World of Ham Radio 1997/WOHR97_AmSoft_(1997-02-01).iso/usenets/1996_04/_equipme.txt

Text File | 1997-02-01 | 812KB | 21,956 lines

The World of Ham Radio CD-ROM



From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:30:00 1996
From: jaeschke <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: (no subject)
Date: 2 Apr 1996 13:05:09 GMT
Message-ID: <4jr8m5$[e-mail]>

1.2 GHz Users

I am thinking of setting up a small 1.2 GHz repeater in the
Milwaukee, WI area.  I have heard a lot of rumors about the
characteristics of this band that may make it difficult to use
over a wide area in Milwaukee.  I have not been able to talk
to any one who has actually worked this frequency.  I am
wondering if the free path losses are so high that the range
would be very limited?  I also wonder if the penetration into
buildings and cars would also be lower than on 2 meters?

I would appreciate your comments.

Jim




From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:30:02 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: (no subject)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
References: <4jr8m5$[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 2 Apr 1996 18:12:58 GMT

In article <4jr8m5$[e-mail]> jaeschke <[e-mail]> wri
tes:
>I am thinking of setting up a small 1.2 GHz repeater in the
>Milwaukee, WI area.  I have heard a lot of rumors about the
>characteristics of this band that may make it difficult to use
>over a wide area in Milwaukee.  I have not been able to talk
>to any one who has actually worked this frequency.  I am
>wondering if the free path losses are so high that the range
>would be very limited?  I also wonder if the penetration into
>buildings and cars would also be lower than on 2 meters?

Just the reverse, actually. People seem to have a lot of
misunderstandings about "free path losses". The decrease
in signal strength with distance is purely geometric (depends
only on distance) and is *frequency invarient*.

Where people become confused is when the receiving antenna is
held constant with respect to *wavelength*, IE a 1/4-wave 1.2 GHz
antenna is much smaller than a 1/4-wave 144 MHz antenna. This
reduction in *capture area* scales inversely with the square of
frequency, so we see an *apparent* decrease in signal strength
with increasing frequency. But if we keep the antenna the *same
physical size* as frequency is increased, there is no increase
in apparent path loss. In fact apparent path loss is *less* as we
increase frequency.

And penetration into buildings and autos is *greater* as frequency
increases because the openings through which the signal enters the
structure become *larger* with respect to a wavelength. We've all
experienced this with AM/FM broadcast radios. The wavelength of
AM standard broadcast is so long that it has difficulty penetrating
a steel framed building, but the short VHF waves of FM broadcast
slip right through. The same thing applies even more to 1.2 GHz.

There is less refraction over terrain features as frequency increases,
but there is more scatter. So the location of coverage holes will be
*different* as frequency increases, but not necessarily better or worse.
Due to the increased scatter, multipath can be worse at higher frequencies,
not in absolute depth of fade but in the rapidity of picket fencing
for stations in motion. The tick,,,,tick,,,,tick,,,,tick of 2m picket
fencing becomes the tick,,tick,,tick of 70cm picket fencing and the
ti,ti,ti,ti,ti of 23cm picket fencing. It's actually less annoying.

The one area where higher frequencies suffer is in absorption by
foliage, wooden and masonary structures, etc. This does get worse
with increasing frequency. If you're at ground level trying to
communicate with someone else at ground level, and you're both in
dense forest, then a lower frequency will work better than a higher
one.

What all this means is that if the repeater is well located on a
high site, the users use antennas of reasonable physical size (IE
a colinear 19 inches long for example), and the terrain is fairly
open, then performance will be excellent at 1.2 GHz, very little
different from 144 MHz in practice.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | Due to provider problems
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | with previous uucp address
es
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | Email to [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:30:03 1996
From: Johan Lehmann <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: * Mods Needed *
Date: Tue, 02 Apr 1996 06:56:15 +0200
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Does anyone have mods for the Yeasu FT-51R and Icom IC-820H. I have
scanned most the ftp sites I know but no luck. I think the rigs may be
to new still.

Help will be appreciated.

Johan Lehmann ZR6ANF
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:30:04 1996
From: Will Flor <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: 1.2 GHz Repeater
Date: 2 Apr 1996 17:52:24 GMT
Message-ID: <4jrpgo$[e-mail]>
References: <4jr8sb$[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]

jaeschke <[e-mail]> wrote:
>I an thinking about setting up in the Milwaukee Area a small
>1.2 GHz reater.  I have heard rumors about a lot of
>characteristics of this band that may make the use of this
>repeater difficult.  I have not had a chance to talk to anyone
>who has actual experience with this frequency.  I am wondering
>if the free path losses are so high that the line of sight
>range would be limited?  I also am wondering if the penetration
>into buildings and cars would also be limited?
>
>I appreciate any comments that you have.
>
>Jim
>


Have you contacted Roland KD9Y?  He's active on 1.2G in the Milwaukee area;
so is John WB9SMM.  Free path losses are high, but I don't really know
the details.  If you get your system up, contact me - I'm also interested
in 1.2G activity in the Milwaukee area!

73 de Will KB9JTT




From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:30:05 1996
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: 1.2 GHz Repeater
Date: Wed, 03 Apr 96 06:39:23 GMT
Message-ID: <4jt6sk$[e-mail]>
References: <4jr8m5$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

   [e-mail] (Gary Coffman) wrote:

>People seem to have a lot of misunderstandings about "free path
>losses".

If anyone's interested, I have an Excel spreadsheet that calculates
the received carrier/noise ratio at the receiver and plots it on a
graph of distance VS dB.  I designed it for commercial video
transmission purposes, but the formulas and concepts are the same as
for other modes.  Parameters accepted by the spreadsheet are:

     Transmitter power (watts)
     Combiner/diplexer loss (dB)
     Transmisison line loss (dB - or length and dB/100 feet)
     Transmit antenna gain (dB)
     Receive antenna gain (dBi)
     Downconverter noise figure (dB)
     Signal bandwidth (MHz)

The last parameter is used to calculate ENI (equivalent noise input)
at the downconverter.  Along the way, the sheet also displays EIRP in
watts and dBm, as well as free space (path) loss.  It assumes no
obstructions in the path and 0.6 Fresnel clearance.  I also have a
second sheet that provides a visual representation of 0.6 Fresnel
clearance for user-selectable frequency, distance, and transmit and
receive antenna heights.

>And penetration into buildings and autos is *greater* as frequency
>increases because the openings through which the signal enters the
>structure become *larger* with respect to a wavelength.
          <snip>
>The one area where higher frequencies suffer is in absorption by
>foliage, wooden and masonary structures, etc. This does get worse
>with increasing frequency. If you're at ground level trying to
>communicate with someone else at ground level, and you're both in
>dense forest, then a lower frequency will work better than a higher
>one.

I haven't worked with signals at 1.2 GHz, but at 2.1 and 2.5-2.7 GHz,
signal absorption is much more prominent than the increased
penetration described earlier.  Signals can easily be attenuated by 10
or 20 dB (or more) after entering a structure or passing through even
a small stand of trees.

73,
Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:30:06 1996
From: jaeschke <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: 1.2 GHz Repeater
Date: 2 Apr 1996 13:08:27 GMT
Message-ID: <4jr8sb$[e-mail]>

I an thinking about setting up in the Milwaukee Area a small
1.2 GHz reater.  I have heard rumors about a lot of
characteristics of this band that may make the use of this
repeater difficult.  I have not had a chance to talk to anyone
who has actual experience with this frequency.  I am wondering
if the free path losses are so high that the line of sight
range would be limited?  I also am wondering if the penetration
into buildings and cars would also be limited?

I appreciate any comments that you have.

Jim




From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:30:08 1996
From: "Yves Albert (Al \"Al\") Feder" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: 220 gear FS
Date: Mon, 01 Apr 1996 21:07:13 -0500
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

I'm getting off 220, and am selling these rigs to pay for some
144/440 gear we're putting in here.

HT's:

KENWOOD TH-315A, very little use. With case, small charger, manual.
                                        $225.00 plus shipping.

TEMPO S-2, a veteran, but works great. Thumbwheel freq.selection,
           factory installed tone board, telescoping and rubber ducky
antennas, manuals, case.   $175.00 plus shipping.

MOBILE RIGS:

Icom 37A, with mike/manual. Used mobile. Works fine except at temps
below 10F (squeals, etc. - a lot of rigs die of fright until car warms
up!!!)                          $225.00 plus shipping.

Kenwood 321A, tone, mic, manual, etc. used mobile but in excellent
shape. $300.00 plus shipping.

NOTE: This rig  goes with the companion 221A for "stacking" for two
meters as well. The 221A is also available TO THE BUYER OF THE 321A
(NOT SEPARATELY!) with the stacking mount, for an additional $200.00.

Kenwood 3530A, toneboard installed, mic, manual, etc. never used mobile.
A really nice 220 rig, more elaborate than the 321A but bigger, so I
used this one in the shack. $325.00 plus shipping.


Most (I think all actually) of the rigs come with factory boxes and
all paperwork.

e-mail replies only pleez.......
Thanks!

73
Al W1EOX
--
--
Yves Albert (Al "Al") Feder
[e-mail]
Harpsichord Workshops and Recording Studios
"Danged if'n I unnerstand all I know"

 "When I go, I want to go quietly in my
  sleep, like my grandfather..... not
  screaming, like his passengers."


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:30:10 1996
From: "Yves Albert (Al \"Al\") Feder" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: 220 gear FS
Date: Tue, 02 Apr 1996 07:13:56 -0500
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

I'm getting off 220, and am selling these rigs to pay for some
144/440 gear we're putting in here.

HT's:

KENWOOD TH-315A, very little use. With case, small charger, manual.
                                        $225.00 plus shipping.

TEMPO S-2, a veteran, but works great. Thumbwheel freq.selection,
           factory installed tone board, telescoping and rubber ducky
antennas, manuals, case.   $175.00 plus shipping.

MOBILE RIGS:

Icom 37A, with mike/manual. Used mobile. Works fine except at temps
below 10F (squeals, etc. - a lot of rigs die of fright until car warms
up!!!)                          $225.00 plus shipping.

Kenwood 321A, tone, mic, manual, etc. used mobile but in excellent
shape. $300.00 plus shipping.

NOTE: This rig  goes with the companion 221A for "stacking" for two
meters as well. The 221A is also available TO THE BUYER OF THE 321A
(NOT SEPARATELY!) with the stacking mount, for an additional $200.00.

Kenwood 3530A, toneboard installed, mic, manual, etc. never used mobile.
A really nice 220 rig, more elaborate than the 321A but bigger, so I
used this one in the shack. $325.00 plus shipping.


Most (I think all actually) of the rigs come with factory boxes and
all paperwork.

e-mail replies only pleez.......
Thanks!

73
Al W1EOX
--
Yves Albert (Al "Al") Feder
[e-mail]
Harpsichord Workshops and Recording Studios
"Danged if'n I unnerstand all I know"

 "When I go, I want to go quietly in my
  sleep, like my grandfather..... not
  screaming, like his passengers."


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:30:11 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: 2m HT antenna's WHATS THE BEST WAY TO GO?
Date: Mon, 1 Apr 1996 05:12:55 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

      I just lost the factory antenna on my Yaesu FT-11r dont ask me how. What

I want to do is replace it at this point. I am considering two seperate
antenna's to do this. 1. would be one of those stubby -3db replacements. 2. a
longer flexible after market 0db gain. Any suggestions would be greatly
appreciated. I know most of you have tried several of these and have stories
to tell. Fell free to E-mail or respond to the posting.

     Thanks Brad


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:30:12 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: 6 meter cavity
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
References: <4jrbse$[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 2 Apr 1996 19:54:42 GMT

In article <4jrbse$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (P
rescott) writes:
>Does anyone have plans for\or have seen plans for building a 6 meter
>cavity for a repeater?

Well first you find an old copper water heater....

Gary

--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | Due to provider problems
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | with previous uucp address
es
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | Email to [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:30:13 1996
From: [e-mail] (Ronald Hands)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: 728 vs 735
Date: 1 Apr 1996 02:57:39 GMT
Message-ID: <4jngn3$[e-mail]>

  I've been out of the loop for a few years and hence am unfamiliar with
the current crop of HF solid state rigs.
  I've seen several postings praising the Icom 735 as a durable classic
transceiver, but I understand production has now ceased.  Another Icom in
the same price category is the IC 728.  Could anyone comment on that
radio?  I'm particularly interested in its CW characteristics.
  Or should I just look for a clean, late-model 735 (driven only on
Sundays, etc.)?
  Or are there others I should be looking at?
  Thanks in advance...

-- Ron VE3SP
[e-mail]
[e-mail]



--


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:30:15 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: 728 vs 735
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
References: <4jngn3$[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 2 Apr 1996 19:46:49 GMT

In article <4jngn3$[e-mail]> [e-mail].
ca (Ronald Hands) writes:
>  I've been out of the loop for a few years and hence am unfamiliar with
>the current crop of HF solid state rigs.
>  I've seen several postings praising the Icom 735 as a durable classic
>transceiver, but I understand production has now ceased.  Another Icom in
>the same price category is the IC 728.  Could anyone comment on that
>radio?  I'm particularly interested in its CW characteristics.
>  Or should I just look for a clean, late-model 735 (driven only on
>Sundays, etc.)?

Look for that 735. The 728 is an entry level rig and doesn't compare
well to the 735. Within some limitations, the new IC-706 is a fit
successor to the old 735. Its receiver doesn't have the dynamic
range, and it doesn't have transverter jacks, but it's not bad, and
it does have some features the 735 doesn't, like a real narrow RTTY
filter located where the RTTY tones *are* (you have to jack the IF
shift all the way over to do RTTY on the 735), really small tuning steps
for tweaking in a Clover signal, and it's so small you can't believe
it puts out 100 watts. Having 6m and 2m doesn't hurt either. Of course
it costs twice as much, but that's progress for you. It doesn't do
QSK very well, though, and that might matter to you.

I can buy any radio I want (and have at one time or another, my
latest toy *is* the IC-706), but none of them have displaced my
IC-735 from its place of honor on the operating table. It replaced
my Drake C line, and that's high praise indeed.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | Due to provider problems
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | with previous uucp address
es
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | Email to [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:30:17 1996
From: "Bruce C. Raisley A.R.S. N9ZLE" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: 728 vs 735
Date: Mon, 01 Apr 1996 22:19:39 -0500
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4jngn3$[e-mail]>
To: Ronald Hands <[e-mail]>

Ronald Hands wrote:
>
>   I've been out of the loop for a few years and hence am unfamiliar with
> the current crop of HF solid state rigs.
>   I've seen several postings praising the Icom 735 as a durable classic
> transceiver, but I understand production has now ceased.  Another Icom in
> the same price category is the IC 728.  Could anyone comment on that
> radio?  I'm particularly interested in its CW characteristics.
>   Or should I just look for a clean, late-model 735 (driven only on
> Sundays, etc.)?
>   Or are there others I should be looking at?
>   Thanks in advance...
>
> -- Ron VE3SP
> [e-mail]
> [e-mail]
>
> --I belive there is a user on my web site that has a 735 who just
lowered the price to $600, a good buy.
 I had the 735 and sold it after I purchased a new rig. The
rig I have now is an Icom IC-738 nice rig, but not a whole lot
of an upgrade from the 735. Stay away from the 728 it is an
intry level radio. I think it has more memories but you can
run over the 735 with a truck and it won't quit!

The 735 is going to go down in history! It was as poplar as the
IC706 is today. If I could aford it I would get another one
just as a spare for field day and other outings.

73s DE N9ZLE


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:30:18 1996
From: Jaded <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: aus.radio.amateur.misc,rec.music.makers.guitar.tablature,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,alt.radio.pirate
Subject: A newbie needs help settingup local
Date: 3 Apr 1996 19:57:44 GMT
Message-ID: <4jul7o$r9b$[e-mail]>

I am interested in setting up a local radio channel with a 1000m
radius.  I want to do this cheaply, But I do have several
investors, so the total can at most be $100.

Thanks in advance!
Jade El'Muerte

--


Jaded


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:30:19 1996
From: Judhi Prasetyo <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: Again: FT-5200
Date: Mon, 01 Apr 1996 08:36:19 -0800
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

Seems funny to reply my own posting.
But It could be a good information for some of you.

I wrote :
>When I connect a speaker (internal or external) then the rig seems
>'hang'.
>Dial knob still work but no button does including mic up/down button.
>The rig works properly if I remove any speaker from the unit. :-(
>I also try using earpiece with high impedance coil, but also can't help.

>From Kevin Karamanos
>First, is your radio modified ?? There are 2 different reset procedures
>for the FT-5200, depending on how the internal jumpers are on in your
>radio.  So is your radio stock or Modified ???

>73's

>Kevin

Now I fix the problem.
It's just because I changed one piece of wire inside the Head Unit
labelled wire number 3.
I took it out, leave it open, and work properly, just like that.
Yes, I leave it OPEN !

Thanks guys for supporting me to fix this problem.

-jps



From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:30:20 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (Lauren Schiff)
Subject: Akaline Disposal
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 4 Apr 1996 18:37:51 GMT

Hello,

        I am currently researching alkaline
disposal/recycling.  Our search and rescue team is located in
Charlottesville, Virginia.

        Does anyone have information on alternatives to
disposal?

        Thanks,

        Lauren
        KB8WLD
--
               [e-mail]  http://kelvin.seas.virginia.edu/~las5s
Affiliations:  Blue Ridge Mtn Rescue Group http://www.virginia.edu/~brmrg
               Rodman Scholars Program http://www.virginia.edu/~rodman
               University of VA Systems Engineering http://www.sys.virginia.edu


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:30:21 1996
From: [e-mail] (David L. Thompson)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Amp.
Date: Mon, 01 Apr 1996 03:13:26 GMT
Message-ID: <4jnh4v$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (Kris Mcdonald) wrote:

>Anybody know of any mail-order places that sell amps. and other radio
>equipt?  E-mail me.....thanks...73s

Kris...You must not pick up any magazines (QST, CQ, 73, Worldradio..)
they all show stores that sell via mail order and 800 number.   You
will need a valid amateur radio license to buy an amp or transceiver.

Dave K4JRB



From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:30:22 1996
From: "Devon D. Snyder" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Anyone replace a Lithium battery in Kenwood moble radio?
Date: Thu, 04 Apr 1996 17:38:50 -0600
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

I have a Kenwood TM-231, 2M radio.  Recently, when I power on the radio I lose
all of my memorys and other settings.  I think my lithium battery is dead.
The instruction manual says to send it back to Kenwood to have the battery rep
laced.


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:30:22 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (Tom  Zoch)
Subject: BREAKER! BREAKER!  Fo sure good buddy, come on! Yeppers, HF Sucks For sure!
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Thu, 4 Apr 1996 01:51:34 GMT

Get a Key and learn to love it.



From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:30:24 1996
From: [e-mail] (Robin Pickering)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Can a cell phn be reprog to opp as a ham?
Date: 4 Apr 1996 13:07:57 GMT
Message-ID: <4k0hjd$[e-mail]>

I would like to know if a cell phone can be altered so as to change the pll
frequencies to get it to opperate in the 2m range.
I know cells opperate at about around 900mhz, with an IF around 40mhz.

Can a cell be re programed (along with a xtal change with the pll ref
signal) so as to get it to opperate as a 2m ham radio?

I know a pll can be set to different ranges by a xtal change and different
modulus numbers; however what conserns me are all the tuned circuits in the
intial RF input and the output stage. If it can be done by reprogram the
eprom in the phone and a few simple component changes I'd shure like to take
a crak at it.

Please respond with any ideas or advice you can give!
Thanks




From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:30:25 1996
From: [e-mail] (J.W. Wolfington)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Can a cell phn be reprog to opp as a ham?
Date: Thu, 04 Apr 1996 06:07:06 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4k0hjd$[e-mail]>

On 4 Apr 1996 13:07:57 GMT, [e-mail] (Robin Pickering)
wrote:

>I would like to know if a cell phone can be altered so as to change the pll
>frequencies to get it to opperate in the 2m range.
>I know cells opperate at about around 900mhz, with an IF around 40mhz.
>
>Can a cell be re programed (along with a xtal change with the pll ref
>signal) so as to get it to opperate as a 2m ham radio?
>
>I know a pll can be set to different ranges by a xtal change and different
>modulus numbers; however what conserns me are all the tuned circuits in the
>intial RF input and the output stage. If it can be done by reprogram the
>eprom in the phone and a few simple component changes I'd shure like to take
>a crak at it.
>
>Please respond with any ideas or advice you can give!
>Thanks
>
>



Boy, did this guy just fall off the turnip truck today?  Or was he
born yesterday?  What a stupid question!





































From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:30:26 1996
From: [e-mail] (Douglas R Davis)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Code Tapes
Date: 4 Apr 96 20:17:54 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Does anyone have experience with "Code Quick" learning tapes sold by
"Wheeler Applied Research" of Palm Desert, CA?

I'm thinking of buying, so just checking.

Doug
KC8CGX


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:30:26 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (Randy Herndon)
Subject: crystal radio
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 2 Apr 1996 05:50:43 GMT

I may be in the wrong group here but I want to show my son how to
build a crystal radio. I remember me and my dad building one when I
was a small boy. It had a toilet paper roll with wire wrapped around
it and a tuner slid along this inductor. It at all possible I need the
schematic and a list of stuff that I would need. TIA



From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:30:27 1996
From: [e-mail] (Jay Vanstone)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Data on 2m?
Date: 2 Apr 1996 19:37:15 GMT
Message-ID: <4jrvlb$[e-mail]>

I want to send and receive data over a 2m simplex setup.
I want to use some Motorola portables and mobiles I have.
No need for "fast" rates or packet protocols.  I just want
to do some simple telemetry; (temperature, servo control, etc.).

How do I interface my microcontrollers to the radios?
I don't want to use dtmf.

Any leads/help appreciated.
Thanks,

Jay [e-mail]
InfoMagnetics Technologies Corporation
Winnipeg, MB
CANADA



From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:30:29 1996
From: [e-mail] (roger kumar)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: fm circuits book wanted
Date: 1 Apr 1996 23:54:51 GMT
Message-ID: <4jpqcb$[e-mail]>

hello. i'm looking for a recent book on frequency modulation circuits
(transmitters and amplifiers in particular). so far the best book i have
found is "Frequency Modulation" by August Hund (1942) and was wanting
something more current. any suggestions? thanks.

--
pJou_|        pgpfone encrypted calls and pgp encrypted mail accepted
    _l                            public keys on server or by request


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:30:30 1996
From: [e-mail] (GARY BARNES)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: FS: MT1000 & STX lapel mics new
Date: Wed, 3 Apr 1996 08:28:04 MST
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

I have some new Mt1000/HT600/P200/MTX800/810 speaker mics for $49 each.
Also public safety speacker mics for the STX $60 each.

Email if interested.
Thanks,

Gary


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:30:31 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail]
Subject: FS:AEA Antenna Analyst/Diamond SWR/PWR
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 1 Apr 1996 17:16:51 GMT



For sale:

AEA SWR-121 HF antenna analyst. 1-31MHz. LCD shows graph of antenna
SWR points. FB condition. $350+ at AES. Will sell for $200 shipped.

Diamond SX-1000 SWR/PWR meter. 1.8MHz-1.3GHz, 5/20/200W ranges. A fine
looking meter in perfect condition. $250+ at AES. Will sell for $150 shipped.

THx es 73 de N1QVE
Harry
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:30:32 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (David Harmon)
Subject: Re: FT-51r Reviews
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4j4d49$[e-mail]> <4ji4j3$[e-mail]> <4jindj$[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 1 Apr 1996 06:04:28 GMT

In article <4jindj$[e-mail]>,
Kevin Karamanos  <[e-mail]> wrote:
>To ERASE A FT-51R MEMORY...
>1. In the MR mode, Select the memory you would like to erase...
>2. Press the F button for 1 second, then press the MR key.
>3. The memory is now erased ! It's that simple and it's not in the
>manual...

That doesn't erase the memory.  It masks it.  The info is still there, and
by reversing the process you can reactivate it.  It is just completely
hidden in normal operation.  For practical purposes this is _better_ than
if it were erased, as it is easier to recover from a mistake.  Also, it is
in the manual, pg. 32, as I posted here a few days ago.


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:30:33 1996
From: "T.D.E." <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: FT1000 AGC MOD?
Date: Thu, 04 Apr 1996 15:36:42 -0500
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

I think the AGC on the FT1000 quite noticeably degrades audio
quality.  Attack/Decay are OK, more concerned with the audio.
Wondering if there is a known MOD for this?  Mine was made in 93.
Thanks!  Rick, N1SQJ


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:30:34 1996
From: Chris Boone <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: FT712RH mods wanted
Date: 2 Apr 1996 16:22:21 GMT
Message-ID: <4jrk7t$[e-mail]>

I have a FT 712 RH Yaesu and want to expand it beyond the 430-450
coverage it has....I KNOW the 2mtr version 212 can be expanded...so I
assume the 712 can be also..

Does anyone have the mods for the 712 (I have the 212 mods so please dont
send them!) ???????

Tnx
Chris
WB5ITT



From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:30:35 1996
From: [e-mail] (Drew R. McGhee)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: FT8500 Audio Mute on Sub Channel
Date: Tue, 2 Apr 1996 19:50:53 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Greetings to the group,

I am interested in buying the Yaesu FT8500 and have been following the
review threads with interest. The issue of muting the audio on the 'sub
channel' when there is activity on the 'main' channel has me concerned.
According to the review threads, the 8500 does not have this feature as their
HT the 51R has. I have a review copy of the manual for the 8500 with the new
MH39 mic. On page 28 of the manual it discribes the 'Auto Receiver Mute"
feature. The 'Auto Mute' function SEEMS to mute the sub channel (user
selectable) when the main (also user selectable) is active. The other receiver

mute function options do not seem to be of much use though.

Did Yaesu make a change in the 8500 to do this or am I not reading the manual
correctly? I'm interested in the FS10 mic. Is this 'Auto Mute' feature on the
8500 with the FS10 mic? The copyright on the review copy of the manual I
have is 1995 so it's conceivable that Yaesu added this feature to later rigs.
Anybody know for sure? Does anyone have an 8500 that actually mutes the sub
channel audio automaticly? Does Yaesu have an e-mail address for questions
such as this? Any information would be appreciated. Thanks.

Drew R. McGhee, KA3EJV
Altoona, PA



From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:30:35 1996
From: [e-mail] (Richard Todd Perry)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Handheld batteries help, please
Date: Wed, 03 Apr 1996 21:49:57 GMT
Message-ID: <4jurq7$[e-mail]>

Does anyone remember the name and adress of the place that does the
really good (and cheap) reconditioned/used handheld batteries? I can't
seem to find it around here...

Thanks!

Regards,

R. T. Perry
[e-mail]
KF4BAL
GMOO

- The world is divided up into two groups of people: Those that use HP's, and
those that yell "HEY! Where's the equals sign!"



From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:30:36 1996
From: [e-mail] (Nathan Ryan Gingras)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Hasn't the "HF Sucks" thread wasted enough time?
Date: 3 Apr 1996 07:50:40 GMT
Message-ID: <4jtakg$[e-mail]>
References: <4jr8mf$[e-mail]>

D.W.Hemphill KC5NG ([e-mail]) wrote:
: Can't we kill this thread (or let it die) yet?  Why is it
: that someone has to always post some controversial message
: that he/she knows is gonna stir up a hornet's nest, on a
: newsgroup that's supposed to discuss EQUIPMENT, not what
: facets of ham radio suck or don't suck?
:
: Please, let this mindless waste of time die and let's use
: the newsgroup for its intended purpose.  Please?
:
: 73 de KC5NG
:
For posting in this group I apologize. If you remember correctly I did
this allready immediately after realizing I had posted here.

Nate.



From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:30:37 1996
From: [e-mail] (Scott Rosenfeld NF3I)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Help on Service Monitor Recommendations!
Date: 4 Apr 1996 03:57:52 GMT
Message-ID: <4jvhc0$[e-mail]>

The radio club is looking for a NEW service monitor.

Spending $5,000 or so, what do you recommend???

thanks!
--
* Scott Rosenfeld NF3I Burtonsville, MD FM19  QRV 80-10/6/2/440 *
*** VHF @ <25w, HF @ <5w *** Save a cake, pound BRASS instead ***
* 138 cfd with dipoles * QRP-L #147 QRP ARCI #9054 DXCC/WAS/WAC *
* 301-549-1022 h / 301-982-1015 w * 145.490-  147.225+ PL 156.7 *


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:30:38 1996
From: [e-mail] (Gustavo D. Leizerovich)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: HF Selective Call
Date: Fri, 5 Apr 1996 10:41:28
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

HF-SSB Selective Call Units.
Brand new in the box.
Compatible with any SSB radio.
Excellent performance in poor S/N environments.
Ackback and Busy modes of operation.

Price:  $99 each

Gus Leizerovich
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:30:39 1996
From: [e-mail] (Nathan Ryan Gingras)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: HF sucks!
Date: 1 Apr 1996 06:55:30 GMT
Message-ID: <4jnul2$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4jnmrq$[e-mail]>

N9MXT1 ([e-mail]) wrote:
: I'm not a nice person for telling the truth!  Aaaaahhh ok...  Well, to be
: honest with you... I am on bands you can't work yet.. so, you won't have
: to worry about talking to me!! hehehe
:
:                     BYE!  73 de N9MXT1 - Jeffrey
:
:  O yes.. forgot you might not know what that means..... 73 = Best Regards
: and de=from and my call!
:
:                   :)
Aren't you going to compare me to a CBer? I've been waiting for that!

Nate.



From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:30:40 1996
From: [e-mail] (Glenn Hansen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: HF sucks!
Date: Tue, 2 Apr 1996 22:14:05 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4jnmrq$[e-mail]> <4jnuj4$[e-mail]>

In article <4jnuj4$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Nathan Ryan Gingras)
writes:
>N9MXT1 ([e-mail]) wrote:
>: I'm not a nice person for telling the truth!  Aaaaahhh ok...  Well, to be
>: honest with you... I am on bands you can't work yet.. so, you won't have
>: to worry about talking to me!! hehehe
>:
>:                     BYE!  73 de N9MXT1 - Jeffrey
>:
>:  O yes.. forgot you might not know what that means..... 73 = Best Regards
>: and de=from and my call!

>You are a real ham, and I should have known that I should not try to
>interject an opinion regarding the faults of amateur radio.

Ahh, but others shouldn't do the same if they don't agree?  Don't try and
tell me that you didn't expect such responses after posting such a narrow
generic opinion in public.

>I wholehartedly apologize, I don't know what I could have been thinking
>when I thought a lowly tech such as myself could match wits with a supreme
>being such as yourself.

I think it has more to do with being aa eighteen year old who must be bored as

hell to try and get attention this way.

>73 de Nate, KB9LSX

>ooh, ohh, just like a real ham. I think I am getting the hang of it, your
>highness!

No you aren't. Have mama wipe your nose, take a nap and you will feel better
in the morning.





From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:30:41 1996
From: [e-mail] (Glenn Hansen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: HF sucks!
Date: Mon, 1 Apr 1996 19:34:49 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4jelum$[e-mail]> <4jkg5g$[e-mail]> <4jlpq7$[e-mail]>

In article <4jlpq7$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Nathan Ryan Gingras)
writes:

>Thomas P. Branch ([e-mail]) wrote:
>: In article <4jelum$[e-mail]>, From [e-mail] (Nathan
>: Ryan Gingras), the following was written:
>: > Oh, yeah, you HF'ers are all going to look up my callsign, and to save
>:
>: >
>: > you the trouble, it's KB9LSX, and I am NO-CODE. But believe me, I've
>: > worked my share of HF, and thus I have not upgraded. >
>:
>: How would he know?  It's illegal for him to work HF!
>:
>You people sure talk big for hams who don't quite know the rules:


>Three words: Third Party Operation.


Good old Nate, he is an expert HF operator because he worked third party.  Do
you also make rash judgements with such little experience in the other aspects

of your life?


grh


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:30:42 1996
From: [e-mail] (Glenn Hansen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: HF sucks!
Date: Mon, 1 Apr 1996 20:57:32 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4jelum$[e-mail]> <4jijtt$[e-mail]>

In article <4jijtt$[e-mail]> Rob Bienenstein  N8EAC <[e-mail]> wri
tes:

>Well Nate , It seems that u have a real problem with the guys that
>operate on the hf bands . My guess is that u got on the air with a punk
>signal and the band was noisy , so u had a hard time getting your point
>across .

Punk signal??  Boy, what an insult to QRPers!!   :-)


>Everyone that gets into this hobby had someone to "elmer" them .
>Maybe your elmer did not spend enough time with u . Too bad .

Or he may have shown his Elmer the same attitude he has shown on here and the
Elmer gave up on him.


>Morse code is not that hard to comprehend . If u want it bad enough ,
>it's easy .

I passed 5 WPM after 4 days of an hour each evening.  I had stuggled before
with it but never put in consistent practice times to achive 5 WPM.

>dah dah dit dit dit     dit dit dit dah dah

Glad you didn't send

      dah dah dah dit dit    dah dah dah dit dit        :-)



Nate is just guilty of grouping everything into nice black and white piles. It

is just as ignorant as saying all racial groups are one way or all
nationalities act a certain way. Just an example of ignorance and
nothing more.  I hope in 'real life' he doesn't make snap judgements with so
little experience.



grh


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:30:44 1996
From: [e-mail] (James W Beckett)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: HF sucks!
Date: Thu, 04 Apr 1996 00:12:02 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4jelum$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

On Wed, 3 Apr 1996 16:46:49 GMT, [e-mail] (James Griffith)
wrote:

>In article <4jelum$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>>
>>I think you are right in the type of on the air traffic that takes place
>on HF. But, there is just as much that is fun and useful conversations.
>Some of us old farts, had no trouble getting to 20wpm, or passing the
>test that went with it, or the 2nd and 1st class telephone tests,
>supporting our family for 40 years from the money we made in the
>electronics industry that all started with a novice ticket.
>
>We didn't malign the HF bands, or the hobby for the skill it gave us to
>put food on the table and add to our knowladge of electronics and
>the world about us. Of course our conversations may be a little empty
>now, but not as empty as some of the heads that talk about us. Who live
>on fast foods, in apartments, with nothing paid for, and nothing elce to
>do but call us old farts smelly.
>
>Jim, WA7NDD
>
It doesn't seem so long ago when I tuned 75 phone and said to myself
"Listen to those "old farts".

Now I are one.
:)

Jim

KD2KU




From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:30:45 1996
From: [e-mail] (Nathan Ryan Gingras)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: HF sucks!
Date: 4 Apr 1996 18:14:06 GMT
Message-ID: <4k13he$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

Kevin Muenzler ([e-mail]) wrote:

: But then maybe you don't want a challenge, you might just want
: it handed to you like the last line of your comment suggests.
: Although it probably isn't your fault that you want things handed
: to you.  Maybe you were brought up that way, expecting things
: to be handed to you, not having to work for anything.  Have your

Methinks not. I wouldn't upgrade if I could send code str8key at 20000wpm.
I am saying that hf is LAME! Why would I want to be a part of it? I will
upgrade when I am 65+, and have nothing better to do. You may think that
everyone who doesn't upgrade is a lazy devil, and will not take the time
to learn to copy code... The problem is that I have much more important
things to do than sit in my basement & play with radios. I got the wrong
impression of ham radio, and that's why I got into it. I like
electronics, and all that jazz, but there is noone to talk to on HF that
talks about anything besides radios, etc. When I call someone on the
phone, we don't talk about what kind of telephone we are using.... same
thing. I am sick of hearing about everyones radio. (and all other boring
ragchew crap.) I listen to HF ALOT, and have worked alot too. I have
never heard anyone talk about Music, or Society, or anything interesting.

I have my opinions, you have yours. The difference is that I don't
automatically think my ideas are superior just because they are mine. I
am glad you like HF, but I DONT! (And I was half-hoping I could be
convinced otherwise before I totally gave up on Ham Radio.)


Nate.



From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:30:46 1996
From: [e-mail] (Franky Noten)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew
Subject: How to setup an dual computerlink via radio. Is it possible ?
Date: Mon, 01 Apr 1996 18:24:15 GMT
Message-ID: <4jp38s$[e-mail]>


I would like to setup an link between 2 computers.
What's the maximum speed I can transmit on ?
Please give some solutions.

Thanks.



From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:30:47 1996
From: Mark Schoonover <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew
Subject: Re: How to setup an dual computerlink via radio. Is it possible ?
Date: Wed, 03 Apr 1996 13:49:36 -0800
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4jp38s$[e-mail]> <4jt8cm$[e-mail]>

[e-mail] wrote:
>
> Franky Noten <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> >I would like to setup an link between 2 computers.
> >What's the maximum speed I can transmit on ?
>
> The speed of light.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Well, That's not entirely true. Electrons move slower through copper
wire than throught the void of space.
>
> >Thanks.
>
> You are welcome.

--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Mark Schoonover -- KA6WKE                   E-Mail: [e-mail]
San Diego, CA
   Kenwood R-1000, BC2500XLT, PK232MBX/JVFAX, 66' Indoor Dipole
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:30:48 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: How Tune Tube XMTR for QRP?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
References: <4jk6aa$[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 1 Apr 1996 19:41:30 GMT

In article <4jk6aa$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Mike Keitz) writes:
>
>With all the transmitter tweakers adjusted to peak, it puts out about
>50 W.  But I only need 3 or 5 W to get to the repeater, so I'd like
>to turn the power down somehow.  Obviously there are many ways to do
>that, but some of them may be better than others.  Perhaps someone more
>experienced with tube equipment than I am could comment on which of these
>are best in terms of tube life, spurious emissions, etc.
>
>* Reduce the screen voltage.  This is the method I presently use, as a
>"Tune-Operate" switch has been provided which does exactly that.  I
>assume the purpose of this switch is to keep the tube from conducting
>heavily and burning out during initial tune-up when the plate tuner may
>be badly misadjusted.  It would seem however that the tube operates with
>low efficiency with the screen voltage reduced.  This method does have
>the advantage that full power can be restored easily if needed.

This is a good method. The reason you're getting low output is because
you've reduced PA gain, exactly what you wanted.

>* Detune the "Antenna Coupling" L-C.  Can this be done so the tube
>"idles" into a high impedance from the plate L-C circuit, but little
>power reaches the antenna?

You *don't* want to do this. Operating off resonance will cause the
tube to draw *lots* of current, and light loading will tend to make
the PA unstable.

>* Reduce the drive power (by detuning the grid circuit).  This seems like
>a very bad idea, as the grid bias falls with less drive (about -40 V
>is supplied from the power supply, but it increases to -60 V or so with
>drive).  That probably will make the tube draw excessive DC plate
>current.

Detuning the grid circuit will also tend to make the PA unstable.

Now you *could* bypass the PA stage entirely and just run off the
driver stage. Pull the PA tube and couple from the driver directly
to the output network (you'll likely need an L network where the
PA tube was). This may take some calculation and some cut and try,
but you'll not only save the final (it'll last a long time on
the shelf), but you'll get rid of the filament power draw too.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | Due to provider problems
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | with previous uucp address
es
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | Email to [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:30:49 1996
From: [e-mail](Richard J Jones)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: HTX-202 Expanded Recieve
Date: 2 Apr 1996 02:46:04 GMT
Message-ID: <4jq4dc$[e-mail]>

Does anyone know if the RS HTX 202 is modifiable to expand the recieve
coverage like other brands that go from 118/130Mhz-174Mhz.
Or is it even possible or practical (anythings possible) just how much
do you want to spend, right?
Thanks in advance   Rick...KC7AXU


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:30:50 1996
From: [e-mail] (JRW)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: HTX-202 Expanded Recieve
Date: Wed, 03 Apr 96 06:42:45 GMT
Message-ID: <4jt6gk$[e-mail]>
References: <4jq4dc$[e-mail]>

In article <4jq4dc$[e-mail]>, [e-mail](Rich
ard J Jones) wrote:
>Does anyone know if the RS HTX 202 is modifiable to expand the recieve
>coverage like other brands that go from 118/130Mhz-174Mhz.
>Or is it even possible or practical (anythings possible) just how much
>do you want to spend, right?
>Thanks in advance   Rick...KC7AXU

No No No No No...

Cannot be done. No way, no how.

The 202 was PURPOSELY designed to receive 2 meter amateur frequencies ONLY --
that's why it has the tightest front-end on the market. If you want an
expandable receive, you'll have to trade it for another brand -- and be
willing to live with more intermod.

If you ever see a mod for a 202 to enpand RX or TX... here's a word of
warning:

DON'T DO IT

Unless you want $200 worth of useless electronic parts, that is.

-JRW4
aka KB5ZBR


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:30:51 1996
From: [e-mail] (K Short)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: HTX-202, HTX-404 external mic mod
Date: 2 Apr 1996 16:46:34 GMT
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4jrlla$[e-mail]>


There is a mod to overcome the weak external mic audio problem
of the HTX-202 and 404 rigs. Check out :
http://pages.prodigy.com/CA/LA/htx202htx404/htx202htx404.html




From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:30:52 1996
From: John Ferguson <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: HTX_242 Info wanted
Date: Tue, 2 Apr 1996 20:07:28 -0500
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

    Will the HTX-242 (45 watt 2M mobile by Radio Shack) work the MARS
frequencies outside the 2M band? Can it be modified to do so?

Tnx, 73

 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
 JFERG @ OUTLAND.DTCC.EDU           /      Bend it to fit.....
 John S. Ferguson K3PFW             /      Paint it to match.
 Delaware Tech. & Comm. College-Owens Campus, Georgetown DE 19947 USA
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *




From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:30:53 1996
From: [e-mail] (Michael Hodges)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: ICOM 2340H wanted
Date: 3 Apr 1996 04:52:24 GMT
Message-ID: <4jt068$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

Anyone having one of these radios they wish to sell please e-mail me. This
is the last radio I need to have a complete "set." I have two Yaesu FT-530s
and one Alinco DJ-580 dualbands, both modded for 460 MHZ and I need a good
radio for my car. I was told this was a good one by hams in the area.
I was just wondering, is the 2340H or Alinco 610R (I believe it is) the
better radio? I haven't had time to look at the Alinco so any info would
be appreciated.

Mike :-)


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:30:53 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (Jeff Strailey)
Subject: Icom 720A RX problem
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 4 Apr 1996 03:38:41 GMT

The receiver in my 720A quits below 1.6 mhz.  This doees not appear to be
a bandpass filter problem.  Any ideas?

Thanks...

Jeff
--
                                             [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:30:54 1996
From: [e-mail] (Jonathan M. Tallon)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Icom IC-T21A out of band receive ?
Date: 1 Apr 1996 07:50:03 -0500
Message-ID: <4jojdr$[e-mail]>


I did the mod used on the W21A to allow out of band recieve - hold down B
& # while turning it on, then changes the places setting to 100...  My
question is this - how much of this out of band range can I actually pick
up ?  Did this mod just fool the cpu into thinking it can receive all the
extra frequencies, or can the radio actually pick all the frequencies I
can punch in ?  Bueller ?  Bueller ?  BTW - I don't really have a out of
band frequency to check - I just did the mod because I could :)  Anyone
have any advice/opinions/taunting ?  Thanks in advance.

 --
        "Aerodynamics are for people who can't build engines"
                                        -Enzo Ferrari-

          Jonathan M. Tallon      [e-mail]      M.T.U.
                         KC8CVN - Amateur radio


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:30:55 1996
From: Gary Pearce KN4AQ <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: ICOM W2A Repair
Date: Mon, 01 Apr 1996 06:53:28 -0500
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4jmpm8$[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]

Gene McAvoy wrote:
>
> Anyone know where I can get a flat rate quote on repair of a ICOM W2A?
> Icom in Bellvue, WA wants $65. / hr with a one hour minimum before
> they even open the case.  There is a ribbon cable in mine that has a
> tear and I'd rather not dig into it myself...no proper tools.
>
> HELP!
>
> Gene / KG7XD
> [e-mail]


Hi, Gene.  I understand your reluctance to subject yourself to an "open
ended" repair bill.  I've had work done in Bellvue on several of my Icom
radios, and most of it was done withing the one-hour charge (plus parts).

If your work is as simple as you say, there's nothing to worry about.

Perhaps someone else can recommend exactly what you're looking for, or a
cheaper, independent service tech.

73,
Gary KN4AQ
Raleigh, NC


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:30:56 1996
From: [e-mail] (Gary McDuffie Sr)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Info needed on Kenwood RM-76 Controller
Date: 2 Apr 1996 18:09:03 GMT
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4jrqfv$[e-mail]>

I have need for information on the RM-76 controller, as it would be
used on a 7625 radio.  It uses BCD to set frequency on the radio.
However, the 7625 manual doesn't cover control through that port at
all.  I have both operator and service manuals.

Does anyone have a manual, or even old knowledge about how to properly
interface the remote port?  I would gladly buy the manual, or pay for
copying costs.  If you think you know how it works and don't have a
manual, I'd gladly call you at my expense to discuss it.

Note that I don't receive email at the address this article is posted
from.  Reply to address given below, or in this group.  I read it
daily.

Thank you for any help you might be able to offer.

73, Gary
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:30:58 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Info on CW only xcvrs ??
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
References: <4ji6ll$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 1 Apr 1996 18:29:21 GMT

In article <[e-mail]> Joe Fitter BV/N0IAT <joentam@transe
nd.com.tw> writes:
> {someone asked]
>> >I am looking for a CW only HF transceiver with VFO.  I know Heath made
>> >an HW-99 model.  I believe Drake made one also, anyone know the model
>> >number ? Any others?
>[I replied]
>> I don't recall a CW only Drake, but the Ten-Tec Century 21 is a CW
>> only rig I believe.
>
>I had to think about this one too...I believe the Drake twins, 2NT
>(transmitter) and 2B or 2C receiver were set up as CW only.  Maybe
>the 2NT also ran AM, but I dont recall.
>
>Of course, the classics of yesteryear like Heath DX-40, DX-60 etc ran
>AM and CW...but most guys today use them as CW only rigs I would guess.

Yep, but he was asking about *transceivers*, and neither the Drake
2NT nor those old Heath boat anchors were transceivers. The Century 21
is a transceiver.

I had overlooked the MFJ QRP CW single banders because they now have
QRP SSB single banders too (which I mistakenly assumed to be *instead*).
Oh, well. And there are all the little kit QRP rigs too. The majors
don't seem to be making CW only transceivers anymore, but there are
still some bit players in the game. Forgive me mighty MFJ. :-)

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | Due to provider problems
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | with previous uucp address
es
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | Email to [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:30:59 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Info on CW only xcvrs ??
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
References: <4jonb2$[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 1 Apr 1996 18:37:52 GMT

In article <4jonb2$[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>
>Ten Tec also ran off about 800 Argonauts. This rig included sideband as well.

Only 800? Gee, I thought there were more than that.

Gary

--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | Due to provider problems
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | with previous uucp address
es
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | Email to [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:31:00 1996
From: [e-mail] (W. D. Milner)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: KAM Upgrades
Date: Tue, 02 Apr 1996 06:43:43 GMT
Message-ID: <4jqhqq$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (Ari Husa) wrote:

>I have been offered an old Kantronics KAM TNC.
>It does not seem to know the latest HF modes (e.g. PACTOR, G-TOR).
>What are the upgrade possibilities for it?
>The serial number is 100 06262 and the EPROM has a label '2.85'.

I beleive there is an add on board for the KAM to take it to the KAM
Plus. The current BIOS version is 8.0 You might try www.kantronics.com
for further information.

Hope it helps.


---------------------------------------
Dean, VE1CBF        [e-mail]
[e-mail]  FN96VC

- - ...  ... - -



From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:31:01 1996
From: [e-mail](Dick McCoy)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,
Subject: Kenwood Serial # s
Date: 2 Apr 1996 19:46:31 GMT
Message-ID: <4js06n$[e-mail]>

A question:

I frequently hear hams who are buying/selling
certain models refer to serial # ranges.
This typically applies to the 440S, 930S, 940S, etc.

Obviously,  the higher serial numbers would
represent rigs with bug fixes and later manufacture.

Does anyone know what the "good" ranges are
for each series of radio? and why ?

Thanks for any assistance.

Dick, N4UN



From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:31:01 1996
From: [e-mail] (Cyberlord)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Kenwood TH-78A
Date: Tue, 02 Apr 1996 23:35:51 GMT
Message-ID: <4js91h$[e-mail]>

        I am looking for a Kenwood TH 78 A.  Anyone have one.

Greg Imel
e-mail...
[e-mail]





From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:31:02 1996
From: [e-mail] (Scott Remington)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Kenwood th-79a Problem
Date: 2 Apr 1996 00:29:59 GMT
Message-ID: <4jpse7$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>
>I have noticed that recently, when I first switch on my unit, the LCD
>display, when I press the PTT key, will fade by around 50%.  This will
>last for around 3-5 short transmissions (usually 5 seconds or less).
>After that the LCD display seems to no longer fade when transmitting.
>Has anyone else had any similar experience.
>
>Rich
>N1VAJ

Every time it's happened to me it's been because the batteries were
not fully charged.  Since the current drain during tx is several times higher
than rx, the voltage in a partially depleted battery can drop during high
current demand thus dimming the display.  Keep your batteries charged and
your problem should disappear.

73
Scott -KC7MRV



From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:31:03 1996
From: [e-mail] (Joe Landis - Systems & Network Mgr)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Kenwood TM-455a Cheap??
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 3 Apr 96 10:21:10 EST
References: <[e-mail]>
Distribution: world

In article <[e-mail]>, Jeff Goebel <[e-mail]> writes:
> I have noticed that AES has a very low price on the Kenwood TM-455a.  I have

> wanted a 70cm all mode and am impressed with the price.
>
> Does anyone know the frequency coverage on this rig?  Will it work the FM
> repeaters or only the SSB frequencies?
>
> Jeff N0VHB
> [e-mail]

Jeff,
As I understand it, the rig covers only 430-440 - hence no US repeaters.
If anyone differs, please speak up! This is a nice price, but it still
seems too high for a radio with limited utility.
Joe - AA3GN
--
Joe Landis - Systems and Network Manager - North American Drager - Telford, PA
[e-mail]                        ..speaking only for myself, of course..


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:31:05 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: Paul Moller <[e-mail]>
Subject: Kenwood TR-41 help
Date: Tue, 02 Apr 1996 10:32:23 -0600
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

I am looking for a schematic and/or pcb layout for the old Kenwood TR-41
handheld (440 Mhz). Remember those, they were the first of the really
small handhelds. When Kenwood introduced them at Dayton (approx 1984)
they had them for show in a clear plastic case so that you could see
that there really was a radio in a package that "small".  Thanks in
advance!

[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:31:05 1996
From: Jared Cassidy <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: looking for a variable capacitor
Date: Wed, 03 Apr 1996 16:09:18 -0600
Distribution: inet
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4jsv3o$[e-mail]>
To: jalsa <[e-mail]>

jalsa wrote:
>
> I am looking for a 75pf-100pf variable capacitor. THis is not available at
> radio shack. Does anyone know where to find such an item? Catalogs,etc.?
>
> [e-mail]
>
> --
> Jalsa Salsa
> [e-mail]


Check with Antique Electronic Supply, they might be able to help.  Their telep
hone number is 602-820-5411.

You might also check with Surplus Sales of Nebraska and Fair Radio Sales.  Ten
-Tec may also have a high
voltage variable cap available.

Good Luck!

73,

Jared Cassidy, KQ4VT
Svetlana Electron Devices, Inc.
E-mail: [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:31:06 1996
From: Michael Grant <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Looking for computer controllable transceiver
Date: Tue, 02 Apr 1996 11:55:56 +0200
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

I'm looking for a 2M/70cm base/mobil tranciever which can be
controlled via a serial port.  I want to essentially control the
entire radio from the serial port, including PTT.

Can anyone recommend a decent unit?

Please reply to me directly: [e-mail].  If this isn't already in
some FAQ, I will send a followup of responses to the newsgroup.
Thanks.

Michael Grant


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:31:07 1996
From: Will Flor <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: MFJ Artificial Ground
Date: 2 Apr 1996 17:48:28 GMT
Message-ID: <4jrp9c$[e-mail]>
References: <4j25fi$[e-mail]> <4j45r8$[e-mail]> <4j5fd3$[e-mail]> <4jc3is$[e-mail]> <4jq2d4$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

Monty Wilson <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>Another thing that helps (I understand) is to connect a tuned
>counterpoise for each band of interest.  This is nothing more than
>a quarter-wave of wire tied to the ground post of the radio and the
>rest strung up out of the way but more or less in a straight line.
>I've never tried it, but I have heard it helps a lot to get your
>radio at RF ground potential on the bands of interest.  When you
>transmit, the counterpoise wires for bands other than the one you
>are operating on become detuned and have no effect.
>
>Comments or corrections, anyone?

This helps a *lot* in many cases.  The counterpoise wires can be at
ground level or elevated, and they don't have to be in a straight
line, although that may help.

73 de Will KB9JTT




From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:31:09 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: Monty Wilson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MFJ Artificial Ground
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 2 Apr 1996 15:41:59 GMT
References: <4j25fi$[e-mail]> <4j45r8$[e-mail]> <4j5fd3$[e-mail]> <4jc3is$[e-mail]> <4jq2d4$[e-mail]>

[e-mail] (Charles Hoffman) wrote:
>Did'nt see the original bulletin but I gather this is about RF in the
>shack...IF it is, you might try recutting your transmission line to
>the antenna to electrical half-wavelength or any multiple.  That will
>put the shack at a current max and a voltage min...good luck

I attended a forum at Dayton several years ago.  I don't remember
the name of the lecturer, but this guy was an antenna expert.  He
really knew his stuff.  The forum I attended was on coax and other
feedlines, and one subject he covered was this business of using an
electrical half-wavelength feedline.  He explained the several reasons
why this really should be done, then quickly went through the
calculations.  What he found was that for all bands 10-80 there was a
length that was a multiple of a half-wave, or close-enough to it.
For a coax with a velocity factor of .66, that length is 91'3".  This
covers most common types of coax, but he recommended that you check
the velocity factor when you buy your feedline, and scale the length
accordingly.  Since we are working with integer multiples of half a
wavelength, you can cover 160 also just by doubling the length; in
other words, 182'6", but you can't just cut it in half if you're not
interested in 80m because not all the multiples are even; instead you
must go through all the calculations again and I don't have my notes
from that meeting.  This was about 1988 or so, and I don't
remember if he included the WARC bands in his calculations.  I wish
I knew who it was and some means of contacting him, because I'd
really like to have that information again; I could kick myself for
losing it.

Another thing that helps (I understand) is to connect a tuned
counterpoise for each band of interest.  This is nothing more than
a quarter-wave of wire tied to the ground post of the radio and the
rest strung up out of the way but more or less in a straight line.
I've never tried it, but I have heard it helps a lot to get your
radio at RF ground potential on the bands of interest.  When you
transmit, the counterpoise wires for bands other than the one you
are operating on become detuned and have no effect.

Comments or corrections, anyone?
--
.........Monty.
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:31:10 1996
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: MFJ Artificial Ground
Date: 3 Apr 1996 12:55:59 -0500
Message-ID: <4jue3f$[e-mail]>
References: <4jtsrr$[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>, Monty Wilson
<[e-mail]> writes:

>When you are feeding a 50 ohm antenna system from a 50 ohm radio, with
>50 ohm coax, minimum  standing waves on the braid of your
>coax (and thus minimum RF in the shack)
>is achieved when the points at each end of the coax are current nodes.

No, that isn't true at all! Common mode currents (that cause RF in the
shack):

First, are they are not affected by the velocity factor of the cable. The
cable's internal dielectric has no effect on these currents! The
surroundings of the cable does have a great effect, and that varies with
cable placement. The use of the cable's published velocity factor in the
formula is completely without merit!

Second, a half wave of cable, or multiples (for common mode), is the WORSE
possible length imaginable to use with a half wave antenna. Unless you
WANT maximum RF in the shack! The ground connection at the shack reflects
as a low impedance for common mode currents at the antenna, and
**maximum** feedline common mode current occurs.

>other words, there is a current node where the coax attaches to the
radio,
>optionally some others along the coax, and another current node at the
>antenna feed point.

Feeding a half wave dipole, there will be a common mode current loop
(maxima) at the radio and at the antenna!

>half wavelength down the coax, you want to choose your coax length so one
>of them occurs at the end.

We really "want" the cable to present a very high impedance for common
mode currents at the sorce of the currents. That is at the antenna, or the
balanced to unbalanced junction. The highest impedance comes from using a
**quarter wave** of coax between a dipole antenna and rig.

Voltage nodes, on the other hand, occur at ODD
>multiples of a QUARTER wavelength; in other words, halfway between the
>current nodes.  In the case of a tuned 50 ohm dipole, the ends of the
>radiators are voltage nodes.

The ends of the antennas are voltage maxima, not nodes. Node is the
minimum.

>Choosing a feedline that's an electrical half wave (or multiple thereof)
>not only reduces RF in the shack, but it also makes the SWR readings on
>the shack wattmeter more accurately reflect what's going on out at the
>antenna.

If the meter reads different SWR as it's moved along the line, either the
meter or the line is of a different design impedance. If the meter's
design impedance is 50 ohms, and the line design impedance is 50 ohms, the
SWR reading will be correct and the same anywhere along the line (unless
the line is very lossy).

Did a lecturer at Dayton actually say all of this without anyone
questioning him?

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:31:12 1996
From: [e-mail] (Charles Hoffman)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: MFJ Artificial Ground
Date: Tue, 02 Apr 1996 02:10:37 GMT
Message-ID: <4jq2d4$[e-mail]>
References: <4j25fi$[e-mail]> <4j45r8$[e-mail]> <4j5fd3$[e-mail]> <4jc3is$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: choffman @pelican.davlin.net

Did'nt see the original bulletin but I gather this is about RF in the
shack...IF it is, you might try recutting your transmission line to
the antenna to electrical half-wavelength or any multiple.  That will
put the shack at a current max and a voltage min...good luck


[e-mail] (WB3U) wrote:

o--->   [e-mail](LARRY PIKE ) wrote:

o--->>Hey - why not spend a few extra bucks and go all the way --
o--->>buy a REAL ground!

o--->What type of ground are you referring to?  It's almost impossible
to
o--->achieve a good RF ground with ground rods.  Even if you bury a
couple
o--->of junk cars and weld them together (I know someone who did
that), the
o--->length of the ground wire creates a series impedance that varies
with
o--->frequency.

o--->73,
o--->Jack  WB3U




From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:31:12 1996
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: MFJ Artificial Ground
Date: Thu, 04 Apr 96 21:57:28 GMT
Message-ID: <4k1h27$[e-mail]>
References: <4jtsrr$[e-mail]> <4jue3f$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

   Monty Wilson <[e-mail]> wrote:

>The ideal feedline is that which looks like there is no feedline at
>all; in other words, the rig generating the RF signal appears to be
>right at the antenna.

I just caught the tailend of this discussion, but the preceding is not
correct.  What you're saying is that the impedance of the outside of
the shield between the rig and antenna should be zero ohms. However,
if that was the case, common mode current would be greatly encouraged
to flow from the shield connection at the antenna through the
transmitter chassis to ground. In fact, all else being equal, RF
currents on the chassis of the transmitter would be higher than in any
other possible scenario.

73,
Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:31:14 1996
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: MFJ Artificial Ground
Date: 4 Apr 1996 12:07:44 -0500
Message-ID: <4k0vl0$[e-mail]>
References: <4jui3t$[e-mail]>

Hi Monty,
In article <[e-mail]>, Monty Wilson
<[e-mail]> writes:

>Well what he was using the velocity factor for was to determine what
>PHYSICAL length of cable represented an ELECTRICAL half wave.  In other
>words, if you wanted a half wave length of feedline for six meters, you
>can't just measure out three meters of coax; you first have to multiply
>by the velocity factor.  If you disagree with that, then you definitely
>have a disagreement with this fellow, because I remember that part of
>his presentation very distinctly.

I agree with that *when* speaking of the desired normal transmission line
currents. But not at all when dealing with common mode currents that cause
RF in the shack! That formula doesn't work for unwanted ground currents.

>The ideal feedline is that which looks like there is no feedline at all;
>in other words, the rig generating the RF signal appears to be right at
>the antenna.  Zero is an integer multiple of a half wave, but it is not
>an odd multiple of a quarter wave.

Sometimes having a certain feedline length is useful. The key is picking
the right length. In most cases a 1/4 wl (or odd 1/4 wl) line is best for
reducing RF in the shack. In most other cases, a 1/2 wl long feeder is
still the last thing we want. The issue is complex, but I'm sure this is
true in the vast majority of practical installations.

>If there is an error here, then it is only in my own mind and my memory
>of the event.  But I sure thought I heard "integer multiple of a half
>wavelength," and I definitely heard 91'3".
>I'm not talking about common mode and I'm not talking about differential
>mode.  I'm not talking about loops, spins or dive bombs.  All I'm saying
is
>that in a properly designed feedline and antenna system, the RF current
which
>flows from the radio, through the feedline, to the antenna, will be at a
>maximum at the radio and again at the antenna, and the voltage at these
>points will be a minimum.

With a simple resonant 1/2 wl dipole fed with coax, the length of line
makes NO difference to "desired" currents. The current is essentially the
same everywhere on the line! The length of line only affects the undesired
common mode currents that cause RF in the shack.

>I never said this stuff was gospel.  I am, after all, doing this from
>memory and I'm just trying to impart it to the original poster as best
>I can.  I did ask for corrections and comments.  I guess the exclamation
>points were thrown in free of charge.

Sorry about that. I wasn't being critical of you, I was extremely
surprised a public speaker at Dayton could mislead people. The
exclaimation points were to illustrate more than casual surprise, almost
to the point of shock!

>>If the meter reads different SWR as it's moved along the line, either
the
>>meter or the line is of a different design impedance. If the meter's
>>design impedance is 50 ohms, and the line design impedance is 50 ohms,
the
>>SWR reading will be correct and the same anywhere along the line (unless
>>the line is very lossy).

>A meter is only capable of reading what's going on at its terminals.

The SWR is equal anywhere along the line. An SWR meter will read correctly
at any location in the line. That information can be found in many
sources, like the ARRL Antenna Handbook.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:31:15 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Mods for the FT-51R Yaesu
Date: Mon, 01 Apr 1996 18:23:41 -0800
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

David H. Malin wrote:
>
> Just wondering if anyone knew of all the mods for the Yaesu 51R. Or at
> least point me in the right direction.  Thanks

Try the Boston Amateur Radio Archives at:

http://www.acs.oakland.edu/barc/archives.html

jeff, kf6bkg


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:31:16 1996
From: [e-mail] (William Buck)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Morse Code Decoder
Date: 2 Apr 1996 18:55:16 GMT
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4jrt6k$[e-mail]>

Can anyone tell me where I might buy a Morse Code Decoder for around $!00
T0 $500 . Also is there any kits that I can build- has to have PCBoards
included.



From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:31:17 1996
From: Hank <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Need opinions on RS DSP filter
Date: Thu, 04 Apr 1996 12:54:29 -0500
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Radio Shack is currently selling a dsp filter/speaker for only $50.  Has
any one used this thing?  Is it any good?


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:31:18 1996
From: Cal Eustaquio <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Need tech advice on Heil HC-5 element
Date: Thu, 4 Apr 1996 08:35:52 -0800
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Has anyone ever used the Heil HC-5 element in their mic? I just installed
one in an old EV 664 mic. I haven't tried it on the air yet. It was
recommended to me by a friend. Seems to work o.k. But, even for sideband
use, is it a fairly restrictive element or one that has good sounding
audio? Let me know, please. Cal.


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:31:19 1996
From: [e-mail] (John Stroppel)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Need Ten Tec model #
Date: 4 Apr 1996 21:37:53 GMT
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4k1ffh$[e-mail]>

Anyone out there know of a Ten Tec amp unit used with a QRP rig to
get 50 to 100 watts out.  If so what was the model #.  Thanks

John WA0VYZ

--
 John Stroppel                         | Internet: [e-mail]
 The University of Iowa - Hygienic Lab | Amateur Radio: WA0VYZ
 Oakdale Research Campus, OH-M7A       | Voice:    [phone]
 Iowa City, IA   52242                 | Fax:      [phone]


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:31:20 1996
From: [e-mail] (Stein-Olav Lund)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Needed: 2 ea. 8873 power tubes
Date: Wed, 3 Apr 1996 06:10:25 GMT
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Hi, and thanks for reading this message.
A fellow ham of mine has recently bought a Henry linear which has both
of the tubes in need of replacement.
These are clamped to a heatsink with a BeO insulating block in between.
Anyone out there who wants to sell a couple of these tubes?
What price do you want?

Please e-mail me.

Stein
Stein-Olav Lund, LA9QV
Electronics Engineer
Sor Trondelag College,
Dept. of Engineering,
Inst. of Electronics
  TRONDHEIM, NORWAY
Email:[e-mail]
"There's nothing like the sounds, sights and smell
of an old tube radio working.."



From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:31:21 1996
From: [e-mail] (N9MXT1)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: PK232MBX For Sale
Date: 3 Apr 1996 04:50:38 -0500
Message-ID: <4jthle$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (N9MXT1)


I am selling a PK-232MBX in great conditon!  This TNC has Packet, Morse
Code, Baudot, ASCII RTTY, WEFAX, NAVTEX, and AMTOR/SITOR will do PACTOR
with upgrade.  Also, has 2 ports can handle HF/VHF.  18k Mailbox inside
and plenty more....

Have manuals, cables made up for Kenwood TS450 if you have this also have
premade cable for Kenwood HT.  If you have another radio I have plan cable
for you to make your own cable for your exact radio.  Might even have the
box... will have to check though!

If interested I am selling it for $185 + shipping.

This setup is still available for anyone who is interested.... If
interested email me back.  N9MXT1 - Jeffrey


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:31:22 1996
From: "Richard L. Duell" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Problem with HeathKit SB-200
Date: 2 Apr 1996 02:38:57 GMT
Message-ID: <4jq401$[e-mail]>
References: <4jjdup$[e-mail]> <4jk1as$[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]

Check the HV voltage multiplier resistor.  Without looking it up, I think
it's a 3.7 Megaohm.  My SB220 and SB200 both eat them up.  They change
value and it looks like your HV is dropping

73, Rich - W5VDU



From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:31:22 1996
From: [e-mail] (W. D. Milner)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Problem with HeathKit SB-200
Date: Tue, 02 Apr 1996 06:43:46 GMT
Message-ID: <4jqhqv$[e-mail]>
References: <4jjdup$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] wrote:

>I have a SB-200 that has a high voltage problem.  The meter report a high vol
tage of
>only 1700vdc and not the required 2400vdc for normal operation.  Has any one
encountered
>this problem.  Any help would be great, as I don't want to rebuild the entire
 power supply to
>find the problem.

I assume you've already checked the xfrmr and bridges. There is one
resistoe that CONSISTENTLY burns out in some SB200s. Check R2 - a 10K
2 watt resistor. It might be the problem.

Hope it helps

Dean

---------------------------------------
Dean, VE1CBF        [e-mail]
[e-mail]  FN96VC

- - ...  ... - -



From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:31:24 1996
From: QLF
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: QLF Filter
Date: 4 Apr 1996 14:18:27 GMT
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4k0lnj$[e-mail]>




From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:31:25 1996
From: [e-mail] (Anthony O. Cardenas ~ WA6IGJ)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Remote coax switches  -- any experience(s) ?
Date: Mon, 01 Apr 1996 11:16:55 GMT
Message-ID: <4joe2l$[e-mail]>
References: <4j6v6g$[e-mail]>

Mat Eshpeter <[e-mail]> wrote:
>I am thinking about buying one of the AEA
>remote coax switches. Does anyone have
>any experience with either AEA or other
>manufacturers remote coax switches ?
>I am referring to the switches that typically
>mount on the tower, and have a control box
>at the radio equipment site.
>Mat     [e-mail]
____________________________
Mat,

Yes, I have... the important items are:

1.  Get one designed to handle the power you intend to push thru it.
      Use a factor of 2X if possible.  i.e.  Transmitting 100 watts, get
     contacts that are rated to at least 200 watts.
2.  Get a relay designed to match the frequency you intend to pass.
     i.e.  You intend to switch 900 MHz, get one rated up to at least that
     frequency... the higher, the better.   Sealed relays are best.
3.  Watch the coil voltage.  Often surplus coaxial relays will require
     24 volts dc or 48 volts dc.  I would strongly advise against any
     120VAC coils even if you are willing to use a isolation transformens!
      Transformers can and DO short!  Try to get a coil with low voltage
      that you can easily provide.
4.   Plan on voltage drops because of long runs of coil voltage supply
      cable.  Measure the voltage with the relay attached ~ at the antenna
      end.  You want to be assured that the plunger completes a full stroke
      to assure proper switching!
5.   Solder and weatherproof your exposed junctions and relays.  Roofing
      tar works great!  Get it in white, if you like.

73's
Tony
WA6IGJ




From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:31:26 1996
From: [e-mail] (David L. Thompson)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: S-Meter for Hammarlund HQ129X Receiver
Date: Mon, 01 Apr 1996 03:02:11 GMT
Message-ID: <4jngfr$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (Steven F. Goldberg) wrote:

>I am in the process of restoring a Hammarlund HQ129X receiver and need to
>replace the S-meter.  Any help in locating one would be very much appreciated
.

>Thanks for the help,

>Steve, AA3NE

There is a list of junkers on the boatanchor bulletin net.  I remember
an HQ-129X on that list.  E-mail me if you need more info.

Dave K4JRB
[e-mail]
>




From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:31:27 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: Monty Wilson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: SATELLITE DISH FOR SALE
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 1 Apr 1996 19:00:55 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>

[e-mail] (William Finley) wrote:
>General Insrument, super 350I Receiver with descrambler, C/KU band.
>Sys is less than one year old. 7" Dish.All for $400.00 will work out
>ship....

Don't fall for this one, guys; I've tried those seven inch dishes
and you can't get anything on 'em!

:-)

--
.........Monty.
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:31:28 1996
From: Phil Keller <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.swap,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.space,rec.radio.noncomm,rec.radio.scanner,rec.radio.shortwave,rec.radio.swap
Subject: Re: Shortwave etc database program....
Date: Tue, 02 Apr 1996 16:33:50 -0800
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

And the Cost is ????

