QRZ! Ham Radio 4/QRZ Ham Radio Callsign Database - Volume 4.iso/digests/policy/940033.txt

Internet Message Format | 1994-11-13 | 19.4 KB

Date: Tue,  1 Feb 94 04:30:08 PST
From: Ham-Policy Mailing List and Newsgroup <[e-mail]>
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Precedence: Bulk
Subject: Ham-Policy Digest V94 #33
To: Ham-Policy


Ham-Policy Digest           Tue,  1 Feb 94       Volume 94 : Issue   33

Today's Topics:
                           Antenna Lawsuit
              ARRL's Lifetime Amateur licenses (2 msgs)
                  non-ham using ham station legally?
                    Quake Alert via Amateur Radio
                    Tech->General Upgrade Question

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, 31 Jan 1994 00:16:46 GMT
From: rtp.vnet.net!proclt!pro-charlotte![e-mail]
Subject: Antenna Lawsuit
To: [e-mail]

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

>Don't misunderstand me, I dislike the concept of restrictive covenents
>too. I dislike any form of restriction on my freedoms. But, the way to
>combat them is not in the court, its with our pocketbooks. I will not
>buy any property (condo, etc.) which has any form of personal liberty
>restrictions, including putting up an antenna for my own use.
>

I agree with everything you said, and I will add one last bit of commentary to
what you said.

When my wife and I bought our second home, we were not told of any restrictive
covenants prior to closing.  I was not into amateur radio at that time, but I
was interested in electronics, satellite TV, etc.

We were, however, jerked around by our lender, and what was projected to be an
easy two or three weeks to line up financing and arrange for the closing
turned into a 3 month wait (and at one point, we had to submit another
application since the previous one was stale, or perhaps they lost it...don't
know for sure).

After three months in an expensive furnished apartment (I did not want to pay
for a second move from the apartment to our home, and my company was paying
other relocation costs), the closing date was set.  We showed up and began
signing the various documents (many of which I had never seen or known of
prior to closing).  To my horror, I read through the restrictions and realized
that I couldn't put up an antenna, satellite dish....I couldn't even paint my
house exterior without getting permission from the association.

At this point, I should have called off things right there and had my attorney
get involved, but my wife and I were so tired of living in the apartment,
being without most of our normal possessions (in storage, waiting for the
final move), that we signed the papers.

In retrospect, I should have sued the developer and the real estate agent for
not informing me of the covenants prior to closing.  At the time, however, I
needed a home more than I needed to install antennas!

And yes, we learned a valuable lesson.....and we are now informed buyers who
will be looking out for Number 1 when we shop around for our next home!

Shawn KD4QGZ

ProLine:  shawng@pro-charlotte
Internet: [e-mail]
UUCP:     vnet.net!proclt!pro-charlotte!shawng

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

Date: 31 Jan 94 14:19:59 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: ARRL's Lifetime Amateur licenses
To: [e-mail]

>Just FYI - A pilot's license issued by the FAA is good for life.
...(but unuseable if you don't stay "current" and didn't they use to
effectively give away hot air balloon licenses for a time?)
>There is precedent for a lifetime license.

yes there is.  but is the amateur radio service served by such a plan?
Especially troubling is the situation where you can have licensed operators
w/o a call.  I'm beginning to think we want a shorter license term - I don't
want to have to resort to a "smoke and mirrors" strategy to create a certain
percentage of hams with a QTH of Graveyard USA.  I'd much rather want to know
where we stand.

Bring back the 5 year license.  Maybe even minimum operating hours -- that
oughta boost field day attendance, eh?

bill wb9ivr

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

Date: 31 Jan 94 13:43:31 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: ARRL's Lifetime Amateur licenses
To: [e-mail]

>    I'm in favor of both Code and *Tougher* written tests,
>    (not by VE's but the old fashion way in front of the
>     FCC.)  Unlike others here who want to include the
>|Thomas Collins <WI3P> |  Don't know what's up there, Beyond the sky."     |

Thomas -- why are you insinuating that the VE system is somehow not tough?

under this program i can now make a different test for *everyone* our group
tests.  there's more questions and a regular local schedule (at 2 - 3 sites
per month at that...).  The FCC had only a few test designs that they milked
for as long as possible - sure it was before computers and laser printers but
still the FCC just didn't spin the tumblers as often as i can today - heck,
even the "right answer" for question X could be A, B, C, or D if i let the
test program use either a template or let it completely randomize the answer
order.  and i sure don't use the same VE-supplied test month after month..

