QRZ! Ham Radio 3/QRZ Ham Radio Callsign Database - Volume 3.iso/digests/infoham/931305.txt

Internet Message Format | 1994-06-04 | 19.3 KB

Date: Wed,  3 Nov 93 04:30:06 PST
From: Info-Hams Mailing List and Newsgroup <[e-mail]>
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Precedence: Bulk
Subject: Info-Hams Digest V93 #1305
To: Info-Hams


Info-Hams Digest            Wed,  3 Nov 93       Volume 93 : Issue 1305

Today's Topics:
                     "Vanity" Call Signs (2 msgs)
        Daily Solar Geophysical Data Broadcast for 02 November
                  EMI/RFI from Hidden Fence (2 msgs)
                      Installing in Isuzu Amigo
                Mobile Transceiver Installation Guide?
                    Observations on Kenwood TH-78
                      Repeater Trivia Question.
                      Studying in San Francisco

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: Fri, 29 Oct 1993 17:35:04 GMT
From: agate!library.ucla.edu!news.mic.ucla.edu!unixg.ubc.ca!acs.ucalgary.ca!cpsc.ucalgary.ca!ajfcal!lhaven.UUmh.Ab.Ca!combdyn![e-mail]
Subject: "Vanity" Call Signs
To: [e-mail]

In article <2a8kud$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (prvalko) writes:
>WHOA!!!!!   Hold the phone!   I have been the country's leading
>proponent for "Vanity" calls for years.  This is action is WAY out of
>line and (common for Washington) way out of touch with reality.
>
>First, $7 is NOTHING.  My crude calculations show that the actual
>goverment cost of issueing a ham licence is close to $15.  The
>government is actually LOSE money charging anything less.
>
Which is nothing compared to what us Canadians have to pay for our callsigns
now.

And, it doesn't matter whether you get a vanity callsign or the first available
callsign.

--
 --EMAIL-----------------------------PHONE-----------FAX------------
 | WORK: [e-mail]      | [phone] | [phone] | CallSign
 | HOME: [e-mail] | [phone] | [phone] |  VE6LKC
 -------------------------------------------------------------------
  disclamer = (working_for && !representing) + (Combustion Dynamics Ltd.);

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

Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1993 17:44:31 GMT
From: agate!library.ucla.edu!news.mic.ucla.edu!unixg.ubc.ca!acs.ucalgary.ca!cpsc.ucalgary.ca!ajfcal!lhaven.UUmh.Ab.Ca!combdyn![e-mail]
Subject: "Vanity" Call Signs
To: [e-mail]

In article <2a8r50$[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>
>The proposal would re-issue expired US callsigns on a first-come
>first-served basis.  You would pick a few in order of preference
>and you would get the first on on your list available.
>
One word of warning....if you want an expired callsign and a vanity licence
plate....make sure that a licence plate hasn't already been issued for that
callsign.  They might not let you have it (depends on if its still being used
and the state).

Up here, an Amateur had to change his callsign just so he could get his
callsign on his licence plate.  He had previously requested his initials, which
happened to be a callsign for an Amateur who went SK, his family wouldn't
release the licence plate.

--
 --EMAIL-----------------------------PHONE-----------FAX------------
 | WORK: [e-mail]      | [phone] | [phone] | CallSign
 | HOME: [e-mail] | [phone] | [phone] |  VE6LKC
 -------------------------------------------------------------------
  disclamer = (working_for && !representing) + (Combustion Dynamics Ltd.);

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

Date: 3 Nov 93 03:40:58 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Daily Solar Geophysical Data Broadcast for 02 November
To: [e-mail]

!!BEGIN!! (1.0) S.T.D. Solar Geophysical Data Broadcast for DAY 306, 11/02/93
10.7 FLUX=093.3  90-AVG=093        SSN=028      BKI=2111 1210  BAI=003
BGND-XRAY=B1.3     FLU1=*.*E+**  FLU10=*.*E+**  PKI=2121 1211  PAI=004
  BOU-DEV=010,008,009,008,008,015,005,004   DEV-AVG=008 NT     SWF=00:000
 XRAY-MAX= C3.0   @ 0001UT    XRAY-MIN= A9.1   @ 2353UT   XRAY-AVG= B5.1
NEUTN-MAX= +002%  @ 1635UT   NEUTN-MIN= -002%  @ 2225UT  NEUTN-AVG= +0.0%
  PCA-MAX= +0.0DB @ 2340UT     PCA-MIN= -0.4DB @ 2350UT    PCA-AVG= -0.0DB
BOUTF-MAX=55363NT @ 1337UT   BOUTF-MIN=55347NT @ 1849UT  BOUTF-AVG=55356NT
GOES7-MAX=P:+000NT@ 0000UT   GOES7-MIN=N:+000NT@ 0000UT  G7-AVG=+071,+000,+000
GOES6-MAX=P:+116NT@ 1644UT   GOES6-MIN=N:-059NT@ 1218UT  G6-AVG=+092,+015,-035
 FLUXFCST=STD:090,090,090;SESC:090,090,090 BAI/PAI-FCST=010,015,030/012,015,035
    KFCST=2233 3322 2344 4332  27DAY-AP=013,004   27DAY-KP=4441 1223 2110 1221
 WARNINGS=*SWF
   ALERTS=
!!END-DATA!!

