QRZ! Ham Radio 5/QRZ Ham Radio Callsign Database - Volume 5.iso/digests/infoham/940611.txt

Internet Message Format | 1994-11-13 | 23.2 KB

Date: Thu,  2 Jun 94 11:30:18 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 #611
To: Info-Hams


Info-Hams Digest            Thu,  2 Jun 94       Volume 94 : Issue  611

Today's Topics:
                           440 in So. Cal.
                       Antennas on Taurus Wagon
                      Any Paragon-II 's out yet?
                           Dallas Ham fest?
                      FCC computers up! (2 msgs)
                    Ham Radio few problem (2 msgs)
                             Loop Antenna
                           N7RO QSL bureau
                          RFI Tracked Down!!
                  This Week on Spectrum June 4, 1994
                             TI9JJP / QSL
                     Yaesu FT-530 Microphone Prob

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: Thu, 2 Jun 1994 14:33:52 GMT
From: brunix!pstc3.pstc.brown.edu![e-mail]
Subject: 440 in So. Cal.
To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (John Minger) writes:

> We were told in rather curt terms that no-code techs were not welcome
> there.  (Something about not being able to copy the repeater's ID..)

Well, I can sympathize with their attitude. Many no-clue technicians in
this area are simply CB operators extending their available channel
selections. Perhaps the same is true in your area, I can't say.

You might want to try writing a letter to the trustee explaining that
you are a new ham and the coverage is excellent for your needs, ask
how to join, here is an SASE, your repeater is so nice kissy-kissy
brownnose, etc.

You may be surprised at the response you get. For instance, I am
relunctant to let anyone on my machine, but if you ask politely
generally I say yes (I've only said no twice). And, despite my
vocal opposition to the no-code license, the dominent license
class held by users of my machine is the no-code tech.


MD
--
-- Michael P. Deignan
-- Amalgamated Baby Seal Poachers Union, Local 101
-- "Get 'The Club'... Endorsed by Baby Seal poachers everywhere..."

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

Date: Thu, 2 Jun 1994 13:27:39 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!swrinde!emory!rsiatl!ke4zv![e-mail]
Subject: Antennas on Taurus Wagon
To: [e-mail]

In article <2sjcpu$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Charlie Ross) writes:
>I will soon be getting a Ford Taurus wagon.  I'll be installing a 2M rig
>and an HF rig.  I'm trying to decide where to install the antennas.
>
>For 2M, I'm leaning towards a permanent, roof-top installation.  For HF,
>I'll be using a Hustler mast, and I have no great ideas on how to mount
>it.  On my current car, I mounted the HF mast via a heavy aluminum plate
>bolted to the underside of the steel bumper.  However, the bumpers on the
>Taurus appear to be much flimsier and I'm concerned that the flexing caused
>by the mast would be too much stress.  Of course, there's always the option
>of having it mounted though the sheet metal on the side... unlike the 2M
>installation, however, it can't be later passed off as a cell phone mount.

This is a common problem with newer cars and their flimsy, or plastic,
bumpers. One good solution is to order the car with the trailer towing
package. There are mounts available that slip into the hitch in place
of the regular tow bar with ball, or you can simply replace the ball
with a ball and spring antenna mount.

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: 2 Jun 1994 14:25:22 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!wupost!trinews.sbc.com!mac-gianino.tri.sbc.com![e-mail]
Subject: Any Paragon-II 's out yet?
To: [e-mail]

> Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Has anyone used the new Paragon-II yet?  I've heard there are some out, but
I've yet to see an ad in any of the magazines.  It is claimed to incorporate
some of the new features on the Omni-VI.
Ken - WB0QNA

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

Date: 2 Jun 1994 17:35:38 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!udel!news2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!bga.com![e-mail]
Subject: Dallas Ham fest?
To: [e-mail]

David Martin ([e-mail]) wrote:
: I am looking for some information about a Ham fest that will be hold in
: the Dallas Tx area in June.  Does anyone know where and when?

