home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
Ham Radio
/
Ham Radio CD-ROM (Emerald Software) (1995).ISO
/
news
/
inham08
/
963
< prev
next >
Wrap
Text File
|
1979-12-31
|
19KB
|
448 lines
Reply-To: bu.edu!INFO-HAMS@WSMR-SIMTEL20.ARMY.MIL
Subject: INFO-HAMS Digest V89 #963
To: INFO-HAMS@WSMR-SIMTEL20.ARMY.MIL
INFO-HAMS Digest Sun, 3 Dec 89 Volume 89 : Issue 963
Today's Topics:
(#1 in series) Listen to store security guards catch shoplifters
A Computing Decision:
bobtail antenna
Contests
Hallicrafters S-27
IC-2400 dual-bander
new AMSAT software (2 msgs)
Postings from Jim Grubs
Privacy etc etc
Pueblo West vs. Ham Radio
Yaesu 212RH with MH 15 D8 mike
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 2 Dec 89 20:52:29 GMT
From: uw-entropy!dataio!pilchuck!ssc!tad@beaver.cs.washington.edu (Tad Cook)
Subject: (#1 in series) Listen to store security guards catch shoplifters
Message-ID: <294@ssc.UUCP>
In article <8773.25738058@stjhmc.fidonet.org>, Jim.Grubs@f1.n234.z1.fidonet.org (Jim Grubs) writes:
> > From: tad@ssc.UUCP (Tad Cook)
> >
> >
> > Regarding the controversey that Jim Grubbs has been stirring up as an
> > "advocate" of the ECPA, I think he just LOVES to argue. A couple of
> > months ago on the national Fidonet ham radio echo he got things jumping
> > over there by telling a lot of prospective hams that checking out a
> > piece of ham gear ON THE AIR before buying it was a federal crime,
> > because there was obvious pecuniary interest! (In the examples being
> > discussed, all parties were licensed). When I jumped in and told
> > these poor Novices that trying out a radio before buying it was legal,
>
> It is NOT legal, Tad. Darin Arrick asked if it is legal. I replied by quoting
> Part 97, to wit:
>
> S 97.113 Prohibited transmissions.
> (a) No amateur station shall transmit any communication the
> purpose of which is to facilitate the business or commercial
> affairs of any party. No station shall transmit communications as
>
> In response you became so confused you started to try to convince everyone that
> the FCC no longer issues amateur station licenses.
>
> Sheesh!
>
> 73 de Jim Grubs, W8GRT
>
>
> Grubs, W8GRT
>
> --
> Uucp: ...{gatech,ames,rutgers}!ncar!noao!asuvax!stjhmc!234!1!Jim.Grubs
> Internet: Jim.Grubs@f1.n234.z1.fidonet.org
OH BOY!....Looks like things are really gonna get stirred up over here
on USENET. I was relieved when this stuff by Grubs finally died down
on Fidonet, but as I said, "JIM JUST LOVES TO ARGUE!"
Anyway, as I said earlier, (don't worry Novices or ham wannabees, the
ham world is not as nasty and treacherous as Jim would have you believe)
there is no legal problem with testing a radio before you buy it. There
is no law against it, as long as you are licensed, and no one has ever
been cited for it.
Regarding Jim's remark claiming that I said that the FCC does not issue
ham licenses, again Jim is VERY confused. Someone (was it Jim?) involved
in the big fight Jim stirred up on Fidonet claimed that one of the reasons
that it would be illegal for a licensed ham to try a Tandy 10 mtr radio
in the store is because THE STORE DID NOT HAVE A *SEPARATE* STATION
LICENSE! Of course, after I pointed out that the FCC had not issued
SEPARATE station licenses for many years, Jim now, in his typical fashion,
claims that anyone who disagrees with him thinks that an FCC license is
not needed to operate an amateur radio!
I merely pointed out to the assembled (now thoroughly confused) Novices
and prospective hams that the station location shown on the license does
not preclude operation from other locations. Of course, this kind of
"loose" interpretation makes Jim Grubs VERY angry.
In closing, I am going to ask Mr. Grubs to test his theory about trying
a radio before buying is a federal crime.
On Saturday, December 9, 1989 I am going to walk into Amateur Radio
Supply Co, 6313 13th Ave S, Seattle, WA and TRY A RADIO BEFORE BUYING
IT! For your convenience, I will call CQ with my call, KT7H, and
use an antenna that is on the roof of the store, and will transmit on
14.300 MHz SSB. This will take place sometime before 2100 UTC.
PLEASE, PLEASE, MR. GRUBS, QUIT MISINFORMING THE NEWCOMERS TO THE HOBBY
AND PLEASE *HAVE ME ARRESTED* !
The phone number of the local Seattle FCC office is 206-764-3324.
The number for the local FCC monitoring station is 206-354-4892.
