QRZ! Ham Radio 5/QRZ Ham Radio Callsign Database - Volume 5.iso/digests/infoham/940787.txt

Internet Message Format | 1994-11-13 | 25.7 KB

Date: Wed, 13 Jul 94 11:07:34 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 #787
To: Info-Hams


Info-Hams Digest            Wed, 13 Jul 94       Volume 94 : Issue  787

Today's Topics:
                        amateur radio bitmaps
                      ARLB059 Emergency declared
                          Beginner Questions
                  Does CW as a pre-req REALLY Work?
                              Drake Net
                 GPS Magellan....inaccurate readings?
                       HELP: Simplex Freq. Poll
           Please read: Ham Radio Bootcamp (Long) (2 msgs)
                 WANTED: Manual for an RCA model 1000

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: 8 Jul 94 19:43:10 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: amateur radio bitmaps
To: [e-mail]

I'm finally getting a Sun workstation with a color monitor and was
wondering if anyone in netland has any neat amateur radio bitmaps I
could FTP?

                        73,
                        Scott, WA2CJT
--
Scott Ginsburg            Voice: 508-436-3836
Wellfleet Communications  Internet: [e-mail]
2 Federal St.             Packet: WA2CJT@K1UGM
Billerica, MA 01821

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

Date: 12 Jul 1994 18:53:55 GMT
From: ncd.com!newshost.ncd.com!sheridan.ncd.com![e-mail]
Subject: ARLB059 Emergency declared
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Jeffrey Herman) writes:
|> In article <$[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
|> >SB QST @ ARL $ARLB059
|> >ARLB059 Emergency declared
|> >
|> >Emergency declared
|> >
|> >The FCC's Atlanta office of the Field Operations Bureau on July 8
|> >requested all amateurs to cooperate by recognizing the existence of
|> >a voluntary communications emergency and therefore relinquishing the
|> >use of frequencies between 3972 and 3978 kHz for the handling of
|> >emergency traffic.
|>
|> What was this all about? Was it an exercise?
|>
|>
|> Jeff NH6IL

Guessing, I'd say it probably has to do with the Floods occuring
in the area currently.

Steve KA6S

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

Date: 13 Jul 94 12:33:17 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!swrinde!howland.reston.ans.net!noc.near.net!news.delphi.com!BIX.com![e-mail]
Subject: Beginner Questions
To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (Dan Brown) writes:

>       I would really like a book that covers the stuff for the licences,
>but in a different format--something like an actual book on the subject,
>rather than "these are the answers to the questions they'll ask, and the
>reasons why they're right."  I'd really like something I'd have a chance
>at finding in a rather well-stocked general bookstore, but any
>recommendations for such a book would be appreciated.

Check out the ARRL publications.  The starter book is "Now You're
Talking!" (subtitle: "All You Need to Get Your First Ham Radio License.")
This is a very good, very readable discussion of all the material that
appears in the Novice and Technician exams, presented in a tutorial
fashion.  Cost is $19.  You can get it at most ham-related stores (e.g.,
any Ham Radio Outlet) or direct from ARRL at 203-666-1541.

For General, Advanced and Extra classes, the ARRL publishes a license
manual series.  Each book ($12 for General, $8 for Advanced/Extra) gives
tutorial coverage of the appropriate material plus the complete text of
the questions at the end of the book.

One thing that's good about these ARRL books is the way the exam sections
are cross-referenced to the tutorial material.  If you can't answer a
question, they give you the page number to turn to for the discussion.

Another book worth buying is the FCC Rule Book, also from the ARRL.  Cost
is $9.  You get, certainly, the complete text of Part 97, the FCC rules
covering amateur radio, but you also get a lot of common sensical
interpretation of the rules, including FAQ's, what about zoning limits
on antennas and stuff like that.

>       In the FAQ, it says that the CW test is administered by playing a
>QSO and then giving a 10-question multiple choice test on its contents.
>If the applicant fails to answer at least 7 questions correctly, the
>examiner looks for at least one minute of solid copy, no errors.  In the
>book, however, it says that the examiner will first look for one minute of
>solid copy; if it's not there, s/he will administer a 10-question test of
>either the multiple-choice or fill-in-the-blank variety.  Which of these
>descriptions is more accurate?  The former sounds a bit easier.

Each examiner has a fair amount of flexibility in deciding how to run
the test so no one can give a blanket answer that will be correct in
all cases.

