QRZ! Ham Radio 5/QRZ Ham Radio Callsign Database - Volume 5.iso/digests/digital/940257.txt

Internet Message Format | 1994-11-13 | 10.7 KB

Date: Mon,  1 Aug 94 04:30:18 PDT
From: Ham-Digital Mailing List and Newsgroup <[e-mail]>
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Precedence: Bulk
Subject: Ham-Digital Digest V94 #257
To: Ham-Digital


Ham-Digital Digest          Mon,  1 Aug 94       Volume 94 : Issue  257

Today's Topics:
               EMPLOYMENT OPPTY - RADIO COMMS - NYC/fSU
                    Mic connection KAM--> HTX-202
             Unattended Digital Probs in Britain (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 Ham-Digital Digest are available
(by FTP only) from UCSD.Edu in directory "mailarchives/ham-digital".

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: 31 Jul 1994 13:52:27 -0400
From: news.pipeline.com![e-mail]
Subject: EMPLOYMENT OPPTY - RADIO COMMS - NYC/fSU
To: [e-mail]

A great job with a great company is available for an
experienced VHF/UHF systems engineer with extensive experience
specifying land mobile radio systems --- base stations,
repeaters, trunking. It's a "box" level assignment.

The company deploys such systems throughout the former Soviet
Union, through New York and Moscow offices.

Experience in the following regions helpful:

* Motorola experience, two-way; indoor and antenna
* Point-to-multipoint UHF
* Knowledge of vendors and comparative price/benefit of
alternative solutions
* Microwave terrestrial and satellite
* Computer skills for presentation to clients & colleagues.
* Internet to AX.25 radio links
* Good health and ability to travel 4 times a year to remote
sites in former SU
* Amateur radio license/experience/fanatacism/menatlity a
considerable plus

Please state salary requirements in e-mail reply. Company
offers full benefits and alot of challenges.

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

Date: Sun, 31 Jul 1994 21:52:15 GMT
From: iglou!gregl.slip.iglou.com![e-mail]
Subject: Mic connection KAM--> HTX-202
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:

>I've spent the last 2 days trying to get my KAM and HTX-202 to communicate with
>each other.  I am receiving packet data just fine
>but cannot seem to make a connection.  The HTX-202 is transmitting, but I
>suspect the mic connection is not wired properly and it therefore just
>transmitting useless noise.  I am not very technically oriented, so I would
>appreciate any advice as to the correct wiring for the mic.  Any other
>suggestions would be greatly appreciated.  Tnx.
>
>Dennis, N1RDN

It's real easy to connect the HTX-202 to the KAM, Dennis. First install the HT
jumper inside the KAM. This jumper includes the isolation circuitry for
keeping audio out of the PTT line. Now connect ground to the ring and audio
to the tip of the external speaker connector. The final step is to connect
both the PTT and MIC lines to the tip of the microphone connector.

                              Ring
                            |  v    Tip
                            |-----\  v
                  AUDIO ----|      ====
                           -|-----/
                   GND ---/
                            |
                            |-----\
                PTT+MIC ----|      ====
                           -|-----/
                       ---/
Not a pretty picture perhaps, but hopefully it'll do the trick.


============================================================================
73 de Greg  AMPRNet  - [e-mail] [44.106.56.35]
            AX.25    - ke4dpx@wi9p.#ncky.ky.usa.noam
            Internet - [e-mail]
============================================================================

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

Date: Sun, 31 Jul 1994 12:11:45 +0000
From: pipex!demon!kirsta.demon.co.uk![e-mail]
Subject: Unattended Digital Probs in Britain
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] "C. C. Wynn" writes:

> >In addition, all UK amateurs are now required to notify their local
> >Radio Investigation Service office of unattended digital operation.
> >The RSGB said this additional restriction was necessary following ''a
> >number of problems'' with unattended operation.  ''The procedure is far
> >less onerous than that required for a repeater or beacon on a
> >hilltop site, and requires only the agreeing of suitable emergency
> >close-down procedures,'' the RSGB said.
> >NNNN
> >/EX
>
> It seems that automatic operation is causing problems in GB.  Does anyone
> have any of the details on this?  What is an agreeable suitable emergency
> close-down procedure?  Is this a contractural obligation on the part of the
> operator and the RIS?  What are the penalties for failure to comply?