-Phil-

Charles Bolland wrote:
>
> Sir,
>
> A stand alone IBM compatible Broadcasting Radio Station Database
> program for Longwave, Mediumwave, or Shortwave.  4000 records...
> Completely read/write and updateable...
>
> If you'd like a copy, send your EMail address and Postal Address
> which will be used to pass you more detailed information on
> the full featured program....
>
> The above program will be sent via EMAIL...
>
> All information will be kept confidential....
>
> Chuck
>
> KA4PRF

--
====================================
"Those who avoid decapitation,
              leave more offspring."
    -Carl Sagan-
====================================
Phil Keller                    N6MWC
mailto:[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:31:29 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Subscribe
Date: 1 Apr 96 05:18:46 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Please subscribe me to you digest list.

Vince


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:31:30 1996
From: [e-mail] (mike fletcher)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Tampa area Ham classes
Date: Thu, 04 Apr 1996 15:51:29 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

No-Code tech, Novice and Tech + classes starting in april.

Novice classes at TARC on davis island starting 4-9-96

No Code to Tech+ at TBARS at Tampa Red Cross 202 N Howard Ave.  first
class 4-23-96 7 pm at tampa red cross.

For info call Mike at 813-622-9102


Mike Fletcher  AD4HV     813-622-9102
President,Tampa Bay Amateur Radio Society 95-96
Florida Certified Fire Alarm Contractor # EF-0000028
E-Mail to  [e-mail]   Homepage  **coming soon**
If in the course of offering ideas or speaking my opinion, I
should offend anyone, I apologize.  However, my opinion is my
own and thus, it shall be...................................


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:31:31 1996
From: [e-mail] (mike fletcher)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Tampa Area Rptr Trustee Meeting
Date: Thu, 04 Apr 1996 15:46:28 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

To all Bay Area repeater trustees or technical managers.

Repeater trustees meeting April 9 at 6:00 pm.
Tampa Red Cross chapter, 208 N Howard Ave
Talk in on 147.105
Sponsored by FGCARC and TBARS
See u there..

Mike
Mike Fletcher  AD4HV     813-622-9102
President,Tampa Bay Amateur Radio Society 95-96
Florida Certified Fire Alarm Contractor # EF-0000028
E-Mail to  [e-mail]   Homepage  **coming soon**
If in the course of offering ideas or speaking my opinion, I
should offend anyone, I apologize.  However, my opinion is my
own and thus, it shall be...................................


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:31:32 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Ten-Tec Scout , Opinions, Comments.
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
References: <4jotl2$[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 1 Apr 1996 19:12:32 GMT

In article <4jotl2$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Donn J. Sachs
) writes:
>
>I am looking at the Ten-Tec Scout for my first HF rig and I am interested in
>getting comments on and/or actual experiences, and opinions about this rig.
>I live in an apartment and am limited in the antenna I can use so I need
>a small rig that can work mobile also.
>It also fits my budget right now.

You might want to figure out how much it costs when you add all the
band units. $549 only buys you a monobander. You have to add $290 to
that to get all the HF bands, and you don't get a microphone, mounting
bracket, or the optional noise blanker, that's another $74.45. Sure, you
can add band units one at a time, *now*, but for how much longer? What'll
you do if they decide to quit making them next year and you don't have a
full set? And several people have commented on the disconcerting frequency
shifts as the microprocessor tries to compensate for PTO drift.

A full up Scout is going to cost you in the neighborhood of the
Alinco DX-70 (price recently reduced), and above what you'd pay
for a good used IC-735. Both of those are more radio for the money
than the Scout (IMHO anyway). Both of these alternatives run 100 watts,
compared to the Scout's 50 watts, both have general coverage receive,
which the Scout does not, and the DX-70 even has 6 meters. Both of
these radios include the microphone and mobile mounting bracket and
a noise blanker (essential for mobile operation). Both of these radios
have filter options and PBT or IF shift, VOX, memories, and the ability
to work split, etc.

Now the Scout seems to be Ok, and better than Ok in some respects,
but I think you should weigh other options (including the used
market) before jumping on this rig, especially if mobile operation
is a major consideration. (Think about where you'll store the band
units in the car.)

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | Due to provider problems
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | with previous uucp address
es
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | Email to [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:31:33 1996
From: [e-mail] (Tim Cook)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: TEN-TEC: "Just drop a check in the mail when you get it"
Date: Thu, 04 Apr 1996 01:14:52 GMT
Message-ID: <4jv814$[e-mail]>
References: <4jpidj$[e-mail]>

moore@  (Andrew M. Moore) wrote:

>Omni VI owners:

>The latest ROM is available from TEN-TEC for the Omni VI.
>Check your current ROM version (get the complete version number, from
>the "Logic" chip (28 pin DIP package) under the top cover of the radio).
>Then call TEN-TEC's service department at [phone] and they can
>arrange to send you an updated version.  Email me if you need a detailed
>list of the new features available in the current ROM.

>$15 for a trade-in of your current ROM (you pay return shipping)
>$25 to purchase the new ROM outright

>I just bought the new ROM, and once again, TEN-TEC is sending it out
>and telling me "Just drop a check in the mail when you receive it."

>What a great company.

>-Drew, NV1B
> CFO #963
Drew,
please email with the improvements, I tried to email direct, but
couldn't. I used to have an Omni6, and would like to see what the new
improvements are.
Thanks
Tim
NZ8J



From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:31:35 1996
From: [e-mail] (Bob Levine)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Timewave DSP-59+ EXPERIENCE?
Date: 3 Apr 1996 21:33:04 GMT
Message-ID: <4juqqg$[e-mail]>
References: <4jai0f$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

In article <4jai0f$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Phil Sikes) w
rites:
-->Marty Gulseth <[e-mail]> wrote:
-->
-->>Hello All,
-->
-->>Anyone out there with a Timewave DSP 59+ (I think/hope that's the proper
-->>model #)?  Comments, esp. re operation with HF digital modes?
-->
-->>TNX es 73 DE W7LEJ
-->
-->>Marty, Spokane, WA
-->
-->Hi Marty, I have the DSP59+ and really enjoy using it. I don't do much
-->digital but it does a good job. It is very good on CW and helps quite
-->a bit on SSB also. I tried the MFJ 784B before buying this one and the
-->Timewave is much easier to use. I would buy it again!
-->
-->73 de KJ7NS
-->
-->Phil, Oak Harbor, WA
-->

I use the DSP 59+ almost exclusively on the digital modes, especially
nice during RTTY contests.  Set the BP filter to 300-400hz and set the
center freq to 2120 (I think that's it, a special setting for RTTY)
and you can really isolate a signal in a cluttered environment!

Very nice piece of gear.  For CW, setting the BP to 200-300hz and the
center freq to 800hz really lets you isolate weak cw signals too.



--
/*****************************************************************
 *      Bob Levine                                               *
 *      Manager of Application Engineering                       *
 *      Mercury Computer Systems             KD1GG/VK2GYN/7J1AIS *
 *****************************************************************/




From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:31:36 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: Re: Timewave DSP-59+ EXPERIENCE?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4ivhb3$[e-mail]> <4jai0f$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 4 Apr 1996 01:30:32 GMT

I picked up an MFJ 784B dsp filter Saturday at the hamfest. I was amazed
at the results especially on cw. I first tried it on my IC-706. I followed
the qsk up to 45 wpm without even connecting the ptt feature. Why even
bother? The sidetone even sounds better now! Pure, smooth tone and so easy
to listen to.

Tuning across a noisey 80 meter cw band, I found a signal buried in QRN.
Pushing the (in) button, the signal lept from my speaker with a loud clear
sound. Then pushing the (noise reduction) button, the QRN was instantly
eliminated.

What I like about the MFJ is the ease of varying the different settings.
Just turn a knob! Yes, it's a very flexible and effective tool.
BTW, hamfest prices can really beat normal dealer prices. I got this one
for $50 off the list price.

Finally, MFJ has  made a good impression on me. Nice work guys!



--
Steve Ellington [e-mail]  Louisville, Ky


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:31:37 1996
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Using a Measurements Model 59 Grid Dip Meter
Date: Wed, 03 Apr 96 05:03:35 GMT
Message-ID: <4jt190$[e-mail]>
References: <4jsmlt$[e-mail]>

Post / CC by Mail

   [e-mail] (Michael A. Fallavollita, Ph.D.) wrote:

>A freind and I just purchased an old Measurements
>(Technology/Instruments) Model 59 grid dip meter.  The problem is
>there isn't any documentation with the meter and we don't quite know
>how to use it. The biggest problem is that there isn't anywhere to
>attach the antenna.
>
>Can someone shed some light on how this thing is supposed to work?
>I'd really appreciate some insight.

I'm not familiar with that specific model.  Is there a socket for
plug-in coils?

73,
Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:31:38 1996
From: [e-mail] (Jean)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Wanted  info ATV power module
Date: Tue, 02 Apr 1996 03:43:48 GMT
Message-ID: <4jp4l1$[e-mail]>

Hello OM's

My name is  Albert and I am living in the North of Belgium.
Now I search information  abouth  a  ATV powermodule for 23cm.
The type : M.57762  from MITSUBISHI.
Ilike also information abouth adresse's in Londen UK  where I can find
these module's .
And if possible also the price.....

E-MAIL ADRESS: [e-mail]

Best 73 from ON6BM  Albert  from MOL
Belgium...........................



From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:31:39 1996
From: Kevin Briddon <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: WANTED Grundig Satellit SSB add on
Date: Tue, 2 Apr 1996 18:34:02 +0100
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

I have recently aquired a Grundig Satellt 2100 receiver, and would like
to use it to rekindle my radio interests. Hence I would be grateful for
any information about the SSB add on mentioned in the manual.

Trades, purchaces or circuit diagrams would be most appreciated.

Thanks in advance

Kevin Briddon
**********************************************************************
* The views and comments contained herein are purely personal and in *
* no way represent the views and beliefs of the Signet Group plc.    *
**********************************************************************


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:31:40 1996
From: [e-mail] (Russ Rinckey)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: WANTED MODS FOR 890
Date: 3 Apr 1996 04:03:04 GMT
Message-ID: <4jst9o$[e-mail]>

I need the out of band mod for the yaesu ft 890 at


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:31:41 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Wanted: 928Mhz link equip/info
Date: 3 Apr 96 13:02:46 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Info and equipment wanted.

I'm planning to install a 928 Mhz link to a remote receiver for my UHF
repeater.  Does anyone have or can point me to some decent equipment for this
task?  I need a seperate receiver and transmitter.  I want to cover a 10 mile
shot between the two sites so I don't need lots of power.

I'm looking to beg, borrow, steal, buy and/or modify any equipment that is
capable of operating on this frequency.  I have a shortage of test equipment
for this frequency range so repair/modification will be difficult but I will
consider nearly anything.

Thanks.  Post replies or email me directly.

David
WB1FLD
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:31:42 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: Monty Wilson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: What I need to start?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 1 Apr 1996 19:05:10 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>

[e-mail] (MICHAL TRZCIANOWSKI) wrote:
>Hi!
>I'd like to start with the radio but I don't know
>what parts do I need. Is the license necessary?
>Can someone tell me what do I need to begin?
>thanks,
> Mike

How about it people?  This guy has had his interest sparked,
and he needs it from the very beginning.  We don't know where
he is located, whether he has an active club in his area, or
a friend or family member in radio, we don't even know if there
is a Radio Shack or electronics place where he can buy books.
But he is on the internet.  Does the ARRL have a web page where
he can order an introductory book?

--
.........Monty.
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:31:43 1996
From: Jim Dunne <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: What I need to start?
Date: Tue, 02 Apr 1996 19:57:44 -0800
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

Monty Wilson wrote:
>
> [e-mail] (MICHAL TRZCIANOWSKI) wrote:
> >Hi!
> >I'd like to start with the radio but I don't know
> >what parts do I need. Is the license necessary?
> >Can someone tell me what do I need to begin?
> >thanks,
> > Mike
>
> How about it people?  This guy has had his interest sparked,
> and he needs it from the very beginning.  We don't know where
> he is located, whether he has an active club in his area, or
> a friend or family member in radio, we don't even know if there
> is a Radio Shack or electronics place where he can buy books.
> But he is on the internet.  Does the ARRL have a web page where
> he can order an introductory book?
>
> --
> .........Monty.
> [e-mail], here goes my first time in newsgroups, and,
hopefully, an answer to
your question.

The ARRL home page location is :  http://205.217.201.3/

Links then on from there.

Best 73 to all Ham's and SWL's, and anyone else interested in the hobby!

From
Jim Dunne
G0UPG
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:31:44 1996
From: [e-mail] (Ted Culin)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: wireless internet
Date: Thu, 04 Apr 1996 20:14:58 GMT
Message-ID: <4k1ajg$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

I received a copy of an article which came from the University of
Oregon.  They have set up a wireless internet system on the University
(One mile coverage) using 68 repeaters positioned around the facility.
The computer uses an all in one modem radio with advertised speeds of
14.4 to 28.8.  The company has set up simular systems in San
Francisco.

Anyone hear about this or have any details.  The name of the company
is Metricom, Inc. and they are located in the San Jose area of
California [phone].  I just wounder what it would take to
establish a 28.8Kb link on 2m?




From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:31:45 1996
From: [e-mail] (Fred Hellmig)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: WTB Icom IC-H16
Date: 3 Apr 1996 18:55:13 GMT
Message-ID: <4juhih$[e-mail]>

        I am looking for a Icom IC-H16. I have batteries and the charger.
Please e-mail if you have one for sale.


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:31:46 1996
From: [e-mail] (Griierz)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: WTB Mic for my TS-430
Date: 2 Apr 1996 17:50:46 -0500
Message-ID: <4jsb06$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Griierz)

need a mic fir my ts-430

thanks

robert
KA7ZKL



From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:31:47 1996
From: AA3JD@.epix.net
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: WTB Remote antenna switch
Date: Mon, 01 Apr 96 20:29:48 PDT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>



Thanks for reading..

I looking for a good remote antenna switch.  Prefer the
Ameritron RCS-4, but I'm interested in other brands.

Please send all replies via e-mail.. [e-mail]

Thanks Gary (AA3JD)





From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:31:47 1996
From: [e-mail] (wayne burdick)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew
Subject: WTB:  Ten-Tec Argonaut, any species, <= $250
Date: Tue, 02 Apr 1996 11:22:27 -0800
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

It must be in excellent working order, and rediculously low prices would
be appreciated.  ( I have a couple of friends who know these rigs inside
out who will give me advice on whether the price is right--or better.)
Please include a microphone and power supply if the total price will still
be <= $250.

I'm trying to help out a retired (fixed-income) ham in San Francisco who
really needs a rig.  Thanks in advance for parting with your little-used
gem!


73,
Wayne
N6KR

415-494-3806


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:31:48 1996
From: [e-mail] (CHB890)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: WTB:  WEATHER RADAR
Date: 3 Apr 1996 12:10:55 -0500
Message-ID: <4jubf0$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (CHB890)

WTB
COLOR WEATHER RADAR WITH 48-68 MILE RANGE WORKING COND.

WTB
KENWOOD TK733 MOBILE

E-MAIL OR FAX INFO INC. PRICE,COND., SPECS, AND OTHER INFO.

E-MAIL  [e-mail]
FAX [phone]
Charles H. Beard
CSSI
FAX [phone]
TELCO 817-596-8767 ext 218


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:31:49 1996
From: [e-mail] (PhilRut1)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: WTB: Drake VFO 2NT-VFO ??
Date: 2 Apr 1996 09:06:38 -0500
Message-ID: <4jrc9e$[e-mail]>
References: <4jq644$[e-mail]>

In article <4jq644$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]    (Bill Newkirk)
writes:

>Heathkit's VF-1 seemed to be the usual vfo accessory
>back then...

 I have an HG-10 working in conjunction with my 2-NT/2-C. We had to built
an outboard power supply however, as it would normally take its power from
the octal plug on a DX-60, for instance. It works pretty slick, and
certainly makes the 2-NT a more versatile rig to play with.

 Phil (KB1GO)


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:31:51 1996
From: "Yves Albert (Al \"Al\") Feder" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: WTB: DuoBand Mobile
Date: Mon, 01 Apr 1996 07:18:06 -0500
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Looking for a good duoband mobile rig with detachable faceplate.... Alinco 610
? Yazoo 5200?
Anything out there reasonable?

Tnx - 73,

--
Yves Albert (Al "Al") Feder
[e-mail]
Harpsichord Workshops and Recording Studios
"Danged if'n I unnerstand all I know"

 "When I go, I want to go quietly in my
  sleep, like my grandfather..... not
  screaming, like his passengers."


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:31:51 1996
From: Darryl Ponder <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: WTB: TenTec 2510
Date: Thu, 04 Apr 1996 12:24:16 -0800
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Want to buy a TenTec 2510 VHF/UHF rig.

E-mail [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:31:52 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.swap
From: [e-mail] (Stanley Perkins)
Subject: Re: WTD:HP manuals: 5245, 5255, 8614
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Distribution: phl,pa,nj,del,md,dc,world
Date: Thu, 4 Apr 1996 15:38:54 GMT

[e-mail] (Joe Landis - Systems & Network Mgr) writes:

>I'm looking for service manuals for the following Hewlett Packard instruments
:
>  8614A .8-2.4 ghz  generator
>  5245L counter
>  5255A 3-12.4 ghz counter plug in.
>Anyone have any gathering dust?

>73,
>Joe - AA3GN
>--
>Joe Landis - Systems and Network Manager - North American Drager - Telford, P
A
>[e-mail]                        ..speaking only for myself, of course.
.

Joe,

Give Ed Matsuda a call at 619-479-0225. He'll probably have the manuals
you need.

Stan

--
----------------------------------
|  Stan Perkins   |  ASMG, Inc.  |
| [e-mail] | 619-490-9074 |
----------------------------------



From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:31:54 1996
From: [e-mail] (Joe Landis - Systems & Network Mgr)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.swap
Subject: WTD:HP manuals: 5245, 5255, 8614
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 3 Apr 96 21:24:58 EST
Distribution: phl,pa,nj,del,md,dc,world

I'm looking for service manuals for the following Hewlett Packard instruments:
  8614A .8-2.4 ghz  generator
  5245L counter
  5255A 3-12.4 ghz counter plug in.
Anyone have any gathering dust?

73,
Joe - AA3GN
--
Joe Landis - Systems and Network Manager - North American Drager - Telford, PA
[e-mail]                        ..speaking only for myself, of course..


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:31:54 1996
From: [e-mail] (Griierz)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: WTF: ant tuner like an mfj-948
Date: 3 Apr 1996 12:01:52 -0500
Message-ID: <4juau0$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Griierz)

Looking for an atn tuner

thanks
robert


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:31:55 1996
From: [e-mail] (Griierz)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: WTF: Crystals for my Icom-22
Date: 1 Apr 1996 16:06:56 -0500
Message-ID: <4jpghg$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Griierz)

Looking for a place to buy crystals for my Icom-22

thanks

rob


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:31:57 1996
From: [e-mail] (R.Y.Yang)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Yaesu FT-41R
Date: 2 Apr 1996 06:31:23 GMT
Message-ID: <4jqhjr$[e-mail]>

How can I expand FT-41R to receive radio over 440MHz ?
Any commends are preciated. Thank you !

--
Jeff


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:31:59 1996
From: [e-mail] (Rick Wilson)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: YAESU FT-8500, FT-3000M
Date: Mon, 01 Apr 1996 15:34:09 GMT
Message-ID: <4jopu8$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

[e-mail] (David A. Kay) wrote:

>     I am left with the following questions:

>RE:  The FT-8500 and the FT-3000M

>1.  How is intermod resistance?
>2.  How easy/hard is the auto dial to use?
>3.  Just how well does that Smart Scarch work (3000 only)?
>4.  How much and what can you control the rig from the MH-39 , MH-36 mike?
>5.  Overall, how would you rate the rig?

Hi Dave: We have had an FT-8500 for almost 9 months now. Overall it is
a very well thought out rig. But if you are considering one, I have
the following:
1)  We live in Calgary Alberta which is very susceptible to intermod &
   this rig is no exception. I suppose it is OK but we do get periodic

   bursts of it. Of course the downtown area is bad but without a fil
   ter, I think any rig will give you intermod. I'm not terribly
bothered by what we do get.
2) We have used the autodialer & it works just fine.
4) I presume you are referring to the 'Mr Potatoe Head' mike: Overall
it is very good. It is lit for night-time use.  However....watch the
volume controls....they don't lock at all & there is a definite
tendency for them to move & blow you out of the front seat!!! Also,
unlike the handhelds, you cannot mute the 'other band'. You either
have to mute UHF or VHF & that can be a real pain. We generally just
down the volume.
   Other than that, I really like it. Quite a conversation piece!!
Good Luck!!!
2)
>                              TNX   de   AB7FV,  Dave




From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:32:00 1996
From: "Nick J Chiarchiaro, AET  /N2QXF" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Yaesu FT10
Date: 3 Apr 1996 14:02:09 GMT
Message-ID: <4ju0d1$[e-mail]>

Hi Name is Nick.  I was wondering how do you like your
FT-10/40?  Toughness?  Audio?  ETC?

Tnx and 73 Nick/N2QXF



From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:32:01 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Yaesu FT10
Date: 3 Apr 1996 17:18:25 GMT
Message-ID: <4jubt1$[e-mail]>
References: <4ju0d1$[e-mail]>

Nick,

I love the little radio!  I've got an FT-10 with the '41 battery, and it's a m
arvel.
The audio is great from the the radio itself and from Yaesu's optional speaker
microphone.  It sits very comfortably on your belt.  I program mine without th
e
optional software, and it's straightforward.  I have to admit to "testing" it'
s
durability on the first day I got it, and it suffered no damage from a four fo
ot
fall to the floor.  With the RX Battery Saver mode turned on, the radio will
run for almost a whole week on a single charged NiCd.  Sorry to ramble,
but I was just kinda thinking as I wrote...

Complaints?  The "reverse SMA" antenna connector can be frustrating!  I
also use mine at the office with a "300 ohm J-pole" in the window and at
home for an APRS station.  Having to unscrew the duck, screw in the adapter,
attach the BNC antenna connector, use the radio, disconnect the BNC,
unscrew the adapter, and screw the rubber duck back in gets "tiring".

I've been *VERY* pleased with mine.  If you buy one, I think you will be too.

Bill Young
[e-mail]
KB0UZQ


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:32:02 1996
From: Jeff Goldman <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Yaesu FT10
Date: 5 Apr 1996 20:18:28 GMT
Message-ID: <4k3v6k$9fh$[e-mail]>

What does the battery current (ie battery life) of the battery have to do
with local RFI (ie a receive problem)???


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:32:03 1996
From: Scott Adams <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Yaesu FT530 help!
Date: 2 Apr 1996 00:11:51 GMT
Message-ID: <4jprc7$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

Hi Dave,

I also recently bought an FT530 (from the "local" HRO), as did a friend.  I
bought the Yaesu 12V car adaptor (for an outrageous $25!).  My friend bought
only a plug and cable for about $4 or $5.  Both were purchased at the same
store as the xcvrs.  Call and ask the dealer you bought it from about the
cable/plug.  If they don't have it, call HRO - they definitely have them...

Good luck,

Scott N1WNO

[e-mail] (Dave Blizzard) wrote:
>I recently bought a new FT530 from the local dealer but can't find a
>source for the coax plug used to power this HT from an external DC
>supply. As usual the manual doesn't provide the spec, all it says is
>either a 3.7mm or 4.0mm plug (depending on where you look in the
>manual) but the inside diameter is not specified. All the usual local
>sources don't have anything that will fit.
>What size is it really???
>Any help would be appreciated.
>--
>---------------------------------------------
>73's from Dave Blizzard - VE3SVL
>[e-mail]
>---------------------------------------------



From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:32:04 1996
From: [e-mail] (Rick Prather)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Yaesu FT530 help!
Date: Thu, 04 Apr 96 00:02:58 GMT
Message-ID: <4jv3h6$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4jt6li$[e-mail]>

In article <4jt6li$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (JRW) wrote:

>
>Forget it. Buy it from Yaesu or you won't have one. My experience has been
>that there's only two places to find that size plug:
>
>1. Yaesu
>2. Japan
>
>On the other hand, the folks at Yaesu are real friendly and helpful.
>
>-JRW4
>aka KB5ZBR

Actually I was able to put together one in my local radio shack store.  I
bought a coiled "universal" adaptor which came with 4 plugs (all wrong) but
was able to buy another pack of plugs in their "video game adaptor" section
which included the one for the 530 - now I have a coiled adaptor with the
right plug.

However, the works cost me about $12 (i have plenty of extra adaptors) and I
find that on 440 I have had reports of noise in the signal while plugged in.
Maybe the $25 for the "official" adaptor with a noise filter is not a bad
deal.

I am using this one to power my 530 in the shack from a power supply with a
cigar lighter adaptor.

Rick
KB9E


From [e-mail] Fri Apr 05 16:32:05 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (William Kucharski)
Subject: Re: Yaesu FT530 help!
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 1 Apr 1996 23:44:36 GMT

While reading article <[e-mail]>, I noticed that
[e-mail] (Dave Blizzard) said the following:
 >I recently bought a new FT530 from the local dealer but can't find a
 >source for the coax plug used to power this HT from an external DC
 >supply. As usual the manual doesn't provide the spec, all it says is
 >either a 3.7mm or 4.0mm plug (depending on where you look in the
 >manual) but the inside diameter is not specified. All the usual local
 >sources don't have anything that will fit.

I don't know the size, but the Yaesu cord isn't exceptionally outrageously
priced at $6 or so - expensive for a cord, yes, but if it saves you a lot
of looking around or driving around town, it may be worth it...
--
| William Kucharski                               | Opinions expressed herein
| Internet: [e-mail]                   | are MINE alone, NOT those
of
| Ham: N0OKQ                                      | of NETCOM.
| President, "Just the Ten of Us" Fan Club        | "Dittos from Louisville, C
O"


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:01:36 1996
From: [e-mail] (MalibuGK)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: $900-$1050 Standard C5900 triple band mobile radio
Date: 7 Apr 1996 00:53:20 -0500
Message-ID: <4k7l8g$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (MalibuGK)

So, who else has seen the brochure about the 5900?

It's remotely controllable by DTMF tones -- I certainly didn't expect
that!
The good old 5718 has no remote control feature.  Hey, I wonder if the
9600bps packet interface is any better in the 5900;  With the 5718, I had
to
put an amplifier circuit inline between the MFJ-9600 modem and the 5718's
data port, because the 5718 wanted 5 volts peak-to-peak.

And, I wonder how well the Double Balanced Mixer and Tracking Front-End
really do in preventing intermod.  Sounds interesting, because intermod
does get through my 5718 receiver at home, especially on the 70cm band.


Then there's the Yaesu FT-50R which is described at
http://www.yaesu.com/whatnew.html .  Interesting, but I wonder what
happened
to the ALL NEW: Cellular phone capability.  Maybe it's just not
documented:-)


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:01:37 1996
From: [e-mail] (Bill Bennett)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: 6 meter cavity
Date: Thu, 04 Apr 1996 19:25:03 GMT
Message-ID: <4k17md$[e-mail]>
References: <4jrbse$[e-mail]>

[e-mail] (Prescott) wrote:

>Does anyone have plans for\or have seen plans for building a 6 meter
>cavity for a repeater?

>Prescott
>[e-mail]


Look at feb 1996 Qst pg 20 if you are intrested in the plans such as
they are. Mail a sase $.55 postage to
Bill Bennett
KC6YOX
3537 Strawberry pl
oceanside Ca
92056



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:01:38 1996
From: [e-mail] (Oscar D. Jackson Jr. M.D.)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: 950SDX  for sale
Date: Sat, 06 Apr 1996 02:38:22 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Like new Kenwood 950SDX for sale.


[e-mail]
N77ET
KB4HAM


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:01:39 1996
From: Rick Johnson <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Amp Supply - HELP
Date: Sat, 06 Apr 1996 17:34:27 -0500
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

HELP !
I have found an Amplifier within some auction stuff and I need some
information.
It is an Amp Supply LK 800 ISM.  The tech guys at Amateur Elect Supply
in Cleveland
helped a lot but I need to know some more details.  It has WARC bands
indicated on the
band switch, so it's not ancient.  Does anyone know ---
What minimum power to drive ?
Does anyone have / have source for a schematic ? Owner's Manual ?
Know amp draw @ 220v.  ?
Is Amp Supply deceased ?  I know it used to be Dentron in NC.

Any help is appreciated .
Rick N8HUJ
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:01:39 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (Don Payne)
Subject: Any mailing lists for Drake?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Keywords: Drake
Date: Fri, 5 Apr 1996 04:26:10 GMT

After 20 something years of wanting...I finally got a mint T4X and R4B. Intere
sted in
ideas, mods, hints, etc. Anyone know of a mailing list?
73,
-Don   "[e-mail]"



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:01:40 1996
From: [e-mail](bumologist)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,
Subject: Anybody have an IC-2000H???
Date: 5 Apr 1996 13:46:40 GMT
Message-ID: <4k3880$[e-mail]>

Anybody out there have an Icom Ic2000H?If you do,are you having a problem
with intermod.I had a Yaesu FT2400 and it was much better.Icom claims in
the ad  "Highly Intermod Resistant".Compared to what?My Bearcat 9000 is
better than the 2000 is by far.Anybody else having problems???Thanks..
--

Bumologist....
BARRY FELSTEIN N8PVX


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:01:41 1996
From: "Devon D. Snyder" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Anyone replace a Lithium battery in Kenwood moble radio?
Date: Thu, 04 Apr 1996 17:41:42 -0600
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

Sorry, I sent previous message by mistake without completing it.  I am
looking for advice from anyone who has replaced one of these batteries
or do I really need to send it back to Kenwood.


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:01:42 1996
From: [e-mail] (James Skjervem)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Anyone replace a Lithium battery in Kenwood moble radio?
Date: 5 Apr 1996 16:22:01 -0700
Message-ID: <4k49up$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

"Devon D. Snyder" <[e-mail]> wrote:

>I have a Kenwood TM-231, 2M radio.  Recently, when I power on the radio I los
e
>all of my memorys and other settings.  I think my lithium battery is dead.
>The instruction manual says to send it back to Kenwood to have the battery re
placed.

Devon: I replaced the lithium in my TM-221 2M radio (very similar to
TM-231 I'm sure). It is located in the front panel assembly, and can
be replaced if very careful going about it. Battery is a standard
type, but difficult to find with the necessary tabs. I removed the
tabs from the old battery, and VERY CAREFULLY soldered them onto a new
battery. Other than this soldering process, it is a very simple
disassembly process. If you need more info, I can provide it.

IF YOU ARE IN THE LEAST UNSURE ABOUT DOING THIS, HAVE KENWOOD DO IT.
SOLDERING LITHIUM BATTERIES CAN BE VERY DANGEROUS.  As they say, you
shouldn't try this at home hi hi.

73s Jim KC7MJ
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:01:43 1996
From: [e-mail] (Mparkes)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Attic antenna ideas?
Date: 9 Apr 1996 12:47:17 -0400
Message-ID: <4ke4al$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Mparkes)

I live on the second floor of a 2-story apt. and want to improve my HF
antenna situation. Currently am running Isotrons for 80/40 and 20 meters
but its just sitting on the balcony at abt 12 ft. Have had "some" limited
success with this arrangement but I want to get something up in the attic,
a wire antenna of some sort, which I think would work better. I have abt
50 ft to play with in one direction, and height of abt 26 ft. I am mainly
interesdted in 20 meter operation so was thinking abt just a dipole for 20
meters....but does anyone have any other ideas that might work even
better? Long wire? Folded dipole? Any help is appreciated! 73's Mike KS4DA


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:01:44 1996
From: [e-mail] (mkeitz)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Can a cell phn be reprog to opp as a ham?
Date: 5 Apr 1996 17:40:33 GMT
Message-ID: <4k3luh$[e-mail]>
References: <4k0hjd$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (J.W. Wolfington)
says:
>
>On 4 Apr 1996 13:07:57 GMT, [e-mail] (Robin Pickering)
>wrote:
>
>>I would like to know if a cell phone can be altered so as to change the pll
>>frequencies to get it to opperate in the 2m range.
>>I know cells opperate at about around 900mhz, with an IF around 40mhz.
>>
>>Can a cell be re programed (along with a xtal change with the pll ref
>>signal) so as to get it to opperate as a 2m ham radio?
>>
>>I know a pll can be set to different ranges by a xtal change and different
>>modulus numbers; however what conserns me are all the tuned circuits in the
>>intial RF input and the output stage. If it can be done by reprogram the
>>eprom in the phone and a few simple component changes I'd shure like to take

>>a crak at it.
>>
>>Please respond with any ideas or advice you can give!
>>Thanks
>>
>>
>
>
>
>Boy, did this guy just fall off the turnip truck today?  Or was he
>born yesterday?  What a stupid question!
>
There aren't any stupid questions, just stupid answers.  The original
poster exhibited quite a bit more knowledge about what goes on inside
a cell phone than many people you'll hear on the air or read here.  With
quite a few of the older trunk-mounted cellphones showing up surplus for
very low prices, it is a natural question to ask if they can be used for
ham radio.  They are also usually very solidly built (for consumer
products anyway).

The short answer is that it isn't practical to try and convert a
cellphone for 2m use.  The oscillators, front end, and power amplifer
would all need to be replaced.  Only the IF and synthesizer sections
would be of much use, and the bandwidth of the IF is 30 KHz, not the 12
or so that is usually used for narrow-band FM in the 2m band.  (Back
when cellular was first designed, it was decided to trade wider bandwidth
for better voice quality.  The 800 MHz band seemed infinite).

The band to try and convert to would be 902-928 MHz.  But this is
complicated by the phone's design for full duplex (receiver operates
870-895 MHz, transmitter always exactly 45 MHz lower).  There is a
duplexer that combines the two to the antenna terminal, this part is
probably only useful for the cellular band so it would need to be removed.
In some cases there are separate transmit and receive oscillators, in
others the transmitter oscillator is the LO for the receiver.  The
receiver willprobalby tweak up to the low to middle portion of the 900
MHz band, butthe transmitter may not work very well there.  Since there
isn't 45 MHz of space there for full-duplex operation, the single-
oscillator design will have to retune 45 MHz between transmit and
receive.

The control logic would have to be redone as well, since it won't do
anything without instructions from the cell site.  It is fairly
straightforward for testing purposes to load the PLL chip directly from
a port on a PC.  Usually the PLL setup is general-purpose enough that
changing the crystal is not required.

If the decision is made to scrap it rather than put it on the air,
there are some interesting, educational, and useful parts inside a
cellphone.  The PLL section is usually a "textbook example" already
built with good stable components.  The IF section is wideband enough
for 19.2 Kbaud FSK, and a data seperator is included (cellular control
data is Manchester coded at 10 Kbps). The audio path contains a 2:1
compressor and expander as well as tight 3 KHz active filters.  These
may be useful as part of other homebrew radios.

-Mike KD4QDM


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:01:46 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Can a cell phn be reprog to opp as a ham?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
References: <4k0hjd$[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 5 Apr 1996 23:49:05 GMT

In article <4k0hjd$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Robin Picker
ing) writes:
>I would like to know if a cell phone can be altered so as to change the pll
>frequencies to get it to opperate in the 2m range.
>I know cells opperate at about around 900mhz, with an IF around 40mhz.
>
>Can a cell be re programed (along with a xtal change with the pll ref
>signal) so as to get it to opperate as a 2m ham radio?
>
>I know a pll can be set to different ranges by a xtal change and different
>modulus numbers; however what conserns me are all the tuned circuits in the
>intial RF input and the output stage. If it can be done by reprogram the
>eprom in the phone and a few simple component changes I'd shure like to take
>a crak at it.

No, you can't get the cellphone down to 2m. It's possible you could
move it to the 902 MHz amateur band, however. The split is wider than
that band, though, so you won't be able to use it duplex. Getting it
to work simplex, or at least on a short split, would be challenging,
and the output bricks in those things usually don't work well in the
902 band. The modules are potted, and there's no access to the frequency
determining elements of the hybrid. Probably the best thing to do with
one is to use it for parts. There's some neat stuff in there that you
can use in a homebrew rig.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | Due to provider problems
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | with previous uucp address
es
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | Email to [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:01:47 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Can a cell phn be reprog to opp as a ham?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
References: <4k0hjd$[e-mail]> <4k3nfa$[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 5 Apr 1996 23:57:21 GMT

In article <4k3nfa$[e-mail]> Jim <[e-mail]> writes:
>
>If you know a good way to disable the frequency-hopping functions, and
>allow manually setting the transmit and receive frequencies through
>the keypad, TELL US NOW!!!!!  Even if it's just for one style of
>celphone.  Even if it'll only do one frequency on simplex.

Many of the older cellphones could be put into service mode from
the keypad, my Uniden can be. That allows you to set the transmit
and receive frequencies, put it in transmit or receive manually,
run the power up and down, etc. It will *not* allow you to work
simplex, however, because transmit and receive bands are offset
by 45 MHz and you can't change that.

With all the illegal cloning going on, newer phones generally can't
be put into service mode without a special factory jig and special
software that the factories don't let out of their sight.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | Due to provider problems
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | with previous uucp address
es
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | Email to [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:01:48 1996
From: Bill Crocker <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: CARJACK FREQ
Date: Sat, 06 Apr 1996 00:51:52 -0300
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4k24dr$[e-mail]>
To: The Tech <[e-mail]>

The Tech wrote:
>
> Could someone please Email me the carjack freq? I believe that it
> is 171.something MHZ. Thanks.


Try 173.075 MHz. for LoJaak.

Have fun!  Bill Crocker


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:01:49 1996
From: [e-mail] (DAVE M . SCHERTZER)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: CARJACK FREQ
Date: 8 Apr 1996 12:28:44 GMT
Message-ID: <4kb0ps$[e-mail]>
References: <4k24dr$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

C A R J A C K   F R E Q ?????

Iz this fer real...don't get it???

[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:01:50 1996
From: [e-mail] (The Tech)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: CARJACK FREQ
Date: Thu, 04 Apr 1996 22:32:22
Message-ID: <4k24dr$[e-mail]>

Could someone please Email me the carjack freq? I believe that it
is 171.something MHZ. Thanks.




From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:01:51 1996
From: Scott Macmillan <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Charging sealed lead-acid batteries
Date: Sat, 6 Apr 1996 20:05:46 +0100
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Hello, and thanks for reading this.

I just bought a 12V 12Ah sealed lead-acid battery at a rally.

My problem is I dont have the special charger required to charge it.
I know that these batteries require a constant voltage charge of 2.4 to
2.5 volts per cell (14.4 to 15 volts for a 12V battery), and I was
wondering
if  I could use my PSU to charge this battery.

My PSU is a Manson EP-925, which has a variable voltage output between
5 and 15 volts, but no control of the current output (25 Amps max).
Is there any need to limit the current output, and if so, how can this
be done.

The only charger unit I have seen for these batteries was in Maplin
Electronics,
but it was only suitable for batteries upto 6Ah, (or so it said in their
catalogue)
and it was 35 quid - more than double the cost of the battery.
Yes, we Scotsmen hate parting with our hard earned cash.

Thanks again for your time.


--
Best 73's
DE Scott - GM7OMU
Glasgow, IO75tv.


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:01:52 1996
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Coax Shield Current (Was Re: MFJ Artificial Ground)
Date: Sun, 07 Apr 96 06:36:34 GMT
Message-ID: <4k7v9d$[e-mail]>
References: <4jtsrr$[e-mail]> <4jue3f$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4k1h27$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

   [e-mail] (Gary Coffman) wrote:

>That's assuming the currents are flowing to "ground", Jack. But
>that's not what they do.  The current is trying to "close the
>loop" back to the source, Kirchhoff's law, and the source is
>inside a Faraday box called a transmitter.

Gary, this has nothing to do with Kirchoff's law.  Once the RF exits
the coax at the antenna, it will be attracted to *any* conductor that
has a lower EMF than itself.  It doesn't matter whether that conductor
is the antenna, the shield, the B- of the transmitter, or twelve
bronzed monkeys holding hands and singing Nowhere Man.  Anything the
RF can reach that will conduct, dissipate or radiate is fair game.

>The RF currents on the outside of that box can't get in, can't close
>the loop, and therefore that model fails.

The only model that fails is the one you've described, because it
doesn't exist.  Not only is the inner chassis of the transmitter not
the primary target of the current, it isn't even sealed. Take the key
jack for example.  One conductor is usually connected to the external
chassis by the frame of the jack.  The other conductor typically has a
bypass capacitor from the tip of the jack to the inner chassis.  So
what happens when you close the key?  Zappo!  The outer chassis is
connected to the inner chassis through the key and the bypass
capacitor.  This is also why the key contacts often spark when there's
RF on the chassis of the transmitter.

The point is Gary, the concentrically-shielded RF source you're
envisioning doesn't exist relative to currents flowing on the outer
cabinet.  Even if you don't agree with anything else, you should at
least abandon this concept.

73,
Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:01:55 1996
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Coax Shield Current (Was Re: MFJ Artificial Ground)
Date: Sun, 07 Apr 96 04:07:40 GMT
Message-ID: <4k7fh8$[e-mail]>
References: <4k43ol$[e-mail]> <4k4tth$[e-mail]>

Our news server crashed today so I'm not sure my first copy of this
went out.  Likewise, Gary's article still hasn't appeared here, so I'm
commenting on the basis of the text Tom quoted.

   [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) wrote:
>(Gary Coffman) writes:

>>Tom's mistake is trying to use transmission line theory on what is
>>*not* at this point functioning as a transmission line.

The concept of 1/4 and 1/2 wave lines applies equally well to single
conductors.  This is evidenced by the use of 1/4 wave single-conductor
decoupling stubs in microwave circuitry.

>>It is, instead, an unintended end fed 1/2-wave antenna. Now while it
>>is true that the ends of such an antenna are voltage maxima, that's
>>because the ends are very high impedances, and thus not much current
>>will "turn the corner" to excite this "antenna", so there won't be
>>much high voltage down at the shack end.

This paragraph entirely contradicts itself in trying to prove that a
1/2 wave conductor will isolate antenna currents from the transmitter.
First it states that because the 1/2 wave shield simulates a 1/2 wave
end-fed antenna, the voltage and impedance on both ends will be high.
Then it says that because little current will flow, one end will
actually be low.

>>OTOH, a 1/4-wave will be a low feed impedance at the antenna, thus
>>lots of current will divert down toward the shack, and will express
>>itself as a high voltage at the high impedance of the other end.

Another contradiction; this paragraph says the same thing about the
1/4 wave shield that the previous paragraph said about the 1/2 wave -
that one end will have a higher impedance than the other.  This time
it's true, but the rest of the explanation is incorrect.

Yes, there is a low feedpoint impedance at the antenna, but it's
created by the 1/2 wave dipole, not the shield.  The 1/4 wave shield
looks like a high impedance due to reflections from the other end,
therefore current does not flow toward the shack as claimed.

>>(And the other end *will* be a high impedance because the current
>>can't penetrate the coax shield or the transmitter case to "close
>>the loop" with the driving source.

This is also incorrect.  The RF voltage at the antenna is a free agent
that is attracted to *all* conductive objects with a lower potential.
That includes any object connected to earth or to the B- of the
transmitter, as well as any object large enough to convert the current
into radiated energy.  The latter is the "electrical mass" that Tom
often refers to.

Let's analyze the transmitter in this regard.  If it was totally
isolated from earth, the outer chassis would "float" at some RF
potential due to the connection between the chassis and the outer
shield of the coax.  This would be true regardless of shield length,
because in practice even the input impedance of a 1/4 wave shield
(at the antenna) won't be infinitely high and some current will flow.

However, the trasnmitter is not isolated from earth.  It is coupled to
earth by means of AC lines and other equipment.  Even if this coupling
is very loose, it is sufficient to pull the chassis to near-ground
potential due to the isolation provided by the 1/4 wave shield.

As a side note, earth is likely to be more effective at this than even
a direct connection to the inside of the transmitter.  Unlike earth,
the effectiveness of B- as a return path for common-mode current is
determined in part by the relative phase between current leaving the
transmitter and current arriving at B- by way of the shield.

It's also my belief that the outer chassis of a transmitter is not
well-isolated from internal grounds as previously claimed, and that
phase and amplitude differences are the real reason the shield current
cannot be cancelled by merely returning to B-.  At the very least,
this lack of isolation appears to be confirmed by the fact that RF on
the outer chassis will often create internal equipment malfunctions.

>>Whether the transmitter case is connected to Earth or not is largely
>>irrelevant as well.)

This statement can only be accepted if one believes that RF voltage
is not attracted to earth.

73,
Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:01:56 1996
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Coax Shield Current (Was Re: MFJ Artificial Ground)
Date: Mon, 08 Apr 96 11:21:54 GMT
Message-ID: <4kb4cq$[e-mail]>
References: <4k43ol$[e-mail]> <4k4tth$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

   [e-mail] (Gary Coffman) wrote:

>I'm also fascinated with your fondness for the peculiar properties
>you assign to "ground" and "electrical mass".

I've been thinking that the crux of this argument might be the
perceived impedance of the transmitter chassis.  I finally decided to
look up the subject of antenna current in the ARRL Antenna Handbook.

The discussion in the Handbook is centered on the use of balanced
feeders, but a subsequent paragraph states that the discussion applies
equally well to coax.  I think the text is sufficient to resolve much
of our disagreement (unless we choose not to believe it).  ;)

Here's what I found:

1.  The first scenario presented in the discussion tends to agree with
Gary's claim regarding use of a 1/2 wave long shield.  It states that
the total length of the line plus one side of the 1/2 wave antenna
should *not* be an integral multiple of 1/2 wave.  In other words, the
feedline should *not* be an odd multiple of 1/4 wave.

However, the condition to which this is applied is when the line is
connected to a coupling circuit that is not grounded, either directly
or through a capacitance of more than a few picofarads.

2.  The second scenario agrees with the claim by Tom and myself that
a 1/4 wave shield should be used.  It states that the feedline plus
one side of the antenna should be equal to multiples of 1/2 wave.  In
other words, the feedline should be an odd multiple of 1/4 wave.

The condition this applies to is when "the coupling apparatus is
grounded at the transmitter."  The text goes on to say that "in the
average station, it is not possible to get a connection to real ground
without having a lead that is an appreciable fraction of a wavelength
long" but "if the trasnmitter has fairly large capacitance to
ground, a system of this length will be effectively detuned for the
fundamental and all even harmonics when grounded to the transmitter at
the coupling apparatus."

The latter agrees closely with what I've been saying about the ability
of the loose coupling to ground being able to pull the "residual"
voltage to near-ground potential, so long as a 1/4 wave line is used.

To sum this up, when coax is used, the system does *not* present the
extremely high impedance to ground that might otherwise require
the use of a 1/2 wave line.  If coax is in use and the station is
operated in the usual manner, a 1/4 wave line will detune the system
for antenna currents.

73,
Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:01:57 1996
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Coax Shield Current (Was Re: MFJ Artificial Ground)
Date: Mon, 08 Apr 96 14:20:09 GMT
Message-ID: <4kbeqv$[e-mail]>
References: <4k43ol$[e-mail]> <4k4tth$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

   [e-mail] (Gary Coffman) wrote:

>Let me try to summarize my case so that we can focus on the exact
>point of disagreement.

>1) The outside of the coax is not acting as a transmission line,
>   and thus transmission line theory does not apply.

Wave reflection theory will apply.

>2) The outside of the coax is acting as a halfwave resonant
structure, IE antenna, and antenna theory must apply.

Antenna theory based on unterminated lines will not apply.  The 1/2
wave shield is not unterminated.

>3) The standing wave on a halfwave antenna forces the ends to be
>   voltage maxima.

This is true of both the antenna and the 1/2 wave shield.

>4) Ergo, the ends of a halfwave antenna are high impedance points.

This statement is true, but because of the error in (2), it does not
apply to the 1/2 wave shield.

>5) And finally, a high impedance load driven by a low impedance
>   source won't accept much current.  Therefore use of a halfwave
>   coax feeder will limit the amount of RF current conducted down
>   to the shack end of the coax along the coax's outer surface.

The first sentence is true, but no valid basis for the conclusion has
been presented.

>Now tell me where any of that is wrong, and we can proceed from
>there.

In a nutshell, you're mixing absolute and relative terms.  You've used
"low" when the correct term is "less", and "high" when the correct
term is "greater".  This has led to incorrect conclusions regarding
both the 1/2 wave and 1/4 wave shield lengths.

You're also applying theory based on unterminated conductors to a
shield that is terminated by a finite degree of coupling to earth at
the transmitter.

73,
Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:01:59 1996
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Coax Shield Current (Was Re: MFJ Artificial Ground)
Date: Mon, 08 Apr 96 09:38:25 GMT
Message-ID: <4kaual$[e-mail]>
References: <4jtsrr$[e-mail]> <4jue3f$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4k1h27$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

My apologies if this is posted twice.  Our news server crashed
recently and is still unstable.  I am having considerable difficulty
reading and posting news.  :(

   [e-mail] (Gary Coffman) wrote:

>That's assuming the currents are flowing to "ground", Jack. But
>that's not what they do.  The current is trying to "close the
>loop" back to the source, Kirchhoff's law, and the source is
>inside a Faraday box called a transmitter.

Gary, this has nothing to do with Kirchoff's law.  Once the RF exits
the coax at the antenna, it will be attracted to *any* conductor that
has a lower EMF than itself.  It doesn't matter whether that conductor
is the antenna, the shield, the B- of the transmitter, or twelve
bronzed monkeys holding hands and singing Nowhere Man.  Anything the
RF can reach that will conduct, dissipate or radiate is fair game.

>The RF currents on the outside of that box can't get in, can't close
>the loop, and therefore that model fails.

The only model that fails is the one you've described, because it
doesn't exist.  Not only is the inner chassis of the transmitter not
the primary target of the current, it isn't even sealed. Take the key
jack for example.  One conductor is usually connected to the external
chassis by the frame of the jack.  The other conductor typically has a
bypass capacitor from the tip of the jack to the inner chassis.  So
what happens when you close the key?  Zappo!  The outer chassis is
connected to the inner chassis through the key and the bypass
capacitor.  This is also why the key contacts often spark when there's
RF on the chassis of the transmitter.

The point is Gary, the concentrically-shielded RF source you're
envisioning doesn't exist relative to currents flowing on the outer
cabinet.  Even if you don't agree with anything else, you should at
least abandon this concept.

73,
Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:02:00 1996
From: Chris Huber <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Combination cellphone, commercial 2-way radio?
Date: Mon, 8 Apr 1996 14:43:16 -0700
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4k6s0b$[e-mail]>


What you might have seen is a Motorola 800 Mhz ESMR trunked radio that is
proved by Nextel. It is digital with 1.5 to 2 watts and does full duplex
interconnect and 2 way radio. In northern California, Nextel system covers
from Redding to the north to Fresno in the south and the Bay Area. Not
bad for wide coverage.

I got to use one for a week, and it has different audio quality than FM, but
it was consistent no matter what part of the network you came in on.
 On 6 Apr 1996, Bob Witte wrote:

> The other day, I'm reasonably sure I saw a radio that was
> a combination cellular telephone and commercial grade
> HT.  I did not get a chance to find out the mfg or model.
> Can anyone confirm that this exists and point me to a
> manufacturer?
>
> Or maybe I was hallucinating again.
>
>   Bob KB0CY
>
> Bob Witte / [e-mail] / HP / EMD / [phone] / KB0CY / 7J1AUE
>
>
>

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Chris Huber
Telecommunications                              Voice:          916-734-0085
UC Davis Medical Center                         Pager:          916-762-6860
Sacramento, Ca. 95817                           Internet:[e-mail]
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++




From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:02:01 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Commercial UHF OEM Transceiver modules WANTED
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
References: <4jsoj8$[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 5 Apr 1996 19:37:15 GMT

In article <4jsoj8$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Zak) writ
es:
>I am working on an AVLS project in Asia that may require up
>to several thousand units and I have been let down badly by a
>supplier.
>
>Actually, we are using a conventional VF transceiver in the
>range 460-490 Mhz, up to 5 Watts FM.  This is the 'let down' product.
>Synthesized, 12.5 Khz steps programmable using jumpers or RS232
>download of frequencies.
>
>Can use a modified OEM board from a commercial hand-held transceiver.
>Don't need speaker, mic, chassis etc. just the board.
>
>Does Anybody manufacture or supply an equivalent radio ?  We need it
>to be about 100 x 90 x 20 mm (not including BNC female connector).
>
>Our requirement is for 3000 units by 1 June 96.
>
>This is as serious as a heart attack, because our supplier
>was supposed to have 4 samples ready on the 8th of February.
>As I type this, we are still looking at 3 weeks delay before
>we get even the SAMPLES !  So basically we are crippled by the lack
>of a suitable UHF radio.

Email fails to your address, so I'll offer a suggestion here.
Look at the TEKK KS-900. It fits your power and size constraints
fairly well, and is intended for board mounting. It's designed as
a data radio, used here for 9600 baud, runs 2 watts, and can be
crystalled anywhere in the UHF band. 800-521-TEKK is their number.
(I know that's no good internationally, but it's all I have.)

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | Due to provider problems
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | with previous uucp address
es
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | Email to [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:02:02 1996
From: [e-mail] (Raymond Sarrio)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Compare Rig Prices TODAY @ http://www.csz.com/sarrio.html
Date: 6 Apr 1996 06:25:43 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

The Raymond Sarrio Company's Ham Radio WWW site is proud to announce a
FREE Ham Radio classified advertising page at
http://www.csz.com/sarrio.html.

This new classified section will allow Hams to search for equipement with
the help of a search engine--no need to scroll through 100's of listing
before you find that special piece of gear. Plus, when you find the gear
your interested in, each listing comes with point-and-click e-mail access,
direct to the Ham that listed the item.

For those Hams with gear to sell, take note! It is absolutely FREE to list
your equipment within Ham Classifieds, and there will be no posting time
delays.  Your posting will go on-line, in our classified search engine,
immediately. All you need do is fill out a simple forms page, and upon its
(point-and-click) submission, your "For Sale" advertisement is on-line
within 1 hour. I will be purging the classified listing initially about
once every month, but that timeline will shorten as our classified numbers
go up. Give it a try, and let me know how you like it. 73's Ray
--
The Raymond Sarrio Co. a full feature Ham Radio Storefront on tth WWW at http:
//www.csz.com/sarrio in association with Brillar Enterprises http://win-win.co
m/brillar an Extensive Discount CD-Rom Catalog!



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:02:03 1996
From: [e-mail] (Terry Dunlap, AC6EF)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: CQ 80m CQ Maine
Date: 2 Apr 96 15:17:19 PST
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

I'm trying to finish up the 80m portion of 5BWAS and I'm down to one
state......Maine.  Are there any Maine hams out there who would be
interested in setting up a sked??  It can be either CW or SSB.

Please don't suggest I try a net.....I'd prefer to do it on my own.

Reply via email...

73 de Terry AC6EF
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:02:04 1996
From: [e-mail] (Scott Malm)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Dual Band Mobiles..which one..any coments, good or bad
Date: 6 Apr 1996 09:44:35 -0500
Message-ID: <4k600j$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Scott Malm)

I am going to purchase a dual band mobile rig. I would like to hear any
comments, good and bad from anyone who cares to make recommendations.
                                                               Thank You!
                                                                73's
                                                                Scott,
KB7RLY
Scott Malm


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:02:05 1996
From: [e-mail] (Jack Kovar  KE0AX)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Fix your Radioshack DX-390 yourself.
Date: 6 Apr 1996 23:56:32 GMT
Message-ID: <4k70bg$[e-mail]>

        Is you DX-390 receiver dead or very poor sensitivity on AM?
        The FM section works great?
        I just fixed mine for $1.39.
        I blew out the front end with a static charge into the antenna.
        I replaced one part and it works better then before with ECG
        replacement part.

        Let me know if you have had this problem and I will hel you fix
        it and also suggest a mod to protect the front end failures.
        Less than TWO BUCKS TOTAL one phillips screw driver to get radio
        opened up.
                                Jack Kovar
                                [e-mail]



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:02:06 1996
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Fix your Radioshack DX-390 yourself.
Date: Sun, 07 Apr 96 21:39:06 GMT
Message-ID: <4k9k5t$[e-mail]>
References: <4k70bg$[e-mail]>

   [e-mail] (Jack Kovar  KE0AX) wrote:

>       I just fixed mine for $1.39.

This reminds me of a very odd defect that was experienced by several
models of Sony AM/FM stereo receivers back in the 70's.

Sony had plated the tuning capacitors with some type of alloy that
would cause microscopically-thin strands of crystalline metal to
"grow" between the plates after a few years of use.  The strands were
totally invisible to the naked eye, but would short the capacitor and
cause the front end to go dead.  The cure was to either brush
between the plates with a very soft brush, or blow out the cap with
compressed air.

I was in the service business the first time I ran into this, and it
was exceedingly difficult to convince the customer that we had
repaired his stereo with air.  I finally had to show him the service
bulletin from Sony.  ;)

73,
Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:02:07 1996
From: [e-mail] (Bill Michna)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: FS 1948 ARRL Handbook
Date: 6 Apr 1996 16:37:21 GMT
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4k66k1$[e-mail]>

1948 Radio Amateur's Handbook $30.00 plus S&h good shape.
-
  BILL  [e-mail]
KB9ACI



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:02:08 1996
From: [e-mail] (CHB890)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: FS Quintron 350 watt base stations
Date: 3 Apr 1996 07:28:41 -0500
Message-ID: <4jtqtp$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (CHB890)

FOR SALE. QUINTRON 35 MHZ OR 43 MHZ 350 WATT PAGING TRANSMITTERS.
LATE MODEL7300 SERIES.
MAKE OFFER.
ALSO GLENAIRE IMTS 4 CHANNEL TERMINAL.
MAKE OFFER.
20 CHANNEL, 24 HOUR TAPE RECORDER WITH TAPE LOGGING UNIT.
MAKE OFFER
200   & 400 AMP 48 VOLT TELCO CO POWER SUPPLIES.
MAKE OFFER.

MAKE OFFERS BY E-MAIL  [e-mail]
OR FAX [phone]

ATTN: CHARLES

[e-mail]

Charles H. Beard
CSSI
FAX [phone]
TELCO 817-596-8767 ext 218


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:02:11 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: FS Sony CRF-330K 33 band portable w/recorder
Date: Sat, 06 Apr 1996 19:49:07 -0600
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

This is about a 1983 model in perfect working condition. FM/SW/MW/LW,
operates on D Batteries or include cigarette adoptor or ac. Best offer


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:02:11 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: FS:  Alinco DJ-580T Dual band HT
Date: Fri, 05 Apr 96 12:56:22 PDT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>


This unit looks good and is in excellent working condition.  Has Alinco Quick
Charger and original packing carton.  Have complete operators manual.  No 440
activity here so would like to trade, even, up or down for a 2 meter mobile or

2 meter all mode with comparable features. ie memory, dtmf, etc.
please e mail direct if interested
73's de jim/kf4alv



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:02:12 1996
From: [e-mail] (beard)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: FS: HP 608D Signal Generator
Date: 3 Apr 1996 21:03:03 GMT
Message-ID: <4jup27$[e-mail]>

I have a very good condition, both physically and functionally, HP
608D signal generator with a good copy of the manual.
This is the 10 - 420 Mhz model.

$150.00 and I pay shipping for continental USA

David Beard
WA4QGA



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:02:13 1996
From: [e-mail] (Bill Michna)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: FS: IC-22A 2meter
Date: 6 Apr 1996 14:18:23 GMT
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4k5uff$[e-mail]>

For Sale ICOM 22A 2meter radio with crystals.
Works fine ... $35.00 plus shipping.


-
  BILL  [e-mail]
  KB9ACI



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:02:14 1996
From: [e-mail] (DAVE.FORMILAN)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: RE: FS: IC-22A 2meter
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 09 Apr 96 14:37:00 -0400
Distribution: world
Reply-To: [e-mail] (DAVE.FORMILAN)
References: <4k5uff$[e-mail]>






Z>For Sale ICOM 22A 2meter radio with crystals.


Is this unit still for sale? I sent you private email on 4/8, but didn't
receive a reply.


Please provide more details as to type (HT, Base or Mobile), watts, CTCSS
capable, number of channels and approximate size if either base or
mobile.

It really doesn't matter to me as to type, etc., as long as it works
and I can readily buy crystals for it.


How much for shipping to my QTH (NJ)?


73 de Dave KB2VNL
---
  OLXWin 1.00a  If this were an actual tagline, it would be funny.


              .....oooooOOOOOo         http://www.intac.com/~cono
      __,-----. ---+_________#_     The Roy Hobbs BBS [e-mail]
     |________| |__|___________}          Node 1: 201-641-7307
      ooooo oo ~ ooO-O-O-O == oo\         Node 2: 201-641-3126



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:02:16 1996
From: Robert  H°yvald <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.swap
Subject: FS: IC706 & TM742a
Date: 3 Apr 1996 22:50:06 GMT
Message-ID: <4juvau$cm4$[e-mail]>

Getting out of Ham Radio sale!

For sale Icom 706 plus mobile brackets, separator cable, and
UT-102 speech module.  Excellent condition!
Extended TX/RX mod. and yellow wire mod. done
All docs, and boxes plus the hard to get schematics
Radio operates fantastic and is still covered by warranty with the
mods!
$1000 plus shipping
________________________________________________

Kenwood TM-742a for sale dual bander with decoder.
Great condition
All docs. and boxes
$ 580.00 plus shipping

Serious offers only and prices are final

E-mail [e-mail]
@ 5:39 PM,
on Wednesday, April 03, 1996


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:02:17 1996
From: [e-mail] (Dave Fortenberry)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: FS: ICOM IC-706
Date: Fri, 05 Apr 1996 14:24:31 GMT
Message-ID: <4k3ag4$[e-mail]>

IC-706 w/250 hz CW filter, uninstalled high stab osc, standard acc's,
box, manual. Great shape. Paid almost $1400 with the extras, will sell
to first $1100, shipped. No COD's. Leave e-mail or call 916-991-7014.

                                      Dave Fortenberry



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:02:18 1996
From: USCG TELECOMMS <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: FT-1000D AM Receiver Distortion
Date: Fri, 5 Apr 1996 12:16:48 -0500
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

For a few minutes after it's turned on, the Audio is distorted.  Also
hear a few squeals as I tune across the AM signal, in the AM mode of
course.  A friend of mine has the same problem with his.  Anyone know how
to fix this without going through Yaesu assistance?


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:02:19 1996
From: [e-mail] (William Collins)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: FT-50R
Date: Fri, 05 Apr 1996 21:28:20 -0600
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Howdy everyone,

I saw an ad for the new Yaesu FT-50R and wonder if anyone has any info on
it or has used it yet. Thanks in advance

--
Regards,
William Collins
Atlanta, GA
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:02:20 1996
From: LARRY JUNSTROM <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: FT-990DC FOR SALE
Date: Mon, 08 Apr 1996 22:43:50 -0400
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

YAESU FT-990DC 2 YRS OLD  EXCELLENT CONDITION.WITH 250HZ CW
FILTER,MIC,AND ORIGINAL BOX  $1150  CALL 904-779-9415 BEFORE 9 PM EST OR
E-MAIL [e-mail]   73 Larry KN4UB



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:02:21 1996
From: ANDREW JENTIS <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: FT50
Date: 7 Apr 1996 18:54:47 GMT
Message-ID: <4k931o$[e-mail]>

Has anyone own the new dual band HT from Yaesu? if yes, how is it?

andy n6xkn



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:02:22 1996
From: Jeff Goldman <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: FT50
Date: 7 Apr 1996 19:38:36 GMT
Message-ID: <4k95js$lcm$[e-mail]>

>Has anyone own the dual band HT from Yaesu?<

It's out in Japan, but won't be available in the US until around the first
of May. The Japanese version supposedly only has the 2m and 430MHz bands,
while ours will be a wideband radio (76-999MHz receive, with some breaks
in coverage).

                             -Jeff


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:02:23 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: FT736R performance on 70cm
Date: 7 Apr 1996 17:10:39 -0700
Message-ID: <4k9lhv$[e-mail]>

The QST product review of the Yaesu FT736R (May 90) said:  "but the
receiver falls apart at 432 Mhz."  Does anyone know if this terrible
blocking dynamic range performance on 70cm has been corrected?

Thanks in advance for the information.

Tom KD2MF


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:02:24 1996
From: [e-mail] (Chris Boone)
Date: 02 Apr 96 21:23:16
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: GE Master II queries
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

5*** Quoting Dana Myers to All dated 03-28-96 ***
>                     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> What IF does the Mastr II use?  The Mastr Exec/Custom MVPs I've
> tinkered with use a single 11.2MHz IF - my Murata catalog doesn't
> list anything quite like this ;-).
The MSTR II is the same rcvr as the EXEC II and MVP in most respects..
it is also a 11.2 IF ...


73
Chris
WB5ITT
--
|Fidonet:  Chris Boone 1:106/4267
|Internet: [e-mail]
|
| Standard disclaimer: The views of this user are strictly his own.



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:02:26 1996
From: Will Flor <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: GMRS Repeater Linking ???
Date: 7 Apr 1996 03:42:21 GMT
Message-ID: <4k7dit$[e-mail]>
References: <4k6lif$[e-mail]>

[e-mail] (William Rahl) wrote:
> Is it legal to Link GMRS repeaters? I  so how would you link them when
> your only assigned UHF frequencies. Unlike Ham bands you can link
> VHF to UHF . Any help appreciated.
>-

I don't know whether its legal to link GMRS repeaters if you use
a landline circuit, like a leased phone line, but to do so with
radio is probably a no-no.  Unless there are GMRS link frequencies
allocated by the FCC, you'd have to do it with some other radio
service - and the FCC is very unhappy with people who cross traffic
between FCC radio services, with a very few exceptions - and I
don't think this is one.

73 de Will KB9JTT




From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:02:27 1996
From: [e-mail] (SandDRal)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.shortwave,rec.radio.swap
Subject: Re: GrandFather left 2 Garages full of Stuff
Date: 1 Apr 1996 20:30:28 -0500
Message-ID: <4jpvvk$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (SandDRal)

Todate the 800 phone number is not working, good luck.


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:02:28 1996
From: [e-mail] (KD4GEU)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Help with older FT-530?
Date: 9 Apr 1996 04:15:23 -0400
Message-ID: <4kd6as$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (KD4GEU)

Hello:
     I have an older Yaesu FT-530 that's about 3 years old
and its one that only took the solder pad 13 mod. My question
is that it will only transmit up to about 456.000mHz but at
that freq it flutters at keyup, its quite about 454.000mHz.

     Does anyone have any suggestions to get the unit to
transmit up to 470.000mHz. I did the same mod on a friend's
530 and his will transmit up around 470.000 to my jealously.

     I have permission to use a 460 business band repeater,
and would like to be able to do so with the 530.

     I think the 530 is a excellent radio and hate to see them
discontinue it. Any help with my mod will be appreciated.

                      Thanks for reading this!
                          [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:02:29 1996
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: How to setup an dual computerlink via radio. Is it possible ?
Date: 5 Apr 1996 08:29:50 -0500
Message-ID: <4k378e$[e-mail]>
References: <4k1asd$[e-mail]>

In article <4k1asd$[e-mail]>, Bob Winingham <[e-mail]>
writes:

>
>I think you will be very surprised to know
>how VERY slow Electrons move through copper.ie
>from one end to the other.  and if using AC they NEVER make it. :-)
>---
>That DARN power compamy, selling me the SAME electrons month
>after month.
>
>73

That's why I wired in a group of relays. I have them timed to move
sections of wire along the same direction as the electron flow.

It's sorta like picking up part of the river in a barge and transporting
it downstream on a very fast jet.

If you zig zag a number 8 wire (the electrons move real slow in it) and
keep the relays close together, you can really speed up the electrons.
When I get em going really fast I feed them into a wire with a gradual
taper and that accelerates em like a hose nozzel.

After they're going fast, I shoot em up my feedline. That's better than
having em just sitting there jiggling around.


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:02:30 1996
From: [e-mail] (JJ Martin)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew
Subject: Re: How to setup an dual computerlink via radio. Is it possible ?
Date: Mon, 08 Apr 1996 07:32:17 GMT
Message-ID: <4ka50g$[e-mail]>
References: <4jp38s$[e-mail]> <4jt8cm$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

>[e-mail] wrote:
>>
>> Franky Noten <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>
>> >I would like to setup an link between 2 computers.
>> >What's the maximum speed I can transmit on ?
>>
>> The speed of light.

Then came the term VELOCITY FACTOR.   Where velocity factor, "v", is
expressed as a percentage by :

                                v = 100c' / c

where c' represents the speed of propogation in a particular
substance, and c is the speed of light in a perfect vacuum.  Both c'
and c must be specified in the same units. -Amateur Radio Encyclopedia

-73 de wk1v



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:02:32 1996
From: John Ferguson <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: HTX_242 Info wanted
Date: Wed, 3 Apr 1996 07:59:44 -0500
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4jt0n6$[e-mail]>

On 3 Apr 1996, Marc Purdon wrote:

> John Ferguson ([e-mail]) writes:
> >     Will the HTX-242 (45 watt 2M mobile by Radio Shack) work the MARS
> > frequencies outside the 2M band? Can it be modified to do so?
> >
>
> My HTX-212 will transmit from 143-149MHz. What I am wondering is: what is
> the difference between the HTX-212 and the 242? What new features are
> supposed to be on the 242?
>
    Thanks for your reply.  I guess I should have asked about odd splits
and if it handles them well, also?  Seems to be a nice rig at an
attractive price.  I assume you like it and find that it meets your needs.
Thanks again for your reply.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
 JFERG @ OUTLAND.DTCC.EDU           /      Bend it to fit.....
 John S. Ferguson K3PFW             /      Paint it to match.
 Delaware Tech. & Comm. College-Owens Campus, Georgetown DE 19947 USA
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *




From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:02:33 1996
From: [e-mail] (Marc Purdon)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: HTX_242 Info wanted
Date: 3 Apr 1996 05:01:26 GMT
Message-ID: <4jt0n6$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Marc Purdon)

John Ferguson ([e-mail]) writes:
>     Will the HTX-242 (45 watt 2M mobile by Radio Shack) work the MARS
> frequencies outside the 2M band? Can it be modified to do so?
>

My HTX-212 will transmit from 143-149MHz. What I am wondering is: what is
the difference between the HTX-212 and the 242? What new features are
supposed to be on the 242?




From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:02:34 1996
From: "Irina N. Borisova" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: I look for metal detectors creator for technical information exchange.
Date: 5 Apr 1996 22:33:02 +0400
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>




From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:02:36 1996
From: "Irina N. Borisova" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: I look for somebody interested in metal detectors manufacturing in Russia.
Date: 5 Apr 1996 22:33:05 +0400
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>




From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:02:37 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: IC-720A RX Problem
Date: Fri, 05 Apr 1996 15:04:56 GMT
Message-ID: <4k3cg1$[e-mail]>

The receiver in my 720A quits below 1.6mhz.  No bandpass filter change
should occur here so it must be something else.  Any ideas?