That said, I think the exams I took, given by ARRL VE's at the Boston
Amateur Radio Club, were probably typical.  They give you headphones
and a blank sheet of paper and then play a tape of a short QSO (ham
"conversation").  You copy down whatever you like, whether it's just
taking notes on important points (e.g., call signs, transmitter type,
locations, power used, etc.) mentioned in the exchange or actually
copying the text exactly as transmitted.  It's up to you, though most
folks try for exact copy.

Then you get a minute or so to go back over what you've written.  If
you copied "I'm using a _aesu FT-_000", obviously, you fill in that
missing "Y" and "1" that common sense tells you must have been there.

Next you get the exam, which is all multiple choice, focusing on the
important points in the QSO.  Half the questions tend to be difficult,
e.g., correctly picking out which of 4 fairly similar callsigns you
actually heard, and the rest somewhat easier, e.g., was N1CVD using
a Yaesu or a Kenwood radio?  (You'd have had to miss a LOT of characters
to blow that question!)  Since it is multiple choice, obviously, guessing
is allowed.

If you don't pass the multiple choice, they'll check over your written
copy, looking for that solid minute of copy.  But realistically, if you
couldn't pass the multiple choice, you probably don't have the solid
minute either, is my suspicion.

Because the exams are multiple choice, they are easier than you expect.
I was fairly confident when I went in that I could pass 5 wpm, but
certainly didn't think I was ready to do better than that.  But after
passing 5 wpm, the examiners talked me into trying 13 wpm anyway (you
pay just one fee, no matter how many tests you take, so the 13 wpm test
was "free") and to my amazement, I passed that too.

>       Other than these tapes, what else might I want to try for learning
>code?  Listening to actual radio stuff is out right now, as I don't have a
>radio.  I'm doing pretty well at 5 wpm so far (about 1/2-way through the
>course, and still copying 95-100%).

I have the ARRL code tapes and really like them a lot.  Each set of 2
tapes are $10.  They cover 0 to 5 wpm ("Your Introduction to Morse Code"),
5 to 10 wpm, 10 to 15 wpm and 15 to 22 wpm.  All are recorded in what's
called Farnsworth method, meaning the characters are sent at 18 wpm, but
spaced out for a slower overall rate.  There's also a special 13 to 14
wpm tape that uses standard spacing (useful if you expect to take an
exam from someone who, unlike the ARRL VE's, does not use Farnsworth
spacing.)

>       When I think I'm ready, how do I take the test?

Call around to local ham radio clubs.  Here in Boston, the BARC offers
open walk-in testing for all classes every month.  Other clubs give
exams every few months.

If you're not sure what clubs are active in your area, call the ARRL's
Educational Activities Dept at 800-32-NEWHAM.  They'll send you a
printout of all the clubs in your area and a schedule for exams.

>       Are there any decent Ham shops in either San Bernardino or
>Riverside county, CA?

Ham Radio Outlet has several stores near you.  Anaheim is probably
the closest (933 N. Euclid St, 800-854-6046 or 714-533-7373), but
you might also check out the stores in Van Nuys (same 800# or
818-988-2212) or San Diego (same 800# or 619-560-4900).  Flipping
thru QST, I also see ads for Jun's Electronics (5563 Sepulveda,
Culver City, 310-390-8003) and Henry Radio (2050 S. Bundy Dr, Los
Angeles, 310-820-1234).

Good luck!


Regards,
Doug Hamilton    KD1UJ    [e-mail]    Ph 508-358-5715
Hamilton Laboratories, 13 Old Farm Road, Wayland, MA  01778-3117, USA

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

Date: Tue, 12 Jul 1994 23:33:55 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!swrinde!gatech!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!news.ysu.edu!malgudi.oar.net!witch!doghouse![e-mail]
Subject: Does CW as a pre-req REALLY Work?
To: [e-mail]


In article <2vu2d0$[e-mail]>, Michael P. Deignan ([e-mail]) writes:
>There is no way to "work inside" it. And, the FCC has made abundantly
>clear that they have no interest in the amateur radio service anymore.
>Why should I care?
>

Really -- when has the FCC "made it abundantly clear that they have no
interest" any more?  Seems to me they still do their part, and expect
us to do ours.  The "self-regulating" idea has been part of ham radio
from its earliest days.

As for why you should care -- because you're a part of the service.
If you don't care about what happens to the amateur radio service,
might as well turn in your license, sell your rigs and find another
hobby.  Let the hams who do care about it do what they can to improve
it.



