QRZ! Ham Radio 4/QRZ Ham Radio Callsign Database - Volume 4.iso/digests/infoham/940795.txt

Internet Message Format | 1994-11-13 | 24KB

Date: Fri, 15 Jul 94 07:37:43 PDT
From: Info-Hams Mailing List and Newsgroup <[e-mail]>
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Precedence: Bulk
Subject: Info-Hams Digest V94 #795
To: Info-Hams


Info-Hams Digest            Fri, 15 Jul 94       Volume 94 : Issue  795

Today's Topics:
                     2M opening to Hawaii de CA.
                         CW - THE ONLY MODE!
                            Enough already
                FCC accepts no data entry volunteers?
                      HTX202/404 Mods? (2 msgs)
                 Learning the dreaded CODE! (2 msgs)
                Letter to Washington about FCC delays
                Please read: Ham Radio Bootcamp (Long)
                           SAREX Keps 7/15
                              Tech Plus?
                       th78e and antenna tv !!!

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: Thu, 14 Jul 94 14:18:19 PDT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!swrinde!emory!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!gatech!ncar!noao!asuvax!chnews![e-mail]
Subject: 2M opening to Hawaii de CA.
To: [e-mail]

When I lived in Ohio (ex: WA8NSH) 20 some years ago, I worked W1AW on
two meter FM through a Pittsburg, PA repeater. I know I could of just
pick up the phone and called W1AW, however its fun to play with radios
when you get conditions which are unexpected. That's what the hobby is
all about, playing and having fun!!!

Tom WB7ASR...

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

Date: Thu, 14 Jul 1994 21:51:14 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!swrinde!emory!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!newsfeed.ksu.ksu.edu!moe.ksu.ksu.edu!osuunx.ucc.okstate.edu!olesun![e-mail]
Subject: CW - THE ONLY MODE!
To: [e-mail]

In article <30494e$[e-mail]>, Dan Brown <[e-mail]> wrote:
>In article <[e-mail]>, Ray Wade ([e-mail]) wrote:
>:  On 07-11-94 STEVEN JACKSON wrote to ALL...
>
>:  SJ> breaking into the tv programs, the local tv station played ---.. at
>
>: Its a morse oh (letter "O") so maybe it means "oh, s**t" as in watch
>
>    --- is the letter O, but I think ---.. represents the numeral 8
>instead.  No idea what it'd mean, of course...
>
One of our tv stations send WX in Morse before weather advisories.
Gordon AB5DG

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

Date: Thu, 14 Jul 1994 22:45:47 GMT
From: news.Hawaii.Edu!kahuna![e-mail]
Subject: Enough already
To: [e-mail]

In article <303g7b$[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>Jeff,
>It seems to me you were the only person saying -40F=-40C meant
>that you could cancel the -40s.  Everyone else seemed to realize
>that since you can't put a degree sign in a usenet post, it was
>just deleted.
>
>Sheesh

Read the portion you deleted! He said something like:

`` -40F = -40C would mean F = C ....''.

That's  why certain portions of previously posted articles are
included - the followup refers to the included text. You've got
to read the included text to understand the followup.

Sheesh.

Jeff  NH6IL

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

Date: 14 Jul 94 11:36:40 EDT
From: psinntp!main03![e-mail]
Subject: FCC accepts no data entry volunteers?
To: [e-mail]

In article <3010g1$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Scott Richard Rosenfeld) writes:
> Apparently, there's a clause in somebody's law book that prohibits the
> FCC from accepting volunteer help in doing data entry.  Apparently the
> Gettysburg people would love the help, but CAN'T accept it.  Looks like
> well, I don't know what it looks like...
Probably union rules.
> Purdy ridiculous, eh?
Yes they are.
--
Joe Landis - System & Network Mgr. - North American Drager Co. Telford, PA
[e-mail] | uupsi5!main03!landisj | AA3GN@WB3JOE.#EPA.PA.USA
Opinions are mine only, and do not reflect those of my employer.
...Munging Until No Good...

