QRZ! Ham Radio 5/QRZ Ham Radio Callsign Database - Volume 5.iso/digests/infoham/941012.txt

Internet Message Format | 1994-11-13 | 18.1 KB

Date: Sat, 10 Sep 94 04:30:11 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 #1012
To: Info-Hams


Info-Hams Digest            Sat, 10 Sep 94       Volume 94 : Issue 1012

Today's Topics:
        Boatanchors list - anybody know what the status is???
                           Callsign Servers
                     Hiram Maxim's Flying Machine
                        NYS Ham License Plates
                           SAREX Info Sheet
                 When was or is Gathersburg Hamfest?

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: 9 Sep 1994 13:22:04 -0400
From: noc.near.net!shore.shore.net!shore.shore.net![e-mail]
Subject: Boatanchors list - anybody know what the status is???
To: [e-mail]

Does anyone know what the current status of the Boat-anchors mailing list
is?  I sent a subscription request about two months ago and have seen
nothing since.  I read a post somewhere that there was a problem with the
list owner and the poster advised against sending in any more
subscription requests until things were normalized.  Can anyone out there
tell me what's happening?

73,

Michael Crestohl KH6KD/W1
[e-mail]

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

Date: 9 Sep 1994 20:24:09 GMT
From: cs.utexas.edu!news.tamu.edu![e-mail]
Subject: Callsign Servers
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>,
Charles R. Hohenstein <[e-mail]> wrote:
>Will there be an update to the callsign servers anytime soon, or are they
>only updated on a yearly basis? I believe, for example, that the last
>update to callsign.cs.buffalo.edu 2000 occured in January. I'm not
>bitching, mind you--I simply wondered when to expect new info.
>
>Charles
>N9SQE

I believe that the callsign server is updated when someone donates a copy of
the database to the maintainer.  I recall that the January update took place
when someone donated a copy of the QRZ! CD-ROM to the maintainer (in fact the
information message says it was N9DK).  I imagine the next update will occur
when someone donates the Summer QRZ! CD-ROM.  There's not a large, well-funded
bureaucracy behind these things---just the generosity of volunteers.

                    --Rick
                      KE3IV

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

Date: 9 Sep 1994 17:02:19 GMT
From: iphase.com![e-mail]
Subject: Hiram Maxim's Flying Machine
To: [e-mail]

I thought the inventor of the maching gun was Hiram Percy Maxium's
uncle no his father.

Wes

WA5TKU

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

Date: Fri, 09 Sep 94 14:57:33 PDT
From: psinntp!interramp.com![e-mail]
Subject: NYS Ham License Plates
To: [e-mail]

In article <34km0s$[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>
writes:

> I just got a nice letter yesterday from the NYS Custom Plates office.
> They apologized for the delays which were due to heavy demand and some
> problems with manufacturing the newly designed plates and assured me
> that my plates would be shipped out by September 16th.  They had cashed
> the check around August 14th.
>
> 73 de Alan N2YGK

I got the letter from NYS Custom plates too, indicating a target date of Sept.
30th.  Funny though, as I did not order the new plates (but I did get an
invitation from them to do so earlier).

mla

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

Date: 10 Sep 94 02:28:09 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: SAREX Info Sheet
To: [e-mail]

SB SAREX @ AMSAT $STS-64.002
SAREX Info Sheet


            STS-64 Shuttle Amateur Radio Experiment (SAREX)
                         Information Sheet

Mission:    STS-64 Space Shuttle Discovery
        Lidar In-Space Technology Experiment (LITE-1)
        SPARTAN-201
        Robot Operated Materials Processing System (ROMPS)

Launch:        September 9, 1994, 22:22 UTC

Orbit:        57 degree inclination

Mission Length:    9 days (Nominal)

Amateur
Radio
Operators:    Dick Richards, KB5SIW, Commander,  Blaine Hammond, KC5HBS,
        Pilot, and Jerry Linenger, KC5HBR, Mission Specialist

Modes:        FM Voice
        Prime callsign: KB5SIW

        Packet Radio
        Callsign:     W5RRR-1

Frequencies:    All operations in split mode.  Do not transmit on
        the downlink frequency.

