QRZ! Ham Radio 4/QRZ Ham Radio Callsign Database - Volume 4.iso/digests/infoham/941162.txt

Internet Message Format | 1994-11-13 | 28KB

Date: Thu, 27 Oct 94 03:09:10 PDT
From: Info-Hams Mailing List and Newsgroup <[e-mail]>
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Precedence: List
Subject: Info-Hams Digest V94 #1162
To: Info-Hams


Info-Hams Digest            Thu, 27 Oct 94       Volume 94 : Issue 1162

Today's Topics:
                           AM AIRBAND INFO
                             Call Sign ID
                          Change of address
        Earth Ground (was: ARRL And Gay Hams Settle Complaint)
                     Exploring the Internet (QST)
                   IPS Daily Report - 26 October 94
                            Is this legal?
                     LOGIC (Logbook Program)????
                     PGP-Signatur in PACKET RADIO
                    Philippine Reciprocal License
                   PRB-1: Send it to me please????
                      Questions on this and that
                      Repeater Controller 4 sale
                               Spectrum
                           TEST MESSAGE...
                      The Kenwood TH-79 (2 msgs)
                       What is "Amateur Radio"?
                  What is my CQ zone number (2 msgs)

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: 27 Oct 94 15:15:00 GMT
From: [e-mail] (VEKINIS Peter)
Subject: AM AIRBAND INFO

A friend of mine who works in search and rescue is looking for an HT that
can handle AM airband xmit plus FM xmit. It turns out that Search and Rescue
personnel wear equipment on them and they cant be asked to have even more
equipment in their suits.
Does anyone know of a rig that can handfle AM transmit and FM, in otherwords
offer 118-136MHz AM plus the FM band. He needs AM to talk to the Chopper S&R
personnel and FM to talk to Police etc. An amateur radio HT that is
modifiable would do nicely.
Thanks,
Peter, KC1QF
[e-mail]

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

Date: 27 Oct 1994 04:28:55 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Brian Kantor)
Subject: Call Sign ID

>
>An older Ham indicated this was not proper.
>What does the group think?

I think that older Ham has entirely too much time on his hands.

The local FCC office once cited a commercial outfit for identifying
as K-A-B-nine, when their callsign was KAB0009.  They changed to using
K-A-B-triple-oh-nine and were not cited again.  I suspect that if the
monitoring station can figure it out, it's all right.
    - Brian

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

Date: Wed, 26 Oct 1994 20:42:19 UNDEFINED
From: [e-mail] (Gene Maletta)
Subject: Change of address

Where should I write to for change of address for my licence and any fee?
Email info if possible     [e-mail]

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

Date: 27 Oct 1994 04:23:33 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Brian Kantor)
Subject: Earth Ground (was: ARRL And Gay Hams Settle Complaint)

>May God have pity on your troubled souls,

"Do you know why I drink only pure rainwater, Mandrake?  ... Purity of
Essence, that's the key... I have made love to a number of women, but I
never share my essence with them..."
    - Gen. Jack D. Ripper (dec.)

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

Date: 27 Oct 1994 00:46:57 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Scott Ehrlich)
Subject: Exploring the Internet (QST)

In article <38mkd9$[e-mail]>, Michael Crestohl <[e-mail]> wrote:
>In article <38m73s$[e-mail]>,
>Scott Ehrlich <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>
>>Greetings!
>>
>>I have written a published article in the ham radio magazine QST
>>(published by the American Radio Relay League) on ham radio and the
>>Internet.   The whole series is called "Exploring The Internet-Part x"
>>where 'x' is one of the parts shown below:
>>
>>
>>If you miss the series, don't have access to QST, or simply want
>>reprints, here is the information (provided by Steve Ford):
>>
>>Article copies are $3 per article. The contact person is:
>>
>>Bridget DiCosimo
>>Technical Department Secretary
>>ARRL
>>225 Main St
>>Newington, CT 06111
>>
>Why don't you just post the articles in this newsgroup?
>
>73,
>
>Michael KH6KD/W1
>[e-mail]
>

First, that would by copyright infringment.  Second, I want people to
actually read the article in the magazine or as a reprint.  There are
some nice examples and sidebars you would be missing if it were posted here.

Neither I nor anyone else can stop someone from doing this, but I
certainly won't.