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

Date: 14 Jul 94 11:38:49 EDT
From: psinntp!main03![e-mail]
Subject: HTX202/404 Mods?
To: [e-mail]

In article <2vo9a2$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Charles Richards) writes:
>  Does anybody have, or know where I can get plans for modifications
> (freq. expanding, etc.) for the HTX202 or HTX404? And is it possible to
> get the 404 up to 462.675(React)?
>                                      Thanks,
>
>                                      [e-mail]
>                                      (waitin' for that ticket)
>
They're arent any, and no. Thats why the reciever performs so well in them.
--
Joe Landis - System & Network Mgr. - North American Drager Co. Telford, PA
[e-mail] | uupsi5!main03!landisj | AA3GN@WB3JOE.#EPA.PA.USA
Opinions are mine only, and do not reflect those of my employer.
...Munging Until No Good...

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

Date: 14 Jul 1994 21:12:02 -0400
From: newstf01.cr1.aol.com!search01.news.aol.com![e-mail]
Subject: HTX202/404 Mods?
To: [e-mail]

In article <302v3o$[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (Charles Richards) writes:

>The HTX-202, for the most part, is a nice, simple, design.

: Rumor has it that Maxon builds them.  Really!
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Maxon DOES build them and very well at that. The reason these little
radios have good receivers is because of their limited bandwidth. There is
always a compromise when they add extra coverage.

- Rob, N1NTE

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

Date: 14 Jul 94 09:52:13 EDT
From: psinntp!main03![e-mail]
Subject: Learning the dreaded CODE!
To: [e-mail]

[Erich Stocker wrote]
...
> For the past year I have been trying to get up to 13wpm.  I practice
> every day for at least 30min and many days twice for 30min.  I can,
> with 90% accuracy, take 5, 6 or 7 character random code groups (on
> my computer not with pencil) at 18wpm.  However, when I shift to
> random length code groups, I have trouble even getting 10 wpm at a
> less than 90% accuracy rate.
>
...
> After a close to a year of being able to take fixed length random
> code groups at 18wpm and still not being able to complete 13 wpm
> transmission rate, I'm fairly bored with the entire process. Beeping
> away is not my idea of fun or challenge.  Quite honestly, its just a
> big bore.
>
> Erich
>
Erich, have you TRIED the take the exam yet? Why not give it a shot? You don't
NEED to copy 100%. And if you take it with ARRL VE's, it's multiple choice.
100% copy comes with lots of time and practice. Doesn't happen in real QSO's
either. You have to "fill in the blanks" based on context. Go for it anyway!
You may be pleasantly surprised. Worst that can happen is that you're out $5.60.

Joe - AA3GN (ARRL VE)
--
Joe Landis - System & Network Mgr. - North American Drager Co. Telford, PA
[e-mail] | uupsi5!main03!landisj | AA3GN@WB3JOE.#EPA.PA.USA
Opinions are mine only, and do not reflect those of my employer.
...Munging Until No Good...

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

Date: 14 Jul 1994 19:33:21 GMT
From: pacbell.com!sgiblab!sgigate.sgi.com!olivea!charnel.ecst.csuchico.edu!nic-nac.CSU.net!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!newsrelay.iastate.edu!news.iastate.edu!@@ihnp4.ucsd.edu
Subject: Learning the dreaded CODE!
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Joe Landis - System & Network Mgr) writes:
>Erich, have you TRIED the take the exam yet? Why not give it a shot? You don't
>NEED to copy 100%. And if you take it with ARRL VE's, it's multiple choice.
>100% copy comes with lots of time and practice. Doesn't happen in real QSO's
>either. You have to "fill in the blanks" based on context. Go for it anyway!
>You may be pleasantly surprised. Worst that can happen is that you're out $5.60.

Acutally, it's $5.75 for 1994.  (At least for ARRL VEs.)

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

Date: Thu, 14 Jul 1994 12:57:58 GMT
From: lerc.nasa.gov!kira.cc.uakron.edu!malgudi.oar.net!witch!doghouse![e-mail]
Subject: Letter to Washington about FCC delays
To: [e-mail]


In article <301c1d$[e-mail]>, Ira Machefsky ([e-mail]) writes:
>If our congressional representatives cut the budget without forseeing this
>difficulty, then they bungled, not the FCC. If the ARRL opposed license fees
>(which I understand they did), then they bungled. No one is doing me a service
>by saving me 10 bucks and making me wait 17 weeks.
>

The opposition to license fees is based on the fact that under the
current system, any fees paid go into the general fund, and NOT to the
agency actually issuing the license.  The only way I'd pay a fee is if
I was absolutely sure it went to the FCC, and not to the Department of
Investigating Nose-picking.