The Dallas HamCom will be held June 10, 11, 12  at the Arlington
Convention Center in Arlington (between Dallas and Fort Worth.

This is a really good ham fest with a large indoor flea market (and an
outdoor overflow) and many, many commercial exhibitors in a separate
area.  There are, of course, some good show-specials to spend your money
on.

It starts Friday afternoon, peaks on Saturday, and is much lower key on
Sunday.  If you need a hotel room, call right now or you will not be able
to find anything reasonably close.

Patrick McGuire, WA8PLR
Austin  TX

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

Date: 2 Jun 1994 15:53:19 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!usc!cs.utexas.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!wupost!bigfoot.wustl.edu!cec3![e-mail]
Subject: FCC computers up!
To: [e-mail]

Well, I found out something new today.  FCC says that their new computer system
was online as of two (2) days ago, and they're processing about 300
applications a day.  Now that hasn't helped me, as I passed the test >5 months
ago and still haven't heard a peep from them.  They also said that they're
withholding the tech-plus applications till last?

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

Date: Thu, 2 Jun 94 11:55:49 CDT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!swrinde!gatech!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu![e-mail]
Subject: FCC computers up!
To: [e-mail]

On 2 Jun 1994 15:53:19 GMT,
Jesse L Wei  <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Well, I found out something new today.  FCC says that their new computer system
>was online as of two (2) days ago, and they're processing about 300
>applications a day.  Now that hasn't helped me, as I passed the test >5 months
>ago and still haven't heard a peep from them.  They also said that they're
>withholding the tech-plus applications till last?

Hmmm...10+ weeks and counting for me...time to go and check the mail - sure
would be nice to see it today! It's been more than *5* months for you???
Maybe yours is not due to a processing delay.....

-Steve-
N9???

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

Date: Thu, 2 Jun 1994 14:26:55 GMT
From: brunix!pstc3.pstc.brown.edu![e-mail]
Subject: Ham Radio few problem
To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (Gary Coffman) writes:

> And after enriching the lawyers to the tune of several thousands or tens
> of thousands of dollars, you could still lose.

There are no such things as absolutes.

> The FCC does *not* recognize
> closed repeater *coordination*.

I am guilty of a poor choice of words. I do have an "FCC-recognized
closed repeater" and I do have "coordination". I was not attempting to
imply that the FCC recognizes coordination.


MD
--
-- Michael P. Deignan
-- Amalgamated Baby Seal Poachers Union, Local 101
-- "Get 'The Club'... Endorsed by Baby Seal poachers everywhere..."

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

Date: 2 Jun 94 17:31:12 GMT
From: sdd.hp.com!col.hp.com!fc.hp.com![e-mail]
Subject: Ham Radio few problem
To: [e-mail]

Mike,

> The FCC has stated that repeater owners have always had the authority to deny
> individuals access to their repeater.

There is no question about this. The repeater owner can turn off the machine
whenever they choose to do so. I think the key word here is that the trustee
must deny the access -- which to me means more than saying "Get off the
frequency - we own this one."

> If someone knowingly takes steps to key a repeater, even though
> they have been told not to, then that is intentional interference.

Can you support this statement by other than your own opinion, if the
attempted usage of the repeater is not malicious?
I would be very interested in any case where the FCC has held that attempting
to use a repeater is considered "malicious interference". My personal
contention is that PL today is not an access-restriction mechanism -- almost
all new rigs include encoders and many open machines require PL to reduce
interference from other services keying the repeater.

> However, we're not speaking simply of actions, we're also speaking of
> intent. Someone may choose to operate simplex on my repeater input,
> and use the same PL as I have on my machine because it happens to be
> the same as one they use elsewhere. Does this become intentional
> interference?