If for some reason (?) the FCC is not interested in pursuing the
perpetrator of this dastardly felony, you may be able to stir up
some interest by calling the local Amateur FCC Auxillary at
206-226-4222. Ask for Millard Gibson, W7JIE.
73!
Tad Cook
tad@ssc.UUCP
KT7H @ N7HFZ.WA.USA.NA
------------------------------
Date: 1 Dec 89 04:42:00 GMT
From: mnetor!tmsoft!masnet!canremote!jim.shutsa@uunet.uu.net (JIM SHUTSA)
Subject: A Computing Decision:
Message-ID: <89120107514722@masnet.uucp>
I hate to say this, but I would go with IBM. Though IBM has the most
antiquated DOS system and is by far least user-friendly of all (compared
to MAC, AMIGA etc) it has the largest software base around. Its also
cheaper.
This is just my humble opinion. What do I know, I own an Amiga.
js
---
* Via ProDoor 3.1R
------------------------------
Date: 2 Dec 89 21:10:19 GMT
From: uw-entropy!dataio!pilchuck!ssc!tad@beaver.cs.washington.edu (Tad Cook)
Subject: bobtail antenna
Message-ID: <295@ssc.UUCP>
Regarding the Bobtail, let me tell you an anecdote from Field Day of
a few years past.
A bunch of local folks went to a spot on the West side of Puget Sound
for Field Day (near Seattle), and this gave us a water shot to the
east. Rush Drake, W7RM, came along to help with antennas, and he
saw a good spot for a bobtail curtain for 40 meters away from the main
station location. We set up a couple of masts an a little rise just
above the salt water, and strung up the curtain. The feedline came
straight down to a ground mounted tuning unit in a small plastic
garbage can on the ground. RG8 ran back to the station. The
curtain faced ESE across salt water to the rest of the USA.
Running barefoot, George Ockwell, K7HBN stayed up all night on 40mtrs
and ran up an amazing score. The bobtail curtain over salt water played
VERY well.
73,
Tad Cook
tad@ssc.UUCP
KT7H @ N7HFZ.WA.USA.NA
------------------------------
Date: 2 Dec 89 07:50:48 GMT
From: psuvm!afz1@psuvax1.cs.psu.edu
Subject: Contests
Message-ID: <89336.025048AFZ1@PSUVM.BITNET>
SUPPOSE IF ONE IS NOT INTENDING TO ACTIVELY PARTICIPATE IN THE CONTEST,
CAN ONE JUST GIVE THE SAME SERIAL NUMBER LIKE 001 SAY (IF SERIAL NUMBERS
ARE REQUESTED)? I SOMETIMES CALL THE CONTESTING STATIONS AND DO NOT KEEP
TRACK OF HOW MANY STATIONS I WORKED, SO I SOMETIMES JUST GIVE 001 FOR ANY
STATIONS I CALLED. WOULD THE STATIONS BE PENALIZED WHEN ALL THEIR LOGS
INDICATE A 59 001 FROM THE SAME CALLSIGN?
AHMAD,N3FLX
-------
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
<< >>
<< AHMAD F. M. ZAIN BITNET : AFZ1@PSUVM >>
<< 316 COMM AND SPACE SCIENCE LAB PACKET : N3FLX@WA7SSO.PA.USA.NA >>
<< ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING EAST 9M2DX@9M2BBS.MYS.AS >>
<< PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY >>
<< UNIVERSITY PARK, PA 16802. "TIME IS LIFE" >>
<< >>
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 3 Dec 89 08:46:24 EST
From: Robert Carpenter <rc@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov>
Subject: Hallicrafters S-27
Message-ID: <8912031346.AA09568@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov>
Someone asks about the S-27.....
Wow! A REAL S-27! I would have given my eye teeth for one, once upon a time.
Or better yet, an S-36. If I remember correctly, both these receivers used
acorn tubes (954, 955, 957) in the front end. Do you know of a source of
spares of these tubes? In any case, these receivers weren't at all sensitive,
by today's standards - I don't think that the term "noise figure" could fairly
be assigned to them ... they would have had trouble hearing a 10 uV signal, I
suspect.
Just my (poor) memory at work.
Bob, W3OTC
------------------------------
Date: 2 Dec 89 22:42:00 GMT
From: silver!commgrp@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu
Subject: IC-2400 dual-bander
Message-ID: <12600086@silver>
>>... the Nov/Dec 1989 _Icom Newsletter_ from International Radio and
>>Computers, Inc. [ 751 S. Macedo Blvd., Port St. Lucie, FL 34983
>>(407)878-8856 ] describes mods for IC-2400 which expand UHF
>>coverage 400-479 MHz and VHF 138-174 MHz. There is also a 300 MHz
>>mod, and a crossband repeater mod. Does anyone know if the IC-2400
>>in repeater mode will do offsets??