Thanks all,

Jeff



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:02:38 1996
From: [e-mail] (Gary Fiber)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Icom 720A RX problem
Date: Fri, 05 Apr 1996 13:26:57 GMT
Message-ID: <4k37ep$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

[e-mail] (Jeff Strailey) wrote:

>The receiver in my 720A quits below 1.6 mhz.  This doees not appear to be
>a bandpass filter problem.  Any ideas?

>Thanks...

>Jeff
>--
>                                             [e-mail]
Jeff,

I think the 720A has a low band antenna input for operation below 1.6
Mhz.  This was quite common in ICOM H.F. radios of that vintage. So an
antenna connected to the usual antenna connector will do nothing got
below 1.6 Mhz.

Gary



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:02:40 1996
From: [e-mail] (Edward Kravitz)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Icom 720A RX problem
Date: 5 Apr 1996 01:16:34 GMT
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4k1s9i$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

Jeff  Check to see if you've got a separate antenna jack for lowband on
the 720.


Ed K.   KB2NSP in OC, NJ



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:02:42 1996
From: [e-mail] (ROLAND STINER)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Icom 720A RX problem
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 07 Apr 96 20:33:00 -0400
Distribution: world
Reply-To: [e-mail] (ROLAND STINER)


To: [e-mail]
Subject: Icom 720A RX problem

J>The receiver in my 720A quits below 1.6 mhz.  This doees not appear to be
 >a bandpass filter problem.  Any ideas?

"Quits" meaning no receive at all or just poor sensitivity?
---
   OLX 1.53   -------------->    73, de NK2U    <----------------

 * Origin: CyberNet BBS   Lyndhurst, NJ (1:2604/151)

              .....oooooOOOOOo         http://www.intac.com/~cono
      __,-----. ---+_________#_     The Roy Hobbs BBS [e-mail]
     |________| |__|___________}          Node 1: 201-641-7307
      ooooo oo ~ ooO-O-O-O == oo\         Node 2: 201-641-3126



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:02:42 1996
From: [e-mail] (Michael Hodges)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: ICOM IC-2340H radio wanted
Date: 8 Apr 1996 21:00:14 GMT
Message-ID: <4kbuou$[e-mail]>
References: <4k9fau$[e-mail]> <4kajba$[e-mail]>

Hi, I'm looking for an IC-2340H radio. If someone has one they're willing
to sell or knows of someone who wants to sell theirs, please let me know.
Thanks!




From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:02:44 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Info on CW only xcvrs ??
Date: 1 Apr 1996 08:56:50 -0500
Message-ID: <4jonb2$[e-mail]>

In article <4ji6ll$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (George
W.
 Zachmann) writes:
>I am looking for a CW only HF transceiver with VFO.  I know Heath made
>an HW-99 model.  I believe Drake made one also, anyone know the model
>number ? Any others?
>                                               Thanks
>
>                                               George, KG6GA
>
George: Drake did not make a cw only tranceiver. They produced the 2NT
transmitter which was crystal controlled and matched up with their other
receivers.

Heath produced the HW 16 novice cw tranceiver but requires an external vfo
such as the HG 10 series. This rig runs on 80, 40 and 15 meters.

Heath produced the qrp series HW 7 and HW 8 and these rigs containthe vfos
since they are common components for receive.

Ten Tec produced the Century 21 self contained cw only transceiver. Nice qsk!

Ten Tec also ran off about 800 Argonauts. This rig included sideband as well.

 >
Hope this post enlighten you in your quest.

73's Dick K8WHA


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:02:45 1996
From: [e-mail] (Mark Monninger)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Info on CW only xcvrs ??
Date: 1 Apr 1996 19:22:00 -0700
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4ji6ll$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

Don't forget the Heath HW-16. It was (is?...I still have one) meant for Novice

use in the late 60's/early 70's. CW only on 80/40/15 meters (the Novice HF
bands then). It was sort of an xcvr...crystal controlled xmtr (Novices
were restricted to crystal control then) but tunable rcvr. You
could add the HG-10 VFO. There were mods for making it a true xcvr and for
changing the bands. Nice little rig for its time.

For more modern stuff, there are lots of nice CW only QRP (<5W output)  rigs.
Lots of good kits from the various QRP clubs. They're affordable (many <$100)
and are really good performers. If you really gota have more power, there are
some fairly simple amp circuits around for up to 50W.

There are a couple SSB QRP kits available too.

73...      Mark    AA7TA


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:02:47 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Info on CW only xcvrs ??
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
References: <4ji6ll$[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 31 Mar 1996 21:22:48 GMT

In article <4ji6ll$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (George W
. Zachmann) writes:
>I am looking for a CW only HF transceiver with VFO.  I know Heath made
>an HW-99 model.  I believe Drake made one also, anyone know the model
>number ? Any others?

I don't recall a CW only Drake, but the Ten-Tec Century 21 is a CW
only rig I believe.

Gary

--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | Due to provider problems
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | with previous uucp address
es
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | Email to [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:02:48 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Johnson Viking II
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
References: <4k9vhu$[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 8 Apr 1996 15:38:44 GMT

In article <4k9vhu$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Randie koc
hals,Toronto CANADA) writes:
>
>A aquaintance of mine mentioned that a "Johnson Viking II"
>would make a good first radio for HF.  I am not familiar
>with this unit. Can someone give me some input on it?
>I.E. Specs and and expected price for a used unit.
>
> Any info would be helpful.   Thanks!

Your aquaintance is a joker. This rig is affectionately
known as a boatanchor. It is a very large, very heavy
all vacuum tube plate modulated AM transmitter. It is
not a transceiver as is the norm today, so you also need
a separate receiver to use with it. An old Hallicrafters
or National would be a good match.

These old rigs can sound good on AM, but they're somewhat
dirty with respect to TVI and your neighbors won't be very
happy with you. Also some of the tubes are getting harder
to find and are becoming expensive. Since there isn't a
lot of AM activity on the amateur bands these days, the
phone contacts you will make will be limited to other
nostalga buffs who like to play with this old equipment.
It's over 40 years old. The transmitter will also do CW
of course, so you can use it that way. However, frequency
stability isn't up to modern standards and that can lead
to frustration.

One of these old rigs would make a fine restoration project
if that's what you like to do, but I would definitely not
recomend it as a beginner rig.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | Due to provider problems
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | with previous uucp address
es
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | Email to [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:02:49 1996
From: [e-mail] (Oscar D. Jackson Jr. M.D.)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Kenwood 922 Amp FS
Date: Sat, 06 Apr 1996 02:39:15 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Kenwood 922 Linear for sale.  Excellent shape.  Best offer.
[e-mail]
N77ET
KB4HAM


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:02:50 1996
From: [e-mail] (Oscar D. Jackson Jr. M.D.)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Kenwood 950SDX
Date: Sat, 06 Apr 1996 15:49:15 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Pristine 950SDX...........hardly used.........best offer.
[e-mail]
N77ET
KB4HAM


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:02:52 1996
From: [e-mail] (Collier Chun)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Kenwood TM-742A 10m question
Date: Thu, 04 Apr 96 07:04:58 PST
Message-ID: <4k0oes$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4jq79f$[e-mail]>

In article <4jq79f$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]@mail.mo.net says...

>Yes, with the extended receive mod the 10 meter module will copy 11 meter
>AM.  The squelch works strange by you can get your traffic reports. You
>can also copy AM all the way down to 15 meters.

Whoa, what mod are you referring to?  My 10M module will tune down there
(well, the DISPLAY shows I'm there, but I don't know if the PLL is locked)
but I'm unaware of any mod' which will switch in AM demodulation.

Incidentally, anyone else have RF feedback problems into their 10M module?
I can't have any 10M RF near the radio (like coming back down the shields
of the coax lines) or my transmitter locks up with a loud squeal.

- Collier



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:02:53 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: KW160 circuit desperately needed
Date: Tue, 02 Apr 1996 02:53:44 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

I am trying to restore an KW160 topband CW/AM TX but a previous owner
has removed a coupling coil in a can and I have no details of it.  If
anyone can help with a circuit I would be very gratful.  Naturally I
would cover any expenses incurred.

Dave Holland G4LDT



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:02:54 1996
Distribution: world
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Lo/Jack
From: [e-mail] (Bill Dunn)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4k24dr$[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 08 Apr 1996 17:48:00 -0640




TT>Could someone please Email me the carjack freq? I believe that it
TT>is 171.something MHZ. Thanks.



  All you will hear is DATA, even the Car Thief will find out TOO LATE.



 173.075 Mhz for the United States.

[e-mail]      :   EastCoast Paging Systems EC92
Official Scanner Guides     :   1-508-229-2288
1-603-432-2615              :   NatScan & NESN MA 1 APW
Metro Boston DMAT MA-1      :   Mass EMT-Mast 831884  N1/KUG

---
* CMPQwk #1.42-R2* UNREGISTERED EVALUATION COPY


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:02:55 1996
From: [e-mail] (ED WELCH)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Looking for past copies of 73 magazine
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 04 Apr 96 18:42:00 -0600
Distribution: world
Reply-To: [e-mail] (ED WELCH)

I'm just getting into radio and trying to find some past copies of 73
magazine.  If you've got some past copies gathering dust I'd like to see
about taking them off your hands.  Thanks.

Ed Welch
[e-mail]
Cheaha!!!


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:02:56 1996
From: Jim Van Scoy <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Match Box Wanted
Date: Sat, 06 Apr 1996 13:56:14 -0800
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

I want to buy a Johnson Match Box antenna tuner, either the 275 watt or
the 1000 watt version. Must be in very good operating condition.

Regards, Jim


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:02:57 1996
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: MFJ Artificial Ground
Date: 6 Apr 1996 01:13:26 -0500
Message-ID: <4k5226$[e-mail]>
References: <4k43ol$[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Gary Coffman) writes:

>That's assuming the currents are flowing to "ground", Jack. But
>that's not what they do.

Of course they do Gary. When dealing with common mode currents, the line
must be treated like a single conductor.

The path is from the voltage source (in this case the antenna) at the to
another low impedance point (in this case the rigs chassis and everything
it connects to). The concept is commonly misunderstood, but here's how it
works in the case of a dipole.
Assume a transmitter with a coaxial output connection to a dipole antenna.
Each half of the antenna is excited by the differential voltage at the end
of the coax. Since each half of the antenna has a low self impedance (it
is a 1/4 wave with an open far end)m at the feedline terminals, a finite
voltage will appears from each terminal to any electrical mass not charged
with exactly the same voltage.

You can prove this by touching the dipole at each side of the center
insulator. No matter where you stand, you'll get a burn! The rapidly
changing voltage tries to charge and discharge your body, and current
flows in your fingers.

The feedline is no exception, and since the center conductor of the line
is not connected to the rest of the world the same way as the shield,
current will flow on the feeder. Since the current has no equal and
opposite current to force it to the center of the cable, it appears on the
shield.

If the cable presents a low common mode impedance to the antenna,
considerable current will flow. If the common mode impedance is zero ohms,
the shield half of the antenna will have NO current at all. All of the
current that used to excite that half of the antenna will simply turn and
flow back down the outside of the line. The theoretical maximum common
mode current is equal to the current in the half of the antenna attached
to the center conductor. Each side of the antenna has around 30 ohms of
impedance, so with 100 watts of excitation the current will be 1.82
amperes with a common mode impedance of zero ohms. The feedpoint will see
a 30 ohm load.
With a common mode impedance of 30 ohms at the feedpoint, the center
conductor side of the antenna will have 1.49 amperes of current, the
common mode current will be .745 amperes, and the side of the antenna
connected to the sheild wil, have .745 amperes of current at the
feedpoint. The overall impedance at the feedpoint will be 45 ohms in this
case.

This is why changing the length of the feedline changes the SWR when a
balun isn't used at the feedpoint of a coax fed dipole, and the source of
the myth "moving the meter causes a false SWR reading"!

If the distance to the rig (or any other ground) is 1/2 wl electrical for
common mode signals, a low common mode impedance appears at the antenna
terminals.
If a "ground" or low RF impedance is placed on the feedline 1/4 wl from
the antenna feedpoint, the antenna sees a high common mode impedance and
balance remains pretty good even without a balun.

Kirchoff is completely satisfied, as he must be, at every point in each of
these systems.
73 Tom


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:02:59 1996
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: MFJ Artificial Ground
Date: Sun, 07 Apr 96 00:38:34 GMT
Message-ID: <4k7394$[e-mail]>
References: <4k43ol$[e-mail]> <4k4tth$[e-mail]>

Gary's article hasn't appeared on my news server yet, but I would like
to post some preliminary comments based on the text Tom quoted.

   [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) wrote:
>(Gary Coffman) writes:

>>Tom's mistake is trying to use transmission line theory on what is
>>*not* at this point functioning as a transmission line.

The concept of 1/4 and 1/2 wave lines applies equally well to single
conductors.  This is evidenced by the use of 1/4 wave single-conductor
decoupling stubs in microwave circuitry.

>>It is, instead, an unintended end fed 1/2-wave antenna. Now while it
>>is true that the ends of such an antenna are voltage maxima, that's
>>because the ends are very high impedances, and thus not much current
>>will "turn the corner" to excite this "antenna", so there won't be
>>much high voltage down at the shack end.

This paragraph entirely contradicts itself in trying to prove that a
1/2 wave conductor will isolate antenna currents from the transmitter.
First it states that because the 1/2 wave shield simulates a 1/2 wave
end-fed antenna, the voltage and impedance on both ends will be high.
Then it says that because little current will flow, one end will
actually be low.

>>OTOH, a 1/4-wave will be a low feed impedance at the antenna, thus
>>lots of current will divert down toward the shack, and will express
>>itself as a high voltage at the high impedance of the other end.

Another contradiction; this paragraph says the same thing about the
1/4 wave shield that the previous paragraph said about the 1/2 wave -
that one end will have a higher impedance than the other.  This time
it's true, but the rest of the explanation is incorrect.

Yes, there is a low feedpoint impedance at the antenna, but it's
created by the 1/2 wave dipole, not the shield.  The 1/4 wave shield
looks like a high impedance due to reflections from the other end,
therefore current does not flow toward the shack as claimed.

>>(And the other end *will* be a high impedance because the current
>>can't penetrate the coax shield or the transmitter case to "close
>>the loop" with the driving source.

This is also incorrect.  The RF voltage at the antenna is a free agent
that is attracted to *all* conductive objects with a lower potential.
That includes any object connected to earth or to the B- of the
transmitter, as well as any object large enough to convert the current
into radiated energy.  The latter is the "electrical mass" that Tom
often refers to.

Let's analyze the transmitter in this regard.  If it was totally
isolated from earth, the outer chassis would "float" at some RF
potential due to the connection between the chassis and the outer
shield of the coax.  This would be true regardless of shield length,
because in practice even the input impedance of a 1/4 wave shield
(at the antenna) won't be infinitely high and some current will flow.

However, the trasnmitter is not isolated from earth.  It is coupled to
earth by means of AC lines and other equipment.  Even if this coupling
is very loose, it is sufficient to pull the chassis to near-ground
potential due to the isolation provided by the 1/4 wave shield.

As a side note, earth is likely to be more effective at this than even
a direct connection to the inside of the transmitter.  Unlike earth,
the effectiveness of B- as a return path for common-mode current is
determined in part by the relative phase between current leaving the
transmitter and current arriving at B- by way of the shield.

It's also my belief that the outer chassis of a transmitter is not
well-isolated from internal grounds as previously claimed, and that
phase and amplitude differences are the real reason the shield current
cannot be cancelled by merely returning to B-.  At the very least,
this lack of isolation appears to be confirmed by the fact that RF on
the outer chassis will often create internal equipment malfunctions.

>>Whether the transmitter case is connected to Earth or not is largely
>>irrelevant as well.)

This statement can only be accepted if one believes that RF voltage
is not attracted to earth.

73,
Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:03:00 1996
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: MFJ Artificial Ground
Date: 7 Apr 1996 15:08:56 -0400
Message-ID: <4k93s8$[e-mail]>
References: <4k7394$[e-mail]>

In article <4k7394$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(WB3U) writes:

>This statement can only be accepted if one believes that RF voltage
>is not attracted to earth.
>
>73,
>Jack  WB3U

And that would be true if the earth had no conductive mass to charge and
discharge!!!
;-)

Tom


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:03:01 1996
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: MFJ Artificial Ground
Date: 8 Apr 1996 12:04:51 -0400
Message-ID: <4kbdf3$[e-mail]>
References: <4k93s8$[e-mail]>

Hi Gary,
In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Gary Coffman) writes:
>
>You persist in treating this wire as a transmission line when that
>is not how it is operating.

Of course it is! Even an antenna can be analyzed as a transmission line,
there are whole articles and sections of textbooks that treat antennas
this way. An antenna is really an opened up transmission line.
Electromagnetic Waves and Radiating Systems (Jordan-Balmain, Prentice Hall
EE series, second edition page 388 amoung many).

Broadcast towers (even dipoles and other antennas) are commonly treated as
transmission lines with a single conductor impedance (Zo). If a single
wire **can't** act like a transmisssion line, then how do long wires
function?

The truth is, the conductor is both a radiator AND a transmission line.

>I would ask you, what is the impedance
>of "ground", and between what two terminals are you measuring it?

The system is impossible to quantize, but in approximation the large
conductive mass of the station ground is a reasonably low impedance. If
not, we wouldn't be able to end feed wires at all without a radial system.
With changing voltage, any conductive mass has impedance.

>And why would that matter anyway? Transmission line currents must
>form a closed path, and this path is not closed.

Are you actually saying that I can't excite a single conductor with RF,
and have current and voltage appear for many wavelengths along that
conductor unless there is a "return path" from the far end?

>It is not behaving
>as a transmission line. It is behaving as an excited resonant 1/2-wave
>antenna structure. *The point where the excitation is applied does
>not change the standing wave pattern on the radiator.* It must have
>voltage maxima at its ends.

Let me see if I understand this statement. Are you saying, if I ground the
far end of a half wave antenna, the current maximum STILL occurs in the
middle instead of the end?

>[snip]
>>Gary's mistake is forgetting a half wave repeats what ever happens at
the
>>far end.
>>I'll accept an I'm sorry>;-)
>
>If you can demonstrate that this current flow on the coax outer
>is a closed path transmission line current, I'll say I'm sorry,
>or at least grumpily acknowledge I'm wrong. I don't believe that
>it is, so I don't agree with your conclusions. And yes, I know there
>are such things as single wire transmission lines, but that doesn't
>apply here since both ends of the line are not operating against
>"ground", and thus don't form a closed path for the transmission
>line currents to follow.

Are you saying I can't feed a Windom with a single wire transmision line?
After all, both ends aren't grounded.

>1) The outside of the coax is not acting as a transmission line,
>   and thus transmission line theory does not apply.

Antenna's act like transmission lines, and imperfect transmission lines
act like antennas. If what you say is true, connecting the far end of a
half wave long conductor to a low impedance (for example it could be the
near end of a 1/4 wave open ended wire, or a ground rod, or a radial
system, or a large conductive mass), will not change the current
distribution in that half wave conductor. We know that isn't true.

If I terminate the ends of a half wave center fed antenna in any low
impedance electrical mass (and even if there is no "return path"), your
"theory" dictates the center impedance would remain a current maxima. We
know that isn't true.

If what you're saying is true, I can put up a half wave dipole and
ANYTHING I do at the dipole ends won't change the current distribution or
feedpoint impedance!
73 Tom



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:03:03 1996
From: [e-mail] (RMS514)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Mod for YAESU FT 3000?
Date: 6 Apr 1996 09:37:12 -0500
Message-ID: <4k5vio$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (RMS514)

I am looking for the mod or mods for this new radio.
There are none in the latest edition of the Artsci book.
Any information would be greatly appreciated.


  Thanks  Steve


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:03:03 1996
From: [e-mail] (Dave Jordahl)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Mods For Alinco 610???
Date: 8 Apr 1996 15:22:11 GMT
Message-ID: <4kbav3$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

David,
  I also have the Alinco610. I don't see how it is possible
to get the 800 Mhz. to work, as this takes a separate module
that is not installed in the radio.  The control head does
contain the red and blue wires as listed in various mods., but
in this case hardware is also missing.
Regards,
Dave Jordahl

Tektronix Inc.
The views expressed are those of the individual and not Tektronix Inc.


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:03:04 1996
From: [e-mail] (Les Zaraza)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Mods for Kenwood TR751A?
Date: 8 Apr 1996 20:51:53 GMT
Message-ID: <4kbu99$[e-mail]>

Anyone know of any mods for the Kenwood TR-751A 2 meter
all mode? Kenwood bulitin board doesnt list any.

Tnx,
Les

--

_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
_/ Les Zaraza                  email : [e-mail] _/
_/ General DataComm, Inc.      [phone]         _/
_/ Middlebury, CT 06762-1299   N1HPF                  _/
_/    My opinions are my own, not my employer's.      _/
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:03:05 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: National HRO Wanted
Date: 4 Apr 1996 23:29:05 GMT
Message-ID: <4k1m01$[e-mail]>

        Wish to purchase a really mint or excellent+ HRO that is complete & original.
 Also looking for
speaker & power supply for same. Please e-mail. Dick Doremus


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:03:06 1996
From: [e-mail] (Dave Stuart ([e-mail]))
Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner,alt.radio.pirate,aus.radio,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.scanner,rec.radio.shortwave,uk.radio.amateur
Subject: Re: Naughty Rude Words
Date: 6 Apr 1996 03:24:38 GMT
Message-ID: <4k4o5m$[e-mail]>
References: <4jloui$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>


: --
:      Robert Garland                            NX3S @ N3ACL.PA.USA.NOAM
:      Hilltown Township Bucks County               [e-mail]
:      Pennsylvania USA                                       Grid FN20ii
:                    Hams do it bouncing off the "F" layer

We see that someone else in the world is taking themselves too seriously.

I have always heard that hams do it with big towers.

Also, teachers do it on the blackboard.

Also, chess players mate better.

What's naughty about that?

--
-- Dave Stuart
[e-mail]
University of Missouri -- Rolla

KB0SLY



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:03:08 1996
From: [e-mail] (Carl H Nord)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Need Geneave GTX 600 Manual
Date: Sat, 06 Apr 1996 15:49:07 GMT
Message-ID: <4k5p1a$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

Help,
I need a manual achematic etc. for this rig.
Anybody have any ideas.
Genave does not have a copy.
Thanks
Carl
WA1KPD



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:03:09 1996
From: Ron Thompson <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Need help with high SWR problem
Date: 5 Apr 1996 15:18:33 GMT
Message-ID: <4k3dk9$5mg@lambchop>

I have a mobile 2M 50W radio I am using as a base rig.
It runs off of a 20A power supply, and feeds a 75 foot
piece of RG-213 connected to a Cushman Ringo Ranger II
7db gain antenna.

When I adjusted the tuning rod, my SWR meter was hooked
up near the radio.  I got the SWR down to 1.1:1, but the
indicated forward RF power was 120 Watts.  This radio
only puts out 50 Watts.

In use, the radio can recieve another 50W radio, but
cannot transmit to it very far.  This indicates to me
that all the power is not getting out.

I then moved the SWR meter to the antenna end of the
feedline, and took another reading.  The SWR was
over 8:1, and the indicated RF power was about 50 Watts.

I unscrewed the shield from the feedline on receive to
see if there was a short, but the signal dropped.  I
also used a multimeter to check for a short between the
shield and the center wire, and it is OK.

This is the second antenna I have tried, since I thought
something was wrong with the first one.  Same thing
with both antennas, so I can rule that out.

I'm stumped.  HELP!

Please e-mail reply as well as posting.

KE6AGC
Ron Thompson
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:03:10 1996
From: Gregory Boren <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Need help with high SWR problem
Date: Fri, 05 Apr 1996 11:32:48 -0600
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4k3dk9$5mg@lambchop>
To: Ron Thompson <[e-mail]>

Sounds like you are exactly at a half-wave lenght multiple of coax, try
adding a 1/4 wave to the cable and see if it changes. Good luck.

Greg/N5SKE


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:03:10 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Need opinions on RS DSP filter
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
References: <[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 6 Apr 1996 00:00:55 GMT

In article <[e-mail]> Hank <[e-mail]> writes:
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win16; I)
>
>Radio Shack is currently selling a dsp filter/speaker for only $50.  Has
>any one used this thing?  Is it any good?

I've got one, the hetrodyne notcher and narrow filters work Ok, the
noise reduction doesn't. For $50, it's Ok, but it doesn't compare to
some of the better units. It does have nice loud audio output though.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | Due to provider problems
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | with previous uucp address
es
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | Email to [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:03:11 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: Re: Need Ten Tec model #
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4k1ffh$[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 5 Apr 1996 11:05:44 GMT

Model 405. 50 watts out for about 2.5w input. Switching done automatically
via RF sensor which activates relay. Runs on 12vdc. Woodgrain cabinet
matched the Argonaught 509 etc.

John Stroppel ([e-mail]) wrote:
: Anyone out there know of a Ten Tec amp unit used with a QRP rig to
: get 50 to 100 watts out.  If so what was the model #.  Thanks

: John WA0VYZ
:
: --
:  John Stroppel                         | Internet: [e-mail]
:  The University of Iowa - Hygienic Lab | Amateur Radio: WA0VYZ
:  Oakdale Research Campus, OH-M7A       | Voice:    [phone]
:  Iowa City, IA   52242                 | Fax:      [phone]

--
Steve Ellington [e-mail]  Louisville, Ky


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:03:13 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Opinions on starter equipmnet.
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
References: <447cc$112a27.28c@NEWS>
Date: Sat, 6 Apr 1996 00:16:09 GMT

In article <447cc$112a27.28c@NEWS> [e-mail] (Marci & Dan Mouer)
 writes:
>I am studying for the Tech No-Code license and am looking for a portable
>2 meter radio.   What do I want to look for in a radio?  Initially I would
>like to use a portable between home and car.  RS down the street has their
>HTX-202, can anyone tell me if this is a good or bad unit? They also have a
>model HTX-212 (mobile).
>Is there an ideal or minimum number of memory channels to be had?  I'm not
>100% sure but I think the 202 puts out about 2 watts, right? That should be
>more than enough for the local repeaters, right (Waldorf/LaPlata, MD area)?
>Any suggestions are welcome.

The HTX-202 is about the best 2m HT on the market. Its intermod
resistance is better than anything else out there thanks to very
tight front end filtering (which limits it strictly to ham band
only, it is not a wide coverage scanner). With a 12 volt battery,
it'll make over 5 watts. It is big and clunky by today's standards,
but it takes room to fit in those good filters.

The HTX-212 isn't so special. It's not a bad radio, but it isn't
a great radio either. There are a number of 2m mobile rigs that
are its equal or better. None of those better radios have a name
that begins with 'K' however. Alinco, Icom, Standard, and Yaesu
all make better radios (at least some models are better, even
that crowd has been known to turn out a squalling lemon).

My normal advice is that a HT is a specialist tool, for foot mobile
operation. For a rig to move back and forth between car and home,
get a real mobile rig and a quick release mounting bracket. Something
with good filters and 45 watts of power. You'll be happier, and those
who have to listen to you will be happier too.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | Due to provider problems
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | with previous uucp address
es
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | Email to [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:03:14 1996
From: david <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Private Squelch mod for Motorola p10 radius
Date: Tue, 02 Apr 1996 20:43:05 -0500
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Hi:
   I own a pair of Motorola "P10 radius" (1 watt VHF) radios, I would like to
know if
there is some mod I could install to get private squelch. Any help would be gr
eatly
appreciated.
Thanks
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:03:15 1996
From: Charles Bolland <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec,radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc.,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.space,rec.radio.noncomm,rec.radio.scanner,rec.radio.shortwave
Subject: Radio Broadcasting Database LW MW, SW
Date: Fri, 05 Apr 1996 23:30:26 -0500
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

A Stand alone IBM compatible Broadcasting Radio Station Database Program
for longwave, Mediumwave, and Shortwave.  Over 4,000 records included
already.  Completely, read/write and update-able.

If you would like a copy, send your Mailing Address - the one you
receive letters with - and your E-mail address.  The program will be
sent back via E-mail to you within 24 hours.

Your mailing address will be used to send you further details on a full
featured database program called Voyageur.   All information is
confidential.........!

Hope to hear from you.

Chuck Bolland
[e-mail]

P.O. BOX 18402
WEST PALM BEACH, FL 33416

KA4PRF


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:03:16 1996
From: [e-mail] (Ed Gallup)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Radio Mods.
Date: Sun, 07 Apr 96 04:55:33 GMT
Message-ID: <4k7hpg$[e-mail]>
References: <4k7c0c$dat$[e-mail]> <4k7e28$[e-mail]>

In article <4k7e28$[e-mail]>, Will Flor <[e-mail]> wrote:
>Robert  H°yvald <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>If making modifications to allow extended rx/tx on amateur radio
>>is illegal then why is motorola allowed to sell comm. radios that
>>tx in the amatuer bands (146-174) ???
>
>1) Making the modifications IS NOT illegal.  Transmitting outside
>amateur bands with such a modified radio may or may not be legal,

    You guys have totally ignored the issue of type acceptance.  While not
required for CAP,  type acceptance is required for most land-mobile radio
operation in the public and private services.  Using a modified ham radio in
these areas is illegal.

   Ed   WB6SAT   [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:03:17 1996
From: Will Flor <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Radio Mods.
Date: 7 Apr 1996 03:50:32 GMT
Message-ID: <4k7e28$[e-mail]>
References: <4k7c0c$dat$[e-mail]>

Robert  H°yvald <[e-mail]> wrote:
>If making modifications to allow extended rx/tx on amateur radio
>is illegal then why is motorola allowed to sell comm. radios that
>tx in the amatuer bands (146-174) ???

1) Making the modifications IS NOT illegal.  Transmitting outside
amateur bands with such a modified radio may or may not be legal,
depending on what non-ham licenses you hold.  As an example, I am
a Communications Officer in Civil Air Patrol, a civilian SAR agency
of the Department of Defense.  Four of my ham radios have been
modified (three by me) to transmit out of the ham bands, and I do
in fact transmit on CAP frequencies every day.  It's not illegal
at all.  If I *didn't* have the appropriate Federal radio license
to do so, it would be illegal for me to transmit on CAP frequencies,
but it *still* wouldn't be illegal to modify the radios - just to
key them up on the wrong frequency.

2) Motorola sells commercial radios that tx down to 146 primarily
because the 2m ham band only goes 144-146 in many parts of the world.
However, there's nothing wrong with using a Motorola commercial radio
on ham bands - I own *two* Motorola radios, and use them both for CAP
and ham.  Again, it's not illegal at all.

-Will Flor       KB9JTT        [e-mail]
Milwaukee Emergency Services Squadron
Civil Air Patrol




From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:03:19 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Radio Mods.
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
References: <4k7c0c$dat$[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 8 Apr 1996 01:54:08 GMT

In article <4k7c0c$dat$[e-mail]> Robert  H°yvald <722
[e-mail]> writes:
>If making modifications to allow extended rx/tx on amateur radio
>is illegal then why is motorola allowed to sell comm. radios that
>tx in the amatuer bands (146-174) ???

Making mods is not illegal, using the modified equipment for services
for which the modified equipment is neither type accepted nor licensed
is. Since no amateur rigs (excluding HF external amplifiers) require
type acceptance, it is not illegal to use a modified commercial radio
in the amateur service. The vice is not, however, versa.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | Due to provider problems
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | with previous uucp address
es
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | Email to [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:03:21 1996
From: Will Flor <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Radio Mods.
Date: 8 Apr 1996 02:42:07 GMT
Message-ID: <4k9udv$[e-mail]>
References: <4k7c0c$dat$[e-mail]> <4k7e28$[e-mail]> <4k7hpg$[e-mail]>

[e-mail] (Ed Gallup) wrote:
>In article <4k7e28$[e-mail]>, Will Flor <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>Robert  H°yvald <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>>If making modifications to allow extended rx/tx on amateur radio
>>>is illegal then why is motorola allowed to sell comm. radios that
>>>tx in the amatuer bands (146-174) ???
>>
>>1) Making the modifications IS NOT illegal.  Transmitting outside
>>amateur bands with such a modified radio may or may not be legal,
>
>    You guys have totally ignored the issue of type acceptance.  While not
>required for CAP,  type acceptance is required for most land-mobile radio
>operation in the public and private services.  Using a modified ham radio in
>these areas is illegal.
>

Once again, this is NOT true.  What you are thinking of is operating an FCC-li
censed
land mobile station, which does indeed require type-accepted equipment.  Using
 a
modified ham radio in this way is indeed against FCC regs (actually not the sa
me
as "illegal" but this is a very minor point.)
However, here's an example of when it IS legal to use a modified ham radio for
 FCC
land mobile bands: when your station is legal but NOT FCC-LICENSED.  You see,
my
Civil Air Patrol radio station is not an FCC-licensed station - since CAP is p
art
of the Federal Government, our licenses are issued by NTIA (the National
Telecommunications and Information Administration) and the FCC has no say over
 us
at all.  Unlike FCC licenses, NTIA licenses do not specify things like what fr
equency
we're allowed to use; the authority to transmit on a given frequency comes fro
m the
Federal agency *requesting* the license - in this case, Civil Air Patrol.  CAP
 has
official documents called "MOUs" with various public service agencies like pol
ice
departments, fire departments, road crews, etc. who use FCC land mobile radio
stations.
They must use FCC type-accepted radios - but under the terms of the MOU, when
we're
on a mission with them, to co-ordinate with them, we are allowed to transmit o
n their
frequencies - without FCC type-accepted equipment, since as stated above, the
FCC has
no power over us whatsoever.  NTIA does not have the concept of "type acceptan
ce," BTW.

Has any of this cleared this somewhat complicated issue up?

73 de Will KB9JTT




From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:03:22 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Radio recomendations and suppliers
From: [e-mail] (Kris Mcdonald)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 8 Apr 96 18:47:24 PDT

How does the Emperor TS-5010 compare to the RCI-2950?
Is the Emp a good radio?
Some people have told me that the Emperor is a piece of crap radio compared
to the RCI and I'm just trying to get a concensus opinion.

Also I need #s of some mail order places that sell 10m rigs and amps.


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:03:23 1996
From: Larry Bourdillon <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Radio Shack HTX-242
Date: 3 Apr 1996 03:31:03 GMT
Message-ID: <4jsrdn$[e-mail]>

The latest flyer lists the HTX-242 (2mtr. mobil) at $299.99 - presumably
it's the successor to the HTX-212. Has 41 memories instead of 30 and some
cosmetic differences. What else (if anything) is different? Anybody know?
Thanks

..larry



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:03:23 1996
From: AC6V <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: really cheap TNC
Date: 7 Apr 1996 18:21:48 GMT
Message-ID: <4k913s$[e-mail]>
References: <4k8ts4$[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]

Have you looked at (Baypac/Baycomm/Tigertronics ad in QST) or poor mans
packet on BBS's??
Good packeting
Rod

--
*****************************************************************
Hark! I Have Hurled My Words To The Far Reaches Of The Earth!
What King Of Old Could Do Thus ?  --- AC6V
*****************************************************************
A Man May Know Of The World Without Leaving The Shelter Of His
Own Home!
Loa-Tsze
*****************************************************************




From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:03:24 1996
From: [e-mail] (Gregg4111)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: really cheap TNC
Date: 7 Apr 1996 13:26:28 -0400
Message-ID: <4k8ts4$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gregg4111)

is anyone selling a really cheap TNC that I could use for packet???

I would like one that would work, but that is about it. I don't need a
manual, don't need any of the fancy schmancy stuff..


If it works please let me know, I may be interested in buying it!

Thanks!

[e-mail]
N9UCC   Fcc Licensed amateur Radio Operator


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:03:25 1996
From: [e-mail] (John Newman)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Req4Info: Link 1907 (tube VHF relic)
Date: 9 Apr 1996 05:15:56 GMT
Message-ID: <4kcrqc$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

An acquaintance of mine (without net access) recently purchased a
                        Link 1907 ED.2A
at a local hamfest.  It's an *old* tube-driven VFH monster, apparantly rigged
w/ Civil Air Patrol duplex crystals.

Of course, there was no documentation at all with it (it looks to be an
antique :o), so he's interested in anything anybody might know or have
stashed away:  specs, anecdotes, etc.

Please respond by e-mail and I'll repost.
(I just don't have the bandwidth to keep up with this newsgroup.)
Thanks in advance.

[e-mail] / KB0GOW


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:03:26 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Slams and Spams of new Hams
Date: Sun, 07 Apr 1996 22:24:29 GMT
Message-ID: <4k9fau$[e-mail]>

I've been an amateur radio operator for about 1 1/2 years now, and
been surfing this news group for about a year.  I have recieved quite
a lot of useful information while browsing.  The only thing I find
that  is  most distressing is the slams/spams of what appears to be
new operators who ask what appearto be "STUPID" questions.

I have seen a lot of literature which talks about an elmer to help new
hams out.  Why isn't this true on this news group as well?  Come on
floks, be a good  will ambassador here as well!  Help those who don't
know.  I ahve spent 15 years in both the Army as well as the Navy, and
as an instructor in both, I have started each class with the
statement-"The only stupid question is the one you did not ask, if you
don't know, ask and find out, any questions?"

IMHO.  R. Haig KB0PVU.



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:03:27 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Source For DTMF Audio Squelch
Date: Sat, 6 Apr 1996 16:11:08 UNDEFINED
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Summary: Looking for DTMF audio squelch add-on for older two-meter radio
Keywords: DTMF Squelch

        Could someone please direct me to a source to buy an add-on for the
audio output of a two-meter radio to give it DTMF (touch tone) tone squelch.
I have an old Kenwood TS-711A that I want to add squelch to so that the audio
will only become active when the proper tone code is received.
        I would appreciate a copy of any replies sent directly to my email address
as well as to this news group, as the feed from my internet provider is not
fully dependable.       Thanks.
                Norman   W3FYH



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:03:29 1996
From: Chris Boone <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Tampa Area Rptr Trustee Meeting
Date: 7 Apr 1996 01:44:15 GMT
Message-ID: <4k76lf$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

[e-mail] (mike fletcher) wrote:
>To all Bay Area repeater trustees or technical managers.
>
>Repeater trustees meeting April 9 at 6:00 pm.
>Tampa Red Cross chapter, 208 N Howard Ave
>Talk in on 147.105
>Sponsored by FGCARC and TBARS
>See u there..
>
>Mike
>Mike Fletcher  AD4HV     813-622-9102
>President,Tampa Bay Amateur Radio Society 95-96
>Florida Certified Fire Alarm Contractor # EF-0000028
>E-Mail to  [e-mail]   Homepage  **coming soon**
>If in the course of offering ideas or speaking my opinion, I
>should offend anyone, I apologize.  However, my opinion is my
>own and thus, it shall be...................................


Say hello to George WB4AQR for me IF he shows up and is still activce
with all his rptrs on UHF and 1.2Ghz


73
Chris
WB5ITT



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:03:29 1996
From: Greg Limeberry <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: TenTec Omni VI
Date: 5 Apr 1996 02:33:15 GMT
Message-ID: <4k20pb$[e-mail]>

Am searching for opinions of the Omni VI. What has been your experience?
What are the strong/weak points? How is the service and ease of operation?
Thanks in advance for your help!

Greg Limeberry



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:03:30 1996
From: Greg Limeberry <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: TenTec Omni VI
Date: 5 Apr 1996 02:33:19 GMT
Message-ID: <4k20pf$[e-mail]>

Am searching for opinions of the Omni VI. What has been your experience?
What are the strong/weak points? How is the service and ease of operation?
Thanks in advance for your help!

Greg Limeberry



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:03:31 1996
From: brian@nothing (Brian Kantor)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: test message
Date: 5 Apr 96 18:47:11 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

test message - ignore (testing the gateway)


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:03:32 1996
From: Greg Limeberry <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: The Perfect CW Station
Date: 5 Apr 1996 12:43:14 GMT
Message-ID: <4k34h2$[e-mail]>

Greetings to the group and help from experienced operators:

Am a relative newbie and am wanting to set up the perfect (or as close to
it as possible) CW station. What types of equipment would you suggest?
I've thought about the Omni VI. Comments? What other types of equipments -
including antennas? I appreciate being able to access the wise counsel of
this group.

Thanks in advance

Greg



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:03:33 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: The Perfect CW Station
Date: 8 Apr 1996 08:40:21 -0400
Message-ID: <4kb1fl$[e-mail]>

In article <4k34h2$[e-mail]>, Greg Limeberry <glimeber@mail.
ti
ma.com> writes:
>Greetings to the group and help from experienced operators:
>
>Am a relative newbie and am wanting to set up the perfect (or as close to
>it as possible) CW station. What types of equipment would you suggest?
>I've thought about the Omni VI. Comments? What other types of equipments -
>including antennas? I appreciate being able to access the wise counsel of
>this group.
>
>Thanks in advance
>
>Greg
>
My perfect CW station just consists of gear I can afford. With all the bells
and whistles on today's gear, the perfect station becomes a quest of personal
preference and the ability of your wallet to support those choices.

I really enjoy the thrill of DX ing with my Drake 2NT running 35 watts on
crystal control to a trap vertical. I also enjoy working QRP with my HW 8.
Of course my TS830s does a really great job also. It just really depends what
my mood is as to which station I get on the air with.

Good luck in your quest for the perfect station

        73's Dick K8WHA


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:03:34 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: The Perfect CW Station
Date: 9 Apr 1996 11:40:27 -0400
Message-ID: <4ke0db$[e-mail]>

In article <4kbmp9$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (PhilRut1) wri
te
s:
>In article <4kb1fl$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] writes:
>
>>I really enjoy the thrill of DX ing with my Drake 2NT running 35 watts on
>>crystal control to a trap vertical. I also enjoy working QRP with my HW
>8.
>
> Dick-- I'm with you, as I have both of these units on the air now. The
>only difference being that we've adapted a Heath HG-10 VFO to the 2-NT
>which has made it that much more enjoyable!
>
>  73--Phil (KB1GO)
You are definitely correct... I used to use the HG-10 VFO when I ran the set
with a Heath SB300 receiver. However, my external power supply (SB300) went
south to a new ham to get him started on the air. So I don't have an external
supply to run the vfo. I use it with the HW 16 novice rig at times. However I
keep getting a chirpy signal on 15 mtrs. Seem the OO's out there like to mail
me notification cards on it but they don't seem to want to tell me about it on
the air. For all the OO's out there... Yes I do have a regulated B+ line so
you can quit putting that cure on the notices :-}

 Thanks for the post Phil.  73's

            Dick K8WHA
            >


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:03:35 1996
From: [e-mail] (Jaime)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Tm 251 in 800 MHZ band ??
Date: 6 Apr 1996 19:54:41 GMT
Message-ID: <4k6i61$[e-mail]>

Please ,anybody knows how i can receive 800 MHz band ( cellular )
in a Kenwood  TM 251 ???

any reply I will be wondered ....

Thanks , my  E-Mail is [e-mail]



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:03:35 1996
From: [e-mail] (DAVE M . SCHERTZER)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Tm 251 in 800 MHZ band ??
Date: 7 Apr 1996 17:42:52 GMT
Message-ID: <4k8uqs$[e-mail]>
References: <4k6i61$[e-mail]>

No 800mhz mod avil but, remove Diode D416 to get
TX/RX fm [e-mail]



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:03:37 1996
From: gary <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: TS850 vs TS450
Date: 9 Apr 1996 19:43:37 GMT
Message-ID: <4keel9$[e-mail]>
References: <4kc5af$[e-mail]>

[e-mail] (John DeRuiter) wrote:
>I am trying to decide between the Kenwood TS450 and TS850.  I work
>primarily DX and am primarily interested in receiver performance.
>From the specs, there does not seem to be much difference.  Is the
>extra cost of the 850 worth it.  I would greatly appreciate any
>comments
>
>73 and Thanks in advance
>KJ7GU, John
>
I have both, and primarily use the 450 as a mobile/RV rig because of it's
smaller size. Both are very good, but the 850 definitely gets the nod as
a low noise receiver, and the ability to vary the passband response
really helps sort out weak signals. Good luck with your choice - you
won't be disappointed with either of them!

--
Gary....KJ6Q    *** I AM THE NRA! ***



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 09 17:03:37 1996
From: Brad Rehm <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: TS930S for sale
Date: Thu, 4 Apr 1996 10:21:50 -0600
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

John, WA5TOS, and I have a TS930S with internal tuner for sale.  The radio
has been serviced, with alignment touchoup, and works beautifully.  The
receiver has the crispness and cleanness for which the '930 is famous.

The manual and original carton are included (although the carton is
shipable, it is a little ragged). The price is $850, and we'll ship within
U.S.  We're in the Austin, TX area.  Call or reply to my email address:

     Day Phone: [phone]           email: [e-mail]
     Home Phone: [phone]

Or call John, WA5TOS, at 512-863-8632

73, Brad, KV5V



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:39:33 1996
From: /PN=Scott.C.Werling/O=wallace/PRMD=iadps/ADMD=attmail/C=us/@safe.ia.GOV
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: (none)
Date: 12 Apr 96 14:22:01 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

>From /PN=Scott.C.Werling/O=wallace/PRMD=iadps/ADMD=attmail/C=us/ Fri Apr 12 0
9:22:51 CDT 1996 remote from osiint.safe.ia.gov
Date: 12 Apr 1996 09:22:04 -0500
X400-Trace: US*ATTMAIL*IADPS
        arrival 12 Apr 1996 09:22:04 -0500
        action Relayed
From: /PN=Scott.C.Werling/O=wallace/PRMD=iadps/ADMD=attmail/C=us/@osiint.safe.
ia.gov
To: "/RFC-822=Ham-Equip(a)ucsd.edu/OU=OSI-INTERNET/O=WALLACE/PRMD=IADPS/ADMD=A
TTMAIL/C=US/"@osiint.safe.ia.gov
In-Reply-To: <"\"/RFC-822=199604102331.QAA22569(a)mail.ucsd.edu/OU=OSI-INTERNE
T/O=WALLACE/PRMD=IADPS/ADMD=ATTMAIL/C=US/\""@osiint.safe.ia.gov>
Subject: DSP reply
Importance: normal
Autoforwarded: FALSE
Message-Id: <werl0412091936aa*/PN=Scott.C.Werling/O=wallace/PRMD=iadps/ADMD=at
tmail/C=us/@osiint.safe.ia.gov>
P1-Message-Id: US*ATTMAIL*IADPS;IDPS3550 werl0412091936aa
UA-Content-Id: werl0412091936aa
P1-Content-Type: P2
Priority: normal
Received: from osiint.safe.ia.gov by iadpshub.safe.ia.gov; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 09
:22 CDT
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 1093

> Date: Tue, 09 Apr 96 12:29:00 -0400
> From: [e-mail] (ROLAND STINER)
> Subject: DSP UNITS
>
> Maybe you can help me with this question:  there is a delay between the
> signal that goes into the unit and that which comes out.  When you are
> sending CW, does that "mess up your timing" (if you send and hear the
> signal slightly after you close the key?)
>    OLX 1.53   -------------->    73, de NK2U    <----------------
> ------------------------------
Sri for not responding sooner, I have noticed no delay at my 10wpm rate.  Not
to say some speedy type 20+ may not notice it.  OTOH, I'm not tech oriented
but my question is this:
Is the DSP (this or any model for that matter) active on transmit as well as
well as receive?  I was under the impression it was for receive only.
Or I may be way off base on the impression I get from the above post.  If I'm
off the mark, I apologize.  But a very interesting question.

All answers/info appreciated.

73 de Scott N0XZY
[e-mail]           OR         [e-mail]




From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:39:35 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: *** Manuals For Sale *** - manuals.doc [01/01]
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
References: <4jvkb6$[e-mail]> <4ki01n$[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 17:42:04 GMT

In article <4ki01n$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Qwick) wri
tes:
>[e-mail] (Bobby Raymer) wrote:
>
>wtf is all that crap??  I'm serious... I need doc... and manuals...
>for peaking and tuning..  and also mod info  on Uniden 66,
> Ranger 2950, Cobra 29  23-channel   and most important..
>a Midland  ???  got it from walmart
>any help would be appreciated

SAMS has Photofact folders for all of these radios. As others
have noted, you shouldn't need to touch any of the adjustments
in these radios. They were aligned at the factory using better
test equipment than you likely have and shouldn't ever need
readjustment, even after repairs (unless the repair consisted
of replacing one of these adjustable parts).

There is a book out on converting some of these radios to
10 meter operation, there's a little ad in most issues of
QST. In particular, the Midland chassis is rather easy to
convert. Of course these are, I think, old AM rigs and not
of much use on 10 meters. If you had one of the 40-ch SSB
Midlands, however, it can be made into a good 10 meter rig.
I have one that I converted some years ago when the sunspots
were better.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | Due to provider problems
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | with previous uucp address
es
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | Email to [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:39:36 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: *** Manuals For Sale *** - manuals.doc [01/01]
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 22:34:07 GMT
Message-ID: <4kjqa1$[e-mail]>
References: <4jvkb6$[e-mail]> <4ki01n$[e-mail]>

[e-mail] (Qwick) wrote:

>[e-mail] (Bobby Raymer) wrote:

>wtf is all that crap??  I'm serious... I need doc... and manuals...
>for peaking and tuning..  and also mod info  on Uniden 66,
> Ranger 2950, Cobra 29  23-channel   and most important..
>a Midland  ???  got it from walmart
>any help would be appreciated

This area is mainly for "AMATEUR" Radio, hence the word amateur in the
group name.  Good luck.


           C. Dean Norris
      Amateur Radio Station K7NO
      e-mail to [e-mail]



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:39:37 1996
From: Steve K Brown <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc,uk.radio.amateur
Subject: -= IC-125 Need mods for 2M and 9600 =-
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 96 21:46:53 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

Hi,

I have recently obtained an Icom IC-125 High Band PMR radio, which I
intend using for 9k6 linking. It is a 5 channel, diode-programmable
synthesised radio of the upconverting kind, so should give excellent BER
performance.

I believe I need to change crystal X2 to 40.2166 MHz and retune to get
it into the 2M band, and fm X1 (21.4 MHz) with a varactor for
modulation.

Does anyone have any experiences of this set, and I would *really*
appreciate a copy of the circuit diagrams etc.

Here's hoping ;-)


Steve


--
#------------------------------------------------------------------------#
| Steve Brown   Voice: [phone]  Email: [e-mail] |
| Delta BBS - The Biz! [phone]  Free Access, Echomail, Files etc. |
#------------------------------------------------------------------------#


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:39:38 1996
From: [e-mail] (ROLAND STINER)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: 220Mhz Equipment
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 09 Apr 96 12:29:00 -0400
Distribution: world
Reply-To: [e-mail] (ROLAND STINER)


To: [e-mail]
Subject: 220Mhz Equipment

G>I'd like to purchase some 220 equipment of my own, but can't seem to
 >locate any. Can anyone give a recommendation as to what to purchase or
 >even from where... I know I can buy 200 equipment at a hamfest, I was
 >looking into new equipment.

I know that there is a mobile unit made by ICOM, the IC-38A and an HT
from ICOM, the IC-03AT.

Personally, I find that the IC-38A is a bit limiting with the memory
arraignment but you might be able to work around it if there are not too
many different PLs being used in your area.

---
   OLX 1.53   -------------->    73, de NK2U    <----------------


 * Origin: CyberNet BBS   Lyndhurst, NJ (1:2604/151)

              .....oooooOOOOOo         http://www.intac.com/~cono
      __,-----. ---+_________#_     The Roy Hobbs BBS [e-mail]
     |________| |__|___________}          Node 1: 201-641-7307
      ooooo oo ~ ooO-O-O-O == oo\         Node 2: 201-641-3126



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:39:39 1996
From: [e-mail] (Richard Zimmerman)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: 220Mhz Equipment
Date: Sun, 07 Apr 1996 12:45:14 GMT
Message-ID: <4k8fqk$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]


A friend of mine gave me a 220mhz radio to use so we are able to talk
without having to mess with the repeater gods in the area. Come to
find out, I like 220 a LOT as down here in Ocala, Florida, it seems
like NOBODY else uses the band but Butch (KC4LBG) and myself
(Richard KE4RIT).

I'd like to purchase some 220 equipment of my own, but can't seem to
locate any. Can anyone give a recommendation as to what to purchase or
even from where... I know I can buy 200 equipment at a hamfest, I was
looking into new equipment.

Any help is Appriciated.

Richard, KE4RIT




From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:39:40 1996
From: [e-mail] (Chris Weddle)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: 2N2156 transistor
Date: 10 Apr 1996 18:31:37 GMT
Message-ID: <4kguq9$[e-mail]>
References: <4kfes1$[e-mail]>

Colin Schmutter writes:
>I am looking for a source for 2N2156  transistors.
>If these are unavailable what would be an equivalent?
>Any help would be appreciated.
>Please reply to [e-mail]
>Colin
>VE7CQH

I ran this part number thru my ECG, NTE and SK cross reference programs.
Here's what comes back:

2N2156 = ECG213 = NTE213 = SK3012 = PNP Germanium/Hi Current/Power/TO-36.

Good luck,
Chris - N7RME


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:39:41 1996
From: Colin Schmutter
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: 2N2156 transistor
Date: 10 Apr 1996 04:53:21 GMT
Message-ID: <4kfes1$[e-mail]>

I am looking for a source for 2N2156  transistors.

If these are unavailable what would be an equivalent?

Any help would be appreciated.

Please reply to [e-mail]

Colin

VE7CQH



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:39:42 1996
From: Greg Limeberry <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: 3950 on the net?
Date: 12 Apr 1996 02:05:22 GMT
Message-ID: <4kkdp2$[e-mail]>

Greetings to the group:

I've heard that the 3950 group will be getting on the net soon (i.e. a
home page). I would be interested in contacting anyone connected with this
effort.

Thanks in advance,

Greg Limeberry



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:39:43 1996
From: "T.D.E." <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: 950SDX  for sale
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 1996 08:11:59 -0400
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

Oscar D. Jackson Jr. M.D. wrote:

> Like new Kenwood 950SDX for sale. How about a price?  It's not too high to p
rint, is it?


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:39:44 1996
From: [e-mail] (George Deamicis)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: AEA DSP 232
Date: 10 Apr 1996 21:05:58 GMT
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4kh7rm$[e-mail]>

I have had my DSP 232 for about two weeks and I cannot seem to xmit or
receive in ASCII or BAUDOT has anyone experience this problem? According
to DAVE KB7DCD at AEA Tech Support they are unaware of any problems. I'm
ready to take it back unless I can solve it.


       73 GEORGE

        N1JGE





From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:39:44 1996
From: [e-mail] (Ian Campbell)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: AEA DSP 232
Date: 11 Apr 1996 02:47:22 GMT
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4khrrr$[e-mail]>
References: <4kh7rm$[e-mail]>

In article <4kh7rm$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
says...
>
>I have had my DSP 232 for about two weeks and I cannot seem to xmit or

HI George,
I just bought a DSP-232 myself.  I have i working in ASCII and BAUDOT just
fine using both the audio AFSK output and the FSK (true FSK keying) outputs.

What is weird though is that AEA forgot to put a CW key output on the back of
the unit... Morse software works just fine, but you can't use it because you
can't get at it.

The received characters are displayed real funny as well (five at a time ??).
I also can't stay connected in PACTOR.....

Other than that, a really fine unit..

73,
Ian Campbell
VA3IC




From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:39:45 1996
From: [e-mail] (Peter Bealo)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: AEA DSP-2232... New S/W out there???
Date: 13 Apr 1996 20:29:20 GMT
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4kp2r0$[e-mail]>

Hi I'm looking for any new AEA DSP-2232 S/W that folks may have
developed/are developing. Is anyone doing independant S/W design for this
unit???  Is AEA doing any new S/W for this unit???

Peter WB2MJG




From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:39:47 1996
From: [e-mail] (Chris Weddle)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Akaline Disposal
Date: 9 Apr 1996 17:58:10 GMT
Message-ID: <4ke8fi$[e-mail]>
References: <4kdkfc$[e-mail]>

[e-mail] writes:
>[e-mail] (Lauren Schiff) wrote:
>>Hello,
>>I am currently researching alkaline
>>disposal/recycling.  Our search and rescue team is located in
>>Charlottesville, Virginia.
>>Does anyone have information on alternatives to
>>disposal?
>>Thanks,
>>Lauren
>I have to admit I am intreagued by your post. Alkaline what disposal?
>Batteries?  What does this have to do with Search & Rescue?  I can see
>it now... You are performing a search/rescue in the mountains but your
>battery dies... Halt.  Call it off.  "Give a hoot-Don't pollute",
>Back to the base men/women!  We must be environmentally/politically
>correct.
>C. Dean Norris
>Amateur Radio Station K7NO
>e-mail to [e-mail]

I imagine Dean has tongue firmly in cheek here? Personally I'm against
this recycling stuff, seems rather environmentally risky to me. All
those batteries sitting in storage for some far distant day when someone
discovers a use for them.

My advice is to not worry about it. Certainly it would be very rude to
leave one's trash despoiling the wilderness. Just pack it out and throw
it away. I buy AA and D size Duracells for use in my SAR radios and
headlamps, and routinely trow away the dead ones.

But of course, we SAR sorts often pick up trash when we're out there. I
only do this when hiking out 'tho, as I've more than too much to cwrry
into the mountains as it is!

Chris - N7RME


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:39:48 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Akaline Disposal
Date: Sun, 14 Apr 1996 02:35:23 GMT
Message-ID: <4kpkid$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4kdkfc$[e-mail]>

[e-mail] wrote:

>[e-mail] (Lauren Schiff) wrote:

>>Hello,

>>      I am currently researching alkaline
>>disposal/recycling.  Our search and rescue team is located in
>>Charlottesville, Virginia.

>>      Does anyone have information on alternatives to
>>disposal?

>>      Thanks,

>>      Lauren


>I have to admit I am intreagued by your post. Alkaline what disposal?
>Batteries?  What does this have to do with Search & Rescue?  I can see
>it now... You are performing a search/rescue in the mountains but your
>battery dies... Halt.  Call it off.  "Give a hoot-Don't pollute",
>Back to the base men/women!  We must be environmentally/politically
>correct.


>           C. Dean Norris
>      Amateur Radio Station K7NO
>      e-mail to [e-mail]

they make lovely earrings



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:39:49 1996
From: fiz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Alinco DR-150T or Ramsey Kit?
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1996 09:38:04 -0700
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4kk9m5$[e-mail]>

>
> Douglas R Davis ([e-mail]) wrote:
> : My little Alinco DJ-160T would not open the repeater, so I sold it to a mo
re
> : knowledgeable Ham. My question: Assuming my kit building skills are up to
par, what
> : quality of 2 Meter mobile would I end up with after building the Ramsey ki
t for $149.00
> : plus about $22.00 for the enclosure?
> : Would I be better off just to buy the DR-150T alinco 2 Meter Mobile for $4
79.00?
> : (Amateur Electronic Supply)
>

$479?!, why don't you shop around and buy a nice 2 meter mobile for $250-300?
I take it
you are looking at the price listed in the catalog and haven't called and aske
d for
the 'actual' price yet. I don't know why the bone headed places don't list the
 real
price to begin with. It would make deciding what to buy a lot easier. I think
HRO finally
got real prices listed on their WEB page.

ttfn  fiz (KG0YG)


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:39:50 1996
From: [e-mail] (Scott Rosenfeld NF3I)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Alinco DX-70T CW filter
Date: 10 Apr 1996 15:12:59 GMT
Message-ID: <4kgj5r$[e-mail]>

I ran into the Sales Manager when at the Timonium hamfest.

The DX-70T's CW filter doesn't sound particularly sharp
because it's a CERAMIC filter as opposed to a crystal
filter.  Apparently, they couldn't get a crystal lattice
filter small enough to fit inside the radio.

It works pretty well, but is not a lattice filter; you can
tell.

He also avowed no knowledge of the radio being able to
go up to 2m, although people claim there's something
like "144" on the PC board....
--
* Scott Rosenfeld NF3I Burtonsville, MD FM19  QRV 80-10/6/2/440 *
*** VHF @ <25w, HF @ <5w *** Save a cake, pound BRASS instead ***
* 138 cfd with dipoles * QRP-L #147 QRP ARCI #9054 DXCC/WAS/WAC *
* 301-549-1022 h / 301-982-1015 w * 145.490-  147.225+ PL 156.7 *


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:39:52 1996
From: F. Kevin Feeney <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Alinco DX-70T CW filter
Date: 11 Apr 1996 19:49:12 GMT
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4kjnno$[e-mail]>
References: <4kgj5r$[e-mail]>

In article <4kgj5r$[e-mail]> Scott Rosenfeld NF3I,
[e-mail] writes:
>I ran into the Sales Manager when at the Timonium hamfest.
>
>The DX-70T's CW filter doesn't sound particularly sharp
>because it's a CERAMIC filter as opposed to a crystal
>filter.  Apparently, they couldn't get a crystal lattice
>filter small enough to fit inside the radio.

Then where does ICOM get the 500hz and 250hz filters for the 706? Doesn't
the TS-50 (a very nearly identical box) have a narrow filter option too?

Alinco advertised it as having a 500 Hz cw filter. I measured the
response on mine, and it's about 1.6 khz wide at -6 db.  500 Hz cw
filters have been a pretty standard quantity on ham rigs for the last 10
years or so - if they weren't going to include one, they shouldn't have
advertised it as having one. I can't think of any way you could
characterize what they have for a narrow filter in there as being 500 hz
wide - unless you measured at the -0.1 db points maybe. Saying it had a
500 hz cw filter when in fact it doesn't is pretty low. A lack of a
narrow filter isn't an insignificant issue - it's important for anything
but the most casual cw operating, and very useful for digital modes.

It was instructive reading the review that 73 mag gave it - they
mentioned something like the 'sharp cw filter', blah-de-blah. By that
point I'd already talked to Alinco and found out about the bogus filter.
Reading over the section in the review on cw operating and the glowing
report,  I realized the reviewer apparently never opened the box. The QST
review in comparison did point up the problem.
>
>It works pretty well, but is not a lattice filter; you can
>tell.

To me it just sounds like a hi-cut, as if they had tacked a cap across
the audio channel to drop a little of the high frequency hiss. If you
listen to a croweded frequency and switch the narrow filter in and out,
you can still hear all the signals, but the background noise changes. :-(

You could put a better *audio* filter in than what they have - even the
cheap little RS DSP box has much better filtering in it's cw mode.
Unfortunately adding an external audio filter for CW adds another box of
near equal size - nullifying the whole concept of a small
multimode/multi-role radio.

Bottom line, it's still a good radio for lots of other uses - it has a
decent receiver and always gets good audio reports on transmit. But if I
had had the truth when I was making the selection, that there really
wasn't a 500 hz cw filter and no possibility of installing one optionally
- I'd have made another choice. Now I have to read all advertising from
Alinco with a big grain of salt. Fooled me once....

73 de Kevin, WB2EMS
"When I was a child, mommy told me not to talk to strangers.
 Now that I'm a ham, it's my hobby! "


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:39:53 1996
From: [e-mail] (Jim Stahl)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: AM reception on FT-2200
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 96 11:08:28 EDT


Is there a secret trick to let the Yaesu FT-2200 use the AM
detector on frequenies above 140 MHz?

I'd like to be able use it for line noise chasing using a 2 meter
yagi, whose pattern is going to be much better in the band than 4
MHz below its design frequency.

Thanks,

Jim   K8MR       [e-mail]



----------------------------
Jim Stahl
InterNet: [e-mail]
Basic Amateur Radio Frequency, BARF-80 +1 216/237-8208
"Totally devoted to Amateur Radio" - 24 Hrs a day 8/N/1 14.4k-300 baud


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:39:54 1996
From: [e-mail] (Walter R Francis)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Anybody have an IC-2000H???
Date: 08 Apr 96 20:43:46 -500
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4k3880$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]


On 05-Apr-96 08:46:40, bumologist articulated:

>Anybody out there have an Icom Ic2000H?If you do,are you having a problem
>with intermod.I had a Yaesu FT2400 and it was much better.Icom claims in
>the ad  "Highly Intermod Resistant".Compared to what?My Bearcat 9000 is
>better than the 2000 is by far.Anybody else having problems???Thanks..

OH yeah..  A friend (WD4EJA) purchased this radio to replace his frail TS700
for daily chatting and mobile work, and he couldn't even receive repeaters
until he purchased a PAR filter.

I too wonder what the heck the (NO INTERMOD) symbol means in their
advertisement!

--
-.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.. .
.  Walter Francis                                               _. KT4LH  .
-                 HP48GX  Alinco DJ580  Icom 281  Kenwood 530S o:o        -
.  [e-mail]                                   Life begins on 80  .
--... ...-- --... ...-- --... ...-- --... ...-- --... ...-- --... ...--  ..



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:39:55 1996
From: [e-mail] (Jay B)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Attic antenna ideas?
Date: 14 Apr 1996 00:20:06 -0400
Message-ID: <4kpudm$[e-mail]>
References: <4ke4al$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Jay B)

i'd move into a bigger apartment, and install a rhombic


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:39:56 1996
From: Cliff Soderback <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Beldon 9913
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 1996 11:01:43 -0700
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4kgoto$[e-mail]>
To: Scott Ryan <[e-mail]>

Scott Ryan wrote:
>
> Where can I buy (mailorder) Beldon 9913?  I have heard that it is the
> best for long runs & that it is expensive.  How much a foot?

 Scott:
         Beldon 9913 is inexpensive, but it has some serious drawbacks.
First: it requires special connectors because the center conductor is slightly
larger(9 gauge) than RG-8.

Second: Mechanically 9913 is rather poor. The outer braid is VERY fragile
and makes poor connection to the connectors. I have used 9913 for several
years and even with the supposed improved connectors have had connections
break. The inner conductor is not located very well with the small plastic
string and is uneven in its impedence.

 The LMR series of cables are much better mechanically and are availible at
most 2-way suppy houses.

 If you need good transmission line use any of the available hardlines, they
cost a little more for the cable and connectors but in the long you will have
better connections and lower losses.

                                  Cliff, W7VVA


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:39:59 1996
From: Cliff Soderback <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Beldon 9913
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 1996 19:45:20 -0700
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4kgoto$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4khlum$[e-mail]>
To: Chris Weddle <[e-mail]>

Chris Weddle wrote:
>
> Cliff Soderback <[e-mail]> writes:
> >Scott Ryan wrote:
> >>Where can I buy (mailorder) Beldon 9913?  I have heard that it is the
> >>best for long runs & that it is expensive.  How much a foot?
> >Scott:
> >Beldon 9913 is inexpensive, but it has some serious drawbacks.
> >First: it requires special connectors because the center conductor is sligh
tly
> >larger(9 gauge) than RG-8.
> >Second: Mechanically 9913 is rather poor. The outer braid is VERY fragile
> >and makes poor connection to the connectors. I have used 9913 for several
> >years and even with the supposed improved connectors have had connections
> >break. The inner conductor is not located very well with the small plastic
> >string and is uneven in its impedence.
> >The LMR series of cables are much better mechanically and are availible at
> >most 2-way suppy houses.
> >If you need good transmission line use any of the available hardlines, they
> >cost a little more for the cable and connectors but in the long you will ha
ve
> >better connections and lower losses.
> >Cliff, W7VVA
>
> Interesting evaluation. I used a Belden 9913 equivilent sold by Pasternak
> under their name for a variety of things, and have been very pleased with
> it. I bought a 500' roll for $182 on sale about 2 years ago. I am curious
> what connectors you are refering to as being poor choices with this cable.
> As all my applications have been VHF, I've been using silver/teflon PL259
> connectors. These go together very nicely. Will be putting up some VHF/UHF
> antennas on the house this spring and expect to use this cable for it. Some
> of these antenns will be rotatable beams, so pigtails of RG213 are planned
> for the flexibility concern.
>
> Chris - N7RME

 Chris:
        I have found NO "N" connectors that gave satisfactory results, due
to mechanical problems. Some of the PL-259 types have larger holes in the
center pin than others. On the smaller ones the center conductor of the
9913 is too large to fit without some modification. When using 9913 outside
be sure that the connectors are taped and water tight. The water can literally
fill the transmission line. The problem on the connectors is that the outer
braid is so flimsy that very little of it comes in contact with the connector.

                                Cliff ,W7VVA


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:40:01 1996
From: [e-mail] (Chris Weddle)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Beldon 9913
Date: 11 Apr 1996 01:06:30 GMT
Message-ID: <4khlum$[e-mail]>
References: <4kgoto$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

Cliff Soderback <[e-mail]> writes:
>Scott Ryan wrote:
>>Where can I buy (mailorder) Beldon 9913?  I have heard that it is the
>>best for long runs & that it is expensive.  How much a foot?
>Scott:
>Beldon 9913 is inexpensive, but it has some serious drawbacks.
>First: it requires special connectors because the center conductor is slightl
y
>larger(9 gauge) than RG-8.
>Second: Mechanically 9913 is rather poor. The outer braid is VERY fragile
>and makes poor connection to the connectors. I have used 9913 for several
>years and even with the supposed improved connectors have had connections
>break. The inner conductor is not located very well with the small plastic
>string and is uneven in its impedence.
>The LMR series of cables are much better mechanically and are availible at
>most 2-way suppy houses.
>If you need good transmission line use any of the available hardlines, they
>cost a little more for the cable and connectors but in the long you will have
>better connections and lower losses.
>Cliff, W7VVA

Interesting evaluation. I used a Belden 9913 equivilent sold by Pasternak
under their name for a variety of things, and have been very pleased with
it. I bought a 500' roll for $182 on sale about 2 years ago. I am curious
what connectors you are refering to as being poor choices with this cable.
As all my applications have been VHF, I've been using silver/teflon PL259
connectors. These go together very nicely. Will be putting up some VHF/UHF
antennas on the house this spring and expect to use this cable for it. Some
of these antenns will be rotatable beams, so pigtails of RG213 are planned
for the flexibility concern.

