QRZ! Ham Radio 5/QRZ Ham Radio Callsign Database - Volume 5.iso/digests/infoham/940845.txt

Internet Message Format | 1994-11-13 | 12.6 KB

Date: Wed, 27 Jul 94 04:30:07 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 #845
To: Info-Hams


Info-Hams Digest            Wed, 27 Jul 94       Volume 94 : Issue  845

Today's Topics:
                         August 73 for Ramsey
                       FCC Processing info ...
                       Military Test Equipment
                    Q: Frequency allocation in USA
                                Radar
                      Radio mods by FTP. Where?
                            Ramsey SlyFox
             Why is 1750Hz tone used in Europe? (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 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: Tue, 26 Jul 94 18:53:31 -0500
From: news.delphi.com![e-mail]
Subject: August 73 for Ramsey
To: [e-mail]

Darryl, Do actually think we could sell a dual band amp in kit form and expect
the average Joe to build it? My gosh, the ARRL couldn't get their fx to work
and you of course read what joe moell could do. (A shorted disc cap... come on,
I've yet to encounte
r one of those. A solder bridge, yes. But that's my gut feeling!) I wish I
could let you see some of the incredible solder/assembly jobs we get back here,
and I like to think our manuals are pretty good. It's hard to make a kit that
can be easily built and
 aligned by the average ham on his kitchen table. I like to think we make it as
easy as possible to enable the builder to get something working with as little
test equipment as possible. With all the talk about how you need a spectrum
analyzer before you p
ut that on the air... it makes me wonder what the hams did years ago when they
built most of their gear???

Although I appreciate your offer, past experience with our 2M kit and seeing
the level of expertise of the FM operator makes the mere thought of a 2M/440
kit nearly impossible. Thanks, tho'


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

Date: 26 Jul 1994 10:49:34 -0500
From: agate!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!news.umbc.edu!eff!news.kei.com!ddsw1!mbi.moody.edu!mbi.moody.edu![e-mail]
Subject: FCC Processing info ...
To: [e-mail]

I posted some info to rec.radio.amateur.policy (I intended to x-post
here, but didn't seem to work) about what the FCC is doing to get the
licenses out quicker.

Any follow-ups to that post should be directed here.


Paul -- N9WHG

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

Date: 26 Jul 1994 18:35:08 -0400
From: newstf01.cr1.aol.com!search01.news.aol.com![e-mail]
Subject: Military Test Equipment
To: [e-mail]

Can anyone forward me any suggestions, leads, etc., on
individuals/suppliers/junque traders of military radios and test
equipment?
I am looking for an obscure piece of equipment and I don't even know who
to ask.
Reply directly,
thanks,
scott [e-mail]

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

Date: 26 Jul 1994 16:21:52 GMT
From: pacbell.com!well!barrnet.net!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!news.umbc.edu!eff!news.kei.com!news.byu.edu!hamblin.math.byu.edu!bert.cs.byu.edu![e-mail]
Subject: Q: Frequency allocation in USA
To: [e-mail]

Hi

I was wondering where I could find out about frequency allocation in the US.
I am interested in the 20mhz-80mhz range with details of all allowed uses,
allocations, etc.

Thanks
Chad
[e-mail]\

--
------------------------- Live Free or Die !----------------------------
Chad Leigh              |  When Guns are Outlawed, Criminals Win!
private citizen         |  Stop the socialization of America!
software engineer       |  Stop Clinton and company

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

Date: 26 Jul 1994 17:26:46 -0400
From: dog.ee.lbl.gov!overload.lbl.gov!dancer.ca.sandia.gov!cronkite.nersc.gov!fastrac.llnl.gov!usenet.ee.pdx.edu!cs.uoregon.edu!reuter.cse.ogi.edu!hp-cv!hp-pcd!sdd.hp.com!@@ihnp4.ucsd.edu
Subject: Radar
To: [e-mail]

Can anybody help me out?  I am looking for information
on speed detection radar that the police use.  Specifically,
doplar radar.  I would like information on accuracy.  If you
have done any tests or know someone who has and could help me,
I would greatly appriciate it.

thanks in advance...


matt...

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

Date: 26 Jul 1994 11:10:43 -0400
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news.acns.nwu.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!gt-news!prism!prism![e-mail]
Subject: Radio mods by FTP. Where?
To: [e-mail]

 Hello,

 I know there used to be at least one FTP site that archived all the mods to
various radios. I seem to have lost the address though. Can someone tell me
what it is?

 Barring that, I need the current list of mods for the Yaesu FT-530. I know
there are at least 2, one to enable out of band Rx/Tx; and one to just
enable out of band Rx....

 I really need this info sometime today (7/26/04), so please reply via
e-mail; even if you don't reply today.....

    Much Thanks,

         Monte     KC4GPW


--
Monte Freeman  --  Operations Department / Information Technology
Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta Georgia, 30332
Internet: [e-mail]
Bitnet:   [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 26 Jul 94 19:00:34 -0500
From: news.delphi.com![e-mail]
Subject: Ramsey SlyFox
To: [e-mail]

Cecil, The manual clearly states to spread the coils for max power output. We
purposely have the coils wound with a 'tad' too much inductance - it's easier
to spread the coils a bit than to have to add more turns!

de the old college days easier - I changed many a tank circuit, modifying
commercial 2 way radios for buddies of mine!

