: I just put RF concepts 30 watts amp. in my car and every times I
: key on the air the car alarm go off. It'll stop as soon as I let off the
: key. When I turn the amp. off it's find. I have call RF concepts and
: they told me to use aluminum foid to wrap around the brain unit and
: siren. It's still go off everytimes. I have 5/8 larsen mount on the
: roof. The SWR read lower than 1.5:1. Any idea, what I have to do to
: have 30 watts amp. and car alarm.
First of all, you could eliminate some possibilities. Try the HT and amp
with an isolated power supply (12V, powered by 110V...or another car batt.)
This will let you know if the sudden power drain is triggering some "low
voltage warning" feature of the alarm. Maybe it's not a "feature", but
just a quirk. Mine gets weird at low voltage. If that's it, you probably
just need a bigger battery and/or alternator. If you can't do that,
you'll need to run a cut-off switch to the alarm and it's back-up batt.
(if it's got one).
If you think the RF output is the trigger, confirm this with a dummy
load at the output of the amp. If that is it, you may solve your problem
by moving the alarm and antenna as far apart as possible. If that STILL
doesn't do the trick, you'll probably have to use the cut-off switches
(or buy a different alarm).
Let us know what you find.
...chuck...KE4QPU...
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 1994 09:55:42 EDT
From: w1aw@arrl.org
Subject: ARLB084 FCC licensing changes
SB QST @ ARL $ARLB084
ARLB084 FCC licensing changes
ZCZC AG49
QST de W1AW
ARRL Bulletin 84 ARLB084
From ARRL Headquarters
Newington CT October 25, 1994
To all radio amateurs
SB QST ARL ARLB084
ARLB084 FCC licensing changes
The FCC today released a 7-page Order amending its amateur rules,
effective December 20, 1994, to reflect what the Commission calls
''nonsubstantive procedural changes'':
1. To permit electronically filed data from VECs (paper
applications also will still be accepted);
2. To authorize operation as soon as the new license data appears
in the amateur service licensee data base, rather than (as now) when
the license document has been delivered (details of how the new
licensee can determine his call sign will be announced later);
3. To add a new rules section, ''Examinee Conduct,'' to emphasize that
an examinee must comply with the instructions given by the
administering VEs;
4. To treat ''Technician Plus'' as a license class;
5. And to provide for a ''renewal short form'' which the FCC says
will be mailed to licensees in advance of their expiration date
beginning sometime in 1995. The FCC added that renewal applications
would be accepted no more than 90 days before the expiration date.
Because of the nature of these rule amendments, there is no notice
or comment period required by federal law. Again, these changes do
not take effect until December 20, 1994.
NNNN
/EX
------------------------------
Date: 25 Oct 1994 13:56:53 GMT
From: wjturner@iastate.edu (William J Turner)
Subject: Call Sign ID
In article <38hqas$6rt@detroit.freenet.org> ad779@detroit.freenet.org (John Hughes) writes:
>Is it appropriate or not to state a call with a double letter (i.e., xy8ppq) as xy8 double pq? An older Ham indicated this was not proper. Seems minor, with all the imaginative phonetics heard and people who say zed for the z in thei
>in their calls...which is supposed to be some fancy british pronunciation?
I'd say no. Say what you mean, and mean what you say. if you say
"double p", some will undoubtedly think you are using a cute phonetic
for d.
BTW--"zed" is the correct pronunciation for z. It keeps it from being
confused with c. Of course, only old-timers probably know this, as it
hasn't been stressed much at all lately.
------------------------------
Date: 25 Oct 1994 10:17:55 GMT
From: kebsch@pdb.sni.de (Waldemar Kebsch)
Subject: callsign server site
In <9410241828.AA04591@tix.timeplex.com> taylor@tix.timeplex.COM (Seth Taylor) writes:
>Can anyone advise where I might telnet to get a US based