>Is the Icom Newsletter any good?...
Frankly, not very. But it has no competition; it's the best source of
collected mods I know (they also publish Yaesu and Kenwood
newsletters). Their published instructions for mods are often
abbreviated and ambiguous (but all I have tried have worked). They
claim copyright on info taken verbatim from this newsgroup (I know
because I discovered some of my own writing in the Icom Newsletter).
>Has the IC-3210A been covered in any back issues?...
I don't have a complete set. The 1989 index does list out-of-band and
crossband repeater mods for IC-3210A.
>It SEEMED they were really a way behind type of operation... they
>sure turned me off of ever subscribing).... --Phil Howard, KA9WGN--
I get the impression from reading their catalog that they sell lots of
ham equipment to non-hams. I'm not sure I like being on their mailing
list.
--
Frank W9MKV reid@gold.bacs.indiana.edu
------------------------------
Date: 2 Dec 89 07:48:15 GMT
From: psuvm!afz1@psuvax1.cs.psu.edu
Subject: new AMSAT software
Message-ID: <89336.024815AFZ1@PSUVM.BITNET>
HOW MUCH DOES IT COST?
TNX DE AHMAD, N3FLX/9M2DX
-------
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
<< >>
<< AHMAD F. M. ZAIN BITNET : AFZ1@PSUVM >>
<< 316 COMM AND SPACE SCIENCE LAB PACKET : N3FLX@WA7SSO.PA.USA.NA >>
<< ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING EAST 9M2DX@9M2BBS.MYS.AS >>
<< PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY >>
<< UNIVERSITY PARK, PA 16802. "TIME IS LIFE" >>
<< >>
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
------------------------------
Date: 2 Dec 89 20:24:52 GMT
From: uw-entropy!dataio!pilchuck!ssc!tad@beaver.cs.washington.edu (Tad Cook)
Subject: new AMSAT software
Message-ID: <293@ssc.UUCP>
This is off the subject of the original posting, but can anyone
give me the phone number for the AMSAT BBS, or any West Coast
BBS that carries the AMSAT bulletins?
Tad Cook
tad@ssc.UUCP
KT7H @ N7HFZ.WA.USA.NA
MCI Mail: 328-8544
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 2 Dec 89 17:40:47 EST
From: mgb@apg-tecnet.apg.army.mil
Subject: Postings from Jim Grubs
Message-ID: <8912022240.AA27458@apg-tecnet.apg.army.mil>
NOTE TO MR. J. GRUBS: THIS POSTING IS NOT FOR YOU EVEN THOUGH YOU ARE
IN THE SUBJECT LINE. I REALIZE THAT IT IS A PUBLIC BROADCAST THAT GOES
OUT ALL OVER THE WORLD AND THAT YOU CAN RECEIVE IT, BUT I DO NOT INTEND
IT FOR YOU. YOU ARE DIRECTED TO READ NO FURTHER! I KNOW THAT YOU WILL
ABIDE BY THIS DIRECTION, BECAUSE IF YOU DON'T YOU WILL BE EAVESDROPPING
ON MY CONVERSATION!
:-)
samsung!usc!cs.utexas.edu!asuvax!stjhmc!f1.n234.z1.fidonet.org!Jim.Grubs
@think.com (Jim Grubs) writes:
<previous posting deleted>
>I guess you weren't around when the FCC told us we couldn't even use
>ham radio for things like a guy mobiling home from work asking his wife
>by phone patch (or directly if she had a ticket) if she wanted him to
>pick up a loaf of bread at the supermarket on the way.
Jim, is simply one amazing fella! I read a previous persons comments (on
this net) about how he felt that Mr. Grubs was really only a rabble rouser
and got his kicks from stirring up a hornets nest and then sitting back
and watching the ruckus.
I took all that "with a grain of salt" but now am ready to agree that his
comments are not really directed towards discussions on a particular subject
but are instead intended to simply start RAGING DEBATES on anything that
he can think of.
This latest posting on his part is simply an attempt to fan the flames on
another PIZZA WARS battle. I.E. "Just what can a ham do with an autopatch?"
This subject was beaten into the ground a month or two ago, and here he goes
trying to start it up again.
People of the net-world.... when you get postings from Jim Grubs, don't
read what he is SAYING and react to it.... that is JUST what he wants,
and you are being played for suckers. Instead try to imagine WHY he is
saying what he is, and the big light will go on for you as it did for me.
And Jim, if you are reading this and have gotten this far.... How dare you!
Mark Bitterlich
WA3JPY@WB4UOU
mgb@apg-tecnet.apg.army.mil
------------------------------
Date: 1 Dec 89 04:53:00 GMT
From: mnetor!tmsoft!masnet!canremote!jim.shutsa@uunet.uu.net (JIM SHUTSA)
Subject: Privacy etc etc
Message-ID: <89120107514766@masnet.uucp>
The public airwaves are the PUBLIC airwaves. Phone lines are are
private hard-wired systems. Cellular phones use the PUBLIC airwaves.