The FCC was on the verge of not handling amateur exams at all back at the
beginning of the 1980s. That's one of the reasons a VE system was established.
The FCC code tests in Tampa consisted of cassette recorder played into a PA
system.  We have headphones (and before that, we used the cassette recorder
scheme, but we had nicer quarters for a code test for acoustics...all things
considered).

The "old fashioned way" would mean only a mere fraction of those qualified for
a ham license (even w/o the code-free tech) would not be able to take the exam
since they were almost always on a workday morning in the middle of a week.
Tough when you are 2-3 hours away at best.  and some guys talk about code
being a "hazing ritual" -- i hold the "old fashioned way" was more of a hazing
ritual especially if the federal building was in an unsalubrious part of town.

What we have today is pretty good.  to dismiss it as not living up to the
rose-colored romantisism (??) of yesteryear is a disservice to those of us
putting in the time to make the VE system work.

bill wb9ivr

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

Date: Fri, 28 Jan 1994 17:16:32 GMT
From: catfish!cscsun![e-mail]
Subject: non-ham using ham station legally?
To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] ([e-mail]) wrote:
: Is it legal for a non-ham to use a ham radio station if the owner of the
: station has granted the non-ham permission to use his callsign?  I believe
: the rules state that the ham must be "in control" of the station, but
: if the ham believes the non-ham is capable of using the station within
: the rules, can the ham grant the non-ham permission to use his callsign?

Not exactly.  The licensed ham must always be the control operator of the
station - there's no way around that. The non-ham may 'participate' in the
QSO, but may not operate the station. The ham must be present to verify
the rules are being adhered to, and be able to stop any illegal transmissions
toot-sweet.  The definition of 'operate' has been hashed over - does it mean
the non-ham can't push the mic switch?  That's up to your interpretation...
--
David Tiller        | Network Administrator    | Voice: [phone]       |
[e-mail]        | Randolph-Macon College| Fax:   [phone]       |
[e-mail]    | P.O. Box 5005        | ICBM:  37d 42' 43.75" N     |
+++Arch-Conservative+++    | Ashland, Va 23005    |        77d 31' 32.19" W     |

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

Date: 1 Feb 1994 05:39:10 GMT
From: news.service.uci.edu!mothra.nts.uci.edu![e-mail]
Subject: Quake Alert via Amateur Radio
To: [e-mail]

I thought people in these newsgroups would find this info to be of
interest.

In a post from another newsgroup someone said:

"A recent posting made mention of a "Quake Awake" device which warns of
P-waves which preceed S-waves in a quake.  Can anyone give me more
information on this device?"

And someone else said:

"I bought two "Quake Awakes" after Loma Prieta.  Not because I thought
they would be particularly useful as a warning device, but because I
found the concept interesting.  Subsequent postings to the net
ndicated that they were not particularly reliable, but since we ave
had *no* noticeable quakes in the last four years, I have no mpirical
evidence :-(."

And finally I said:

"Better yet, if you are a amateur radio operator or have a scanner,
you may be interested in a SEISMIC DETECTOR on frequency 445.400 MHz.

Someone has a seismometer interfaced to a radio transmitter.  Perhaps
it is the USGS.  I just don't know.  Anyway, this unit probably picks
up P waves (and maybe S waves) from a seismometer somewhere in the
mountains in the Los Angeles basin.  The transmitter sends out a tone
on some secret frequency.  Maybe it is not so secret, but, I don't
remember it.

Anyway, the ALERT group knows the frequency regenerates the signal and
pipes it via landline to one of its repeaters on Easter Hill (My note:
located in the hills of Orange, CA).  We get a 8-14 second warning
before aftershocks generated from the Northridge sequence.  Events
from Landers take about 10-15 seconds and those from Big Bear take
about 7-10 seconds.  The detector picks up events from afar if they
are strong enough.  It even picked up events in Oregon last year.