Chris - N7RME


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:40:02 1996
From: Madjid <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Can a cell phn be reprog to opp as a ham?
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 1996 00:07:04 -0700
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4k0hjd$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

>
> On 4 Apr 1996 13:07:57 GMT, [e-mail] (Robin Pickering)
> wrote:
>
> >I would like to know if a cell phone can be altered so as to change the pll
> >frequencies to get it to opperate in the 2m range.
> >I know cells opperate at about around 900mhz, with an IF around 40mhz.
> >
> >Can a cell be re programed (along with a xtal change with the pll ref
> >signal) so as to get it to opperate as a 2m ham radio?
> >
> >I know a pll can be set to different ranges by a xtal change and different
> >modulus numbers; however what conserns me are all the tuned circuits in the
> >intial RF input and the output stage. If it can be done by reprogram the
> >eprom in the phone and a few simple component changes I'd shure like to tak
e
> >a crak at it.
> >
> >Please respond with any ideas or advice you can give!
> >Thanks
> >
> >
>

Some OLD cell-phone (the portable type) can be modified
for the 1Ghz band but it is not easy. Some VE2's did it.

The new models are very difficult (impossible) to modify:
 Surface mount.
 Power Modules Hybrids designed for Cell Phone bands can't be pulled
 to higher frequency without dropping dead, etc..

Mr kc5afm No question is stupid, just the answers !


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:40:03 1996
From: [e-mail] (Qwick)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: CB MODS NEEDED
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 1996 23:42:27 GMT
Message-ID: <4kh9op$[e-mail]>

I need mods for the following:
Uniden 66
Ranger 2950
Cobra 29  23-channel
and most important.. Midland  ???  a cheapy from walmart
Any other info on linears or amplifiers would be of great help too.
Thanks




From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:40:04 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: CB MODS NEEDED
Date: 11 Apr 1996 15:07:13 GMT
Message-ID: <4kj771$[e-mail]>
References: <4kh9op$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

In <4kh9op$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Qwick) writes:
>I need mods for the following:
>Uniden 66
>Ranger 2950
>Cobra 29  23-channel
>and most important.. Midland  ???  a cheapy from walmart
>Any other info on linears or amplifiers would be of great help too.
>Thanks
>
>

Modifing CB's for use in the CB band is illegal.  So is the use of power amps.
You are on the wrong newsgroup for that information anyhow.

Try rec.radio.cb  You'll get your answers there.

 Good luck,
   Steve W.
     N2RWE


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:40:05 1996
From: [e-mail] (Bill Paul)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: CB MODS NEEDED
Date: 11 Apr 1996 03:38:05 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4kh9op$[e-mail]>

In article <4kh9op$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Qwick) wrote:

> I need mods for the following:
> Uniden 66
> Ranger 2950
> Cobra 29  23-channel
> and most important.. Midland  ???  a cheapy from walmart
> Any other info on linears or amplifiers would be of great help too.
> Thanks
Yea, there's a good book covering most of the models you mentioned. I
belive it is called "CQ for newbies" by U.R. Trolling.

-BP

----------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Paul      KF6BBL      San Diego,CA       [e-mail]
----------------------------------------------------------------


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:40:06 1996
From: [e-mail] (Bill Paul)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: cellular phones
Date: 13 Apr 1996 01:13:53 GMT
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4km1j1$[e-mail]>

In article <4km1j1$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] wrote:

> I have been given a cellular phone (brand name PUlsar - a Canadian tire
> Brand). It was manufactured by Modar Communications Inc. USA. The model is
> 12325.
> What I would like to know is - are there any mods (or key stroke sequences)
> that will nable me to use the phone as a scanner? Failing that, what mods
> would be necessary to change its operating frequency to the 900 meg ham band
?

Somebody should write an FAQ on what you could do with an old cell phone.
It would be really short or really comical.

Anyway, I can alsmost gaurantee there are no keyboard mods to do anything
with a cell phone besides make cell phone calls. The company that wrote
the code in the phone probably wouldn't want to spend hundreds of extra
man hours on a 'hidden' feature' that has no additional benefit to their
end users.

As far as your other mods, the chances of modifying the phone to work
900Mhz are pretty slim as well.

Big problem #1: The phone's RF section will be optimized to transmit on
824 - 849 MHz. If it could be re-tuned to a higher frequency, it would be
a very poor performer in the 900 MHz amateur band. You would be better off
building your own RF section.

Big problem #2: There is probably a PLL controlled by a microprocessor
that you will have to reprogram. That is assuming it runs code from an
PROM that you can remove and reprogram. It may have One Time Programmable
(OTP) memory built in the processor, so you can pretty much toss that CPU
in the trash, and redesign the entire digital section around another CPU
that you can program yourself (not an easy task -don't forget about the SW
engineer that would need a couple of hundred hours just to add your
scanner function)

Big problem #3: The display -Assuming you want some useful information on
the display like what frequency you're listening to, you'll have to
understand how to program or control the display. LCDs typically have
there own little controller with it's own command language. You'll need
information on that )not easy either -you probably stand a better chance
on getting photo's f alien from the white house then info on a propietary
LCD!)

I could keep going with more gory details, but I think you get the point.

So what are you left with?, A keypad, a microphone, a speaker, a battery,
a handy little case, and an antenna; not much.

-BP

----------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Paul      KF6BBL      San Diego,CA       [e-mail]
----------------------------------------------------------------


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:40:08 1996
From: [e-mail] (James W. KELLEY)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Coax Shield Current (Was Re: MFJ Artificial Ground)
Date: 9 Apr 1996 17:08:37 GMT
Message-ID: <4ke5il$[e-mail]>
References: <4k43ol$[e-mail]> <4k7394$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4kaua0$[e-mail]>

In article <4kaua0$[e-mail]>,
WB3U <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>Gary, no offense, but this couldn't be more ambiguous.  Voltage is
>attracted to all unlike voltages.
>
>Also, unless you believe that a charge on an object is imaginary,
>voltage is indeed a substance.  It is the "essential nature" of
>the objects under discussion.  We can feel it, we can see its effects,
>and we can measure it.
>
>73,
>Jack  WB3U

Ben Franklin couldn't have said it any better!














From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:40:09 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Coax Shield Current (Was Re: MFJ Artificial Ground)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
References: <4k43ol$[e-mail]> <4k7394$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4kaua0$[e-mail]> <4ke5il$[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 1996 18:29:37 GMT

In article <4ke5il$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (James W
. KELLEY) writes:
>In article <4kaua0$[e-mail]>,
>WB3U <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>
>>Gary, no offense, but this couldn't be more ambiguous.  Voltage is
>>attracted to all unlike voltages.
>>
>>Also, unless you believe that a charge on an object is imaginary,
>>voltage is indeed a substance.  It is the "essential nature" of
>>the objects under discussion.  We can feel it, we can see its effects,
>>and we can measure it.
>>
>>73,
>>Jack  WB3U
>
>Ben Franklin couldn't have said it any better!

Except that Ben did say it better. He knew that only *charge*
moves, and voltage is what moves it. I expanded on this in
another post, complete with math. We cannot feel voltage,
we can feel currents driven by a potential difference (voltage).
We can't see voltage, we can only see the current flow (spark)
caused by the potential difference. And we can't measure voltage,
we can only infer its presence by measuring the current flow
it causes through a meter movement. All we can directly sense is
charge and its flow, just as we can sense a falling rock. We
can *infer* that something is making it fall, in this case
a gravitational potential, and infer the value of that potential
by the acceleration of the rock, but we can't alter or move
or measure the potential directly.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | Due to provider problems
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | with previous uucp address
es
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | Email to [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:40:10 1996
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Coax Shield Current (Was Re: MFJ Artificial Ground)
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 96 06:48:50 GMT
Message-ID: <4kihhj$[e-mail]>
References: <4kdkph$[e-mail]> <4keeoc$[e-mail]>

   [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) wrote:

>The return path can be either "displacement current" or conduction
>current. There doesn't need to be a ground plane or opposing
>conductor.

Actually, there doesn't need to be a return path either.  This concept
of a "loop" is being misapplied and is absolutely wrong.

Current at the output connector of the transmitter will be *forced* to
be equal and opposite by the fact that a coaxial cable is attached.
Even if the center conductor is disconnected at the antenna, the
current within the coax will still be equal and opposite.  This is
what satisfies Kirchoff in terms of the current supplied by the
opposing poles of the transmitter.

It's also what I meant when I said earlier that RF at the output end
of the coax is a free agent.  It is under no obligation to Kirchoff or
any other law to return to the transmitter, to radiate, to be absorbed
by earth, etc.  It can fail to do all those things and the two poles
of the transmitter will still deliver equal and opposite current.

73,
Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:40:11 1996
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Coax Shield Current (Was Re: MFJ Artificial Ground)
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 96 17:51:54 GMT
Message-ID: <4kjgpu$[e-mail]>
References: <4k43ol$[e-mail]> <4k4tth$[e-mail]> <4k7394$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4kaua0$[e-mail]> <4kdkph$[e-mail]>

In article <4kdkph$[e-mail]>,
   jaeschke <[e-mail]> wrote:
>Jack:
>
>I believe that Gary has a point in that the circuit back to the
>transmitter must be (visibly) completed.  To me this means that
>the current that leaves the transmitter in the center lead of
>the coax must return to the transmitter in some manner.
>Generally, this is throught the shield of the coax.  If it did
>not return, then the negative charge of the electrons leaving
>the radio would leave a positive charge on the case of the
>radio.

The return path is not through the shield, but on its surface. The shield
has two surfaces, inner and outer, and entirely different currents can flow
on each surface. We'd like all the return current to flow on the inner
surface, where its field cancels that from the current on the center
conductor. Current flowing on the outer surface will radiate, just like
current flowing on any other wire.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:40:12 1996
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Coax Shield Current (Was Re: MFJ Artificial Ground)
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 96 20:00:42 GMT
Message-ID: <4kjvuc$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4kaua0$[e-mail]> <4kdkph$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4kiuge$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

   [e-mail] (Gary Coffman) wrote:

>No, Jim. In an *AC* circuit there is no net charge flow. All
>charges merely oscillate back and forth around their original
>positions in step with the changes in potential.

Gary, explanations like this are the reason your readers are confused,
and perhaps also the reason we are having this discussion.  What
you've said is true, but it falls far short of explaining the flow of
current that Jim asked about.

It is much easier to understand what's happening if it's remembered
that the transmitter has two RF output terminals (poles).  The only
"loop" that must exist in order for current to flow is the current
path internal to the transmitter and through the load.  To satisfy
Kirchoff, the current flow through all internal points and through the
two output terminals must be the same.

What you've missed is that current drawn from those two poles is
forced to be equal and opposite by the inherent nature of the fields
inside the coax.  Therefore, regardless of the load at the far end of
the coax, the load seen by the transmitter itself is *always* balanced
at both poles.  Nothing is attempting to draw more current from one
pole than the other, therefore there is no need for any "return"
current in order to balance the transmitter.  **This condition is
satisfied whenever coax is attached to the transmitter.**

Please stop this nonsense about some sort of external loop that must
be completed.  It is an instinctual concept that does not exist in a
coaxially-fed system.

73,
Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:40:13 1996
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Coax Shield Current (Was Re: MFJ Artificial Ground)
Date: 13 Apr 1996 10:47:28 -0400
Message-ID: <4koeq0$[e-mail]>
References: <4knkfh$[e-mail]>

In article <4knl7o$[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (WB3U) writes:

>
>That would be ideal.  However, it is much more difficult to achieve a
>good RF ground than most people realize.  The best solution is still
>to prevent the current from flowing down the line in the first place.
>
>73,
>Jack  WB3U

Charlie made a good point.

A correctly placed "ground" could help prevent current from flowing down
the line in the first place. It doesn't need to be a perfect ground, or
even a real good one. It does need to be properly placed.

This is commonly done at microwave.

Why are you guys wasting time arguing terms when the problem is with
someone's concept of RF circuit behavior? This seems like a Mexican Hat
dance, or a Snake dance around the real issue. It even snakes all over the
newsgroups in four or five places at once, like that is necessary!

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:40:15 1996
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Coax Shield Current (Was Re: MFJ Artificial Ground)
Date: Sat, 13 Apr 96 05:09:22 GMT
Message-ID: <4knkfh$[e-mail]>
References: <4k43ol$[e-mail]> <4ke5il$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4kihkr$[e-mail]> <4kn142$[e-mail]>

   [e-mail] (Mike McCarty) wrote:

>Voltage is not a substance. It is a name for the UNIT OF MEASURE
>(like "inch") for the ElectroMotive Force (EMF).

No, the Volt is the unit of measure.  Voltage is a synonym for EMF.

Also, I'm not the person who brought the term "substance" into this
discussion and I agree that it sounds odd when it's applied to
voltage. Nevertheless, voltage qualifies because it is the "essential
nature" of the conductors under discussion.  If you disagree with
this, Webster's the guy you want to talk to.

>Voltage is not attracted to anything.

My statement was intended to convey the idea in layman's terms.  From
that perspective, it is not inaccurate and I will continue to use it
when appropriate.  I apologize if you find the wording annoying, but
the statement is useful in describing the cause and effect simply and
in a way that no reader will misunderstand.

>I have never seen the phrase "common mode" used in this sense before.

The current (and thus voltage and impedance) that we were discussing
is antenna current.

73,
Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:40:16 1996
From: [e-mail] (Tom Bruhns)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Coax Shield Current (Was Re: MFJ Artificial Ground)
Date: 13 Apr 1996 00:55:52 GMT
Message-ID: <4kmu2o$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

Gary Coffman ([e-mail]) wrote:

: We cannot directly measure a potential difference, we can only infer
: it indirectly by the charge displacements it causes.

Again agreeing with Gary on this, I'd repeat:  you would have good company
if you believe that potential differences and the fields they imply
are simply mathematical models to explain the motion of charged particles
that we can actually observe.  If you insist on thinking of a field or a
potential difference as "real," I have no trouble with that, but it
also doesn't bother me if you think of it only as a mathematical
abstraction that you use to explain the forces on the things (charged
particles) that we can see.  But I do have a problem about "potentials
attracting" (or repelling) eachother.  It's the charged particles
that interact with eachother through electrostatic and dynamic forces.

--
Cheers,
Tom
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:40:17 1996
From: [e-mail] (Mike McCarty)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Coax Shield Current (Was Re: MFJ Artificial Ground)
Date: 13 Apr 1996 01:47:46 GMT
Message-ID: <4kn142$[e-mail]>
References: <4k43ol$[e-mail]> <4ke5il$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4kihkr$[e-mail]>

In article <4kihkr$[e-mail]>,
WB3U <[e-mail]> wrote:

)Gary, you're absolutely right about this and I should have been more
)careful in my comments.  Our limited senses and instrumentation don't
)allow direct measurement of voltage, only its effects.

This has nothing to do with electricity. NOTHING can be detected by any
means other than by its effects.

)This does not mean that voltage is not a substance, however.  I used
)the phrase "essential essence" intentionally, as this is the very
)first definition of "substance" according to my copy of Webster's.

Voltage is not a substance. It is a name for the UNIT OF MEASURE (like
"inch") for the ElectroMotive Force (EMF).

)Also, your reply doesn't respond to my statement that voltage is
)attracted to all unlike voltages.  Are you disputing this or is it
)actually a similar disagreement regarding definitions?  I reread your
)previous post, but I'm still not sure.

Voltage is not attracted to anything.

)Incidentally, unless I'm missing some of your articles, I haven't seen
)a reply to either of my posts discussing the impedance of the
)transmitter chassis (one was the article quoting the Antenna
)Handbook).  The common mode impedance of the chassis is one of the
)basic issues behind our disagreement regarding the correct shield
)length.  Have you changed your position on this?
)
)73,
)Jack  WB3U


I have never seen the phrase "common mode" used in this sense before.

Mike
--
----
char *p="char *p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}

I don't speak for DSC.         <- They make me say that.


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:40:18 1996
From: [e-mail] (Mike McCarty)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Coax Shield Current (Was Re: MFJ Artificial Ground)
Date: 13 Apr 1996 01:44:53 GMT
Message-ID: <4kn0ul$[e-mail]>
References: <4k43ol$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4kaua0$[e-mail]> <4kdkph$[e-mail]>

In article <4kdkph$[e-mail]>,
jaeschke  <[e-mail]> wrote:
)Jack:
)
)I believe that Gary has a point in that the circuit back to the
)transmitter must be (visibly) completed.  To me this means that
)the current that leaves the transmitter in the center lead of
)the coax must return to the transmitter in some manner.
)Generally, this is throught the shield of the coax.  If it did
)not return, then the negative charge of the electrons leaving
)the radio would leave a positive charge on the case of the
)radio.
)
)Jim

Huh? You seem to think that wires are like water hoses with electrons
squirting out of the end. The electrons go -nowhere-. They don't move.
They vibrate about equilibrium positions. It's the electromagnetic
-wave- which moves. Like waves on water. The water doesn't go anywhere.
Only the waves move.

Mike


--
----
char *p="char *p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}

I don't speak for DSC.         <- They make me say that.


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:40:19 1996
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Coax Shield Current (Was Re: MFJ Artificial Ground)
Date: Sat, 13 Apr 96 22:37:20 GMT
Message-ID: <4kphsm$[e-mail]>
References: <4k43ol$[e-mail]> <4k4tth$[e-mail]> <4k7394$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4kaua0$[e-mail]> <4kdkph$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4kiuge$[e-mail]>

  jaeschke <[e-mail]> wrote:

Hi Jim,

>If I have a DC source that I connect with one polarity to a
>resistor for a while and then reconnect it with the other
>polarity fot the identical amount of time, I will have a net
>flow of current into the resistor of zero.

It appears that way only if you sum the currents after assigning "-"
and "+" designations.  That's not correct, because this particular
concept of labeling is only appropriate when two phenomena occur
simultaneously.  When that's not the case, only absolute values can be
applied.

73,
Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:40:20 1996
From: marc lurie <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Collectors Keys
Date: 12 Apr 1996 19:05:12 GMT
Message-ID: <4km9h9$[e-mail]>

Hi there,

I have available a number of miniature morse keys.They are ex- South
African military, are 80mm(3.15in)L, 40mm (1.57in)W, 35mm(1.38in)H, and
were manufactured in France by Jardillier. They were originally
designed to be strapped over the thigh. Each key is individually boxed,
unused, and ideal for portable or QRP operation. Price is US$ 20.00 each +
US$ 3.00 post and package, airmailed within 2 days of receipt of payment.
Payment can be made by Visa or Mastercard, or telegraphic transfer. Please
fax card number, expiry date, and mailing address to Marc at Lieberman
Amateur Radio (PTY) ltd at [phone] or e-mail to
[e-mail]

'73 de ZS6HZ




From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:40:22 1996
From: TOM GUNTZEL <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Complete Shack for Sale
Date: 9 Apr 1996 13:40:01 -0700
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Ham Shack For Sale

1. Icom IC-736 HF Transceiver  with 6m.  100 watts all bands inc. 6 meters.  B
uilt in
power supply and antenna tuner.  One year old.  Mint Condx.    $1400.00
2. Henry 2K Classic X 80-10 meter linear.  Floor model.  Legal limit output on
 all modes
with pair of 3-500z. $800.  This is too heavy to ship.  Pick up only or will m
eet
someone within 600 miles half way.
3. Icom IC-229H VHF mobile  50 watt output extended receive. Excellent Condx $
275
4. Alinco DR1200 25w 2m fm data radio $225.
5. Alinco ALD-24t vhf/uhf dual bander $300
6. Dentron DTR-3KA 1500 watt HF antenna tuner.  $150
7. Timewave Tech DSP 59+ DSP  $220
8. AEA Morsemachine Memory Keyer and a whole lot more.  $125
9. KPC3 Packet Controller  $80
10. Bencher Chrome BY2 Keyer Paddle $75
11. Vibroplex Brass Racer Paddle $60
12. Ham Windows Plus Control and logging software..V 3.0 for SVGA $60
13. Welz 1.6-60 mhz 2KW peak reading power meter  $75
14. Yaesu ys-500 140-525 mhz power meter $75
15. GAP DX-VIII vertical antenna 6 months old  with counterpoise kit,, $225
16. Heil Headset with HC4 element and ICOM and KENWOOD connectors  $85
17. US Tower TX-455  55 foot  crank up tower with tail twister rotor, Hygain E
xplorer
14 Tribander 20 foot HD mast. Heathkit HD1780 rotor controller, KLM 2m and 430

satellite antennas, Yaseu elevation rotor. And Hygain 3 element 6m antenna. Al
l coax
and controller cables included.  Will separate after tower is sold.  Whole pac
kage
$1900.  Tower with mast $950.  (This setup is about 7 years old).  The tower a
nd
antennaÆs are still standing and I will need help taking them down.


For further information contact my via email [e-mail] or call Tom at
612-529-8966




From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:40:23 1996
From: "Philip Singley, Jr." <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: CW Transmitter-Globe Chief 90, or Deluxe
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 02:55:22 -0700
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Looking for an old transmitter used in the 50's and early 60's.  The
Globe Chief 90 and Globe Chief Deluxe had 807's as finals.  Any help
appreciated

Phil fmr. K5FSP


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:40:24 1996
From: [e-mail] (Carl Hodder)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Display Problem Pro 2004
Date: 10 Apr 1996 15:12:57 GMT
Message-ID: <4kgj5p$[e-mail]>
References: <4kfdsg$[e-mail]>

Take a look in the back of POPULAR COMMUNICATIONS and you will see
an ad for PRO-2004 display panels for sale. Not sure of the price
but think it was around $34.

Richard R. Fasi (rfasi@.castles.com) wrote:
: I picked up a PRO 2004 at a swap. The display works but doesn't appear to
: be backlit. Does the 2004 have backlighting? I checked the display board
: and could not find bulbs. Are they integral to the lcd? Is there an easy
: way to get backlighting for this scanner?

: Thanks for ur comments.

: 73 de Dick KM6PA



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:40:25 1996
Date: 10 Apr 1996 10:47:02 EDT
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (Hugh Duff)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4kfdsg$[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Display Problem Pro 2004


> I picked up a PRO 2004 at a swap. The display works but doesn't appear to
> be backlit. Does the 2004 have backlighting? I checked the display board
> and could not find bulbs. Are they integral to the lcd? Is there an easy
> way to get backlighting for this scanner?
>
> Thanks for ur comments.
>
> 73 de Dick KM6PA
>

An electroluminescent panel is used for the backlighting.
It is a thin flexible plastic covered piece that is removable from
behind the LCD display.  you can order them from Tandy National Parts
(don't have the number handy...call your local R/S).

regards...

Hugh  VA3TO  Toronto


---
 ■ NFX v1.3 [000]


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:40:26 1996
From: "Richard R. Fasi" <rfasi@.castles.com>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Display Problem Pro 2004
Date: 10 Apr 1996 04:36:32 GMT
Message-ID: <4kfdsg$[e-mail]>

I picked up a PRO 2004 at a swap. The display works but doesn't appear to
be backlit. Does the 2004 have backlighting? I checked the display board
and could not find bulbs. Are they integral to the lcd? Is there an easy
way to get backlighting for this scanner?

Thanks for ur comments.

73 de Dick KM6PA



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:40:27 1996
From: [e-mail] (ROLAND STINER)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: DSP UNITS
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 09 Apr 96 12:29:00 -0400
Distribution: world
Reply-To: [e-mail] (ROLAND STINER)


To: Scott.C.Werling/O=wallace/PRMD=iadps/ADMD=attmail/C=us/@safe.ia.GOV
Subject: DSP UNITS

>I have the Radio Shack DSP model 21 I think, I think it works fine for CW.
>I can pick out some sigs buried in the novice portion of 40m at night with it
>and it is very easy to set up and VERY easy to use.  Mostly plug and play.

Maybe you can help me with this question:  there is a delay between the
signal that goes into the unit and that which comes out.  When you are
sending CW, does that "mess up your timing" (if you send and hear the
signal slightly after you close the key?)
---
   OLX 1.53   -------------->    73, de NK2U    <----------------



--- PCBoard (R) v15.22 (OS/2) 2
 * Origin: CyberNet BBS   Lyndhurst, NJ (1:2604/151)

              .....oooooOOOOOo         http://www.intac.com/~cono
      __,-----. ---+_________#_     The Roy Hobbs BBS [e-mail]
     |________| |__|___________}          Node 1: 201-641-7307
      ooooo oo ~ ooO-O-O-O == oo\         Node 2: 201-641-3126



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:40:28 1996
From: Jim Reid <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: DSP UNITS
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 1996 15:06:27 -1000
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

Signal delay and CW sending

Yes,  it is very difficult!  Best to turn off the rig sidetone and
listen to your keyer.  The JSP DPS units have a transmit delay
defeat feature; the DSP is disabled by a signal from the keyer
to the DSP unit,  or maybe it is from the rig,  but anyway,  the
idea is to defeat the delay  while you are transmitting by
shoring out the DSP path.

73,  Jim,  AH6NB


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:40:29 1996
From: [e-mail] (Kevin Muenzler, WB5RUE)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Frequencies
Date: 11 Apr 96 14:55:36 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

[e-mail] (Jeremy  Consolatti) writes:
>
>
>      i am looking to by aradio that supports the frequencies 33.000 and 33.7
00.
>I have been told that this is low band. I don't know what that means. Are
>these frequencies in the VHF or UHF or neather band?? Has anyone used a
>Vertex FTH-7008TD ??
>
>
>
>Jeremy
>[e-mail]

Any good scanner will pick up those frequencies.  They are called
VHF-Low.  The "old" scanners that were classified as VHF Low/High
and UHF would receive 30-50MHz (VHF-Low), from 138-174MHz (VHF-High)
and from 420-512MHz (UHF).  The main reason for the large gaps is that
the gaps contained either aircraft (108-138MHz) that were transmitted
AM or television channels.  Many of the newer scanners will pick
up 30MHz to 1300MHz, excluding the cellular phone frequencies.
Hope this helps.

Kevin, WB5RUE
[e-mail]
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:40:30 1996
From: Bob Curci <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: FS or WTT:Kenwood TH-28a w/acc
Date: Sun, 14 Apr 1996 14:30:47 -0400
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

For sale or trade:
Kenwood TH-28A 2m HT w/440 receiver in excellent condition.
Radio is 1yr old.
Comes with 2 7.2v and 1 12v Battery, wall charger, alkaline battery
holder, and boom mic/earpiece with vox/ptt.
Asking $275 plus shipping or trade for Motorola HT600,P200 uhf or
MT1000 uhf(preferred).
E-mail me with what you have.

Bob.



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:40:31 1996
From: Bill Crocker <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: FS:  DRAKE R8A
Date: Sat, 13 Apr 1996 00:07:27 -0200
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

DRAKE R8A Shortwave Communications Receiver (Latest Model!)
100-30,000 KHz, AM/FM/LSB/USB/CW/RTTY Modes!
Includes Drake's optional internal VHF module, adding
coverage: 35-55 MHz, and 108-174 MHz, including Aircraft!

I purchased this brand new just last month (Mar 96).  I'm
forced to sell it due to loss of employment.

Including tax, I have $1,351.50 invested!
I am willing to sell it for only:  $950.00 [firm]
I will also pay standard UPS, insured shipping, anywhere
in the U.S.

Bill Crocker










From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:40:32 1996
From: [e-mail] (N9MXT1)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: FS: GP300 UHF/16 CH
Date: 10 Apr 1996 12:42:26 -0400
Message-ID: <4kgodi$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (N9MXT1)

Hi,
  I am selling a Motorola GP300 UHF 16 channel hand-held.  It comes with
the   following:

  16 channels
  DTMF Touch-tone pad on the front
  2 antennas
  Leather Carrying case...
  All programmed for your need!
  Extra Case... incase you don't want the DTMF pad.

  I am asking $375 with shipping.... if interested please email me back.

                                Thanks for your time.. 73 de N9MXT1
                                                   Jeffrey


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:40:33 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: FS: Lots of tubes
Date: 11 Apr 1996 21:48:49 GMT
Message-ID: <4kjuo1$[e-mail]>

For Sale:  Two repairman boxes full of tubes.

    I have two of the old style repairman comes to your home and fix the TV or
 Radio type of boxes full of tubes.  My father and his
brother had a old style general store back in the 50's and 60's.  They sold ap
pliances and actually provided a TV cable service to a
small town in the mountains of Virginia.  They also repaired TV's and Radios.
 The stored burned down in the late 60's and they
never rebuilt it.  Both these boxes are full of vaccuum tubes plus a small bag
 of tubes that won't fit in the boxes.  I'm sure some of
them are used but most are probably new.   I don't know what the inventory is
but will be willing to scope it out in whatever way
some one who is interested in buying may want.

   My father passed away about a year ago and I found these boxes stashed away
 in the  basement.  I will sell them to the best offer.  If
you"re interested, e-mail me direct.

Best,   Jim


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:40:33 1996
From: [e-mail] (David Thomas)
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.equipment,sci.electronics.repair,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.swap
Subject: FS: O-Scope 100Mhz
Date: Sat, 13 Apr 1996 21:23:29 GMT
Message-ID: <4kords$[e-mail]>

I have for sale 3 each 100mhz O-scopes Dual trace no probes asking
$350.00 each.please email me [e-mail]
Email me at [e-mail]


Email me at [e-mail]




From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:40:34 1996
From: [e-mail] (David Thomas)
Newsgroups: misc.industry.electronics.marketplace,sci.electronics.equipment,sci.electronics.repair,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.swap
Subject: FS: O-Scope 100Mhz
Date: Sat, 13 Apr 1996 21:44:54 GMT
Message-ID: <4koslu$[e-mail]>

I have for sale 3 each 100mhz O-scopes Dual trace no probes asking
$350.00 each.please email me [e-mail]
Email me at [e-mail]


Email me at [e-mail]




From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:40:35 1996
From: [e-mail] (John)
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.equipment,sci.electronics.repair,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.swap
Subject: Re: FS: O-Scope 100Mhz
Date: Sun, 14 Apr 1996 01:48:40 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4kords$[e-mail]>

[e-mail] (David Thomas) wrote:

>I have for sale 3 each 100mhz O-scopes Dual trace no probes asking
>$350.00 each.please email me [e-mail]
>Email me at [e-mail]
>
>
>Email me at [e-mail]
>
>


Dave!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

One time on the send button is enough to get your message sent!!  I
got this one 6 times.  Calm down.... It'll get here. <VBG>

JohnSon


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:40:36 1996
From: [e-mail] (David Thomas)
Newsgroups: misc.industry.electronics.marketplace,sci.electronics.equipment,sci.electronics.repair,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.swap
Subject: FS:100 Mhz O-Scope Dual Trace
Date: Sat, 13 Apr 1996 21:44:34 GMT
Message-ID: <4kosla$[e-mail]>

5 Kikusui COS6100M 100 Mhz, 5-Channel Portable Oscilloscopes. Has up
to
12 traces. 5mv to 5V per division (1 mv with magnifier), 2% accuracy.
Extrememly light (only 21 pounds). Trigger lock allows for stable,
automatic triggering. Can display several lissajous patterns at once.
Meets military specifications. Great scopes, excellent condition.
$350.00 each. Please call Jon Friedman at [phone] for more
info.or e-mail [e-mail]
Email me at [e-mail]




From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:40:38 1996
From: [e-mail] (Jim Fellows)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: FT736R performance on 70cm
Date: 11 Apr 1996 20:35:11 GMT
Message-ID: <4kjqdv$[e-mail]>
References: <4k9lhv$[e-mail]> <4kjimq$[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail] (Peter A. Klein), [e-mail] (Tom Swift)

Hi Tom, Peter and others,

This might explain some things I've been noticing with my 736R also.  I'm goin
g
to search for mods that might cover this problem.  I intend to contact Yaesu t
o
see if they might have some pointers on do-it-yourself mods.  I don't have muc
h
hope on either of these, so I'd be willing to work with some of you folks on
attempting to come up with some modifications ourselves.  I don't think I have
enough technical expertise to go it alone, but am able to work on it as a team
.
I'm doing this as I use the radio mostly for terrestrial SSB work right now, a
nd
would like to clean it up.

Tom, does the article give any more specific information as to the cause of th
e
problem and/or remedies?  I haven't been able to locate a May 90 QST.

Jim
KF6AGJ
[e-mail]


In article <4kjimq$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Peter A
.
Klein) writes:
|> In article <4k9lhv$[e-mail]>,  <[e-mail]> wrote:
|> >The QST product review of the Yaesu FT736R (May 90) said:  "but the
|> >receiver falls apart at 432 Mhz."  Does anyone know if this terrible
|> >blocking dynamic range performance on 70cm has been corrected?
|>
|> I just got a 736-R in January.  No, it hasn't been fixed.  Fortunately,
|> this should only be an issue on the terrestrial portion of the band.
|> There's a very strong local beacon around 432.250 that I can hear for a
|> couple of megahertz (!) in either direction with an omni antenna.  But I
|> can hear FO-20 fine (no pumping) on the same omni antenna and no preamp
|> while the beacon is going.  And FO-20 is very faint on an omni, so I
|> suspect I wouldn't hear it at all if there was any desense.
|>
|> --Peter
|> --
|> Peter A. Klein  ([e-mail])  :    -----==3==      ---      ---
|> Information Services, ext. 5569        :   |    |  |  |    |   |    |   |
|> Seattle University                     :  @|   @| @| @|   @|  @|   @|  @|


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:40:39 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: FT736R performance on 70cm
Date: 12 Apr 1996 16:47:51 -0700
Message-ID: <4kmq37$[e-mail]>
References: <4kjqdv$[e-mail]>

Dale:  Have you heard rumors of a 746R?  Tom KD2MF


In article <4kkadm$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>
>Hello FT736R owners (inc. me),
>In the Proceedings of the 21st Eastern V/U Conference (available thru
>ARRL) there is an article by Bruce Wood N2LIV and Ron Katz WB2DVK on
>"revitalization of the 736." It describes entirely new front ends for the
>xcvr. These are commercial front ends. Noise floor, NF, and dynamic range
>were the areas of improvement. I have not bought these.
>I am a bit disappointed in the features of the rig. Even my FT650 had a
>built in attenuator! Also seems like a rig in this price range would have
>xvrtr outputs and the ability to turn OFF the AGC. Hard to measure sun
>noise when the AGC is always on (I don't need 3 different AGC speeds).
>
>Dale WA2YPY awaiting the 746R


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:40:42 1996
From: [e-mail] (Jefferson Rayol)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: FT990
Date: 12 Apr 96 00:27:08 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Dear Friends.

I need urgently. How to encrease power in ft900???
Whats VRs and board....

PP8KWA Fred in Amazonas Brasil

***Sorry my English***

[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:40:43 1996
From: [e-mail] (Brian Williams)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: GMRS Repeater Linking ???
Date: 10 Apr 1996 23:44:25 GMT
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4khh4p$[e-mail]>
References: <4k6lif$[e-mail]>

In article <4k6lif$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
says...

> Is it legal to Link GMRS repeaters? I  so how would you link them when
> your only assigned UHF frequencies. Unlike Ham bands you can link
> VHF to UHF . Any help appreciated.

>       Bill          [e-mail]

Technically speaking,
they can be linked via phone lines.

Brian





From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:40:44 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: GMRS Repeater Linking ???
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1996 00:45:16 -0700
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4k6lif$[e-mail]> <4k7dit$[e-mail]>

[e-mail] (William Rahl) wrote:
> Is it legal to Link GMRS repeaters? I  so how would you link them when
> your only assigned UHF frequencies. Unlike Ham bands you can link
> VHF to UHF . Any help appreciated.

According to the "Personal Radio Steering Group" (PRSG) which publishes a
plain english instruction booklet on how to properly fill out a GRMS
license form:

"The GMRS is available only for communications between MOBILE UNITS, or
from one or more mobile units with a single land station. Land stations
are PROHIBITED for communicating with each other."

The document can be downloaded from the PRSG bulletin board at (313)
995-2100.

-jeff, kf6bkg - monitoring


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:40:45 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (Charles Bacon)
Subject: Heathkit DF-1
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 1996 03:08:07 GMT

I recently picked up a Heathkit DF-1  Direction Finder, & I'm looking
for the schematics/manual. Ideally, I'd like to find originals, but
I'm happy to settle for photocopies.

It's missing a back & the off/volume knob, so if anyone has these
parts, let me know.

Charles Bacon
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:40:45 1996
From: Peter Shintani <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Help me, do linears need antenna tuners ?
Date: 9 Apr 1996 22:50:13 GMT
Message-ID: <4kepj5$[e-mail]>

Hi:
        I am looking for some advice.
I plan on purchasing a linear amp. I am using an R-7
with under a 1:2 SWR match on all the bands I intend
to use. If I try to use a tube type linear, will the linear's
pi or pi-L matching section be adequate  or will
an external antenna tuner be necessary. Currently, my
HF rig is connected to the R-7 with 8D-FB(I think it's
about equivalent to low loss double shielded RG-8).
Furthermore, I have a Bencher low pass filter, in the event
that I have to use an antenna tuner after the linear, should
the LPF be before or after the antenna tuner.( I assume that the
LPF is looking for 50 ohms termination)

Peter




From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:40:46 1996
From: [e-mail] (PhilRut1)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Help me, do linears need antenna tuners ?
Date: 11 Apr 1996 01:02:46 -0400
Message-ID: <4ki3pm$[e-mail]>
References: <4khqo8$[e-mail]>

In article <4khqo8$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (JJ Martin)
writes:

>Now, I have heard of people
>blowing traps in their R-7s by attempting to load them on 80 meters.
>Won't work, wasn't designed for that.

Jim-- Didn't we just have this conversation at the "shop" on Tuesday? hi
hi

 73-- Phil (KB1GO)

P.S. Give Manny a big "OLA" for me!


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:40:47 1996
From: [e-mail] (Vic Klein)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Help me, do linears need antenna tuners ?
Date: 11 Apr 1996 17:16:20 GMT
Message-ID: <4kjep4$[e-mail]>
References: <4kepj5$[e-mail]>

In article <4kepj5$[e-mail]>, Peter Shintani <[e-mail]
.co.jp> says:
>
>Hi:
>        I am looking for some advice.
>I plan on purchasing a linear amp. I am using an R-7
>with under a 1:2 SWR match on all the bands I intend
>to use. If I try to use a tube type linear, will the linear's
>pi or pi-L matching section be adequate  or will
>an external antenna tuner be necessary.

In my experience, the matching network of tube-type finals
such as with a linear amp are adequate for up to a 3:1
SWR, which is actually about all many tuners are capable
of. Paying big bucks for an external tuner is pretty much a
waste, IMHO.

Now with solid state finals, another story...

Make sure the antenna can handle the power as well..

=Vic=
WA4THR


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:40:48 1996
From: [e-mail] (JJ Martin)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Help me, do linears need antenna tuners ?
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 05:26:10 GMT
Message-ID: <4khqo8$[e-mail]>
References: <4kepj5$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (Rich Mulvey) wrote:

>On 9 Apr 1996 22:50:13 GMT, Peter Shintani <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>Hi:
>>      I am looking for some advice.
>>I plan on purchasing a linear amp. I am using an R-7
>>with under a 1:2 SWR match on all the bands I intend
>>to use.

>   You may want to reconsider getting an amp.  I have seen many, many
>reports of R7's blowing traps at 100W.  I can just imagine what will
>happen with 1500.  :-)

Rich,

I believe those might have been JUST reports and that's it.  I've
never heard of what you're saying.  Now, I have heard of people
blowing traps in their R-7s by attempting to load them on 80 meters.
Won't work, wasn't designed for that.

If someone did happen to get an antenna with a defective trap,
however, Cushcraft is usually pretty good about replacing it.

  just my $.02

  jim, wk1v




From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:40:49 1996
From: [e-mail] (JJ Martin)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Help me, do linears need antenna tuners ?
Date: Sat, 13 Apr 1996 04:00:01 GMT
Message-ID: <4kmuel$[e-mail]>
References: <4khqo8$[e-mail]> <4ki3pm$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (PhilRut1) wrote:

>In article <4khqo8$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (JJ Martin)
>writes:

>>Now, I have heard of people
>>blowing traps in their R-7s by attempting to load them on 80 meters.
>>Won't work, wasn't designed for that.

>Jim-- Didn't we just have this conversation at the "shop" on Tuesday? hi
>hi

> 73-- Phil (KB1GO)

>P.S. Give Manny a big "OLA" for me!

Heheheh hi Phil....I'm BUSTED!



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:40:50 1996
From: [e-mail] (Bill Paul)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Help selecting a 2m HT (Newbie)
Date: 10 Apr 1996 17:02:32 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4k8o6p$[e-mail]>

In article <4k8o6p$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Scott Drumm) wrote:

> I just recently received my no-code Tech license, and the time has now
> come to purchase a radio.  I'm looking for a 2m HT that is small and
> rugged enough to be carried when backpacking, hunting, hiking, etc.
>
> Members of the local club recommended the ICOM IC-T22A for $245,
> and I was wondering if anyone has had positive/negative experiences
> with this particular model and/or company.

Nothing but good things to say about mine. Great Rx sensitivity. Extended
Rx range. Transmits good sounding audio (according to the people I talk
to). The sales man said the user interface was easier on the Kenwood T22,
but I didn't have any problems learning the Icom.
>
> Also, what features should I be looking for in a handheld unit in the
> $250-$350 price range?  I'm a little vague on what DTMF, coded squelch,
> and tone squelch features actually *do*, so any help in that area would
> be appreciated.
>
DTMF (Dual Ton Multiple Freqency) is for creating the tones for dialing
telphone numbers, like through an autopatch. Many repaeters have
additional controls, like linking to other systems, that can be controlled
by DTMF tones. I would venture to say that most, if not all new HTs have
DTMF capability.

Coded squelch uses those DTMF tones to open up preprogrammed receivers.
The receivers will only open the squelch after hearing the tone sequence
you've programmed. This can allow many people to use the same simplex
frequency without hearing each other (not at the exact same time however).
This is popular with commercial radios, but I haven't heard anyone using
it in the 2m band. It is an option on many radios.

Tone squelch uses a sub-audible tone (aka PL tone) to open the squelch of
the receiver. This is something that is used alot in repeater operation. A
tone, anywhere from 50 to 300Hz, but usually around 100Hz, is transmitted
along with your voice. I don't know if the IC22A can use the tone on it's
receive (it has some tone scan feature for figureing out what tone a
repeater is using), but it can transmit the tone. I think any new radio
can transmit a PL tone.

> Thanx for the assist!
no problem
-BP

----------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Paul      KF6BBL      San Diego,CA       [e-mail]
----------------------------------------------------------------


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:40:51 1996
From: [e-mail] (Scott Drumm)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Help selecting a 2m HT (Newbie)
Date: 7 Apr 1996 15:49:45 GMT
Message-ID: <4k8o6p$[e-mail]>


I just recently received my no-code Tech license, and the time has now
come to purchase a radio.  I'm looking for a 2m HT that is small and
rugged enough to be carried when backpacking, hunting, hiking, etc.

Members of the local club recommended the ICOM IC-T22A for $245,
and I was wondering if anyone has had positive/negative experiences
with this particular model and/or company.

Also, what features should I be looking for in a handheld unit in the
$250-$350 price range?  I'm a little vague on what DTMF, coded squelch,
and tone squelch features actually *do*, so any help in that area would
be appreciated.

Thanx for the assist!




From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:40:52 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (Charles Bacon)
Subject: Help with Heathkit
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 13 Apr 1996 13:28:45 GMT

I need the schematic/manual for a Heathkit DF-1. I'll be happy to
cover copying/postage.

Charles Bacon
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:40:53 1996
From: [e-mail] (Michael Parkin)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Help with older FT-530?
Date: 10 Apr 1996 16:54:52 GMT
Message-ID: <4kgp4s$[e-mail]>
References: <4kd6as$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

I had exactly the same problem with my FT-530.  You need to upgrade the VCO
at Yaesu.  It will cost $50.00.  I sent mine in but haven't got it back yet.
It takes about 3 weeks.  Just send it in to Yaesu service center with a note t
hat
you want the VCO upgraded and you understand it will cost $50.00.  Include you
r
name, address, & phone number.
Don't call and ask them about it?  They will say they don't do VCO upgrades.
However when I called John Lynn (head of Customer service) he said they will d
o it.
Thanks to Kevin (wd6dih) for this info and John's name.

Mike




From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:40:54 1996
From: [e-mail] (Kjell Johnsen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: HF for amateur and marin bands
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1996 22:29:12 GMT
Message-ID: <4kmovn$[e-mail]>

I plan to use the Icom 706 / AH-3 in my sailboat.  Need to use it both on
amateur bands and on marin bands HF. Can anybody tell me if this can be
done?
Kjell Johnsen, Borgar Steinsets vei 4., N-3034 Drammen, Norway
e-mail: [e-mail]    Phone: [phone]
Ham-call: LA7GV  AX25:  [e-mail]   Loc.: JO59CR



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:40:55 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: HF for amateur and marin bands
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
References: <4kmovn$[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 13 Apr 1996 20:02:43 GMT

In article <4kmovn$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Kjell Johnsen)
writes:
>I plan to use the Icom 706 / AH-3 in my sailboat.  Need to use it both on
>amateur bands and on marin bands HF. Can anybody tell me if this can be
>done?

It certainly can be done, just remove diode D59 and reset the microprocessor.
Whether it can *legally* be done will depend on what the rules are in the
nation where your craft is flagged, IE does the nation have a Type Acceptance
requirement for marine radios like the US does? If so, you're out of luck,
if not, then no problem.

Gary

--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | Due to provider problems
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | with previous uucp address
es
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | Email to [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:40:56 1996
From: [e-mail] (Paul Erickson)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: HF sucks!
Date: 6 Apr 1996 21:06:39 GMT
Message-ID: <4k6mcv$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4k13he$[e-mail]>

[e-mail] (Nathan Ryan Gingras) writes:

>Kevin Muenzler ([e-mail]) wrote:

>: But then maybe you don't want a challenge, you might just want
>: it handed to you like the last line of your comment suggests.
>: Although it probably isn't your fault that you want things handed
>: to you.  Maybe you were brought up that way, expecting things
>: to be handed to you, not having to work for anything.  Have your

>Methinks not. I wouldn't upgrade if I could send code str8key at 20000wpm.
>I am saying that hf is LAME! Why would I want to be a part of it? I will
>upgrade when I am 65+, and have nothing better to do. You may think that
>everyone who doesn't upgrade is a lazy devil, and will not take the time
>to learn to copy code... The problem is that I have much more important
>things to do than sit in my basement & play with radios. I got the wrong
>impression of ham radio, and that's why I got into it. I like
>electronics, and all that jazz, but there is noone to talk to on HF that
>talks about anything besides radios, etc. When I call someone on the
>phone, we don't talk about what kind of telephone we are using.... same
>thing. I am sick of hearing about everyones radio. (and all other boring
>ragchew crap.) I listen to HF ALOT, and have worked alot too. I have
>never heard anyone talk about Music, or Society, or anything interesting.

Hi Nate,

If you don't like something, try to make it better.  If you ever hear me
on, would love to talk about music etc. Let's get a group going and
light a match rather than curse the darkness..

cheers, Paul
ve7cqk
email: [e-mail]

>I have my opinions, you have yours. The difference is that I don't
>automatically think my ideas are superior just because they are mine. I
>am glad you like HF, but I DONT! (And I was half-hoping I could be
>convinced otherwise before I totally gave up on Ham Radio.)


>Nate.



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:40:57 1996
From: [e-mail] (Karen Elizabeth Johansen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Home Electronics Business Guide
Date: Tue, 9 Apr 1996 17:02:13 UNDEFINED
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Keywords: Home business, electronics

The Home Electronics Business Guide is a complete guide for opening and
operating an electronics business at home, in a garage or spare room. For more

information, visit our home page to download our free Electronic book
describing our product.
Far Horizons Publishing Company

http://home.comm.net/~horizons
KC5FCU


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:40:58 1996
From: Bob Winingham <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew
Subject: Re: How to setup an dual computerlink via radio. Is it possible ?
Date: 4 Apr 1996 20:19:25 GMT
Message-ID: <4k1asd$[e-mail]>
References: <4jp38s$[e-mail]> <4jt8cm$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]

>Well, That's not entirely true. Electrons move slower through copper
>wire than throught the void of space.
>
>

I think you will be very surprised to know
how VERY slow Electrons move through copper.ie
from one end to the other.  and if using AC they NEVER make it. :-)
---
That DARN power compamy, selling me the SAME electrons month
after month.

73




From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:40:59 1996
From: [e-mail] (Aaron Jones)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: HW-101 Mods?
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 1996 19:03:48 -0700
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Does anyone know if any MARS mods exist for the HeathKit HW-101?

Aaron
KC7CKY
please reply through e-mail to  [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:41:00 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: I need some input on ICOM IC-2700H
Date: 10 Apr 1996 05:43:04 GMT
Message-ID: <4kfhp8$[e-mail]>

 I'm planing to buy mobile rig IC-2700H...is it any good. What
should I watch out for.. Thank you for replay.


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:41:01 1996
From: [e-mail] (Steve Hideg)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: IC-T41A no VHF Rx
Date: 10 Apr 1996 20:25:39 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Hello.

I have an IC-T41A 440MHz handheld transceiver that also has VHF receive
capabilities. Well, it used to. It now is totally deaf on VHF. It seemed
to happen suddenly.

Does anyone out there have any experience with this radio or, more likely,
its 2-meter cousin, the T21A? Might there be something obvious to check
like a severed antenna connection that I could open up the radio and fix?

Just want to see if there is any useful advice out here before I send it
to Icom.

Thanks and 73.

--Steve Hideg, N8HSC
  [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:41:02 1996
From: Robert  H°yvald <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Icom 706 Mods Wanted
Date: 7 Apr 1996 03:18:27 GMT
Message-ID: <4k7c63$dat$[e-mail]>
References: <4k5vb0$[e-mail]>

check out some web sites.


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:41:02 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (Robert E. Garland)
Subject: Re: Icom 720A RX problem
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4k37ep$[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 03:15:28 GMT


The Icom IC-720A DEFINITELY has a low band antenna input.  To listen
below 160 meters, use the separate RCA connector as your antenna input,
not the SO-238 connector.  Gets AM broadcast and lower bands just fine
with a long wire.

(signed)
a former IC-720A owner



--
     Robert Garland                            NX3S @ N3ACL.PA.USA.NOAM
     Hilltown Township Bucks County               [e-mail]
     Pennsylvania USA                                       Grid FN20ii
                   Hams do it bouncing off the "F" layer


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:41:03 1996
From: [e-mail] (Kevin McGuirt)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: ICOM IC-737 Mods
Date: Sun, 14 Apr 1996 19:12:11 GMT
Message-ID: <4krin6$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

Does anyone have any mods for the original ICOM IC-737 (not the 737A)?
Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks,

Kevin McGuirt
KK4AG




From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:41:04 1996
From: Thomas Martin <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Info - FT101E -6146W
Date: Fri, 05 Apr 1996 19:18:43 -0800
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Does anyone have info on the mod to changeover to 6146W finals in a
FT101E

Thanks

Tom



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:41:05 1996
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Info - FT101E -6146W
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 96 06:00:23 GMT
Message-ID: <4kfqah$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

Post / CC by Mail

   Thomas Martin <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Does anyone have info on the mod to changeover to 6146W finals in a
>FT101E

Are you sure you want to do that?  The 6146 won't handle as much peak
current as the sweep tubes and the power loss is not insignificant.
Without digging out my old schematic, I'll hazard a guess and say the
FT-101E produces about 600V B+.  That's not enough to achieve full
output from a pair of 6146's and I think this is why Yaesu used three
tubes when they made the switch in later models.

Incidentally, the 6146W has a 25 watt plate dissipation rating,
compared to 35 watts for the 6146B.

73,
Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:41:06 1996
From: [e-mail] (Steven Fritts)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Info on Alinco DX-70 needed
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 1996 02:41:29 GMT
Message-ID: <4kfaqa$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]



Anyone using/heard the Alinco DX-70 rig? Comments?? Thinking about
buying one.

Steve, WA4GZE



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:41:07 1996
From: [e-mail] (Steve Hideg)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Info on CW only xcvrs ??
Date: 10 Apr 1996 18:22:24 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4ji6ll$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Mark
Monninger) wrote:

> For more modern stuff, there are lots of nice CW only QRP (<5W output)  rigs
.
> Lots of good kits from the various QRP clubs. They're affordable (many <$100
)
> and are really good performers. If you really gota have more power, there ar
e
> some fairly simple amp circuits around for up to 50W.
>
> There are a couple SSB QRP kits available too.

Check out:

   <http://qrp.cc.nd.edu/QRP-L/index.html>


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:41:08 1996
From: [e-mail] (KI5BD)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Johnson LTR radios for sale/trade
Date: 13 Apr 1996 04:16:30 -0400
Message-ID: <4knnsu$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (KI5BD)

I have the following radios for sale or trade. All operate on the Johnson
Clearchannel LTR trunking system.

Uniden FPS 820 TS handheld (the big one) with DTMF and APX114 rapid
charger.
$175

Uniden FTS 800 TS trunk mount mobile with DTMF mic.
$200

E.F.Johnson 8870 trunk mount duplex phone/radio with TD7 paging feature.
$200

E.F.Johnson 8870 with Telephone Interface Module (allows the use of any
standard telephone equipment). Great for remote locations where there is
no standard phone service. It works like a standard wall jack and allows
the use of multiple phones, fax machines, modems, cordless phones or alarm
equipment.
$400

All of these units would require programming by your local E.F.Johnson LTR
provider.

Add $20 each for shipping.

Will trade for All Mode Dual band  2m/70cm ham rig.

Resond by Email to :     [e-mail]



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:41:09 1996
From: "Carmine M. Iannace" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Johnson Viking II
Date: Tue, 09 Apr 1996 08:34:57 -0400
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4k9vhu$[e-mail]>

Randie kochals,Toronto CANADA wrote:
>
> A aquaintance of mine mentioned that a "Johnson Viking II"
> would make a good first radio for HF.  I am not familiar
> with this unit. Can someone give me some input on it?
> I.E. Specs and and expected price for a used unit.
>
>  Any info would be helpful.   Thanks!

A Viking II was a ham radio transmitter manufactured in the mid to late 1950's
. It had
two 6146 tubes in the final and two 807's as modulators. The rig was noteable
for it's
continous tuning capability from 1.8 to 30 mHz, utilizing a roller inductor in
 the final
amplifier. The transmitter needs an external VFO to operate or you may plug in
 a crystal
in the crystal socket for fixed, drift free, operation. The output power is ju
st over
100 watts if the tubes are good. The chassis is copper plated and weighs about
 75
pounds. You can find one at a hamfest for around $75 to $100 if you're lucky,
as it is
becoming a collectors item.

Of course you'll need to buy a companion receiver to compliment your transmitt
er.
--
Carmine Iannace KA2PAP
The Mountain Top Homepage
http://members.aol.com/greeneny


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:41:11 1996
From: Grant Youngman <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Johnson Viking II
Date: Tue, 09 Apr 1996 22:16:56 -0500
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4k9vhu$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

Gary Coffman wrote:

> Your aquaintance is a joker.

Well, maybe not

>This rig is affectionately
> known as a boatanchor. It is a very large, very heavy
> all vacuum tube

Yes, but that doesn't make it a bad transmitter.

> These old rigs can sound good on AM,

That's where the best people in ham radio are -- on AM

> dirty with respect to TVI and your neighbors won't be very
> happy with you.

Dirty is a bit of an overstatement.  The Viking II is very good in the TVI sup
ression
department

>Also some of the tubes are getting harder
> to find and are becoming expensive.

Nothing in the Viking II is rare, hard to find, or expensive

Since there isn't a
> lot of AM activity on the amateur bands these days, the
> phone contacts you will make will be limited to other
> nostalga buffs who like to play with this old equipment.

Like I said -- the best people in ham radio are on AM :-)


> if that's what you like to do, but I would definitely not
> recomend it as a beginner rig.

Seems to me this WAS pretty much a beginner rig in its day.  Are we suggesting
 that
today's beginners aren't up to the level of, say, beginners in the 50's ????
I guess
today's beginners aren't capable of doing much but opening the box and pluggin
g the
plastic radio-thingy found there-in into the wall?  Is more than one knob too
many?

Affectionately ... Grant/NQ5T

[e-mail]
http://home1.gte.net/nq5t/index.htm -- wherein lie REAL radios


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:41:11 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Kenwood HT
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 1996 23:03:33 GMT
Message-ID: <4kh7eg$[e-mail]>

Does anyone know of a Kenwood dual-band HT sold overseas which
looks like a "flip-phone"

Alex



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:41:12 1996
From: [e-mail] (robbin decker)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Kenwood MC85 connectors wanted
Date: Sun, 14 Apr 1996 15:11:24 GMT
Message-ID: <4kr7vb$[e-mail]>

I am looking for one or more of either the cables, or at least the 7
pin plugs to make up cables for the MC85 mike. E mail replies please,
Bill KB2RMI



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:41:13 1996
From: [e-mail] (Walter R Francis)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Kenwood TH-225A mic hook-up.
Date: 09 Apr 96 11:34:33 -500
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]


I am attempting to hook up my TH-225A to a footswitch I made for my Alinco
DJ580 and my TS-530.  I can select input (headset, handmic, desk mic, etc.)
and switching method and off I go.  I can either key in-circuit (HT) or out of
circuit (HF), but from what I can tell neither way will work with the 225?

I know the mic shield is normally isolated and when it is brought to ground
the radio keys, but regardless of what I do I get no audio.  A friend said
that this radio doesn't do pull-down, it does pull-up, and using the switch
circuit within the radio as the power for the mic, so I'm not powering the mic
doing what I am trying.

If anyone could suggest something I'd appreciate it.  The PTT is a real beast
to keep held for ragchewing!

--
-.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.. .
.  Walter Francis                                               _. KT4LH  .
-                 HP48GX  Alinco DJ580  Icom 281  Kenwood 530S o:o        -
.  [e-mail]                                   Life begins on 80  .
--... ...-- --... ...-- --... ...-- --... ...-- --... ...-- --... ...--  ..



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:41:14 1996
From: [e-mail](Clifford Uyeda)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Kenwood th-79a Problem
Date: 10 Apr 1996 16:56:10 GMT
Message-ID: <4kgp7a$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

In <[e-mail]> Steven
Smith <[e-mail]> writes:
>
>I'm currently having a similar problem with my 79a. When I turn it on the

>display is dim. (batt fully charged) If I wait 60 + seconds and turn it
>off and then back on it comes up full brightness and stays that way.
>
>On Sun, 31 Mar 1996, Rich Papa wrote:
>
>> I have noticed that recently, when I first switch on my unit, the
LCD
>> display, when I press the PTT key, will fade by around 50%.  This
will
>> last for around 3-5 short transmissions (usually 5 seconds or less).

>> After that the LCD display seems to no longer fade when
transmitting.
>> Has anyone else had any similar experience.
>>
>> Rich
>> N1VAJ

I have talked to customer service at Kenwood. If it is not a low nicad
battery problem, it may be the mounting of the LCD itself.  If you are
confident in opening your radio, make sure that the LCD is seated
properly to make a good contact.

If you have any doubts at all, send it in under warranty and the
Kenwood techs will do it for you.



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:41:15 1996
From: Dio <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Kenwood th-79a Problem
Date: Mon, 08 Apr 1996 13:49:24 -0700
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <kham-0404962144010001@204.29.16.48>

I had the same problem with my th79a after 4 months. Receive and
transmit still worked fine. Display was flakey. Returned to Kenwood and
they ended up replacing the LC unit under warranty.
73 DE KE6WEO

David A. Kay wrote:
>
> In article <[e-mail]>, Rich Papa <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> > I have noticed that recently, when I first switch on my unit, the LCD
> > display, when I press the PTT key, will fade by around 50%.  This will
> > last for around 3-5 short transmissions (usually 5 seconds or less).
> > After that the LCD display seems to no longer fade when transmitting.
> > Has anyone else had any similar experience.
> >
> > Rich
> > N1VAJ
>
>      I also suspect that the problem is low battery, since every time a
> battery has gone dead that is exactly what happens to the illuminated
> display.
>
>                                              73',   Dave

--
--Dio
Beacher Tool & Die
(A Hughe Jorgen Company)
1106 2nd St.
Suite 316
Encinitas, CA. 92024


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:41:17 1996
From: Steve Hicks <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Kenwood TM-241 expanded TX mod- HELP!
Date: 11 Apr 1996 05:05:53 GMT
Message-ID: <4ki3vh$[e-mail]>

Thanks for reading this:

I have a Kenwood TM-241A  2meter rig.  I would like to mod it so that I can tr
ansmit on local Civil Defense freq (153 mhz) for Races.
Everything that I have found on the mod says to put a 1N914 diode on D209 of t
he board behind the tone button.  The mod worked fine on
TM-231.  But on my TM-241, there is a small black chip located where D209 shou
ld go.  I have tried the diode in several other positions
around there, but none worked.

Does anyone have any ideas?   Send any ideas to: [e-mail]

73 & Thanks

Steven Hicks



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:41:18 1996
From: [e-mail] (Nick Grose)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Locator Help
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1996 21:55:41 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4km4hr$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

In message <4km4hr$[e-mail]> Sylvan Katz wrote:

> My QTH is (50 deg 50 min North, 0 deg 05 min West) what is my locator?
>
> Tnx Syl
> G0TZX & VE5ZX
>

IO90XT

--
-Nick-
  -----------------------------------oOo------------------------------ ,_,
  Nick Grose                                 [e-mail]  (o,o)
  Bridgnorth Shropshire England                                       {`"'}
  ------------------------------------------------------------------- -"-"-



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:41:18 1996
From: [e-mail] (John Newman)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Looking for info: Link 1907 (tube VHF relic)
Date: 10 Apr 1996 05:40:59 GMT
Message-ID: <4kfhlb$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Keywords: Link1907

[Posted this yesterday, didn't see it up there today, so I'm trying again]

A friend of mine (with no net access) just purchased a

                        Link 1907 ED.2A

2m radio at a local ham-fest.  It looks to be an antique, so of course it
had no accompanying documentation.  This is an *old* tube-driven rig, no
tuner, rollaway cabinet, etc.  It has been retired from Civil Air Patrol
use, so it still has CAP crystals in it.

If you know anything about this radio, have some info in the bottom of your
file cabinet, or maybe have an anecdote to share, I'd sure like to hear
from you.

Please respond via e-mail if possible (I'll repost), as I don't quite have
the bandwidth to keep up with this newsgroup.

Thanks in advance.

[e-mail] / KB0GOW


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:41:20 1996
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: MFJ Artificial Ground
Date: Tue, 09 Apr 96 19:47:10 GMT
Message-ID: <4kemch$[e-mail]>
References: <4k43ol$[e-mail]> <4k4tth$[e-mail]> <4k7394$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

     [e-mail] (Gary Coffman) wrote:
 >[e-mail] (WB3U)wrote:

>Your server has gone beserk, Jack. There are multiple copies of your
>responses out here now.

That's my fault.  My server eats some posts, others it doesn't.
Sometimes it eats them and then spits them out two days later.  I
think the worst is over, although I've noticed that some incoming
posts never show up (I see the replies but not the original).  I'm
trying to use a public server to recover missing articles, but it
doesn't always work.  My apologies to everyone for the clutter.

>>The concept of 1/4 and 1/2 wave lines applies equally well to single
>>conductors.  This is evidenced by the use of 1/4 wave
>>single-conductor decoupling stubs in microwave circuitry.

>No, that's different. Those stubs are part of the antenna and not
>transmission lines.

Actually, I was thinking about stubs used at the output of a mixer or
driver, connected between the signal path and ground.  Wes has called
me to task on this point though and I think it's better left alone.
The analogy may not hold, due to the proximity of those lines to a
parallel ground plane.

>And because the impedance of the outside of the shield at the other
>(transmitter) end is also high (since the loop isn't closed)

No, it isn't high.  I've explained this in three posts, although I
don't know if you've received them all.  One quotes ARRL literature
which states that the impedance at the transmitter chassis isn't a
high impedance point and that a 1/4 line from the antenna will detune
the system for common mode current.

I basically agree with the rest of your post except for statements
specifically related to this concept.  We're splitting hairs on the
subject of voltage; we both know what it is and what it does.

The power flow you mention does need practical consideration, but I
think it's a side issue.  Regardless of the total power, voltage or
current can be high or low, depending on the impedance.  It's those
components that ultimately cause the symptoms we have to deal with.

Anyway, the transmitter chassis is not at a high impedance point in
the typical ham shack.  We should come back to this after you've had a
chance to read my other posts.  One quotes ARRL material from the
Antenna Handbook, the other is titled "The Transmitter Chassis".  We
won't be able to find mutual ground until we discuss the issues in
those articles.  No pun intended.  ;)

73,
Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:41:22 1996
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: MFJ Artificial Ground
Date: Tue, 09 Apr 96 19:48:53 GMT
Message-ID: <4kemfn$[e-mail]>
References: <4k93s8$[e-mail]> <4kbdf3$[e-mail]>

   [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) wrote:

>Let me see if I understand this statement. Are you saying, if I
>ground the far end of a half wave antenna, the current maximum STILL
>occurs in the middle instead of the end?

This is a *very* important point.

If a 1/2 wave end-fed wire is terminated with an infinite impedance
(open ended), it exhibits voltage maxima at the ends.  If it is
terminated with zero impedance (connected to RF ground), it exhibits
voltage minima at the ends.

Between these two values, there is terminating resistance for which
there will be no standing waves on the line. The value of that
resistor is equal to the surge impedance (Z0) of the end-fed wire,
which is in turn determined by the diameter of the wire and the
spacing of the wire above ground.  When it is terminated with that
resistance, the source will see that resistance regardless of the
length of the wire.

In this regard, the wire behaves exactly like a transmission line.

73,
Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:41:23 1996
From: [e-mail] (Cecil A. Moore~)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: MFJ Artificial Ground
Date: 8 Apr 1996 16:02:27 GMT
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4kbdaj$[e-mail]>
References: <4j25fi$[e-mail]> <4jc3is$[e-mail]> <4jq2d4$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>,
Monty Wilson  <[e-mail]> wrote:

>really knew his stuff.  The forum I attended was on coax and other
>feedlines, and one subject he covered was this business of using an
>electrical half-wavelength feedline.  He explained the several reasons

Hi Monty, an electrical half-wavelength feedline (neglecting losses)
will reproduce the antenna impedance. If the antenna impedance is
50 ohms and the feedline is 50 ohms, then the feedline length
doesn't matter. If the antenna impedance is not 50 ohms, you
probably don't want to reproduce it. Rather, you probably want
to transform it as close to 50 ohms as possible by some other
length of feedline.

Maybe he was suggesting a halfwavelength feedline when the antenna
impedance is 50 ohms and one is feeding it with ladder-line. Then
it would make sense. Trying to find a coax length that is a multiple
of halfwavelengths for all HF bands doesn't make sense since the
antenna is probably non-resonant. Again if you have multiple
dipoles such that the antenna impedance is 50 ohms on all bands
(dream on) then the coax length doesn't matter since the SWR is
a perfect 1:1.

On top of all that, halfwavelengths are a poor choice because
of the impedance presented to common mode currents. But it does
make sense when feeding a 50 ohm antenna with ladder-line.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:41:24 1996
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: MFJ Artificial Ground
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 96 16:38:06 GMT
Message-ID: <4km8es$[e-mail]>
References: <4k93s8$[e-mail]> <4kbdf3$[e-mail]> <4kemfn$[e-mail]> <4kklq5$[e-mail]>

Post / CC by Mail

   [e-mail] (Lonnie) wrote:

>I haven't had any problem with RF in the shack even befor I added a
>ground. Since my first post I have added a ground stake and ran a 12
>gauge wire from the ground post of the radio to the ground stake.
>It's 30' long. Now everything I've read says you need to have a
>ground wire as short as possible in order for it to work. In my case
>30' is as short as I can go. This is why I was looking into the
>Artificial Gound. But it really didn't work as I expected it to.

First, what was the purpose of the Artificial Ground?  What were your
performance objectives?

Second, how is your inverted V being fed and how is it tuned on 10-40
meters?  Does it have traps?  Are you using a balun?

>My feed line to the antenna is also 30' long.  The antenna is mounted
>at the eve of the house and goes down at a 45 degree angle to the
>gound with the longest wire coming to with in 4 to 5 feet of the
>ground which then is connected to a insulator and guyed down with
>nylon rope.

Is one leg of the V actually longer than the other, or did you mean
something else?

>Things seem to work fine and I'm able to make contact with almost
>anyone I hear. But like others I want to be able to do the best I can
>with what I have. Does anyone have any suggestions on what I can do
>better, if indeed I need to.

You may not need to.  The trick is to minimize the losses in the feed
system.  Loss can be resistive or it may be the result of radiation
from the feedline.  The latter is only a true loss however if the
operator is certain that energy radiated from the feedline is
unusable.  Depending on many factors, it might occasionally be of
benefit at the receiving end, although it's certainly a pain to deal
with at the transmitter.

Maybe you could describe the antenna system in a little more detail?

73,
Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:41:26 1996
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: MFJ Artificial Ground
Date: 13 Apr 1996 02:11:45 -0400
Message-ID: <4kngj1$[e-mail]>
References: <4kn5n8$[e-mail]>

Hi Jack,
In article <4kn5n8$[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (WB3U) writes:
>
>Tom, you've made an error in this statement.  Both the top and bottom
>are low impedance points.  The bottom is low impedance because it's
>grounded, and the top repeats it.


It's silly to get sidetracked with an antenna that is full of the
principles causing confusion in the first place. The problem is more basic
than something as complicated as a shunt fed vertical. Especially
troublesome is the fact Gary created an example that can only be analyzed
with common mode and differential mode currents!

Let me explain how such an antenna would work Jack.

Imagine a shunt wire connected to the middle of the tower. At the point of
connection, the BOTTOM 1/4 section of the antenna presents a high
impedance, since it is a 1/4 wl section with the bottom connected to a low
impedance. The TOP half of the antenna presents a low impedance, since it
is an open ended 1/4 wl. Most of the current from the shunt feed wire will
flow into the top half of the antenna. The common mode current
distribution of the entire structure will appear almost like a 1/2 wl
vertical.

Connect the shunt wire to the very top, and you have a shorted
transmission line. The only radiation will be from imperfections in the
system. The differental mode currents will be maximum at the top and
bottom, the very small common mode currents will be minimum at the top.

Connect the shunt feed wire at the bottom and we have a short. Nothing
will radiate or be excited. Feed it anywhere in between, and we have
mixtures of the three different systems.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:41:27 1996
From: [e-mail] (Calvin Burnette)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: MFJ TNC 2, 9600bps mod 100.00
Date: Sat, 13 Apr 1996 02:12:49
Message-ID: <4knggt$[e-mail]>



         Hello all,

            Cal here.



 I have an MFJ tnc 2 that is in really great shape
 and has been modified for 9600 baud transmission if you ever
decide to get into that... I also have all the manuals... If you
are interested I will sell it to you for 100.00 shipped C.O.D.
only...