Voice Freqs:    Downlink:    145.55 MHz  (Worldwide)
        Uplinks:    144.91, 144.93, 144.95, 144.97, 144.99 MHz
                (Except Europe)
                144.70, 144.75, 144.80 MHz (Europe only)

        Note:  the crew will not favor any specific uplink
        frequency, so your ability to work the crew will
        be the "luck of the draw"

Packet Freqs:    Downlink:    145.55 MHz
        Uplink:        144.49 MHz

Info:        Goddard Amateur Radio Club, WA3NAN, Greenbelt Maryland,
        SAREX Bulletins and Shuttle Retransmissions
        3860 KHz, 7185 KHz, 14,295 KHz, 21,395 KHz, 28,650 KHz
        and 147.45  MHz (FM)

        ARRL Amateur Radio Station, W1AW, Newington, CT
        SAREX News Bulletins
        3990, 7290, 14,290, 18,160, 21,390, and 28,590 KHz
        and 147.555 MHz (FM)

        Also, bulletins available on internet, via AMSAT ANS,
        Compuserve, and your local PBSS.

School Group Participation:     10 school groups will participate
                in SAREX with pre-scheduled direct
                and telebridge contacts.  These include
                nine in the U.S., and one in New Zealand.


QSLs:     ARRL Headquarters
          SAREX QSL (please indicate flight #, STS-XX)
          225 Main Street
          Newington, CT 06111
          This address must be used for all future missions.

In order for the managing process to run smoothly, please include
the following information in your QSL or report: Shuttle flight
nur (STS-XX), date, time in UTC, frequency and mode (FM voice,
packet, sstv or fv).  This documents the contact or listener
report.  In addition, you must also include an SASE using a large,
business-sized envelope you wish to receive a card.  No cards
are distributed without the proper post affixed or sufficient
IRCs included.

The following clubs have graciously volunteered their service for
handling QSL cards for the following missions:

STS-58    Connecticut DX Association
STS-60    Cowley County Amateur Radio Club, Kansas
STS-59    Orange Park Amateur Radio Club, Florida
STS-64    Nashua Area Radio Club, New Hampshire

Information provided by Frank H. Bauer, KA3HDO and Robert Inderbitzen, NQ1R
for the SAREX Working Group

/EX

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

Date: 9 Sep 1994 17:04:10 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!usc!cs.utexas.edu!convex!news.duke.edu!eff!blanket.mitre.org!linus.mitre.org!newsflash.mitre.org!m14494-mac.mitre.org![e-mail]
Subject: When was or is Gathersburg Hamfest?
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (Lightning Bolt) wrote:

> Was away on vacation, might have missed it? Dick W1DGA

This Sunday, 11 September.
--
[e-mail]

My opinions are my own, not my employer's.

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

Date: Fri, 9 Sep 1994 16:27:20 GMT
From: psinntp!arrl.org![e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

References <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>t
Subject : Re: Thanks, ARRL

Greg Bullough ([e-mail]) wrote:

: In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Ed Hare (KA1CV)) writes:

: >Thanks, Jeff. It sometimes gets discouraging to work a 70-hour week (paid
: >only for 37.5 of them) and then get here in the morning and see some of the
: >usenet participants trash us for our imperfections.

: You begin to go down the wrong path when you mistake criticism for lack
: of gratitude.

I only make that mistake with folks who choose only to show the criticism
and keep the gratitude to themselves. :-) An understandable mistake, I hope.

: >Sadly, I often see that we are being criticized for not doing something
: >we already do, or for doing something that we don't do;

: Education is part of running a business, too. It's called PR. Like it or
: not, perceptions are real, and people make decisions based on them. If
: people don't see what you're doing, then you need to be more effective in
: showing them. That's all.

