QRZ! Ham Radio 5/QRZ Ham Radio Callsign Database - Volume 5.iso/digests/infoham/940518.txt

Internet Message Format | 1994-11-13 | 20.1 KB

Date: Fri, 13 May 94 04:30:02 PDT
From: Info-Hams Mailing List and Newsgroup <[e-mail]>
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Precedence: Bulk
Subject: Info-Hams Digest V94 #518
To: Info-Hams


Info-Hams Digest            Fri, 13 May 94       Volume 94 : Issue  518

Today's Topics:
             A new type of ham radio club / station ....
                       Help:Bootleggers in area
                  ISC Revokes amateur radio licenses
                       nude amateur radio nets
                     sacred frequencies (2 msgs)
                  use INTERNET for linked repeater?

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: Fri, 13 May 1994 00:12:03 GMT
From: dog.ee.lbl.gov!agate!doc.ic.ac.uk!daresbury!keele!uknet!EU.net!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!sdd.hp.com!hpscit.sc.hp.com!news.dtc.hp.com!col.hp.com!@ihnp4.ucsd.edu
Subject: A new type of ham radio club / station ....
To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] ([e-mail]) wrote:
: In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Alan Bloom) writes:
:
: > How about this:
: >
: >     - Buy / rent room somewhere.
: >     - Only 2 or 3 technically competent members have the keys.
: >     - Every member has a UHF or microwave link to the mountaintop
: >       so s/he can operate the superstation from the comfort of
: >       his own home.  The interface could be a PC running special
: >       software (virtual front panel) or even special hardware
: >       that would totally reproduce the front panel of the radio.

: Um... Al, you live up on the top of a mountain don't you??  Yeah... I remember
: that I used to go up there and operate mobile before your house was built. :)
: Let me see, you already have the station so all we need to do is hook up the
: link, right?  :)

Well if you call a 15-year-old Drake TR-7 and 1/2 kW linear a
"superstation" :=)

AL N1AL

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

Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 11:12:40 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!galaxy.ucr.edu!library.ucla.edu!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!newsfeed.pitt.edu!gvls1![e-mail]
Subject: Help:Bootleggers in area
To: [e-mail]

>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Joe Gregg) writes:
>
>I should add, that the appropriate Congress people have been contacted
>already.  I hope that the FCC is just gathering evidence for a big bust, but
>somehow I doubt it.  This is happening in a very rural area of southwestern
>Minnesota, far away from the big cities, and who cares about what happens out
>in the sticks.  Where is the ARRL and the FCC?  Maybe they are afraid of
>liability suits or making waves?

Just like here in the Pottstown, PA. area.  We have had a banana operating
on the repeater frequencies for over a year.  Last year this unlicensed
person was investigated by the hams and FCC and found to be transmitting
illegally also on the police and fire frequencies.  He was fined, which
last I heard he hasn't paid, and is still interferring with the repeaters,
cursing, playing music, tapes of ham conversations, etc.  The FCC is now
ignoring all compaints against this person.

Which Senator or Congressman holds the purse strings for the FCC?  Anyone
know?  Letters to our local Representatives seem to have no effect.

--
Ed Naratil                                 (All standard disclaimers apply)
[e-mail]                Amateur Packet: w3bnr@wb3joe.#epa.PA.USA


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

Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 02:53:31 GMT
From: dog.ee.lbl.gov!agate!darkstar.UCSC.EDU!news.hal.COM!olivea!charnel.ecst.csuchico.edu!nic-nac.CSU.net!usc!cs.utexas.edu!utnut!torn!uunet.ca!uunet.ca!iceonline!icebox!@@ihnp4.ucsd.edu
Subject: ISC Revokes amateur radio licenses
To: [e-mail]

                                    News Release



                            RADIO AUTHORIZATION SUSPENDED


          VANCOUVER, May 6, 1994 - The District Director, Lower Mainland
     Office, Spectrum Management Division of the Department of Industry
     (formerly known as the Department of Communications), today announced
     that the department has recently  SUSPENDED for a period of ONE YEAR
     the Amateur Radio Operator Certificate, of Michael Courtney JOHNS. Mr.
     Johns Amateur Radio Licence (call sign VE7MCJ) was also under review,
     but expired during the review process.