----------
Joe Salemi, KR4CZ               Internet: [e-mail]
Compuserve: 72631,23   FidoNet: 1:109/136   MCI Mail: 433-3961

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

Date: Wed, 13 Jul 1994 13:46:52 GMT
From: netcomsv!netcom.com![e-mail]
Subject: Drake Net
To: [e-mail]

I recall recent mention of an East Coast Drake user group which meets
on 75m on Saturday. Unfortunately, the time and frequency slipped
off the spool before I grabbed it.

Can whoever knows post or email when it is?

Thanks

Greg

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

Date: 13 Jul 1994 12:50:30 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!swrinde!gatech!udel!news2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.infi.net!larry.infi.net![e-mail]
Subject: GPS Magellan....inaccurate readings?
To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] wrote:
: Magellan reports readings that are several hundred meters
: off in elevation as well as location.  The elevation wanders
: as thou it can't decide.  Is this normal for GPS equip?
: Thanx in advance
: Alan
: N1QWT

Mine usually shows about 100 feet of error, which is supposed to
be the norm for the civilian P-code.  Error increases with poorer
signal levels and fewer satellites locked-on.  What's the
operational situation?  Antenna in the clear?  Path losses?
Also depends on the specific receiver implementation.

At any rate, more specifics would be useful in determining the source
of the problem.

The elevation wander is constant in mine, and I've seen it wander
as much as four hundred feet above and below a realistic figure.  I
presume that's the result of the (intentional) degrading of the
P-code.
--
73 de Mark
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Mark M. Plasket                [e-mail]
N4WQJ                          [e-mail]        (AMPRNet)
                               n4wqj @ wd4miz.va.usa.noam  (PBBS)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: 13 Jul 1994 08:59:04 -0400
From: newstf01.cr1.aol.com!search01.news.aol.com![e-mail]
Subject: HELP: Simplex Freq. Poll
To: [e-mail]

I am conducting a poll of VHF/UHF simplex frequencies that hams across the
nation monitor on a regular or semi-regular basis. Please help me out by
EMAILing
me the following information. If you monitor more than one please include
that
info also.

Callsign - State - Simplex frequency - PL (if any) - Monitor: Continuously
or Occasionally

Example:
N1NTE - MA - 50.400 - none - Occasionally
N1NTE - MA - 52.525 - none - Occasionally
N1NTE - MA - 144.310 - 100Hz - Continuous
N1NTE - MA - 146.520 - none - Occasionally
N1NTE - MA - 446.000 - none - Continuous
N1NTE - MA - 446.100 - 88.5Hz - Continuous

Thanks for you help!  Rob, N1NTE   >>> Please reply to: [e-mail]

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

Date: 13 Jul 1994 09:03:02 -0400
From: newstf01.cr1.aol.com!search01.news.aol.com![e-mail]
Subject: Please read: Ham Radio Bootcamp (Long)
To: [e-mail]

HAM RADIO BOOTCAMP

WARNING! The following ideas are of a radical nature and may cause closed
minded
people to scream loudly and form quick, irrational opinions. If you take a
minute to look forward into the future (a bright, positive future, that
is) you may find that a little effort on your part could improve  two
hobbies that have more in common than most people think.


I hear many complaints about the No-Code Tech license from a lot of hams.
Gripes range from "those glorified CB'ers" to "its not fair I had to learn
CW to get my ticket". Well life is a dynamic process and nothing ever
stays the same. How would you feel if ham radio never changed? Let's go
back to spark transmitters - NOT! I don't know about you but I'd rather be
involved in a hobby that offered something new every once in a while.
Statistics say that you're not going to please everyone all of the time.
The goal is to please most of the people most of the time. And it looks
like the No-Coders will end up being the majority very soon.

Another common source of irritation to hams comes from CB'ers. From ham
radio's
regulations and gentlemen's agreements, CB seems to be a wild unruly
jungle. No license requirements, poor operating practices, illegal
operation and lack of FCC supervision give CB'ers free rein of a good size
chunk of 26 to 27 MHz. And to top it all off, outbander excursions into
the 10 meter band feel like an invading presence into the ham realm.

OK, so what do we do? Well, so far, I don't see much happening. Most feel
that one
person's efforts don't amount to much difference, so why bother, right?
Wrong! Most
things get started by one person's thoughts and actions and then as it get
communicated others try it and so on. You've got to start somewhere and
this is somewhere.