73, John

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

Date: Wed, 27 Jul 1994 06:52:25 GMT
From: news.Hawaii.Edu!kahuna![e-mail]
Subject: Why is 1750Hz tone used in Europe?
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Daniel Hilliker) writes:
>In a previous article, [e-mail] (Jason White) says:
>>  I'm simply curious as to why a 1750Hz tone is used to access European
>>repeaters.
>
>Hi There...
>
>I just came back from 18 months in the UK where all of the repeaters (2m
>at least...) were on the 1750 Hz tone.  As I was a poor North American
>with a handheld which didn't do the 1750 thing, I had to whistle into
>every conversation

which is the exact reason I gave for them choosing 1750 Hz - it's
an easy frequency to hit by whistling into your mic.

For those of you in California, listen to the CDF between 151.190 and
151.455 MHz - they still use tone burst to access their repeaters.
When I worked for them I would occasionally make the mistake (hee hee)
of giving a long rising whistle on State 1 to see how many repeaters
I could key up at once; unkeying I hear a mess of heterodynes.

Your tax dollars at work.


Jeff NH6IL
[e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 25 Jul 1994 21:10:25 +0000
From: pipex!demon!kirsta.demon.co.uk![e-mail]
Subject: Why is 1750Hz tone used in Europe?
To: [e-mail]

In article <30vo14$[e-mail]>
           [e-mail] "Jason White" writes:

>
>   I'm simply curious as to why a 1750Hz tone is used to access European
> repeaters.

Why 1750Hz or why a tone at all?

The answer to the latter is that our licensing authorities insist on
it. They will not permit a unit which will retransmit a signal which
just happens to come up on the air: you must take some positive action
to make it come up. Currently that is mostly by tone access at the
start of the QSO. We are slowly moving towards CTSS.

Why 1750Hz? Dunno! It has to be somehting, and I guess 1750 is right in
the middle of the audio passband!

73, John.

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

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

Date: 26 Jul 1994 15:54:16 GMT
From: olivea!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!ncar!csn!col.hp.com!fc.hp.com!news.lvld.hp.com![e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

References <[e-mail]>, <304ho6$[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>vld
Subject : Re: which Ringo do I buy?

Gary Coffman ([e-mail]) wrote:

: I didn't equate the Ringo to a wet string. I merely noted that we all
: know that less than optimum antennas *can* be used, *even* a wet string.
: As inclusion of the ducky indicates, I was saying that inefficient antennas
: are often (but not always) acceptable compromises in the amateur service.

Gary, I don't think I've grossly misread your opinion about the Ringo.
As I read back through your comments, the inference is pretty strong
that you consider the antenna to be little more than junk.

BTW, I think I'd change your last sentence to "inefficient antennas are
*usually* (but not always) acceptable compromises in the amateur
service."  And therin may lie the crux of our difference in opinion.
Most of us simply cannot justify the time/money/room/effort required for
*optimal* antenna solutions, so we compromise.  Those compromises should
be well considered ones and thus require information with a bit more
resolution than A is junk and B is great.  That lack of information was
really what I was reacting to.


: >Again agreed.  It's really a case, though, of when enough is enough.

: The thread was about which antenna is *better*, not which is *enough*.

Ahh, but how do you define better?  I'll make the statement that at the
time I put up my Ringo, it was the *BEST* antenna for me.  Best because
in the real world there are many variables which determine good
solutions.  Certainly performance is one of the variables, but not the
only one.  Time, money, availability, ease of assembly, experience of
the user and a host of other things come into play.  At the time my
Ringo went up, I was just starting out.  I wasn't sure how serious I was
going to get, didn't want to spend much money (couldn't really justify
it) and didn't have much time to spend (and again couldn't really justify
spending much).  For a small investment in both time and money, I got a
solid performer that has served me very well.

Now that I'm a bit more serious, I'm looking at higher performance
options, including some homebrew ones.  I'm more interested now, and
more willing to invest more time and money.  But I would certainly
recommend a newcomer consider the Ringo particularly under circumstances
similar to mine.  And I'll also stand by my original statement to that
newcomer to worry more about getting whatever they put up as high as
possible rather than about getting the ultimate gain vertical built to
withstand hurricanes.

:             If you're going to buy a commercial antenna, you really
: should try to get the most value for your dollar. I don't think the
: Ringo fills that bill very well.

Curious statement for an antenna that can be purchased so cheaply.  I
think the Ringo provides very good bang for the buck.

Enough.  Readers are likely beginning to think I'm some kind of
Cushcraft fanatic and that's really not the case.


Scott Turner  KG0MR  [e-mail]

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

Date: 26 Jul 1994 20:34:44 GMT
From: hplextra!news.dtc.hp.com!col.hp.com![e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

References <304ho6$[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>, <313bj8$[e-mail]>
Subject : Re: which Ringo do I buy?

  It could be where we live, but i'll back Scott as to the best vertical antenna for the money being a RR 2.
   Now if we're talking about a Cushcraft AR 270 (the dual band ringo)
 it can be beat with a rollup 2 meter twinlead j-pole. I've done it.
No one that I know will keep this antenna if they do any comparisons with it.
   John, N0KIC

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

End of Info-Hams Digest V94 #845
******************************