NOTE: The Effective Sunspot Number for 01 NOV 93 was  35.9.
      The Full Kp Indices for 01 NOV 93 are: 2o 2o 2o 2-   3- 2- 3o 2-

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

Date: Tue, 2 Nov 1993 14:41:33 GMT
From: swrinde!emory!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!library.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!csus.edu!netcom.com![e-mail]
Subject: EMI/RFI from Hidden Fence
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Ed Hare - KA1CV) writes:
>Info on Interference From "Hidden Fence"
>
>Several members have reported interference from a new product called the
>"Hidden Fence." This product uses a VLF transmitter, a large perimeter
>loop, a receiver on a dog collar and a shock device to help teach a dog
>to remain within your property lines. (No flames, please -- I just
>report 'em. I don't even have a dog! I like cats! Uh, oh -- another
>flame war!)

Okay, the following inference may be humorous to those out there with a bit
of a sick side, but is probably worth thinking about anyway:

You go in the shack, tune up into the dummy load, switch to the real antenna,
find a clear spot on the band, and start sending 'CQ'

You hear a yelp, and then a howl. "It's that neighbors damn mutt again,"
you think, and carry on.

You finish transmitting and listen. Thinking "well, thank god that hell-hound
has shut up," just as a choice bit of DX responds to your CQ. Thankful that
you can hear yourself think, you give him a call.

The yips, yelps, and howls resume, growing in intensity and trickling off
to a whimper once you sign over to the DX station...

Next day, you see your neighbor, wearing a long face. "This damned invisible
fence is no damned good," says he. "Why, last night Rover set up a terrible
fuss, just like he did the first time that collar zapped him. But then the
strangest thing happened; he made a beeline across the Jones's yard, just
like the fence wasn't there, yowling all the way, then he charged across
the street just as Mr. Grundy was pulling out of the driveway in his 4x4
monster-truck look-alike. Poor little pup never had a chance..."

Now, I *HOPE* that the receivers on the collar are very, very immune to
front-end overload, etc. Either blocking or falsing could have serious
results, indeed. This seems like something that would be worth a few
tests.

Greg

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

Date: 2 Nov 1993 16:12:49 GMT
From: noc.near.net!transfer.stratus.com!sw.stratus.com![e-mail]
Subject: EMI/RFI from Hidden Fence
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Greg Bullough) writes:
>
> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Ed Hare - KA1CV) writes:
> >Info on Interference From "Hidden Fence"
> >
> >Several members have reported interference from a new product called the
> >"Hidden Fence." This product uses a VLF transmitter, a large perimeter
> >loop, a receiver on a dog collar and a shock device to help teach a dog
> >to remain within your property lines. (No flames, please -- I just
> >report 'em. I don't even have a dog! I like cats! Uh, oh -- another
> >flame war!)
>
> [Story about Fido getting zapped by the local DXer deleted for brevity]
>
> Now, I *HOPE* that the receivers on the collar are very, very immune to
> front-end overload, etc. Either blocking or falsing could have serious
> results, indeed. This seems like something that would be worth a few
> tests.
>
> Greg
>

I suspect that the collar receivers are NOT terribly immune to front-end overload.
When my folks got themselves a new dog a few years ago, they had one of those
invisible fences installed at the house.  Duke was lying on the floor under the
TV set one evening, wearing his receiver collar, when Dad turned on the TV.
Poor dog went ballistic.  Apparently either the TV was overloading his collar,
or else the magnetic field around the TV was inducing currents in the collar,
and he was getting zorched.  Ever since then, my folks have only put the collar
on him when he goes outside, so that nothing in the house would hurt him like
that again.

