QRZ! Ham Radio 3/QRZ Ham Radio Callsign Database - Volume 3.iso/digests/policy/930479.txt

Internet Message Format | 1994-06-04 | 21.1 KB

Date: Tue, 23 Nov 93 04:30:11 PST
From: Ham-Policy Mailing List and Newsgroup <[e-mail]>
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Precedence: Bulk
Subject: Ham-Policy Digest V93 #479
To: Ham-Policy


Ham-Policy Digest           Tue, 23 Nov 93       Volume 93 : Issue  479

Today's Topics:
                         Another possible use
                 Another possible use of Morse code??
                       No Code etc... (2 msgs)
                                Robert
     THE argument for CW requirements (was: End-It All Now, Pleas
                This is a hobby not a career, darn it!
                     Use of HT for Marine & GMRS
             Why the L.A. .435 repeater wasn't shut down

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 Ham-Policy Digest are available
(by FTP only) from UCSD.Edu in directory "mailarchives/ham-policy".

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: Mon, 22 Nov 1993 18:16:37 GMT
From: qualcomm.com!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!emory!wa4mei!ke4zv![e-mail]
Subject: Another possible use
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Ranfry) writes:
>
>     Another alternative is the chordic keyboard.  This system of
>keyboard is designed to be used with one hand and is reletively easy
>to learn to use.  Once you are able to use it, typing is pretty fast,
>faster than writing or coding.
>
>     This type of keyboard is usually the size of a keypad, and is
>quite comfortable to use.

Yeah, Steve Whatshisname of Winnebiko fame has one on the bike's
handlebars. It's really slick. They're actually shaped more like a
potato than a keypad. I found I could chord in about 30 WPM after
a few minutes practice. There are 4 keys for the fingers and a
nibble shift key for the thumb. Two squeezes encodes any ASCII
character. Baudot could be done with a single squeeze unless you
needed a shift character. Not the 120 WPM I do on the keyboard,
but lots faster than I can do with a pencil.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          | Where my job's going,  | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems | I don't know. It might | uunet!rsiatl!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             | wind up in Mexico.     | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |          -NAFTA Blues  |

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

Date: 22 Nov 1993 19:43:24 GMT
From: newsstand.cit.cornell.edu!newsstand.cit.cornell.edu![e-mail]
Subject: Another possible use of Morse code??
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]> Dan Pickersgill  N8PKV,
[e-mail] writes:
>
>Why not a ascii text to MORSE decoder... (Speed could even be adjustable
>for preferance)
>

Yeah, that was one of the first thoughts and easy to implement. (some
time in my copious free time (ha!) I might try to work up an cw to ascii
terminal emulator with built in keyer so all you do is hook up the key
paddles to one of the ports.....  But, I'd also be interested in
something that could speak the ascii to me. Morse is fun and I can
operate it mobile, but it does take a fair bit of concentration. Having
the computer speak to me would drop the load somewhat and be kinda neat
besides. I'd like to have both options.

Kevin

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

Date: Sun, 21 Nov 93 15:59:29 CST
From: library.ucla.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!sdd.hp.com!swrinde!menudo.uh.edu!jpunix!unkaphaed!amanda![e-mail]
Subject: No Code etc...
To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (Dan Pickersgill  N8PKV) writes:

> [e-mail] (Jay Maynard) writes:
>
> > In article <[e-mail]>,
> > Robert <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > >Here in the United States, knowledge of Morse
> > >is required for access to the HF bands. Your constant bitching about that
> > >fact will not change matters.
> >
> > Unfortunately, it may well. We now have a no-code license because people wo
> > rather bitch than work. Continued bitching may well produce the same result
> > HF.
>
> Morse testing will be removed from the HF bands (assuming that we still
> exist by then), the only question is when we will enter the 21st
> century along with the rest of the world or by the begining of the
> 22nd? And Morse testing will be removed from HF for one important
> reason, the arguments the anti-testing people are making are valid even
> today, and more so tomorrow. The significance of Morse in communications
> is dropping rapidly to zero. We will either move ahead with the world or
> go the way of the spark gap commercial radio. That is not to say that
> the pro testing people are making fine arguments, just that the
> arguments don't fit with the state of radio today, as much as they would
> prefer (or believe).