        The suspension means that Mr. JOHNS is ineligible to renew his former
     amateur radio licence, or apply for a new amateur radio licence, for the
     duration of the suspension period. The Radiocommunication Act
     PROHIBITS the possession, installation or operation of radio equipment
     (unless specifically exempted) without a valid radio licence.

          The suspension came after a joint investigation between the Maple
     Ridge R.C.M.P. and the department revealed that Mr. JOHNS had
     possession of modified amateur radios programmed to transmit on a police
     frequency.

          The District Director stated that while a shorter suspension would
     normally have been applied on a first offence, the circumstances of the
     case were such that a more lengthy suspension was called for.

          Charges under the Radiocommunication Act have also been laid against
     Mr. JOHNS.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Matthew Asham, VE7QSY                    | Were sorry, but your brain cannot
                                         | be connected as dialed, please
InterNet : [e-mail] | hangup and try your thought again
           [e-mail]     | if you need help, dial your brain
 FidoNet : 1:153/7116                    | surgeon, this is a recording...
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: 12 May 1994 16:08:05 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!newshub.sdsu.edu!nic-nac.CSU.net!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!swrinde!gatech!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!cat.cis.Brown.EDU!noc.near.net!hopscotch.ksr.com![e-mail]
Subject: nude amateur radio nets
To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (Scott Dorsey) writes:
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Gary Davis) writes:
<>What is wrong with you geeks? Haven't you ever wished to join the natives
>>of the Amazon rain forests?
<>What could be more natural?
>No way.  Sure, it's wet enough for good grounding, but the treeline is
<too high to put up a decent antenna system.  I think I'll stay nude right
>here, thank you very much.

No, no, you climb one of the trees and put the mast for your vertical up
toward the top of one of them.  The ARRL Antenna Book includes more details.
You should probably feed with low-loss openwire rather than coax, due to the
length (see Reflections, by Maxwell).  Or, you can use jungle creepers to
build a hammock up in the canopy somewhere, for the ideal in operating comfort.

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

Date: 12 May 94 14:23:05 EDT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news.acns.nwu.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!jobone!lynx.unm.edu!pacs.sunbelt.net![e-mail]
Subject: sacred frequencies
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Roger Buffington) writes:
>Derek Wills ([e-mail]) wrote:
>: [e-mail] (Roger Buffington) says:
>
>: >>Erich Franz Stocker ([e-mail]) wrote:
>
>: >>The most absurd statement I have heard is that a "dxer" has the
>: >>"right"  to complain because someone may use the frequency
>: >>that nothing has been  heard  on for 5min or more.  That
>: >>certainly isn't real friendly band sharing.
>
>: >You are exactly right.  I couldn't agree with you more.
>
>:    I disagree, within limits.   There are standard DX frequencies
>:    in the phone bands that are used by DXpeditions and individual
>:    DX operators, such as 3795, 14195, 21295, 28495.   These are
>:    recognized worldwide as DX gathering places.   If you know this,
>:    and insist on starting a ragchew on 14195, I think it would be
>:    unnecessarily provocative.
>
>:    DX newsletters will often say "Expedition such-and-such will
>:    operate on the standard DX frequencies", and they are small
>:    enough in number and well-enough known by most hams that it
>:    is courteous to avoid those for casual operating when possible.
>
>:    Whether this is what the original poster is thinking of, I have
>:    no idea, but outright condemnation of DXers for wanting to keep
>:    one frequency per band clear for their sport is not warranted.
>:    It's a little like claiming that it's OK to park right next to
>:    a fire hydrant because there hasn't been a local fire for the
>:    last 5 minutes.
>
>There is room for honest disagreement here, and I disagree with you
>thoroughly.  Firstly, I've been an amateur since 1966, and I've never
>heard of the frequencies you reference in the context you mention.  Not
>once.  And I subscribe to CQ and QST.  If I didn't know about it, how
>many of the many many newcomers who are upgrading to general class and
>above are gonna know it?  Darned few, that's how many.
>
>The dx stations have VFOs on their rigs just like the rest of us.  They
>can move a few Khz right or left.  If someone else is using the
>frequency, then that's too bad.
>
>I've had a sked for years with a buddy on 14.0765.  At a certain time, I
>sure wish the rest of you would stay off it.  For some reason the rest of
>hamdom doesn't listen to my pleas and we often have to sidestep. :-)
>
>Sorry, but I think you are wrong on this one.
>
>
>
>: Derek "is this frequency in use CQ CQ CQ CQ" Wills (AA5BT, G3NMX)
>: Department of Astronomy, University of Texas,
>: Austin TX 78712.  (512-471-1392)
>: [e-mail]
>--
>                                             [e-mail]
>                                             Glendale, CA
>                                             AB6WR