Here is info from one of the bulletins sent to ALERT members.


               SEISMIC DETECTOR WORKING WELL

The new seismic detector on the 445.400 MHz repeater continues to work
great.  A 186.2 Hz CTCSS tone will be heard over the repeater during
earthquake events.  To use this new feature set your radio frequency
to 445.400 MHz and your PL to 186.2 Hz decode (stored this into an
extra memory slot for easy access).  Whenever an event occurs your
radio will pass the earthquake warning tones but normal conversation
on the repeater will be muted.  This great new feature allows your
radio to stay on all night in a mute mode.  Please remember when you
hear the earthquake tones coming through the 445.500 MHz Easter Hill
repeater we ask all members to stop QSO's and stand by until the
warning tones stop coming through the link.  This allows all members
to get a bearing on where the earthquake activity might be.  This
seismic tone will continue to be TESTED at 9:00 PM every Monday and
once again at the conclusion of the Net around 9:25 PM.  Thanks Gary -
WA6SUL for maintaining this important ALERT system feature.

Note: ALERT means Amateur Licensed Emergency Response Team (I think)."

~jack_
--
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
|         Jack C. Lockhart     << SNAILMAIL                                 |
|      Radio Systems Engineer        E-MAIL > [e-mail]              |
|OAC-Electronic Communication Srvcs. !BANG! > ...!ucbvax!ucivax!lockhart    |
|    2209 Central Plant Building        HAM > WD6AEI                        |
| University of California, Irvine     AMPR > WD6AEI@n0ary.#nocal.ca.usa.na |
|      Irvine, CA  92717-5475         VOICE > [phone]                |
|              U.S.A                    FAX > [phone]                |
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

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

Date: Thu, 27 Jan 1994 15:34:37 GMT
From: mvb.saic.com!unogate!news.service.uci.edu!usc!sdd.hp.com!col.hp.com!csn!server!stortek.com![e-mail]
Subject: Tech->General Upgrade Question
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Phil Riba) writes:
>From: [e-mail] (Phil Riba)
>Subject: Tech->General Upgrade Question
>Date: Wed, 26 Jan 1994 23:55:33 GMT

>I upgraded my original Novice license to my current Technician license
>about eight years ago.  I'm thinking about brushing up on my code to go
>for my General.

>Is it still just a code test, or is there more to it with the new
>license structure?  Is there some statute of limitations time period
>that I should be concerned with?


Phil

    I'm a Tech working on my General. You need to take the written exam and
the 13wpm code test for General. I've taken the written exam and it's not that
bad. It's a little harder than the Tech test. The 13wpm is the hard part and
with practice it can be done. The ARRL publishes a study guide for the written
test. Good luck on your upgrade efforts.  73's

Patrick N0WCG

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

Date: Fri, 28 Jan 1994 01:21:38 GMT
From: mvb.saic.com!unogate!news.service.uci.edu!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!library.ucla.edu!news.ucdavis.edu!chip.ucdavis.edu![e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

References <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>
Subject : Re: Antenna Lawsuit/CC&Rs

hamilton on BIX ([e-mail]) wrote:

: Am I the only one now scratching his head wondering just what can
: justify a CC&R?  Let's think about this for a moment:  I sell you
: my house but only on some condition that you maintain it a particular
: manner (e.g., no antenna or whatever) and then move away.  What in
The reason many people establish CC&R's is to maintain a certain "mood"
to a neighborhood and this  is often the initial developer.  The last
thing a developer wants is to subdivide 50 lots out and then have the
first person who buys a lot/house invite all their relatives to come park
their RV's on the street and move in.  Is this a reasonable concern? yes!
does that make the resrictions acceptable? in most cases no!
Another case for CC&R's is to provide income for the homeowners
Association to maintain Commons this is especially important in the case
of condominiums.


: hell is the rationale here?  As the seller, what possible rationale
: is there for you being able to tell me what I can do with the property
: once you give it up?  Setting aside that you might be able to get me

Most CC&R's are placed on properties by the original developer and not
the individual selling the property.  The right to enforce these CC&R's
then passes to the HOA who are people not leaving the neighborhood when
the individual owner sells their property.  They still care about what
happens to property in their 'hood when someone moves out.