Believe me.  The series is worth reading in the magazine or in reprint form.
The responses I've already received have proven that point.

73,
Scott


--
Scott Ehrlich       Amateur Radio Callsign: wy1z     E-mail: [e-mail]
Boston ARC ftp archives: ftp oak.oakland.edu /pub/hamradio
Boston ARC Web page: http://www.acs.oakland.edu/barc.html
Ham Radio and More: http://www.acs.oakland.edu/barc/ham-more/ham-more.html

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

Date: Wed, 26 Oct 1994 23:45:59 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Regional Warning Centre)
Subject: IPS Daily Report - 26 October 94

SUBJ: IPS DAILY SOLAR AND GEOPHYSICAL REPORT
ISSUED AT 26/2330Z OCTOBER 1994 BY IPS RADIO AND SPACE SERVICES
FROM THE REGIONAL WARNING CENTRE (RWC), SYDNEY.
SUMMARY FOR 26 OCTOBER AND FORECAST FOR 27 OCTOBER - 29 OCTOBER
-----------------------------------------------------------
1A. SOLAR SUMMARY
Activity: very low

Flares: none.

Observed 10.7 cm flux/Equivalent Sunspot Number :  93/38

GOES satellite data for 25 Oct
       Daily Proton Fluence >1 MeV:   4.2E+05
       Daily Proton Fluence >10 MeV:  5.4E+04
       Daily Electron Fluence >2 MeV: 3.7E+08 (moderate)
       X-ray background: B1.6
Fluence (flux accumulation over 24hrs)/ cm2-ster-day.

1B. SOLAR FORECAST
             27 Oct             28 Oct             29 Oct
Activity     Low                Low                Low
Fadeouts     None expected      None expected      None expected

Forecast 10.7 cm flux/Equivalent Sunspot Number for 27 Oct:  95/41

-----------------------------------------------------------
2A. MAGNETIC SUMMARY
Geomagnetic field at Learmonth: quiet to unsettled

Estimated Indices : A   K           Observed A Index 25 Oct
    Learmonth        7  3222 2121
    Fredericksburg   8                           8
    Planetary       12                          11

Observed Kp for 25 Oct: 2442 2122
2B. MAGNETIC FORECAST
DATE      Ap    CONDITIONS
27 Oct    22    Quiet to unsettled initially, possible active to
minor storm levels late in the UT day.
28 Oct    20    Unsettled to active
29 Oct    15    Unsettled to active
COMMENT: disturbances are expected late today due to a small
flare on the 25th.

-----------------------------------------------------------
3A. GLOBAL HF PROPAGATION SUMMARY
                LATITUDE BAND
DATE        LOW            MIDDLE         HIGH
26 Oct      normal         normal-fair    normal-fair
PCA Event : None.

3B. GLOBAL HF PROPAGATION FORECAST
                LATITUDE BAND
DATE        LOW            MIDDLE         HIGH
27 Oct      normal         normal-fair    normal-fair
28 Oct      normal         normal-fair    fair
29 Oct      normal         normal-fair    fair

-----------------------------------------------------------
4A. AUSTRALIAN REGION IONOSPHERIC SUMMARY
       Observed
DATE   T-index  MUFs at Sydney
26 Oct     7    about 10 to 15% below predicted monthly values

Predicted Monthly T-index for October: 20

4B. AUSTRALIAN REGION IONOSPHERIC FORECAST
DATE   T-index  MUFs
27 Oct     5    10 to 15% below predicted monthly values
28 Oct     5    10 to 15% below predicted monthly values
29 Oct     5    10 to 15% below predicted monthly values
COMMENT: slightly depressed conditions are persisting at Sydney.
Townsville were near predicted values yesterday.
Degraded conditions may be experienced on 28th due to a recent solar
flare.

--
IPS Regional Warning Centre, Sydney       |IPS Radio and Space Services
RWC Duty Forecaster   tel: [phone]  |PO Box 5606
Recorded Message      tel: [phone]  |West Chatswood NSW 2057
email: [e-mail]  fax: [phone]  |AUSTRALIA

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

Date: Wed, 26 Oct 94 15:04:52 EST
From: [e-mail] (Deef)
Subject: Is this legal?