Do you oppose EVERYTHING that requires effort in order to achieve, or
just Morse code? I read something about a student who felt he deserved a
Ph.D, but said that it was irrelevant whether he attended the classes or
not. Was that you? If so, is your Doctoral degree hanging on the wall
next to your Extra class license?

 --Robert

____________________________________________________________________
|  A Codeless Technician is never a villain in his own eyes.       |
|  Keep this in mind; it may offer a way to make him your friend.  |
|  If not, you can kill him without hate - and quickly.            |
--------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1993 13:32:59 GMT
From: news.Hawaii.Edu!kahuna![e-mail]
Subject: No Code etc...
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Robert) writes:
>Ed Ellers <[e-mail]> writes:
>
>> Jeff, I'n getting disgusted and angry at your attitude.  Instead of giving a
>> rational argument to rebut mine, you act as though 11 meters and Part 15 are
>> the only alternatives and must always remain so.  We're not talking about 11
>> meters, or 1750 meters, or about FM broadcast band operation -- we're talking
>> about amateur radio.
>
>Ed, please quote a portion of the post you are replying to.
>
> --Robert

I really have to agree. Ed, please use your editor. Your posts look like
you're talking to yourself.

At this time Ed, 11M and 1750M ARE your only options, unless you can get
a code waiver from the FCC. Have you tried?

I find it very difficult to believe that someone could diligently work
on the code for 20 years and not be able to pass the test. When I went
throught Coast Guard radioman school, I saw people with no backround
in radio comms go from 0 to 22 wpm in 12 weeks (it was a 20 week
school). I have to admit, the CG knew the science of teaching quite
well!

Jeff NH6IL

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

Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1993 09:39:26 -0700
From: ftpbox!mothost!schbbs!node_13059.aieg.mot.com![e-mail]
Subject: Robert
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Michael P. Deignan) wrote:

> [e-mail] (Mike Waters) writes:
>
> > "The NRA should be added to the AJ's list
> > of subversive organizations since they advocate the overthow of the U.S.
> > government by force".
>
> They do? I've never seen any such reference in my NRA membership package.
> Perhaps you have a reference?
>
> :-) for the humour-impaired.

Actually only one of about a dozen flaws in the position, the most obvious
being that the AJ's list doesn't exist any more. :-)


Of course I didn't exactly develop the theme in such neutral terms either.
:-)


--
Mike Waters  [e-mail]  [e-mail]

BOBS BEST BENT WIRE SK

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

Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1993 09:45:57 -0700
From: ftpbox!mothost!schbbs!node_13059.aieg.mot.com![e-mail]
Subject: THE argument for CW requirements (was: End-It All Now, Pleas
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Gary Coffman) wrote:


> Overcrowding? On 2m FM? Surely you jest? Monitoring the band on the
> spectrum analyzer, I see mostly 3.8 MHz of FM territory vacant except
> for the little cluster of activity around 145 MHz where the packet
> robots play. Even during peak drivetime it's rare to see *all* the
> repeater pairs in use at the same time, and be assured that *every*
> pair *has* a repeater on it, and the simplex frequencies stay mostly
> vacant even then. I don't hear constant hetrodynes from band edge to
> band edge like one would expect from an *overcrowded* band.

After all the griping about 2 meters on this newsgroup, I set my rig to
scan 2M while on a trip to LA this weekend.  Even on Saturday night I never
counted more than 10 repeaters in use when scanning 144-148 Mhz!  Typically
it was more like 2-3.

Operation sounded very much like Phoenix to me.  I wasn't able to hear the
infamous 147.22/147.435 machine, but the QSOs I did hear sounded exactly
like those you would expect anywhere - "Hi Bob haven't heard you in a while
..."

So I agree even more strongly with Gary - *what* overcowding?

--
Mike Waters  [e-mail]  [e-mail]

BOBS BEST BENT WIRE SK

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

Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1993 17:52:08 GMT
From: qualcomm.com!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!emory!wa4mei!ke4zv![e-mail]
Subject: This is a hobby not a career, darn it!
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Jeff Herman) writes:
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Ranfry) writes:
>>  It's about bloody time that HAMs lead the
>>pack again, instead of falling behind.