True indeed, however, I see this problem as a two-way street; I think that
people who are going to make decisions about an organization share in
the responsibility to be properly informed. Unfortunately, it is easy
to miss something in the 200+ pages of information we publish in QST,
the thousands of pages of information we publish in our books or in
the megabytes of files we make available on our server and by ftp, etc.

: For example, you have here, rather than receiving a compliment with a
: gracious 'why thank you,' responded with a laundry list of why this
: forum makes you so miserable.

: Not real appropriate.

Part of the value of this forum is that we amplify and expand on each
other's ideas. If I limit my responses only to exactly the subject at
hand, and offer no original thought, each thread would die down in short
order. Come to think of it . . . :-)

: >Even more sadly, I have seen us criticized
: >*appropriately* on this forum *instead* of having the "constructive
: >criticism" directed to the appropriate staff or to your Division
: >Director who *can* change League policy.

: Now this is VERY inappropriate. It comes across as trying to quash League
: Members' and other Radio Amateurs' expresssion of their thoughts in a
: public forum of their own choosing. For years, the staff, directors,
: and officers have had a forum of their own, QST, and have filtered
: dissenting opinions rather high-handedly. In fact, they frequently used
: the journal to belittle dissenting opinions.

: Ed, I don't know if it's what you intend, but it comes across as if
: you are saying 'go through channels, where we can decide what spin to
: put on your expression of opinion...'

Oh, that is not at all what I intended! I must admit that I am a bit
surprised to see your reaction from someone who has an opportunity
to see me for a few years on this forum. I had hoped that the emphasis
of *instead* would communicate my intent. If it was insufficient for
some, I do apologize. I keep forgetting that this group of fine folks
is comprised of a wide spectrum of technical and social backgrounds and
I guess that the things unsaid can be important. OTOH, it has oft' been
pointed out to me that some of my posts tend to blather on and on and ...
I was trying to cut to the quick of my communication without the usual
pages of explanation about how and why I had come to believe as I do.

I find this forum to be quite useful, or I wouldn't use it. It has
helped me to shape and sound out my ideas quite effectively. You may
have missed the number of times I have said so.

: As a organization run by the Membership, the League doesn't have the
: luxury of putting on blinders. At this point, I frankly expect my
: Division Director to be reading this forum (I'm willing to see
: the League foot the bill for an account, which may also be used
: for League business-related e-mail, if that's what it takes) in
: order to stay in touch with what people are saying about things.

: But I *really really* have a problem with League Staff trying to
: get the membership to not voice their opinions.

Well, I re-read my post and just didn't see where I tried to get anyone
NOT to voice their opinions. If I really stretch, I can read that into
my choice of words, but that is not my intent -- never has been and never
will be.

: To be blunt, Ed, it's not what I pay you for. Express any opinion
: you want in this forum, but do not, under your ARRL hat and signature,
: try and get the members you serve to be quiet. Or to re-direct them
: to a place where other members-at-large can't hear them. Don't.

I didn't. See below.

: >I encourage all rec.radio.amateur participants to make your views known to
: >your Division Director, by mail, email, telephone or in person at his or her
: >many appearances at conventions, hamfests and club meetings! The
: >[e-mail] files have a list of HQ and ARRL officers email addresses,
: >postal mail addresses, telephone numbers, etc. See also page 8 of QST. This
: >forum has produced many excellent ideas and a wide spectrum of amateur
: >community opinion. If it worth saying it is worth saying to the ARRL
: >Division Directors, too. All of the Directors I have met feel that they
                       ^^^
Now I think Jon Bloom's summary of my intent was more eloquent than mine,
but I think I got the idea across. Let me sum it up by encouraging
communication, here, with each other, with HQ staff and Directors.

We will never put the puzzle together by keeping the pieces inside the box.