M{>{[e-mail]}

M{>I live in New York State and my brother-in-law is presently living in
M{>Colombia, South America. He's not a ham but has a short wave radio. Would
M{>it be legal for me to make a one-way transmission intended for him to
M{>hear, or are amateur radio transmissions only legal if they're 2-way w/
M{>other hams?

M{>KB2PWM

"Fox hunt" contests for hidden transmitters are legal, and those aren't
two-way transmissions.  But, you raise an interesting question,
especially since it is an international communication.
--Deef ([e-mail]) N1JAL

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

Date: 26 Oct 1994 13:27:59 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Waldemar Kebsch)
Subject: LOGIC (Logbook Program)????

Hi,

I have got the hint, that the progy "LOGIC" will be the ultimative
loggbook progy, but no info about where I can get it?

Any recommendations?

73 de DK3VN
Waldemar
--
Waldemar Kebsch  (dk3vn),  c/o  Siemens Nixdorf Informationssysteme AG,
33106 Paderborn, Federal Republic of Germany, E-Mail: [e-mail]

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

Date: 26 Oct 1994 16:31:20 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Jeff Racz)
Subject: PGP-Signatur in PACKET RADIO

[e-mail] wrote:

: IT>A ham is only allowed to use "open speech". But signing a message
: IT>with the program PGP might be ok.

: IT>It could reduce the possibility of pirates in amateur radio using
: IT>others call sign to work in Packet Radio.

: IT>Any comments are welcome

You should refer to the section of the rules prohibiting amateurs from using
codes and cyphers in communicating.  I think that they pretty explicitly
exclude the use of PGP in amateur radio.

Just my .02 worth.
73...de kj5az, Jeff Racz, Houston, Texas

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

Date: 26 Oct 1994 01:02:27 -0700
From: [e-mail] (Dominic C. Mercado)
Subject: Philippine Reciprocal License

To all Filipino ham operators:

I plan to take a trip to the Philippines next April. I was wondering
if anyone had any experience getting a reciprocal license to operate
there.  Also, if there is a club in the Manila area that would let me
operate their equipment while I'm there.  I'm aware of the Philippine
Amateur Radio Association.  Maybe someone could tell me more about
them.

Thank you in advance,
Dominic Mercado, Burbank CA
Packet:    KC6ZCR @ K6VE.#SOCAL.CA.USA.NOAM
Internet:  [e-mail]
           [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 27 Oct 1994 01:25:22 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Don Woelz)
Subject: PRB-1: Send it to me please????

I need a copy of PRB-1 as quickly as possible.  Can someone please
send me a copy via email to  [e-mail]  right away if you have
it.  I have an antenna zoning problem that I believe can be solved
by having this in hand.

Thanks and regards,
Don
K9GR

   Donald D. Woelz, K9GR              Office Phone: [phone]
   GENROCO, Inc.                      K9GR @WB9TYT.#MKE.WI.USA.NOAM
   205 Kettle Moraine Drive North     [e-mail] [44.92.1.48]
   Slinger, WI 53086   U.S.A.         [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 27 Oct 1994 01:37:58 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Jeffrey Herman)
Subject: Questions on this and that

[e-mail] writes:

[e-mail] (Jeffrey Herman) writes:

>>[e-mail] (David Jenkins) writes:

>>>2)  I heard WB9RUM talking to a CBAGV (I'm pretty sure) on CW last night.

>>Might it have been C6AGV? Or even CB1GV is a possibility - some folks,
>>after the first exchange of callsigns, may shorten the numeric charac-
>>tor to just the first two elements: A = 1, N = 6, T = 0 (not legal!).

>What isn't legal?  As long as no one is encoding text to obscure meaning,
>and properly identify with a complete callsign every ten minutes (for US
>amateurs), the callsign may be abbreviated.
>
>What makes you think this isn't legal?

The 10-minute ID is what I had in mind, Dana. But I still wouldn't test
the FCC regarding this.  Along these lines:

Here's a cute anecdote provided by Chuck K5FO: During the late 50's,
the phrase `Shave and a haircut - two bits'' became popular on
either the broadcast AM radio or TV (might have been a commercial).
Hams started using the first part (.  ...  .) in place of CQ on
HF. Another station hearing the psudo-CQ would answer with the
``two bits'' part:  .  .  and the QSO would then take off. This
got very popular with US hams but the FCC took a dim view of it
and started handing out lots of pink slips. The dit dit is still
retained on HF today - you'll hear a CW op end a QSO with that.