                       73, Cal... N4UTN...

         [phone] after 5pm est... or email me..



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:41:28 1996
From: Dr. K
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Mobile hamming
Date: 10 Apr 1996 19:10:35 -0700
Message-ID: <4khpmr$[e-mail]>

Greetings!

I just got my ham license and was wondering if anyone had any suggestions as
to what is a good mobile rig.  Basically, a single-band, 2M unit would be just
fine for me right now.

Any suggestions would be appreciated!

Dr. K ([e-mail]), KB9NEM


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:41:29 1996
From: [e-mail] (J. Larry Taylor)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Mods
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 04:57:07 GMT
Message-ID: <4ki30t$[e-mail]>

Does anyone have any modifications for a Kenwood TH22AT???
Thanx &73's
Larry



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:41:29 1996
From: Robert Carson <bcarson@198.77.1.3>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: RE: Mods DR610 & DJ582T?
Date: Mon, 08 Apr 1996 16:37:02 -0400
Message-ID: <316978EE.528F@198.77.1.3>

Looking for mods for Alinco DR610 & DJ582T???



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:41:30 1996
From: [e-mail] (Walter R Francis)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Mods for DJ582?
Date: 11 Apr 96 00:27:15 -500
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]


A friend is wanting to know what mods there are for the DJ582.  He has both a
582 and a 580, but the 582 has different coloured wires and he wants to be
sure he's cutting the correct wires.

I assume he wants both tx/rx.

Thanks

--
-.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.. .
.  Walter Francis                                               _. KT4LH  .
-                 HP48GX  Alinco DJ580  Icom 281  Kenwood 530S o:o        -
.  [e-mail]                                   Life begins on 80  .
--... ...-- --... ...-- --... ...-- --... ...-- --... ...-- --... ...--  ..



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:41:31 1996
From: [e-mail] (Todd Owen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Mods for Heath HW24HT?
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 1996 01:47:32 GMT
Message-ID: <4kf3vj$[e-mail]>

I am looking for mods for the Heath HW24HT. Despite what I've been
told and have read, this rig doesn't match the Standard C528. For one
thing it does not have  UHF and VHF pushbuttons and Function+0 is
"Offset" and not "Set"--this model must be a little older (1988
vintage).

The radio tunes 130-170, 340-380 and 400-470 MHz out of the box.

I'm looking for extended TX and police band 800 MHz Rx.

--73, Todd KE4UDN

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Todd Owen       Hanover Engineers, P.C.
Richmond, VA    804-730-0011 (Voice)
                804-730-4012 (Fax)

[e-mail]
-----------------------------------------------------------------



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:41:32 1996
From: "Edward N. McConnell" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Mods for the Alinco DX-70
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 1996 22:56:54 -0500
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Need help finding mods for the DX-70.  Reply to [e-mail]  thanks for
the help!

73, KE4GOH
Neil


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:41:33 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: Dave Fifield <[e-mail]>
Subject: More on FT-530 mods
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Fri, 5 Apr 1996 19:55:54 GMT

I have a brand new FT-530. I did the "green wire" mod. It does NOT
receive on the 800 to 950 MHz band.

A friend of mine also has an FT-530 that he bought last year. He also
did the "green wire" mod. His radio DOES receive stuff on 800 to 900
MHz.

Both radios have exactly the same schematic (I borrowed his to check).

Soooooo, that leads me to believe that the ONLY difference is in the
control module programming. Checking the circuit diagram, there is a
signal (L1) that could control the RX front end power. Maybe this gets
turned off? I'll check.

Maybe all "we" need to do is change one of the other little links?
Anyone found out anything else yet? Anyone got a proper service manual
yet?

Let me know, thanks.
--

                  Dave Fifield
 ------------------------------------------------
| LAN Applications Manager          | KE6ZBZ     |
| National Semiconductor Corp       | QRP-L #92  |
 ------------------------------------------------


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:41:34 1996
From: "R.G.Foster" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Motorola Amateur radios
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 12:33:50 -0500
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4kja5h$[e-mail]>

AA9IS wrote:
>
> A couple of months ago I saw a couple of aticles indicating that
> Motorola was planning to offer radios built for the Amateur radio market.
> Has anyone heard any more about this?

Several years ago Motorola did sell a 2M FM transceiver. It didn't stay on the
 market very long.
It would be interesting if they were attempting to market ham products again.
--
Richard G. Foster  [e-mail]
Argonne National Laboratory
Argonne, Il
http://www.anl.gov/


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:41:35 1996
From: AA9IS <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Motorola Amateur radios
Date: 11 Apr 1996 15:57:37 GMT
Message-ID: <4kja5h$[e-mail]>

A couple of months ago I saw a couple of aticles indicating that
Motorola was planning to offer radios built for the Amateur radio market.
Has anyone heard any more about this?



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:41:35 1996
From: Len Revelle <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Motorola Amateur radios
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 22:11:03 -0700
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4kja5h$[e-mail]>

AA9IS wrote:
>
> A couple of months ago I saw a couple of aticles indicating that
> Motorola was planning to offer radios built for the Amateur radio market.
> Has anyone heard any more about this?

Someof the guys at my RACES unit are Motorola employees. One has a 2 mtr
Motorola HT but said to date thay are only available overseas. It was
about the size of a Visar and looked much like most of the current mini
jobs.
--

********************************
| Len Revelle   [e-mail] |
| Illinois      CIS 72607,1320 |
|           KE9YR              |
********************************


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:41:36 1996
From: Scott Miner <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Motorola MCX100
Date: Sat, 13 Apr 1996 11:40:03 -0700
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Hello,

        A friend of mine needs a service manual for a Motorola MCX100
radio. Please contact me if you can help him out.

Thanks,

Scott
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:41:37 1996
From: [e-mail] (Skip Withrow)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Motorola PC10 - Help
Date: 11 Apr 1996 15:11:33 -0600
Distribution: usa
Message-ID: <4kjsi5$[e-mail]>


I was given a Motorola PC10 vhf ht that is in the business band
and have some questions in regard to making it useful to me.

1. Can this radio be made to work on 2 meters?

2. The radio contains a 7 pin connector (I presume for programming)
   Is the pinout / protocol / software available to reprogram this
   radio?

3. Can the radio be programmed for 600kHz splits? (It's simplex now)

4. There are 4 switches inside the radio. What are their functions?

Thanks in advance for any help.

73,
Skip Withrow - WB0BBE
[phone]
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:41:38 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: National HRO wanted
Date: 10 Apr 1996 23:42:39 GMT
Message-ID: <4khh1f$[e-mail]>

        Looking for and excellent to mint National HRO receiver. Can you help? Dick D
oremus


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:41:39 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: National HRO wanted
Date: 10 Apr 1996 23:43:22 GMT
Message-ID: <4khh2q$[e-mail]>

        Looking for and excellent to mint National HRO receiver. Can you help? Dick D
oremus


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:41:40 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Need mod for IC735 noise blanker
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
References: <4kk4mu$[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1996 14:51:24 GMT

In article <4kk4mu$[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>
>Is there an improvement mod for the IC735 noise blanker? If I turn the
>blanker up high enough to reduce the noise, the audio becomes
>distorted.

That's a surprise? When a blanker blanks, it kills the desired signal
for the duration of the noise pulse as well as the noise pulse itself.
*Of course* that's going to generate distortion, that's inherent in
the process. The hope is that the resulting distortion is less annoying
than the noise that is removed. I believe that the time constants used
in the IC-735 blanker are as close to optimum as you can reasonably
expect in a radio of its type. You can play with the time constants,
but I don't think you can substantially improve upon them. The slice
level setting is absolutely critical for best performance on different
types of impulse noise and signals, so you need to set that carefully
on a case by case basis. If the impulses are wide or very frequent,
then you may do better leaving the blanker off because too much of
the desired signal will also be lost and the distortion will be severe.
There's no good way to handle this problem using a blanker. A noise peak
clipper may be better in these cases, but the real answer is to eliminate
the noise at the source.

I hope this doesn't sound like I'm trying to teach you to suck eggs,
you may already know all of this and still hope to improve the blanker
in the IC-735. I've had my IC-735 for 7 years and I've tried modifying
the noise blanker time constants for better operation. I wound up back
at the factory values. I don't think you can get it to work much better.
I think that if the blanker can't handle the impulses without unacceptable
distortion, you're going to have to do something else to deal with the
noise (like using an ANC-1 noise canceller).

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | Due to provider problems
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | with previous uucp address
es
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | Email to [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:41:41 1996
From: Igor Blakunov <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Need: Chip 144 MHz sinthesizer.
Date: Tue, 9 Apr 1996 12:31:08 +0300
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Hi.

Do you know somebody information about simple digital
synthesizers frequency in the DIP case only on the
144...146 MHz (or more) ?

Where I can to buy it ?  What cost ?

I need also in practical circuit diagram of this synthesizers using.

Thank you.

Igor B. (YL2GKB)

Packet: [e-mail]
E-mail: [e-mail]






From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:41:42 1996
From: [e-mail] (Jefferson Rayol)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: oops on radio is FT990 not FT900
Date: 12 Apr 96 12:43:52 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Dear Friends.

I need urgently. How to encrease power in FT-990?
Whats VRs and board ???

PP8KWA Fred in Amazonas Brasil

***Sorry my English***

[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:41:43 1996
From: [e-mail] (David Thomas)
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.equipment,sci.electronics.repair,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.swap
Subject: Prog. O-Scope Cal.
Date: Sat, 13 Apr 1996 21:20:04 GMT
Message-ID: <4kor7d$[e-mail]>

For sale (3) Programmable O-Scope Calibration units.  Manufactured by
Ballentine Electronics.  Model #6127A
Reply with an offer for each or all.    [phone],  [phone]

Email me at [e-mail]




From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:41:44 1996
From: [e-mail] (David Thomas)
Newsgroups: misc.industry.electronics.marketplace,sci.electronics.equipment,sci.electronics.repair,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.swap
Subject: Prog. O-Scope Cal.
Date: Sat, 13 Apr 1996 21:45:11 GMT
Message-ID: <4kosmi$[e-mail]>

For sale (3) Programmable O-Scope Calibration units.  Manufactured by
Ballentine Electronics.  Model #6127A
Reply with an offer for each or all.    [phone],  [phone]

Email me at [e-mail]




From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:41:44 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Q: switching p/s - How to combine?
Date: 9 Apr 1996 16:37:45 GMT
Message-ID: <4ke3op$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

I have 2 TDK switching power supplies, they are 5v @ 60A each.  They have a
voltage adjust pot, and I have been able to get them to go as high as 6.2v eac
h.
In a test, I combined them in series and got 12.3v out of them, but have not
incorporated it into my shack yet because I want to make sure there's not anyt
hing
else that I have to do.

Is there a proper way to combine switching power supplies (I've been told that
it is possible, but they weren't sure how) and is it possible to modify each u
nit
so that it can produce say 6.5 to 6.8v that way I can get at least 13v out of
the
two of them??  Anyone done this before?

Thanks in advance for you help!

Steve W.
 N2RWE


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:41:45 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (Marci & Dan Mouer)
Subject: Question abt 2m ant.
Message-ID: <497cc$11226.13b@NEWS>
Date: Tue, 09 Apr 96 22:01:51 GMT

I am planning to purchase a 2 meter portable (HTX-202) and maybe a mobile ant.


 What is recommended, if it's even neccessary? 1/4, 1/2, 5/8? Is a magnetic
mount possible?
Thanks.

-Dan.



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:41:46 1996
From: ()
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Question abt 2m ant.
Date: 10 Apr 1996 14:13:33 GMT
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4kgfmd$[e-mail]>

In message <497cc$11226.13b@NEWS>, [e-mail] (Marci & Dan Mouer)

writes:

>Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
>Path:
wrdis02.robins.af.mil!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!NEWS
!m
ouer
>From: [e-mail] (Marci & Dan Mouer)
>Subject: Question abt 2m ant.
>Message-ID: <497cc$11226.13b@NEWS>
>Date: Tue, 09 Apr 96 22:01:51 GMT
>X-Newsreader: News Xpress 2.0 Beta #0
>Lines: 7
>
>I am planning to purchase a 2 meter portable (HTX-202) and maybe a mobile ant
.

>
> What is recommended, if it's even neccessary? 1/4, 1/2, 5/8? Is a magnetic
>mount possible?
>Thanks.
>
>-Dan.
>
DAN
I RECOMMEND THE RADIO SHACK 5/8 WAVE MAGNETIC MOUNT FOR 2 METERS.
THIS ANTENNA GETS A LOT WORK AROUND THIS PART OF THE COUNTRY.
THE PRICE IS $39.95.
GOOD LUCK.
AL COPP KF4GKV




From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:41:48 1996
From: [e-mail] (Forrest T. Charnock)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Question abt 2m ant.
Date: 11 Apr 1996 01:34:26 GMT
Message-ID: <4khnj2$[e-mail]>
References: <497cc$11226.13b@NEWS>

Marci & Dan Mouer ([e-mail]) wrote:
: I am planning to purchase a 2 meter portable (HTX-202) and maybe a mobile an
t.
:
:  What is recommended, if it's even neccessary? 1/4, 1/2, 5/8? Is a magnetic
: mount possible?
: Thanks.
:
: -Dan.
:

        You will definately want a mobile antenna, not only because of
its better range, but often rubber ducks don't work if you try putting
too much power into them.  Which one you want, like everything, depends
on what your doing.  A 5/8 has superior gain, but the darn thing's 4 feet
tall (beware of low lying branches!).  1/4 is only 20 inches and in a
city, it's low gain can be an advantage; you get more radiation up and
over the buildings.
        Yes, mag mounts are easily available.

        I have an htx-202 and am generally pleased.  Two suggestions:

Radio Shack puts the htx-202 on sale once or twice a year for under $200;
also there are mail order sites that offer the same rig with same
warrenty at discount.  I don't have any numbers or addresses but perhaps
someone who reads this will.

Go ahead and get the extended warrenty.  For most items, this is a waste
of money, but with the abuse an HT recieves it's a bargain!

        If you have web access, you will be interested in the following site:

        http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/wa3rvt/htx-202.htm

--
*************************************************************************
Olin Physical Lab        Wake Forest University         Winston-Salem, NC
                http://www.wfu.edu/~charnoft      KE4RJG
         *            *            *            *              *
 All science is either physics or stamp collecting.  --Ernest Rutherford



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:41:49 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Radio MODS look here first
Date: 8 Apr 1996 15:20:58 GMT
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4kbasq$[e-mail]>

radio mods page!!!
see
http://www.execpc.com/~markstrm/ham.html


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:41:50 1996
From: [e-mail] (Kirk James Smith)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Radio Mods.
Date: 8 Apr 1996 16:06:40 -0700
Message-ID: <4kc660$[e-mail]>
References: <4k7c0c$dat$[e-mail]> <4k7hpg$[e-mail]> <4k9to3$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

Can someone point to the specific text of the CFRs that prohibit the
end-user from programming land mobile gear?

I'm a bit confused on this...  CURRENT production Bendix-King and Icom
land mobile rigs (including stuff that's come out in the last year) is
keyboard programmable via a "password" or by shorting some pins in the
mic connector..  And now Motorola, the king of non user-programmable
radios has introduced the JT-1000 series, which is programmable via the
front panel.

What gives?

Someone said that the manditory non user programmability never made the
law books, but was only recommended.  Maybe the manufacturers figured out
a way around it with keyboard passwords or temporary jumpers?


--
 Kirk J. Smith, KD6RCT, EMT-P    |  Biological Sciences Dept, Microbiology
 [e-mail]    |  California Polytechnic State University
 http://www.calpoly.edu/~kjsmith |  San Luis Obispo, California, USA


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:41:50 1996
From: Robert  H°yvald <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Radio Mods.
Date: 7 Apr 1996 03:15:24 GMT
Message-ID: <4k7c0c$dat$[e-mail]>

If making modifications to allow extended rx/tx on amateur radio
is illegal then why is motorola allowed to sell comm. radios that
tx in the amatuer bands (146-174) ???


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:41:51 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Radio Shack HTX-242
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1996 03:59:36 GMT
Message-ID: <4kkkb5$[e-mail]>
References: <4jsrdn$[e-mail]> <4jvjie$[e-mail]> <4kjeep$[e-mail]>

John Hughes <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Larry Bourdillon <[e-mail]> wrote:
>

>Hello, Rodney.  Any chance my local store will let me trade in the 212 I
>bought last fall for the new/improved model?

I would be very surprised if they would.  Your best bet is to sell it
at a local hamfest or put an ad in the paper.  The current sale price
for a 212 is $269.99, so I would price yours a little lower (maybe
249.99 if you have box and manual).

73s,

Rodney, KB0SPZ



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:41:52 1996
From: Charles Bolland <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.space,rec.radio.noncomm,rec.radio.scanner,rec.radio.shortwave,rec.radio.swap
Subject: Radio Station Database Program Stand Alone
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 01:00:53 -0400
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Sir,

It's still available.  The IBM/DOS Broadcasting Radio Station Database
Program for Longwave, Mediumwave, and Shortwave.  Over 4,000 records
included already.  The program is completely read and write.  Records
can be added or changed.  Sorts in many different formats both on your
screen and printing.

If you would like a copy of the program, send your request to
"[e-mail]".  Please include your MAILING ADDRESS. For example,
your street number, city, state and zipcode.  Also include your Email
address.

The program will be sent to you via Email probably within 24 hours if
not sooner.  If you request the program and haven't received it in that
period, check back with me..

Remember to send your address.  Requests without a mail address will no
longer be acknowledge to save time on the internet.  In the past,
requests without an address were reminded with a message.  Usually, the
reminder went unanswered anyway.  If it was, the reply was sometimes
very rude.

This program is free!  Everything works.  It has many features and they
all work, not like shareware where some of the features work and others
don't.

You address will be kept confidential.  I will be sending you a first
class letter later explaining another full featured Database program
available. It's very big!


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:41:53 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: Martin Gilbert <[e-mail]>
Subject: Request: FM Receiver
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 1996 15:00:35 GMT

Hi,

I have what is probably a really easy question, but one that has me
temporarily stumped.  I want to receive a 418 MHz signal from a low
power transmitter, which is FM modulated by +- 50 kHz.

I need to find a commercially available receiver that can output the
data as fast as possible - can anyone help me with my problem?

Sorry if this question is out of place, I looked through the
newsgroups list and this one seemed to be the best place to ask.

Thanks in advance,

<artin Gilbert




From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:41:54 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: Martin Gilbert <[e-mail]>
Subject: Request: FM Receiver
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 1996 15:00:48 GMT

Hi,

I have what is probably a really easy question, but one that has me
temporarily stumped.  I want to receive a 418 MHz signal from a low
power transmitter, which is FM modulated by +- 50 kHz.

I need to find a commercially available receiver that can output the
data as fast as possible - can anyone help me with my problem?

Sorry if this question is out of place, I looked through the
newsgroups list and this one seemed to be the best place to ask.

Thanks in advance,

Martin Gilbert




From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:41:55 1996
From: [e-mail] (Tony Salvador)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: RS-232 to TTL interfaces ...
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 96 16:10:05 GMT
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4kgmk9$[e-mail]>

If you are thinking about using you PC to control
you ham rig check out my page and the FT-736R CAT
section. The unit shown is usable on all rigs that
require a RS-232 to TTL level converter to control
the rig. Kits include all connectors needed for
connection to Kenwood, Yaesu or Icom rigs and as
well as others.

Check it out ...

http://www.gcr1.com/n5gpi/

73,
N5GPI


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:41:57 1996
From: [e-mail] (Calvin Burnette)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Sale Azden PCS-4000 $150.00
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 01:25:21
Message-ID: <4ki50d$[e-mail]>

  Hello,

      The name here is Cal.... I have an Azden Pcs-4000 fully
  Synth. mobile radio for $150.00... needs backup battery...
  will lose memory if disconnected from battery or power supply.
  Electronically in great condition.. case worn but front is
  great shape... will take $150... Cashiers check, money order
  or C.O.D. only... for this 2 meter rig..

            Call 804-821-6233 after 5pm est or email me...

                             Cal, [e-mail]



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:41:58 1996
From: [e-mail] (Calvin Burnette)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Sale Dualband Ht $150
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 01:12:59
Message-ID: <4ki499$[e-mail]>

 Hello,

    The name here is Cal.. I have a HW-24t made by Heath. This
 handheld is fully synth.. Has bookoo functions and works. Needs
 a battery pack but functional on the one it has. Has slight 3/4
 inch crack in case next to bottom.. has no effect on use or
 operation... will sell for 150.00.. shipped...

          Call me at 804-821-6233 after 5pm est or email me..
 shipping after receiving certified check or money order or
 C.O.D. only...
                             Cal, [e-mail]



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:41:59 1996
From: [e-mail] (RKing0030)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Shack Cleanout
Date: 13 Apr 1996 09:29:11 -0400
Message-ID: <4koa77$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (RKing0030)

I have the following to get rid of:
Yeasu FTV-700 transverter. Turns yout FT-757 into an all mode radio.
Includes the 2 meter module. 440, and 6 meter modules are available. This
may work on other Yeasu models, but I'm not sure.
Comes with maunal, and works great! $250.00

Stone Mountains QSY'er. This hooks into a port on the rear of a FT-757,
and allows you to change freqs by using a touch-tone pad. This may work
with other Yeasu rigs, but the 757 is a definite. $25.00

Uniden President 2600, unmodified, with manual, and mod instructions.
$150.00

Email me here, or at [e-mail] , or phone me at
708-489-0030.
Ronnie King, N9SJM
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:42:00 1996
From: [e-mail] (John Doty)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.shortwave
Subject: Re: Synthesizer Tuning Noise
Date: 5 Apr 1996 02:06:03 GMT
Message-ID: <4k1v6b$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]> Walt Novinger <[e-mail]> w
rites:
> J. L. Blanton wrote:
> >
> > On my Drake R-8A I9ve noticed a clicking or scratching noise that occurs
> > when the synthesizer is tuned.  <snip>
> > Lee, WA8YBT/6
> > Temecula, CAFunny you should mention this, as I'm using a friend's Lowe Eu
ropa
> for a
> couple of weeks, and have found the same problem (also had the problem
> on my Lowe HF-150). Turns out that the receiver is radiating the hash
> and it is being picked up by the antenna. How do I know this?
> Simple...my ANC-4 nulls it out *completely*. It appears that the hash
> leaks out either the case, ot thru the power cable or the keypad cable.
> Whatever the path, if it were being picked up *inside* the radio, the
> ANC-4 in series with the antenna wouldn't have such a profound effect,
> IMHO.

On the R8 and R8A, this is not leakage, it is phase discontinuties
in the frequency synthesizer. The R8 synthesizer operates in base
100, with different PLL's handling tens of Hz, thousands of Hz,
and hundreds of kHz. When you tune from, say, 5.00099 to 5.00100
MHz, the 10 Hz loop drops down 990 Hz while the 1 kHz loop jumps
up 1000 Hz. These jumps are neither instantaneous nor simultaneous,
so for a couple of milliseconds the receiver is mistuned by hundreds
of Hz. I've actually measured the phase discontinuity on my R8:
it's about 8 radians.

I'm trying to use the R8A for a satellite data collection project,
using it to feed narrow band CPFSK to a software demodulator.
Doppler tracking of the spacecraft carrier (by commanding the R8A
from the computer) causes a phase discontinuity, and thus a possible
data dropout, every kHz. This is more a minor annoyance than a
major problem (but I'm still annoyed :-(. I also have a few $10,000
telemetry receivers for this purpose, but at low signal/noise they
show a much higher bit error rate than the R8A/software demodulator
combination (and are too expensive for a big network anyway).

There are also some extremely faint clicks on the 10 Hz boundary,
but I need a very clean, high signal/noise carrier to hear them at
all, and I can't find them with my phase tracking software.

--
John Doty               "You can't confuse me, that's my job."
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:42:01 1996
From: [e-mail] (Rick)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew
Subject: Re: Ten-Tec 1209 transverter kit: comments?
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 1996 02:56:22 GMT
Message-ID: <4kfc9v$[e-mail]>
References: <4j8v9u$[e-mail]> <4je7ud$[e-mail]>



>

>       I received my 1209 2m - 6m transverter kit last week, but have

What other new kits have they announced?  I hadn't heard about the
2m to 6m kit?

Rick  KT2Q



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:42:02 1996
From: [e-mail] (Jeff Gold)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew
Subject: Re: Ten-Tec 1209 transverter kit: comments?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 12 Apr 96 08:56:57 -0500
References: <4j8v9u$[e-mail]> <4je7ud$[e-mail]> <4kfc9v$[e-mail]>

In article <4kfc9v$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
t.net (Rick) writes:
>>
>
>>      I received my 1209 2m - 6m transverter kit last week, but have
>
> What other new kits have they announced?  I hadn't heard about the
> 2m to 6m kit?
>
> Rick  KT2Q

I am completing a review of the 2 meter kit. The basic kit is $200
and an extra $50 I believe for the 35 watt amplifier module which
fits on a large heat sink that attaches to the back of the rig.

The finished rig won't have all the bells and whistles of a mobile
2 meter rig.. no scanning, and right now no DTMF mike to go with
it.. but it has internal provisions for tones and packet and they
are looking to put a matching mike or mike kit out for it.

The rig does have 15 memories, is small and looks very
professional (not like a kit) when completed.. does the offset and
non-standard offset.

The rig is built in sections and you test each section and get it
functional before proceeding.. I love this approach. The quality
of all parts is excellent.. the manual is excellent. the original
had a couple of minor errors, only one that would cause you
desoldering problems.. but they have already done an addendum that
caught all the problems I came across.. the Faxed it to me. The
support is excellent.. if you run into a problem,  you can talk to
someone I believe who designed it.. but at least he knows about
everything there is to know about the rig.

You only need a standard meter for most of the alignment. I found
the alignment process for all sections extremely easy.

I loved building the kit.. it works great and the enjoyment I had
building it justified its cost.

73
Jeff


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:42:03 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: test message
Date: Sun, 14 Apr 1996 02:25:27 GMT
Message-ID: <4kpjvo$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

brian@nothing (Brian Kantor) wrote:

>test message - ignore (testing the gateway)
test test ok. i'm ignoring your test message



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:42:04 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: The Perfect CW Station
Date: 10 Apr 1996 10:02:55 -0400
Message-ID: <4kgf2f$[e-mail]>

In article <4kf2tr$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (W
B3
U) writes:
>   [e-mail] wrote:
>
>>For all the OO's out there... Yes I do have a regulated B+ line so
>>you can quit putting that cure on the notices :-}
>
>I still remember the OO notice I got as a Novice.  Seems like my
>homebrew transmitter didn't like the doubler coils.  It worked fine on
>80M, but my 40M sig was a capital offense.  ;
>
>If you're looking for a nice CW rig, I've heard the Omni 6 is hard to
>beat.
>
>73,
>Jack  WB3U

Hi Jack;
    Boy I have gotten a stack of the OO notices in the last twenty years. All
    concerning my chirpy signals. I have never gotten one from the FCC.
    Sometimes I think I should apply for a Cuban callsign so I will quit
    getting the notices. Now don't all you people get upset and think I am
    slamming the Cubans. There is a good reason for their chirpy signals.
    The Cuban stations generaly don't have the luxery of stable 60 Hertz
    power.  I would challenge any station to try running a tube rig on power
    that runs from 50 HZ to 70HZ and not sound chirpy.

    Thanks for the hint on the Omni 6. I have operated the Century 21 and it
    was a nice rig. I almost bought one but my cousin traded it in for a TR4 C
W
    The Ten Tecs have nice QSK features.  I haven't run accross many of the
    TEN Tec rigs at hamfest. They must have lots of happy owners.

    73's    Dick K8WHA
    >


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:42:05 1996
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: The Perfect CW Station
Date: Tue, 09 Apr 96 23:21:10 GMT
Message-ID: <4kf2tr$[e-mail]>
References: <4ke0db$[e-mail]>

   [e-mail] wrote:

>For all the OO's out there... Yes I do have a regulated B+ line so
>you can quit putting that cure on the notices :-}

I still remember the OO notice I got as a Novice.  Seems like my
homebrew transmitter didn't like the doubler coils.  It worked fine on
80M, but my 40M sig was a capital offense.  ;

If you're looking for a nice CW rig, I've heard the Omni 6 is hard to
beat.

73,
Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:42:07 1996
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: The Transmitter Chassis (Was MFJ Artificial Ground)
Date: 13 Apr 1996 02:11:09 -0400
Message-ID: <4knght$[e-mail]>
References: <4kn1cs$[e-mail]>

In article <4kn1cs$[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (Mike McCarty) writes:

>ALL alternating current radiates. With coax, you have (nearly) equal
>currents flowing in opposite directions, with one enclosed in the other.
>Each of the currents then radiates an electromagnetic wave of (nearly)
>equal amplitude but (nearly) opposite phase. These interfere
>destructively, resulting in (nearly) zero radiation from the feedline.
>
>[rest gone]
>
>Mike

Please read what Mike wrote. That's exactly how ANY shield works.

Even the cabinet of the rig works that way. Without equal and opposite
fields, a shield will not work.

That is the reason current stays on the inside of a coaxial line, the
reason a transmission line does not readily radiate, and the reason
shields work.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:42:08 1996
From: [e-mail] (Mike McCarty)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: The Transmitter Chassis (Was MFJ Artificial Ground)
Date: 13 Apr 1996 01:52:27 GMT
Message-ID: <4kn1cs$[e-mail]>
References: <4k43ol$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4kbeqv$[e-mail]> <4kccpb$[e-mail]>

In article <4kccpb$[e-mail]>,
WB3U <[e-mail]> wrote:
)The discussion regarding artificial grounds and coax shield currents
)has raised a related issue that I think is widely misunderstood.
)
)First, it was stated in the other discussion that feedline currents
)radiate because they are unable to enter the transmitter and return to
)their source.  I have disputed this because there are many openings
)and pathways into the typical transmitter for current flowing on the
)outer chassis.  If the current is attracted to the inner chassis, and
)it appears that it is, it can find a way in.  The evidence of this is
)that RF in the shack often causes the internal workings of the
)transmitter to malfunction.  In addition, removing the cabinet of the
)transmitter will typically have little or no effect, good or bad, on
)the RF in the shack.

ALL alternating current radiates. With coax, you have (nearly) equal
currents flowing in opposite directions, with one enclosed in the other.
Each of the currents then radiates an electromagnetic wave of (nearly)
equal amplitude but (nearly) opposite phase. These interfere
destructively, resulting in (nearly) zero radiation from the feedline.

[rest gone]

Mike
--
----
char *p="char *p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}

I don't speak for DSC.         <- They make me say that.


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:42:09 1996
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: The Transmitter Chassis (Was MFJ Artificial Ground)
Date: Sun, 14 Apr 96 01:29:55 GMT
Message-ID: <4kps09$[e-mail]>
References: <4kn1cs$[e-mail]> <4knght$[e-mail]>

   [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) wrote:

>Please read what Mike wrote. That's exactly how ANY shield works.
>
>Even the cabinet of the rig works that way.

Except most cabinets have big holes and lots of wires going
in and out.  ;)

73,
Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:42:10 1996
From: Tom Ross <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: TM-231A
Date: 9 Apr 1996 01:25:29 GMT
Message-ID: <4kcea9$[e-mail]>

Does anyone out there still have a Kenwood TM-231A.  I just got mine back
after being repaired (it was out of service for a couple of years).  I
have lost my manual and can't remember how to program the thing!  I need
to get a hold of a manual.



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:42:11 1996
From: [e-mail] (Carl Hodder)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Trade 200 channel scanner for Icom R1
Date: 6 Apr 1996 06:28:35 GMT
Message-ID: <4k52uj$[e-mail]>

Not happy with your Icom R1 or just want a base scanner.

I will trade you a Realistic PRO-2022 200 channel scanner that
covers the full 800 MHz band including cellular. Same style as
the PRO-2005 or PRO-2006

This is one of the scanners that scan cellular in the proper
30 kHz steps and not 12.5 kHz steps.

200 channels divided into 10 groups of 20 channels and 10
monitor memories

Scanner has programmable priority channel, direct search
and limit search.

I believe the CE-232 and HB-232 computer interface can be
connected to this scanner.

Radio comes with original manual and box.


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:42:12 1996
From: [e-mail](Clifford Uyeda)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: TS850 vs TS450
Date: 10 Apr 1996 17:11:35 GMT
Message-ID: <4kgq47$[e-mail]>
References: <4kc5af$[e-mail]> <4keel9$[e-mail]>

>[e-mail] (John DeRuiter) wrote:
>>I am trying to decide between the Kenwood TS450 and TS850.  I work
>>primarily DX and am primarily interested in receiver performance.
>>From the specs, there does not seem to be much difference.  Is the
>>extra cost of the 850 worth it.  I would greatly appreciate any
>>comments
>>
>>73 and Thanks in advance
>>KJ7GU, John
>>

Your right! Very little difference in receiver specs in comparison.
However, my  money is on the TS-850S!  There is about a $300 difference
in sales price.

Here is the $300 worth of features.

Electronic Keyer
Variable speech and noise blanker
slope tuning
Quick memo
monitor for tx audio
dim for display
digital CW recorder/playback
optional- Voice recorder
audio- Hi boost

If your into DX, and want a competitve edge, get the TS-850S.  If your
on a budget and you want a radio that will work for all your ham needs
get the TS-450S.

Just my .02 cents worth



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:42:14 1996
Date: 10 Apr 1996 10:46:54 EDT
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (Hugh Duff)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4kd208$[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: TS850 vs TS450


> In article <4kc5af$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (John DeRuiter)

> tes:|> I am trying to decide between the Kenwood TS450 and TS850.  I work
> |> primarily DX and am primarily interested in receiver performance.
> |> From the specs, there does not seem to be much difference.  Is the
> |> extra cost of the 850 worth it.
>
>
> Get a 850 ! There does not seem to be much difference to the 450, but there
> are some small yet important advantages. The most important to me is the 850
'
> "slope tune" which works by adjusting the second and third oscillator and
> allows for blanking out unwanted signals that are close to the station you'r
e
> listening to. This feature is very helpful against heavy qrm, both on ssb an
d
> .
> vy 73, Wolfgang DJ3TZ
>

I have owned both radios.
Big difference in receiver performance between the 850 and 450.
The 850 has a lower noise floor, noticeably better dynamic range
and noise filtering (slope tuning as mentioned above).
The 450 suffers from front-end overload when band activity is high,
especially on 20 and 40M. ( I have not noticed this on my 850.)
The 850 also has some features that make DXing and contesting smoother
like a built-in CW keyer, optional voice recorder-playback, 2 levels
of RX attenuation, ect...
The tuner also works from 160 to 10M whereas the 450 tuner does not
cover 160M.
I believe you would be much happier with the 850 !


Regards...Hugh Duff  VA3TO  Toronto


---
 ■ NFX v1.3 [000]


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:42:15 1996
From: [e-mail] (ED WELCH)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: TS850 vs TS450
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 96 21:55:00 -0600
Distribution: world
Reply-To: [e-mail] (ED WELCH)
References: <[e-mail]>

-> I have both, and primarily use the 450 as a mobile/RV rig because of
-> it's smaller size. Both are very good, but the 850 definitely gets
-> the nod as a low noise receiver, and the ability to vary the passband
-> response really helps sort out weak signals. Good luck with your
-> choice - you won't be disappointed with either of them!

I too have been looking at these transceivers.  How about the built-in
antenna tuners?  Good?  External tuner better?  Thanks, I'm just getting
into HAM and all the options and choices are really bewildering.

Take care,

Ed Welch
[e-mail]
Cheaha!!!


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:42:16 1996
From: Saad Mahaini <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: TS850 VS. IC736 - Input Please
Date: 12 Apr 1996 21:18:34 GMT
Message-ID: <4kmhba$[e-mail]>

Does anyone have both of these two radios, and can provide a
comparison input on their capabilities and performance.



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:42:17 1996
From: [e-mail] (JOE BRANDT)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Tx/Rx Mods wanted for Alinco 180
Date: 12 Apr 1996 17:35:21 GMT
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4km48p$[e-mail]>

I have looked far and wide for Tx/Rx mods for the Alinco DJ-180 HT,
with no luck.
Anybody know of these mods, or have found that they just don't exist?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    _/       _/   _/_/_/_/       _/           _/_/_/     National
   _/ _/    _/   _/      _/    _/ _/        _/     _/    Radio
  _/   _/  _/   _/_/_/_/      _/____/      _/     _/     Astronomy
 _/     _/_/   _/      _/    _/     _/    _/     _/      Observatory
_/       _/   _/        _/  _/       _/    _/_/_/        Green Bank, WV
Joe Brandt (N0NYO) N.R. EMT/FF          [e-mail] [phone]
------------------------------------------------------------------------


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:42:19 1996
From: [e-mail] (Kevin Kadow)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,sci.electronics.equipment,sci.electronics.misc,alt.radio.scanner,rec.radio.scanner
Subject: Unlawful reception
Date: 10 Apr 1996 22:43:33 GMT
Message-ID: <4khdil$[e-mail]>
References: <4keg34$[e-mail]>

BTW, I am one of the people who originally pushed for the creation of the
alt.radio.scanner newsgroup when the rec.radio.* regulars were opposed to
the creation of rec.radio.scanner, which eventually passed a couple years
later.

In article <4keg34$[e-mail]>, Heli Maki <[e-mail]> wrote:
>What about radio waves genarally? What you need to catch them from the
>air? How is the right frequency adjusted? What kind of traffic in the
>air is possible to follow? Are there frequencies that are not allowed
>to listen. How is that prevented?

In many parts of Europe and 'authoritarian' countries in general, it may in
fact be illegal to own and/or operate radio _receivers_ capable of operating
on certain bands.

In the USA, it is unlawful to import or manufacture a radio receiver capable
of intercepting cellular telephone frequencies- there are also restrictions
on the interception of cordless phone conversations.

Until these laws were passed, all radio transmissions were fair game- the only
limitation being that in some instances (such as police broadcasts) it was
illegal to retransmit or otherwise convey the content of the conversation to
others. E.g. you can listen in, but you can't transcribe what you hear and
tell your friends.


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:42:20 1996
From: [e-mail] (Richard Ridgeway)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,sci.electronics.equipment,sci.electronics.misc,alt.radio.scanner,rec.radio.scanner
Subject: Re: Unlawful reception
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 23:47:34 GMT
Message-ID: <4kk8vs$[e-mail]>
References: <4keg34$[e-mail]> <4khdil$[e-mail]> <4khgk6$[e-mail]>

[e-mail] (Dana Myers) wrote:
>Kevin Kadow <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>In the USA, it is unlawful to import or manufacture a radio receiver capable
>>of intercepting cellular telephone frequencies.
>This is not true.  It is unlawful to import or sell a scanning receiver;
>scanning receiver in this context means 4 or more channels.  You can
>build a receiver that doesn't scan and the ban wouldn't apply.
>This is off the top of my head after reading Part 15 a few months ago.

I believe you are in error.  The law was put in place to prohibit
unathorized tapping of Telephone Conversations.  If you were to listen
to a Cell conversation, this would constitute tapping of the line as
only a small portion of the conversation is actually on the air.  The
rest is on copper or fiber.  This is the same with cordless phones.

Your statement about scanning rcvrs is also incorrect.  I can order a
rcvr with full coverage from 100khz to 1.9Ghz (except cellular bands)
with 1000 channels.  I did it this year when I purchased an AR8K.  The
loophole is manufacturing the scanner.  It states the unit cannot be
easly  modifable.  Yet multiple ads in magazines offer 800Mhz restore
for $40-$50.  Obviously, a loophole or just not being inforced.  I
purchased software and an interface for the 8K and all I had to do was
click a button on the screen and put the unit in download mode.  Real
easy if you ask me.  The law as it stands is esentially a joke.  Many
double conversion rcvrs will pick up cell when legal freqs are plugged
in and scanned.  Does this constitute as a violation of the law???  I
had a RS PRO-39 and while at the sceen of a suspected bankrobber hold
up in an apartment.  I heard the FBI talk about the suspect, I was
scanning legal trunk freqs.  Am I a criminal because I heard the
conversation, NO!  But IF I were to use that info maliciously and it
could be PROVED that I got it from the scanner then YES I would be
committing a crime.    Also, the conviction of the man how modified
receive only trunked radios to receive other talk groups than the
police dept had placed in them for the media was reversed. (can't
remember source, maybe MT or USSN)  There are more laws that apply to
scanning than part 15, try the ECPA.

73's

//r\\




From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:42:21 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Using a Measurements Model 59 Grid Dip Meter
Date: Sun, 14 Apr 1996 02:21:10 GMT
Message-ID: <4kpjnn$[e-mail]>
References: <4jsmlt$[e-mail]>

[e-mail] (Michael A. Fallavollita, Ph.D.) wrote:

>A freind and I just purchased an old Measurements
>(Technology/Instruments) Model 59 grid dip meter.  The problem is
>there isn't any documentation with the meter and we don't quite know
>how to use it. The biggest problem is that there isn't anywhere to
>attach the antenna.

>Can someone shed some light on how this thing is supposed to work?
>I'd really appreciate some insight.

>       -- Mike Fallavollita
>          [e-mail]
i too, have a '59. as the other reply mentioned, what i have is a
connector with 2 turns of 18 awg wire just larger than the coils on
the '59. connect this connector to the antenna coax and bring the
'59's coil to about 1", as you sweep thru the frequency dial, there
will be a pont where the meter will "dip", this is where the antenna
is hogging power from the meter. you'll need to set the "sensitivity"
knob to get the meter about 1/2 way up before you couple to an
antenna. another neat thing to do is to make an l/c circuit (obviously
do the math to see where it should resonate) and see how resonance
works. a valuable tool have a "standard" capacitor, like a 100pf
silver mica, and you can find unknown inductor values by looking for
resonance. the same goes the other way too, standard coil value,
unknown cap value.



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:42:22 1996
From: Bob Ludlum <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Viking Ranger
Date: Tue, 09 Apr 1996 18:23:25 -0700
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

I should have been more explicit. I am trying to determine a fair asking
price for a friend who wants to buy one from another friend. I think the
Ranger has a slight modification. A pot was installed on the front panel
but isn't connected to anything. No other mods. Cosmetically in good
shape and functional.

Bob K4LXA


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:42:23 1996
From: "Tom V. Pfaffenbach" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Viking Ranger
Date: 10 Apr 1996 20:39:58 GMT
Distribution: usa
Message-ID: <4kh6au$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

In 1958 the Viking Ranger sold new as a kit without tubes for 189.50. As
I recall it could be purchased factory wired for $229.00. In 1968 I
bought one used for $50.00. Back then it was just an "old" radio. Today
it is probably classified as a "nostalgia" item. If it has been taken
care of all of these years it should still look fine and and work
excellently. It may be worth considerably more than the "old" radio
price. It is a fine, durable, AM & CW transmitter,with excellent audio
quality. I had mine on the air last winter on 160 meters with a local AM
nostalgia net. It is still a lot of fun. It is worth what you can get!
Caveat Emptor -  let the buyer beware.

73 de K9JDU




From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:42:24 1996
From: Bob Ludlum <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Viking Ranger
Date: Mon, 08 Apr 1996 20:33:26 -0700
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Would someone venture a guess as to a fair selling price for an
operational Johnson Viking Ranger transmitter?

Bob K4LXA


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:42:25 1996
From: [e-mail] (j. selby)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: W.T.B.440S W/TUNER OR 450S
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 04:33:24 GMT
Message-ID: <4khr85$[e-mail]>

Looking for a ken. 440 or a 450 with built in tuner. must be in very
good condition. send reply with terms to jerry  tnx. n1umh



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:42:26 1996
From: Chris Boone <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: WANT: RPTR MOD for GE MVP mobile
Date: 9 Apr 1996 23:14:40 GMT
Message-ID: <4ker10$[e-mail]>
References: <4kb9de$[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]

I have the mods and will post them here for you OR email them...your
choice...

Chris
WB5ITT


444.5 Beaumont (MVP rptr since 1988)




From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:42:27 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] ("Stephen Walters")
Subject: Wanted Narrow CW filter for the FT101z Mk2
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 1996 22:23:04 GMT

Wanted Narrow CW filter for the FT101z Mk2
Does anyone have one of these for sale, new or second hand?

I am in London, England,

Steve, G7VFY, Tel [phone].


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:42:28 1996
From: [e-mail] (Jerry Flanders)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: WANTED...R-390A Meters...Can Anyone Help Me??
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 1996 18:28:06 GMT
Message-ID: <4kguja$[e-mail]>
References: <4jmcn5$[e-mail]> <CSLE87-1004960803560001@145.1.114.19>


><[e-mail]> wrote:

>> Hi,
>> Thanks for reading this posting. I am looking for the original
>> meters for a R-390A Receiver( One is the "Carrier Level" meter
>> and the other is the "Line Level" meter). If anyone has one or
>> both of these meters or knows where I can find them, please let
>> me know.
>>
>> Thanks alot,
>> George
>> KC2MF
>> [e-mail]
=====================================================================
Fair Radio Sales (somewhere in Ohio) has a pretty good assortment of
parts for the R-390/A receivers. Did you try them? E-mail me if you
need their phone nr.

Jerry W4UKU [e-mail]



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:42:29 1996
From: [e-mail] (Karl Beckman)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: WANTED...R-390A Meters...Can Anyone Help Me??
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 1996 08:03:56 -0500
Message-ID: <CSLE87-1004960803560001@145.1.114.19>
References: <4jmcn5$[e-mail]>

In article <4jmcn5$[e-mail]>, George Sereikas
<[e-mail]> wrote:

> Hi,
> Thanks for reading this posting. I am looking for the original
> meters for a R-390A Receiver( One is the "Carrier Level" meter
> and the other is the "Line Level" meter). If anyone has one or
> both of these meters or knows where I can find them, please let
> me know.
>
> Thanks alot,
> George
> KC2MF
> [e-mail]

Sorry to rain on your restoration project, but you will have a VERY
difficult timer finding these meters, and rightly so.  The original meters
utilized a "glow in the dark" radioactive phosphor dial paint.  DoD
required all R-390 users to place radiation warning labels on the front
panel of every receiver next to the meters.  Further, when these receivers
are taken out of service, the user is required to remove the meters and
send them to a low-level radioactive material disposal site.  It is not
possible for the average civilian to remove the radioactive paint and have
a non-radioactive working meter movement.

--
Karl Beckman, P.E.                <      If our English language is so   >
Motorola Pvt Data Systems         <   precise, why do you drive on the   >
Schaumburg, IL  /  Parma, OH      <   parkway and park on the driveway?  >
[phone] / [phone]
**  Schaumburg area code changes from 708 to 847 on January 20, 1996!   **
**  Opinions expressed here do NOT represent the views of Motorola Inc. **
--
Amateur radio WA8NVW                        NavyMARS NNN0VBH @ NOGBN.NOASI


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:42:30 1996
From: [e-mail] (DM McNeal)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: WTB Drake 1A
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 1996 08:35:19
Message-ID: <4kgaep$[e-mail]>

Since the Drake 1A was the first rx designed for SSB, I am hoping
to find one in mint condx for a nostalgically classic station.
Gus
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:42:31 1996
From: [e-mail] (mentor)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: WTB Icom R-9000
Date: 13 Apr 1996 18:39:29 GMT
Message-ID: <4kosd1$[e-mail]>

I would like to buy an Icom R-9000, in mint or better conditon
(non-smoker).  Please contact me by e-mail or at [phone] or
[phone].  Would "rjone1" please contact me.  Thanks very much!

                                        Jim N9CXU



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:42:32 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: WTB Standard C-508A
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 1996 23:02:30 GMT
Message-ID: <4kh7ci$[e-mail]>

If you have one to sell, email me.
Thanks.
Alex.



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:42:33 1996
From: rew5808 <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.swap,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.shortwave
Subject: wtb: allied cb & shortwave
Date: 12 Apr 1996 21:53:46 GMT
Message-ID: <4kmjda$[e-mail]>

looking for a knight-kit walkie talkie (model# c-100) 100mw cb from 1963
or 1964.  it was blue.

also, need a knight-kit ""span master" 4-band shortwave receiver (built
or unbuilt).  this receiver is also from 1934 or 1964.

would also be interested in lafayette, heathkit, or allied catalogs from
1962 to 1966.

thanks
bobby
wb5wur




From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:42:34 1996
From: [e-mail] (Sam Wang)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: WTB: cheap TNC
Date: 10 Apr 1996 23:48:11 GMT
Message-ID: <4khhbr$[e-mail]>

I'm looking to buy an inexpensive TNC that would work with an Icom 2AT.
If you have one for sale, write to me with description, condition, and
price.

[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:42:35 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.swap,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (Michael L. Ardai)
Subject: WTB: Icom IC900 control head
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 9 Apr 1996 02:51:55 GMT


I have an Icom IC-900 radio, but no control head (and of course, Icom
hasn't had these in years...)  If you have a control head lying around,
please let me know.  If you know anything about the serial protocol
between the head and the "A" unit (Icom doesn't know this either), I'd
appreciate that too, since I don't mind hacking together a head.
Thanks very much.
/mike

--
\|/     Michael L. Ardai        N1IST       [e-mail]     \|/
-*- --- Boston Amateur Radio Club:  http://www.barc.org/barc --- -*-
/|\        or send "info barc-list to [e-mail]        /|\


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:42:37 1996
From: "David W. Biddle" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.swap,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: WTB: Icom IC900 control head
Date: 10 Apr 1996 14:50:48 GMT
Message-ID: <4kghs8$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]

If you can't find the parts you need and want to sell the radio
as parts let me know I have two of these radios and would like
to acquire some backup parts.
Thanks
David
David W. Biddle
41 Valley Run Drive
Cromwell Ct. 06416
860-632-9390



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:42:38 1996
From: Bob Curci <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: WTB: Manual for IC-3200
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 22:34:41 -0400
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

I am in need of a operator's manual for an Icom IC-3200. If anyone has one and
 would
like to part with it or a copy of it, I would be glad to pay for shipping and
copying
costs. Thanks

Bob.
N2XWK




From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:42:39 1996
From: Steve Cockburn <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: WTB: TEN-TEC LINEAR
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 08:37:41 +0100
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

I am looking for a TEN-TEC Centurian or similar in good condition for a
friend (Staurt GM0CAQ) . Please email with details.

Many thanks

Steve GM0VXB
--
Steve Cockburn


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:42:40 1996
From: [e-mail] (RH3333)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: WTB:8873/8874/8875 TUBES
Date: 5 Apr 1996 12:32:55 -0500
Message-ID: <4k3lg7$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (RH3333)

Am looking to purchase new Eimac 8873, 8874, and 8875
Please Email me with availability and cost.
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:42:41 1996
From: [e-mail] (Larry Fisher)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: yaesu 2100B
Date: 12 Apr 1996 05:54:36 GMT
Message-ID: <4kkr6s$[e-mail]>

I've got a 2100B that doesn't do it to it anymore.  The plate and grid
resistors keep burning out and I believe now the tubes are cratered.  The
cost to repair AGAIN is out of the question.  Why should I continue to
throw good money after a bad design??  I need to know if any of you out
there in cyberland have modified this hummer to be a different animal that
actually lasts beyond 30 hrs of operation.  I hate to dump this boat anchor,
the transformer puts out plenty of power......there should be some other
tubes and associated bits of carbon and porcelin to make this thing fly more
gooder more longer eh??  73 KI7RI    or Kay seventeen are one    or
Killowatt India Seven Ruptured Intestine.
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
                     AMERICAN PIANO & ORGAN TECHNOLOGY
                specialist in retrofits for acoustic pianos
                      email [e-mail] about
           PianoDisc, QuietTime, PianoCD, Pianomation & Disklavier
       Check out my homepage http://pacifier.com/~larryf/homepage.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:42:42 1996
From: [e-mail] (Anonymous)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Yaesu FT-50R DUAL BAND
Date: 11 Apr 1996 06:55:33 GMT
Message-ID: <4kiad5$[e-mail]>

        Can anyone tell whether the Yaesu's new Dual-Band 2m/70cm

hand-held radio is modifiable or not.. If you have any other comments

about the radio please email me at :  [e-mail]


thanks
steve foster
\



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:42:43 1996
From: White Heat <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Yaesu FT-51R and 41R
Date: 13 Apr 1996 21:48:30 GMT
Message-ID: <4kp7fe$gts$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

Hi i also own an FT-51RH (5 watt battery fnb-38) and i have found
there are a couple of mods and most of them are for out of band
transmit, i have not performed these mods but i have heard they
work quite well... there is some features that can be accessed by
holding the volume up/down buttons and the call button when
turning on the radio, if you find anymore info please E-MAIL it to
me thanx..
                73's
            Chris KC8BTV


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:42:44 1996
From: [e-mail] (Jerry Cupples)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Yaesu FT-8500 noise?
Date: Sat, 13 Apr 1996 08:38:15 -0500
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Recently got a new FT-8500 dual band mobile rig.

I've noticed a low-level high frequency audio noise in the background,
particularly irritating if using a headset, but audible even from the
internal speaker. This noise is present whether or not the squelch is
broken and is unaffected by changing the volume control setting.

If using only the speaker, this is not too irritating, as the sound is
directional, and would not be obtrusive in a noisy mobile setting. I'd
guess it to be 8 kHz or so, and pretty consistent in tone.

Has anyone else observed anything like this? My FT-51R HT is dead quiet
when the squelch is unbroken, and I'm thinking of sending the FT-8500
back, but if it is something characteristic of this model I'd like to
know...

Otherwise, the radio is OK, comments on my signal have been very good, and
the rig is remarkably compact and solid mechanically. The MH-39 mike is
nice enough, although this radio has practically no controls besides power
and freq  otherwise. It has a small and fairly quiet two-speed cooling fan
in the rear heat sink, thermostatically controlled. Display looks/works
good.

BTW, you do not get the remote faceplate kit except as an option.

cheers,

Jerry Cupples
KC5SXA


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 14 17:42:45 1996
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 21:24:36 -0700
From: "Chris M. Bridges" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Yaesu FT-890

I Just bought a FT-890. Are their any mods other than tx mod?
Any firware upgrades?
Any Yaesu mailing list?
Any info on this rig would be Welcome!
Thanks for reading this post.
--

   Chris M. Bridges
   >>>>>N4FAN<<<<<<
   [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:50:37 1996
From: Calvin Burnette <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: 2m 3db Base Ant  25+shipping
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 1996 00:53:09
Message-ID: <4kskj5$[e-mail]>

    Hello All... Cal here..

            I have for sale a 2 meter base ant that is new in
       the box... bought 2 of them and only using one... SWR
       is great and it is easy to mount.. about 6ft long...
       no radials sticking out at the bottom... if you are
       interested, I will take 25 and you pay the shipping....
       Will ship C.O.D. or send check for 30.00
       (5 bucks extra for shipping) to:

                   Calvin Burnette
                   Rt 1 Box 561-B
                   Rustburg, VA 24588

                                        73





73, .... Cal, [e-mail]
73, .... Cal, [e-mail]



From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:50:39 1996
From: [e-mail] (Bob Duckworth)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Akaline Disposal
Date: 14 Apr 1996 16:08:07 -0400
Message-ID: <4krlv7$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4kdkfc$[e-mail]> <4kpkid$[e-mail]>

In article <4kpkid$[e-mail]>,  <[e-mail]> wrote:
>[e-mail] wrote:
>
>>[e-mail] (Lauren Schiff) wrote:
>
>>>Hello,
>
>>>     I am currently researching alkaline
>>>disposal/recycling.  Our search and rescue team is located in
>>>Charlottesville, Virginia.
>
>>>     Lauren
>
>
>>I have to admit I am intreagued by your post. Alkaline what disposal?
>>Batteries?  What does this have to do with Search & Rescue?  I can see
>>it now... You are performing a search/rescue in the mountains but your
>>battery dies... Halt.  Call it off.  "Give a hoot-Don't pollute",
>>Back to the base men/women!  We must be environmentally/politically
>>correct.
>
>
>>           C. Dean Norris
>>      Amateur Radio Station K7NO
>>      e-mail to [e-mail]
>
>they make lovely earrings
>

It's a valid concern. Alkaline batteries contain a significant
amount of Mercury. I would not be surprised if some of the battery
manufacturers have recycling programs.

At one time radio shack advertised that they would accept
Alkaline batteries for recycling but the store managers
I spoke with knew nothing of the program.

-bob

--
Bob Duckworth Consulting, 960 Ralph McGill Blvd. Atlanta GA 30306-4447
bobs' address is [e-mail]    404-888-0389(V) 892-2301(FAX)
Buy Sell Trade Surplus Computer Electronics Datacom Telecom since 1981.
Fax or email your list for a fast cash offer. Watch for listserv catalog.


From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:50:40 1996
From: [e-mail] (Russ Rinckey)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: AMP HOOK UP FOR IC706
Date: 13 Apr 1996 11:42:45 GMT
Message-ID: <4ko3vl$[e-mail]>


Any body out there running a amp with a 706? I need to hook up my AL 80
. Looks like you use pin 3 on the acc bot 20 ma isnt going to get it you
must have to find a light relay to switch with les than that. Any help
would be great.


From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:50:41 1996
From: [e-mail] (John Furlow)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: AMP HOOK UP FOR IC706
Date: 16 Apr 1996 15:17:56 GMT
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4l0dn4$[e-mail]>
References: <4ko3vl$[e-mail]> <4kovim$[e-mail]>

I use a Yaesu FRB 757 relay to switch my Heath SB201. It wires into the
ACC socket to get 12vdc and gnd and then wires to amp jack on amp from
relay module.
706 manual has pin out info on page 6 . Pin 2 gnd on relay module pin 8
13.8vdc to relay module. DO NOT WIRE AMP DIRECTLY TO 706. AES Orlando has
more info if you call them. I would suggest you confirm this with either
AES or ICOM ( Gary Fiber)

John WA4BMG



From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:50:42 1996
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: AMP HOOK UP FOR IC706
Date: 17 Apr 1996 02:00:29 -0400
Message-ID: <4l21dt$[e-mail]>
References: <4l0dn4$[e-mail]>

In article <4l0dn4$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(John Furlow) writes:

>I use a Yaesu FRB 757 relay to switch my Heath SB201. It wires into the
>ACC socket to get 12vdc and gnd and then wires to amp jack on amp from
>relay module.
>706 manual has pin out info on page 6 . Pin 2 gnd on relay module pin 8
>13.8vdc to relay module. DO NOT WIRE AMP DIRECTLY TO 706. AES Orlando has

>more info if you call them. I would suggest you confirm this with either
>AES or ICOM ( Gary Fiber)
>
>John WA4BMG

Be careful because the Yaesu relay may even exceeed the 706's ratings. 20
mA is the maximum current and no voltage is given.

What is the current of the Yaesu relay?

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:50:43 1996
From: Steve Dworkin <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,li.wanted
Subject: Antenna Hardware Supplier ???
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 1996 20:34:03 GMT
Message-ID: <4l3kla$[e-mail]>

I am looking for a supplier of stainless or
galvanized antenna hardware.  The U-Bolts and
Saddles seem to be the tough ones.

(Wilson, the company that originally manufactured
the antenna is no longer in existence.)

Please e-mail suggestions to: [e-mail].


Steve Dworkin, N2MDQ
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:50:44 1996
From: [e-mail] (Carl Hodder)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Anyone own a Yaesu FT-221R transceiver?
Date: 13 Apr 1996 03:48:29 GMT
Message-ID: <4kn86d$[e-mail]>

I am looking for a copy of an owners or service manual for a Yaesu FT-221R
2 meter all-mode transceiver. Would also like to know the differences between
the FT-221 and FT-221R.


From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:50:45 1996
From: [e-mail] (crum)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: ARRL insurance
Date: 13 Apr 1996 21:50:09 -0600
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Thanks to everyone who replied or posted about ARRL insurance.
It sounds great.  All replies from experienced people were positive;
besides the followups posted, I got two messages by e-mail from people
who had processed claims with no trouble.




From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:50:46 1996
From: Burt Fisher <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: ARRL insurance
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 1996 09:03:08 -0400
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

--------------5D6566644641
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

crum wrote:
>
> Thanks to everyone who replied or posted about ARRL insurance.
> It sounds great.  All replies from experienced people were positive;
> besides the followups posted, I got two messages by e-mail from people
> who had processed claims with no trouble.

--------------5D6566644641
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline; filename="Tnx"

How many times do I have to read messages from hams that send a
"Thank You" addressed to ALL. When one seeks help and
someone takes the time to respond, the least the receiver of
help can do is send a simple individual reply for thanks. After
all-the respondents to this call for help responded one by one.
I have received up to 75 messages in a call for help and sent
individual thanks to each. It was very time consuming, but it
was the right thing to do.

Would you at your wedding, if you were the groom, get up at the
end of the reception and yell out, "Gee, Thanks everyone for the
gifts?"
If you are a  T Y P I C A L  ham--absolutely.

It is unlikely you will respond to this if you did not even bother to
respond to someone who  H E L P E D  you.
--------------5D6566644641--



From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:50:47 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Coax Shield Current (Was Re: MFJ Artificial Ground)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
References: <4k43ol$[e-mail]> <4ke5il$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4kihkr$[e-mail]> <4kn142$[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 13 Apr 1996 23:44:16 GMT

In article <4kn142$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (M
ike McCarty) writes:
>In article <4kihkr$[e-mail]>,
>WB3U <[e-mail]> wrote:
>)This does not mean that voltage is not a substance, however.  I used
>)the phrase "essential essence" intentionally, as this is the very
>)first definition of "substance" according to my copy of Webster's.
>
>Voltage is not a substance. It is a name for the UNIT OF MEASURE (like
>"inch") for the ElectroMotive Force (EMF).

Yeah, sort of, but that's not telling the essence. It certainly gives
the wrong impression. The volt isn't a unit of force, it is a *work*
function that measures how much work it takes to move one coulomb of
charge a specific distance against a specified field gradient. It has
units of J/C (joules per coulomb). Work is, of course, force*distance,
so force is certainly part of what constitutes the volt, but so is
distance, the two end points locating Vab or the *potential difference*
of the field gradient across which you are measuring. Thus the volt has
no meaning unless it is measured between *two* points. There can be no
naked potential.

You always have to ask, "relative to what?" when talking about the voltage
at a certain point. And you are perfectly free to choose that "what" to
be any point you like, and you'll get a different voltage for every different
"what" you choose (assuming the points chosen don't form an equipotential
surface around the other point). However, if you don't choose the "what"
carefully, the voltage you read may be meaningless to the circuit in
question. That "what" has to be another point through which the charge
represented by the coulomb part of the volt can move, IE the point must
be inside the topology of the circuit where Kirchhoff's laws hold, if
it is to have any meaning to the circuit. In such a circuit, charge
must be conserved.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | Due to provider problems
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | with previous uucp address
es
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | Email to [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:50:49 1996
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Coax Shield Current (Was Re: MFJ Artificial Ground)
Date: Sun, 14 Apr 96 20:19:31 GMT
Message-ID: <4kru6j$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4kmu2o$[e-mail]>

   [e-mail] (Tom Bruhns) wrote:

>But I do have a problem about "potentials attracting" (or repelling)
>each other.  It's the charged particles that interact with each other
>through electrostatic and dynamic forces.

Hi Tom,

This terminology is not an uncommon means of viewing and analyzing
a circuit.  In my case, it's the result of thousands of hours of
schematic analysis and equipment troubleshooting.  Like others in the
field, I have found that this language not only provides a perspective
unencumbered by particle theory, it is universally understood.

The process of analyzing and troubleshooting equipment at the
component level is not too different from the exercise we have been
involved with here.  In addition, because the audience is diverse and
because particle theory is mostly unnecessary to gaining an
understanding of the circuit, I chose this particular wording.

Gary also took exception to my use of this terminology, but for less
valid reasons than yours.  Because his own statements regarding the
circuit were (and continue to be) severely flawed, he chose to shift
the focus from the ongoing analysis to terms and definitions.
Unfortunately, a review of the "correction" to my statements reveals a
set of definitions and explanations that could not possibly be applied
without bringing the discussion of shield current to an immediate and
chaotic halt.  That was, of course, the intended result.  Readers left
without an understanding of the circuit would remain unable to discern
fact from fiction, or more to the point, to associate each with its
respective author(s).

As a side note, in the many years that I was involved in equipment
service, the worst examples of "butchered" equipment came at the hands
of two groups; those with inadequate electronics exposure and
experience, and electrical engineers.  For the latter, it's my
opinion that in many cases their professional skills were geared to
finer pursuits, and that simply put, the individual was often unable
to see the forest for the trees.

I don't mean to demean the engineering profession with this comment,
nor do I mean to stereotype all engineers.  I have met many engineers
who were expert at both design and failure analysis, as well as those
who could do neither.  Rather, I only mean to say that the skills each
of us acquires are usually most effective when applied to their
intended endeavors.

So it goes with terminology and I maintain that the wording I used was
appropriate to both the general audience and the analysis.  Any
attempt to disassemble the inner workings of the circuit at the
particle level is not only unnecessary, but potentially destructive to
the purpose of the discussion.

It is hoped that you and others will consider my description in the
context of the nature of the discussion at hand, and will not take
offense.  In all honosty, had this thread been an exercise to acquaint
readers with the Artificial Ground or shield currents through particle
analysis, I would not have bothered to even get involved.  Such a
discussion would be far too silly and far too useless to be worth
anyone's time or effort.  ;)

73,
Jack WB3U


From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:50:50 1996
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Coax Shield Current (Was Re: MFJ Artificial Ground)
Date: Sun, 14 Apr 96 08:18:38 GMT
Message-ID: <4kqjup$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4kiuge$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4klhk7$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

The ARRL Antenna Book states that a 1/4 wave feedline (or odd
multiple) will minimize antenna currents when "the coupling apparatus
is grounded at the transmitter."  It further states that "if the
transmitter has fairly large capacitance to ground, a system of this
length will be effectively detuned for the fundamental and all even
harmonics when grounded to the transmitter at the coupling apparatus."

Gary, this contradicts most of your claims relating to shield length
and ground.  It deserves your comments.

73,
Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:50:51 1996
From: [e-mail] (Rob Whitacre)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Coax Shield Current (Was Re: MFJ Artificial Ground)
Date: 15 Apr 1996 14:07:10 GMT
Message-ID: <4ktl6e$[e-mail]>
References: <4kaua0$[e-mail]> <4ke5il$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4kjhck$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4kp6oh$[e-mail]>

In article <4kp6oh$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
says...
>
>>[e-mail] (WB3U) writes:
>  [e-mail] (Gary Coffman) wrote:
>
>>>What you've missed is that current drawn from those two poles is
>>>forced to be equal and opposite by the inherent nature of the fields
>>>inside the coax.  Therefore, regardless of the load at the far end
>>>of the coax, the load seen by the transmitter itself is *always*
>>>balanced at both poles.  Nothing is attempting to draw more current
>>>from one pole than the other, therefore there is no need for any
>>>"return" current in order to balance the transmitter.  **This
>>>condition is satisfied whenever coax is attached to the
>>>transmitter.**
>
>>Ok, so if we believe this,
>
>Gary, if you don't believe that the currents on the inside of the coax
>are forced to be equal and opposite by the internal fields, we can
>stop here.  This is one of the basic attributes of coax and you should
>address this issue for yourself post haste.
>


Jack is absolutely right here about the coaxial transmission line. The
mathematics of the situation requires the current to be equal and opposite on
the inner conductor and inside of the outer conductor.  At the load end some
sort of impedance is connected between these two points. Part of this
impedance could be a path which includes the outside of the coax. This does
not upset any fundamental laws or require any other current sources.  This
can be difficult to visualize, but that doesn't mean we should change
electromagnetic theory.

Rob WB8WQA



From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:50:53 1996
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Coax Shield Current (Was Re: MFJ Artificial Ground)
Date: 16 Apr 1996 00:36:23 -0400
Message-ID: <4kv847$[e-mail]>
References: <4ktl6e$[e-mail]>

In article <4ktl6e$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Rob
Whitacre) writes:

>
>Jack is absolutely right here about the coaxial transmission line. The
>mathematics of the situation requires the current to be equal and
opposite on
>
>the inner conductor and inside of the outer conductor.  At the load end
some
>sort of impedance is connected between these two points. Part of this
>impedance could be a path which includes the outside of the coax. This
does
>not upset any fundamental laws or require any other current sources.
This
>can be difficult to visualize, but that doesn't mean we should change
>electromagnetic theory.
>
>Rob WB8WQA

Another good explaination. Right on Rob!

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:50:54 1996
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Coax Shield Current (Was Re: MFJ Artificial Ground)
Date: 14 Apr 1996 10:06:29 -0400
Message-ID: <4kr0p5$[e-mail]>
References: <4kqjup$[e-mail]>


Hi Jack,
In article <4kq1mh$[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (WB3U) writes:

>My apologies Tom, you were correct.  If it's shunt fed in the center,
>it behaves like two 1/4 waves.  It will have a low impedance at the
>bottom and a high impedance at the top.  BTW, I also found some
>interesting information on J-fed 3/4 wave towers, but that's another
>story.
>
>The other thing I discovered is that the 1/2 wave shunt-fed vertical
>is in no way a "classic example" of anything other than a 1/2 wave
>shunt-fed vertical.  Can I suggest that we resolve the issues that are
>actually relevant to this thread before moving on to areas like this?
>
>73,
>Jack  WB3U

No need to worry or appologize Jack. You're always disagree in a
non-personal and mature way.

The grounded shunt fed 1/2 wave vertical may be a bit tricky to
understand, but it is also good for proving the point about feedline
lengths. If that antenna is modeled (using a program capable of analyzing
currents at close spacings) you'll see something interesting. When
shunt-fed at a point 1/4 wl above earth the tower has very little current
below the shunt feed wire tie-in point!

If I were going to build a system like that I'd use a skirt for a feed
wire.

Anyway, the very example given by someone to discredit well accepted fact
actually confirms the fact someone was attempting to disprove.

Use a 1/4 wl coaxial feeder to a dipole, and the line will have minimum
parallel line currents (as a general rule). Use a 1/2 wl feeder, and the
line length helps bring the problem right home to the hamshack.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:50:55 1996
From: [e-mail](Jeff Jurenka )
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: DCI-100 Digital Voice Mail For Ham Radio.
Date: 15 Apr 1996 01:02:19 GMT
Message-ID: <4ks76r$[e-mail]>

Are there any users out here who have any information on the DCI-100?
This is a pc board for the IBM compatable  that can make a voice mail
system for ham radio. I am looking for a software upgrade above 4.0 .
If anyone eles has tricks that they have found and would like to share
with the rest of us please make them public.
If anyone has one out there that they dont want anymore please let me
know.

