QRZ! Ham Radio 4/QRZ Ham Radio Callsign Database - Volume 4.iso/digests/policy/940330.txt

Internet Message Format | 1994-11-13 | 8.6 KB

Date: Tue, 26 Jul 94 04:30:09 PDT
From: Ham-Policy Mailing List and Newsgroup <[e-mail]>
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Precedence: Bulk
Subject: Ham-Policy Digest V94 #330
To: Ham-Policy


Ham-Policy Digest           Tue, 26 Jul 94       Volume 94 : Issue  330

Today's Topics:
                Emergency TX on police freq. (2 msgs)
                         Re: CW ... My view.

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, 25 Jul 1994 21:25:46 GMT
From: spool.mu.edu!uwm.edu!mixcom.com![e-mail]
Subject: Emergency TX on police freq.
To: [e-mail]

In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Stan Olochwoszcz N2AYJ) writes:

>In article <znr774714286k@Digex> [e-mail] writes:
>>... I have lost count of the times I have
>>called MAYDAY on every repeater I could reach on two bands when I had a
>>CAPITAL S Situation and have my only response be the courtesy beep and/or
>>squelch tail.

>Which is why, IMO, we need some sort of nationwide 911 access on all
>repeaters equipped with autopatch. Page a trustee, get an operator, dial the
>State Police - SOMETHING! Then we wouldn't have to worry about going out of
>band for help.

I understand your concern.  Unfortunately, jammers and hell-raisers would
be dialing 911 for the fun of it.  False 911 calls via landline can
be traced to the source (that is what the 911 system does!).  In the
case of a jammer on the repeater, it would only be traced back to the
site of the repeater controller's patch-point to the land-line.  The
jammer would be home free, "isolated" by RF.

Around here, we've had jammers interfere with emergency patches so often
that one system usually has the DTMF decoder disabled!  I've given up
and bought a cell phone.  Sad.  One of the reasons I got into the hobby
was hopes for reliable emergency communication.  Hopefully, you can
find someone who is listening and can forward the message if the patch
is down.

--
 [e-mail]  |  Vote Libertarian!
                          |
                          |  Call 1-800-682-1776
                          |  for more information.

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

Date: Tue, 26 Jul 1994 00:01:50 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!sdd.hp.com!col.hp.com!csn![e-mail]
Subject: Emergency TX on police freq.
To: [e-mail]

Stan Olochwoszcz N2AYJ ([e-mail]) wrote:
: In article <znr774714286k@Digex> [e-mail] writes:
: >... I have lost count of the times I have
: >called MAYDAY on every repeater I could reach on two bands when I had a
: >CAPITAL S Situation and have my only response be the courtesy beep and/or
: >squelch tail.

: Which is why, IMO, we need some sort of nationwide 911 access on all
: repeaters equipped with autopatch. Page a trustee, get an operator, dial the
: State Police - SOMETHING! Then we wouldn't have to worry about going out of
: band for help.

Two of the clubs (Aurora Repeater Assoc. and Rocky Mountain Relay League)
in the Denver, CO. area do have 911 access.  If your club does not, offer
to help to somthing about it!

73 -- Joel
KG0IL

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

Date: Mon, 25 Jul 1994 23:51:04 GMT
From: cs.utexas.edu!wotan.compaq.com!twisto.eng.hou.compaq.com![e-mail]
Subject: Re: CW ... My view.
To: [e-mail]

>CC>>  British hams also say if the current method of restriction, the
>CC>>Morse Code, is eliminated for High Frequency operation then some
>CC>>other "filter" to limit number of operators should be found.
>
>At least they are honest about CW testing being a filter to keep people
>out. Because what I see on this internet thing, is all you Pro-testing
>people making up strange analogies about:
>
>1} how learning CW is technically superior
>2} How you have to learn to drive a stick before you drive an automatic
>3} Here's a good one: "would you want to piloted by a guy who wears
>glasses and nylons?"
>
>And on and on. If you could read the collective history of this CW
>test/no test thing, you folks who are debating the pro side would be
>emabassed at some of the lame analogies and appoligetics ysed to keep CW
>in the test.
>

That's exactly what it is "a filter", but a required filter.  Regardless of the pathetic
whines of the masses that can't do code the code is still required for HF access.

So enjoy the world above 30 MHz, but don't come and play below 30 MHz until you
have demonstrated your CW proficiency to a VEC or whined loud enough to your doctor
for a waiver.

If that filter is what keeps the whiners above 30 MHz and on the internet then it
is better than any filter I currently have for QRN/QRM in my radio.

As for CW anonymous:  screw it.   I can quit CW anytime I want, I just don't want to.

Earl Morse
KZ8E
[e-mail]

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

Date: 25 Jul 1994 14:44:16 -0700
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!lll-winken.llnl.gov!apple.com!apple.com![e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

References <30ehqb$[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>
Subject : Re: Does CW as a pre-req

[e-mail] (Nick Waterman) writes:

>In article <[e-mail]>,
>Jeffrey Herman <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>In article <30ehqb$[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>[ blah blah ]
>>Hmmm, no name nor call again. I don't know what to call you other
>>than Mr. 3061sk$7ne:
>
>OK, so it's off-topic, BUT, look closely and you'll see
>"[e-mail]" as his address. If you have a half-decent
>internet connection you'll find you can type "finger
>[e-mail]", and it'll tell you, amongst other things:
>
>Login name: TWP77                       In real life: TURNER WILLIAM J


And, carrying the experiment one more step, looking for a William
Turner in Iowa turns up

Call-Sign: N0RDV                    Class: ADVANCED
Previously: SAME CALL               Class: TECHNICIAN
Real Name: WILLIAM J TURNER         Birthday: MAY 3, 1974
Mailing Address: 517 NW LINDEN ST, ANKENY, IA  50021

An Advanced license, no less.  Heh, heh.


73,

Kok Chen, AA6TY                [e-mail]
Apple Computer, Inc.

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

Date: 25 Jul 94 22:55:25 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!lll-winken.llnl.gov!unixhub!headwall.Stanford.EDU!abercrombie.Stanford.EDU![e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

References <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>mbie.S
Subject : Re: What is wrong with ham radio

[e-mail] (Dan Pickersgill) writes:

>And thanks for you observation that a group of people REQUIRED to demonstrate
>morse proficeny do occationally use it. That shocks us all.

Actually, what shocks me is that you seem to have forgotten that satellites,
weak signal vhf/uhf, and moonbounce are mostly done on frequencies available
to codeless techs.  Oops.

>Gee three whole years and it is a failure. My God. Your apparent
>understanding of the development process astounds us.

Three years is a eon in both the computing and communications industry.


--
-=Paul Flaherty, N9FZX |      "The National Anthem has become The Whine."
->[e-mail]   |        -- Charles Sykes, _A Nation of Victims_

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

Date: 25 Jul 94 22:50:48 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!lll-winken.llnl.gov!unixhub!headwall.Stanford.EDU!abercrombie.Stanford.EDU![e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

References <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>
Subject : Re: What is wrong with ham radio

kevin jessup <[e-mail]> writes:

>No, Paul did not say that.  As usual, I am all screwed up here.  ;-))
>Sorry Paul.

Never post before morning coffee, I always say. ;-)

--
-=Paul Flaherty, N9FZX |      "The National Anthem has become The Whine."
->[e-mail]   |        -- Charles Sykes, _A Nation of Victims_

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

End of Ham-Policy Digest V94 #330
******************************