A good question, and I would be interested if you have any evidence from
the FCC's rulings to support your contention that attempting to use the
repeater is interference. According to the FCC, as you've already stated,
there really is no such thing as "open" or "closed" repeaters. Anyone can
shut off their repeater to anyone else. Where we differ is on the issue of
whether it's malicious interference to try to operate within the rules on a
"closed" machine that readily responds to all users (or all users with the
proper PL).

73,

John, NK0R

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

Date: 2 Jun 94 15:19:47 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Loop Antenna
To: [e-mail]


 Hi

 I am gathering the parts for the "Compact Loop Antenna for
 30 through 12 Meters" which was written up in the May, 1994
 QST. I will be using it for my 20 Meter NN1G rig.

 I was wondering, before I get too far along, if any one
 built it and if someone did: Any hints in building it? and
 how does it perform?

 Thanks and 73

 TJ, kv2x
--
-------------------------------------------------------------
                               |
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: Thu, 02 Jun 94 02:03:22 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!news.umbc.edu!eff!news.duke.edu!godot.cc.duq.edu!newsfeed.pitt.edu!dsinc!wells!w2up![e-mail]
Subject: N7RO QSL bureau
To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (Derek Wills) writes:

>
>
> Maybe it's just the times, when there are pigs/thieves
> >like F6FNU and DJ6SI who want "tips" for their troubles...
>
>      DJ6SI is not a QSL manager, he goes on DXpeditions to places
>      that are semi-rare to rare.  He then replies to QSL cards that
>      people send him.  I don't know what the minimum is you can get
>      away with and get a card from him, you need to send $2 for the
>      Germany --> USA mailing costs, and I have sent him $3 in the past
>      and had cards back.   The rarer the place he goes to, the more I
>      contribute.   He doesn't answer bureau cards, and he doesn't keep
>      his logs open for more than a few months, but I can live with that.
>
>      F6FNU is only a manager, not a DXpeditioner, and I think he has
>      reformed somewhat (at one time his cards were not counted for the
>      French awards, not sure if that is true now).  He replies promptly,
>      and I believe he will send a card if you send him only $1.  Again,
>      if I want a card for a new country, I don't mind sending $2 a time.
>      You can confirm a couple of hundred countries via the bureau, and
>      spending a total of $250 confirming the other 120 or so is peanuts
>      compared with the hours you put in working them, or the equipment
>      you use to work them.
>
>      So I really wouldn't call said people pigs or thieves, especially
>      when they go on DXpeditions to countries that we need.  I have had
>      essentially 100% returns for direct cards over the years, thanks
>      to a lot of responsible DXers and managers.  I've never used N7RO,
>      but I wouldn't discourage anyone from using any method of getting
>      QSL cards if that is their goal.   Happy DXing!
>
>
> Derek Wills (AA5BT, G3NMX)
> Department of Astronomy, University of Texas,
> Austin TX 78712.  (512-471-1392)
> [e-mail]

Derek - I think you are missing my point (sort of). The two I mentioned
are profiteers. DJ6SI (and some others) are professional DXpeditioners.
They make a nice living by going to places (yes, some rare) and raking in
the bucks for QSLs. It's one thing to contribute voluntarily for an
expedition (which I frequently do). It's another to "extort" money by
REQUIRING a donation for a QSL.  This practice should be banned on
ehtical grounds by ARRL.  Let see how fasr these guys change their
practices if their expeditions don't count for DXCC.


=======================================================================
Barry N. Kutner, W2UP       Usenet/Internet: [e-mail]
Newtown, PA                 Packet Radio: W2UP @ WB3JOE.#EPA.PA.USA.NA
                            Packet Cluster: W2UP >K2TW (FRC)
.......................................................................

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

Date: Thu, 2 Jun 1994 15:40:07 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!usc!nic-nac.CSU.net!charnel.ecst.csuchico.edu!olivea!sgigate.sgi.com!odin!chuck.dallas.sgi.com![e-mail]
Subject: RFI Tracked Down!!
To: [e-mail]

Good job Andrew and a good report on RFI from water heater
(or is that watter? :-)  ) energy saver.