Except for officially designated sub-bands for phone, cw, et al, NOBODY OWNS
ANY PART OF THE AMATEUR SPECTRUM...DXers, loudmouth no-call-sign ragchewers,
or anyone else!!!  If a frequency ain't in use, it AIN'T IN USE!  Can't
reserve seats at an open-seating concert and can't reserve frequencies,
either!

The idea of checking for "frequency in use" is of course a different
thing...something we should all do.  Sometimes, however, longwinded
qsos (transmissions of 5 minutes plus!) make it impossible to hear one end of
the exchange.

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

Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 02:17:17 GMT
From: dog.ee.lbl.gov!agate!darkstar.UCSC.EDU!news.hal.COM!olivea!charnel.ecst.csuchico.edu!yeshua.marcam.com!zip.eecs.umich.edu!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!@@ihnp4.ucsd.edu
Subject: sacred frequencies
To: [e-mail]

Dorr R. Depew - A.R.S. N4QIX ([e-mail]) wrote:

: Except for officially designated sub-bands for phone, cw, et al, NOBODY OWNS
: ANY PART OF THE AMATEUR SPECTRUM...DXers, loudmouth no-call-sign ragchewers,
: or anyone else!!!  If a frequency ain't in use, it AIN'T IN USE!  Can't
: reserve seats at an open-seating concert and can't reserve frequencies,
: either!

: The idea of checking for "frequency in use" is of course a different
: thing...something we should all do.  Sometimes, however, longwinded
: qsos (transmissions of 5 minutes plus!) make it impossible to hear one end of
: the exchange.


I think this comment says it all :-)   :-)

"and no, never heard of the Newington DX Bulletin and hope I never do.

:-)
--
                                             [e-mail]
                                             Glendale, CA
                                             AB6WR

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

Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 03:51:24 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!pacbell.com!att-out!att-in!news.bu.edu!olivea!charnel.ecst.csuchico.edu!yeshua.marcam.com!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!emory!kd4nc!ke4zv![e-mail]
Subject: use INTERNET for linked repeater?
To: [e-mail]

In article <2qm2fp$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Jeffrey R. Luszcz) writes:
>Hello,
>  What do people think about the legalities of using
>the net to link a repeater system. Say I want to link a
>set of repeaters that are seperated by a large distance
>which would cost too much to link with normal means (vhf
>or hf links). Say instead you had this setup.
>
>  repeater  output ->  computer -> internet -> computer -> repeater input
>
>  and vise versa.
>
>  I would invision using a set of macs run maven or something
>along those lines with 2 HTs with the ptt hooked up a set
> of cheap TNCs which would only hand the PTT with the microphones
> of the HT hooked to the speakers of the computers.
>  This is just a thought experiment. Problems I would see would
>be validating the data stream so that only authorized traffics
>would be able to pass, maybe hand-filtering.
>
>  Link only runs say an hour a day, someone babysits it with
>a 5 second delay before what goes over the repeater goes out
>, the babysitter si then able to kill the stream if problems
>arise.
>
>  What do you think?

I think you're trying to make this more complex than it is. Wireline
links are allowed by the rules for linking repeaters. The net is not
different from telco links in any reasonable way as long as you use
connection oriented protocols. In fact that's the way the telco works
these days.  There's no need to delay and babysit the link to the extent
you suggest.  All you have to do is make sure that the link behaves in
a manner similar to a traditional wireline connecting two repeaters.