73...joe



----------
Joe Salemi, KR4CZ               Internet: [e-mail]
Compuserve: 72631,23   FidoNet: 1:109/136   MCI Mail: 433-3961

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

Date: 14 Jul 1994 21:09:06 -0400
From: newstf01.cr1.aol.com!search01.news.aol.com![e-mail]
Subject: Please read: Ham Radio Bootcamp (Long)
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>,
William=E.=[e-mail] writes:

>i think the CB bands around here have been picked clean as far as finding

people interested in getting into amateur radio or those needing things
like
GMRS or cell radiophones.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

This may be true in some parts of the country but I've heard otherwise
about other parts. There is a lot of mis-information in radio land
regarding ham radio and I think its a matter of setting the record
straight. A lot of operators would enjoy becoming hams if they knew more
about it.

My comments in my mini-article may not apply in all circumstances but I
think, judging by the replies I've received that an overwhelming amount of
hams consider CB to still have some potential.

I am taking my own advice by getting my CB up and running and searching
for "fresh game".

- Rob, N1NTE

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

Date: 15 Jul 94 13:28:41 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: SAREX Keps 7/15
To: [e-mail]

SB SAREX @ AMSAT $STS-65.010
SAREX Keps 7/15 at 13:30 UTC

Greenbelt, MD 7/15 at 13:30 UTC

At this time, the official SAREX Orbital element set for the STS-65 Space
Shuttle Mission is set GSFC-023a with the NORAD drag values corrected by
Gil Carman, WA5NOM.  This set was generated by Ron Parise, WA4SIR at the
Goddard Space Flight Center.

STS-65
1 23173U 94039A   94196.27214970 0.00067371  00000-0  20209-3 0   230
2 23173  28.4690 318.5489 0002791  13.8590 346.2097 15.90733062  1064

Satellite: STS-65
Catalog number: 23173
Epoch time:      94196.27214970         (15 JUL 94   06:31:53.74 UTC)
Element set:     GSFC-023a
Inclination:       28.4690 deg
RA of node:       318.5489 deg          Space Shuttle Flight STS-65
Eccentricity:    0.0002791                  Keplerian Elements
Arg of perigee:    13.8590 deg
Mean anomaly:     346.2097 deg
Mean motion:   15.90733062 rev/day      Semi-major Axis: 6678.3626 Km
Decay rate:     6.7371E-04 rev/day*2    Apogee  Alt:        301.84 Km
Epoch rev:             106              Perigee Alt:        298.11 Km

NOTE - This element set is based on NORAD element set # 023.
       The spacecraft has been propagated to the next ascending
       node, and the orbit number has been adjusted to bring it
       into agreement with the NASA numbering convention.


Submitted by Frank H. Bauer, KA3HDO for the SAREX Working Group

/EX

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

Date: Thu, 14 Jul 1994 12:59:57 GMT
From: lerc.nasa.gov!kira.cc.uakron.edu!malgudi.oar.net!witch!doghouse![e-mail]
Subject: Tech Plus?
To: [e-mail]


In article <301obd$[e-mail]>, Steve Bertsch ([e-mail]) writes:
>OK, I've been out of touch for a while.*  Be gentle.  What is this tech+
>license I keep hearing about? A new class, or simply code credit to work
>the HF novice bands? If the former, how do privileges differ from a plain
>tech?
>

Tech Plus is a Tech who's passed the 5wpm code test. A Tech Plus has
all technician privileges (everything above 30MHz), as well as Novice
HF privileges.

73...joe



----------
Joe Salemi, KR4CZ               Internet: [e-mail]
Compuserve: 72631,23   FidoNet: 1:109/136   MCI Mail: 433-3961

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

Date: Wed, 13 Jul 1994 00:04:59 GMT
From: tandem!pacbell.com!pb2esac![e-mail]
Subject: th78e and antenna tv !!!
To: [e-mail]

In article <2vtfp5$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] writes:
> In article <2vqss5$[e-mail]>,
> Fabio MUCINGHIA II Morandi <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >i have a problem !!!
> >a man that live near my house, say that, when i tal with my radio, him
> >tv is disturb !!!! is it possible ???? Fabio (IW2HNP)
>
> Hi Fabio, is his TV FCC approved?... just kidding. You did not say what
> frequency you are on but if you are on HF, get a low-pass filter for you
> and a high-pass filter for him. It is possible that the design of his TV
> is so bad, nothing you can do can help. I wait until all my neighbors go
> to sleep and then work DX.
>
> Good Luck and 73, KG7BK, [e-mail]
>
>

Isn't the TH-78E the European version of the TH-78A 2M/440
hand-held?  I don't know what frequencies are used for TV
in Europe, but I've never seen my TH-78A affect anyone's TV
at all.  In fact, my J-Pole is on the same mast as my TV
antenna, just above it.