I ran into a problem during a QRP QSO Party test several
months ago.  I usually operate on 40M (7.040MHz area) during
a contest.  This time I decided to bop up to 20M (14.060MHz
area, just between the digital crowd and the county hunters).

Well, wouldn't you know it, some lid has a carrier at
14.06000000MHz, S9+ and rock steady.  Band was bad anyway,
so back to 40M or QRT.

Next day --- same song same verse.  I say to myself, no body
is that stupid.  Must be something in house doing this.  So,
around I bop turning off anything and everything electrical.
Sure enough, one Panasonic ansering machine which had not been
on during the last contest.  (*&@#$#$ thing to the trash.

I refuse to give up the frequency to something that I dislike
in the first place.  People should talk to people anyway.  :-)

dit dit
--
Chuck Adams  K5FO  CP-60
[e-mail]

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

Date: 2 Jun 1994 10:33:05 -0400
From: spcuna!starcomm.overleaf.com![e-mail]
Subject: This Week on Spectrum June 4, 1994
To: [e-mail]

On Saturday June 4'th we will take a look at Digital Audio broadcasting
or DAB.  This high-tech system is in the wings and should be here near
the end of the century.  A few systems have been proposed for dab and a
standard hasn't been decided as of yet.  Our guest will be Ted Schober.
Ted has been on the leading edge in the world of DAB and will give us a
look into the radio of the future.

On Saturday June 11'th we will take a look at VSATS, (very small
apachure earth terminals).  Vsats are the newest high-tech method of
satellite communications.  Our guest will be Bill Septmeyer.  Bill is an
engineer and founder of National Supervisory Network (NSN).  Nsn is on
the cutting edge of this new communications technology.  So join us on
the 11'th of June when we take to the sky on Spectrum.

On Saturday June 19'th Spectrum will celebrate its one year anniversary
with a special show.  You'll just have to tune in and find out what
happens.

--
Spectrum airs live Sunday at 0200 UTC (2200 EDT Saturday) on:

  WWCR, 5810 KHz, Nashville, TN (World Wide)
  WIFI, 1460 AM, Florance, NJ (Philadelphia Area)
  KHNC, 1360 AM, Johnstown, CO (Denver Area)
  Omega Radio Network, Galaxy III, X17, 5.8 MHz WIDE audio. (Satellite)

Spectrum is rebroadcast:

  Sunday at 1500 EDT, on WIFI, 1460 AM, Florance, NJ (Philadelphia Area)

--
Spectrum, "The Communications Magazine You Read With Your Ears."
Box 722, Holmdel, NJ, 07733-0722, USA
[e-mail], [e-mail]
+1 800-787-SPECTRUM, [phone]

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

Date: 2 Jun 1994 10:39:09 -0400
From: newstf01.cr1.aol.com!search01.news.aol.com![e-mail]
Subject: TI9JJP / QSL
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (Evert Halbach) writes:

> I got my card yesterday.

In one sense, Jose got a bad rap for the QSL problems; in the other,
he appeared to be in denial about how bad the mail ripoff situation
was in Costa Rica.  At first, he thought only 250 pieces of mail had
been stolen/lost.  I had sent two QLS/SAE/$$ packages spaced about 6
months apart for last year's operation, and neither one received a
reply.  I eventually got a card from a different method, but I'm glad
he's now got a U.S. mail drop going.  That should ease relations in
the future.

Danny Goodman AE9F/6

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

Date: Thu, 2 Jun 1994 14:22:07 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!sdd.hp.com!col.hp.com!csn![e-mail]
Subject: Yaesu FT-530 Microphone Prob
To: [e-mail]

My thanks to all of you who responded, both here and via mail.  I am
posting this followup in case this information is useful to anyone else.

