QRZ! Ham Radio 5/QRZ Ham Radio Callsign Database - Volume 5.iso/digests/infoham/940561.txt

Internet Message Format | 1994-11-13 | 22.7 KB

Date: Mon, 23 May 94 09:37:58 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 #561
To: Info-Hams


Info-Hams Digest            Mon, 23 May 94       Volume 94 : Issue  561

Today's Topics:
                          "for ID" (3 msgs)
                          2 meter thru-glass
      40 to 50 mile range listening -- Which band to use/build?
                  610 Form in PostScript(r) (2 msgs)
                  cycles, cycles/sec vs Hz (2 msgs)
                        Ham Radio few problem
                        HAM RADIO RUDENESS
                      Need help with QSL address
                   Need info on operating in Canada
                  Need info on operatin in Thailand
                        repeater slang/lingo.
                        Speaker-Mike Connector
                              W21AT mods

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: Mon, 23 May 1994 07:56:27 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!swrinde!emory!kd4nc!ke4zv![e-mail]
Subject: "for ID"
To: [e-mail]

In article <2ro5vg$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Derek Wills) writes:
>[e-mail] (Gary Coffman) says:
>
>>if you're in a *large* roundtable, and 10 minutes has passed since
>>your last ID, you might insert your callsign "for ID" at a pause.
>>That tells everyone that you're not asking to break rotation, just
>>stay legal.
>
>Are you saying that even if you haven't transmitted a thing for
>10 minutes, you still have to identify?   If I finish a QSO, give
>my callsign, the other guy says "bye" and I say "bye" (or "dit dit")
>without an identification, do I have to make a special broadcast
>within the next 10 minutes just to give my callsign?   In the case
>cited above, why isn't it enough to identify the next time you actually
>make a transmission as part of the ongoing discussion?

The rules say you should ID every 10 minutes during a QSO. And it's
a bad practice that impedes the natural flow of conversation to say
your callsign at the end of *every* short transmission on a repeater.
So it's often necessary to ID after being silent for a few minutes to
stay legal. Since you haven't signed, you're still part of the QSO,
and need to ID at 10 minute intervals. An often satisfactory alternative
is for everyone to ID when the repeater does.

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: Mon, 23 May 1994 13:01:41 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!agate!spool.mu.edu!news.clark.edu!netnews.nwnet.net!ns1.nodak.edu!dp1.lib.ndsu.NoDak.edu![e-mail]
Subject: "for ID"
To: [e-mail]

In article <2ro5vg$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Derek Wills) writes:

>[e-mail] (Gary Coffman) says:

>>if you're in a *large* roundtable, and 10 minutes has passed since
>>your last ID, you might insert your callsign "for ID" at a pause.
>>That tells everyone that you're not asking to break rotation, just
>>stay legal.

>Are you saying that even if you haven't transmitted a thing for
>10 minutes, you still have to identify?   If I finish a QSO, give
>my callsign, the other guy says "bye" and I say "bye" (or "dit dit")
>without an identification, do I have to make a special broadcast
>within the next 10 minutes just to give my callsign?   In the case
>cited above, why isn't it enough to identify the next time you actually
>make a transmission as part of the ongoing discussion?

>Anyway, I hear this "for ID" thing at the start and end of monologues
>on HF phone sometimes, which doesn't seem appropriate.

**Stuff deleted**

"for ID" is one of my many pet peeves.  Why the heck else would you say your
call?  You ALWAYS give your call "for ID."  It is just an annoying habit.

>And while I'm at it, what is the purpose of those CQ DX calls that
>say "beaming the Pacific" - not "CQ Pacific", but "CQ DX, beaming
>the Pacific"?

** More stuff deleted**

The only possible use for such prattle is to make a longer call to give a
potential respondent time to get you tuned in.  Mostly tho, someone heard
someone else say it, thought it sounded pretty good, so they say it too.

>It might make communications much easier if we just said what we
>meant all the time, which means proper phonetics and procedures.
>The cute stuff is OK when you know you are S9+, I suppose.

Hear hear!!!  Here here, too.  There are so many examples of silly things hams
say on HF and VHF/UHF that it is embarassing to have a non-ham hear most of
it.  Around here, "By golly" is a biggie, along with "and stuff" and "for id."

I tell newbies to talk just like they would on the phone or in person.  When
you get home, say "I'm home now" and not "I'm at the home QTH."  There isn't
any good reason to say "73" to someone when it is just as easy to say "Bye,"
but for cripes sake, don't say "73's."

Don't forget, teacups have handles, people have names.