Public airwaves can,and do, trespass over my personal jurisdiction ie:my
house, property etc. As far as I'm concerned, anything on PUBLIC
airwaves is fair game for interception. If privacy is of the utmost
concern, don't go PUBLIC.
js
---
* Via ProDoor 3.1R
------------------------------
Date: 3 Dec 89 07:31:18 GMT
From: cs.utexas.edu!asuvax!stjhmc!f1.n234.z1.fidonet.org!Jim.Grubs@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (Jim Grubs)
Subject: Pueblo West vs. Ham Radio
Message-ID: <9001.2578CE52@stjhmc.fidonet.org>
There have been a number of rather confusing messages posted about the
situation in Pueblo West, Colorado. To see if I could sort things out a little
more clearly, I called Chris Knight, N0IJK. The story as he related it to me
is this:
First, we are definitely dealing with a situation involving a homeowners'
association architectural committee attempting to sue in court to get a real
estate deed restrictive covenant enforced against an amateur, Mr. Charles
Landers, W5QZS, and order him to dismantle his Butternut HF6V antenna and
remove his transmitting equipment from the premises.
The removal of the antenna is being sought on the grounds that it is an ugly
eyesore. The removal of the equipment is being sought as apparatus that
creates a nuisance by causing interference with telephones and entertainment
devices.
The amateurs of Pueblo West (12 in number) have all been ordered to submit
applications for covenant restriction variances. Mr. Knight stated that the
W5YI Report statement that all 12 have already been ordered to take down their
antennas and get rid of their equipment is in error. Two of them have already
knuckled under and removed their antennas and radios. Mr. Landers is so far
the only one legal action has been initiated against. This is because he
announced he would refuse to submit an application, which later may prove to
have been a tactical error.
Mr. Landers and Mr. Knight have been in contact with ARRL HQ and the League's
counsel, Chris Imlay. The latter is reported to have stated that the situation
is very grave because in the case of deed covenants the homeowner is presumed
to have read the covenant and agreed to its terms before purchasing the
property. Landers and Knight have also been supplied with the League's "PRB-1
Kit".
Mr. Landers is reported to be willing to spend up to $15,000 in his own legal
defense. However, preliminary estimates of legal fees and other costs have
been set at approximately $65,000. Mr. Landers is therefore willing to accept
donations. The details of when, where, and how to make donations will be
announced later. Mr. Landers has also been quoted by Mr. Knight as stating
that he will donate a portion of any damages he may receive from any
countersuit to the ARRL Legal Fund.
During my conversation with Mr. Knight he stated that the home owners'
committee is being used by one of its members to settle a personal grudge
against Mr. Landers. Three dogs owned by the committee member and roaming at
large attacked Mr. Landers' dog while he was walking it near the
committeeman's home. Mr. Landers reported him for violation of the leash law,
and the vendetta ensued. Since the committee member apparently realizes he
can't get away with selective enforcement, he is converting it into an attack
against all hams living in the subdivision.
The committeeman is also charging that Mr. Landers' radio equipment interferes
with his telephone. However, he refuses to permit tests by the telephone
company, and even his wife is reported by Mr. Knight to have denied the
interference story. Mr. Landers is not without his local supporters. More than
360 of his neighbors have signed a petition stating that they do not consider
the antenna to be an eyesore and that they have suffered no interference.
How this all will turn out, I do not know, but I will try to keep you up to
date. I have urged Mr. Knight and/or Mr. Landers to acquire DIRECT access to
Fidonet/Usenet for the purpose of providing more direct and more timely
contact with us. I hope they will be able to do so soon.
73 de Jim Grubs, W8GRT
--
Uucp: ...{gatech,ames,rutgers}!ncar!noao!asuvax!stjhmc!234!1!Jim.Grubs
Internet: Jim.Grubs@f1.n234.z1.fidonet.org
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 3 Dec 89 07:23 EST
From: LEAVITDG%SNYPLAVA.BITNET@CORNELLC.cit.cornell.edu
Subject: Yaesu 212RH with MH 15 D8 mike
Message-ID: <KPETERSEN.12547157165.BABYL@WSMR-SIMTEL20.ARMY.MIL>
We have a Yaesu 212RH with a MH 15 D8 mike, but no info on how to use the
mike. I will pay for postage, copying, etc if anyone would send me such
information.
Darrell Leavitt
Mt Rte 8, Box 270-b
Plattsburgh, NY, 12901 <LEAVITDG@SNYPLAVA>
------------------------------
End of INFO-HAMS Digest V89 Issue #963
**************************************