IDEA:
Get hams involved in CB radio. (Here comes the screaming!) No really, I
mean it. The CB frequencies are frequencies just like hams use. The only
difference is that the style of operating that is dissimilar. This is a
learned trait and learned traits can be modified.  Look at the CB'er who
gets his/her ticket and starts talking on 2 meters. Can't you detect
slight mannerisms reminiscent of CBing? But after a few weeks or months
there's no way you can tell this person from any other experienced
operator. All it takes is a little training and practice to improve
operating skills. This is what I'm leading up to.

If some forward thinking hams would take the time, set up a decent CB
station, talk to a few people who are genuinely interested in
communications and MAYBE in becoming a
ham, and give them some on-the-air training, what do you think would
happen? Two
things immediately come to mind. One, more interest in ham radio and two,
better trained operators once they get their license.

This is how my vision of this plan works and this is by no means set in
stone. Joe, K1ABC, reads this article and says to himself, "Hmm, why
not!". So, Joe goes down to Radio Shack and picks up a CB radio but being
a true ham he builds his own antenna. As he get his station on the air, he
begins to get very nauseated listening to all the ridiculous behavior on
nearly all the 40 channels.


Until one night at about 9:30 pm after all the "children" are asleep. A
small group of three CB'ers are talking on channel 27 about getting their
ham license. Joe says, "Aha!" and breaks into the conversation and tells
them, "Hi, folks, I'm a ham. Can I help you by answering any questions?".
Well, time goes by and its midnight and Joe is beginning to lose his
voice. He's made  three new friends, gave them the names of some books to
pick-up, and has a schedule every 9:30 pm on channel 27 to discuss more
ham radio. Joe says to himself, "Gee, that was easy!". The next morning on
the way to work he's talking to his buddies on the repeater and tells them
what happened. One of the hams suggests they take away his ham license for
talking on a CB (half jokingly of course!) Another says "I've got an old
CB in my garage, I'll set it up and join you at 9:30".

Well its been a week and Joe is not the only ham on channel 27. He's
opened the minds of three other hams who've set up an informal question
and answer net. They get about 5 CB'ers on average every night and with
many just listening on the side. To participate in this net CB'ers must
follow a few operating rules like courtesy and identifying yourself (by
real name). The hams must follow rules, too. Number one rule - Talk person
to person, not holy ham to lowly CB'er. No condescending tones. (Remember,
you WANT them to become hams!) Questions could be about equipment, rules,
and even Morse code practice could be covered in such a net. VE's could
fill their classes if they hooked up with these enterprising hams. This
net gives budding hams the chance to learn proper operating procedure
BEFORE they get their ticket.

Imagine if this was done all over the country. All these new operators
coming on board with the all the skills necessary to become good ham
operators. Not only that, think of how many people you can reach using
this method. People who would have otherwise never got involved but did
because it was right on THEIR radio. The FCC would have to allocate MORE
frequencies for ham radio! Could this improve CB radio as a whole? Maybe.
Would it make it any worse? I don't think so. Will it help ham radio?
Definitely, YES!

CB radio has some positive things going for it. Its readily available so
that no one is
excluded (one of its problems, too). Also, all those who use CB radio have
some degree of desire to be communicators and radio enthusiasts. Isn't
this one of the reasons people get their ham license? Not everyone wants
to be a ham but why ignore this large pool of potentials who may want to
benefit from ham radio and what it can offer?

So, if you're tired of sitting around doing nothing, try talking on the
radio. A different radio, that is. If everyone contributes just a little
we'd all get quite a lot in return. Do something!Please send your comments
and suggestions to me via email - [e-mail] or write me: Rob
Bellville, N1NTE, PO Box 892, Northboro, MA 01532-0892. Thanks for
reading!

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

Date: 13 Jul 1994 14:00:52 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!swrinde!news.uh.edu![e-mail]
Subject: Please read: Ham Radio Bootcamp (Long)
To: [e-mail]

In <300om6$[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:

>  HAM RADIO BOOTCAMP
>
>  WARNING! The following ideas are of a radical nature and may cause closed
>  minded
>  people to scream loudly and form quick, irrational opinions. If you take a
>  minute to look forward into the future (a bright, positive future, that
>  is) you may find that a little effort on your part could improve  two
>  hobbies that have more in common than most people think.