There have, apparently, been a couple of cases of rogue transmitters
interfering with other services, and the RIS not being able to close
them down. The new condition is not particularly onerous: We just have
to tell the RIS how the station can be closed down if the need arises.

There are lots of nit-pick questions being asked about the fine points
of what "unattended" and "attended" actually mean; but with a few
dissenting voices the new condition has been accepted as reasonable
and even desirable: if your gear does go crazy it is better that it can
be closed down reasonably quickly.

Suitable procedure? Not well defined. Concensus seems to be "if need
be, can your transmitter be switched off within <n> minutes, even if you
are away on holiday at the time?". The trouble is that nobody yet knows
what <n> is.

One datum: Our club station, way up in the hills, runs an unattended
node. The close-down procedure we have set up for that is to provide
the home and work phone numbers of three key holders, any one of whom
should be able to get to the site within about 30 minutes. The RIS have
raised no objection to this.

Contractual obligation? Well, it runs roughly like this: The RIS are
the field arm of the RA. The RA is a branch of government. The
government makes laws. If they get *really* out of line we vote them
out of office...

Penalties: Nobody knows yet, as no-one has yet fallen foul of the
change. Available sanctions range from a verbal or written warning,
through removal of priveleges, through to a fine of several thousand
pounds. From recent history, the RIS are only interested in the most
egregious offenders.

73, John.

--
John Morris    email: [e-mail]    AX25: GM4ANB@GB7EDN.#77.GBR.EU

                       Absurdity: A statement or belief manifestly inconsistent
                                  with one's own opinion  -  Ambrose Bierce

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

Date: Sun, 31 Jul 1994 21:41:32 +0000
From: pipex!demon!hartford.demon.co.uk![e-mail]
Subject: Unattended Digital Probs in Britain
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] "C. C. Wynn" writes:

|> It seems that automatic operation is causing problems in GB.  Does anyone
|> have any of the details on this?  What is an agreeable suitable emergency
|> close-down procedure?  Is this a contractural obligation on the part of the
|> operator and the RIS?  What are the penalties for failure to comply?

   One of the problems has apparently been that unattended stations have
   been sending signals out of band which have interfered with our
   emergency serices.  I understand that the Fire Brigades have suffered
   this from time to time.  One possible cause of the problem is the
   proliferation of ex-PMR transceivers, re-aligned by amateurs but fitted
   with amateur spec Xtals instead of the commercial spec for which they
   were originally designed.  Either way, there have been instances of
   transmissions obliterating traffic outside the amateur bands and some of
   those instances have been traced to unattended operation.

   The RIS appear to be happy to accept notification, per se, that a
   station will be running unattended, provided only that they are given
   a means of having it switched off if necessary.  Different OM have
   obviously submitted different arrangements, ranging from complicated
   "open OFF / coded (or keyed) ON" switches outside the shack and a list
   of telephone numbers manned by other amateurs to simple assurances that
   someone on the end of a (supplied) telephone number will be in a
   position to switch the station off if asked so to do by the RIS.  The
   RIS do not appear to be adopting a difficult attitude to the new
   requirements and first reports are that local officers are actually
   being very helpful.

   There's plenty of argument (as usual) within the hobby about what does
   and what does not constitute "unattended operation".  Likewise about
   what length of delay between being asked by the RIS to switch the
   station off and actually getting it switched off is acceptable.

   There hasn't been a specific definition of "unattended" and it's
   probably better that there isn't.  Most of us are applying common sense
   to simple English ;-}  As to the delay aspect of it, some local RIS
   officers are known to have accepted arrangements with a built-in maximum
   delay of as much as two hours !

   In so far as these requirements now form part of the UK Licensing
   Conditions, I guess you could say that they are part of a contractual
   obligation imposed on the licensee.

   Penalties for non-observance (possible loss / suspension of licence,
   fines, seizure of equipment etc) are the same as for any other
   transgression of the Wireless Telegraphy Act 1949.  I'd have liked to
   quote them for you, as you asked, but I don't have the Act handy.
   Maybe someone else in the thread will elucidate on them shortly.

        .~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.
        |  Greg REILLY-COOPER      :      [e-mail]  |
        |          ax25:  G0MAM @ GB7CHS  (Remote Co-SysOp)          |
        |      Emergency Communications Officer  (RSGB + RAYNET)     |
        |  ========================================================  |
        |    Be a cynic - they probably expect it of you anyway !    |
         ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

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

End of Ham-Digital Digest V94 #257
******************************