QRZ! Ham Radio 5/QRZ Ham Radio Callsign Database - Volume 5.iso/digests/infoham/940857.txt

Internet Message Format | 1994-11-13 | 22.5 KB

Date: Sat, 30 Jul 94 10:09:11 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 #857
To: Info-Hams


Info-Hams Digest            Sat, 30 Jul 94       Volume 94 : Issue  857

Today's Topics:
                         15mW QSO's (2 msgs)
                    6 Meters-New op needs advice.
                      Call Sign Server (3 msgs)
                        Callsigns via e-mail?
                            GB0SNF..ooops
                              ham humor
                      Info-Hams Digest V94 #843
                      Model rocket telemetry...
                             Note to all
                     PA3CXC/ST0 QSL Card (2 msgs)
                            Ramsey SlyFox
                   repeaters in the microwave bands
                 Simulcasting repeaters on same freq

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: 29 Jul 1994 11:43:57 +0300
From: elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!EU.net!sunic!news.funet.fi!news.cc.tut.fi!proffa.cc.tut.fi![e-mail]
Subject: 15mW QSO's
To: [e-mail]

David Cook ([e-mail]) wrote:


[About 15mW output power just before battery exaustion]

> Hmmm! How many situations have I been in where my battery is about to go
> and I am close enough to the receiving antenna on the other end that 15mW
> of power will do the job. Am I missing something here? 150mW I could maybe
> start to believe.

15 mW (+12 dBm) is a lot power if you have a line of sight path. At 145 MHz
and a 10 km line of sight path, the path loss is about 95 dB and assuming
omnidirectional antennas at both ends, the received power is -83 dBm or
just below S7. At 1 km that would be S9+6 dB.

At 430 MHz the received power is about 10 dB less due to reduced capture
area in omnidirectional antennas and about 19 dB less at 1290 MHz.

The real question is, what is the power consumption of the rest of the
radio circuitry (receiver, prosessor and the rest of the transmitter
circuitry excluding the output stage). There is no point to reduce the
output stage power consumption (and thus output power) much below the
consumption of the rest of the circuitry.

                Paul OH3LWR


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

Date: Fri, 29 Jul 1994 15:18:30 GMT
From: lll-winken.llnl.gov!overload.lbl.gov!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!news.uoregon.edu!netnews.nwnet.net!reuter.cse.ogi.edu!hp-cv!hp-pcd!hpcvsnz![e-mail]
Subject: 15mW QSO's
To: [e-mail]

Greg Tarcza ([e-mail]) wrote:

:      The last time the final amp in our local repeater went out (Colorado
: Springs, CO - repeater elevation > 14000 ft), I noticed that the repeater
: was getting quite weak from about 40 miles away.  When the machine was
: swapped out and brought down for repair, the transmitter output was
: measured at LESS THAN THREE MILLIWATTS!     ... that's 3mw INTO the
: duplexer!   I believe that 15mw will go much further than you think.

:                              Greg Tarcza  WA2OOD

In this case 15mW is probably sufficient. However, around here with all the
hills and buildings etc. more often then not one of them is in the signal
path and I know 15mW will not cut it. Then again our RACES repeater is located
on the side of a mountain just out of town here and 15mW just might do it.

Dave KB7QCL

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

Date: Fri, 29 Jul 1994 15:10:49 GMT
From: lll-winken.llnl.gov!overload.lbl.gov!agate!spool.mu.edu!news.clark.edu!netnews.nwnet.net!reuter.cse.ogi.edu!hp-cv!hp-pcd!hpcvsnz![e-mail]
Subject: 6 Meters-New op needs advice.
To: [e-mail]

Hi

Welcome to 6 mtrs.... You have made a good choice BUT you have to
understand that operating on 6 requires dedicated listening and making
noise on the band. I have run a beacon on 6 in the past and it is
amazing how that helps. When the band opens all of those quiet hours are
forgotten - its great!!

You will find that you end up 99+% listening and very little actual
contact time - outside of 'local' qso's. Local being 100 miles.