Jeff "Mark" Jurenka
DBH_Prod [e-mail]
[phone]



From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:50:55 1996
From: Mark Pettigrew <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Digital Recording Units for TS870
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 1996 15:31:04 -0700
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Anyone know if you can use the DRU-2 digital recording unit in the TS870
(for which the manual says it needs a DRU-3)?

Thanks in anticipation

Mark
G0WLR


From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:50:56 1996
From: [e-mail] (Tom )
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: DX-70 , TS-50 - IC706 receivers
Date: Sun, 14 Apr 1996 15:27:27 GMT
Message-ID: <4kquoo$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

I am looking for comments on the receiver performances of the
small hf transceivers??? Which one has the best receiver?  I am
not much concerned about 6 or 2 meters - primarily hf performance.
Which radio has the better sounding receiver characteristics?



From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:50:57 1996
From: [e-mail] (Clifford Buttschardt)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: FS Yaesu FT890
Date: 11 Apr 96 02:17:41 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Mint condition with warranty card TS890 with 500 Hz CW filter.
Protective LCD coating and cardboard backing still in place.
Microphone modified to incorporate electret cartridge.  Matching
FT757 switching power supply available.
All of above $1250 with shipping double boxed within USA.
All of the above WITHOUT FT 757 switching power supply, $950.
Cliff Buttschardt   W6HDO       [e-mail]
[phone]
Morro Bay, Calif


From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:50:58 1996
From: [e-mail] (louis)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: FS: Large  MILITARY COMM SHELTER
Date: Sat, 13 Apr 1996 22:47:58 GMT
Message-ID: <4kpb4j$[e-mail]>

I acquired some military shelters that I had planed a use for, but I did not e
ver see the project through.  I
am selling these shelters and thought you might like to check out a few photos
 of them.  If you click on the thumb
nail you can see the larger picture in 800 x 600 resolution.  The shelters are
 rated to block Rf frequencies
up to, I believe, 1.3GHz and at 120db of attenuation.  These would make Ideal
radio repair rooms.  The construction of
the units are double aluminum clad over a foam core with an outer kevlar skin
( Bullet resistant! ).  In pictures 8 and 9 you
will notice that the shelter can be used with a 40 foot Wil-Burt pneumatic 9 s
ection mast.  I am selling these masts separately
if desired.  If you would like the shelter with out the mast I can reduce the
price some what.  These masts are like the
ones on the news vans, except that these are built to Mil Spec and the origina
l cost to the defense contractor was $20,000 each.
Don't worry that is not my asking price.

I will sell you the mast separately for $2,500
I am asking $5,000 for a shelter with a mast, and I am asking $3,500 for a She
lter with out the mast.
If anyone would like more details, I can be reached at [phone] ask for
Louis or E-mail   [e-mail]

To see photos of these shelters use your web brouser and go to this URL

http://home.ptd.net/~louis/forsale/forsale.html



From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:50:59 1996
From: [e-mail] (Waltech007)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: FS: Midland UHF 70-245AXT
Date: 15 Apr 1996 01:23:09 -0400
Message-ID: <4ksmft$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Waltech007)

UHF, Low Split, 16 channel, 2/5 watt, tone board with battery, antenna and
belt clip...Unknown battery condition...No Charger...$75.00 shipped
COD....
Interested?   E-mail [e-mail]...


From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:51:00 1996
From: [e-mail] (Fred Moore)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: FS: UHF Amplifier D1010 Mirage 250 Dollars
Date: 16 Apr 1996 23:19:50 GMT
Message-ID: <4l19um$[e-mail]>

For sale Mirage D1010 with N connectors  Firm 250 dollars,  Works well, like
new condition.  10 watts in 100 watts out.  I will pay UPS shipping, Either I
send it UPS COD or you send certified funds in advance. Of course cash also
works.

Fred Moore
Daytime [phone]
Evening [phone]

Orlando Florida.



From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:51:01 1996
From: Josh Pavlovich <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: FS: Yaesu FT-10 in new condition
Date: Sun, 14 Apr 1996 16:11:22 -0700
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

I am selling the high power version of the Yaesu FT-10. This is the
top of the line with the voice memory chip and all. 99 channels, pl
encode and decode, dpl, paging functions. If you want more info email
me. I paid $305 for it about a month ago, and have hardly used it. I
think I may have charged the battery 4 or 5 times. I prefer to sell it
to someone locally, but will ship if necessary. I live near Santa
Cruz, so anyone in the SF Bay area is pretty local. Asking price is
$290/offer.

Josh
--
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:51:02 1996
From: [e-mail] (David Thomas)
Newsgroups: misc.industry.electronics.marketplace,sci.electronics.equipment,sci.electronics.repair,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.swap
Subject: FS:100 Mhz O-Scope Dual Trace
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 1996 00:49:10 GMT
Message-ID: <4kug78$[e-mail]>

5 Kikusui COS6100M 100 Mhz, 5-Channel Portable Oscilloscopes. Has up
to
12 traces. 5mv to 5V per division (1 mv with magnifier), 2% accuracy.
Extrememly light (only 21 pounds). Trigger lock allows for stable,
automatic triggering. Can display several lissajous patterns at once.
Meets military specifications. Great scopes, excellent condition.
$350.00 each. Please call Jon Friedman at [phone] for more
info.or e-mail [e-mail]
Email me at [e-mail]




From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:51:02 1996
From: [e-mail] (David Thomas)
Newsgroups: misc.industry.electronics.marketplace,sci.electronics.equipment,sci.electronics.repair,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.swap
Subject: FS:Microwave Freq. Counter
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 1996 00:49:01 GMT
Message-ID: <4kug6v$[e-mail]>

for sale EIP model 545 Microwave Frequency Counter 10Hz upto 18 Ghz
reply with best offer $$$$ for more info call [phone] or e-mail
[e-mail]
Email me at [e-mail]




From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:51:03 1996
From: [e-mail] (David Thomas)
Newsgroups: misc.industry.electronics.marketplace,sci.electronics.equipment,sci.electronics.repair,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.swap
Subject: FS:Polarad Microwave Signal Generator
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 1996 04:38:19 GMT
Message-ID: <4l1i0r$[e-mail]>

I have a Polarad Microwave signal generator New in the box with
manuals & probes. asking $500.00 OBO call John at [phone] or
e-mail [e-mail]
Email me at [e-mail]




From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:51:04 1996
From: Jimmy Hall <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: FT-10R MARS Mods
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 1996 17:29:20 -0500
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Hello,
I am looking for MARS mods for the Yaesu FT-10R Handy???

Jimmy KJ5QN


From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:51:05 1996
From: Jimmy Hall <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: FT-10R MARS Mods
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 1996 17:36:07 -0500
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Hello,
I am looking for the Mars Mods for the Yaesu FT-10R Handy??

Jimmy KJ5QN


From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:51:06 1996
From: [e-mail] (Marcus)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: FT-736R vs TS-790 vs IC-820H
Date: 16 Apr 1996 14:27:06 GMT
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4l0anq$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4ku6mc$[e-mail]>

In article <4ku6mc$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
says...
>
>    If you don't want other bands then stay a way from the Yaesu 736 - my
>experience is they have poor receivers. They overload easily with strong
>ssb signals. The Kenwood 790 has a better receiver and you can monitor
>both bands at the same time - you can NOT do that with the 736. I don't
>know much amout the Icom 820. Kenwood and Yaesu are both overdue for new
>multimode vhf/uhf rigs. Good luck.   --- Steve N9ROU
>


I Heard Rumors that YAESU is comming out with a new RADIO to replace the
FT736R and it may start hitting the Ham Mags around the last quarter 96.



From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:51:07 1996
From: [e-mail] (J. Crawford)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.space
Subject: Re: FT-736R vs TS-790 vs IC-820H
Date: 16 Apr 1996 13:23:31 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4kur8k$[e-mail]>


In article <4kur8k$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Vince Fiscus,
KB7ADL) wrote:

> In article <[e-mail]>,
>    Joseph M Zawodny <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >Hello,
> >
> >       I am considering one of the following for a satellite, packet,
> >and SSB contesting: FT-736R, TS-790, or IC-820H.  Assume that I am only
> >interested in the 2m and 70cm bands so I don't care about plug in extras
> >such as additional bands and the like.  What are the pro's and cons for
> >each of these rigs?  I will be using these with computer control, what
> >information can I get FROM the radio via the computer interface?  Since
> >the 820 is rather new, how does the computer interface differ from the
> >IC-970?  Will a program that was designed for use with the IC-970 work
> >with the IC-820H?  I read the QST review of the 820H, but found that it
> >did not address many of the items mentioned above.
> >
> >       TIA 4 the info.
> >
> >               Joe
> >
>
>
> Hi Joe,
>
> I don't know about the other radio's, but I like the TS-790.  The TS-790
could
> be improved some, but it is some a good radio for satellite.
>
> 73 de KB7ADL


Joe,

I bought the Ic-820H to use for Satellite work and had a lot of problems with
the interfaces to control the radio's freq., mode, etc.  The support from Icom
was not any help.  I worked with it for 60 days and finally traded it in on a
new TS-790.  I was up and running with full computer control of the radio,
antenna tracking, and Packet TNC in less than a day.  I looked at the
FT-736R
but never tried it out.  The TS-790 is the oldest of the group, but it does th
e
job as advertised.

73 from K╪GH


From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:51:08 1996
From: [e-mail] (Burch Akin)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: FT736R performance on 70cm
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 1996 20:01:57 GMT
Message-ID: <4kua0b$[e-mail]>
References: <4kjqdv$[e-mail]> <4kmq37$[e-mail]>

[e-mail] wrote:

>Dale:  Have you heard rumors of a 746R?  Tom KD2MF

I talked to a Yaesu employee and he said there were no plans to
replace the FT-736R in the next two years(this was in January.)  He
said that a new radio would probably be in the works after the Phase
3-D Sat. has been up in operation for awhile.  He also said that the
FT-736R was has been Yaesu's best selling radio for years, so as long
as it sells they  probably won't change much.

KE4ZQV




From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:51:09 1996
From: Greg Fox
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Handheld 2-meter
Date: 15 Apr 1996 17:15:14 GMT
Message-ID: <4ku072$[e-mail]>

I am new to Ham radio market and I'm looking at getting a handheld 2-meter rad
io.  Can anyone give
me some info on what brands and features I should look for??  I was looking at
 the Yaesu FT-10R
and FT-11R, any suggestions.  Thanks.

-Greg
([e-mail])


From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:51:10 1996
From: Peter Shintani <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Help me, IC706 rx pre-amp etc
Date: 15 Apr 1996 23:55:38 GMT
Message-ID: <4kunlq$[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]

Hi Gary and others:
1)      I was looking over the schematics of the IC-706 and was shocked to
see that the pre-amp circuit was not discrete but an NEC upc1658.
(I should have realized that for cost and size restraints ICOM
would have to revert to IC's  for efficiency) .I looked up  the specs
and was shocked to see that the nf was listed as 2.0 whereas
typical FET tr's used in pre-amps are in the sub 0.5 nf range.
I was wondering if this is just my imagination or misunderstanding
but is a front end amp with an nf of 2.0 going to make my
rx noisey in comparison to a discrete implementation with a lower nf  ?
( would the affect only be noticeable on 6m or 2m ? but not at hf ?)

2) I was wondering if anyone has figured out how to hot rod the SSB tx per
formance ? For example in a past QST article  outlining how to add an RF
speach processor to an IC-726, would a similar mod be easy to add to the 706 ?
I know it is a tight fit, but has anyone thought of adding an RF speech proces
sor?

3) Has anyone tried using an external RF speech processor, the type that
clips the voice at RF and returns it to baseband audio which is then
inputted to the rig's mic jack ? Since the RF processor should raise
the average RF output, can the 706 handle  the  increase thermal load on
the finals ? Or is this insignificant ?

4) I don't know if it's just my location's poor background noise situation,
which causes the AGC to act un-necessarily, but I would like to know if there
is a simple mod to defeat the AGC or to change the time constants ?

Peter






From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:51:11 1996
From: [e-mail] (Rich Mulvey)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Help selecting a 2m HT (Newbie)
Date: 16 Apr 1996 17:54:26 GMT
Message-ID: <4l0msi$[e-mail]>
References: <4k8o6p$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4kuglr$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

On 15 Apr 1996 21:56:11 GMT, bobr2 <[e-mail]> wrote:
>I am alwo looking for my first radio.  I had an ICOM ICZ1A dual band
>suggested to me.  This is for sale (New) for $399.  But, it is not PC
>programmable.  Is that a problem.
>
>Bob Robbins  N1WWV

  Well, that depends on whether you're planning on carrying a PC
around with you.  ;-)

   Seriously - PC programmability is a just a gimmick - don't worry
about it unless you have to reprogram dozens of rigs on a regular
basis.

- Rich



From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:51:12 1996
From: ross langridge <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Help selecting a 2m HT (Newbie)
Date: 17 Apr 1996 10:08:53 GMT
Message-ID: <4l2fvl$[e-mail]>
References: <4k8o6p$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]


ONLY BUY A KENWOOD!
THERE IS ONLY ONE BRAND WORTH BUYING!



From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:51:13 1996
From: Shelby Merrick <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: HF to 2m Transverter
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 1996 17:10:22 -0400
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

I'm looking for a transverter to go from HF (probably 10m) to 2m.  The
radio i'm using is a Yaesu FT-757 GXII.  It's an allmode all band HF
transceiver.  Any information would help.  Thanks in advance and 73's
KE4AKA
Shelby


From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:51:14 1996
From: [e-mail] ([e-mail])
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: IC-2340H & 800-900MHz Receive???
Date: Sun, 14 Apr 1996 22:05:18 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

Has anyone figured out how to get the Icom 2340H to receive on 800 to
950 MHz like the IC-2410H???  The radio (2340H) has the front-end
module installed.

Andrew, N2CBU


From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:51:15 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Message-ID: <1996Apr15.134747@clstac>
From: [e-mail] (Douglas Leffert)
Subject: IC-D1A INFO WANTED
Date: 15 Apr 96 13:47:47 PST

From: [e-mail] (Douglas Leffert)
Subject: IC-D1A INFO WANTED
Date: 15 Apr 96 13:47:47 PST
Organization: California State Polytechnic University, Pomona
Message-ID: <1996Apr15.134747@clstac>

HI. I AM LOOKING FOR SOMEONE WITH AN ICOM DELTA 1A. THAT HAS THE MOD DONE.
IF YOU FIT THIS DESCRIPTION PLEASE E-MAIL ME.
TNX & 73'S
DOUG

--
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
<>
Doug Leffert
KC6WZU Vice-President, Cal Poly Amateur Radio Club, WA6GYI  /  /  /  /  /
Club Phone [phone] Club Home Page:                  /--/--/--/--/
http://vms4.sci.csupomona.edu/~rcsyms/cparc.html          /  /  /| /  /
e-mail [e-mail]                                   |


From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:51:15 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (ML of Michigan)
Subject: Impending HDTV....
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 20:52:18 GMT

Does anyone know if a newsgroup exist where HDTV issues are discussed?

     If not, I figured our amateur radio newsgroup would be the best place to
post a technical question about the impending HDTV broadcasting changeover...S
o
here it goes....

    The projected cost figures of the HDTVs are extremely high compared to
current TVs.   I suspect the majority of american families will be unable to
come up money for the HDTVs.

     Since HDTV transmissions will be incompatible with the current NTSC
transmissions, is it possible and likely that TV accessory manufacturers will
come up with an economical convertor box to convert HDTV transmissions into
NTSC signals, so that HDTV broadcasts can be viewd by regular NTSC TVs?

     Your comments on the topic are appreciated.  Please email your response t
o
[e-mail].   Thank-you

73, KB8VBA



From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:51:16 1996
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: Impending HDTV....
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 96 07:49:58 GMT
Message-ID: <4l2fds$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

   [e-mail] (Michael White) wrote:

>>The projected cost figures of the HDTVs are extremely high
>>compared to current TVs.   I suspect the majority of american
>>families will be unable to come up money for the HDTVs.

>Don't be too sure. Back in the 1950s, even ordinary TV sets cost
>around $700; that's several thousand in 1990s dollars.  Even today,
>lots and lots of people fork over $2k - $3K for big screen TVs. I
>even saw an 80 inch set for over $8000 (awe inspiring experience!).
>Never underestimate the value people place on entertainment.

This reminds me of an editorial in one of the prominent Hi-Fi
magazines back in the early 80's.  The editor claimed that the cost of
components and production of the medium itself would prevent *CD's*
from ever becoming a household item.  Sure wish I still had a copy of
that article. <g>

73,
Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:51:17 1996
From: [e-mail] (Steven B. Bryant)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Info:  Icom IC-730 Info Wanted?
Date: 12 Apr 1996 07:25:30 GMT
Message-ID: <4kl0ha$[e-mail]>

Hello-

I'm looking for any information, good or bad on the Icome IC 730.  I don't
know a whole lot about this rig and have an opportunity to purchase one.
Please e-mail or reply post with your comments.  Thanks in advance.

Steve



From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:51:19 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (Paul H. Bock)
Subject: Re: Johnson Viking II
References: <4k9vhu$[e-mail]> <4l0hss$[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 1996 17:54:27 GMT
Message-ID: <phb.829677267@melpar>

>>A aquaintance of mine mentioned that a "Johnson Viking II"
>>would make a good first radio for HF.  I am not familiar
>>with this unit. Can someone give me some input on it?
>>I.E. Specs and and expected price for a used unit.

>> Any info would be helpful.   Thanks!


>It is an old AM/CW rig running about 120-watts using 6146's.  Very
>large and heavy.  Built like a tank.

     Let me elaborate a little (I used to own one):

Johnson Viking II:     160-80-40-20-15-11-10 meters
                       crystal-controlled (external VFO required)
                       180 W. DC input on CW
                       140 W. DC input on AM
                       2-6146s in the final
                       2-807s in push-pull in the modulator
                       cathode-keying of buffer stage
                       Pi-network output circuit including
                         rotary inductor

     Very large, very heavy.  Has multiple crystal sockets with a
selector switch if you haven't got a VFO.  Occasionally exhibits
"chirp" on CW on the higher bands unless the oscillator is detuned
slightly (to reduce the effect of the buffer load varying as it's
keyed).  AM is full plate modulation, good quality audio; works
very nicely with a D-104 mike.

     Hope this helps.

   73,

   Paul, K4MSG

P.S. This transmitter is early-mid 1950s technology, BTW.


From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:51:20 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (William Simpson)
Subject: Marine Quality Amateur radio
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 1996 02:03:27 GMT

I'm looking for a 2meter only OR a dual band 2meter/70cm mobile unit
for a boat that is watertight "built like a marine spec radio", OR
a housing of some sort for a regular mobile unit. Also what kind
of antenna system should I use for it as well ? The boat will only be used
on lakes and maybe a few rivers as well. It has an antenna for the AM/FM
radio in it the goes through the bottom of the hull into the water. Is
this the kind of setup I should use as well ? Any help will be
apprieciated. If you can E-mail me OR if you think anybody else might
be interested in the info just post it here .

Thanks,

   Tom Simpson KF4GKW
   [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:51:21 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: MFJ Artificial Ground
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
From: Bill <[e-mail]>
Date: 14 Apr 96 23:29:32 CDT
References: <4kemch$[e-mail]> <4kq2lc$[e-mail]>

"Huh?", I said, scratching my head. "What are these guys talking
about?"

AA4FM



From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:51:22 1996
From: [e-mail] (Drew Loker)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Mods for Yaesu FT-5100, CrossBand Repeating??
Date: 15 Apr 1996 09:30:04 GMT
Message-ID: <4kt4us$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Drew Loker)


I was surprised to find that the 5100 does not have the same scanning
range as the 51r HTs. I would really like to be a ble to scan at least to 470
mhz. Are there any modifications that can be made. Also, I have read the
manual several times and am sure I haven't overlooked anything, but is there
an undocumented way to get the 5100 to do a cross band repeat, similar to the
way the Yaesu 51r does?

Thanks!
Drew Loker
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:51:23 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Message-ID: <4kscrr$[e-mail]>
From: [e-mail] (James A)
Subject: Motorola JT1000 info needed
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 1996 02:38:40 GMT

From: [e-mail] (James A)
Subject: Motorola JT1000 info needed
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 1996 02:38:40 GMT
Organization: Netcom
Message-ID: <4kscrr$[e-mail]>

Does anyone have any tips for field programming the JT1000? I have
been told that some of the "software" programmable features can be
performed via the keypad. I have the programming plug and am able to
program the basics(freq, squelch, dpl, etc), but would like to enable
additional features that the radio's are capable of. My dealer can do
this for me, but I am involved in search and rescue and don't want to
be without my units for an extended period.

If anyone can help, an e-mail would be appreciated. Thanks in advance.

James Allan




From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:51:24 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: MY FIRST HF RADIO/LARGE OR SMALL
From: [e-mail] (Wynn Rostek)
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4kugbu$[e-mail]>
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 16 Apr 96 02:19:10 GMT

In article <4kugbu$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>
>I have the same question.  I am looking at getting a MFJ 9040
>transceiver.  I is a CW 40 meter rig putting out 5 watts.  Any
comments?
>
>Bob Robbins N1WWV
>

QRP is not the best way to enter the hobby.  After you've got some
experience under your belt, you stand a much better chance of enjoying
QRP.  I would recommend at least 25 watts.  You can pick up some nice
buys on 10 meter rigs, used, at hamfests.  I've bought two so far, and
paid $100 each.  Both worked.  This time in the solar cycle, 10 meters
tends to be fairly dead, so you may want to opt for a lower band.  I
like the looks of the Scout 555 from Ten Tec, but at $550, it's a little
steep, but you get 50 watts output, more than enough to get started.
(My first rig was a heathkit DX 60 transmitter, one crystal for 21.150
and about 60-70 watts out.  Worked quite nice.)

Another option is an older used rig.  Rigs with tube finals can be had
fairly cheap.  I've still got the Kenwood TS-520 I bought new back in
1979.  Very maintainable rig, no special micros that get hard to replace
after time.  These show up at hamfests for about $250 to $350, and will
provide more than 100 watts CW.

If you go looking for used gear, find an older ham to help out.  There
is no substitute for having owned a rig for several years when looking
at used gear.

Just my $0.02

WB4ZUY



From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:51:25 1996
From: bobr2 <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: MY FIRST HF RADIO/LARGE OR SMALL
Date: 15 Apr 1996 21:51:37 GMT
Message-ID: <4kugd9$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

I have the same question.  I am looking at getting a MFJ 9040
transceiver.  I is a CW 40 meter rig putting out 5 watts.  Any comments?

Bob Robbins N1Tom Haley <[e-mail]> wrote:
>Tom G. Haley wrote:
>>
>> I Just bought a FT-890. Are their any mods other than tx mod?
>> Any firware upgrades?
>> Any Yaesu mailing list?
>> Any info on this rig would be Welcome!
>> I would be "very" interested in hearing some general good and bad
>> points of purchasing a physically small versus a normal sized HF
>> rig.  Any problems you may have had with heat dissapation/frequency
>> drift/ability to manipulate the controls for big fingers, etc.  I
>> have never been in this area of the net before, so if I'm not doing
>> something according to Hoyle please be gentle in your rebuke.  I will
>> be taking and "passing" my General license test prior to the end of
>> this year.  I'm somewhat interested in the Icom 706 since it has two
>> meters and I will have to unload a lot of my stuff to make such an
>> expensive purchase.  If this seems fool hardy don't be afraid to let
>> me know.  I will check back Monday for responses.  Thanks for the
>> input. (Tom Haley, KC4ZVM-ORLANDO, FLORIDA)
WWV



From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:51:26 1996
From: [e-mail] (David Thomas)
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.equipment,sci.electronics.repair,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.swap
Subject: O-Scopes 100 Mhz 2-trace
Date: Sat, 13 Apr 1996 21:14:58 GMT
Message-ID: <4koqtr$[e-mail]>

I have for sale 3 each 100mhz O-scopes Dual trace no probes asking
$350.00 each.please email me [e-mail]
Email me at [e-mail]




From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:51:27 1996
From: Hank <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: packet mod for ft-2500 wanted
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1996 17:47:17 -0500
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Does anyone know where I could find the ptt data on the controle board of
a ft-2500?  I want to make a data port for the radio so that I don't have
to keep plugging & un-plugging the mic.  The manual describes how to do a
9600b mod that could also be used to bring the Tx,Rx,& Gnd out of a
cutout on top of the radio, but it DOES NOT show where to find the Ptt.
I don't want to remove the front/display pannel if I don't have to,
unless I could find a service manual, just to tap into the back side of
the mic conector.  Thanks, 73 Hank


From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:51:28 1996
From: Greg Ottria <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Pro-2042
Date: Sun, 14 Apr 1996 22:11:34 -0700
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Does anybody know where to tap into the 2042 to add a S-meter?


From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:51:28 1996
From: Greg Ottria <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Pro-2042
Date: Sun, 14 Apr 1996 22:11:51 -0700
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Does anybody know where to tap into the 2042 to add a S-meter?


From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:51:29 1996
From: [e-mail] (Lynn D. Osterbur)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Pse ur input on Ameritron AL1200, Henry 3KD, Commander amps
Date: 12 Apr 1996 21:33:21 GMT
Message-ID: <4kmi71$[e-mail]>


If you have experience with any of these amps, I would like to hear
the pros and cons.  I am curious about rtty output and qsk operation
with these units.  Any comments would be appreciated.  73 de Lynn
--


From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:51:30 1996
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: QST conflict of interest Again!
Date: 15 Apr 1996 11:47:19 -0400
Message-ID: <4ktr27$[e-mail]>
References: <4kski8$[e-mail]>

I was dismayed to see an advertisement for a certain tube "hidden" in an
article about an 811A in QST.

Readers beware of cases like this, when the person telling the story makes
direct profit from the article's conclusions!

What ever happen to good old fashoned editing to avoid direct connection
between an article and the author's wallet??

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:51:31 1996
From: [e-mail] (Chris Weddle)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Radio Mods.
Date: 14 Apr 1996 02:37:09 GMT
Message-ID: <4kpocl$[e-mail]>
References: <4khv35$[e-mail]> <4kngqa$[e-mail]>

[e-mail] (LMcKelp) writes:
>>[e-mail] writes:
>>I am glad Motorola has allowed the overlap of band ranges because it
>>allows me, as a user, the flexability to use first rate equipment and not
>>experience the intermod and other problems that others, who run rice
>powered
>>equipment, constantly complain about.
>>Kevin  KA0JQO
>You HAD to start some shit, didn't you?  Bragging about your, um,
>technical skills wasn't enough.

Betch'a this is entirely off the topic: I run "Rice Burners" because I can't
locate US made toys, I can't afford Motorola (who sneaks in a lot of rice
fed stuff anyway!) and if I could afford to buy Motorola I couldn't afford
to keep reprogramming it every time I need to do something different in ham
radio.


But just let some USA made VHF/UHF radios pop up on the market and I'll
trample others getting to the store to buy them!

Chris - N7RME


From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:51:32 1996
From: [e-mail] (Dalevanbat)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Radio Mods.
Date: 14 Apr 1996 02:26:15 -0400
Message-ID: <4kq5q7$[e-mail]>
References: <4kngqa$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Dalevanbat)

Gee, Last time I looked at my Motorola it said Made in Malaysia. Isn't
rice grown there too?



From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:51:33 1996
From: [e-mail] (LMcKelp)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Radio Mods.
Date: 13 Apr 1996 02:15:38 -0400
Message-ID: <4kngqa$[e-mail]>
References: <4khv35$[e-mail]>

In article <4khv35$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] writes:

> I am glad Motorola has allowed the overlap of band ranges because it
>allows me, as a user, the flexability to use first rate equipment and not
>experience the intermod and other problems that others, who run rice
powered
>equipment, constantly complain about.
>
>
>Kevin  KA0JQO
>
>

You HAD to start some shit, didn't you?  Bragging about your, um,
technical skills wasn't enough.


From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:51:34 1996
From: [e-mail] (Bostonian)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: RCA WT - 100A TUBE TESTER WANTED
Date: 14 Apr 1996 01:04:04 GMT
Message-ID: <4kpiu4$[e-mail]>

RCA WT-100A and/or Hickok 700 tube tester wanted.  Seeking unit in good
running condition, needing some repairs or for parts (if I later come across
a working unit).  Willing to swap for something or please state a fair price
for the respective unit.  I would prefer swapping something as cash is tight,
but I would have to find out what you are looking for -- I may have it.
Please indicate if you have manuals, schematics, charts and/or plug-in tube
sockets for the respective tube tester.

Kindly, email with details.

Thank you.

Having email problems -- my correct address is:

[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:51:35 1996
From: [e-mail]   (Pierre Tremblay)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Request: FM Receiver
Date: 14 Apr 1996 13:50:22 GMT
Message-ID: <4kqvqu$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

In <[e-mail]>, Martin Gilbert <[e-mail]> wr
ites:
>Hi,
>
>I have what is probably a really easy question, but one that has me
>temporarily stumped.  I want to receive a 418 MHz signal from a low
>power transmitter, which is FM modulated by +- 50 kHz.
>
>I need to find a commercially available receiver that can output the
>data as fast as possible - can anyone help me with my problem?
>
>Sorry if this question is out of place, I looked through the
>newsgroups list and this one seemed to be the best place to ask.
>
>Thanks in advance,
>
>Martin Gilbert
>

Well, since ready-made equipment for your needs is quite hard to find, I would

think your message is on topic: you will have to adapt what is available.
You could start with a FM car radio and a VHF ham band converter like we use
for Amateur TV. With a crystal change and a retuning of the front end, you wou
ld
just have to pick your signal off the FM detector...

Pierre VE2BRD



From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:51:36 1996
From: [e-mail] (Robert)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: rig interface
Date: 12 Apr 96 15:15:08 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Anyone have phone # & know of good rig/computer hardware interface
vendor?
--
73 Robert  WB5CRG  [e-mail]



From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:51:37 1996
From: [e-mail] (Tony Salvador)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: RS-232 to TTL Rig Control ...
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 96 13:29:56 GMT
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4l2rss$[e-mail]>

If you are thinking about using you PC to control
you ham rig check out my page and the FT-736R CAT
section. The unit shown is usable on all rigs that
require a RS-232 to TTL level converter to control
the rig. Kits include all connectors needed for
connection to Kenwood, Yaesu or Icom rigs and as
well as others.

Check it out ...

http://www.gcr1.com/n5gpi/

73,
N5GPI


From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:51:37 1996
From: [e-mail] (Thoughtful)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Sport Headphones that Work!
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 1996 20:15:03 GMT
Message-ID: <4l12es$[e-mail]>

Sport Headphones That Work!

Listening to music while you running used to be impossible.  Walkman
style ear buds fall out or misalign while jogging or running.  Even
when properly placed, ear buds don't eliminate road noise and wind.
Cranking up the sound to compensate for noise is dangerous.

Radio Partners builds custom ear molds to fit only in your ears.  They
then use Sony's state of the art Turbo ear buds as speakers.  Together
you have headphones that block wind/road noise and sound great, even
on long runs!  They don't dislodge when the wires are pulled.

For more information call Steve Stegman at:
800-321-3364

Or visit our Web Site at:
http://branch.com/rp/rp.htm

Email:
[e-mail]

Make sure to use reference number: NET.RRAE




From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:51:38 1996
From: [e-mail] (Bobby Raymer)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Swap-Fest Tailgate Party
Date: 11 Apr 96 03:08:54 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

There will be a Ham Radio Swap-Fest Tailgate Party April 27,1996
Starting at 8:00 AM CDST till ?? at the Algood School on East Main
Street in Algood,Tennessee.

FREE ADMISSION NO CHARGE TOO SETUP EVERYONE WELCOME
Radio Gear ONLY SORRY NO CRAFT STUFF ALLOW

Algood is right off Highway 111 North 5 miles North of Interstate 50
take Cookeville Algood Exit go north too Algood Exit,Talkin Frequency
145.110 -600 Repeater


For futher information Email too Bobby Raymer AD4HL at
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:51:40 1996
From: [e-mail] (Roger Wiseman)
Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner,alt.radio.pirate,aus.radio,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.scanner,rec.radio.shortwave,uk.radio.amateur
Subject: Re: Sxxx, my FM-25 is Fxxxxx! What to do??
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 1996 14:52:11 GMT
Message-ID: <4ktnta$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4ijvsq$[e-mail]> <4ikqld$[e-mail]> <4jmrld$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4k0dt6$[e-mail]> <4k19av$[e-mail]> <4k3p56$[e-mail]> <4k5rmr$[e-mail]> <4kjb9v$[e-mail]> <4komm1$[e-mail]> <4kqaue$[e-mail]>

[e-mail] (Walt Davidson) wrote:

>[e-mail] (Roger Wiseman) wrote:

>>hey.., wasn't there a Bob Clary on "Hogan's Heroes????!!!" <<grin>>

>Are you sure that wasn't Julian Clary?

No, Walt, it's Robert<Bob> Clary..now he's active in educating about
the holocost. The radio antenna on the show was interesting..a
flagpole..but they did get the grounding system right..a knife switch
connected to the antenna..and the radioman..Kinchloe!(Ivan Dixon) <g>
[e-mail] (Crow(Roger Wiseman))
#(:)o]    |  Mystie #15126
________________________________________________________
Guitarist | The Beatles are #1 !!!!! |  Jeet Kune Do/Kung Fu stylist @)
"Love is the answer..."        John Lennon
" Mind Games"  ⌐1973 Lennon Music/ATV Music Corp./BMI



From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:51:41 1996
From: [e-mail] (Mark Downing)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew
Subject: Re: Ten-Tec 1209 transverter kit: comments?
Date: 15 Apr 1996 22:19:52 GMT
Message-ID: <4kui28$[e-mail]>
References: <4j8v9u$[e-mail]> <4je7ud$[e-mail]> <4kfc9v$[e-mail]>

Rick ([e-mail]) wrote:


: What other new kits have they announced?  I hadn't heard about the
: 2m to 6m kit?

I called today, and found out that my 20m->6m kit shipped last week.

73 de AC6PN
--Mark


--
Mark A. Downing                       Relational Data Systems
Phone:[phone]              30 Executive Park, Suite 260
Internet: [e-mail]              Irvine, CA 92714


From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 00:51:42 1996
From: Reid Simmons <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: TEN-TEC Omni VI
Date: 14 Apr 1996 18:39:12 GMT
Message-ID: <4krgog$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4j20m7$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4j64mv$[e-mail]> <4kbul7$[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]

Hi Bill;

I know I am late on this thread but I must put in my "two cents".

I have had my Omni VI since they first shipped in the summer of 1992),
(yep I am one of the first) and I can whole heartedly say that I LOVE
EVERY CUBIC CENIMETER OF IT.

I have been hamming since 1961 and have had a variety of rigs over the
years.  In the early seventies I went "the way of the Jap rigs" and I can
tell you that the fun I had previously enjoyed in Ham Radio declined went
away.

The Jap rigs did (and still do) lack engineering quality and true
inovation -- i.e. if they can't copy it from us you won't see it in their
products.

When I went looking for a new rig in early 1992 Ten Tec had just
announced the Omni VI.  I decided on the spot that I had to have one.  It
was the perfect rig -- well thought out (hear me Japs) and not a too many
bells and whistles most of which you will never use.

Well when I finally received my Omni VI(there was a waiting period then
since demand was so high) I decided that all my Jap stuff had to go
"yesterday if not sooner!"

I sold some, gave some away, and since there is not a big market for most
Jap stuff, I wound up throwing a lot of it into the trash can!!!

Since I got my Ten Tec Omni VI Ham radio has become FUN again!!!!  I have
since bought their six meter transverter kit which is also great (better
than the kits from Heath) and I can't wait for Ten Tec's next HF
offering.

This was my two cents... or was it three!!

Reid NZ8K
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 15:18:32 1996
From: [e-mail] (Bill Edwards)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: DJ191 Alinco Manual
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 1996 10:07:39
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

I am in need of a copy of the owners manual for the alinco dj191 handie talkie

if someone can help me please e-mail me at [e-mail]
Thanks Bill//NW5M



From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 15:18:33 1996
From: Grant Youngman <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.swap
Subject: Re: DON"T SELL YOUR TUBES TO ANYONE ELSE!!
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 1996 10:24:11 -0500
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4l2n6g$[e-mail]>

Kevin Deal wrote:
>
> If you have tubes to sell, let me know. I will pay from 10 to 200% more than
> other dealers for certain stuff I need.
>
> E-mail me for a want list.
>
> Kevin Deal
> UPSCALE Audio

Personally, I think we need a consitutional amendment which
prohibits any person from purchasing any tube from anyone if
its use is in supposed "high end" (read that "absurdly priced")
audio equipment. :-)

Audiophiles out to tighten down their screws ...  must be a lot
of loose ones in there.  Oh well, fools and their money ....

Personally, I won't be pleased at having to pay several
hundred bucks for a replacement set of 807 modulator tubes
for my Viking II ....

Grant/NQ5T


From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 15:18:34 1996
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: DON"T SELL YOUR TUBES TO ANYONE ELSE!!
Date: 18 Apr 1996 04:20:53 -0400
Message-ID: <4l4u15$[e-mail]>
References: <4l44rk$[e-mail]>

In article <4l44rk$[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (WB3U) writes:

>Hi Grant,
>
>Perhaps you've never done an A-B test between a tube hi-fi amp and
>one using transistors?  Whether it's due to the tone controls, the
>softer clipping of tubes or whatever, there is a distinct difference
>in the quality of the sound.
>
>On the other hand, the benefit of tubes in ham gear is much less
>tangible.  Given the choice between keeping an old Viking II on the
>air or continuing to enjoy high quality audio, I know what my decision
>would be.  There are cheaper ways to heat a hamshack.  ;)
>
>73,
>Jack  WB3U
>
>

When I eat pickled eggs and drink Blatz there is a disstinked difference
in my tone also.

Seriously, I have to go along with Grant. I don't believe it Jack. I think
people that buy those mega buck tube type amps listen through their gills.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 15:18:35 1996
From: S9 PLUS <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: FT 990 dc + 2kw amp
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 1996 00:03:18
Message-ID: <4l4ep5$[e-mail]>

  Hello, My name is Cal.

      I am getting interested deeply in 6m allmode and EME.
    I have a YAESU FT-990dc w/35 amp external supply in perfect
    condition that I bought last March 95. In order for me to
    get the allmode equipment I will have to sacrifice the
    990 and supply... cost 1800.00 plus after shipping and will
    sell for 1400.00 firm. This setup allows the Nice HF you
    want and you will have a 35 amp supply to run it and your
    whole shack.

    Also for sale is my LK500zc Amp Supply 2kw amp... Legal Limit
    plus.... it is in beautiful condition and well cared for.
    I installed 2 brand new 3-500zg tubes (graphites) for the
    heck because it had the same tubes in it from the beginning.
    I did not see an appreciable power gain so the old tubes were
    in great shape (sold the old ones). I figure the graphites
    will never have to be replaced... will sell for 1300.00 firm.

        All prices are firm and you pay for shipping....

                        Calvin Burnette

                   804-821-6233 after 5pm est



........ 73 ........Cal,  [e-mail]



From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 15:18:36 1996
From: Jimmy Hall <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: FT-10R MARS Mod Info??
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 1996 00:47:40 -0500
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Hello,
Does anyone know of any MARS mods for the Yaesu FT-10R Handy??

Jimmy KJ5QN


From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 15:18:37 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (David Feldman)
Subject: Re: FT736R performance on 70cm
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4kjqdv$[e-mail]> <4kmq37$[e-mail]> <4kua0b$[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 1996 20:57:20 GMT

In article <4kua0b$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Burch Akin) write
s:
>[e-mail] wrote:
>
>>Dale:  Have you heard rumors of a 746R?  Tom KD2MF
>
>I talked to a Yaesu employee and he said there were no plans to
>replace the FT-736R in the next two years(this was in January.)  He
>said that a new radio would probably be in the works after the Phase
>3-D Sat. has been up in operation for awhile.  He also said that the
>FT-736R was has been Yaesu's best selling radio for years, so as long
>as it sells they  probably won't change much.

So I guess that means I need to buckle down and figure one thing out:

On the FT736 how do you copy a Memory to VFO? There is a V->M key and
a V<->M key, but no M->V key as far as I can see. Is there a trick to
this I never discovered?

73 Dave WB0GAZ [e-mail]



From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 15:18:38 1996
From: [e-mail] (Vince Fiscus,  KB7ADL)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.space
Subject: Re: IC-970 is it good ??
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 96 00:03:03 GMT
Message-ID: <4l40s6$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>,
   [e-mail] (Gary Coffman) wrote:

>
>The TS-790A should be avoided for satellite use. It has *serious*
>design flaws for such usage. Not recomended. It can be Ok for
>light duty terrestrial use.
>


I disagree, while the TS-790 left some things out, it is still a good
satellite rig.


73 de KB7ADL



From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 15:18:39 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Message-ID: <4l0rng$[e-mail]>
From: [e-mail] (James A)
Subject: Motorola JT1000 info needed
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 1996 19:15:22 GMT

From: [e-mail] (James A)
Subject: Motorola JT1000 info needed
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 1996 19:15:22 GMT
Organization: Netcom
Message-ID: <4l0rng$[e-mail]>

Does anyone have any tips for field programming the JT1000? I have
been told that some of the "software" programmable features can be
performed via the keypad. I have the programming plug and am able to
program the basics(freq, squelch, dpl, etc), but would like to enable
additional features that the radio's are capable of. My dealer can do
this for me, but I am involved in search and rescue and don't want to
be without my units for an extended period.

If anyone can help, an e-mail would be appreciated. Thanks in advance.

James Allan

BTW, If this posting appears twice in the same NG, it is because I
tried posting this before but I don't think the post ever made it.



From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 15:18:40 1996
From: bobr2 <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: MY FIRST HF RADIO/LARGE OR SMALL
Date: 15 Apr 1996 21:50:54 GMT
Message-ID: <4kugbu$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
To: all

I have the same question.  I am looking at getting a MFJ 9040
transceiver.  I is a CW 40 meter rig putting out 5 watts.  Any comments?

Bob Robbins N1WWV



From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 15:18:41 1996
From: [e-mail] (Bill Myers)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Need Heathkit Manual
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 1996 22:37:45 GMT
Message-ID: <4l1b9c$[e-mail]>

I am in desperate need of a manual for the Heathkit HW-16.

I recently was given one of these fine rigs, in mint condition, and
would like to have a manual, or a copy of the manual, for it.

Any help is appreciated.

73's

Bill Myers      KK4KF
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 15:18:42 1996
From: Bob <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: QST conflict of interest Again!
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 1996 23:16:28 -0500
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4kski8$[e-mail]> <4ktr27$[e-mail]>

Tom--
Seems to me to be much ado about nothing!  Before I retired, it was
common in my company to have sales folks come in and complain about
article in trade journal extolling the virtues of a new system just
installed from Timbuctu to Swaziland by XYZ Corp.  The article covered
all of the technical issues involved and how XYZ solved them with their
new Slopbucket radio system.  What's different?  Nothing that I can see
if you regard QST as a trade journal.  For Svetlana I would assume
that's the view.  I would chide those who complain and suggest they
submit an article.  It's great advertising.  I'm sure QST would welcome
similar inputs from Eimac or whoever.  Every construction article (or
most at least) have and ad in the notes telling you where to get parts
(or EPROMS programmed by Ole Joe's Widget Shop) etc.  Again, what's the
difference - none in my mind. I think it's neat that someone is still
making tubes for all of those 811A sockets -- RCA sure as hell ain't.
If Svetlana can make a quality product for less, then power (pardon the
pun) to them.
A tempest in a teapot!
Bob W5TKB


From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 15:18:43 1996
From: [e-mail] (Walt Davidson)
Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner,alt.radio.pirate,aus.radio,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.scanner,rec.radio.shortwave,uk.radio.amateur
Subject: Re: Sxxx, my FM-25 is Fxxxxx! What to do??
Date: Sun, 14 Apr 1996 07:50:29 GMT
Message-ID: <4kqaue$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4ijvsq$[e-mail]> <4ikqld$[e-mail]> <4jmrld$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4k0dt6$[e-mail]> <4k19av$[e-mail]> <4k3p56$[e-mail]> <4k5rmr$[e-mail]> <4kjb9v$[e-mail]> <4komm1$[e-mail]>

[e-mail] (Roger Wiseman) wrote:

>hey.., wasn't there a Bob Clary on "Hogan's Heroes????!!!" <<grin>>

Are you sure that wasn't Julian Clary?

:-))))))))

Regards,

--
Walt Davidson               E-mail: [e-mail]
                                    [e-mail]




From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 15:18:44 1996
From: Reid Simmons <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: TEN-TEC Omni VI
Date: 14 Apr 1996 18:39:40 GMT
Message-ID: <4krgpc$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4j20m7$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4j64mv$[e-mail]> <4kbul7$[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]

Hi Bill;

I know I am late on this thread but I must put in my "two cents".

I have had my Omni VI since they first shipped in the summer of 1992),
(yep I am one of the first) and I can whole heartedly say that I LOVE
EVERY CUBIC CENIMETER OF IT.

I have been hamming since 1961 and have had a variety of rigs over the
years.  In the early seventies I went "the way of the Jap rigs" and I can
tell you that the fun I had previously enjoyed in Ham Radio declined went
away.

The Jap rigs did (and still do) lack engineering quality and true
inovation -- i.e. if they can't copy it from us you won't see it in their
products.

When I went looking for a new rig in early 1992 Ten Tec had just
announced the Omni VI.  I decided on the spot that I had to have one.  It
was the perfect rig -- well thought out (hear me Japs) and not a too many
bells and whistles most of which you will never use.

Well when I finally received my Omni VI(there was a waiting period then
since demand was so high) I decided that all my Jap stuff had to go
"yesterday if not sooner!"

I sold some, gave some away, and since there is not a big market for most
Jap stuff, I wound up throwing a lot of it into the trash can!!!

Since I got my Ten Tec Omni VI Ham radio has become FUN again!!!!  I have
since bought their six meter transverter kit which is also great (better
than the kits from Heath) and I can't wait for Ten Tec's next HF
offering.

This was my two cents... or was it three!!

Reid NZ8K
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 15:18:45 1996
From: [e-mail] (louis)
Newsgroups: dc.ham-radio,alt.ham-radio.packet,alt.radio.digital,alt.radio.networks.cdc,alt.radio.networks.npr,alt.radio.pirate,alt.radio.scanner,dc.ham-radio,de.comm.ham,in.ham-radio,pl.rec.radio,rec.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.packet,rec.radio.amateur.space,rec.radio.amateur.swap
Subject: TEST POST PLEASE IGNORE *******7c19
Date: Sun, 14 Apr 1996 00:39:53 GMT
Message-ID: <4kphmf$[e-mail]>

test test test



From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 15:18:46 1996
From: [e-mail] (louis)
Newsgroups: dc.ham-radio,alt.ham-radio.packet,alt.radio.digital,alt.radio.networks.cdc,alt.radio.networks.npr,alt.radio.pirate,alt.radio.scanner,dc.ham-radio,de.comm.ham,in.ham-radio,pl.rec.radio,rec.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.packet,rec.radio.amateur.space,rec.radio.amateur.swap
Subject: TEST POST PLEASE IGNORE *******7d19
Date: Sun, 14 Apr 1996 00:42:08 GMT
Message-ID: <4kphqn$[e-mail]>

test test testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest tes
t testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest test testte
st test testtest test testtest test test
test test testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest tes
t testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest test testte
st test testtest test testtest test test
test test testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest tes
t testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest test testte
st test testtest test testtest test test
test test testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest tes
t testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest test testte
st test testtest test testtest test test
test test testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest tes
t testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest test testte
st test testtest test testtest test test
test test testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest tes
t testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest test testte
st test testtest test testtest test test
test test testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest tes
t testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest test testte
st test testtest test testtest test test
test test testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest tes
t testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest test testte
st test testtest test testtest test test
test test testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest tes
t testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest test testte
st test testtest test testtest test test
test test testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest tes
t testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest test testte
st test testtest test testtest test test
test test testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest tes
t testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest test testte
st test testtest test testtest test test
test test testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest tes
t testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest test testte
st test testtest test testtest test test
test test testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest tes
t testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest test testte
st test testtest test testtest test test
test test testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest tes
t testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest test testte
st test testtest test testtest test test





From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 15:18:48 1996
From: [e-mail](Daniel M. McMonigle)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: TH-79A  Mods on the keyboard??
Date: 16 Apr 1996 13:36:48 GMT
Message-ID: <4l07pg$[e-mail]>



I've heard all kinds of rumors that the Kenwood TH-79A has some
expanded RF recieve capibilities.  I also hear some of them are
completed by entering in a code on the keypad.


I have looked into various mods areas but no one has a listing for this
keypad mod!!


Any help here!??

Dan



From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 15:18:49 1996
From: [e-mail] (Alfred Lee)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: The Transmitter Chassis
Date: 16 Apr 1996 09:41:04 -0700
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4k43ol$[e-mail]> <4k4tth$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4kbeqv$[e-mail]> <4kcftv$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

This has been the most educational thread I have seen in a long while.
Keep up the good discussion.

In article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (Gary Coffman) wrote:
> In article <4kcftv$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (
WB3U) writes:

[deleted]

> >Now, considering that the AC voltage at the two output terminals of an
> >isolated generator will be equal amplitude and opposite phase, how can
> >the preceding be true?  Shouldn't the flange of the connector (and
> >thus the chassis of the transmitter) have the same RF voltage as the
> >center pin?  The answer is yes, it should, and if we perform the same
> >test with a solid-state mono *audio* amplifier, we would find that the
> >AF voltages on the chassis and on the "positive" output terminal are
> >in fact nearly identical.
>
> Yes, at *audio* frequencies, where *skin effect* doesn't come into
> play, this is true. But at RF, where skin effect does come strongly
> into play, the signal on the *inside* of the connector shell can't
> get to the outside of the connector shell, or the outside of the
> chassis. The thickness of those parts is several skin depths, so
> their insides and outsides are isolated from each other.
>

With so much talk about skin effect every where I have never seen
a figure being quoted.  I firmly believe some figures will put
discussions and understandings in perspective.  So here it goes:

    THE SKIN DEPTH AT 100 MHZ IS 0.66 uM (MICRON)

The variations due to different material is within an order of
magnitude.  If my memory failed me please quote the correct figure.
I think the number is so incredible that everyone should know.

[deleted]

>
> Gary
> --
> Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | Due to provider problems

> Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | with previous uucp addre
sses
> 534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | Email to [e-mail]
> Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |

On some previous posts RF current within the coaxial transmission line
and outside the shield were discussed.  The discussion centered on the
effect of line length, particularly at 1/4 wave length and 1/2 wave
length.  Doesn't the difference in velocity factors causes the current
maximum/minimum to occur at different location?  For RF current within
the coaxial line the V.F. is 66% (or some other number.)  For RF
current on the outside shield, due to the skin effect, the entire
cable might just as well as a solid conductor, for which the V.F.
is around 95%.  Wouldn't this effect make any difference?

73,

---
Alfred Lee                                                       [e-mail]
m
KE6KGV           'The answer is (e^iπ + 1) ? "No" : "Yes"'
Silent keys: KE6LTH, KD6HNU, March 22, 1996


From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 15:18:51 1996
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: The Transmitter Chassis (Was MFJ Artificial Ground)
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 96 21:46:19 GMT
Message-ID: <4kunli$[e-mail]>
References: <4k43ol$[e-mail]> <4k4tth$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4kbeqv$[e-mail]> <4kcftv$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

It appears that the "Artifical Ground" thread may be about over.
Nevertheless, I wanted to repond to this particular post because it
describes several misconceptions regarding currents in and around
the typical HF transmitter chassis.  Sorry I didn't follow up sooner;
it didn't appear on my news server until earlier today.

      [e-mail] (Gary Coffman) wrote:
   >I wrote:

>>First, it was stated in the other discussion that feedline currents
>>radiate because they are unable to enter the transmitter and return
>>to their source.  I have disputed this because there are many
>>openings and pathways into the typical transmitter for current
>>flowing on the outer chassis.

>Any shielding that lets RF in, must also let RF out. Now I don't
>know about you, but I'd be real upset with a transmitter that
>leaked a lot of RF into the shack (if it did, I wouldn't *care*
>if RF also came back down the feedline because I'd already have
>a "hot" shack).

Leakage currents around the cabinet generally aren't detectable by
touch.  Even significant leakage won't usually cause the symptoms
associated with a "hot" shack.  The latter is the result of high RF
voltage, not current.  Also, in terms of radiation, the size of the
cabinet is only a small fraction of a wavelength.  It would require
an extraordinary amount of current to create notable symptoms.

>So I'd suggest that any leakage either way is going to be minute,
>which implies that the pathway through the shielding is a very high
>impedance.

I don't know what the actual impedance is, but I don't believe it's
very high.  It might be a few hundred ohms, but it certainly isn't
thousands of ohms.  Like I said before, the evidence of this is that
the appearance of voltage on the cabinet (such as results from common
mode feedline currents) often causes the transmitter to malfunction.
Sometimes this occurs long before the operator is even able to
physically detect the voltage, indicating that even moderate levels of
RF voltage on the cabinet can cause disruptive currents to flow into
the transmitter.

>I deleted the rest of your argument because it is premised on the
>outside of the chassis being at the RF potential of the inside of
>the chassis, which it isn't. If it were, you could take a transmitter
>up in a balloon and draw arcs from either the antenna or the chassis
>since there's no nearby Earth to unbalance it and make the outside of
>the chassis cold.  But you can't. The chassis is still cold up there
>far from Earth too.

No, it's not.  Measurement from any third point will show the voltage
on the chassis is nearly equal to the voltage at the feedpoint of the
antenna.

>But you *can* draw an arc from the end of *either* leg of a dipole
>fed by that transmitter,

Of course you can.  There's an impedance transformation along each leg
that steps the voltage up at the end.  Attach a 1/4 wave wire to the
chassis and the same thing will happen.

>showing that both the inner and the *inside* of the outer of the coax
>are hot.

None of this disproves the existence of a current path between the
inner chassis and the cabinet.

73,
Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 15:18:51 1996
From: [e-mail] (Russ Rinckey)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: TO MUCH AUDIO ON MY 229H ICOM
Date: 16 Apr 1996 03:18:56 GMT
Message-ID: <4kv3j0$[e-mail]>


I need to find out what pot to turn down on my 229 its distorting a bit.
Any help would be great.


From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 15:18:52 1996
From: [e-mail] (John Payne)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: TR7600 manual
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 1996 18:15:01
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Keywords: Kenwood, manual,tr7600

Does anyone have a manual for the Kenwood TR7600?  I will pay postage and copy

costs.

Thanks!  John Payne N4FLJ


From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 15:18:53 1996
From: [e-mail] (Rob Cheply)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Trade
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 1996 02:57:18 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

        I am currently constructing a collection of box schematics,
willing to trade some fer some. E-mail me for more info. on what I've
got. ThanX


From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 15:18:54 1996
From: [e-mail] (Gary McDuffie, Sr.)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: TS-850 Control Program?
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 1996 06:55:31 GMT
Message-ID: <3171f21e.33014044@164.119.101.2>

Are there any good TS-850 control programs out there?  Looking primarily
for DOS apps, but I'm also interested in a good Win program for the future.

73, Gary
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 15:18:55 1996
From: [e-mail](Jim E. Mitchell )
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,sci.electronics.equipment,sci.electronics.misc,alt.radio.scanner,rec.radio.scanner
Subject: Re: Unlawful reception
Date: 14 Apr 1996 21:37:55 GMT
Message-ID: <4krr7j$[e-mail]>
References: <4keg34$[e-mail]> <4khdil$[e-mail]> <4kjfnk$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>


>>In the USA, it is unlawful to import or manufacture a radio receiver
capable
>>of intercepting cellular telephone frequencies

>>Point # 5 the only folks this law applies to is law enforcement,

I don't know about other manufacturers but ICOM still sells there
receivers without the cellular frequencies blocked, but only to the
government.

I guess it's ok to break the law if your in charge of it?

Jim Mitchell
KC7FBP


From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 15:18:56 1996
From: [e-mail]    (Bill Newkirk)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,sci.electronics.equipment,sci.electronics.misc,alt.radio.scanner,rec.radio.scanner
Subject: Re: Unlawful reception
Date: 17 Apr 1996 02:11:19 GMT
Message-ID: <4l1k07$[e-mail]>
References: <4keg34$[e-mail]> <4khdil$[e-mail]> <4kjfnk$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Bill Newkirk)

In <[e-mail]>, Will Flor <[e-mail]> writes:
>to be.  Any TV set sold recently in the US only goes up to Channel 69.
>73 de Will KB9JTT           [e-mail]

yeah, but then go check out the catv coverage...interesting things are found
on the ranges covered by the CATV folks...it's like they passed a law
banning tides. any technically astute person could build a receiver and there'
s
always the test equipment markets..

Bill Newkirk WB9IVR                  The Space Coast Amateur Technical Group
Melbourne, FL                       duty now for the future of amateur radio
Lombardi's 1st Law of Business:
Companies succeed in spite of their best effort.  If they succeed at all.



From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 15:18:57 1996
From: Will Flor <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,sci.electronics.equipment,sci.electronics.misc,alt.radio.scanner,rec.radio.scanner
Subject: Re: Unlawful reception
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 1996 16:29:22 -0500
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4keg34$[e-mail]> <4khdil$[e-mail]> <4kjfnk$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4krr7j$[e-mail]>

Jim E. Mitchell wrote:
>
> >>In the USA, it is unlawful to import or manufacture a radio receiver
> capable
> >>of intercepting cellular telephone frequencies
>
> >>Point # 5 the only folks this law applies to is law enforcement,
>
> I don't know about other manufacturers but ICOM still sells there
> receivers without the cellular frequencies blocked, but only to the
> government.
>
> I guess it's ok to break the law if your in charge of it?
>
> Jim Mitchell
> KC7FBP

There is a specific exemption in the law for such agencies; they
don't *have to* break the law to do this.

73 de Will KB9JTT              [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 15:18:58 1996
From: [e-mail] (Dave)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: WEFAX/JVFAX
Date: 15 Apr 1996 17:49:52 GMT
Message-ID: <4ku280$[e-mail]>

Good afternoon FOLKS,

     I am currently looking to purchase (not construct) an interface for RTTY/
WEFAX
reception.  If any of you great folks would happen to have one lying around th
e shack,
and would like to part with it, I would appreciate it....

73'S

Jeff

[e-mail]

Pls reply VIA EMAIL


From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 15:19:00 1996
From: Barry Brazier <[e-mail] >
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Which HF freqencies to add
Date: 16 Apr 1996 05:36:28 GMT
Message-ID: <4kvbkt$[e-mail]>

I am buying a yacht in the US to sail back to Australia and to save
money I was hoping that I could buy a US transever that fitted
Australian marine specs. But after talking to the Australian agency it
seams that in Australian waters it is not just enough to satify the
specs. Each australian boats has to use Hf radios which is "type
approved" This mean it must have a stamp on the back detailing AUS
approval.They claim that Oz specifications for marine use are different
to other counties There's a $10,000 fine for using another radio on
marine bands out here.
One option is  to buy a second hand marine SSB in the States for use
outside  and keep my old australian HF for use in australian waters
My old stringray is a crystal tuned SSB.HF with the following
freqencies:
 2182.,4125,6215,,2524,4483,2201 and radnar chanel 402 (4426/4134).The
first three are distress/calling frequ. the next two are yacht race and
recreation frequ. and the 2201 and 402 are working ship to shore frequ.s

                Are any of these used in US and Pacific waters (I know 2182 is used
universally for distress). I can add three more frequ. What would you
suggest for some international application (a 6meg radnar chanel?)

Barry




From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 15:19:01 1996
From: [e-mail] (Peter Gerba)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: WTB Kenwood 130V
Date: 17 Apr 1996 23:51:08 -0700
Message-ID: <4l4oos$[e-mail]>

I'm looking for a 130V

pete
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 15:19:01 1996
From: Jeff Goldman <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: WTB Standard C-508A
Date: 16 Apr 1996 17:01:33 GMT
Message-ID: <4l0jpd$1ga$[e-mail]>

Beware, they've improved the audio of the later ones in the AM (aircraft)
mode. Also, the very latest shipments are unmodifiable for cellular.


From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 15:19:02 1996
From: [e-mail] (RSmall01)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: WTB: Heath APACHE
Date: 15 Apr 1996 00:50:16 -0400
Message-ID: <4kski8$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (RSmall01)

Hello all..

I am seeking a collector quality Apache. This transmitter must be "MINT"
(a 9.5-10 throughout) with no significant mods, full output and complete
original documentation. I will arrange for pickup or delivery from
anywhere in the USA. If you have this unit and are willing to sell it,
please CALL COLLECT at 207-767-5143 or EMail: [e-mail]

Thank you!
Dick N1WJP


From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 15:19:03 1996
From: Steve Zettel <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: WTB: TenTec Hercules II HF Amp & PS
Date: Sat, 13 Apr 1996 22:40:03 -0600
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

I've located a Herc II and P/S, and believe we've clsoed the deal.
Please excuse the post here; I found out after that rec.radio.swap would
have been more appropriate. Thank you to all who reponded.

Steve Zettel
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 15:20:42 1996
From: Ed Hare <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: 1. Need Help With RFI Problems
Date: 17 Apr 1996 13:45:19 GMT
Message-ID: <4l2slf$[e-mail]>
References: <4kpd74$q2o$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (Gary Coffman) wrote:

>The FCC prints a pamphlet on RFI causes and cures, but it isn't
>very technical, oriented more toward the consumer. A better book
>on RFI causes and cures is offered by the ARRL.

The FCC's book is useful in one important regard -- it will help your
neighbor understand the difference between transmitter-caused
interference and consumer-equipment caused interference.  The ARRL also
has an "RFI Pamphlet," available from the Technical Department Secretary
for an SASE that says the same things (surprise!), but having it said in
the FCC's own words often carries more weight with your neighbor.  The
book is called "Interference to Home Electronic Entertainment Equipment
Handbook (CIB-2)."  It is available for $2.50 from: (I ordered it by name
with no difficulty.)

US Government Printing Office
Washington, DC 20402-9371
Phone: [phone]
202-512-1800 (credit card orders only)
Web Site: http://www.gpo.gov

ARRL also has several interference packages that will offer some fast
starter help.  Most are available electronically from the ARRL area at
oak.oakland.edu or from [e-mail].  Paper copies are available from
our Technical Department Secretary for $2.00 for ARRL Members, $4.00 for
non members.

We have the "RFI Pacakge," RFI-Telephone, RFI-TV, RFI-Audio,
RFI-Electrical and RFI-CATV.  The CATV package is available ONLY in paper
form; it is a reprint of an article I wrote for Communications
Technology, the journal of the Society of Cable Television Engineers.  (I
chose that instead of QST because I wanted something hams could hand to
their cable operator.  They trust CT more than they trust QST, for some
reason. :-)  ).

Our RFI book, Radio Frequency Interference is available from most ham
dealers, our Pub Sales Department, using the handy-dandy order form in
QST.  If you are an ARRL Member, you can get a bit of technical advice
before you buy the book by calling us at [phone].

73 from ARRL HQ,  Ed Hare, KA1CV, ARRL Laboratory Supervisor





From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 15:20:43 1996
From: Alan Wolke <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.homebrew
Subject: Re: 2N2156 transistor
Date: 11 Apr 1996 14:03:58 GMT
Message-ID: <4kj3ge$fdq$[e-mail]>
References: <4kfetm$[e-mail]>

>I am looking for a source for 2N2156  transistors.
>If these are unavailable what would be an equivalent?

The 2N2156 is listed in my NTE and ECG Semiconductor cross
references as a PNP, Germanium, high power, high gain amplifier
transistor.  It crosses to an NTE213 / ECG213.

--
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+         I usta cudn't spel enjinere, now I ar wun             +
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 15:20:45 1996
From: [e-mail] (Mark Trevisiol)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.homebrew
Subject: Re: Antenna for sat. sub audio
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 1996 14:54:36 GMT
Message-ID: <4ktnsh$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

[e-mail]   (Frank Bures) wrote:

>I am soliciting an advice on how to create professionally looking front panel
s
>of electronic devices.

>Over my 37 years of both amateur and professional prototyping I tried all
>kinds of technologies, none of them with the results I want. E.g.:
>Letraset: Too time consuming, very difficult to keep equal spacing between
>letters, inability to create graphics.
>I even tried PnP Blue to transfer front panel images printed on a laser
>printer. It works _very_ well on Vector aluminum front panels. I does NOT wor
k
>at all on sand blasted panels or pre-painted panels. The toner simply would
>not stick.

>I would very much appreciate any advice on how to create silk-screen-like
>panels.

>Thanks

>Frank Bures, Dept. of Chemistry, University of Toronto, ON
>[e-mail]
>CompuServe:71324,1515
>[e-mail]

Frank,

I worked at a company where the ME would plot a mirror copy of the
screen on clear mylar overlay.  The overlay was then placed on the
front panel of the equipment (ink/toner side toward panel).  On most
panels it looked good.  With the ploter they could do multiple colors
as well.

Have fun,

Mark Trevisiol




From [e-mail] Thu Apr 18 15:20:46 1996
From: Alan Wolke <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.homebrew
Subject: Re: 2N2156 transistor
Date: 11 Apr 1996 14:03:58 GMT
Message-ID: <4kj3ge$fdq$[e-mail]>
References: <4kfetm$[e-mail]>

>I am looking for a source for 2N2156  transistors.
>If these are unavailable what would be an equivalent?

The 2N2156 is listed in my NTE and ECG Semiconductor cross
references as a PNP, Germanium, high power, high gain amplifier
transistor.  It crosses to an NTE213 / ECG213.

--
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+         I usta cudn't spel enjinere, now I ar wun             +
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:46:06 1996
From: [e-mail] (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Francisco_Deir=F3_Couto_Borges?=)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: (none)
Date: 21 Apr 96 15:12:46 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

add ham-equip



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:46:07 1996
From: [e-mail] (DARRYL LINKOW)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: ADMS-1B Webpage wanted
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 96 00:57:00 -0800
Distribution: world
Reply-To: [e-mail] (DARRYL LINKOW)


Hello all and thanks for reading this.  A couple of weeks ago
someone posted the Web Page for downloading the patch files for the
latest version of the Yaesu ADMS-1B software.  If you know that
Website, please Email me or leave message here.
              73, Darryl KE6IHA

              [e-mail]

---
 * OLX 2.2 * Darryl Linkow [phone]  9 am - 5 pm PDT


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:46:08 1996
From: [e-mail] (David Liu)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Any FAQ for that news group?
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 18:19:43 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

Is there any FAQ for this Newsgroup?


..........................................................................
.    David Liu     (CNE,MCSE)    |    Voice    : Soon!                   .
.                                |    Fax :    : [phone]          .
.    [e-mail]           |    BBS :    : (852)2539-7218          .
.    [e-mail]             |    FidoNet  : 6:700/671               .
.                                |    http://www.hkstar.com/~dliu        .
.                                |    http://www.glink.net.hk/~dliu      .
..........................................................................


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:46:09 1996
From: [e-mail] (W. D. Milner)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Anyone own a Yaesu FT-221R transceiver?
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 1996 00:36:51 GMT
Message-ID: <4ks8ls$[e-mail]>
References: <4kn86d$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (Carl Hodder) wrote:

>I am looking for a copy of an owners or service manual for a Yaesu FT-221R
>2 meter all-mode transceiver. Would also like to know the differences between
>the FT-221 and FT-221R.

I have a copy of the service manual for the FT221R but not the owners
manual (unfortunately). I can probably have it copied (if I can talk
my boss into monopolizing the photocopier<g>)  it but it would be
quite bulky and might take a bit of time as it is a fair size.




---------------------------------------
Dean, VE1CBF        [e-mail]
[e-mail]  FN96VC

- - ...  ... - -




From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:46:11 1996
From: Chris Boone <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: ARRL insurance
Date: 20 Apr 1996 23:01:31 GMT
Message-ID: <4lbqcb$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

Burt Fisher <[e-mail]> wrote:

>How many times do I have to read messages from hams that send a
>"Thank You" addressed to ALL. When one seeks help and
>someone takes the time to respond, the least the receiver of
>help can do is send a simple individual reply for thanks. After
>all-the respondents to this call for help responded one by one.
>I have received up to 75 messages in a call for help and sent
>individual thanks to each. It was very time consuming, but it
>was the right thing to do.
>
>Would you at your wedding, if you were the groom, get up at the
>end of the reception and yell out, "Gee, Thanks everyone for the
>gifts?"
>If you are a  T Y P I C A L  ham--absolutely.
>
>It is unlikely you will respond to this if you did not even bother to
>respond to someone who  H E L P E D  you.

You excessive whinning and moaning and groaning will NOT be missed here
or in the FIDONET echos..

I thought you were leaving this hobby....WHY do you continue to badger
people in the newsgroups and echos?  GROW up and get out! (ya know, there
are ONLY 3 people I have wished that to since getting into ham radio at
the age of 14....and you're ONE of them!)

Chris
WB5ITT




From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:46:12 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (Matt Roberts)
Subject: RE: Beldon 9913
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 96 17:26:51 GMT
References: <4kgoto$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

My experiences with 'real' 9913 taught me never to use it again.  There are ma
ny cable types
which offer _almost_ the same electrical/RF specs, which at the same time are
much easier
to use mechanically.  9913 is hard to work with due to the way it is built.  T
he solid center is a
major concern.  It makes the cable hard to route and manage.  Also the air cor
e makes the
cable easy to 'kink'.  I suggest using a good quality RG-213 with a stranded c
enter, solid
dielectric, and 97% or more braid.  If you don't mind a little more $$$ the fo
il+braid
combination seems to work well.
----
Matt Roberts, KK5JY,
[e-mail]





From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:46:12 1996
From: [e-mail] (Tony Salvador)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Computer Control For Your Rig !
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 96 13:40:50 GMT
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4lg2cu$[e-mail]>

If you are thinking about using you PC to control
you ham rig check out my page and the FT-736R CAT
section. The unit shown is usable on all rigs that
require a RS-232 to TTL level converter to control
the rig. Kits include all connectors needed for
connection to Kenwood, Yaesu or Icom rigs and as
well as others.