I received several replies stating that the mike element did not have an
adequate path to the outside of the mike case, and the recommended mod
was to drill a 1/16 inch hole in the appropriate place.  I tried this,
and there was no apparent improvement.

I received three replies stating that some mikes were shipped with bad
mike elements or other parts, and that a call to Yaesu would get me
what I need to fix it.

Before calling Yaesu, I called Ham Radio Outlet where I bought the mike.
They said they were unaware of any problems, which is amazing considering
the number of responses I have received here and on Compuserve acknowleging
this phenomenon.   However, the HRO fellow did say that the MH-29 is
designed to filter out background noise, and that requires holding the mike
close - VERY close - when transmitting.  He said holding the mike 6 inches
away would not cut it, and xmit volume would be lost.  He also recommended
talking right at the lower right hand area of the mike where the element is.

My preliminary testing of this idea seems to indicate HRO was correct.  I will
probably call Yaesu anyway, just to see what they say, but there seems to
be a solution for now.

Thanks again for all the suggestions.

Jim Deeming
KB0MED / AG

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

Date: Thu, 2 Jun 1994 16:04:04 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!llyene![e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

References <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>
Subject : Re: 440 in So. Cal.

In article <[e-mail]>,
>
>I can't resist sharing an experience with trying to contact the folks
>on a closed repeater...  We discovered W6UE on 445.450 - (pl 100) in
>the Glendale/NE LA/Pasadena area.  It had only a trickle of users and
>the coverage was perfect for our needs.  We called the control operator
>one evening to ask about using/joining it.  This repeater appears to be
>affiliated with CALTECH, although the repeater guide is useless there.
>We were told in rather curt terms that no-code techs were not welcome
>there.  (Something about not being able to copy the repeater's ID..)
>We were nice guys and let that sleeping dog lie there.  Makes me wonder
>what the reaction would be if we started communicating via CW on that
>repeater. ;-)
>
>-John

That is absurd! One of the control ops for W6UE is a tech, and all licensed
amateur operators who exhibit good operating practice are welcomed there.
A quick check of the callserver shows that W6UE is the club call of the
Caltech Amateur Radio Club. About the only restriction I have ever heard
is for operators to be considerate of the co-channeled repeater which has
a significantly overlapping coverage area. You either misunderstood something,
talked to an impostor, or are making this up. I daresay you will _NOT_ be
welcomed there after an insulting post like this.

-Greg
KD6MSM

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

Date: Thu, 2 Jun 1994 16:36:03 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!library.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!csus.edu!netcom.com![e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

References <[e-mail]>, <2s0pqo$dc2$[e-mail]>, <2s2sr5$[e-mail]>
Subject : Re: Bizarre QST statement

In article <2s2sr5$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Scott Turner) writes:
>failing at the worst possible times.  The only sweep tube failure I've
>had came from a filter cap in the Drake power supply dying, which
>caused the TR relay to fail, ultimately trashing the PA tubes.  All, of
>course, while I was out of the room for a while.  I kinda doubt 6146s
>would've fared any better.

Don't be so sure... ...the tales I've heard of 6146B's being roasted and
living to tell of it, without so much as going 'soft,' will curl your hair.

White-hot plates for minutes on end, frying other nearby components, and doing
everything but melting the envelope, and they still hung on. An RCA 6146B
was a tube that had evolved into one tough sumbitch.

The difference between these critters and sweep tubes is three-to-one
in the books, and seems to be far more than that in practice. I was
always surprised that Drake elected to stick with the sweep-tube final,
when they could have easily shifted to 6146's (or something more exotic,
and perhaps just one of them), especially when they were notably on the
high end, both in quality and price... ...it was Collins, not Swan, that
they were really up against. Then again, by the time the 4C came out,
perhaps their design and engineering focus was on what was to be the
7-line.

Still, I wouldn't steer a newcomer away from a TR-4C or FT101 as an
interim rig.

Greg

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

End of Info-Hams Digest V94 #611
******************************