My other favorite band is 160 mtrs. Both bands require many of the same
listening/working skills.

Good luck,

de w7wkr

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

Date: Fri, 29 Jul 94 11:01:00 -0400
From: agate!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!udel!news.sprintlink.net!coyote.channel1.com!channel1![e-mail]
Subject: Call Sign Server
To: [e-mail]

FCC form 610's can also be found in the back of the Gordon West Radio
study Guides, Sold by Radio Shack.

Alan Wilensky, N1SSO
General Manager
Interactive Workplace Division
Vicom, LTD.
Phone: Edmonton Office
11603 165 St.
[e-mail]
---
│ CmpQwk #UNREG│ UNREGISTERED EVALUATION COPY

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

Date: 29 Jul 1994 15:56:10 GMT
From: lll-winken.llnl.gov!overload.lbl.gov!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!newsrelay.iastate.edu!news.iastate.edu!isuvax.iastate.edu![e-mail]
Subject: Call Sign Server
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Alan Wilensky) writes:
>FCC form 610's can also be found in the back of the Gordon West Radio
>study Guides, Sold by Radio Shack.

Are they the new forms?  (Last I checked they were still old ones...)

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

Date: Fri, 29 Jul 94 19:28:00 -0400
From: news.sprintlink.net!coyote.channel1.com!channel1![e-mail]
Subject: Call Sign Server
To: [e-mail]

t>Are they the new forms?  (Last I checked they were still old ones...)

old. Like crusty underware. But mine worked.

Alan Wilensky, N1SSO
General Manager
Interactive Workplace Division
Vicom, LTD.
Phone: Edmonton Office
11603 165 St.
[e-mail]
---
│ CmpQwk #UNREG│ UNREGISTERED EVALUATION COPY

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

Date: 30 Jul 1994 09:03:31 -0500
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!cs.utexas.edu![e-mail]
Subject: Callsigns via e-mail?
To: [e-mail]

Do any call via e-mail services exist?

Thanks.

Scott

-----------------
Scott Ehrlich, Amateur Radio Callsign: wy1z, [e-mail] [AX.25 Packet]
How to reach me: [e-mail] [Internet], [e-mail] [TCP/IP Packet]
Boston ARC ftp archives: ftp oak.oakland.edu /pub/hamradio
Boston ARC Web page: http://www.acs.oakland.edu/barc.html

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

Date: Fri, 29 Jul 1994 21:17:49 +0000
From: pipex!demon!g6dqy.demon.co.uk![e-mail]
Subject: GB0SNF..ooops
To: [e-mail]

It should read July 31st. SORRY!!!
john

--
  e-mail [e-mail]     Nr Shrewsbury Shropshire
  System used : Acorn A3000       4 MB RAM, 60 MB Hard Disk
             AX.25 mail to g6dqy @ gb7pmb.#28.gbr.eu

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

Date: 30 Jul 1994 08:38:48 -0700
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news.cerf.net!mvb.saic.com!bethel.connected.com!hebron.connected.com![e-mail]
Subject: ham humor
To: [e-mail]

Paul (Cliffy) Palmer ([e-mail]) wrote:
: In article [e-mail], [e-mail] (Jerry B Altzman) writes:
: >In article <[e-mail]>,
: >Steven L Goldstein <[e-mail]> wrote:
: >>I was explaining to my wife last night that some hams refer to their
: >>children as harmonics. When she asked why, I explained that, for example,
: >>if you were transmiting a signal on 7 MHz, there'd be a harmonic at
: >>14 MHz, then a smaller harmonic at 21 MHz, kind of like a family.
: >
: >Unless you're into parthenogenesis, why not refer to them as intermods? You
: >need two signals for that...
: >
: >>Steve, KB2PWM
: >
: >//jbaltz
: >jerry b. altzman   Entropy just isn't what it used to be      [phone]
: >[e-mail]   [e-mail]  KE3ML  (HEPNET) NEVIS::jbaltz

: I don't know.  Sometimes, they seem more like parisitic oscillations to me ;)

: ---
: Paul (Cliffy) Palmer, -.- . ....- .. -.. --.
: New Technology, Inc.
: 700 Boulevard South, Suite 401
: Huntsville, Alabama 35802
:
: Internet:    [e-mail].
: Telephone:    [phone]

How about *Hetrodynes* ?