Why would the FCC not like the  .  ...  .  /  . .  exchange in
place of CQ and the proper response? Only recognized prosigns
are to be used on CW. Thus, I wouldn't test the FCC regarding
sending an A or N or T in place of 1 or 6 or 0, respectively,
with regard to a callsign exchange.

Jeff NH6IL

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

Date: Thu, 27 Oct 1994 00:33:06 GMT
From: [e-mail] (tracy diers)
Subject: Repeater Controller 4 sale

ACC  RC 85 repeater controller four sale. Cost 1000 dollars new will sell
for500. Works fine, I got new repeater and it has its own controller
built in. Get info from W2OQK by Email at [e-mail] or
call 718-651-2798 or packet me at K2APL-4. Nmae is Tracy  73s

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

Date: Thu, 27 Oct 1994 03:58:44 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Ekenneth Tracy Son)
Subject: Spectrum

Hello to all.  I hope this message is getting out.  This is to all the
hams who spend a good bit of time on the hf bands.  I would like to have
the list of hf frequencies for Australia and New Zealand Please.  I would
also like to have a list of hf frequencies used in England.  Please send
replies to [e-mail].  Thank you.
Tracy.

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

Date: Wed, 26 Oct 94 22:59:00 -0400
From: [e-mail] (Pat Wilson)
Subject: TEST MESSAGE...

-> Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
-> Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
-> Organization: InfoDude Com. Palo Alto Ca
->
-> Test message, can I get ONE repsonse, please?
->
-> -Evan Platt
-> Southern Region Director
-> Bay Area Fire Photographers Association
-> Internet:[e-mail]
->
-> --
-> ---- Sent by: InfoDude Communications,
->             [phone]
->             Palo Alto, Ca.
->             Via Major Gateway/Internet


Hell NO!!!!!!!

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

Date: Thu, 27 Oct 1994 04:23:35 GMT
From: [e-mail] (James J Martin)
Subject: The Kenwood TH-79

Fred McKenzie ([e-mail]) wrote:
: In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] wrote:
: > Anyone have the Kenwood TH-79? Any opioninos on it?? performance? I'm
: > considering purchasing it, and not sure....

: Evan-

: I was waiting for the weekend, so I could go get the new radio, when I
: read a review here.  The article was quite complimentary of the TH-79, and
: even included details on how to expand its coverage.

: However, there was one shortcoming that stopped me from even considering
: the radio:  the report indicated that it does not have "lock-out"
: capability for scanning.  This feature was supposed to be claimed on the
: flyer from Kenwood, but wasn't mentioned in the owner's manual.

: There was a rumor that Kenwood had been made aware of this shortcoming,
: and was considering a modification.  If they did, I'd plan an immediate
: trip to the nearest Ham store!  However, it has been a couple of months
: now, and no further word.

: Does anyone have an update?  Can anyone verify the report of the missing
: lock-out feature?

: 73, Fred, K4DII

Fred,

No modification in the plans for now.  Maybe a new radio in the future
though, with the missing feature.  Just to make sure, next time I
speak with Loren I'll being it up again.

73 de Jim, WK1V

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

Date: Thu, 27 Oct 1994 04:27:30 GMT
From: [e-mail] (James J Martin)
Subject: The Kenwood TH-79

Fred McKenzie ([e-mail]) wrote:

: There was a rumor that Kenwood had been made aware of this shortcoming,
: and was considering a modification.  If they did, I'd plan an immediate
: trip to the nearest Ham store!  However, it has been a couple of months
: now, and no further word.

: Does anyone have an update?  Can anyone verify the report of the missing
: lock-out feature?

Forgot to mention in previous post that Kenwood is very aware of the
shortcoming.  I was at the dinner with them when it was mentioned
in conversation.  I'll get back to you next time I talk to Loren.

-jim-  WK1V

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

Date: Sun, 23 Oct 1994 02:11:00 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Clint Bradford)
Subject: What is "Amateur Radio"?

M>Path: planet!isdnlin.mtsu.edu!darwin.sura.net!dtix.dt.navy.mil!relay-wo!relay
 >From: [e-mail] (Michael P. Deignan)

M>>     Somone askes you "What is Amateur Radio?", can you give them an answer
 >>they will understand?