>Gad, get out of your dream world; I am so tired of hearing this. Hams will
>never lead the pack again. What we were able to do the first half of the
>century will never be repeated again. How many paid engineers were working
>on expanding the communications science in the earlier part of this century?
>And how many do we have today? In the 20's every ham was an experimenter,
>we created the science; every advancement in frequency was do to the work
>of hams - there were no professionals to lead us - we did it ourselves
>[albeit, in a very crude fashion].Those day are gone. Hams today are
>followers, not leaders. Those on the cutting edge of comms technology
>are not the grocery clerk or shop owner or high schooler or foreman
>of yesteryear, who would come home to a basement of wires and condensers
>and Leyden jars and strings of massive batteries; rather they are the
>holders of M.A. and M.S. and Ph.D. degrees who are paid very high
>salaries to spend their day pushing that edge to new bounds.

Corporate R&D is very productive at turning out products the corporation
wants to market, but it suffers from the lamp post effect. They tend to
look under the lamp post because the light is better there. Nevermind
that something interesting may be over in the dark. Amateurs aren't
subject to that limitation. They tend to look wherever their curiosity
takes them. That's how Sam Harris developed the parametric amplifier.
Hams also dream up new applications of other people's ideas. Aloha
data comms had been developed by ARPA, but it was hams that saw the
techniques as a practical way to form ad hoc networks and pass error
free data, so hams developed the AX25 protocol. During the Gulf War,
the military bought amateur TNCs to put in their vehicles to pass firing
data in a timely and accurate manner. TAPR clones, not some product of a
high powered commercial R&D concern. HAL, a high powered SITOR marine
communications company, embraced the amateur developed Clover system
as a superior method of HF data transfer. They now market it aggressively
in the commercial world. KA9Q's TCP/IP implementation is licensed by
Telebit for use in their Netblazers, another amateur developed product
that has found recent commercial application.

Now true, the vast majority of hams just beep, or chase postal cards,
or make silly "Honey I just left the office where there are hundreds
of telephones" autopatches with their Japanese boxes, but amateur
innovation is not dead.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          | Where my job's going,  | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems | I don't know. It might | uunet!rsiatl!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             | wind up in Mexico.     | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |          -NAFTA Blues  |

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

Date: 23 Nov 93 06:05:43 GMT
From: ogicse!cs.uoregon.edu!sgiblab!darwin.sura.net!emory!kd4nc![e-mail]
Subject: Use of HT for Marine & GMRS
To: [e-mail]

<[e-mail]> writes:

>I have seen various discussions about using the out of band frequencies
>on a Amateur band tranceiver for Marine, GMRS or other services.
>If a person is an Amateur, and also holds liscenses for other services
>can he/she use their amateur radio on those services.  Is there a
>definitive authority or requlation cite which can be found to make
>such a determination ?

>Michael Barbitta

>KD6OAY +

OH boy oh boy oh boy.....

OK....here's how it works....  a 'ham' radio cannot legally be used on
any other frequency other than ham radio frequencies....the exception to this
rule is for MARS operators to operate ham radios on MARS channels, and CAP
operators to operate on CAP frequencies....these two services do have rules
on spectral purity and frequency tolerance - which most commercially produces
amateur radios meet or exceed.

However, supposed you are a cop and you're also licensed on Marine Band, in
MARS, and in CAP, you can buy a radio which is type accepted for PART90
and PART 80 (public safety and marine band) and also program in your
favorite ham radio repeaters, MARS freqs, and CAP repeaters and be legal
all the way around!

John
n4tii

>Standard Disclaimers Apply

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

Date: Sun, 21 Nov 93 15:54:57 CST
From: library.ucla.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!spool.mu.edu!sdd.hp.com!swrinde!menudo.uh.edu!jpunix!unkaphaed!amanda![e-mail]
Subject: Why the L.A. .435 repeater wasn't shut down
To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (Dan Pickersgill  N8PKV) writes:

> [e-mail] (Jeff Herman) writes:
>
> > I mentioned The Mess on the L.A. 147.435 repeater - that machine was
> > distroyed in the Malibu fire a few weeks ago. I received an interesting
> > email from someone very familiar with the problems in L.A. He stated
> > that the other repeater owners strongly desired that .435 NOT be
> > shut down - these other owners went so far as to pay the expenses
> > for .435 to keep it operating. Why? So that the bulk of The Mess
> > would stay on just one machine; if .435 were shut down The Mess would
> > infiltrate other repeaters. I believe the email writer even stated
> > that those owners who refused to support .435 had trouble with
> > jamming (sounds like radio terrorism).
> >
> > The Mess has now infiltrated the 147.22 CLARA repeater - they've
> > esentially taken it away from the prior users.
> >
> > Jeff NH6IL
>
> Jeff, sounds like someone should build some dopplers and make a few
> quads. Actually a properly attenuated beam is best. To jam they have to
> transmit. The more they do THAT, the easier they make it for me to find
> them.