D
How about *Hetrodynes* ?  hee he

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

Date: 30 Jul 94 15:05:51 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Info-Hams Digest V94 #843
To: [e-mail]

The Detroit address is (44.102.48.2/port=3000).
>>Jon<<

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

Date: 29 Jul 1994 20:59:27 -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: Model rocket telemetry...
To: [e-mail]

Howdy.  I need some sort of circuit that can open a switch for about half a
sec. or so and then close it and then repeat it after about ten seconds.
Could someone give me an easy diagram for this?  Thanks.

P.S.  Does anyone know what a varactor diode is and where I can get one?


--
Joel V. Odom     KB5GWK     +         pi=~3.14159265358979323846264338327950
24879 Georgia Tech        +++++             28841971693993751058209749445923
Atlanta, GA 30332           +     physics   07816406286208998628034825342117
[e-mail]    +      major    067982148086513282306647....

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

Date: 29 Jul 94 16:13:11 -0500
From: news.cerf.net!gopher.sdsc.edu!nic-nac.CSU.net!charnel.ecst.csuchico.edu!yeshua.marcam.com!zip.eecs.umich.edu!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!gatech!howland.reston.ans.net![e-mail]
Subject: Note to all
To: [e-mail]

Someone wrote:
> In order to reply to your messages, please supply your e-mail address at the
> end of each message. The system supplies addresses that are too long. They
> also include uneccessary (for humans) routing information.
> I am on a Lanmanager network, running MSMail with an SMTP gateway which does
> not allow me to use embedded supplied addresses. And I sure aint going to
> type in addresses which in most cases are three lineslong!

Then you should demand they fix it.  Why should the rest of the world have to
adapt because a service provider is too lazy to supply users with the proper
tools?

I note that the poster did not append his own e-mail address to the end of his
post.

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

Date: 29 Jul 1994 20:30:38 GMT
From: cs.utexas.edu!geraldo.cc.utexas.edu!astro.as.utexas.edu![e-mail]
Subject: PA3CXC/ST0 QSL Card
To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (Tom Kacpura (NYMA)) says:

>>My uncle worked PA3CXC/ST0 for his last zone for WAZ on 17 meters.
>>He has of [sic] yet to receive the QSL card.  Can anyone help?

Well, give us some clues.  Presumably he is not just sitting
waiting for PA3CXC to send him a card because CXC needs your
uncle's QSL card in return.

What did he send, where did he send it, and when?   If we know
that, perhaps we can suggest the next step -

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

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

Date: Sat, 30 Jul 94 14:19:45 GMT
From: agate!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!news-feed-1.peachnet.edu!news.duke.edu!eff!news.kei.com!travelers.mail.cornell.edu!newstand.syr.edu!galileo.cc.rochester.edu!uhura.cc.@@ihnp4.ucsd.edu
Subject: PA3CXC/ST0 QSL Card
To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (Tom Kacpura (NYMA)) says:

>My uncle worked PA3CXC/ST0 for his last zone for WAZ on 17 meters.
>He has of yet to receive the QSL card.  Can anyone help?

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

Date: 29 Jul 1994 21:37:42 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news.acns.nwu.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!asuvax!chnews!scorpion.ch.intel.com![e-mail]
Subject: Ramsey SlyFox
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>, Greg Bullough <[e-mail]> wrote:
> ...that as built, the rig (SlyFox) didn't meet specs.

It didn't meet specs because it wasn't tuned yet. Kits don't magically
work, Greg. You have to tune them. I've been told that the guy at 73
forgot to RTFM.

>that was indicative that something less than trivial was involved
>in completing the project.

Don't tell anybody I told you this... ham radio is not trivial... kits
don't work unless you tune them... if you are into trivial, don't attempt
a kit. I learned a heck of a lot _because_ my Heathkit didn't work.