>Derek Wills (AA5BT, G3NMX)
>Department of Astronomy, University of Texas,
>Austin TX 78712.  (512-471-1392)
>[e-mail]


Ummm, ahhhhh, let's see now, I forgot what I was going to say....


Oh yeah, if you are talking to a Japanese guy who's name is Hiro, should you
call him "HEE RO" or "HIDD OH" or Bob?
***************************************************************
Joseph M. Gregg
Internet:  [e-mail]
Packet:  KN0A@W0ILO.#SEND.ND.USA.NOAM
LL:  701-588-4427
***************************************************************

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

Date: 23 May 1994 10:34:05 -0400
From: agate!howland.reston.ans.net!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!ns.mcs.kent.edu!kira.cc.uakron.edu!malgudi.oar.net!news.ans.net!newstf01.cr1.aol.com!search01.news.aol.com!not-for-mail@@ihnp4.ucsd.edu
Subject: "for ID"
To: [e-mail]

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

>>
So if one is in a big roundtable conversation, one should play it
safe by
identifying every transmission he/she makes?
<<

Yup.  (If the roundtable is big enough)  Now whether it =ought= to be
required that one ID at the end of a QSO is a different story... but
as it stands, that is the rule.

Jose   KD1SB

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

Date: 23 May 94 09:11:34 -0600
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!darwin.sura.net!atlas.tntech.edu![e-mail]
Subject: 2 meter thru-glass
To: [e-mail]

#1) how does a thru the glass 2 meter antenna actually work?

#2) what are its disadvantages?


thanks

73

Jeff, AC4HF

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

Date: 23 May 1994 12:56:49 GMT
From: newsgate.watson.ibm.com!watnews.watson.ibm.com![e-mail]
Subject: 40 to 50 mile range listening -- Which band to use/build?
To: [e-mail]

I will be getting a direct conversion receiver kit from
ten-tec in couple of days. I want to use this radio to
receive code practice sessions from W1AW - about 40 to 50
miles from where I live.

I can build this for either 40m or 80m. For the 40 to 50 mile
range, which band will work better? I will be doing most of
my listening in the evening, if that makes a difference. (Also,
I could easily string out about 100 feet of wire for an antenna..)

Many thanks in advance!

--vinod
email: [e-mail]

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

Date: 23 May 94 00:29:59 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: 610 Form in PostScript(r)
To: [e-mail]

Actually, wouldn't it be cheaper to just order up a bunch of forms from the
government (I do when I need to)?  And you would tend to avoid getting old
forms stored away that way.

Xerox "buff" paper seems to be real close to the FCC paper color (goldenrod
looks to be too "orange" to my eyes).  Had to get some copies made in the
early days of the forms, they've been used, so far no rejects. (helps to have
a good copier that doesn't "see" the paper color that would add noise to the
copies -- gotta love those 5100's).

There seems to be some variability in the paper color anyway based on what
people bring with them to exams.  Some are pretty yellow while others are
paler.

Probably as long as it's close it will be OK.  the normal response from the
FCC would probably be a copy of one of their 610's with a letter saying
something like "use the Right Form this time Young Man!" and your form back.

bill wb9ivr
rockwell avionics/collins

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

Date: 23 May 94 15:27:25 GMT
From: unix.sri.com!headwall.Stanford.EDU!ee-news![e-mail]
Subject: 610 Form in PostScript(r)
To: [e-mail]

>> On 23 May 94 00:29:59 GMT,
>> William=E.=[e-mail] said:

> There seems to be some variability in the paper color anyway based on what
> people bring with them to exams.  Some are pretty yellow while others are
> paler.

> Probably as long as it's close it will be OK.  the normal response from the
> FCC would probably be a copy of one of their 610's with a letter saying
> something like "use the Right Form this time Young Man!" and your form back.

I checked on this last week.  I picked up a xeroxed copy of the new 610
form from my local HRO, which was copied onto a light beige paper.  I sent
this thing in 10 weeks or so ago, and have yet to get a reply. After
reading the discussion here, I was woried that the FCC circularly filed the
thing because the color was wrong. So, I checked with our friends in
Gettysburg (717/337-1511 fyi) and a customer service representative told me
that the exact color wasn't all too important [though, I guess white is
still out], as long as all the information was there.  She also said that
their current turn around time is 14 weeks... argh!

The easiest thing to do, it seems, is to order some forms from the
government (in lots of 1000?) or from the ARRL.  This way, there will be no
color conflicts....  Or have the FCC change to a paper color avaialble at
your local CopyMat, etc...