There are frequencies used inside cable TV systems that fall
in the 2 meter range, though.  In some communities, 145.250 is
totally un-usable because of all the leakage caused by poor
cable hardware (or is it cable piracy causing the radiation?).

Just my .02 Lira worth... ;-)


--
John Minger  KE6DTC                        "Society is like a stew.  If you
Glendale, CA                            don't keep it stirred up, you get a
<[e-mail]>                   lot of scum on top."  -Edward Abbey

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

Date: Thu, 14 Jul 1994 12:49:48 GMT
From: lerc.nasa.gov!kira.cc.uakron.edu!malgudi.oar.net!witch!doghouse![e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

References <[e-mail]><2vpr3g$[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]><2vu2d0$[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]><300mv7$[e-mail]>ue
Reply-To : [e-mail] (Joe Salemi)
Subject : Re: The Amateur Radio Service is a Joke


In article <300mv7$[e-mail]>, Michael P. Deignan ([e-mail]) writes:
>If you have a person jamming your repeater today, you can't get the FCC to
>lift a finger. Numerous cases have been cited here about troublemakers whom,
>even after you've caught and they've admitted to it, continue to cause
>problems. A troublemaker has to interfere with other services before the
>FCC even takes notice. The net result will be more lawsuits and guerilla
>warfare as the only way to fight the RF terrorist will become lowering
>yourself to their level. Someone in this very newsgroup posted how they
>planted a white-noise generator near a repeater to wreck havoc and get it
>off the air.

Which completely ignores the list the FCC publishes every month of
NAL's that were issued, including quite a few to hams.

>
>We've got a testing system that is a joke. People selling ham licenses,
>those willing to "study" simply have to memorize the published question
>pool. I wonder how my students would do on their exams if I gave them
>the questions and answers before the examination.

Which is the same test system used for pilot licenses, drivers
licenses, and most other licenses that exist today. If someone can
memorize the answers to 600 questions, they probably deserve a license
-- not to mention that if they memorize the answers, they've learned
the information anyway, becase most learning consists of memorization
anyway.  Or did you figure out the multiplication tables on your own?

>You're deluding yourself if you think you're going to be the instrument of
>change. Amateur radio today is CB radio of the 1970's. Get used to it,
>its here to stay.
>


Well, it's obvious we're not going to agree.  Enjoy yourself bitching
about how bad things are -- I'm too busy helping to teach
amateur radio classes, running ARES events, and working at VE sessions
to have time to do it.  We'll let time see who has the greater effect
on the service.



----------
Joe Salemi, KR4CZ               Internet: [e-mail]
Compuserve: 72631,23   FidoNet: 1:109/136   MCI Mail: 433-3961

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

Date: Thu, 14 Jul 1994 12:41:47 GMT
From: lerc.nasa.gov!kira.cc.uakron.edu!malgudi.oar.net!witch!doghouse![e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

References <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>, <3000gt$[e-mail]><300ick$[e-mail]>.edu
Reply-To : [e-mail] (Joe Salemi)
Subject : Re: Lack of professional consideration for HAM operators


In article <[e-mail]>, Erich Franz Stocker ([e-mail]) writes:
>Well while I know the frustrations of waiting for the ticket, I have to
>say that the FCC has larger fish to fry than Ham radio.  Also, the amateur
>service has no RESPONSIBILITY for emergency radio service.  Hams provide
>such services but there is no legal expectation or requirement for it.
>

Suggest you read Part 97 (you DO have a copy, right?) -- right in the
first section you'll find the following:

"97.1 The rules and regulations in this Part are designed to provide an
amateur radio service having a fundamental purpose expressed in the
following principles:

(a) Recognition and enhancement of the value of the amateur service to
the public as a voluntary noncommercial communication service,
particularly with respect to providing emergency communications."

There are four other purposes listed, but emergency communications is
the first.  So there certainly IS a responsibility and legal
expectation for hams providing emergency communications.