>he, having waited until the orignal posting expired on most systems, has
>got it seriously wrong.

When I read the article in 73, I tried to retrieve your posting but it
had expired. I had to recall it from memory and may not have all the
details right... but I think I got the gist right.

>but if a third of it is at the second harmonic, and you have no
>spectrum analyzer (how many No-coders and Novices do?), you're sunk.

Not true... a dummy load and a wattmeter is all you need to tune the
SlyFox because according to the 73 article, it meets the FCC specs if
it is tuned properly.

>And does Ramsey say 'don't even try to tune this beastie up if you
>don't have a dummy load and VHF/UHF watt-meter? Hmmm?'

Come on, Greg. Ramsey also doesn't say 'you have to understand English
to read the manual'. Some things should be obvious to anyone with a
ham license. The light bulbs are a fair substitute for a dummy load
and a wattmeter, assuming one knows that the final has to be tuned to
resonance (God help us if a bona fide ham doesn't know that).

>>In the 50's, it was a rare ham who didn't wind his own coils and
>>everyone knew the coils might have to be adjusted for proper operation.
>
>This ain't the fifties. In the fifties, Heathkit was just a-astartin.
>
>>Should a kit manual also be required to teach the physics that hams
>>are supposed to know in order to pass their ham tests?
>
>Yes.
>Heath sure did. They told you how to align their kits.  If it was beyond
>the stated target market, they shipped that section, pre-built and aligned.

I'll quote you here. "This ain't the fifties". Heathkit went down the
tubes... seems it cost them so much to teach physics and pre-build and
align sections, they couldn't make a decent profit.

You will probably agree with me on this one... the guys who mail-ordered
their ham tickets from Southern California should not attempt a kit.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (Not speaking for Intel)

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

Date: 29 Jul 1994 11:42:47 +0300
From: elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!EU.net!sunic!news.funet.fi!news.cc.tut.fi!proffa.cc.tut.fi![e-mail]
Subject: repeaters in the microwave bands
To: [e-mail]

Warren Kinninger ([e-mail]) wrote:

> The line of sight requirements would limit the coverage of microwaves
> compared to VHF so you'd tend to have more repeaters with smaller
> coverage areas, especially in areas without mountains or tall buildings
> for repeater sites. I don't see any technical problem in implementing
> this with current microwave components. There are problems with:

Reducing the cell size is the best way to go, if you have a high enough
user density to support this infrastructure. There should be at least a
dozen of hams in each cell (on average) to be able to buy and maintain
the repeater system. This is possible only in densely populated areas.

> 1) Lack of good signal path during casual use due to walls, trees,
> buildings, etc.

Man-made structures are not so much of a problem, as they reflect the
signal quite nicely. A large number of such structures can be modelled
in a similar way as in other scattering propagation modes, i.e. the
power that illuminates the scattering volume is reradiated in all
directions. The scattering modes usually have a path loss that is
proportional to the fourth power of distance (12 dB for each doubling
of distance) , while the line of sight path loss is only proprtional
to the second power of distance (6 dB for each doubling of distance).
If you are used to line of sight path loss calculations (which requires
a surprisingly little power) the ERPs required scattered paths might
initally look enormous.

The real problem is the lack of structures that could be used to reflect
or diffract the signal in rural areas and the absorbtive properties
of vegetation.


> 2) Health hazards from radiation if you crank up the power enough
> to get a good signal because of walls, trees, buildings, etc.

This is a problem with handhelds, but fortunately the available DC-power
is limited and you can not use highly directional antennas with handhelds,
which also limits the awailable ERP.

The proble is how the repeater is going to hear you. If the repeater is
at a high place and omnidirectional coverage is required, the main lobe of
the repeater receiver antenna should extend from the horisontal plane
down to 1 or 2 degrees below the horisontal plane, corresponding to
a gain of 21 or 18 dBi respectively. This can be hard to achive for an
omnidirectional (in horisontal plane) antenna. If feasible, this gain
can still be too little to compensate for the larger path loss (i.e.
reduced capture area) in higher microwave bands.