Check it out ...

http://www.gcr1.com/n5gpi/

73,
N5GPI


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:46:14 1996
From: [e-mail] (Anthony O. Cardenas)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Crystal Oven Help
Date: Fri, 19 Apr 1996 20:34:48 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4l1c8d$[e-mail]>

>I'm looking for information on crystal ovens. I want a crystal
>encased in a temperature regulated enclosure. Who manufactures
>these. Any leads are appreciated.
>Steve Ellington N4LQ
>[e-mail]

'Yo, Steve,

Some companies are SO cheap, they use a resistor and heat shrink to
keep the crystal at a semi-constant temp.

International Crystals 'usta have them.  Most ovens use quite a bit of
current.

How much space do you have to spare?  I have some that use 6 or 12 VDC
and plug into a octal scocket.  I have others that are 6V and 12V.

Better yet, go to a two-way radio shop and ask for one.  I'll bet you
can get one for free!

Tony
WA6IGJ


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:46:15 1996
From: [e-mail] (Jim Weir)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Crystal Oven Help
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 17:16:02 GMT
Message-ID: <4ldqll$[e-mail]>
References: <4l1c8d$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

[e-mail] (Anthony O. Cardenas) shared the following
priceless pearls of wisdom:

>>I'm looking for information on crystal ovens.

>'Yo, Steve,

>Some companies are SO cheap, they use a resistor and heat shrink to
>keep the crystal at a semi-constant temp.

Actually, the design of a resistor/shrink/diode combination is quite
difficult and an elegant inexpensive solution to a complex problem.
It isn't just a resistor inside shrink if you do it right.  All you
get there is a hot crystal that still responds to changes in ambient
temperature.

The trick is to put the resistor (actually just a heat source) on one
side of the crystal, a silicon diode on the other side of the crystal,
shrink sleeving AND silicone seal the ends, and then use the diode's
voltage/temperature curve (which is unbelievably repeatable from diode
to diode) to feed back the temperature of the crystal case to an
amplifier which then regulates the current through the resistor.  By
the time you get through analyzing the time constants of resistor
heating, thermal resistance of the case, how long it takes the case to
heat the diode, then crank all that back into the loop's transfer
function, you've got yourself a day's theoretical work on your hands.

Of course, the way most of us do it is hook it up, measure the loop
time constants, then throw in an electrical time constant ten times
more than necessary.  Yeah, it takes a little longer to settle down
than an exact analysis, but it won't go flegging off into thermal
oscillation at the drop of a quantum, either.

You can actually get control down to less than a couple of degrees
over the full ambient temperature range if you do it carefully enough.
It sure beats the hell out of those old bimetallic strips on the
heater ovens we used back in 'dem golden old days.  You remember --
radios that glow in the dark??

Jim


Jim Weir VP Engineering | You bet your sweet patootie I speak for the
RST Engineering         | company.  If I don't, ain't nobody gonna.
Grass Valley CA 95945   |
http://www.rst-engr.com | AR Adv WB6BHI--FCC 1/C phone--Cessna 182A N73CQ
[e-mail]        | Commercial/CFI-Airplane/Glider-----A&P Mechanic



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:46:16 1996
From: [e-mail] (Robert J. Carpenter)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Crystal Oven Help
Date: 22 Apr 96 09:26:48 GMT
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.3.91.960422052240.6947A-100000@DGS>
References: <[e-mail]>


   What Bob Weir and others seem to have failed to mention is just how bad
the old octal plug-in bimetalic snap action thermostat ovens really were.
   Those old ovens cycled the crystal over 1 or 2 degrees C every few
seconds.  I can recall listening to the beat-note of a 400 MHz signal
multiplied from such an oven.  It sounded like a slow fire siren.

        73 de bob w3otc



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:46:17 1996
From: [e-mail] (Kevin Deal)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.swap
Subject: Re: DON"T SELL YOUR TUBES TO ANYONE ELSE!!
Date: 18 Apr 1996 07:09:01 -0700
Message-ID: <4l5idt$[e-mail]>
References: <4l2n6g$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>, Grant Youngman <[e-mail]> wrote:
>Kevin Deal wrote:
>>
>> If you have tubes to sell, let me know. I will pay from 10 to 200% more
than
>> other dealers for certain stuff I need.
>>
>> E-mail me for a want list.
>>
>> Kevin Deal
>> UPSCALE Audio
>
>Personally, I think we need a consitutional amendment which
>prohibits any person from purchasing any tube from anyone if
>its use is in supposed "high end" (read that "absurdly priced")
>audio equipment. :-)
>
>Audiophiles out to tighten down their screws ...  must be a lot
>of loose ones in there.  Oh well, fools and their money ....
>
>Personally, I won't be pleased at having to pay several
>hundred bucks for a replacement set of 807 modulator tubes
>for my Viking II ....
>
>Grant/NQ5T


I have 807's for $10 each, if your interested.  And I don't sell just audio
tubes.  I supply sweep tubes at prices well below places that specialize in
dealing to hams, and in fact supply some of those dealers.  So while some
dealers charge $45 or more for a 6LQ6 I charge $35 for one or $30 each in
quantity.  I just sold new old stock 8950's  for $45 each (sorry, I have no
more) and RF parts sells them for $75 each.

While there are certain brands of small signal tubes that I pay a higher price

for, there is still in most cases a cheaper version for people that don't want

to pay the price.  Example is Dutch made 6922's which I like.  You can buy
tons of Sylvania 6922's for low bucks.   Very very few audio tubes that are
expensive have affected the ham tube pricing at all, or your ability to get
replaceable parts.  8417's are very rare.  Hard to get.  But the price for
them has been driven by hams as much as audio guys.

So while some high-end equipment is absurdely priced (I agree) the effect on
the ham tube biz is negligable.

The fact is that my post states I will pay more than the usual tube dealer
(Antique Electronic Supply, etc) for stuff I like or I'm out of.  I think most

people appreciate that.

Regards,

Kevin Deal


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:46:19 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: DON"T SELL YOUR TUBES TO ANYONE ELSE!!
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
References: <4l44rk$[e-mail]> <4l4u15$[e-mail]> <4l7q5n$[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 09:03:01 GMT

In article <4l7q5n$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (WB
3U) writes:
>     >I wrote:
>   [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) wrote:
>
>>>Perhaps you've never done an A-B test between a tube hi-fi amp and
>>>one using transistors?  Whether it's due to the tone controls, the
>>>softer clipping of tubes or whatever, there is a distinct difference
>>>in the quality of the sound.
>
>>Seriously, I have to go along with Grant. I don't believe it Jack. I
>>think people that buy those mega buck tube type amps listen through
>>their gills.
>
>I don't have a mega-buck tube amp, but it's not for lack of trying.  I
>first heard the difference years ago, but too late to pick up a
>McIntosh or even a Hafler-designed Dynaco at a reasonable price.

I had a pair of McIntosh 75s, and a Dynaco kit before that. They
were nice in their day, but their day is past. Their damping factor
doesn't match modern speakers, and THD and clipping was not pretty,
even on the Mc with its heavy negative feedback. Of course the old
Bozak Concert Grands and Altec Voice of the Theatre speakers had so
much distortion anyway that it was hard to identify the part contributed
by the amp. Even good modern speakers typically have 3% distortion,
and that's lots more than even a cheap amp produces unless it is
grossly overdriven.

>Incidentally, I wasn't kidding about the tests.  At one time, I did
>double-blind A-B tests over and over because I didn't believe it
>either.  We tried all kinds of tube amps, from the lowly Scotts and
>Fishers up through the most expensive McIntosh.  The solid-state
>units included some of the best in their day, such as Mark Levinson
>(Class A), Ampzilla, Yamaha and the better Harman Kardons.  After a
>few minutes of listening, I was *consistently* able to tell the tubes
>from the transistors.

Yeah, me too, the tube amps had more distortion. You could see it
on a scope, and hear it in good headphones. You didn't usually
notice with speakers unless the amp was badly overdriven, however,
because speakers have so much more distortion. The best I've ever
heard was a pair of Martin Logan's driven by a 1 kW amp (tetrode
tube type actually). The Martin Logan's are pure electrostats, and
the amp had enough headroom to stay out of clipping. A Crown DC-300
amp sounded about equal, however, and I couldn't tell which was which
unless the music had a lot of very loud transients that drove the
smaller amp into clipping.

Music has a huge dynamic range, and most people try to reproduce
it with amps that are too small. If you need 40 watts average to
fill the room, you need about 800 watts peak to stay out of clipping
on transients. You *can* hear that clipping.

The other thing you can hear is the effect of improperly matched
damping factor. Tube amps offer little damping while transistor
amps have a lot (due to their very low output impedance). So if
you are listening with speakers designed for the damping factor
of one, the other will definitely color the sound. Modern speakers
(other than pure electrostats which are insensitive to damping)
sound boomy when driven by tube amps while older speakers designed
in the tube era are way overdamped when driven by transistor amps,
and have muffled bass.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | Due to provider problems
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | with previous uucp address
es
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | Email to [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:46:20 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.swap
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: DON"T SELL YOUR TUBES TO ANYONE ELSE!!
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
References: <4l2n6g$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4l44rk$[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 07:09:28 GMT

In article <4l44rk$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (WB
3U) writes:
>   Grant Youngman <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>Audiophiles out to tighten down their screws ...  must be a lot
>>of loose ones in there.  Oh well, fools and their money ....
>>
>>Personally, I won't be pleased at having to pay several
>>hundred bucks for a replacement set of 807 modulator tubes
>>for my Viking II ....
>
>Perhaps you've never done an A-B test between a tube hi-fi amp and
>one using transistors?  Whether it's due to the tone controls, the
>softer clipping of tubes or whatever, there is a distinct difference
>in the quality of the sound.

Yeah, the tube amp will have much higher THD. That's why rock
guitarists like them so much, really incredible distortion
effects. Of course that's *not* what you want in a high fidelity
audio system.

Gary

--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | Due to provider problems
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | with previous uucp address
es
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | Email to [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:46:21 1996
From: [e-mail] (Steve Kennedy)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.swap
Subject: Re: DON"T SELL YOUR TUBES TO ANYONE ELSE!!
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 1996 15:32:55 GMT
Message-ID: <4lgcc5$[e-mail]>
References: <4l2n6g$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4l44rk$[e-mail]>

[e-mail] (WB3U) wrote:

>   Grant Youngman <[e-mail]> wrote:

>>Audiophiles out to tighten down their screws ...  must be a lot
>>of loose ones in there.  Oh well, fools and their money ....
>>
>>Personally, I won't be pleased at having to pay several
>>hundred bucks for a replacement set of 807 modulator tubes
>>for my Viking II ....

>Hi Grant,

>Perhaps you've never done an A-B test between a tube hi-fi amp and
>one using transistors?  Whether it's due to the tone controls, the
>softer clipping of tubes or whatever, there is a distinct difference
>in the quality of the sound.

>On the other hand, the benefit of tubes in ham gear is much less
>tangible.  Given the choice between keeping an old Viking II on the
>air or continuing to enjoy high quality audio, I know what my decision
>would be.  There are cheaper ways to heat a hamshack.  ;)

>73,
>Jack  WB3U


In my experience (I worked for a high-end audio manufacturer for many
years, and both solid state and tube equipment was produced), there
are two primary EXPLAINABLE (some of this stuff is almost
unquantifiable) reasons why tubes sound "better" than transistors.

The most obvious reason is that the overload characteristics and
clipping are much "smoother", but I think the MAIN difference (which
relates to this smoothness) is the spectral content of the distortions
involved.

Due to their physical nature and construction, tubes produce
predominantly EVEN harmonic content in the distortions they generate.
Even harmonics are pleasing to the ear and sound "smoother".

Bipolar transistors on the other hand, produce predominantly ODD
harmonics, which are atonal to the ear, and are interpreted as "harsh"
by most people.  So even when a circuit isn't in overload, the
difference between tube and transistor is apparent.

Put these circuits side by side on an audio spectrum analyzer and you
can see these spectral content differences.

Steve
WB7PSD





From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:46:23 1996
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: DON"T SELL YOUR TUBES TO ANYONE ELSE!!
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 96 19:18:40 GMT
Message-ID: <4lgtmm$[e-mail]>
References: <4l44rk$[e-mail]> <4l4u15$[e-mail]> <4l7q5n$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

   [e-mail] (Gary Coffman) wrote:

>I had a pair of McIntosh 75s, and a Dynaco kit before that. They
>were nice in their day, but their day is past. Their damping factor
>doesn't match modern speakers,

That's marketing nonsense, intended to cover up the fact that many
"modern" speakers are junk.  They employ ports and enclosures that
boost undamped bass response, with no regard for the tuning between
the enclosure and driver.  Placing a loosely-suspended woofer in a
two-foot tall box with a port helps sell speakers, but it destroys the
damping of the driver below the resonant frequency of the port.  It's
unreasonable and totally unrealistic to criticize an amplifier for its
inability to compensate for this.  Even the highest damping factor you
can produce won't remedy the problems created by these speakers.

>and THD and clipping was not pretty, even on the Mc with its heavy
>negative feedback.

Clipping isn't pretty in any amp.  The difference is the way the two
types of devices clip.  Tube amps create less of the odd-order
distortion that is particularly offensive to the ears.

>Of course the old Bozak Concert Grands and Altec Voice of the Theatre
>speakers had so much distortion anyway that it was hard to identify
>the part contributed by the amp. Even good modern speakers typically
>have 3% distortion, and that's lots more than even a cheap amp
>produces unless it is grossly overdriven.

High quality electrostatics, planars, horns, ribbons, the old Heil
driver, and even some soft-dome midrange and tweeter drivers exhibit
much less than 3% distortion.

>Yeah, me too, the tube amps had more distortion. You could see it
>on a scope, and hear it in good headphones.

If you could see it on a scope, I'm not surprised the results were
disappointing.  No good tube or transistor amplifier will do this
unless it's driven to clipping or into an unsuitable load.  In any
event, many people disagree with your results and their claims have
been verified in double-blind tests.

>Music has a huge dynamic range, and most people try to reproduce
>it with amps that are too small. If you need 40 watts average to
>fill the room, you need about 800 watts peak to stay out of clipping
>on transients. You *can* hear that clipping.

Where in heck did you come up with this?  It certainly speaks in favor
of tubes due to their softer clipping characteristics, but I've never
heard a technically valid claim that 800 watts headroom would be
required to eliminate clipping at average listening levels in the
home.  I'd like to see the math, including the sensitivity of the
speakers in SPL at one watt/one meter, the size of the room and the
SPL you consider "room filling" either at the location of the listener
or one meter from the driver.

Also, which speakers are "most people" using that are capable of
reproducing the 800 watts peak that you claim is necessary?

>The other thing you can hear is the effect of improperly matched
>damping factor.

There's no such thing as matched damping factor.  It's a euphemism for
the need to minimize the audible defects of junk speakers.  I suggest
that if you think older speakers such as Acoustic Research, Klipsch,
Altec, University and Jensen have muddy bass when they're driven by
solid-state amps, you've been conditioned by the large amount of crap
that's now on the market.

73,
Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:46:24 1996
From: Joe Fitter BV/N0IAT <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: DX-70 , TS-50 - IC706 receivers
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 1996 18:41:28 -0700
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4kquoo$[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]

Tom wrote:
>
> I am looking for comments on the receiver performances of the
> small hf transceivers??? Which one has the best receiver?  I am
> not much concerned about 6 or 2 meters - primarily hf performance.
> Which radio has the better sounding receiver characteristics?

Have both the Alinco and the Icom.   Alinco wins hands-down
on HF.   No question.  The ICOM folds under strong signals (like
when I put it on a 2 element quad).

However, CW filter in the ICOM is better but is optional not
included.

Joe


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:46:25 1996
From: [e-mail] (Kevin Deal)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.swap
Subject: FINDERS FEE FOR HICKOK 580 tube tester
Date: 20 Apr 1996 20:08:02 -0700
Message-ID: <4lc8qi$[e-mail]>

I need to  find one of these, and will pay a $50 referral fee to someone who
finds one for me, and I buy it.  Thanks.

Kevin Deal
[phone]

Kevin Deal
UPSCALE Audio Rare Tubes
E-mail for the finest NOS tubes available from
Telefunken, Amperex, Philips NV (Holland), Mullard
[phone] pst





From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:46:26 1996
From: [e-mail] (muddywtr)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: flaky display
Date: 21 Apr 1996 23:02:08 GMT
Message-ID: <4leepg$[e-mail]>

help - friend has hf rig, using NEC PD 549A  as display driver.
we cannot seem to find a suply of these devices. The manufacturer has disconti
nued
this particular device. so if anyone has any ideas\or a supplier pls
contact me.


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:46:27 1996
From: [e-mail] (Burch Akin)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: For Sale Postings
Date: Fri, 19 Apr 1996 17:37:34 GMT
Message-ID: <4l8j0s$[e-mail]>
References: <4l0lkp$[e-mail]> <4l37ak$[e-mail]>

Cecil Moore <[e-mail]> wrote:


>Is there any way to automatically keep "FS" postings off this
>newsgroup? The for sale postings are fast getting to the
>ridiculous level. Maybe we should rename the group
>rec.radio.amateur.equipment-not-for-sale.

>73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


You have to realize, most internet providers don't offer ALL of the
newsgroups so people have to post wherever they can.  I much rather
see FS items than the bickering about code or no-code.

My internet provider gives us only 3000 of over 15,000 available
newsgroups.

KE4ZQV



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:46:28 1996
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: For Sale Postings
Date: 19 Apr 1996 17:20:03 -0700
Message-ID: <4l9ajj$[e-mail]>
References: <4l0lkp$[e-mail]> <4l37ak$[e-mail]> <4l6qbu$[e-mail]>

[e-mail] wrote:

>Why do we care?

Well, Dean, you can be a person who doesn't care if you choose
to. I care that a lot of people have to pay money to download
for sale crap that they don't want to read. I'm limited to 20
hours per month. Anything over than costs me money. If I wanted
to read for sale crap, I would subscribe to rec.radio.swap which
I don't. Why do you think people should be allowed to violate
the charter of this newsgroup? If you want for sale crap, go
read rec.radio.swap. THAT'S WHAT IT'S FOR!!!!

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC




From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:46:29 1996
From: bobr2 <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: For Sale:Two week old Yaesu FT10.
Date: 15 Apr 1996 21:46:25 GMT
Message-ID: <4kug3h$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]

Why are you selling this so quickly?



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:46:29 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: FS   --   HEATHKIT  BROADCAST  RECEIVER
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
From: Bill <[e-mail]>
Date: 21 Apr 96 21:10:44 CDT

Model BR-2
AM Broadcast receiver
Heath Company - Benton Harbor, Michigan

I found this one at an estate sale this weekend, and I think that it
dates back to the early 1950s.  Excellent mechanical and cosmetic
condition, but needs some circuit troubleshooting.

Please e-mail with offers or requests for additonal info.

73s

Bill Worthington
AA4FM/0
Eudora, Kansas, USA




From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:46:30 1996
From: [e-mail] (Clifton Turner)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: FS  Icom R7000 w/HF Converter
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 20:01:44 GMT
Message-ID: <4le45k$[e-mail]>

I have an Icom R7000 Receiver Serial #06298.  It comes with a DC cord,
service manual and an external HF Conveter that covers 500Khz to 30
Mhz( upconverts to 100.5 to 130.0 Mhz),  Excellant working condition
but has a few minor scratches (No Mods).

Best Offer or Trade??  Woud consider Amateur Radio HF Transceiver.

Clifton KF5OJ
[e-mail]
318-442-4734





From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:46:31 1996
From: [e-mail] (SKozmo)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: FS - RS HTX 202
Date: 22 Apr 1996 09:43:28 -0400
Message-ID: <4lg2e0$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (SKozmo)

HTX 202 in very good condition with speaker mic, alkaline battery pack,
manual.

150.00

Reply here or e-mail to SKozmo@ aol.com


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:46:32 1996
From: [e-mail] (Cecil A. Moore~)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: FS in this News Group Question ???
Date: 22 Apr 1996 18:47:16 GMT
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4lgk7k$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>,
Bobby Raymer <[e-mail]> wrote:
>If you dont want folks too list there FS stuff in this newsgroup then
>why dont you STOP ALL Listening then.

Hi Bobby, my dad pays long distance charges to download this newsgroup
at 1200 baud. He lives on social security and doesn't want to pay for
for sale stuff. He doesn't download rec.radio.swap.

>Your Newsgroup address said HAM-EQUIP i seen nothing for
>Not Posting and FS Gear in this newsgroup.

The "Guide to the Personal Radio Newsgroups" is the FAQ for the
r.r.* newsgroups. It says not to post for sale postings here.

>How does one unsubscribe from this and ill be glad too look else where or
>start my own listserv for FS stuff.

There *is* a newsgroup dedicated to for sale stuff. It's described
in "Guide to..." and is rec.radio.swap  Everything is already set up
for everybody. All they have to do is read the "Guide to..." which
is published on all these groups from time to time.

Almost every newsgroup has a FAQ or "Guide to..." Is it too
much to ask that everybody read it and abide by it? Individuals
violating the guidelines are killing the goose that lays the
golden eggs.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:46:33 1996
From: [e-mail] (RVranch)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: FS:  YAESU  FT-890 AT
Date: 18 Apr 1996 18:44:23 -0400
Message-ID: <4l6gk7$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (RVranch)

Mint Condx with 500hz cw filter -- manual -- $850  and I'll ship

WINK  WA8KOQ


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:46:34 1996
From: Spencer Petri <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: FS: Kenwood 520S+D-104 mic
Date: 21 Apr 1996 20:33:53 GMT
Message-ID: <4le63h$[e-mail]>

Posting for W5ORW. $300 U ship. Includes copy of manual. Nice radio.

73 de Pete WA5JCI EM 21




From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:46:35 1996
From: Montbach/Bartlett <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: FS: Kenwood and Motorola 800 mhz radios
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 1996 18:10:24 -0400
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Hi there, name here is will. I have a kenwood tk930 LTR-trunked/conventional m
obile. the
 radio has 6 systems. trunked systems can have up to 6 subgroups, conventional
 systems
can have 4 channels per system. You can program trunked and conventional syste
ms
simultaneously .The radio supports pl and dpl conventional signalling and is t
elephone
interconnect capable. RF power is 15 watts. I will program and ship for $325.
The second radio is a motorola stx single system portable. Can be either motor
ola
trunking or single channel conventional. Also supports pl and dpl in conventio
nal mode.
Asking $200 programmed and shipped. Both radios have been checked out on the b
ench and
are in perfect working order. Contact me at 617-491-2680 till 11 pm est or ema
il. 73,
Will, N1PXA


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:46:37 1996
From: Dave Fortenberry <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: FS: Uniden Force UHF repeater
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 13:27:41 -0700
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

FS: Uniden Force model ARU-251 25 watt uhf repeater. Has ctcss enc/dec,
built in AC supply with automatic battery backup switching w/on air
warning tone. Currently xtaled up on the UHF ham band, but can be moved
to 450 or 460 as well. Comes with service manual. $550 shipped to lower
48. Call 916-991-7014 or e-mail [e-mail]

                                    Dave
--
 WPCä


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:46:38 1996
From: [e-mail] (John)
Newsgroups: misc.industry.electronics.marketplace,sci.electronics.equipment,sci.electronics.repair,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.swap
Subject: Re: FS:Polarad Microwave Signal Generator
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 1996 06:42:11 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4kota9$[e-mail]>

[e-mail] (David Thomas) wrote:

>I have a Polarad Microwave signal generator New in the box with
>manuals & probes. will sell to first best offer $$$ call John at (804)
>340-7685 or e-mail [e-mail]
>Email me at [e-mail]
>
>


DAVID...............

I WILL PUT THIS IN CAPITAL LETTERS AND REAL SIMPLE WORDS SO, MAYBE,
YOU CAN UNDERSTAND IT.   YOU ONLY HAVE TO POST A MESSAGE 1 (ONE) TIME.
PEOPLE HERE ARE QUITE INTELLEGENT (SMART..).   FOR THE 4 (FOUR) ITEMS
YOU HAVE FOR SALE, I THINK YOU HAVE POSTED ABOUT 40 (FORTY) POSTS!!!!
THIS IN A PERIOD OF 5 (FIVE) DAYS!   THIS SERVES ABSOLUTELY NO
PURPOSE, AT ALL, EXCEPT TO PISS READERS OFF!!   EVEN AFTER ALL THESE
POSTS, I DOUBT ANYBODY STILL KNOWS WHAT YOU HAVE FOR SALE OR WHAT THE
EXACT PRICE IS, EITHER.  TO SAY, YOUR DESCRIPTIONS LEAVE A LOT TO BE
DESIRED, WOULD BE AN UNDERSTATEMENT!

POST EXACTLY WHAT YOU HAVE  (YOU "CAN" PUT MORE THAN 1 (ONE) ITEM IN A
POST TOO!)   1 (ONE), I SAID 1 (ONE) TIME!  PUT ALL DETAILS ABOUT THE
ITEMS IN THE POST.  BRAND, MODEL, ACCESSORIES OR OPTIONS, PRICE, ETC.
AND HIT THE SEND BUTTON 1 (ONE),  I SAID 1 (ONE) TIME!!  IF SOMEONE IS
INTERESTED THEY WILL PROBABLE EMAIL YOU OR CALL YOU OR POST A REPLY.

NOW THAT I'VE SAID THAT, THERE MIGHT EVEN BE A BETTER PLACE TO POST
YOUR FOR SALE ITEMS.  I'M NOT SURE IF FOR SALE IS A CORRECT POST FOR
THIS GROUP OR NOT.   I'M SURE SOME OF THE READERS OUT THERE WILL HAVE
THE ANSWER FOR THAT.

JohnSon


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:46:41 1996
From: Josh Pavlovich <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: FT-10R MARS Mods *here it is*
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 1996 22:18:57 -0700
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <CSLE87-1804961033410001@145.39.1.10> <4l5r47$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

Yaesu FT-10 Extended Transmit Mod for 140-174MHz use.

Be sure to set your mail reader to a mono-spaced font (like Courier)
to view this correctly.

1. Remove antenna and battery.
2. Locate the Ni-Cd battery sticker on the back of the radio chassis.
   Pry up the corner of the sticker and peel it off carefully.
3. Remove the two screws located under the sticker. These retain the
keypad.
4. Slowly lift off the keypad. Use care not to dislodge the gasket.
5. Locate and unsolder the 0 ohm chip resistor at location "M" (see
   diagram below).
6. Re-install keypad with two screws. Be sure gasket is properly
seated.
7. Replace the Ni-Cd sticker if desired. Reattach battery and
antenna.
8. Press down and hold the Top-Notch and Lamp button while turning
the
   radio on.

  | knob |
+---------------------+
|  +---------------+  |
|  |  LCD Display  |  |
|  |               |  |
|  +---------------+  |
|  -----------------  |
|  -----------------  |
|  -----------------  |
| (on/off) ---------  |
|                     |
|  +---------------+  |
|  |    Ribbon     |  |
|  |    Cable      |  |
|  |    ||||||     |  |
|  |  o         o  |  |
|  |         ::    |  |
|  |           #:  |  |
|  +---------------+  |
+---------------------+

# = Location "M", chip resistor to remove


If memory serves me, the board actually has an "M" near the correct
resistor.


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:46:42 1996
From: [e-mail] (Chris)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: FT-50R ?
Date: 20 Apr 1996 05:43:08 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Is the new Yaesu FT-50R HT available yet?
Does it do crossband repeat?
Does it have a wideband TX mod like the single band versions?
Looks like a cool radio for its small size, milspec, and DCS capabilites.
First impressions?

Thanks
-Chris


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:46:42 1996
From: Jeff Goldman <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: FT-50R first impressions
Date: 20 Apr 1996 23:40:37 GMT
Message-ID: <4lbsll$17v$[e-mail]>

I talked with an engineer at Yaesu who told me that they goofed and
put a 25kHz filter in there rather than a 75kHz one (for WFM). Hopefully,
this will be rectified soon.


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:46:43 1996
From: Chuck <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: FT-50R info.
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 1996 19:16:11 -0700
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Well I held one. It is the same case as the 40 and 10's The radio uses
the same batt's and case. The 50 also comes with an unadvertised feature:
a game. Just turn it on by pressing MR and power at the same time and
there you are. Very neat sounds and moving numbers on the screen. Pause
is the Ch knob (push it down) and the game keeps score.


I know of no mods for the 50, yet.

                                        CS



--
Man-Servent Hecubus Fan Club of America.


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:46:44 1996
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: FT-50R info.
Date: Sat, 20 Apr 96 17:34:55 GMT
Message-ID: <4lberg$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4l8lhg$[e-mail]>

   Someone wrote:

>The 50 also comes with an unadvertised feature: a game. Just turn it
>on by pressing MR and power at the same time and there you are. Very
>neat sounds and moving numbers on the screen.  Pause is the Ch knob
>(push it down) and the game keeps score.

With products like this, who needs CB?

73,
Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:46:45 1996
From: [e-mail] (Burch Akin)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: FT-736R vs TS-790 vs IC-820H
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 1996 19:22:58 GMT
Message-ID: <4l64qk$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4ku6mc$[e-mail]>

[e-mail] (Steven Umbach) wrote:

>    If you don't want other bands then stay a way from the Yaesu 736 - my
>experience is they have poor receivers. They overload easily with strong
>ssb signals.

I own a 736R and have been very happy with the receiver.  I considered
the 790A.  Both radios cost about the same and the Yaesu has a built
in power supply.  I like both radios, but ended up buying the Yaesu
and have been very happy with mine.  Everyone I know that owns a 736
likes the radio.

KE4ZQV





From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:46:46 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: FT-736R vs TS-790 vs IC-820H
Date: Sat, 20 Apr 1996 04:16:57 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

On Mon, 15 Apr 1996 12:14:06 -0400, Joseph M Zawodny
<[e-mail]> wrote:

>Hello,
>
>       I am considering one of the following for a satellite, packet,
>and SSB contesting: FT-736R, TS-790, or IC-820H.  Assume that I am only
>interested in the 2m and 70cm bands so I don't care about plug in extras
>such as additional bands and the like.  What are the pro's and cons for
>each of these rigs?  I will be using these with computer control, what
>information can I get FROM the radio via the computer interface?  Since
>the 820 is rather new, how does the computer interface differ from the
>IC-970?  Will a program that was designed for use with the IC-970 work
>with the IC-820H?  I read the QST review of the 820H, but found that it
>did not address many of the items mentioned above.


I have an Icom IC-820H and have been 95% happy.   It has an excellent
reciever.  I have been given very good reports regarding my audio.  Of
the three radios you mention the 820H is probably the most convienent
to use mobile or as a rover if you are a contester.

The disadvantages are.... no RF gain control,  both bands cannot be
scanned at the same time, and some of the controls that should have
been on the outside of the radio are on the inside...(such as a small
pot to adjust low power level).

My plan in the future is to wait and see what if any new allmode
muilti-band rigs Kenwood and Yaesu are going to offer in the near
future... they are about due.   If there are no new offerings... I'll
use the 820H mobile.   and get a TS-790 for home use.
I don't do satellite work only weak signal.

All the interface stuff in the 820H is the same as the 970 by Icom.

Hope I was of some help.

KC5FLJ  located in EL17GT




From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:46:47 1996
From: [e-mail] (Nathaniel C. Hinkle)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: FT-900 vs IC706 which is better?
Date: 22 Apr 1996 05:29:20 GMT
Message-ID: <4lf5fg$[e-mail]>

Hello everyone,

        I have had a Yaesu FT101f for many years and want to
upgrade my HF rig. I am looking at both Yaesu and Icom compact
rigs. I like the idea of portability. Who makes the best one?
Any problems that I should be aware of before I buy? Help me
out here it's a lot of money so I want to get a rig that will
last a while.
                                Thanks In Advance.
                                        N6CCR
                                Nathan Hinkle  :)



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:46:49 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: FT-900 vs IC706 which is better?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
References: <4lf5fg$[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 13:28:40 GMT

In article <4lf5fg$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Nathaniel C. Hinkl
e) writes:
>       I have had a Yaesu FT101f for many years and want to
>upgrade my HF rig. I am looking at both Yaesu and Icom compact
>rigs. I like the idea of portability. Who makes the best one?
>Any problems that I should be aware of before I buy? Help me
>out here it's a lot of money so I want to get a rig that will
>last a while.

The FT900 has an internal autotuner and a receiver that is less
overload prone. The IC-706 has 6m and 2m plus wide VHF receive,
and is *much* smaller. If you don't care about 6m and 2m, and
if absolute size isn't critical, you may be happier with the
FT900.

The designers made different tradeoffs. I looked at both,
and bought the IC-706. I wanted the very small size, I wanted
6m, and having 2m too was icing on the cake. I don't care a
whole lot for internal autotuners, figuring that an external
tuner is usually more flexible. And I've learned to cope with
the overload problem (more frequent use of the attenuator),
though I'm still investigating ways to mod it to solve that
problem.

The FT900 is a fine small HF radio, but I'm keeping my IC-706.
You might choose to go the other way and I couldn't say you'd
be wrong. It all depends on which tradeoffs you prefer. I'm
also keeping my IC-735, and it's a better all around HF radio
than either of them (IMHO). A used one goes for around $650 and
might be the perfect upgrade from a FT101. (Note, I saw in the
latest AES catalog that they still have *one* IC735 demonstrator
for sale with warranty. It may be the last "new" IC735 in existance.)

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | Due to provider problems
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | with previous uucp address
es
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | Email to [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:46:50 1996
From: [e-mail] (T. Greening)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: FT530 speaker mic help needed
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 1996 23:38:05 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4ktjmi$[e-mail]>

"John A. Sutliff" <[e-mail]> wrote:

>I recently bought a used FT530 with MH-29 speakermike.  How do
>you program the user definable key on the mike?  I did'nt get a
>speakermike manual.
>
>Thanks,
>KB2WFW
>
>[e-mail]
>

Press the user key while turning on the transceiver, then press the
key you want to duplicate.  The factory setting has the user key
duplicating the BAND key.
--

T. Greening

All of the above IS my opinion..
DOES reflect the views of my company..
AND is also the opinion of everyone in my family tree..

So sue me....
:)





From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:46:51 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (David Feldman)
Subject: FT736 MEM->VFO and PMS->VFO transfers
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 16:43:10 GMT

I've had a FT736 for a long time and always lamented lack of a key to copy
memory to VFO. (there are multiple ways to write/destroy/mangle your memories,
but no documented way to read a memory to VFO).

Anyway, thanx to an e-mail from Charles Sherwood [e-mail], it
turns out there are key sequences to do memory read, along with copying the
current PMS frequency to a VFO.

MEM->VFO:  Go into "MR" mode and dial to the desired memory. Push VFO A or
VFO B button to select the VFO. Press F then VFO. Display will then show
the selected VFO, and operating freq/mode will reflect the copied setting.

PMS->VFO:  Go into "PMS" mode and scan/band to the desired frequency. Push
VFO A or VFO B button to select the VFO. Press F then VFO. Display will then
show the selected VFO, and operating freq/mode will reflect the copied setting
.

I haven't seen reference to either maneuver in the manual.  If it is in the
manual, could someone refer me to the right page/paragraph, so I can kick
myself for suffering for all these years? ;-)

Anyway, much thanx goes to OM Charles (chuck?) for solving one of the most
aggrivating problems I have with the FT736. I didn't get his callsign.

73 Dave WB0GAZ [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:46:52 1996
From: Rolfe Tessem <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: FT736R performance on 70cm
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 1996 14:13:41 -0400
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4kmq37$[e-mail]> <4kscj3$[e-mail]>

Parf wrote:
>
> I heard from Yaesu @Miami that the 746 was awaiting launch of a new AMSAT
> bird that the 746 had particular capabiliies for ( I am not a SAT worker
> so don't know what these features might be). Then I heard someone else say
> the same thing. So apparently it has been built. Dealer seem to be
> discounting the 736R these days also which may signal something.
                                                 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

How about the fact that Oscar 13 is going to splash down in December and will
probably become unusable a month or so earlier?

Rolfe
W3VH

--
Rolfe Tessem            |       Lucky Duck Productions, Inc.
[e-mail]           |       96 Morton Street
[phone]          |       New York, NY 10014


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:46:53 1996
From: [e-mail] (Peter A. Klein)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: FT736R performance on 70cm
Date: 21 Apr 1996 23:24:43 -0700
Message-ID: <4lf8nb$[e-mail]>
References: <4kjqdv$[e-mail]> <4kua0b$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (David Feldman) writes:

>   On the FT736 how do you copy a Memory to VFO? There is a V->M key and
>   a V<->M key, but no M->V key as far as I can see. Is there a trick to
>   this I never discovered?

Simple.  You use the V<->M key to exchange the memory with the VFO.  Then
hit the V->M key to copy the frequency back to the memory channel.
Roundabout, but it works.

73,
Peter - KD7MW
---


--
Peter A. Klein  ([e-mail])  :    -----==3==      ---      ---
Information Services, ext. 5569        :   |    |  |  |    |   |    |   |
Seattle University                     :  @|   @| @| @|   @|  @|   @|  @|


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:46:54 1996
From: [e-mail] (Dave Kelley)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Heathkit HR-1680
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 1996 16:41:17 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

I'm looking for information on the old Heathkit HR-1680 ham-bands-only
receiver. It was manufactured in the late 1970s.

What is its basic design (direct conversion, superhet)?
What IFs (if any) does it use?
Is it all solid-state?
Does it perform well (dynamic range, sensitivity, AGC)?
Does it have a built-in power supply?
What is its overall quality?
What is a typical price for the unit on the used market?

Any other info...?

Thanks for any information you can provide.

73 de NB4J

==========================================================
Dave Kelley                  Ph.D. Candidate
                             Electrical Engineering Dept.
email: [e-mail]    Pennsylvania State University


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:46:55 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Help selecting a 2m HT (Newbie)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
References: <4k8o6p$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4l2fvl$[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 07:04:03 GMT

In article <4l2fvl$[e-mail]> ross langridge <[e-mail]> wri
tes:
>
>ONLY BUY A KENWOOD!
>THERE IS ONLY ONE BRAND WORTH BUYING!

Well, I suppose, if you like lots of intermod, poor thermal design,
a truly wretched user interface, and the worst factory support in
the industry, then perhaps you should buy a Kenwood. Otherwise, I'd
suggest you buy *ANYTHING ELSE*.

Gary

--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | Due to provider problems
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | with previous uucp address
es
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | Email to [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:46:56 1996
From: [e-mail] (Steven B. Bryant)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: HELP:  Grounding Question?
Date: 17 Apr 1996 17:33:10 GMT
Message-ID: <4l3a0m$[e-mail]>


Hello-

I am wondering why I need to ground my radio and power supply using a
separate ground wire instead of using the the ground normally provided by
a 3-plug AC connector?  Wouldn't a separate ground create a ground
referencing problem?  I'm looking to understand what I need to do when I
purchase my Power Supply this week and install my system over the weekend.

I will be using an IC 730 with the IC-PS15 Power Supply.  Any help you
can provide will be greatly appreciated.

-Steve B. N6EQY


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:46:58 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: HELP:  Grounding Question?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
References: <4l3a0m$[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 1996 15:09:20 GMT

In article <4l3a0m$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Steven B. Bryant) writes
:
>
>I am wondering why I need to ground my radio and power supply using a
>separate ground wire instead of using the the ground normally provided by
>a 3-plug AC connector?  Wouldn't a separate ground create a ground
>referencing problem?  I'm looking to understand what I need to do when I
>purchase my Power Supply this week and install my system over the weekend.
>
>I will be using an IC 730 with the IC-PS15 Power Supply.  Any help you
>can provide will be greatly appreciated.

The power supply will have a third wire safety ground, but the radio
still will not. So you'll want to also give it a chassis ground
connection. It has a lug for that purpose. You could tie that to the
third wire connection of the outlet you use for the power supply.
That would give you ordinary electrical shock hazard protection.
(The DC negative lead won't serve because it isn't directly
connected to chassis either in the power supply or the radio.)

The problem is that the house electrical third wire ground won't
do much for you as lightning protection. The ground path is too
long, and has far too much inductance. You're also right to be
concerned about ground loops. They can be damaging.

The answer to both problems is to create an entrance panel that
serves as a shack ground window. This is a copper plate to which
*every* wire that enters or leaves your station is connected *before*
going on to connect to equipment in the station. The wires should
be either directly connected to the plate in the case of "grounds",
or via appropriate suppressors if the wire is nominally "hot". This
means coax, power wiring, telco wiring, etc.  This plate becomes
your station "single point" and shorts any potential ground loops
entering your station.

This ground window is then connected as directly as possible,
using as low an inductance wiring method as possible (5 inch
wide smooth solid copper strap preferred, don't use braid), to a
*good* Earth ground connection. A single ground rod is generally
*not* a good Earth ground connection. I recomend a minimum of
4 rods, with a central rod surrounded by the other 3 arranged
around and connected to the central rod in star fashion. The rods
should be separated by at least twice the length of a single rod
from each other to avoid the charge saturation zones overlapping.

This is often a sufficient Earth connection where the water table
is high. In other areas where soil conductivity is poor, I'd add a
Ufer ground (rebar in concrete) at least 20 feet on a side, and/or
a bunch of buried radials to form a capacitive "plate" to couple
energy to Earth. Dirt is a pretty poor conductor, with most currents
conducted soil grain to soil grain by arcing across the grain boundaries.
So surge currents are most effectively conducted to Earth via capacitance,
with the Earth forming one plate of the capacitor.

This system will give you an effective lightning safety ground,
and incidentally it may also serve as a RF ground should you
need one, providing the connection between the ground window
and Earth is (very) short compared to a quarterwave at the highest
frequency you'll be operating. Note, you usually will *not* need
a RF ground unless you're trying to feed a long wire or other
grossly unbalanced type of antenna. Verticals should be worked
against a ground *at their base* and not a ground back at the
station. Dipoles and other balanced antennas don't require a
RF ground connection.

You'll have to be the judge of how much grounding you want to
do. I wouldn't sleep easy in thunderstorm country with a lesser
system than the one I've described. If you aren't willing to
put in an effective system, you might be better just letting
the station "float" with respect to Earth and religiously
disconnect (and separate) antenna downleads from your equipment
when you aren't operating. Note that word "separate", lightning
that has just traveled miles through open air isn't going to
be deterred by a few inches of separation. Give it a better
choice of path than jumping to your equipment, or you.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | Due to provider problems
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | with previous uucp address
es
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | Email to [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:46:59 1996
From: [e-mail] (Jim Kehler)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: HELP:  Grounding Question?
Date: 20 Apr 1996 02:33:29 GMT
Message-ID: <4l9idq$[e-mail]>
References: <4l3a0m$[e-mail]>

Steven B. Bryant ([e-mail]) wrote:

: Hello-

: I am wondering why I need to ground my radio and power supply using a
: separate ground wire instead of using the the ground normally provided by
: a 3-plug AC connector?  Wouldn't a separate ground create a ground
: referencing problem?  I'm looking to understand what I need to do when I
: purchase my Power Supply this week and install my system over the weekend.

: I will be using an IC 730 with the IC-PS15 Power Supply.  Any help you
: can provide will be greatly appreciated.

: -Steve B. N6EQY

Steve,
    You don't NEED to ground things with a separate ground. Sometimes
you can get away with the AC ground. Separate grounds for the radio
gear are helpful when you start experiencing RFI problems. I have run
plenty of stations without one - including the current one which is
1500 watts. It just depends on the location how things work out.

73, Jim KH2D



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:47:00 1996
From: S9 PLUS <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Hw 24t dual band ht 150.00
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 1996 00:22:56
Message-ID: <4l4ftv$[e-mail]>

 Hello,

    The name here is Cal.. I have a HW-24t made by Heath. This
 handheld is fully synth.. Has bookoo functions and works. Needs
 a battery pack but functional on the one it has. Has slight 3/4
 inch crack in case next to bottom.. has no effect on use or
 operation... will sell for 150.00.. shipped...


                        Calvin Burnette

                  804-821-6233    after 5pm est
........ 73 ........Cal,  [e-mail]



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:47:01 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.space
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: IC-970 is it good ??
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4l40s6$[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 07:35:33 GMT

In article <4l40s6$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Vince Fiscus,  KB7ADL) w
rites:
>In article <[e-mail]>,
>   [e-mail] (Gary Coffman) wrote:
>>The TS-790A should be avoided for satellite use. It has *serious*
>>design flaws for such usage. Not recomended. It can be Ok for
>>light duty terrestrial use.
>
>I disagree, while the TS-790 left some things out, it is still a good
>satellite rig.

The TS-790A has some horrible defects that make it unsuitable for
satellite operation. The most brain dead feature is that the narrow
filters don't work in the sub-band receiver, but that's the one
you have to use when operating satellite because only the main
band unit transmits. Thus your SNR suffers severely unless all
you operate is SSB.

And like all other Kenwood VHF+ gear, it has absolutely horrible
thermal design. The PA modules get very hot. The 70cm module in
mine cooked out after only 30 days of operation (and Kenwood
took months to fix it). The replacement PA module was worse.
Instead of 18 amps current draw for 27 watts output (yeah it
didn't meet power output specs from the factory), the replacement
PA drew 22 amps for only 22 watts output. Then the 2m PA module
died. Same problem, thermal cookout opened metalization in the
module. I sawed that one open rather than send it back to the
factory again, and fixed it myself.

And then there's the brain dead user interface. To make sattrack
tuning work, you have to depress and *hold* the SAT button. That
makes tuning a two handed job. And if you release the SAT button,
you have to press it *twice* to get back into track tuning, useless.
I rigged up a mechanical clamp to keep the SAT button depressed
all the time.

I finally managed to unload it on a sucker (hi Brian), and got
a real radio, the FT-736R. It runs cool, the narrow filters
*work* for satellite, there's a for real rotary switch that
puts you in sattrack tuning and *leaves* you in sattrack tuning,
etc. In other words, it works right.

I know, I should have known better than to buy a Kenwood. I've
got enough experience with them to know that they are all terminally
brain dead. I just have to plead temporary insanity when I bought
yet another of their poorly designed pieces of crap. (Hope springs
eternal that they'll finally get *something* right on a VHF+ radio.
Their HF stuff isn't half bad.)

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | Due to provider problems
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | with previous uucp address
es
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | Email to [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:47:02 1996
From: "Richard R. Fasi" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: ICOM 706 MODS ?
Date: 20 Apr 1996 06:01:28 GMT
Message-ID: <4l9ujo$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]

Roberto,
Try ftp to oak.oakland.edu their radio mods on the 706 are up to date
73 de Dick KM6PA



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:47:03 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: ICOM IC-706 75/80-mtr problem
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
References: <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 07:00:38 GMT

In article <[e-mail]> Carl Estey <[e-mail]
ell.com> writes:
>Has anyone noticed reduced RF output on any one band of the IC-706, even
>into a 50-ohm dummy load?  I get only 50 watts out on 75/80-meters and no
>ALC action.  All other bands are fine.  The reduced output is independent
>of the load (antennas and dummy loads all work the same for me on
>75-meters - reduced output).
>
>Any suggestions?

Have you checked quick set mode Q1? This allows you to set the power
output to any value between 5 watts and 100 watts. This setting applies
on a *band by band* basis. Make sure it is set to 'H' on each band.

Gary

--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | Due to provider problems
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | with previous uucp address
es
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | Email to [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:47:05 1996
From: [e-mail] (Ted Culin)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: Impending HDTV....
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 1996 19:07:53 GMT
Message-ID: <4l3fht$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (ML., Michigan, USA) wrote:

>Does anyone know if a newsgroup exist where HDTV issues are discussed?

>     If not, I figured our amateur radio newsgroup would be the best place to

>post a technical question about the impending HDTV broadcasting
>changeover...So here it goes....

>    The projected cost figures of the HDTVs are extremely high compared to
>current TVs.   I suspect the majority of american families will be unable to
>come up money for the HDTVs.

>     Since HDTV transmissions will be incompatible with the current NTSC
>transmissions, is it possible and likely that TV accessory manufacturers will

>come up with an economical convertor box to convert HDTV transmissions into
>NTSC signals, so that HDTV broadcasts can be viewd by regular NTSC TVs?

>     Your comments on the topic are appreciated.  Please email your response
>to [e-mail].   Thank-you

>73, KB8VBA

>

If you havn't seen a HDTV demonstration go check one out the picture
is amazing.  I watched a demo at the local art muesum, one Japaneese
short showed someone cooking in the kitchen.  You could see very fine
detail on the hamburger and other items without really trying, you
could see the small droplets of greese flying off the frying pan.  I'd
say it was easily as good if not better than any fine grained 35 mil
photo i've seen.

There is a HDTV newletter available on the WWW.  Try www.web-star.com
some stuff is there as well as a full subscription.  I don't have any
interest in the company, but the data is there.




From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:47:05 1996
From: [e-mail] (Scott Remington)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Intrinsically safe certification
Date: 22 Apr 1996 04:00:24 GMT
Message-ID: <4lf08p$[e-mail]>

Thanks to all who answered my question on type acceptance.  The answers were
quite informative.  Now, another question:

        Can anyone explain intrinsically safe certification as its applied to
radio equipment?  I kind of have an idea that to be certified, the electronic
device must be incapable of generating a spark that could cause an explosion.
I'd be interested in the specifics of what testing is done and why.

Thanks in advance.

--
"The only Earth Alliance Captain ever to survive engagement with the
Minbari is behind me. You are in front of me. If I were you, I would try to
be someplace else." - Ambassador Delenn to EA Loyalist commander, "Severed
Dreams" Babylon-5
<<<    Scott Remington    [e-mail]    Amateur Radio KC7MRV    >>>



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:47:06 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Johnson Viking Phone Patch Info Needed
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 06:13:10 GMT
Message-ID: <4lcckf$[e-mail]>



I recently came across a Johnson Viking (Part No 250-46) phone patch
with no information. It has 3 pots on the face (RCVR GAIN, XMTR GAIN,
NULL). On the back it has a 3 conductor line with shield ground, 2 pin
plug, and a terminal strip with the screws labled : L2, L1, SPKR, RCVR
in that order. There is also a grounding lug. I would appreciate any
information on this phone patch.


Thanks,

Wyatt    KF4CHZ

[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:47:07 1996
From: [e-mail] (W3SYT)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Kantronics KPC-3/GPS/ $90
Date: 15 Apr 1996 14:27:09 -0400
Message-ID: <4ku4dt$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (W3SYT)

Near new, just got a KAMplus. In box with books & disc.
$90 ppd COD cash UPS.
73, Bob Rockwell, Pittsburgh.


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:47:08 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: kenwood 450SAT
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 96 01:15:05 GMT
Message-ID: <4lemdr$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>, Robert Newman <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>Would anyone know where to check for why, when I press my VOX switch with not
hi
>ng in my key jack, it goes to the transmit mode?  When I plug my key in it s
>tarts keying like I have my key closed but I dont.  Ive of course checked the
>cable for any shorts.


   Is the Send/Rec button pushed in? If so push it so it's out. Right now
that's the only thing I can think of. I also have the 450/SAT. You may want to

call Kenwood as well.

Tom


   Tom Randall            Amateur Radio - KB2SMS
   [e-mail]       Mt. Beacon Amateur Radio Club / ARRL
                          Member: AAVSO Solar Division

   Opinions herein are mine and they are not that of MHV.NET!


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:47:09 1996
From: Jeff Goebel <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Kenwood TS-50 Filters??
Date: Sat, 20 Apr 1996 10:59:09 -0500
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

I am considering upgrading my TS-50 with a CW and possibly an IRCI 2.1 KHZ SSB

filter.  Does anyone have any experience with the IRCI filter in this radio?
Does
IRCI make a CW filter for the TS-50?  My info from them is about 1 1/2 years o
ld
and only shows the SSB filter.

Thanks for your comments and info.

Jeff Goebel N0VHB
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:47:10 1996
From: [e-mail] (Jim Weir)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Looking for "AA" battery case for Kenwood TR2600 HT
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 1996 23:10:11 GMT
Message-ID: <4l3tr9$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

[e-mail] (Gary F. Kendall) shared the following priceless pearls
of wisdom:

>Does anyone know of a possible source for this battery pack?

Try Ross Distributing in Preston ID.  208/852-0830  I got one for my
2600 about two years ago and seems to me they were about $25 apiece.

Some words of supposed wisdom -- Ross isn't the cheapest in the
country, but always fair and seems to always have what I need.  Use
the Rayovac rechargeable alkalines in the battery pack.  I'm getting
between 50 and 75 charges out of a set before they go away (they don't
self-discharge like nicads and they have almost the same capacity as a
regular alkaline).

Tell the Ross folks they need to be on the 'net to pick up things like
this -- if I didn't happen to casually spot this, they would have lost
a sale.

Jim

Jim Weir VP Engineering | You bet your sweet patootie I speak for the
RST Engineering         | company.  If I don't, ain't nobody gonna.
Grass Valley CA 95945   |
http://www.rst-engr.com | AR Adv WB6BHI--FCC 1/C phone--Cessna 182A N73CQ
[e-mail]        | Commercial/CFI-Airplane/Glider-----A&P Mechanic



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:47:11 1996
From: Spencer Petri <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Manual or copy Heathkit Seneca.
Date: 21 Apr 1996 20:38:35 GMT
Message-ID: <4le6cb$[e-mail]>

Anyone out there been around long enough to have one of these?

73 de Pete WA5JCI




From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:47:12 1996
From: [e-mail] (John Gratton)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Marine Quality Amateur radio
Date: 17 Apr 1996 18:25:15 GMT
Message-ID: <4l3d2b$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (William Simpson) writes:
>I'm looking for a 2meter only OR a dual band 2meter/70cm mobile unit
>for a boat that is watertight "built like a marine spec radio", OR
>a housing of some sort for a regular mobile unit.

Hmmm. That's a pretty tall order considering most marine radios aren't
built 'watertight "built like a marine spec radio"'. You might have
more luck finding a housing for a standard mobile radio. Though
heat disipation might be a problem.

>Also what kind
>of antenna system should I use for it as well ? The boat will only be used
>on lakes and maybe a few rivers as well. It has an antenna for the AM/FM
>radio in it the goes through the bottom of the hull into the water. Is
>this the kind of setup I should use as well ? Any help will be
>apprieciated. If you can E-mail me OR if you think anybody else might
>be interested in the info just post it here .

I don't really understand what the AM?FM antenna is doing, but I'll tell
you about my experince with a marine antenna. I have a sail boat
with a marine VHF radio (frequencies around 156 MHz). The antenna
for the radio is a base loaded 5/8 wave stainless steel whip. About 3 db,
these whips are used mostly on sailboats where angle of heel is a factor.

I called the maker (Metz) and asked them how it would work on 2 meter
freqs, they said the antenna is so broad banded, it should work fine.
When I had a chance to borrow a friends SWR meter I checked and sure
enough, about 1.5:1 SWR. Good enough!

So that's one option for you, a 3db stainless whip that can double as your
marine VHF antenna. You can get these from West Marine for $32.

>
>Thanks,
>
>   Tom Simpson KF4GKW
>   [e-mail]


--
John Gratton                               |                      [e-mail]
m
Hans Christian 33 "Nakia"                  |                      (415)780-577
4


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:47:13 1996
From: [e-mail](Lee Norville)
Newsgroups: misc.industry.electronics.marketplace,sci.electronics.equipment,sci.electronics.repair,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.swap
Subject: misc. T&M gear for sale....
Date: 22 Apr 1996 03:42:15 GMT
Message-ID: <4lev6n$[e-mail]>
References: <4kug6v$[e-mail]>



  We have numerous HP oscilloscopes, protocol,logic,scalar network
analyzers, freq counters for sale.... check out our web site
            http://www.compudigital.com

 for information. new items added daily as they are recieved and
checked out.


            73's de KD6KCD


            [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:47:14 1996
From: [e-mail] (James A)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Motorola JT1000 info needed
Date: Fri, 19 Apr 1996 23:48:21 GMT
Message-ID: <4l98oj$[e-mail]>
References: <4kscrr$[e-mail]>

[e-mail] (James A) wrote:

To the CAP SAR e-mailer,

I was unable to reply to your e-mail address.  Mailer-daemon said no
go. Please send your e-mail address to confirm.

Thanks

James



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:47:15 1996
From: JBraswel <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: NEED manual + Schematic LAFAYETTE HE80
Date: 21 Apr 1996 22:04:14 GMT
Message-ID: <4lebcu$e5s$[e-mail]>

NEED Manual + Schematic for Lafayette HE80 Receiver
joe
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:47:16 1996
From: [e-mail] (David Liu)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Need Recommendation on Dual Band Transciver
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 18:19:36 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

I would like to buy a Dual Band Receiver , I am thinking about buying
a Kenwood TH79A is that a good model ? Function is enough ? Anything
is missing in that model ?

Any other brand name I should look at (with better feature)? (i.e.
ICOM ....)

Thanks!


..........................................................................
.    David Liu     (CNE,MCSE)    |    Voice    : Soon!                   .
.                                |    Fax :    : [phone]          .
.    [e-mail]           |    BBS :    : (852)2539-7218          .
.    [e-mail]             |    FidoNet  : 6:700/671               .
.                                |    http://www.hkstar.com/~dliu        .
.                                |    http://www.glink.net.hk/~dliu      .
..........................................................................


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:47:16 1996
From: "Thomas W. Castle" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Needed... Schem Alinco-570
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 1996 02:48:11 -0400
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Hi Tom here...  N4ZFH a friend of mine is in need of a schematic
for a Alinco 570 Dual band mobile... His particular need is in
reference to the Tx Audio... In his case the stock mic is tx too
much audio in terms of level an Dev. If this rig has a seperate
tx audio level <mic amp gain> need the Vr or location there of.
Or at least the appropriate Vr to set tx Deviation while checking
the Dev on Service monitor... Contact me via the Newsroup or
E-mail... Tnx De Tom
73




From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:47:18 1996
From: Jim Brown <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: PK232 For Sale
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 17:32:06 -0500
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

1 AEA PK 232 tnc with all but the latest updates ie: It has
the mailbox but not Pactor etc. Works fine. Asking $185. phone is
803-874-2834. Name Clarence Lowe.....More???


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:47:19 1996
From: Mitchell <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Portable HF vs. Tabletop HF Transceivers
Date: 17 Apr 1996 22:11:03 GMT
Message-ID: <4l3q9n$[e-mail]>

I recently acquired my General ticket and am debating on a
good first-time HF rig... Price is important, but features and
quality are also essential.  Should I consider a portable,
like an ICOM IC-706, Alinco DX-70T, or a lower priced table
top ICOM or Kenwood.  What are some good used models to consider?

[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:47:20 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Portable HF vs. Tabletop HF Transceivers
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
References: <4l3q9n$[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 08:28:08 GMT

In article <4l3q9n$[e-mail]> Mitchell <[e-mail]> wr
ites:
>I recently acquired my General ticket and am debating on a
>good first-time HF rig... Price is important, but features and
>quality are also essential.  Should I consider a portable,
>like an ICOM IC-706, Alinco DX-70T, or a lower priced table
>top ICOM or Kenwood.  What are some good used models to consider?

The IC-706 is a neat toy, and so small that it practically
disappears in the smallest vehicle. It's good, but it is not
a perfect radio. The receiver will crunch under strong signal
attack, and you need to mod it to get satisfactory out of band
receive on VHF. The Alinco's receiver is a little better in the
crunch department, but its IF filters aren't, and it only puts
out 10 watts on 6m if that's important to you. Yaesu's entry
in this range is better, but bigger. Avoid the TS-50, it doesn't
offer you anything the others don't do better.

If the ultimate in small size, and DC to daylight coverage,
isn't important to you, there are better pure HF radios out
there. One of the best buys is the IC-735. It had the longest
production run of any amateur transceiver, and it is still a
competitive performer today. You can find them on the used
market for around $650.

On the new market, look at the mid and top line Yaesus.
They're very nice. The current bottom and mid-line Icoms
and Kenwoods are not in the same league, though both
of those companies' top of the line radios are pretty good.
(Be really wary of used Kenwoods, however, there are some
real dogs floating around, especially certain TS-440s and
TS-120s. And you want to avoid IC-745s, they were real
crunch boxes.)

Ten-Tec also offers some good HF radios, though I don't
think their Scout is a good deal when you total up all the
costs to get it to cover all the HF bands and fit it with
a noise blanker, etc. It's still a kludge. Ten-Tec's top
of the line is very good though, and a used Corsair II might
be a good buy if you can find one.

Buying a used radio can be very smart. If you choose wisely,
you can resell it for about what you pay for it when you
decide you want something else. Any new radio is going to
cost you a big depreciation hit when you walk out the door
with it. Of course you have to be a little bit careful when
buying used. You have to know something about the model
or else you might be buying a dog. But on the other hand,
lots of people will have experience with the model and can
offer you advice about it. Other than just having to have
the latest gadget, buying new doesn't get you much except
a warranty, and that's usually not worth the big depreciation
hit. Some of the older radios had as good (and in a few cases
better) RF performance than some of the newest radios. So
buying used doesn't necessarily mean accepting second best.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | Due to provider problems
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | with previous uucp address
es
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | Email to [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:47:21 1996
From: [e-mail] (Dennis Collin)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Portable HF vs. Tabletop HF Transceivers
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 20:37:26 GMT
Message-ID: <4lguak$[e-mail]>
References: <4l3q9n$[e-mail]>

Mitchell <[e-mail]> wrote:

>I recently acquired my General ticket and am debating on a
>good first-time HF rig... Price is important, but features and
>quality are also essential.  Should I consider a portable,
>like an ICOM IC-706, Alinco DX-70T, or a lower priced table
>top ICOM or Kenwood.  What are some good used models to consider?

Check out the Yaesu FT-900/AT and get the best of both!  I'm VERY
happy with mine, in the car and in the shack ...



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:47:22 1996
From: [e-mail] (Hubert)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: PRO-2024 MODS WANTED
Date: 14 Apr 1996 15:33:29 GMT
Message-ID: <4kr5s9$[e-mail]>

hi dr om

i ve a realistic scanner pro-2024 and i never found the mods for it

is someone can help me  thanks de [e-mail]



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:47:23 1996
From: gary <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: QST conflict of interest Again!
Date: 19 Apr 1996 17:05:40 GMT
Message-ID: <4l8h55$[e-mail]>
References: <4l6h44$[e-mail]> <4l7a4o$[e-mail]>

[e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) wrote:
>I've never seen Eimac employees describe their tubes as "modern, high
>performance, inexpensive" while directly describing the competition's tube
>design as "not driven by technical performance" and "driven by simplicity,
>low cost, and superb product promotion".
>
>Have you?
>
>73 Tom

LIKE some of the other posters here, I personally appreciated the info
presented in the article. I had just received a new set of 4 572B's from
Svetlana, and appreciated as much supportive info on their products as
possible - regardless of how that info was titled. As already stated in
this thread, tubes currently availble from Svetlana appear to be of good
quality, reasonably priced, and available in types no longer available
from other sources where they were previously offered. To get all
torqed up over such a trivial non issue suggests the original poster
either simply was experiencing a bad hair day or just has too much time
on their hands and not enough *REAl* things to do....

--
Gary....KJ6Q    *** I AM THE NRA! ***



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:47:24 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: QST conflict of interest Again!
Date: Fri, 19 Apr 96 17:13:42 PDT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4l6h44$[e-mail]> <4l7a4o$[e-mail]>  <4l8h55$[e-mail]>


In Article<4l8h55$[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]> writes:

>
> [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) wrote:
> >I've never seen Eimac employees describe their tubes as "modern, high
> >performance, inexpensive" while directly describing the competition's
tube
> >design as "not driven by technical performance" and "driven by
simplicity,
> >low cost, and superb product promotion".
> >
> >Have you?
> >
> >73 Tom
>
> LIKE some of the other posters here, I personally appreciated the info
> presented in the article. I had just received a new set of 4 572B's
from
> Svetlana, and appreciated as much supportive info on their products as
> possible - regardless of how that info was titled. As already stated in

> this thread, tubes currently availble from Svetlana appear to be of
good
> quality, reasonably priced, and available in types no longer available
> from other sources where they were previously offered. To get all
> torqed up over such a trivial non issue suggests the original poster
> either simply was experiencing a bad hair day or just has too much time

> on their hands and not enough *REAl* things to do....
>
> --
> Gary....KJ6Q    *** I AM THE NRA! ***
>
A trivial issue indeed.  In past decades ham magazines featured build it
yourself rigs using tubes made by only one manufacturer!
We built them...where do you think all those 4x250, 300,
800 articles came from.  The best paper on transmitter construction
was "The Care and feeding of Power tetrodes" by Bill ORR
W6SAI. who I believe was long associated witht the Eitel-McCullough gang.
:-)
My Point:  Articles using proprietary tubes got us building and so what.
The Svetlana article was informataive far beyond its
comments about the 4CX1600.  Lighten up and learn.
73,
Scott
40 years a building ham



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:47:27 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: QST conflict of interest Again!
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
References: <4l6h44$[e-mail]> <4l8771$[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 10:03:18 GMT

In article <4l8771$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) writ
es:
>
>Let's not talk emotionally about what the artical "feels like or reads
>like", but what it says. If someone can explain the following to me, maybe
>I'll change my opinion. But hyperbolic comments like a "tempest in a tea
>pot" and so on don't address my concerns, and neither do other general
>"well I think other people have done it" responses. So someone help me
>with facts, not feelings.
>
>Let me once again clarify... I have no objection to the first part of the
>article, the part I think is self-serving bunk is the section "The Next
>Revolution-High Performance Tetrodes'. Without that section, the article
>would have been very well written, unprejudiced, and truthful.

I think the article was as well written, unprejudiced, and truthful
as an article of that type can be. The "Next Revolution" section
explains the demise of the old 4 811A amps and the rise of the
more linear, higher efficiency, single tube amps that have replaced
them in some better amplifier designs.

>And hence my main point. Can anyone address these questions?
>
>1.) Tetrode PA's are more difficult to operate, construct and design that
>GG triode amps, the author's contrary statements were technically false.
>Please explain why tetrodes were incorrectly described as a new
>"technological reveloution" and listed with advantages they (in fact) do
>not have?

Tetrode amps have better linearity and more power gain than triode
amps. They do require a screen supply, and the tuning is a bit
different, but that's only marginally important when contrasted
to the advantages they offer. Tetrode amps were almost exclusively
used (before transistors took over) in TV transmitter linear PAs
because of their better power gain and better linearity. Even in
Class C FM transmitters, tetrodes were often the choice because
their higher power gain improved overall transmitter efficiency.

>2.) Why were tetrodes even mentioned in a article about 811's? What do
>they have to do with 811 tubes?

See above. They were mentioned to show the trend in amplifier design
thinking away from the older 811A multi-tube designs and toward the
single tube designs that have largely replaced them. Zero bias triodes
were also mentioned as another path away from the 811A. This, as in
mention of the tubes that preceeded the 811A, serves to put the 811A
in a historical context.

>3.) Why were the references (with the exception of one to an out of
>business company) only to other articles supporting the author's sales of
>tetrodes and to the author's company?

Probably because there's little literature to reference about power
tubes other than from the author's company and Eimac still available.

>4.) What technical or historical function does any of this have, other
>than to promote the author's tubes over triodes?

Historical context. The 811A is obsolete as a power amplifier tube
except in a few retro designs. Mentioning the two main contenders
which replaced it is certainly a good way to show why the 811A
passed from the scene for new designs.

>>   It told more of a story about Eimac and RCA than about anyone else,
>>the Russian bottles came over as simply copies of the originals. If
>>someone from Svetlana can write in public in such a way, where their
>>competitors are favourably treated, then I am pleased.
>
>But they didn't do that. They directly painted Eimac's zero bias tubes, in
>the closing section, as "not driven by technical performance" and "driven
>by simplicity, low cost, and Eimac's superb promotion". They inferred the
>Eimac tubes are old technoligy.
>
>That is either self-serving criticism of another competitor or it is a
>simple technical fact. Since it is not a true technical fact, it must be
>self-serving propaganda. Someone please correct me if I've made a
>technical error in this. I want to be fair.

It is technical fact. Eimac's zero bias triodes are the result of wanting
tubes that can be used in simple and low cost amplifiers. You claimed as
much above when you noted that they allow amplifiers without a screen
supply (or a bias supply). They are not driven by technical performance
since they don't have either the power gain or the linearity of tetrode
amplifiers.

The popularity of triodes in GG amplifiers for amateur service is
driven by the FCC limit on power gain in external amplifiers for
HF Part 97 operation, the lax distortion requirements for amateur
HF linear amplifiers, the wide availability of 100 watt class
exciters, and the lack of skill and knowledge among amateurs
as to the proper tuning and operation of power amplifiers, IE the
tune for maximum smoke syndrome. At VHF, where higher power gain
is usually wanted (and permitted), where a stricter linearity
standard is imposed, and where the skills of operators using high
power tube amps is usually higher, tetrode amplifiers are almost
universally used.

If you want to argue that triodes are technically superior to
tetrodes, I think even Eimac would take exception since they
wrote the book on power tetrodes. And don't forget that Svetlana
makes triodes too. Are you accusing the author of denigrating
his own products as well?

I really don't understand why you are upset about this article.
It seems as if some personal ox of yours must have been gored
for you to raise these ill founded objections to the article
so strongly.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | Due to provider problems
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | with previous uucp address
es
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | Email to [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:47:28 1996
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: QST conflict of interest Again!
Date: 19 Apr 1996 01:59:52 -0400
Message-ID: <4l7a4o$[e-mail]>
References: <4l6h44$[e-mail]>

In article <4l6h44$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (BillN9HH)
writes:

>
>For many years Eimac employees often authored amplifier article's for QST
>and I don't seem to remember anyone complaining about that.  As long as
>the connection between the author and a company is specified, I'd say
most
>of us have enough brains to judge for ourselves whether there is a
>conflict of interest.

A construction article where the user has his choice of tubes is one
thing, especially if the author is careful to describe correct circuit
operation.

For example, consider a 3-500Z amplifier. The builder could always use
Amperex or other brands of his choice. Even a factual technical article
about a tetrode, using a Svetlana 4CX1600 wouldn't be objectional it
explained why and how to select the various components.

When an article has little technical information, and includes picturesque
descriptions of a particular product not even within the scope of the
article... but manufactured by the author.... it's gone a bit too far.

That's never occured in articles written by Eimac or Collins Radio
employees, they are basic cook book type articles with sound technical
foundations.

I've never seen Eimac employees describe their tubes as "modern, high
performance, inexpensive" while directly describing the competition's tube
design as "not driven by technical performance" and "driven by simplicity,
low cost, and superb product promotion".

Have you?

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:47:29 1996
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: QST conflict of interest Again!
Date: Sat, 20 Apr 96 17:33:29 GMT
Message-ID: <4lbeoq$[e-mail]>
References: <4l6h44$[e-mail]> <4l8771$[e-mail]>

   [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) wrote:

>They directly painted Eimac's zero bias tubes, in the closing
>section, as "not driven by technical performance" and "driven by
>simplicity, low cost, and Eimac's superb promotion".  . . .