M>CB radio. Everyone knows what CB is. And ham radio isn't all that different
 >today.

What a stupid thing to say.

---
 * QMPro 1.53 * Time flies like wind.  Fruit flies like pears.

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

Date: Thu, 27 Oct 1994 04:30:19 GMT
From: [e-mail] (James J Martin)
Subject: What is my CQ zone number

David Adams ([e-mail]) wrote:
: Greetings!  I'm not planning on actively participating in the CQ WW
: contest, but I thought if I heard a CQ from a needed local whilst
: tooling through the bands, I might pop in with the appropriate
: exchange...However, the rules specify giving one's CQ Zone Number...
: I don't know mine (I live in the south bay area in california) if
: anyone could help, I'd appreciate it.

Hi Dave,

How about Zone 3.

73 de -jim-  WK1V

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

Date: 26 Oct 1994 20:01:07 -0500
From: [e-mail] (David Adams)
Subject: What is my CQ zone number

Greetings!  I'm not planning on actively participating in the CQ WW
contest, but I thought if I heard a CQ from a needed local whilst
tooling through the bands, I might pop in with the appropriate
exchange...However, the rules specify giving one's CQ Zone Number...
I don't know mine (I live in the south bay area in california) if
anyone could help, I'd appreciate it.

73 de dave, n9uxu

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

Date: Wed, 26 Oct 94 22:51:42 -0500
From: "Joseph J. Keenan Jr" <[e-mail]>

References<37uv1p$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Which is harder ADVANCED OR EXTRA TEST?

Carl Morgan <[e-mail]> writes:

>>>The Advanced written test is probably harder to study for because you have
>>>to learn more electronic theory rather than memorize who can launch
>>>satellites...  However, neither of these present-day written exams is

I recently took both the advanced and extra...no doubt...the advanced is a
lot harder.  The extra contained so many questions relating to regulations
that the extra really had very little theory in it.  I am fairly amazed
at the large number of responses to this post.

73...Joe Keenan...KB2RCN/ae

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

Date: Wed, 26 Oct 1994 23:15:51 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Steve Wolf NO8M)

References<[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: NoCal OO goes after Packet BULLetins

>What 'One Way' bulletins??? What this idiot OO forgets is the each and every

...snip

>David Tiller                | Network Administrator | Voice: [phone]   |
>[e-mail] |  n2kau/4  | Randolph-Macon College| Fax:   [phone]   |



Your reference to "idiot OO" negated the need to reply.

73,
Steve
     internet      :  [e-mail]
     packet        :  no8m@no8m.#neoh.oh.usa.na
     MSYS Mail List:  [e-mail] ("info" for subject)

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

Date: Wed, 26 Oct 94 13:38:13 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Rajiv Dewan)

References<389n39$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>, <38k0lg$[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: NoCal OO goes after Packet BULLetins

In article <38k0lg$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Gene Wolford) writes:
>Jeffrey Herman ([e-mail]) wrote:
>: [e-mail] (Bob Wilkins  n6fri) writes:
>
>: >This was found floating on the Amateur Packet BBS system. What do you think?
>
>: I think it's always in the benefit of the ARS when a clarification
>: of the rules are made in advance to violation notices being handed
>: out. All it probably took was for a few to stretch what was considered
>: appropriate use of packet for this clarification to be made.
>
>: On the back of our license it says, in part, `Operation of the station
>: shall be in accordance with Part 97 of the Commission's Rules.' Our
>: signature on the front binds us to this statement.
>
>: If someone has a problem with this OO and this clarification, I hear
>: that packet might now be in use on the CB frequencies....
>
>: >*** Yes, Fred, keep up the good work. I'm glad that you are doing all
>: >*** that you can to make Amateur radio packet boring.
>: >*** 73 George K7WWA @ K7WWA.#NOCAL.CA.USA.NOAM
>
>: Boring maybe, but legal!
>: Jeff NH6IL
>
>Oh, goody. We can all snooze away in compliance.
>All bow to the mighty ARRL, (Anally Retentive Regulation Lovers).
>Beware the dreaded "OO"s, (Kilocycle Kops).
>Heil!