I'm trying to remember if Duke was outside with his collar on when Dan was
working K2BSA/1 from our truck.  I suspect he'd have to be fairly close
to the transmitter to get zapped, but you never can tell.

Gives new meaning to the term 'hot dog'...  :-)

73 de Faith N1JIT
--
Faith M. Senie            InterNet: [e-mail]
Stratus Computer, Inc.    InterNet: [e-mail]
55 Fairbanks Blvd.       Pkt Radio: [e-mail]
Marlboro, MA 01752           Phone: [phone]

"I'm afraid I don't know very much about Romulan Disruptor settings" --Spock

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

Date: 2 Nov 93 17:23:27 GMT
From: ogicse!emory!wa4mei!kd4nc![e-mail]
Subject: Installing in Isuzu Amigo
To: [e-mail]

Hi All....

I've recently bought an Isuzu Amigo, and the vehicle has little room under
the dash to mount a stack of radios....(it's got plenty for ONE).  Mine did
not come with the center console so I was thinking of mounting a stack rack
or something in the middle and put all my stuff in it...(I'll have 4 rigs,
10,2,220,440).   I see no problems with that, or antenna considerations....

The question to the group is will there be any RFI problems with radios vs
the motor???   Anyone else having any problems with a rig in an amigo?  I've
been using an HT with external antenna for some time in it for no problems,
but that is only 5 watts.  The dealer said (not in writing, dammit) that I
will have no problems with radio installations....and there's nothing warning
against it in my owner's manual....

So waddya say???

John Reed, n4tii
[e-mail]

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

Date: 1 Nov 1993 18:22 CST
From: elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!swrinde!dptspd!TAMUTS.TAMU.EDU!zeus.tamu.edu![e-mail]
Subject: Mobile Transceiver Installation Guide?
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Paul Lutt) writes...
>I just purchased a 1994 Ford Ranger pickup and I want to transfer my
>2-meter mobile rig to it.  Does anyone know if Ford has any literature
>available recommending how to install two-way radio equipment?  This is
>a fuel-injected vehicle, so I want to take whatever steps are necessary
>to avoid upsetting the vehicle control electronics.  I know I've seen
>postings in the past about such literature, but I think it was for
>General Motors vehicles.

You should not have any problems with an installation.  Just be carefull
where you run the feedline and attach the antenna to the car.  I found
that anywhere aft of the windshield is OK for an antenna, just don't
attach it to one of the front side windows.  If you use good RG-58 or better
with solid connections, there should be no coupling to the truck's systems.

Most problems in the past have come from antennas placed in close proximity
with the computer or power leads not directly attached to the battery.  If you
transmit more than 100 watts into a less than 2:1 SWR antenna, you could be
asking for trouble.

All this is IMHO...:-)

-tim

/------------------------------------------------------------------\
|* *(* (**)(* *)* *)*|           Tim Skloss   KC5DNA               |
|*  *   \/  \/  *   *|  Texas A&M University, Dept. of Chemistry   |
|*    /=========\   *|       College Station, TX 77843-3255        |
|*    | OXFORD  |    |     LABORATORY FOR MAGNETIC RESONANCE       |
|     |  mags.  |   *|           AND MOLECULAR SCIENCE             |
|*    |  RULE!  |    |           voice: [phone]             |
|     |_________|    |           fax:   [phone]             |
|      ||     ||     |     Internet:  [e-mail]       |
|      ==     ==     |  My opinions do not reflect those of TAMU!  |
\------------------------------------------------------------------/
                 "The brain is much like a computer;
     therefore dumb people do not exist, just people running DOS!"
          PowerPC - The ULTIMATE personal computing machine.

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

Date: Tue, 2 Nov 1993 22:52:20 GMT
From: news.cerf.net!kaiwan.com![e-mail]
Subject: Observations on Kenwood TH-78
To: [e-mail]

Since there's been alot of news lately on the Kenwood TH-78 handhelds,
I thought I'd post an observation that I've had for the past few months.
Here in Southern California, there is a rapidly growing radio club
named the 78'ers. For the most part, they all seem to worship and
be very dependant on their 78's. I find it humorous that they all
seem to think that just because they paid an arm and a leg for a
radio that has WAY too many whistles and bells on it, that it will
perform miracles for them. They seem to have a habit of not hooking
the HT's up to an external antenna, so subsequently, they always
sound like crap.