The only real problem you have is timely delivery. The net is slow
compared to straight wireline connections. If you can maintain sufficient
throughput, the net is a valid telco substitute. If you can't maintain
sufficient throughput, the net link will be useless.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | uunet!rsiatl!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |

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

Date: 12 May 94 13:34:18 -0500
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news.acns.nwu.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!newsrelay.iastate.edu!cobra.uni.edu![e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

References <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>, <2qlj5q$[e-mail]>e
Subject : Re: personal autopatch callsdir

In article <2qlj5q$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Jesse L Wei) writes:
> ham this. ([e-mail]) wrote:
>
> : Your advice SUCKS. What in the world is the autopatch for? WRONG.
> : Whatever YOU answered, its WRONG. Thats because whatever I DECIDE to
> : use it for I CAN use it for (within the law). Why should the law limit
> : it to, essentially, anything but running a business on ham radio, and
> : then an idiot like you come along and LIMIT IT FURTHER, to WHATEVER YOU
> : FEEL is 'inappropriate'????????

Possibly this thread discussed this long ago... but I hope anyone adhering to
this advice without inquiry of others is using their own personally owned and
maintained repeater.

The four machines with patches in my area are all known to be very leniant on
usage (whatever's legal goes), but lest we forget it: the control operators of
any machines have total censorship over what gets retransmitted through their
box.  (If it's carrying their callsign- why should they be forced to associate
their call with whatever someone want's to argue/say/use the patch for...
especially if their are legal questions to the conduct).

I for one will not stand by and let people abuse my patch if they are obviously
using it in place of of having a phone at their house.  The autopatch is a
convenience for mobile and portable users, and for emergency use- and nothing
else (not to mention the questionable legality of patches at fixed points where
phone service are available).

Use it, but don't AB-use it.
--or-- Too much of anything is simply too much.

73,
=============================================================================
Chris Conklin
N0PAV,  444.65,  [e-mail]
Public Policy @ The University of Northern Iowa
=============================================================================

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

Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 02:14:27 GMT
From: dog.ee.lbl.gov!agate!darkstar.UCSC.EDU!news.hal.COM!olivea!charnel.ecst.csuchico.edu!nic-nac.CSU.net!usc!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!gatech!news-feed-1.peachnet.edu![e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

References <2qs7du$[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>ivea
Subject : Re: sacred frequencies

Jim Hollenback ([e-mail]) wrote:
: Roger Buffington ([e-mail]) wrote:

: : There is room for honest disagreement here, and I disagree with you
: : thoroughly.  Firstly, I've been an amateur since 1966, and I've never
: : heard of the frequencies you reference in the context you mention.  Not
: : once.

: You live under a rock? Never read the DX bulletin from Newington on Thursday
: afternoon? Mentioned all the time.

Not once buddy.  Not once.  They could mention it every 5 words and it
wouldn't make any difference to me.  Or 99% of the other hams.

FYI, no, I don't live under a rock.  Have a split level house in the nice
part of Glendale.  How about you?

: : The dx stations have VFOs on their rigs just like the rest of us.  They
: : can move a few Khz right or left.  If someone else is using the
: : frequency, then that's too bad.

: Of course when 3Y0PI or such comes up on frequency and doesn't hear the
: ragchew, moving the DX  and the policemen is interesting.

: : I've had a sked for years with a buddy on 14.0765.  At a certain time, I
: : sure wish the rest of you would stay off it.  For some reason the rest of
: : hamdom doesn't listen to my pleas and we often have to sidestep. :-)

: Read your comment about DX stations having VFO's. Don't you have one?

Yes, I do.  Didn't you read my comment.  I use it pretty often.

If you are gonna flame other guys on the net, then have the courtesy (or
brains) to at least read the message of the fella you're flaming. :-)

: Other frequencies of interest ....

:    14.230 - SSTV gathering spot. calling CQ here is greeted with a
:             answer in SSTV. The CQ'er generally moves.

:    14.300 - maritime net stuff and phone patches to the stock broker.

:    14.313 - see 28.325 below, but not limited to N. Texas

:    14.336? - county chasers net

:    14.260, 21.260, 28.260 - island chaser frequency.

:    28.325 - Nortn Texas Jammers Society. CQ'ing on this frequency is
:             generally greeeted with a long blast of profanity and
:             endless tirades. Fortunately the skip is no longer in.


: Jim Hollenback, WA6SDM

FWIW, the only one of those freqs I'd ever heard of was 14.230.


--
                                             [e-mail]
                                             Glendale, CA
                                             AB6WR

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

End of Info-Hams Digest V94 #518
******************************