You have clearly missed the whole point of amateur radio in US being
a self policing hobby.  Would you like ham radio turn into the chaos
of CB?

Rajiv
double a neuf ch

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

Date: Wed, 26 Oct 1994 12:55:46 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Paul H. Bock)

References<[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>, <38ktrd$[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: The (1929) Amateur Code

[e-mail] (Dana Myers) writes:

>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>>[e-mail] (Richard McAllister) writes:
>>
>>Show me a *commercially* built amateur transmitter/receiver for the
>>1929 ham, Rich! Just what do you think was available back then?

     A lot more than you are aware of, obviously.  While it is true
that hams of that era built their own transmitters as a rule, there
were indeed commercial receivers available, bought and used by hams.

     According to magazine ads of that era, it would also seem that
there were many "ready-built" components available which would have
simplified construction somewhat.

     Tomorrow I will post what I can find in the way of "ready-built"
equipment descriptions, which date back to the early '20s, in some
cases.

>>And even if there was one (which there wasn't), it would have been
>>up to the manufacturer, not the ham, to insure it was ``well-built''.

     Better read the FCC regs again, Jeff.  It is *never* up to the
manufacturer to ensure that a piece of equipment *once installed in
a station* complies with the FCC regulations for purity, stability,
etc., etc.  It is *always* the responsibility of the station
licensee.  The FCC does not inspect every piece of manufactured
equipment to see that it complies, it merely tests a sample and
then depends on the manufacturer to ensure that all units comply.
If your rig "gets you in trouble" with the FCC you can try filing
suit against the manufacturer (lots of luck!) and if it happens
a lot the FCC may take a closer look at the manufacturer, but in t
he final analysis it is *always* the licensee who is responsible
(that's why your station is *licensed*, to ensure that *someone*
is responsible for it).

>Not exactly, Jeff.  A "well-built" station can refer to equipment
>that is well-constructed, but I tend to think it means something
>more; a well-put-together station.  A station with adequate
>lighting, adequate room, safely connected equipment.  More than
>just a transmitter and receiver.

     Read "200 Meters and Down" for a historical perspective on this
issue.  The problem in those days was that a lot of the wonderful,
homebuilt stations Jeff is crowing about had *abominable* signals:
Chirp, drift, lots of AC modulation (from using raw AC on the plates),
out of band (very common in those days), etc.  All of which made the
amateurs look like - well, amateurs!  ARRL was so concerned about
the public image this created (by the way, BCI was a *real* nuisance
then, as bad or worse then the worst days of TVI in the '50s) that
a lot of effort was put into getting hams to "clean up their act."
Had that not been done, the support that the U.S. Government had
always given to protecting amateur frequency allocations at the
international conferences (where most of the rest of the world
wanted to ban amateur radio once and for all) might have dwindled
and we might all be talking on the Internet instead of the radio.
:-)   As it turned out, amateurs did finally clean up their signal
quality and operating habits (some very grudgingly, BTW) but even
so, retaining amateur allocations always has been (and still is)
a close-run thing.

>Anyway, even when you buy equipment, it isn't the manufacturer that
>is held responsible for the proper operation of the station; it is
>the station licensee.  In other words, the ham is always the
>the one to insure the station and equipment therein, is
>"well-built".

     Correct.

     One final note:  It was in the 'teens that "amateur wireless"
began to take on a distictly different character, from "wireless
experimenters" to "wireless communicators."  In other words, the
enthusiasts were more interested in communicating on the radio
than just tinkering with it.  This is what led HPM to form the ARRL
and establish the first nationwide trunk lines.  It was a fortuitous
move, because had that not happened and the aspect of "amateur radio
as a public service medium" never developed, there is little doubt
that the U.S. Government, tired of amateur wireless interference to
commercial and government interests and seeing no "saving grace" to
the hobby but merely a bunch of obnoxious, unorganized attic tinkerers,
would not have supported amateur frequency allocations at the
international conferences and amateur radio would hve been banned.

     Remember that, even in the 1920s, many European countries
would not allow their amateurs to communicate with other countries.
One Swiss ham had his license cancelled, his station confiscated, and
all his logbooks, notes, correspondence and postcards (the forerunners
of the modern QSL card) conficated because he had contacts with
other countries.

73 DE K4MSG

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

End of Info-Hams Digest V94 #1162
******************************