[good stuff snipped in interests of bandwidth]

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

Date: Wed, 13 Jul 1994 13:31:47 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!lll-winken.llnl.gov!fnnews.fnal.gov!gw1!cbnewsm![e-mail]
Subject: WANTED: Manual for an RCA model 1000
To: [e-mail]

    Looking for a manual for a RCA 1000 radio. Needed are the schematics
and any tunning or troubleshooting information. Photo copying and shipping
cost will be rembursed.

            Jeff Zell
            NK3O

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

Date: Wed, 13 Jul 1994 13:20:02 GMT
From: netcomsv!netcom.com![e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

References <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>
Subject : Re: Anyone experienced with Cushcraft R7?

Daniel T Senie ([e-mail]) wrote:

: Interesting. I guess the only thing I can disagree with you on is it being
: a "well known" problem. I have not experienced any such problems with
: my R7, but I have not run high power through it either. I guess the
: problem may not be commonly known on this coast...

A friend of mine (local) who had an R-5 eventually sold it due to the
trap problem.  He did an informal on-the-air survey of something like 25
hams with R-5 whom he worked on the air.  All but one had had to request
at least one new trap from Cushcraft.  But out here in Southern Cal, yes,
the problem is well known and widly discussed.

: >

--
                                             [e-mail]
                                             Glendale, CA
                                             AB6WR

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

Date: 13 Jul 1994 12:33:43 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!agate!cat.cis.Brown.EDU!pstc3![e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

References <[e-mail]><2vpr3g$[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]><2vu2d0$[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>
Subject : Re: The Amateur Radio Service is a Joke

In article <[e-mail]>,
    [e-mail] (Joe Salemi) writes:

|> Really -- when has the FCC "made it abundantly clear that they have no
|> interest" any more?

Over the past ten years the FCC has done many things to get out of the
amateur radio business. First, VE testing. Then, policing the bands.
Now, every time you submit a petition they reject it with "amateurs have
indicated with their comments in the past that they like the system the
way it is." Maybe amateurs would be happy with new proposals. But, the
FCC simply throws them away because they could be bothered with the
hassle.


|> Seems to me they still do their part, and expect
|> us to do ours.  The "self-regulating" idea has been part of ham radio
|> from its earliest days.

Self-regulating doesn't work, especially with growth. (Some people may
say that amateur radio's numbers are shrinking, but I think that the
number of active amateurs is actually increasing, largely in part to
the no-code license.) 27mhz in the 1970's shows us what happens when
fear of FCC punishment is lifted. Any complaints sent to the FCC are now
forwarded to the ARRL. Great, no punitive regulatory authority there, that
will work wonders.

If you have a person jamming your repeater today, you can't get the FCC to
lift a finger. Numerous cases have been cited here about troublemakers whom,
even after you've caught and they've admitted to it, continue to cause
problems. A troublemaker has to interfere with other services before the
FCC even takes notice. The net result will be more lawsuits and guerilla
warfare as the only way to fight the RF terrorist will become lowering
yourself to their level. Someone in this very newsgroup posted how they
planted a white-noise generator near a repeater to wreck havoc and get it
off the air.

We've got a testing system that is a joke. People selling ham licenses,
those willing to "study" simply have to memorize the published question
pool. I wonder how my students would do on their exams if I gave them
the questions and answers before the examination.

Then we have some pundits crying for virtually no testing or licensing
standards. ITS MY RIGHT! I'M BREATHING, AREN'T I?!?


|> As for why you should care -- because you're a part of the service.
|> If you don't care about what happens to the amateur radio service,
|> might as well turn in your license, sell your rigs and find another
|> hobby.  Let the hams who do care about it do what they can to improve it.

You're deluding yourself if you think you're going to be the instrument of
change. Amateur radio today is CB radio of the 1970's. Get used to it,
its here to stay.


MD
--
--   The best way for Bill Clinton to keep his
--   legal fees down is to keep his zipper up.
--

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

Date: Wed, 13 Jul 1994 13:21:05 GMT
From: netcomsv!netcom.com![e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

References <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>, <2vvfii$[e-mail]>
Subject : Re: Anyone experienced with Cushcraft R7?

Paul S. George ([e-mail]) wrote:
: How would you know if you had a "blown" trap.  What kind of problems
: would you see?

On a selected band your SWR would suddenly go from below 2.5 to one to
'way above that. (Like 20 to one.)


--
                                             [e-mail]
                                             Glendale, CA
                                             AB6WR

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

Date: (null)
From: (null)
Thanks for a refreshing, reasoned approach that will take only an
investment of time to implement.

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

End of Info-Hams Digest V94 #787
******************************