73, Bill   KD6TOB




--
 Bill Bencze                               [e-mail]

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

Date: 23 May 94 00:40:13 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: cycles, cycles/sec vs Hz
To: [e-mail]

>This silly business of using mHz instead of MHz crept in, as far as my
>observations go, when PC speeds became such an advertizing issue. The
>computer industry today overwhelmingly specify their PC speeds as 33 mHz,

well it only makes sense that it's from the computer companies that perform
the public service of marking their computers with the warning that there is
"intel inside".  (sorta up there with the ad from the company that said they
had the most powerful computer because their PCs had a 250 W (or something)
power supply and what counts in a computer is POWER right???  8) )

bill wb9ivr
rockwell avionics/collins

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

Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 15:58:55 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!library.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!csus.edu!netcom.com![e-mail]
Subject: cycles, cycles/sec vs Hz
To: [e-mail]

>This silly business of using mHz instead of MHz crept in, as far as my
>observations go, when PC speeds became such an advertizing issue. The
>computer industry today overwhelmingly specify their PC speeds as 33 mHz,

Gee, 33 millihertz sure is a slow clock speed....
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra.  C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

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

Date: Mon, 23 May 94 08:53:29 CDT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!library.ucla.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu![e-mail]
Subject: Ham Radio few problem
To: [e-mail]

On Sun, 22 May 1994 17:08:39 GMT,
Jeffrey Herman  <[e-mail]> wrote:

>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Roger Buffington) writes:
>>.....
>>Over 90 percent of repeaters in Southern Cal are closed to virtually all
>>hams, and this IS unwholesome.  Eventually we will do something about it,
>>however.
>
>How? A lawsuit? Internally?
>Is there a precedent for forcing someone to make public a private repeater?

I have a feeling that those have responded to this so far perhaps are
taking this statement the wrong way (please correct me if I'm wrong,
Roger).  My interpretation of Roger's statment is that having 90% of HAM
repeaters closed to all HAMS is not necessarily in the best interests of
HAM radio in general, and that something needs to be done about the
attitudes or circumstances that have led these individuals or organizations
to keep thier repeaters closed.  I never got the impression that legal
action was being considered or promoted.

My $.02 worth...

-Steve-
N9??? (passed test 3/20 and holding...)

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

Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 12:45:13 GMT
From: world!mv!mv.mv.com![e-mail]
Subject: HAM RADIO RUDENESS
To: [e-mail]

To: [e-mail]

In a recent message, you wrote;

>>>
>>By the way, I started this thread and I'm glad to see so many of you
>>have encountered the same kinds of hassles I have.  Let's hang in
there and
>>quit putting up with this kind of junk!

    Ha, have I got one for you. When I finally passed my general, I
came home and went to 20m. Now as a tech+ I had never even
listened to 20m, so this was my first experience with that band.

    I listened for a dead piece of band, asked if the frequency was
being used *3* times with no response.

    I then called CQ and unkeyed to hear,

    "Are you stupid or just deaf? This frequency is being used. So
shut up and leave"!

    I then removed myself from 20m and now only go there fro a
little slowscan.

    Nice way to treat a newbie huh?

    Mark


---
* UniQWK v3.3 * The Windows Mail Reader

--
-------------------------------------------------------
| Mark D. Tetrault      | [e-mail]          |
| 6 Colonial Drive      | 1:132/[e-mail]       |
| Pembroke, NH 03275    | n1men.ampr.org_44.52.7.8    |
| [phone]        | Have a Nice Day!            |
-------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 13:12:57 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!agate!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!news.ecn.bgu.edu!siemens![e-mail]
Subject: Need help with QSL address
To: [e-mail]

Hi All

Can someone help me to find the address for this call "KI7VQ".
I have not been able to find him in any of the online (internet)
call books.  I think this ham is in Washington State. and I
need it for my WAS.

Please send the information to me directly.


Thanks for your help

Dave Post
WA2QIK
[e-mail]

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

Date: 23 May 94 08:25:33 EST
From: ccsua.ctstateu.edu![e-mail]
Subject: Need info on operating in Canada
To: [e-mail]

I'm traveling to the Canadian Maritimes this summer (August) and
want to operate from Nova Scotia, PEI, Newfoundland, and Labrador.
Do I need to apply to the Canadian equivalent of the FCC or can
I simply operate as VO1/N1QVE? Operations will be on HF as well
as VHF. Is there a Canadian equivalent of the ARRL's Repeater
directory?
Thanks & 73 de N1QVE
Harry

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

Date: 23 May 1994 12:45:58 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!EU.net!dkuug!eunet.no!nuug!nac.no!nntp-oslo.uninett.no!mac_inge![e-mail]
Subject: Need info on operatin in Thailand
To: [e-mail]

Hi there!