73 from ARRL HQ, Ed
--
Ed Hare, KA1CV, ARRL Laboratory, 225 Main, Newington, CT 06111
203-666-1541 [e-mail]

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

Date: Fri, 9 Sep 1994 16:57:42 GMT
From: psinntp!arrl.org![e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

References <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>
Subject : ARRL to serve? or shape? (was Re: Thanks, ARRL)

Greg Bullough ([e-mail]) wrote:

: And, by the way, I also believe that the staff (that means *you*) should
: exercise some restraint in counter-pointing the views of the membership.
: We are, after all, an organization of members. The views of the members
: prevail. The staff is there to serve, not to shape, the will of the Amateur
: Radio community. Even if the staff believe that will is wrong. And yes,
: most of the staff are members, but as such they must still take care not
: to use their position to overly influence membership opinion, and to avoid
                           ^^^^^^
: the perception of doing so.

I agree, the HQ staff must exerise some restraint and must be viewed
as representing this organization on all of their posts on this forum. The
last time I said so, it erupted into a "League Censor" flame war, though.
:-) Having said that, don't expect us not to be real people, with our own
individual ideas. Those personal ideas will color our posts and
our membership contact. Very few things in life are black and white.

I think your choice of the word "overly" is the definitive part of what
you said; we are here to both serve and to shape. The skill in doing
our jobs comes from the balance.

Let me demonstrate that with an example: Mentally answer the question
that follows.

QUESTION: "The amateur service continues to have problems with interference.
Should the ARRL push to get susceptibilty legislation to replace the
voluntary standards for RFI immunity of consumer electronics equipment?"

I can almost hear the resounding "yes!" If I am proscribed from shaping
amateur opinion, I can count the votes and set the appropriate action
in place.

However, let me now shape amateur opinion on the issue by offering a point
of view formed from several years of experience and thought:

___
Susceptibility legislation is a two-edged sword. One one hand, there is
a distinct benefit to force the manufacturers to build equipment that is
immune to our legal signals. However, the current standards in US and Europe
range from immunity of 3- to 10-volts/meter. These standards represent
the state of the art that can be achieved without increasing the cost of
TVs to be higher than an air-force screwdriver. It is not likely that we
can get legislation enacted for much more than the current US standards
of 3 V/m.

Approximately 90% of the 100-watt class amateur stations would not generate
a field in a neighbor's house > 3 V/m. (10% would.) Most 1500-watt class
stations would generate a stronger field. In most European countries,
the immunity standards have the force of law. If we were to get immunity
enacted here, there would be a real risk that once it is deemed best to
take a legislated approach to EMI problems, that legislated approach would
be applied equally(?) to the consumer equipment and RF emitters. If hams
ended up with legislation that required us not to generate a field > 3 V/m,
it would defacto limit the power of most amateur stations. This would also
be a burden on amateur stations, who might have to prove their field
strength to be below the limits.  This is happening in several countries
as we speak (any expansion from our European participants?)

For this reason, I recommend that we continue to work closely with
manufacturers and standards groups to strengthen the process that
is resulting in ongoing improvements to  the immunity of consumer
equipment, saving a legislated approach only for a last resort.
___

I offer that the amateur community is much better served by my shaping
of opinion on this issue rather than leaving each person to determine
what is the best course of action, probably basing an opinion on less
information that I have managed to gather in 5 years of being the ARRL
RFI Desk. (Please do not read into this that I am prohibiting anyone
from forming their own opinions on this, or any issue, using any amount
of information they deem appropriate.) It does demonstate
that there are few black and white issues, or black and white rules on
how HQ staff should conduct themselves. All in all, I think we have
conducted ourselves with dignity and honor, and usefully, on this
forum.

73 from ARRL HQ, Ed
--
Ed Hare, KA1CV, ARRL Laboratory, 225 Main, Newington, CT 06111
203-666-1541 [e-mail]

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

End of Info-Hams Digest V94 #1012
******************************