73...joe









----------
Joe Salemi, KR4CZ               Internet: [e-mail]
Compuserve: 72631,23   FidoNet: 1:109/136   MCI Mail: 433-3961

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

Date: Thu, 14 Jul 1994 12:55:44 GMT
From: lerc.nasa.gov!kira.cc.uakron.edu!malgudi.oar.net!witch!doghouse![e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

References <2vrslk$[e-mail]>, <2vs5rm$[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]><[e-mail]>kei.
Reply-To : [e-mail] (Joe Salemi)
Subject : Re: IARU Contest


In article <[e-mail]>, Greg Bullough ([e-mail]) writes:
>Funny how impressions differ. I jumped in around 2300Z, just to see
>what could be done with 20m. With the TR7 barefoot and a 90-foot wire
>on an SGC-230, I worked 'em as fast as I could tune 'em. Only one or
>two state-side stations. I did just about 30 countries in 4+ hours,
>all on 20. Mostly worked stations on the second or third call.
>

Where are you located?  Early indications from scores on posted on the
local packet cluster seemed to indicate that the propagation to some
areas was much better than others.  Around here, it looked like
Pennsylvania to the North was hopping, while the D.C. Metro area was a
black hole as far as most signals were concerned...

73...joe



----------
Joe Salemi, KR4CZ               Internet: [e-mail]
Compuserve: 72631,23   FidoNet: 1:109/136   MCI Mail: 433-3961

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

Date: 14 Jul 1994 23:29:10 GMT
From: news.cerf.net!gopher.sdsc.edu!news.tc.cornell.edu!travelers.mail.cornell.edu!news.kei.com!yeshua.marcam.com!zip.eecs.umich.edu!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!gatech!swrinde!sdd.@@ihnp4.ucsd.edu
To: [e-mail]

References <2vuena$[e-mail]>, <2vv0vl$[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>m
Subject : Re: which Ringo do I buy?

Gary Coffman ([e-mail]) wrote:
: In article <2vv0vl$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Scott Turner) writes:
: >I just love the net.  Everything tends to take on a binary nature, as
: >though the 0's and 1's from the computer were permeating the thoughts
: >and ideas of those using it.  Everything is either great or it's junk
: >with nothing in between.

: >Scott - singing the praises of mediocrity :-)

: Ah, well, that says it all. :-)

: It's true that even a wet string will radiate after a fashion. I've
: even made fairly distant contacts using a lightbulb dummy load. And
: we all know how good rubber duckies are, but we still use them.

Doggone it Gary, that's exactly what I was referring to!  We agree that
Diamond and Comet make superior antennas, but I can't agree with
comparisons to wet strings, lightbulbs and grounding rods.  That's just
not fair to readers looking for information.  Ringos work.  Other, more
expensive antennas work better.  Wet strings are wet strings.

: It just seems odd to me that people, who will spend *thousands* on radio
: equipment, balk at spending a few extra dollars for a good antenna system.
: A better antenna is almost always more cost effective than a better radio.

Again agreed.  It's really a case, though, of when enough is enough.  A
while back, I was talking to a friend who was up in the mountains with a
portable 2 meter beam doing a little mountaintopping and looking for fm
contacts.  He was continuously frustrated because, as we talked, folks
kept jumping into the QSO calling *me* because of my big signal.
Several folks that day almost refused to believe my location as they'd
never worked FM simplex that far before.  It works because the
combination of antenna mast and house location yield a good HAAT.  A
better omni antenna is simply not going to improve things much.  Nor is
it going to help the hapless individual stuck in a hole.

BTW, like many (maybe even most) hams, when I originally put the Ringo
up it was hooked to a very marginal radio and money most certainly *was*
an issue.  Even now the radio that drives it is hardly worth thousands.
Neither, I would guess, are most ham's VHF rigs, particularly those
hooked to omni antennas.  If you're talking about a quality all-mode VHF/UHF
rig then certainly it's poor economy to scrimp on antennas.  I don't
think that's what the original poster was doing.  I don't think that's
what most people are doing.  A Ringo is a decent, cost-effective way to
hook up a VHF mobile or HT in a house to work repeaters and a bit of
simplex.

There's really no point in paying Ferrari prices to drive 2 miles through
city traffic to commute to work.  I like having the best too.  When
there's a point to it.


Scott Turner  KG0MR  [e-mail]

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

End of Info-Hams Digest V94 #795
******************************