Thanks for reading this message.
I am planning a trip to Thailand, and I wonder how it
is to get a licence to  operate there.
I will also consider visiting other Far Eastern countries, such
as Japan, Hong Kong etc.
Any info on obtaining licence in these countries will also
be very much appreciated.

vy 73s de Tom/LA1BJA/JW1BJA/...

tomrune@mac_inge.itek.norut.no

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

Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 07:47:14 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!swrinde!emory!kd4nc!ke4zv![e-mail]
Subject: repeater slang/lingo.
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Michael P. Deignan) writes:
>
>[e-mail] (Gary Coffman) writes:
>
>> So, if you're in a
>> *large* roundtable, and 10 minutes has passed since your last ID, you might
>> insert your callsign "for ID" at a pause. That tells everyone that you're
>> not asking to break rotation, just stay legal.
>
>Unfortunately, most of the time I hear "for ID" is when two people are
>chatting with one another. Clearly in this case its redundant, since why
>else would you be giving your callsign if you're in the middle of a
>conversation with someone?

Yeah, that's redundant, just as saying "Guess it's about time to ID, this
is Kxxxx" is more words than absolutely necessary. However, once you're in
the habit of saying "for ID" in a repeater setting, it tends to be used all
the time. No harm done as far as I can tell whether you do it one way or the
other.

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: 23 May 94 15:06:10 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Speaker-Mike Connector
To: [e-mail]

Hello,

At the Rochester, NY Hamfest last weekend I bought a speaker-mike
for my ht.  It has a specialized connector to fit the HT it was
designed for.  In order to use it with my Alinco DJ-F1T, I must
replace the connector with what matches the ones on my Alinco ht.
Does anyone know where I can buy one? or do I make it myself?

--
-------------------------------------------------------------
                               |
Thomas J. Jennings             | Tel: [phone]
Development Engineer           | Fax: [phone]
                               |
ABB Process Automation         |
Post Office Box 22685          |
Rochester, New York 14692-2685 |
                               |
-------------------------------------------------------------
Internet: [e-mail]
-------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: 23 May 94 12:50:13 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: W21AT mods
To: [e-mail]

How do you open up extended receive on the Icom W21AT HT? Also, does this
give you access to aircraft bands?

TNX es 73 de KB2PWM

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

Date: 23 May 94 16:13:35 GMT
From: dog.ee.lbl.gov!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!library.ucla.edu!news.ucdavis.edu!modem109.ucdavis.edu![e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

References <[e-mail]>, <2rngno$[e-mail]>, <2ro8ib$[e-mail]>ucdav
Subject : Re: FCC licensing delays

In article <2ro8ib$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Darrell Shandrow) writes:

 They asked the FCC for a special callsign for the
>person to operate due to their short life expectancy.  I think there was
>not an affirmative response and the person died a few days before the
>license arrived in the mail. This is a terrible example of the amount of
>time required
If all they wantd was their callsign immediately they should have become an
astronaut.  They don't wait for their calls like the rest of us.  aside from
that I can't believe their local legislator wasn't willing to step in.  I
assume you meant an immediate license and not just a special call.

Dan
=========================================================================
Dan Todd       [e-mail]           kc6uud@ke6lw.#nocal.ca.us.na
Charter Member: Dummies for UNIX
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
When radios are outlawed, only outlaws will have radios
- David R. Tucker on rec.radio.amateur.policy
==========================================================================

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

Date: 23 May 1994 15:58:44 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!cs.utexas.edu!news.tamu.edu![e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

References <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>π
Subject : Re: repeater slang/lingo.

I have at times heard the "for ID" suffix used on the air as a gentle
reminder to the other party that they should ID.  It usually seems to
work, too.

                    --Rick
                      KE3IV

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

Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 12:43:29 GMT
From: brunix!pstc3![e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

References <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>v-lyon1
Subject : Re: Ham Radio few problems!

In article <[e-mail]>,
    [e-mail] (Roger Buffington) writes:

|> Here in Southern Cal, amateur radio is in great shape.  We have very few
|> lids on 2 meters, and we don't have a lot of cb-type operating.

I must have the section of California wrong. I'm constantly hearing
accounts from people who indicate that listening to some of the
conversations on CA 2 meter repeaters reveals language which is actually
worse then what you hear on the 27mhz band.


MD
--
-- Michael P. Deignan
-- RI Center For Political Incorrectness & Environment Ignorance
-- 'Have you hugged your chainsaw today?'

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

End of Info-Hams Digest V94 #561
******************************