> 3) Multipath interference due to walls, tree, buildings, etc. Multipath
> can be reduced somewhat by using special antennas and signal processing.

You need some frequency spreading system so that you can avoid these
frequency dependent nulls (in more or less) stationary stations.
A moving mobile station has its own "mechanical" null avoidance
system :-)

Even if frequency spreading is used, you must still expect a large number
(maybe hundreds) of signal dropouts every second lasting 5-30 % of the
time of each multipath cycle. This requires a heavily interleaved code
and a very strong forward error correction, even stronger than the
Compact Disc system.


                Paul OH3LWR

--
Phone   : [phone]                       Mail: Hameenpuisto 42 A 26
Internet: [e-mail]             FIN-33200 TAMPERE
Telex   : 58-100 1825 (ATTN: Keinanen Paul)            FINLAND
X.400   : G=Paul S=Keinanen O=Kotiposti A=ELISA C=FI

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

Date: Fri, 29 Jul 1994 22:23:29 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news.acns.nwu.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!llyene!marconi.jpl.nasa.gov![e-mail]
Subject: Simulcasting repeaters on same freq
To: [e-mail]

Greetings all!

I was wondering if anyone has any experience with repeater simulcast.
The Los Angeles County Sheriff has it on their system with over 30
repeaters all on the same frequency, but all phase locked so that
overlapping regions have nearly zero beat note (perhaps at most a
slight fading effect once every 4 seconds).

I've read in Mobile Radio Technology that these commercial sites are
synchronized via WWVB or GPS.

What I'd like to know is if this is plausible for ham radio use for
say two sites?  Is there a simple way to get reused Micors/Mitreks/etc.
to be phased locked together?  It doesn't seem easy.  The receiver
voting portion seems easier than getting both sites to xmit in phase.

Is there equipment from Motorola that already does this?  How much
would something like that be?  Could I get a DDS board that replaces
the elements in the Micors/Mitreks that can be fed a 10MHz reference
signal from a GPS/WWVB receiver?

Any suggestions or hints would be appreciated.
Thanks & 73's
- Cliff

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

Date: (null)
From: (null)
Rajiv
aa9ch/2

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

Date: (null)
From: (null)
I also noticed that the one month dated QST no longer has a price on
the front cover, interesting. ;)

kc4iyd

  Nancy Rabel Hall            [e-mail]
  Space Experiments Division             --... ...--   -.. . KC4IYD
  NASA - Lewis Research Center          stamp collector, SF addict

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

Date: 30 Jul 1994 00:18:49 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news.acns.nwu.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!asuvax!chnews!scorpion.ch.intel.com![e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

References <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>ion.ch.
Subject : Re: Ramsey SlyFox

In article <[e-mail]>, Greg Bullough <[e-mail]> wrote:

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

>>>it's easier to spread the coils a bit than to have to add more turns!

>Gee, Cecil, it's a good thing that kit manufacturers can expect not to
>have to re-teach hams the 'basic physics' that they had to know to get
>their ham licenses, isn't it?  Greg

Hi again Greg, Obviously, John functions on an algebraic plane so he
no doubt meant to say, "add more (negative) turns".  ;-)

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (Not speaking for Intel)

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

Date: 29 Jul 1994 15:44 EDT
From: lerc.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!venus.lerc.nasa.gov![e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

References <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>, <31701t$[e-mail]>h.edu
Subject : Re: QST on News Stands?

In article <31701t$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Kok Chen) writes...
>[e-mail] (Brien Pepperdine) writes:
>
>>Why is the QST issue dated July/August? Anyone know?
>>Masthead says its a monthly, and it has been 12 issues per annum for a
>>long as I remember.
>
>Perhaps that only applies to news-stand QSTs?  My July QST said July,
>and the QST that came in the mail two days ago (the one with the olde
>wireless sets and olde pharte on the cover :-) says August.
>
>
>Kok Chen, AA6TY                [e-mail]
>Apple Computer, Inc.

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

End of Info-Hams Digest V94 #857
******************************