I decided to "test-drive" a friend's 78 one day, and was truly
dissappointed. On top of the disgustingly poor intermod rejection,
the battery life was nil, even though it was a fresh battery that
had been fully charged the day before. I think it died on me within
about 4 hours, and I wasn't talking all that much. And, the damn thing
is SO small, that everytime I tried pushing a button, I ended up hitting
a few others in the process.

So, in conclusion, finally, I think I'll stick with my Alinco 580,
which was quite a bit less money, and seems to work quite a bit better
than the Kenwood TH-78. Please, people, buy whatever you want, but
if you're planning on using your new HT in an area with RF obstructions,
buy a less expensive radio, and spend the left-overs on a decent antenna
system. My $0.02.

--
--------------------------------------------------------------
| Andrew Parker     |     KD6TGM     |     [e-mail] |
--------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: 3 Nov 93 00:55:23 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Repeater Trivia Question.
To: [e-mail]

>In article <2b3b7g$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Bill Turini) writes:
>Who put the first amateur repeater on the air?  When? Where? and what band?
>
>No prize to the winner, only everlasting gratitude :-)
>
>73's
>
>Bill

I think it was W5VPQ in San Antonio with the first one in
the nation on 146.94 about 35 years ago.

jd

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

Date: 2 Nov 1993 09:40:54 CST
From: ftpbox!mothost!schbbs!maccvm.corp.mot.com![e-mail]
Subject: Studying in San Francisco
To: [e-mail]

I think several of us missed something in one or more segments of this
thread. The frequency of the military antennas is usually 2-30 MHz,
with a tuner (usually automatic) inside the vehicle. Even 12 feet of
whip isn't enough to do anything serious at 2 MHz, but it beats two
tin cans and miles of elastic string!
   On 2M, assuming FM, the smallest audible change requires a 3 dB
change in signal strength. 3dB involves doubling the capture area of
the antenna. The basic quarter-wave antenna is about -1.4 dBd, that is,
compared to a dipole. So, to get an improvement, you must double the
length. More improvement, double again. Now you are at 78 inches and
4.6 dBd. The next step takes you to 13 feet and only 7.6 dBd, which is
why most folks prefer to find the gain electronically rather than using
bigger antennas and trimming every low-hanging tree along the highway.
------------------------- Original Article -------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: [e-mail] (Michael Sattler)
References: <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 2 Nov 1993 04:19:01 GMT
Lines: 19

Gary Coffman ([e-mail]) wrote:
: [e-mail] (Michael Sattler) writes:
: >
: >Thanks for the reply.  If what you say is true, then why do so many
: >people (including the military) mount huge whip antennae with shiny
: >loading coils on their bumpers?

: Because if they mounted those huge whips on the top they'd hit every
: highway overpass in the country. As I said, *when mechanically feasible*,
: the best place to mount an antenna is in the center of the roof.

I guess I'm not understanding the most basic part of this issue.
How much of an advantage does a huge whip offer over, say, a Diamond
roof-top (3 db gain on 2 meters, 5 db gain on 70 cm) antenna?
--

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael S. Sattler         [e-mail]        [phone]
Digital Jungle Software    Encrypt now; ask me how.   (finger for PGP key)

               All that is required for evil to triumph is
                for {wo}men of good will to do nothing.

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

Date: 1 Nov 93 09:18:32 GMT
From: yale.edu!xlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!wupost!crcnis1.unl.edu!moe.ksu.ksu.edu!matt.ksu.ksu.edu![e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

References <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>ale.edu
Reply-To : [e-mail] (Steve Schallehn)
Subject : Re: Packet

[e-mail] writes:
>In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Bryan Weaver) writes:
>> Like a couple of others, I've been watching all the non-activity on
>> this newsgroup. One person, Joe KQ4BX, said this is an obsolete or
>> abandoned newsgroup. Does anyone know what replaced it? Or what the
>> mandate of this newsgroup is?
>>
>---------------------------------------------------------
>I believe all the activity moved to rec.radio.amateur.digital

rec.ham-radio.packet has been obsolete for over 2 years and should have
been RMGROUP'ed and removed from your news system.  If it has not, your
site/news administrator does not listen to control messages.  (No
surprise, my news.admin does not listen either)

Move all traffic over to the new group, rec.radio.amateur.digital.

-Steve Schallehn  KB0AGD
 Kansas State University

PS: All traffic has been moved off of rec.ham-radio too.  Its new group
is rec.radio.amateur.misc (among other rec.radio.amateur.* groups).

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

End of Info-Hams Digest V93 #1305
******************************
******************************