL, and Email

I sent this to them:

Date: Tue, 5 Dec 89 10:59:42 EST
From: faunt
To: [e-mail]
Subject: [ubvax![e-mail]: ARRL]

It appears to me that N6KZB is taking a bit much on.  If he really is
reporting all this information to the FCC, no wonder they're ignoring
us when we have real complaints.  I'd like your comments on this,
please.
Note that mods are NOT illegal.  Some uses of them are.  There's a
real difference.

    doug, N6TQS  (I am an ARRL member, and plan to stay that way)

<<<Hardwick message with N6KZB message deleted>>>


I got this back:

Date: Wed, 20 Dec 89 15:53 EDT
From: Richard Palm <[e-mail]>
To: doug faunt <[e-mail]>
Subject: N6KZB bulletin

Dear Doug:

Thanks for calling the N6KZB matter to our attention.
He is a volunteer official of the League's Field
Organization and reports to the ARRL Orange Section
Manager. I have called the matter to the attention
of Section Manager Joe Brown, W6UBQ, for handling.

Thank you again. Happy holidays.

73,

Richard K. Palm, K1CE
Manager, ARRL Field Services Department,
ARRL Headquarters, Newington, CT

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

Date: Wed, 20 Dec 89 15:35:46 CST
From: [e-mail] (Bob West, WA8YCD)
Subject: Don't Jump Ship!!
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Henry,

I, for one, would like to encourage you to renew.

I can't claim to totally eschew the "appliance" concept, as I own a Drake
4 Line (older, but appliance nonetheless, not home-brew) and a couple of
VHF/UHF riceboxes. I started out with kits and home-brew, but later
I discovered there was more to Amateur Radio than solder and wire.

I see Amateur Radio as a multi-faceted entity. The true challenge today
might be to get what you want out of it. Maybe it is to bring something
new to it. Certainly a good thing is to spend some time helping someone
else get started. (How much influence did the hams you met early on have
on your perception of it, on your enthusiasm for it?)

You have had a very poignant view of Amateur Radio which, up until the
last line, I think you expressed rather elegantly.

C'mon, renew! Even if you don't feel like it now, you'll still have it,
still be "connected," and maybe one day soon you'll find that enthusiasm
once again. Believe me, I know.

By the way, my most recent QSO was on CW in the 15-meter Novice band just
prior to a code practice session/study group at the club station.

73,
Bob WA8YCD
[e-mail]



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

Date: 19 Dec 89 18:52:04 GMT
From: oliveb!amdahl!twg.com!obelix![e-mail]  (Bruce B. Sawyer)
Subject: FCC License Turnaround Time, Recent Observations
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Bob West, WA8YCD) writes:
>        All I want for Christmas is my ticket! (being processed as we speak)
> Who does the FCC hire in Gettysburg, anyway! (sorry. a little flame here...)
>
> Not very many people.

and I saw the following response from Bob, WA8YCD:

>OBSERVATION:
>
>  Having watched times from our VE testing sessions to the time our folks
>  get their tickets in the mail, (and other folks' sessions and turnaround
>  times) SIX WEEKS is what you can reasonably expect.
>
>  One of our guys counted 44 days from the time he took the test to the day
>  he got his real thing (he got to operate "temporary AA" so it wasn't so bad!)
>
>  Another got the license in about the same time (plus or minus a day or two
>  for local mail loading) but went from NO LICENSE to GENERAL and was on
>  pins and needles...
>
>  Congrats on the new license (whether BRAND NEW or UPGRADE) and hope the
>  time flies for you--HAVE FUN ON THE AIR!

For a different response--

Let's not impugn the FCC so unfairly!  The problem both you guys are having
is with your VEC, not the folks in Gettysburg.  I'm a VE with the Sunnyvale,
Ca. VEC, and I guarantee you that the FCC is utterly predictable.  We give
our exams on Sunday, and the successful candidates get their tickets EXACTLY
29 days later--in Monday's mail.  Now it is true that we express mail all of
our 610's immediately after the exams, but then we feel we're here to serve!

Now it is known that the ARRL VEC has a nasty habit of sitting on the 610's
before sending them in, and people here locally who took their exams with the
ARRL end up waiting ABOUT six weeks.  But it's not the FCC's fault.

Another thing I would mention in this regard is that the VEC cannot mail in
a 610 if there is a license application pending with the FCC.  We will hold
them until the application on file has been processed AND a photocopy of the
license sent to the VEC.  Sunday we had a fellow who had passed his general
exams with us on 12/3, then his advanced class with the ARRL VEC on 12/10,
and was successful on his extra exams on 12/17.  We estimate he will get his
general ticket in the mail on January 8, then send it to the ARRL.  The ARRL
might send off his advanced application by January 22, and he can get that
ticket back by February 19.  If he gets a copy of that to us right away, we
can process his extra class paperwork in time for him to get that ticket by
March 19 at the absolute earliest.  Get the idea?

                                  73,
                                    Bruce Sawyer, AA6KX

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

Date: Wednesday December 20, 1989,  3:48:58 p.m.
From: watmath!ria.ccs.uwo.ca!HAMSTER.business.uwo.ca![e-mail]
Subject: In-reply-to: DAYTON '90 !!
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

==============================================================================

I find it interesting that anyone can use their handy in Dayton.  Good place
to test for intermod and/or channel rejection.  Also a good place to turn
on that CTCSS tone decoder.  Anyway, so you in Dayton.  I will be wearing
glasses and a light green jacket if you want to say hi.

Mark Bramwell, VE3PZR      [phone] {UWO}
BITNET: [e-mail]    Packet:  VE3PZR @ VE3GYQ


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

Date: 20 Dec 89 22:07:04 GMT
From: zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!sdsu!crash![e-mail]  (Scott O'Connell)
Subject: morse code practice program
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Does anyone have a morse code practice program for Xenix?  I saw
mention to one in comp.unix.xenix and replied to the author, but
didn't hear anything back and lost his original post.

I bought two of "Gordon West's [call me Gordo]" books to help me
learn the code and jump right to Tech, but am finding myself
wanting some real "random", but meaningful practice.  I was thinking
of saving some usenet articles and running them through a morse
code generator for practice.  This saves me from having to buy a
radio (course I can't buy one until I'm licensed, right? :-) and I
can sneak in some practice while working.

So, any of you have a program like this?  Do you have any other
ideas, besides running MS-DOS?

Thanks in advance
--
Scott O'Connell        UUCP: {nosc, ucsd, hplabs!hp-sdd}!crash!ipars!scotto
            ARPA: crash!ipars![e-mail]
            INET: [e-mail]

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

End of INFO-HAMS Digest V89 Issue #1047
***************************************