The Barney Fife of the airwaves. Don't forget the bullet in your pocket!

 --Robert

____________________________________________________________________
|  A Codeless Technician is never a villain in his own eyes.       |
|  Keep this in mind; it may offer a way to make him your friend.  |
|  If not, you can kill him without hate - and quickly.            |
--------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1993 09:21:44 -0700
From: ftpbox!mothost!schbbs!node_13059.aieg.mot.com![e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

References <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>t
Subject : Re: No Code etc...

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Gary Coffman) wrote:

> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Michael P. Deignan) writes:
> >Ed Ellers <[e-mail]> writes:

> >Whether or not knowledge of Morse Code is relevant to SSB operation is
> >irrelevant. As of this point it is still required under treaty for HF
> >access, and therefore we have to incorporate it as such.
>
> Yes, at least until we change our treaty arrangements either by taking
> an exception as the Japanese did, or at the next competent WARC. PPT
> says that's at least 12 years away which is may be correct. However,
> the treaty doesn't set *any* speed requirement, so we're free to tinker
> with that as we desire in the meanwhile. And we can lobby aggressively
> for the US to take a rational position at the next opportunity to change
> the treaty requirements.

The treaty requirement really is a red herring, as has been pointed out
before.  We either take an "exception" to the treaty as the Japanes and a
few others have done or we work around it in some way.

For example:

The morse character for "A" is:  (1) dot dash (2) dot dot ....

One question on the test, asking for any one of 26 characters.

This would do no more than satisfy the letter of the treaty, but would
certainly remove Morse tests as an effective barrier to a ham ticket!

I hasten to add that I am *not* proposing this, only pointing out that the
treaty is not a barrier to what would be a "no-code" HF license.

--
Mike Waters  [e-mail]  [e-mail]

BOBS BEST BENT WIRE SK

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

Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1993 16:47:26 -0700
From: orca.es.com!cnn.sim.es.com!msanders.sim.es.com![e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

References <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>
Subject : Re: Another possible use of Morse code??

In article <[e-mail]>, F. Kevin Feeney
<[e-mail]> wrote:

>
> Kevin


Thanks Kevin.  I had missed earlier postings about the "mobile" aspect of
your ideas.  Makes much more sense when considering driving while sending,
receiving.  We need to keep our eyes on the road and at least one hand on
the wheel!
CUL
73
Milt
--
=========================================================================

Opinions, thoughts, &cetera are my own (when I can remember them).

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

Date: 23 Nov 93 03:19:57 GMT
From: ogicse!uwm.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!noc.near.net!news.delphi.com![e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

References <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>, <rcrw90-221193092144@node_13059.aieg.mot.com>
Subject : Re: No Code etc...

Thanks for the common sense.

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

Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1993 17:55:00 GMT
From: qualcomm.com!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!emory!wa4mei!ke4zv![e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

References <[e-mail]>>, <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>
Reply-To : [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject : Re: Why isn't Amateur Radio like CB?

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Douglas J Renze) writes:
>
>If their operating budget is at stake (where do you think that $30/yr would
>go to?), then yes, they'll nail the bootleggers.  They might run in the red
>for a few years, but they'll do it.

Where will the $30 go? Why the same place it used to go, into the General
Fund of the Federal government as it's required to by the Constitution.
Only the House of Representatives can appropriate funds to be expended
by Federal Agencies. They can't go out and set up their own little
extortion rackets and keep the proceeds.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          | Where my job's going,  | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems | I don't know. It might | uunet!rsiatl!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             | wind up in Mexico.     | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |          -NAFTA Blues  |

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

End of Ham-Policy Digest V93 #479
******************************
******************************