Dan
--
*---------------------------------------------------------------------*
* Daniel D. Todd      Packet: KC6UUD@KE6LW.#nocal.ca.usa              *
*                   Internet: [e-mail]                      *
*                 Snail Mail: 1750 Hanover #102                       *
*                             Davis CA 95616                          *
*---------------------------------------------------------------------*
*       I do not speak for the University of California....           *
*       and it sure as hell doesn't speak for me!!                    *
*---------------------------------------------------------------------*


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

Date: 28 Jan 1994 00:30:32 GMT
From: mvb.saic.com!unogate!news.service.uci.edu!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!cs.utexas.edu!koriel!newscast.West.Sun.COM!abyss.West.Sun.COM!pongo![e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

References <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>st.We
Subject : Re: Code: Guarantying long-term proficiency

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (cory zito) writes:

>I really don't like flames and as of yet have not been "flamed" in its
>true form

Butthead:  "Hey Beavis, is he, like, asking for it?"
Beavis:  "Yeah, umm, he wants to be flamed! Fire!"
Butthead: "These young ham newbies are like so predictable".
Beavis: "Yeah! yeah!"
Butthead: "If he's never been flamed in its true form, how does he
           know he's never been flamed?"
Beavis: "Um, yeah, he doesn't know!"

>*  Cory Zito   *    Email: [e-mail]                    *
>*  AA9GB       *    10 REM STUPID LITTLE BASIC PROGRAM :-)          *
>*  Saxophonist *    20 PRINT "RECURSIVE"                            *
>*  Student     *    30 GOTO 20                                      *

Cory, son, go on back to class and figure out the difference between
repetition and recursion.  Hint:  look up GOSUB in your BASIC reference.

As for ham radio, well, congrats on the license.  You're making me
feel quite old, since I'd been licensed for a couple of months when
you were born...

--
 * Dana H. Myers KK6JQ, DoD 466    | Views expressed here are    *
 * [phone]         | mine and do not necessarily    *
 * [e-mail]    | reflect those of my employer    *
 * This Extra supports the abolition of the 13 and 20 WPM tests *

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

Date: Sun, 30 Jan 1994 23:09:19 GMT
From: netcomsv!netcom.com![e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

References <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>
Subject : Re: Antenna Lawsuit

CC&R's have been and will continue to be both a blessing and a problem
for homeowners in general and hams in particular. There are two basic
techniques for beating them. Unfortunately, niether of them appears to
apply to Stoner. They are a theme and variation on "abandonment".

The first technique is to just go ahead and put up your antenna anyway.
If the homeowners association does not try to enforce the CC&R's within
a reasonable amount of time (months?) you may be able to claim (through
your lawyer) that the CC&R's have been abandoned. YMMV

Most CC&R's are a contract between the buyer and an entity known as a
"homeowners association (HA)". In many cases, the HA is set up by the
folks selling the housing subdivision for the first time. What's more,
after the builder/original seller is gone, the HA ceases to exist due
to ignorance/apathy on the part of the homeowners. If this is the case,
the CC&R's are a contract with an entity that no longer exists and so
may be unenforcable. Again, YMMV, so check with your lawyer.

I am not sure the the abolition of CC&R's is a good idea. However, motivation
may be supplied to society in general (whoever THEY are) by using CC&R's
in imaginative ways. For example, CC&R's are simply a contract between
seller and buyer. Next time you sell your property, add some CC&R's of
your own. You might simply insist that all subsiquent buyers of the
property in question will give you 1% of the purchase price and agree to
make the same, unmodified agreement with the buyer when they are the seller.
The penalty for breach of this contract should be explicitly stated, maybe
5% of the selling price plus all actual collection/legal expenses?

If enough of this kind of thing goes on, society in general[tm] will
find a way to limit what can be agreed to in CC&R's, and that will be
the time to include reasonable antennas in what cannot be prohibited.
Alternetively, if nothing is done, and you sell a lot of houses, you
may become well off from multiple 1% of sales!!!

Glenn [e-mail]

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

End of Ham-Policy Digest V94 #33
******************************