>Tetrode PA's are more difficult to operate, construct and design that
>GG triode amps, the author's contrary statements were technically
>false.  . . .

No one seems to be responding to this from a logical perspective.  I
guess some folks will support QST no matter what the breach of faith
with the reader.

73,
Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:47:30 1996
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: QST conflict of interest Again!
Date: 22 Apr 1996 13:58:28 -0400
Message-ID: <4lghc4$[e-mail]>
References: <4ledgu$[e-mail]>

In article <4lg6u0$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Rob
Whitacre) writes:

>
>The historical tube article was an out and out advertisement paid for by
you
>and me. I see this all the time in trade publications I receive, but in
that
>case I am not paying for them. When I pay for a magazine I expect the
>advertisers to pay too.
>
>Rob WB8WQA
>
>

The facts seem to suppport your comments 100 percent Rob.

But I am more concerned with the technical inacccuracies presented. It is
a much larger problem when fact are mis-stated to promote a product, even
in a paid ad.

Technical articles should be based on fact, not hyperbole.

I am puzzled why more of us don't share that view.

73 Tom



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:47:31 1996
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: QST conflict of interest Again!
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 96 17:18:20 GMT
Message-ID: <4lgml3$[e-mail]>
References: <4kski8$[e-mail]> <4ktr27$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]><4kski8$[e-mail]> <4ktr27$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4l9hei$[e-mail]> <4ledgu$[e-mail]>

   [e-mail] (Joe Subich) wrote:

>I've known George Badger for several years.  The article is a very
>good history of zero bias tubes and, yes, being the marketing person
>he is, George just couldn't resist the chance to get in a plug for
>his products.

George isn't the problem, even though his plug included statements
that are wrong.  The editors are to blame for allowing his technical
inaccuracies to slip into print.

Hopefully, no one will build a tetrode amp as a result of this
article, only to discover that what they really needed was a simpler
and cheaper triode design.

QST should print a correction to the statements in the article
relating to this point, and should probably apologize to Eimac as
well.

Very sloppy work.

73,
Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:47:32 1996
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: QST conflict of interest Again!
Date: 22 Apr 1996 12:24:54 -0400
Message-ID: <4lgbsm$[e-mail]>
References: <4ledgu$[e-mail]>

In article <4ledgu$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Joe Subich)
writes:

>I would be interested in hearing W8JI's take on this modification.
>However, the Svetlana 4CX800 should do a very nice job replacing a
>pair of 8875s.  The 4CX800 has th same plate dissipation capability
>as the pair of 8875s and if the cathode has sufficient emmission
>(enough current capability) it should be a good candidate to replace the
>very expensive and very fragile 8875s.
>
>--
>73,
>    ... Joe Subich, AD8I

I have not seen the article Joe. Do they regulate thee screen and grid
bias? How do they drive the tubes, cathode or grid? Do they monitor the
screen current and protect it?

By the way, thank you for the direct reply to my question. I suspected
there was a bit of "marketing" involved in the article.

Doesn't QST watch for that?

73 Tom







From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:47:34 1996
From: [e-mail] (Joe Subich)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: QST conflict of interest Again!
Date: 21 Apr 1996 22:40:30 GMT
Message-ID: <4ledgu$[e-mail]>
References: <4kski8$[e-mail]> <4ktr27$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]><4kski8$[e-mail]> <4ktr27$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4l9hei$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

In message <4l9hei$[e-mail]> - [e-mail] (Robert
Wood) writes:
:>
:>IF this is about the MLA2500 conversion, what a waste of bandwidth.

This is about the article by W6TC in the April QST (The 811A:
Grandfather of
the Zero Bias Revolution).  The original poster contends that the
article
represents a shameless plug for Svetlana tubes based on the last section
(two paragraphs).

I've known George Badger for several years.  The article is a very good
history of zero bias tubes and, yes, being the marketing person he is,
George just couldn't resist the chance to get in a plug for his
products.

:>IT IS GREAT THAT QST IS CARRYING SUCH MODIFICATIONS AND EQUIPMENT
:>CHANGES.  I would not call this an upgrade to a MLA2500!,  The single
:>800 tube is far to whimpy to two 8875's that I'll not be rushing out
:>to change mine out.    I'd like to hear about the 1600 tube mod.

I would be interested in hearing W8JI's take on this modification.
However, the Svetlana 4CX800 should do a very nice job replacing a
pair of 8875s.  The 4CX800 has th same plate dissipation capability
as the pair of 8875s and if the cathode has sufficient emmission
(enough current capability) it should be a good candidate to replace the
very expensive and very fragile 8875s.

--
73,
    ... Joe Subich, AD8I
        ([e-mail])



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:47:35 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: question about transceiver Atlas 400XHF
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
References: <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 17:22:50 GMT

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (=?iso-8859-
1?Q?Francisco_Deir=F3_Couto_Borges?=) writes:
>Dear friends.
>
>I'd like to know something about the transceiver Atlas 400XHF.
>
>Is it yet beeing factured? Is it good for TX and RX?

The Atlas company has failed again. The remaining assets appear
to have been turned over to another company, but those having
deposits on the Atlas radio will probably never see either their
money or a radio.

Gary

--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | Due to provider problems
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | with previous uucp address
es
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | Email to [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:47:36 1996
From: [e-mail] (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Francisco_Deir=F3_Couto_Borges?=)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: question about transceiver Atlas 400XHF
Date: 21 Apr 96 15:16:22 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Dear friends.

I'd like to know something about the transceiver Atlas 400XHF.

Is it yet beeing factured? Is it good for TX and RX?

Thank you very much

73's

Francisco [e-mail]



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:47:37 1996
From: [e-mail] (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Francisco_Deir=F3_Couto_Borges?=)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Radio Atlas 400XHF
Date: 21 Apr 96 04:18:03 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

I'd like to have some information about the new radio transceiver Atlas 400XHF
Price with power supply and equipments, performance, and so for.

Thank you very much

Francisco - [e-mail]



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:47:38 1996
From: [e-mail] (David Prince)
Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner,alt.radio.scanner.uk,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.scanner
Subject: Realistic Pro-43 tips and tweeks
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 96 19:38:55 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Is it possible to reprogramme the Pro-43 to scan outside of its
set limits ie, below 68Mhz and above 999Mhz?



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:47:40 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner,alt.radio.scanner.uk,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.scanner
Subject: Re: Realistic Pro-43 tips and tweeks
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 96 20:40:57 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

On 4/17/96 3:38PM, in message <[e-mail]>,
David Prince <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Is it possible to reprogramme the Pro-43 to scan outside of its
> set limits ie, below 68Mhz and above 999Mhz?
>

begin 664 pro-43.mod
M1E)/33H@350N($%)4EDL($U!4EE,04Y$#0H-"E1/.B!!3ED@4%)/+30S($]7
M3D524R!)3E1%4D535$5$($E.(%)%4U1/4DE.1R!42$4@0TU4($9215%514Y#
M2453#0H-"D=2145424Y'4R!&14Q,3U<@4%)/+30S($]73D524R$A(2!)($I5
M4U0@3T)404E.140@35D@3U=.(%!23RTT,PT*2$%.1$A%3$0@1E)/32!2041)
M3R!32$%#2R!43T1!62!!3D0@5$A/54=(5"!42$%4($DG1"!005-3($].($$@
M#0I154E#2R!!3D0@4TE-4$Q%(%!23T-%1%5212!/3B!(3U<@5$\@4D535$]2
M12!42$4@0T5,3%5,05(@1E)%45,-"DE.(%1(25,@3$E45$Q%($I%5T5,+@T*
M#0I35$50(#$M(%)%34]612!42$4@0D%45$5262!#3TU005)4345.5"!#3U9%
M4B!!3D0@5$A%($)!5%1%4ED@4$%#2PT*("`@("`@("!&4D]-(%1(12!30T%.
M3D52+B!!3%-/(%)%34]612!42$4@(E)50D)%4B!$54-+244B($%.5$5.3D$-
M"B`@("`@("`@050@5$A)4R!424U%+@T*#0I35$50(#(M($9)3D0@02!33T94
M($-,3U1(($%.1"!34%)%040@250@3U54($].($$@4U5)5$%"3$4@0D5.0T@-
M"B`@("`@("`@04Y$($Q!62!42$4@4T-!3DY%4B!&04-%($1/5TX@3TX@5$A%
M($-,3U1(+B!214U/5D4@*#0I#0H@("`@("`@($),04-+($-/3$]2140@4$A)
M3$Q)4%,@4T-215=3($923TT@5$A%($)!0TL@04Y$(%-%5"!42$5-#0H@("`@
M("`@($%3241%+B!'14Y43%D@3$E&5"!42$4@0D%#2R!&4D]-(%1(12!30T%.
M3D52($%.1"!3150@250-"B`@("`@("`@05-)1$4@04Q33RX-"@T*4U1%4"`S
M+2!/3D-%($E.4TE$12!42$4@4T-!3DY%4B!93U4@5TE,3"!"12!'4D5%5$5$
M($)9($$@4U1!0TL@3T8-"B`@("`@("`@*#,I(%`N0RY"3T%21%,N($E4(%=)
M3$P@0D4@3D5#15-305)9(%1/(%)%34]612!42$4@5$]0(%173PT*("`@("`@
M("!!3D0@02!32$E%3$0@5$\@1T%)3B!!0T-%4U,@5$\@5$A%($E.1D%-3U53
M(%!23T=204U-24Y'(`T*("`@("`@("!$24]$15,@3D585"!43R!42$4@0U!5
M($-(25`@3TX@5$A%($E.3D52+4U/4U0@4"Y#+D)/05)$+@T*("`@("`@("!4
M2$E3(%`N0RY"3T%21"!)4R!)3B!214%,2519(%1(12!"04-+(%-)1$4@3T8@
M5$A%($M%64)/05)$+@T*#0I35$50(#0M(%)%34]612`H-BD@4TU!3$P@4$A)
M3$Q)4%,@4T-215=3($923TT@5$A%(%1/4"!0+D,N0D]!4D0@04Y$#0H@("`@
M("`@($%.1"!$25,M0T].3D5#5"!42$4@*#(I($-/3DY%0U1/4E,@3D585"!4
M3R!42$4@4TA)14Q$140@05)%00T*("`@("`@("!)3B!42$4@34E$1$Q%($]&
M(%1(12!54%!%4B!"3T%21"X@3D585"!#05)%1E5,3%D@1$4M4T],1$52#0H@
M("`@("`@(%1(12!!3E1%3DY!($-/3DY%0U1)3TY3(%1(12!/551%4B!32$E%
M3$0@5$%"($%.1"!42$4@24Y.15(-"B`@("`@("`@0T].3D5#5$E/3B!&4D]-
M(%1(12!"3D,@0T].3D5#5$]2(%1/(%1(12!0+D,N0D]!4D0N($=%3E1,60T*
M("`@("`@("!04ED@55`@5TE42"!93U52($9)3D=%4E,@3TX@5$A)4R!"3T%2
M1"!/3B!42$4@0D%45$5262`-"B`@("`@("`@0T].3D5#5$]2($5.1"X@5$A%
M(%504$52($)/05)$(%=)3$P@3$E&5"!!5T%9($923TT@5$A%#0H@("`@("`@
M(")35$%#2R(@4T54($E4($%3241%+B!42$4@3D585"!42$E.1R!43R!214U/
M5D4@25,@5$A%(%173PT*("`@("`@("!334%,3"!02$E,3$E04R!30U)%5U,@
M4T5#55))3D<@5$A%($U)1$1,12!0+D,N0D]!4D0@5$\@5$A%#0H@("`@("`@
M($923TY4($A!3$8@3T8@5$A%($-!4T4N3$E&5"!42$E3($)/05)$(%50($=%
M3E1,62!!3D0@34]610T*("`@("`@("!)5"!43R!42$4@4TE$12!33R!!4R!4
M3R!'04E.($-,14%2($%#0T534R!43R!42$4@4TA)14Q$($].#0H@("`@("`@
M(%1(12!)3DY%4BU-3U-4(%`N0RY"3T%21"X@250@25,@3D]4($Y%0T534T%2
M62!43R!43U1!3$Q9#0H@("`@("`@($1)4RU#3TY.14-4(%1(12!314-/3D0@
M0D]!4D0@1E)/32!42$4@2T590D]!4D0L($I54U0@4U=)3D<-"B`@("`@("`@
M250@3U54($]&(%1(12!705DN#0H-"E-415`@-2T@54Y33TQ$15(@5$A%("@T
M*2!404)3($].(%1(12!#3U).15)3($]&(%1(12!32$E%3$0@04Y$(%)%34]6
M10T*("`@("`@("!)5"X@3D585"!,3T-!5$4@5$A%($-052!#2$E0("A42$4@
M3$%21T4@4U%505)%($-(25`@4D]51TA,60T*("`@("`@("!)3B!42$4@0T5.
M5$52($]&(%1(12!+15E"3T%21"!0+D,N0D]!4D0I($%.1"!43U=!4D13(%1(
M12`-"B`@("`@("`@0D%45$5262!#3TY.14-43U(@64]5(%=)3$P@4T5%($$@
M4D]7($]&(%0M22U.+5D@4U521D%#10T*("`@("`@("!-3U5.5$5$($1)3T1%
M4RX@5$A%62!!4D4@3E5-0D52140@5TE42"!!(%-)3$LM4T-2145.($%.1`T*
M("`@("`@("!42$4@1$E/1$4@3E5-0D52140@1#0@25,@5$A%($].12!43R!2
M14U/5D4N($1/($Y/5"!44ED@5$\-"B`@("`@("`@0U)54T@@5$A)4R!005)4
M+"!)3E-414%$(%5312!!(%--04Q,(%=!5%1!1T4@25)/3B!7251(($$-"B`@
M("`@("`@1DE.12!425`@04Y$($1%+5-/3$1%4B!)5"X@*$D@2$%612!&3U5.
M1"!42$%4($$@5$]/5$A024-+#0H@("`@("`@(%=/4DM3(%=%3$P@05,@02!0
M4EE"05(I+B!!1E1%4B!42$4@1$E/1$4@25,@4D5-3U9%1"!404M%#0H@("`@
M("`@($$@1T]/1"!,3T]+($%23U5.1"!&3U(@04Y9(%-(3U)44R!/4B!33TQ$
M15(@0E))1$=%4R!!3D0@248-"B`@("`@("`@04Q,($E3(%=%3$P@4D4M05-3
M14U"3$4@64]54B!30T%.3D52(%)%5D524TE.1R!42$4@04)/5D4-"B`@("`@
M("`@4%)/0T5$55)%+@T*#0I35$50(#8M($%&5$52($E.4U1!3$Q)3D<@5$A%
M($)!5%1%4DE%4R!!3D0@04Y414Y.02`H64]5($1)1"!214U%34)%4@T*("`@
M("`@("!43R!215-/3$1%4B!42$4@0DY#($-/3DY%0U1/4B!43R!42$4@55!0
M15(@4"Y#+D)/05)$($1)1$XG5`T*("`@("`@("!93U4_*2!455).($].(%1(
M12!30T%.3D52($%.1"!'3R!43R!42$4@4%)/1U)!34U)3D<@34]$12X-"B`@
M("`@("`@2$E4($Q)34E4($].0T4@04Y$(%=(14X@(DQ/(B!)4R!$25-03$%9
M140@2T59($E.(#@V-RXP,#`@04Y$#0H@("`@("`@($A)5"!%3E1%4BX@*$E&
M(%E/55(@34]$(%=!4R!354-%4U-&54PL(#@V-RXP,#`@5TE,3"!"10T*("`@
M("`@("!$25-03$%9140L($E&($Y/5"!'3R!"04-+($%.1"!212U#2$5#2R!9
M3U52(%=/4DLN*2!.15A4($A)5`T*("`@("`@("!,24U)5"!!1T%)3B!!3D0@
M(DA)(B!724Q,($)%($1)4U!,05E%1"X@2T59($E.(#@Y-BXP,#`@04Y$#0H@
M("`@("`@($A)5"!%3E1%4BX@4%)%4U-)3D<@5$A%($Q)34E4(%-7251#2"!2
M15!%051%1$Q9(%=)3$P@5$]'1TQ%#0H@("`@("`@($)%5%=%14X@(DQ/(B!!
M3D0@(DA)(B!,24U)5%,N($A)5"!42$4@55`@3U(@1$]73B!!4E)/5R!!3D0-
M"B`@("`@("`@64]5(%=)3$P@4U1!4E0@4TE&5$E.1R!42%)/54=((%1(12`B
M1D]20DE$1$5.(B!&4D51545.0TE%4RX-"@T*("`@("`@("!214U%34)%4B!4
M2$4@14-002!/1B`Q.3@V($9/4D))1%,@5$A%($U/3DE43U))3D<@3T8@0T5,
M3%5,05(-"B`@("`@("`@34]"24Q%(%1%3$502$].15,@04Y$(%1(25,@24Y&
M3U)-051)3TX@25,@4%)/5DE$140@1D]2#0H@("`@("`@(")%1%5#051)3TY!
M3"!055)03U-%4R!/3DQ9(BXN+BXN+BXN+BXN+BXN+BXN2$%04%D@4T-!3DY)
M3D<-"@T*#0H-"AH:&AH:&AH:&AH:&AH:&AH:&AH:&AH:&AH:&AH:&AH:&AH:
6&AH:&AH:&AH:&AH:&AH:&AH:&AH:&AH:
`
end



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:47:42 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: RFI: Eico 710 Dipper Coils?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
References: <4l05n3$[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 1996 19:02:29 GMT

In article <4l05n3$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Watts)
 writes:
>Hello, I have obtained an Eico model 710 Grid Dip Meter, covering
>0.4 to 250 MHz, but no coils.  Internal inspection reveals three
>terminals for the coils, and a small test with a coil of wire didn't
>come out too nice.
>Anybody have any information on how the various coils are wound or
>where to get a copy of a manual?
>Trying to dip,
>galen, KF0YJ

Straining the brain, I seem to recall that dipper uses the Hartley
circuit.  So the third wire connection is to a tap near one end of
the coil for feedback excitation. Memory could be faulty, but I
also recall that the highest frequency "coil" is just a loop of
heavy wire formed from a piece of wire about 6 inches long and
plugged into only the two outside pins of the socket. Feedback
in that case must be by circuit strays. I had one of these many
years ago, but sold it and bought a solid state version, a Heath,
a long time ago.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | Due to provider problems
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | with previous uucp address
es
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | Email to [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:47:43 1996
From: Bob Jones <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Rotor Wanted
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 1996 22:12:35 -0400
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

looking for a medium duty rotor for a Small tri band Beam
I need a CDR (Hy-Gain) rotor to mount on a push up Mast

please contact me at [e-mail]


Bob Jones
WA4UUE

[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:47:44 1996
From: [e-mail] (Tony Baca (?))
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Sale Azden PCS-4000 $150.00
Date: 18 Apr 1996 14:27:41 GMT
Message-ID: <4l5jgt$[e-mail]>
References: <4ki50d$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

Calvin Burnette ([e-mail]) wrote:
:   Hello,

:       The name here is Cal.... I have an Azden Pcs-4000 fully
:   Synth. mobile radio for $150.00... needs backup battery...
:   will lose memory if disconnected from battery or power supply.
:   Electronically in great condition.. case worn but front is
:   great shape... will take $150... Cashiers check, money order
:   or C.O.D. only... for this 2 meter rig..
:
:             Call 804-821-6233 after 5pm est or email me...
Cal,
I tried to e-mail you but it bounced.  because the Azden radios
have a problem with falling out of lock, I would offer $100 for
the above.

:                              Cal, [e-mail]



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:47:45 1996
From: [e-mail] (Radiomatt)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: SKYWARN WEATHER AND TORNADO SPOTTERS!
Date: 21 Apr 1996 15:21:19 -0400
Message-ID: <4le1rf$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Radiomatt)

there are several such newsgroups; i looked at this one, very slick and
very commercial--the real meat is a book they're trying to sell, plus a
movie (TWISTER) which is being pushed by warner bros.
certainly a great concept, but it needs time


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:47:45 1996
From: [e-mail] (Betchy)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Standard HT Batteries
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 1996 06:41:19 -0400
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

I have 2 CNB163 7.2V 1000MAH batteries for the mini series HT's (168,468
etc.) these batteries have seen little use, 35.00 ea. or 65.00 for both.
These are shipped prices. [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:47:46 1996
From: Val Gahagan <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.swap;,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Swan 350C HF
Date: Sat, 20 Apr 1996 23:44:27 -0700
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Swan 350C tube HF rig 10-80 meters. AC power supply.
asking $275.00 plus UPS shipping.

Jerry KE4DOW


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:47:47 1996
From: [e-mail] (JCHol)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Ten Tec Omni V vs. Omni VI?
Date: 19 Apr 1996 12:13:58 -0400
Message-ID: <4l8e46$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (JCHol)

Fellow amateurs:  I am an avid cw op and have decided to make the big
money plunge to Ten Tec.  What is the difference in durability, operation,
and features between the Omni V and Omni VI?  I see that the price
difference is about $900 on the used market.

Thank you for your comments and 73 de John, WA5TWL...



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:47:49 1996
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: The Transmitter Chassis
Date: 17 Apr 1996 05:27:20 -0400
Message-ID: <4l2dho$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Alfred Lee)
writes:

>>
>> Yes, at *audio* frequencies, where *skin effect* doesn't come into
>> play, this is true. But at RF, where skin effect does come strongly
>> into play, the signal on the *inside* of the connector shell can't
>> get to the outside of the connector shell, or the outside of the
>> chassis. The thickness of those parts is several skin depths, so
>> their insides and outsides are isolated from each other.

The insides and outsides are only isolated if there is a equal and
opposite current involved. Without equal and opposite currents, even VHF
current can flow right through a chassis to the outside. All shields
depend on this effect.

Inside and outside are bad terms to use. I like the surface and interior
better! While current doesn't flow through the interior, the voltage is
the same on each side of the wall. And the outside is a continious path in
a three dimensional world. The only thing that keeps the current inside a
coaxial cable is the equal and opposite currents, the skin depth "allows"
it to happen.

>With so much talk about skin effect every where I have never seen
>a figure being quoted.  I firmly believe some figures will put
>discussions and understandings in perspective.  So here it goes:
>
>    THE SKIN DEPTH AT 100 MHZ IS 0.66 uM (MICRON)
>
>The variations due to different material is within an order of
>magnitude.  If my memory failed me please quote the correct figure.
>I think the number is so incredible that everyone should know.

But current continues for some depth beyond that point. And don't try to
treat the conductor interior as insulation, it doesn't always work.

>On some previous posts RF current within the coaxial transmission line
>and outside the shield were discussed.  The discussion centered on the
>effect of line length, particularly at 1/4 wave length and 1/2 wave
>length.  Doesn't the difference in velocity factors causes the current
>maximum/minimum to occur at different location?  For RF current within
>the coaxial line the V.F. is 66% (or some other number.)  For RF
>current on the outside shield, due to the skin effect, the entire
>cable might just as well as a solid conductor, for which the V.F.
>is around 95%.  Wouldn't this effect make any difference?

While we know what the inside TEM mode VF is, we usually don't know what
the outside (common mode) VF is!  It depends on the cable's surrounding
environment.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:47:50 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: TO MUCH AUDIO ON MY 229H ICOM
Date: 18 Apr 1996 02:24:50 GMT
Message-ID: <4l495i$[e-mail]>
References: <4kv3j0$[e-mail]>

>   [e-mail] (Russ Rinckey) writes:
>
>  I need to find out what pot to turn down on my 229 its distorting a bit.
>  Any help would be great.
>
>>>>
Hope you find out 'cause mine could use the same tuneup.


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:47:51 1996
From: JBraswel <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: TR7
Date: 20 Apr 1996 00:05:19 GMT
Message-ID: <4l99nv$fhb$[e-mail]>

Can anyone tell me the pinout on Connector "J"
on the rear of the TR7.  It is the PS7
connector.

joeb


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:47:51 1996
From: [e-mail] (JJ Martin)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: TR7
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 05:58:54 GMT
Message-ID: <4lc8di$[e-mail]>
References: <4l99nv$fhb$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

JBraswel <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Can anyone tell me the pinout on Connector "J"
>on the rear of the TR7.  It is the PS7
>connector.

>joeb

"J" is the PS7 Control - that is providing we are speaking from the
same sheet of music.

  Pin         Function

    1          AC from switch
    2          AC to switch
    3          NC
    4          NC
    5          NC
    6          AC to fan
    7          NC
    8          VOX relay (linear)[sic]
    9          ALC input
  10          Ground

Mates with S-310-CCT

Hope this helps.

  73 de jim
    wk1v



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:47:53 1996
From: Paul O'Kane EI5DI <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: TS-870 given Bad Report in Rad.Com review
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 23:25:32 -0700
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

John M Sonley wrote:
>
> I was planning to buy the new TS-870 until I read the Peter Hart review
> in Radio Communication April 1996.

In my experience the RadCom review is accurate.  If you're a serious
contester in the major worldwide events you'll have problems.  If not,
you'll probably never notice anything.

Although the 870S uses digital filtering, it also has conventional crystal
and ceramic filters in the 8 MHz and 455 KHz IFs.  The narrowest conventional
filters are 3 KHz.  I replaced the stock 3 KHz filters in my TS870S with
8 pole 2.1 KHz crystal filters in both IFs from International Radio in
Florida.

I had previously used the same filters in both a TS830S, a TS830M (same as
the 830S but with the addition of AM, and no provision for CW filters), and
the 455 KHz filter in a Yaesu FT990.  Athough the 830M had no CW filters, I
found that the combination of high quality 8 pole crystal filters and
variable bandwidth tuning gave me all the selectivity I ever needed for
CW contests.  I had previously used Kenwood's 500 Hz CW filters in both
IFs on the 830S, but found them too narrow for CW contesting because I missed
stations calling off frequency.

In the 870S the International Radio filters give a marked improvement. I
can't say how much, but I have done a direct comparison with an
unmodified rig and it's worthwhile.  They are automatically switched in
when you select a bandwidth (the difference between your selected low and
high cutoff frequencies) of 2400 or less.

One other observation.  I used my 870 in an International Marconi Day
station this weekend.  We had two stations using separate wire antennas
which were physically close together.  When one station was transmitting
on 80m, both a TS940S and an FT990 on 20m suffered from serious breakthrough
and were unusable.  The 870S was completely unaffected because its internal
auto-ATU also works on receive and gave the necessary additional isolation.

Finally, if you enjoy AM listening, whether on LF of HF, there's nothing
to touch the 870S for audio quality.  It's a pleasure to listen to.  On
SSB also, as conditions permit, you can increase the bandwidth and hear
SSB sound like it never did before.

Every radio is a compromise in some respects.  You can't have the best of
everything in a single rig.  Because I do a lot of contesting, I had been
thinking of selling my 870S, but now, and especially with the "new" filters,
I've decided to keep it.

73,
Paul EI5DI

PS:  The inbuilt keyer (same as the Super CMOS II or the Logikey) is the
best available on any rig.


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:47:54 1996
From: [e-mail] (James W Beckett)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: wanted Mil-DF parts
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 1996 18:48:42 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Wanted: Pieces, parts OE-4/GR (AN/TRQ-23) DF system
Fixed    pedestal TG-176/GR
Portable pedestal TG-177/GR
Azimuth indicator IP-740/GR
Receivers  R-901, R-902/GR
Antenna Control  C-6183/GR
This stuff is 1979 vintage.
Have the large loop- want the rest.

Jim

KD2KU
Corning NY





From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:47:55 1996
From: Bob Winingham <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Wanted: Manual for HTX-202 Radio Shack 2m HT
Date: 21 Apr 1996 16:20:41 GMT
Message-ID: <4ldn8p$[e-mail]>
References: <4kv917$[e-mail]> <4l9dvo$[e-mail]>
To: @postoffice.ptd.net

Seems to me I saw a posting that said the Manuals are
on the TANDY www site.

73




From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:47:56 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (David Feustel)
Subject: Re: Wanted: Manual for HTX-202 Radio Shack 2m HT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4kv917$[e-mail]> <4l9dvo$[e-mail]> <4lcfc3$[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 13:41:38 GMT

JRW ([e-mail]) wrote:
: In article <4l9dvo$[e-mail]>, n3vqv <@postoffice.ptd.net> wrote:
: >David Dobrin <[e-mail]> wrote:
: >>
: >> I have recently acquired an HTX-202 HT Sans manual. I am looking for a
: >> manual or instruction sheet. I would be happy to
: >> pay for copy/mailing fees. I have figured out a lot of the commands, but
: >> would like information on the following codes:
: >> Thanks,
: =SNIP=
: >> Dave KD6AOF Westchester, CA
: >>

: Dave --

: I can't help you personally, but your local Radio Shaft, er, Shack can...

: Give 'em the catalog number, & ask a rep to order you one. It'll probably ru
n
: you about $3 - $5, but at least you'll have one.

You can also order a maintenance manual (including schematic) from Radio Shack
.
It will be sent to you by mail within a week.
--
[e-mail]
Dave Feustel            N9MYI - NRA Life
Fort Wayne, IN          For PGP Public Key, finger [e-mail]
219-483-1857            Or else access http://www.mixi.net/~feustel/


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:47:57 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: Jim Kusznir <[e-mail]>
Subject: Wanted:220 Mobiles and IBM Laptops
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 20 Apr 1996 04:36:28 GMT

Hello all:

I am speaking for Jerry, kk6pa, who is coordinating the construction of
Portable Packet stations for use in disasters for the Ridgecrest/China
Lake Area (by LA).

We need 220 mobiles (monoband) and inexpensive laptops.  The only
requirements for the laptops are:
Hard drive
720K 3.5 Disk Drive
Backlighted Display
Serial Port

If you have access to the packet network, Jerry can be mailed directly
at:
kk6pa@wa6ybn.#soca.ca.usa.noam

If you don't have access to the packet network, reply to me and I will
relay the message.

Thank you,
Jim Kusznir
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:47:58 1996
From: [e-mail] (Ken N2SQW)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Wanted:R390A manual
Date: 22 Apr 1996 13:30:54 -0400
Message-ID: <4lgfoe$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Ken N2SQW)

I need a manual for the R390A. I have one for the R390, bu tthere are
enough differences to require the proper manual. Original or photocopy, it
doesn't matter, as long as it's readable.
Thanks, Ken


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:47:59 1996
From: Saad Mahaini <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: WTB accessories for IC735
Date: 18 Apr 1996 19:50:55 GMT
Message-ID: <4l66ev$[e-mail]>

I am looking for the following accessories for the Icom IC735 radio:

AT150 matching tuner
SP7 matching speaker
CW Keyer internal board

All must be in mint condition and reasonably priced.  Please respond
directly by email.

TNX


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:47:59 1996
From: [e-mail] (John Frank)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: WTB:  IC-900 with 1296
Date: 21 Apr 1996 14:50:08 GMT
Message-ID: <4ldhv0$[e-mail]>

        Looking for an ICOM IC-900 with the 1296 MHz unit. Or will
buy just the 1296 unit if available.
                         Jack   WB3ICL




From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:48:00 1996
From: ()
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: WTB: 70CM ALLMODE/DUAL BAND BASE  [AL COPP]
Date: 18 Apr 1996 11:23:30 GMT
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4l58ni$[e-mail]>

73'S TO EVERYONE ON THENET!

I AM IN SEARCH OF A ICOM IC-471H 70CM ALLMODE, OR POSSIBLY A DUAL BAND
(IF THE PRICE IS RIGHT!!!!) BASE. IT MUST BE IN EXCELLENT CONDITION, BOTH
COSMETICALLY AND MECHANICALLY, AND IT MUST BE VERY REASONABLE. IMPOSSIBLE?
MAYBE NOT.

THANKS FOR READING MY MESSAGE

AL COPP KF4GKV
9127815836 OR POST THIS NET.




From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:48:01 1996
From: [e-mail] (Bostonian)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: WTD:  RCA WT-100A or Hickok 700 Tube Tester
Date: 22 Apr 1996 02:05:51 GMT
Message-ID: <4lephv$[e-mail]>

RCA WT-100A and/or Hickok 700 tube tester wanted.  Seeking unit in good
running condition, needing some repairs or for parts (if I later come across
a working unit).  Willing to swap for something or please state a fair price
for the respective unit.  I would prefer swapping something as cash is tight,
but I would have to find out what you are looking for -- I may have it.
Please indicate if you have manuals, schematics, charts and/or plug-in tube
sockets for the respective tube tester.

Kindly, email with details.

Thank you.

My correct email address is:

[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:48:02 1996
From: [e-mail] (Tom Howley)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Yaesu 50R Mods??
Date: 21 Apr 1996 19:37:53 GMT
Message-ID: <4le2qh$[e-mail]>
References: <4l6fcn$[e-mail]>

I am about to buy this radio, if anyone has any mods for this one,
please let me know also!!



In article <4l6fcn$[e-mail]>, GregFox says...
>
>Does anybody know of any mods for the new Yaesu FT-50R?  Thanks.
>
>-Greg



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:48:02 1996
From: Joe <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Yaesu 840 mods ?
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 23:41:58 +0000
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

Looking for any mods for the 840 !


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:48:03 1996
From: Dave Norton <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: YAESU FT 1000MP - extra menu
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 1996 10:26:33 +0100
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4j6e3o$[e-mail]>

In article <4j6e3o$[e-mail]>, Boerge Ravn-OZ8BR/SM0EBP
<[e-mail]> writes
>There are som "hidden info" in the FT 1000MP menu-system!
>A. Press and hold LOCK+FAST, turning power ON
>B Press FAST+ENT keys simultaneously to go into manuf.-mode
>C Select 9-9 using MEM/VFO.
>Enjoy your rig!
>73 Boerge
>
>
Anyone know what the other functions do ?


Dave Norton ([e-mail])

   *** Hobby Accessories ***



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:48:04 1996
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Yaesu FT-101E Bands
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 96 17:05:17 GMT
Message-ID: <4le1ga$[e-mail]>
References: <4lbj50$[e-mail]> <4lc1no$[e-mail]>

   [e-mail] (James A. Nitzberg) wrote:

>The Yaesu ft-101e operates 10, 15, 20, 40, and 75/80 meters.  I
>believe that it  also receives on 10Mhz.

It also covers 160M.

73,
Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:48:05 1996
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Yaesu FT-101E Bands
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 96 16:36:09 GMT
Message-ID: <4lgk5v$[e-mail]>
References: <4lbj50$[e-mail]> <4lc1no$[e-mail]> <4le1ga$[e-mail]> <4lgam5$[e-mail]>

   [e-mail] (Don Montgomery) wrote:

>I used to have FT101EE.  All one had to do was clip the brown jumper
>on the bandswitch and you were instantly on 11 meters, where most of
>the FT101(X)s are these days.

Are you sure you had the EE model?  Mine didn't even have a factory-
installed crystal for 11M.  The TX lockout jumper was only used to
prevent transmission on the 10 MHz WWV band.

73,
Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:48:05 1996
From: [e-mail] (Harvey Sattin)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Yaesu FT-50R
Date: 22 Apr 1996 13:26:33 GMT
Message-ID: <4lg1e9$[e-mail]>

Has anyone seen any mods for the Yaesu FT-50R yet?



From [e-mail] Tue Apr 23 07:48:06 1996
From: [e-mail] (KC7FYS)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Yaesu FT-757 gxII info wanted
Date: 19 Apr 1996 00:48:14 -0400
Message-ID: <4l75ue$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (KC7FYS)

Hello,
I just purchased a good cond ft757 in JA and I am looking for the english
manual for the thing--and also anyone who has interesting anecdotes about
mods, QRV, etc, with this rig.  I am going to install the CW filter when
it arrives.  Any tips.  Please email me.
Jonathan 7j1awl/kc7fys


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:14:07 1996
From: [e-mail] (Francois BONNET)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: 1750 Hz burst tone on a FT-51 R
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 22:11:08 GMT
Message-ID: <4lgsn9$[e-mail]>

I've got a Ft 51 R and ADMS 1B software. I would like to
use 1750 HZ burst tone , is it possible ?


Thank you for answering at [e-mail]


73 de Francois   F1ITT   (france)





From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:14:08 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (Dan Mouer)
Subject: 5/8 (2m) wave MFJ vs. Larsen?
Message-ID: <41a7cc$335a.183@NEWS>
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 96 08:52:14 GMT


I have an HTX-202 (1 watt low, 5 watt hi).

I am looking to get a 5/8 wave mag mount ant. but I don't know which one I
should get.  Maybe even a 5/8 @ RadShak would be enough, I don't know and
that's why I'm posting this here.

1.  What I want/need to know is does MFJ, Larsen, and RS ants have magnetic
     mounts (~5" dia) that would allow me to exchange the 5/8 with a 1/4?

2.  Which would you recommend? What would you say is the "quality/$" index?

3.  What is the gain on a 1/4 and a 5/8 wave?

3.  Are these calculations correct...(assume P_in = 1 watt)

     3dB Gain:      10*log(Power Gain) = dB
                        ==> P_out = P_in * 10^(3/10)
                               P_out = 1.99 watt

     6dB Gain:      10*log(Power Gain) = dB
                        ==> P_out = P_in * 10^(6/10)
                               P_out = 3.98 watt

Any info is appreciated.
Thanks.

-Dan.



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:14:09 1996
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Battery/charger
Date: 24 Apr 1996 23:03:47 GMT
Message-ID: <4lmc0k$[e-mail]>

The Ameritron Mobile Amplifier, the ALS-500M, requires 80 amps peak
current. Can I parallel a big battery and a 13.8v/20a supply and
get away with it? How about a standard battery charger in parallel
with the battery during operation. This is for fixed operation.

thanks and 73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)




From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:14:10 1996
From: Scott Ryan <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: RE: Beldon 9913
Date: 22 Apr 1996 11:50:45 GMT
Message-ID: <4lfrql$[e-mail]>
References: <4kgoto$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <01bb2d9b.ee066d40$28ddc7cd@default>

I'd like to thank everyone for their tips & advice on coax.  I did find
Belden 9913 locally for .59 cents/ft. plus $12.00 for the correct
connectors.

What an improvement!!  The local airport (15 miles away) ATIS is now
receivable, never heard it with the RG 59 coax.  Also the signal on 800
mhz + is much stronger.



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:14:11 1996
From: nmaddix@PROBLEM_WITH_INEWS_DOMAIN_FILE (Nick Maddix N1IHA)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Differences bet. FT-51R and IC-W31A?
Date: 24 Apr 1996 01:36:11 GMT
Message-ID: <4lk0ib$[e-mail]>
Keywords: Yaesu Icom Dual-band HT

I think I've narrowed my search for a dual band HT down to the Icom
IC-W31A and the Yaesu FT-51R. I like the backlit keypads a lot. Anyone
have any opinions on these radios? Experience? I need out-of band
transmit on 2m for UHF/SHF transverter use, but I don't see a mod for
the Icom...

Thanks and 73,
Nick N1IHA

--
Nick Maddix     [e-mail]     http://fuzzball.stu.rpi.edu/~nmaddix
Person. Mostly harmless.                           Amateur radio: N1IHA
Computer and Systems Engineering       Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
   "Keyboard error: keyboard not installed. Press F1 to continue."


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:14:12 1996
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.swap
Subject: Re: DON"T SELL YOUR TUBES TO ANYONE ELSE!!
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 96 16:39:01 GMT
Message-ID: <4lgkbc$[e-mail]>
References: <4l2n6g$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4l44rk$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

   [e-mail] (Gary Coffman) wrote:

>Yeah, the tube amp will have much higher THD. That's why rock
>guitarists like them so much, really incredible distortion
>effects.

Gary, this is completely untrue.  Lead guitarists often run their amps
"wide open" in order to imitate the sound of musicians like Hendrix
and Stevie Ray Vaughn.  The soft clipping of tubes produces an effect
that cannot be duplicated with either a solid-state amplifier or
external "fuzz" devices.  Contrary to your statement, the tube
amplifier produces less odd-harmonic distortion when driven into
clipping, in turn creating a more "natural" sound.

73,
Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:14:14 1996
From: [e-mail] (Bill Nelson)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.swap
Subject: Re: DON"T SELL YOUR TUBES TO ANYONE ELSE!!
Date: 25 Apr 1996 06:57:54 GMT
Message-ID: <4ln7pi$[e-mail]>
References: <4l2n6g$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4l44rk$[e-mail]> <4lgcc5$[e-mail]>

Steve Kennedy ([e-mail]) wrote:

: In my experience (I worked for a high-end audio manufacturer for many
: years, and both solid state and tube equipment was produced), there
: are two primary EXPLAINABLE (some of this stuff is almost
: unquantifiable) reasons why tubes sound "better" than transistors.
:
: The most obvious reason is that the overload characteristics and
: clipping are much "smoother", but I think the MAIN difference (which
: relates to this smoothness) is the spectral content of the distortions
: involved.
:
: Due to their physical nature and construction, tubes produce
: predominantly EVEN harmonic content in the distortions they generate.
: Even harmonics are pleasing to the ear and sound "smoother".

I find this hard to believe. Clipping, in the time domain, can be described
by a series of odd-order harmonics. The even order values cancel out. This
is independent of whether the clipping occurs in a transistor or tube amp.

I suspect the main difference is due to tube amps having an output
transformer. The hysteresis/inductance would "round" any impulse waveforms.
In practice, this means that the transformer would be distorting the clipped
waveform even further - but the resulting sound would not be as "harsh".

Bill


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:14:15 1996
From: [e-mail] (K1EL)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: DT600 RTTY Decoder Info
Date: 26 Apr 1996 21:23:40 -0400
Message-ID: <4lrsus$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (K1EL)

Back in Feb 1976 there was an article published in Ham Radio Magazine
about an RTTY demodulator called the DT600. Boards could be purchased from
a company in Florida called Data Technology Inc. I am looking for someone
that purchased the board and has the schematics and could make a of copy
of them for me. I have all the documentation except for the schematics.
Thanks es 73s de Steve K1EL


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:14:16 1996
From: [e-mail] (Steve Hilberg)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Eartalk speaker mics for HT's
Date: 24 Apr 1996 21:25:05 GMT
Message-ID: <4lm67h$[e-mail]>

I'm interested in obtaining an external mic for my HT, and I'm seriously
considering an ear mic. There was an ad in the latest issue of CQ
magazine by a company called Genesys.  They manufacture two of these ear
mics, the CT-221E Enhanced EARTALK mic, and a new product, the ET-MARKII
Next Generation EARTALK mic.  Has anyone had any experience with either
of these products - pro or con?  Thanks.

______________________________________________________________________
Steve Hilberg                       *    /==
[e-mail]                     * *  x
N9XDC                               *
                           "Some people are weatherwise but
                           most are otherwise."



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:14:18 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (Mike Morris)
Subject: Re: Eartalk speaker mics for HT's
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4lm67h$[e-mail]> <4lmr30$[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 1996 08:20:41 GMT

[e-mail] (Lon Lentz) writes:

>[e-mail] (Steve Hilberg) wrote:

>>I'm interested in obtaining an external mic for my HT, and I'm seriously
>>considering an ear mic.
>> Has anyone had any experience with either
>>of these products - pro or con?  Thanks.

>  My experience with these, on the receiving end, is that while they
>work pretty well, they give the transmitter a muffled sound.

And they are totally useless if you have the sniffles, a cold or the
flu.

For best results have an ear mold made by a good hearing aid shop. The
comfort level is much improved.

And after you get comfortable with it, and build yourself a pendant-
style PTT button to drop down your jacket sleeve, you'll get strange
looks if you go to the airport, wearing a suit with the HT on your
belt and with an american flag lapel pin.
Standard question from security: "Who is coming in today?".
Standard answer: "If you needed to know, you would".

--
Mike Morris                              [e-mail]
#include <disclaimer.std.h>      I have others, but this works the best.
  Looking for CDA-banned material?  Try the bible: Genesis 19:30-38,
  or Ezeikel 23:20.


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:14:19 1996
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: For Sale Postings
Date: 19 Apr 1996 17:25:02 -0700
Message-ID: <4l9asu$[e-mail]>
References: <4l0lkp$[e-mail]> <4l37ak$[e-mail]> <4l8j0s$[e-mail]>

[e-mail] (Burch Akin) wrote:
>You have to realize, most internet providers don't offer ALL of the
>newsgroups so people have to post wherever they can.  I much rather
>see FS items than the bickering about code or no-code.

Hi Burch, wonder how you would feel if each for sale posting cost
you ten bucks? The total cost for these for sale postings runs into
thousands of dollars, if not hundreds of thousands of dollars. I
don't like paying for them, thank you, and yet I am forced to do
so if I am to read this newsgroup. Why can't you and your kind simply
follow the newsgroup guidelines????

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC




From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:14:20 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: FS   --   KINGS  PJ-068  MIC  PLUGS   <<  THE REAL THING  >>
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
From: "Bill  (AA4FM/0)" <[e-mail]>
Date: 22 Apr 96 22:38:41 CDT

      ::::::::::::::::   KINGS PJ-068 MIC CONNECTOR   ::::::::::::::::

        New original PJ-068 microphone plugs manufactured by
        Kings Electronics.

        These are the MIL-SPEC mic connectors supplied as original
        equipment to the military and Collins Radio.

        Why buy a cheap copy when you can have the real thing
        for the same price?

        Fits Collins, Drake, and others that specify a .206"
        3-conductor phone-type mic plug.

        These plugs retail for about $14 + postage (if you can
        find them!)

        My price:  $7.50 each  ( I pay postage )

      ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::






From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:14:21 1996
From: [e-mail] (Jim Price)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: FS Alinco DJ-120 2M HT $150
Date: 27 Apr 1996 17:16:02 GMT
Message-ID: <4ltkoi$[e-mail]>


Hello, I have an Alinco DJ-120 2M HT For Sale.  10 Memories
5 Watts(Lo), 2.5 watts(Hi), DTMF Pad, Tone encode, With 2
7.2V batt Packs,  Wall Charger,  MFJ-283 Speaker Mic(Not
made for this radio but will work with proper connector
soldered on),  and Cigarette lighter plug.

This radio is old but works well and was sent to Alinco last
summer for complete alignment, as well as replacing a bad cap
and BNC jack.  It's had minimal use since then.

I'm asking $150 plus a few bucks for shipping.
Contact Jim - kd4zmi@kd4om.#hky1.nc.usa.noam or
reply via EMail.  Thanks for reading....


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:14:23 1996
From: [e-mail] (Marty Watt)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.swap
Subject: FS or Trade:  Toshiba Laptop
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 1996 13:13:51 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

I have a Toshiba T-1900 laptop, grayscale b/w screen, brand new
battery, 486, 4 meg RAM, 200 meg HD (uncompressed -- 360 compressed),
14.4 fax/data PCMCIA modem, charger and carrying case (Targa).  I'm
looking to swap for a clean TS-50 or similar mobile HF rig.  Also have
an external monitor/keyboard/Microsoft mouse, and Epson Stylus 400
ESC/P2 Inkjet printer that I can throw in for an HF/VHF all-mode
mobile ICOM IC-706.  Manuals for the computer, and the card manager
software, are included.

Being an apartment dweller, would really like to go compact HF.
Personal delivery can be arranged throughout the midwest and southeast
(I'm in Kansas City, and for the next month or so will still be
travelling through Missouri to Western Tennessee.  Iowa, Southern
Nebraska, Western Kansas, Eastern Oklahoma -- including OKC -- East
and Northwest Arkansas, Western Kentucky, Middle Tennessee, North
Mississippi, Northern Alabama are all potential areas for delivery, on
my schedule!)

This computer is in excellent condition, and was used both on the road
and as a primary home computer with the accessories.  Reason for
trade:  got a new pentium at home, and have little need for mobile
computing anymore.

Address/Phone number will be given out by private e-mail only, for
serious inquiries.  Cash price would be $950 for the laptop, $1,250
with the external accessories.

Thanks,

Marty KN4BH/0
Overland Park, Kansas



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:14:23 1996
From: alt.radio <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: FS:  40 Meter Kit for A4
Date: 26 Apr 1996 23:08:47 GMT
Message-ID: <4lrl1v$oo5$[e-mail]>

Brand new in box, never opened.  $100.  Jeff/WB3DLG


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:14:24 1996
From: [e-mail] (D.W.Hemphill KC5NG)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.swap,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: FS:  Heath SB-640 remote VFO for SB-101 and SB-102
Date: 24 Apr 1996 12:34:46 GMT
Message-ID: <4ll756$[e-mail]>

FOR SALE:  - a rare item -
Heathkit SB-640 remote VFO (really a LMO).
Matches SB-101 and SB-102 transceivers.
Fresh alignment, tubes checked good.
Really nice condition, no modifications.
With connecting cable and copy of manual.
The price: $75, buyer pays shipping.

E-mail me if you're interested in buying!
I'll be out of town April 25 through 28,
so I'll return any e-mail correspondence
on April 29 when I get back to work.

Thanks and 73,
                Dean Hemphill, KC5NG
                Lake Dallas, Texas



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:14:25 1996
From: Chuck Penson <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.swap,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: FS:  Heath SB-640 remote VFO for SB-101 and SB-102
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1996 12:57:15 -0600
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4ll756$[e-mail]> <4lm6su$[e-mail]> <4lmi4r$[e-mail]>
To: "D. Ragsdale" <[e-mail]>

> >Isn't the remote VFO for the SB-102 solid-state?
> >

No. It is based on the SB-101 VFO.

--
Chuck Penson
Education Division
Science Museum of Minnesota

[e-mail]
612.221.4510 voice
612.224.5092 fax
http://comped.sci.mus.mn.us

Standard Disclaimer: The opinions expressed are etc. etc. ...

"Nothing is too wonderful to be true" -- Michael Faraday


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:14:26 1996
From: alt.radio <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: FS:  MFJ Electronic Keyer
Date: 26 Apr 1996 23:09:50 GMT
Message-ID: <4lrl3u$oo5$[e-mail]>

New, in orig box. $50.  Jeff/WB3DLG


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:14:27 1996
From: [e-mail] (Greg Wittig)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: FS: Halicrafter SX28
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 96 19:06:57 GMT
Message-ID: <4lr6sh$[e-mail]>

Great working cond with rare original manual best offer.
Greg Ca. Local pickup 80 pounds


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:14:28 1996
From: Richard Harel <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: FS: Harris RF590 General Cov. Receiver
Date: 21 Apr 1996 10:35:44 GMT
Message-ID: <4ld320$[e-mail]>

For Sale:
  Harris RF590 0-30Mhz receivers. Very clean, used by the US Dept. of
  State at the local US Consulate here in Jerusalem until very recently.
  Side by side with my Yaesu FT-990, it beats it hands down in every way.
  30dbm 3rd order intercept point, 100 memories, remote controlable, all
  filters installed. One of the best receivers ever made (imho, along
  with the Collins 851S-1A and Rohde & Schwartz EK-70).
  I also have the matching exciters and Harris 1.5KW amplifiers with PS
  units. All in very clean condx.

  Make me an offer.

I can be contacted at:
011-972-2-785578
or e-mail me at:
[e-mail]

73,
Richard Harel
WB2JBS/4X1DA


Disclaimer
=================
My thoughts, writings, any previous writings, spelling,
opinions and other mental noise are in no way reflective
or related to my employer or any organization that might
appear in an "address header".
I assume complete responsibility for my actions.




From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:14:29 1996
From: Chuck <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: FS: Yaesu FT-40R As new in box
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1996 19:00:58 -0700
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Clean, 5 watt battery, 420-470Rx/Tx, PL/DPL keypad, never droped or even
bumped. $300

                      [phone]




--

Man-Servent Hecubus Fan Club of America.


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:14:32 1996
From: GARY BARNES <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: FS:FT1000 Yaesu
Date: 22 Apr 1996 13:59:12 GMT
Message-ID: <4lg3bh$[e-mail]>

I have a Yaesu Model FT1000 with external speaker,Md100 desk mic,phone patch .
Asking $3000 for all.

This is my fathers radio and he can be reached at 602-988-1101 his name is Gar
y. Call him if interested.
Thanks,
Gary


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:14:33 1996
From: [e-mail] (Bill Hosking)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: FS:Kenwood TS140 HF XCVR
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 96 23:27:28 GMT
Message-ID: <4ls0ig$[e-mail]>

Mint condition TS-140S. Only reason I'm selling is it doesnt have
transvert connection I need. Price is $500 firm, includes
shipping inside US.
Bill Hosking W7JSW
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:14:34 1996
From: [e-mail] (David Thomas)
Newsgroups: misc.industry.electronics.marketplace,sci.electronics.equipment,sci.electronics.repair,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.swap
Subject: FS:Polarad Microwave Signal Generator
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 1996 17:41:37 GMT
Message-ID: <4liq4n$[e-mail]>

I have a Polarad Microwave signal generator New in the box with
manuals & probes. asking $500.00 OBO call John at [phone] or
e-mail [e-mail]
Email me at [e-mail]




From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:14:34 1996
From: [e-mail] (David Thomas)
Newsgroups: misc.industry.electronics.marketplace,sci.electronics.equipment,sci.electronics.repair,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.swap
Subject: FS:Polarad Microwave Signal Generator
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 1996 17:10:41 GMT
Message-ID: <4lqled$[e-mail]>

I have a Polarad Microwave signal generator New in the box with
manuals & probes. asking $500.00 OBO call John at [phone] or
e-mail [e-mail]
Email me at [e-mail]




From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:14:35 1996
From: [e-mail] (Chip)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: FT-50 questions
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 1996 21:32:18 -0500
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>



    I was wondering if any out here can answer some questions about the Yaesu
FT-50R?

    How is it on intermod?

    I made the mistake once of buying a Kenwood TH-79a. That thing was useless
as it would pick up every radiating if oscillator with in a block of itself.
Was always hearing garbage, images etc. It went back to kenwood and was
told thats the way it is and learn to live with it.   Question...is the
FT-50 prone to suck up this crud too?

    How do you like the rx audio, qualitity?, loudness?

    Battery life?

    Anyone hack any mods?

    Thanks !


   Yaesu told me on the phone today that the FTT-12 keypad option will not
be available till sometime in May.


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:14:36 1996
From: [e-mail] (Don Davis)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: FT-50 Wide FM Receive
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 22:08:04 GMT
Message-ID: <4lh3av$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

I called Yaesu today to ask about the wide FM mode on my FT-50. I
received email from one person that a Yeasu engineer told him that
25KHz filters were used instead of 75 KHz by mistake. Another
respondent was told by Yaesu that the wide FM isn't "true" wide FM
broadcast receive, but just TV sound (which works fine on my unit).
That seems inconsistent with the sales info which talks about FM
broadcast receive capability. The response I got was similar to that
of the second caller - that WFM was not really wide. When I asked
about the other story, the Yaesu employee said that, since the first
radios are just now here, he wasn't really sure if things would be
changed or not. I'm not too worried, since Yaesu has always "made
things right" when there is a mistake (i.e. 15 KHz scan mod on the
FT-51R). I guess it remains to be seen if this is considered a mistake
in radio construction or in ad writing. anyway, FYI...

PS I like the radio very much and I will be glad I bought it even if I
never use WFM. If you are considering purchasing one, don't let this
scare you away. I'm very happy with it.  Don (KE4KYO)



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:14:37 1996
From: Greg Ottria <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: FT-50R
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 1996 19:09:05 -0700
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Just wondering if anybody knows what the jumper pads 2 and 3 are in the Yaesu
50R,
under the keypad?
             Thanks Greg


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:14:38 1996
From: ANDREW JENTIS <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: FT-50R first impressions
Date: 21 Apr 1996 05:58:36 GMT
Message-ID: <4lciqc$[e-mail]>
References: <4l9lj4$[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]

I also feel the FT50R is a great radio. I am getting lots of intermod in
the 482 mhz area on a NBFM signal. any ideas on reducing it? also; who
sells sma antennas that fit the radio? the standard is too long.

andy n6xkn



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:14:39 1996
From: "Gregory J. Buhyoff" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: FT-900 vs IC706 which is better?
Date: 24 Apr 1996 16:47:29 GMT
Message-ID: <4lllv1$[e-mail]>
References: <4lf5fg$[e-mail]>

I have owned an IC 706 and own a FT 900.  They were compared side by side.  Th
e FT
900 wins hands down. It has a very good receiver and does not suffer from IMD
and
overload like the 706 does.  In addition the IC 706 CW filters are the worst I
 have
ever experienced in a radio of that price range.  The blowby is terrible.  The
 menu
system is good but awkward to use unless your use of the radio is casual at be
st.
The ergonomics of the FT 900 are very good.  You have a full range of connecto
rs and
ports on the FT 900 which you do not on the 706 due to its size.  The 706 is a
 fun
radio but I would not choose it for anything other than very casual operation
on HF.
Finally, I found its six meter recieve to lack sensitivity and this was proble
matic
enough for me to determine that it would not be good for dx'ing on six.  The 7
06 is
fun radio and would be great for portable or causual operating -- that is my b
ottom
line.

Greg KN4FR




From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:14:40 1996
From: Rich Fortnum <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Great Commercial Omnidirectionals?
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 1996 17:25:12 -0400
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

Anybody know of any great multiband omnidirectional antenna's?  =

Perhaps around 100 watts.

Cheers.
-- =


Rich Fortnum (aka BeeRich)
F&M Breweries
Guelph, Ontario
[e-mail] / http://www.pints.com/pints/index.html
Renaissance Brewers of Fine Ales and Lagers=99
VA3 RFZ


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:14:41 1996
From: NewsBoy! <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: HAM
Date: 26 Apr 1996 23:09:07 GMT
Message-ID: <4lrl2j$rs2$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

This was really damn weird....

--
"I am personally responsible for the agony of Christ"
"I am personally responsible for the agony of Christ"
"I am personally responsible for the agony of Christ"
"I am personally responsible for the agony of Christ"


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:14:42 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: How can I adjust the LCD contrast of FT-51R ?
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 1996 23:29:12 +0800
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

How ?


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:14:43 1996
From: [e-mail] (Roberto Munoz (EA4ABB))
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: IC 706 - LOW POWER !??
Date: 27 Apr 96 12:12:52 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Hello everybody !!

I have just bought an IC-706 and I was testing it and it works fine ! 100
w on all the bands except on 2m (it is normal)...

I have been doing a lot of things with it, activating options that I do
not know what they do and now I have a problem, The radio output is only
25 W ! I cannot put more power, I think that the radio is broken because
adjusting the power output to H is only give me 25 Watts !!

Any help will be welcome !

-- Roberto
_____________________________________________________________________________
Email:[e-mail]  |  ampr: [e-mail]
fidonet: Roberto Munoz  2:341/64.10     |  ax25: [e-mail]
<A HREF="http://www.etsit.upm.es/~rclub">Paginas WEB del Radioclub EA4RCT</A>
************************** AND SOON VIA SATELLITE ***************************


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:14:44 1996
From: Gary - KJ6Q <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.space
Subject: Re: IC-970 is it good ??
Date: 24 Apr 1996 04:26:30 GMT
Message-ID: <4lkahm$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4l40s6$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]

GARY, I've *GOTTA* tell you, you have the best all around knowledge and
helpful nature I have seen on these much abused newsgroups. I don't know
how you find the time to put in appearances here on the 'net, and still
support yourself, but I am certain I am only one of *MANY* who are glad
you DO! Keep up the good work.

Cheers, and 73.

--
Gary... KJ6Q...I am the NRA



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:14:45 1996
From: [e-mail] (Tom Quayle)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Icom IC-745 mod for computer control?
Date: 26 Apr 96 20:45:50 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Hello:
Do any Icom users know if there is a mod from Icom to allow RS-232
interfacing with the Icom IC-745 HF transceiver?
Thanks - TQ in MT


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:14:45 1996
From: Bill Crocker <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Icom IC-T7A Mods?
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 1996 17:35:04 -0200
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Anyone familar with the new ICOM IC-T7A Dual-Band H.T.?

Interested in undocumented features, extended receive frequency coverage, etc.
Also, is the PC software available for it?  If so, how does it work?

Thanks, Bill Crocker


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:14:46 1996
From: [e-mail] (Berlin Slone)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Icom Ic-Z1a
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1996 21:38:13 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

Wanted any mods for the Icom Z1a.  Also anybody been able to get the
alpha #'s to share for both Vhf and Uhf?  It only shows on the single
band.  I want it to at least share??? Thanks   73's....
Berlin Slone////berlin @serv2.fwi.com///


That's Buck with a "B"

*********************Sheriff Lucas Buck********************
If you need some good hometown Law Enforcement you came to the
right place.......  Email back to [e-mail]
                                or [e-mail]
                    Fido Mail to   1:236/7.6
                    BBS            219-837-3604 8 cd roms!


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:14:47 1996
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Impending HDTV....
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 96 03:42:19 GMT
Message-ID: <4lhr75$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4l958p$[e-mail]>

   [e-mail] (Joe Subich) wrote:

>However, any problem (including TVI, folks) will likely cause
>complete signal/picture loss.

Hi Joe,

I know what you probably meant by this, but not all readers will.
When signal integrity is lost, the video "freezes" until the data
stream is recaptured.  During this interval, audio is muted.

Incidentally, I had a chance to witness a live HDTV broadcast on 2.5
GHz a few years ago at a Wireless Cable convention.  The carrier to
noise ratio of the received signal was terrible, but picture quality
was truly superb.  This despite the fact that a single 6 MHz cahnnel
was being used to carry four separate programs!

73,
Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:14:49 1996
From: [e-mail] (ROLAND STINER)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Impending HDTV....
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 20 Apr 96 13:25:00 -0400
Distribution: world
Reply-To: [e-mail] (ROLAND STINER)


To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Impending HDTV....

T>If you havn't seen a HDTV demonstration go check one out the picture
 >is amazing.  I watched a demo at the local art muesum, one Japaneese
 >short showed someone cooking in the kitchen.  You could see very fine
 >detail on the hamburger and other items without really trying, you
 >could see the small droplets of greese flying off the frying pan.  I'd
 >say it was easily as good if not better than any fine grained 35 mil
 >photo i've seen.

That is an analog system.  The US is supposed to be developing a
digital one that could co-exist with the current analog standard.

---
   OLX 1.53   -------------->    73, de NK2U    <----------------

 * Origin: CyberNet BBS   Lyndhurst, NJ (1:2604/151)

              .....oooooOOOOOo         http://www.intac.com/~cono
      __,-----. ---+_________#_     The Roy Hobbs BBS [e-mail]
     |________| |__|___________}          Node 1: 201-641-7307
      ooooo oo ~ ooO-O-O-O == oo\         Node 2: 201-641-3126



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:14:50 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: [e-mail] (Glenn Thomas)
Subject: Re: Impending HDTV....
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 1996 04:02:45 GMT

HDTV may well be a technical marvel (though most SVGA monitors will
provide the same resolution if not the aspect ratio) but what makes
you think that the quality (or content) of the shows will be any
better than it is now? (yecch!)

--
*********************************************************************
* "Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do."              *
*                                                                   *
*  [e-mail]  - Glenn Thomas                                  *
*********************************************************************


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:14:51 1996
From: [e-mail] (Joe Subich)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Impending HDTV....
Date: 25 Apr 1996 00:49:56 GMT
Message-ID: <4lmi7k$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4l958p$[e-mail]><[e-mail]> <4l958p$[e-mail]> <4lhr75$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

In message <4lhr75$[e-mail]> -
[e-mail] (WB3U)Tue, 23 Apr 96 03:42:19 GMT writes:
:>
:>Incidentally, I had a chance to witness a live HDTV broadcast on 2.5
:>GHz a few years ago at a Wireless Cable convention.  The carrier to
:>noise ratio of the received signal was terrible, but picture quality
:>was truly superb.  This despite the fact that a single 6 MHz cahnnel
:>was being used to carry four separate programs!
:>

What you observed was not HDTV in the present sense (a single 1050
line, progressive scan, 60 frame per second, 16:9 aspect ratio
picture).  Instead, you probably witnessed an example of HDTV's
"scalability" - the ability to transmit several (the number varies
between four and six depending on the "expert") normal NTSC resolution
(the "new" term is Standard Definition Television or SDTV) signals
in the digital domain.

The intriguing thing is that the "Grand Alliance" system slated for
adoption by the FCC will operate with perfectly clean signals down
to within .5 dB of the noise floor - the adaptive equalizers and
precorrection are than good.  UHF/VHF field tests in the Charlotte
area last year showed the Grand Alliance system could withstand
several hits (bad packets) per second and still provide adequate
perceived signal quality.  However, when the signal started to go,
it went very quickly ... no ghosting, fading, etc.  It was almost
like turing out the light.

The biggest problem as far as TVI goes is lockup time (training
time for the adaptive equalizers).  If TVI causes a problem when
the receiver is trying to acquire a signal, there are real problems.

I hope the broadcast industry will not fall victim to the low power
myth that is being circulated in HDTV circles ("you'll only need
about 30 KW to equal your current grabe B contours").   While 30 KW
may provide a 1 dB margin at 55 miles (the line of sight horizon for
most TV stations over flat ground), having extra fade margin at the
horizon will increase program availability from 85% +/- to 99.5%
and make reception much less susceptible to interference, etc.

The old grade B contours were based on the F(50,50) curves meaning
that 50% of the receiver locations should receive service 50% of
the time ... that works out to 25% of receivers actually getting
a usable signal (that's not good enough for me!).

--
73,
    ... Joe Subich, AD8I
        ([e-mail])



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:14:52 1996
From: [e-mail] (David L. Thompson)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Info on Siltronix Linear LA-600.
Date: Sun, 28 Apr 1996 04:36:16 GMT
Message-ID: <4luvjp$[e-mail]>
References: <4lpqdp$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (Carl Hodder) wrote:

>Need info on a Siltronix LA-600 linear 10 or 11 meter amplifier.
>Would SAMs have any info on it? What is the power rating on
>this linear? How old is it? Is Siltronix's still around?

Try Brock Publications, Grace Brock at 619-757-0372.  If anyone has a
manual she has (for Swan, Cubic, Siltronix, older Atlas)

Dave K4JRB



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:14:53 1996
From: Norm Hammar <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Info on TS-50
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1996 06:35:38 -0600
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

I have a Kenwood TS-50, and notice that the fan comes on regularly when
transmitting. Is this normal...or do I need to make an adjustment
somewhere?  I notice it at both 100 and 50 watts output. Any help would
be greatly appreciated. [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:14:54 1996
From: Desmond Crisis <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Info Request: Mobile Data Terminal
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 21:32:18 -0700
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Hello and thanks for reading this.

I've recently acquired an MDT (pretty sure it's a Motorola) and I want
to put it into service on a mobile packet station.

I don't have the model number of the unit but it is apparently a few
generations old.  (it has a dot-matrix style display rather than a CRT
and a limited keyboard)  The unit is all one piece and has a DB-25 as
well as a similar style 37(?) pin connector on the back.  Power
apparently comes through the DB-25 somehow.  According to the man I
bought it from, the 37-pin connector (and board it is connected to) were
not present on most of the units in the batch he originally purchased
from a police department in either Nevada or Arizona.  (Apparently the
department replaced them with GRID laptops.)

I'm hoping that it will speak RS-232 somehow and that I'll find a way of
mapping one of the special function keys to operate as a carriage
return.

If you have any information on MDT's or pointers to more information I
would greatly appreciate it.

Thanks,

Desmond Crisis
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:14:55 1996
From: Nat Davis <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Int vs. ext antenna tuners
Date: 26 Apr 1996 13:01:32 GMT
Message-ID: <4lqhfc$[e-mail]>

I'm considering a new HF rig and was wondering about internal versus
external antenna tuners...

Internal ones are "automatic" and would seem to be very convenient.
When an "added" cost to the basic rig, they seem to be less $$ than
external ones.

Are external tuners more versatile -- handle wider SWR ranges or power
for example?  Not that I plan on changing rigs often, but it would seem
that an external one might be more cost effective in the long run
when it can be used with several different rigs.

Bottom line is: in terms of performance and cost, which is my best bet?
If you like externals, any favorite brands/models (I do not anticipate running

a linear amp)?


Thanks for you input.

Nat Davis
N4BTO




From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:14:56 1996
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Int vs. ext antenna tuners
Date: 26 Apr 1996 19:09:01 -0700
Message-ID: <4lrvjt$[e-mail]>
References: <4lqhfc$[e-mail]> <4lrded$[e-mail]>

[e-mail] (Steven Umbach) wrote:

>External
>transmatches will give you - greater matching range, swr and power meter,
>built in antenna switches, and biult in balun usually if you are going to
>use ladder line for antenna feed.

Hi Steve, it is hard for me to believe that anyone who reads this
newsgroup is using the built-in balun to feed other than the
characteristic impedance of the ladder line. If one is running
anything other than a characteristic impedance resistive load,
like a non-resonant length antenna, one should not be using the
built-in balun in an unbalanced antenna tuner. To advocate such
is simply bad advice.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC




From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:14:58 1996
From: [e-mail] (Jim Garver)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: intermod vs overload
Date: 25 Apr 1996 17:10:37 GMT
Message-ID: <4lobmd$[e-mail]>
References: <4lg5h8$[e-mail]>

In article <4lg5h8$[e-mail]>,
Gary Ross Hoffman  <gary@carcs3> wrote:
>Can someone explain the difference between "intermod" and
>"front end overload"?
>Thanks


I'm surprised that no one has followed up on this simple yet
pointed question.  Many hams talk about intermod yet I suspect
that few know what the term really means.
Maybe its in the wrong newsgroup.  *rec.radio.amateur.misc*
seems to mostly contain followups to Burt, code debates, FM-25
testimonials, and attacks/defense of ham radio in general.
I will crosspost this to *rec.radio.amateur.equipment* and
route followups to that group which is closest to the technical
segment of ham radio, apparently a declining vestage.

Its been said that the best way to extract correct information
from the Net is to first post incorrect information, so here
goes:

Front End Overload occurs when a nearby strong signal drives one
or more of the active devices in the initial RF circuits of a
receiver into their non-linear regions.  This may create
additional products due to the mixing action of the non-linear
device.  The result may be spurious signals all over the band.
In other cases it may cause the receiver to become deaf to weak
signals because the active device has been shifted out of the
weak signal region.

Intermod, or Intermodulation occurs when a strong signal that
is not within the receiver's passband is amplified by
successive stages anyway until it is strong enough to overload
an active device and drive it into a non-linear condition.  In
this non-linear condition the device will mix signals with other
weaker signals as well as the intended signal.  Many more signals
will be created by the sum and difference of the mixing action.
Some of these product signals may fall within the Intermediate
frequency passband and be further amplified by the receiver.
This is similar to front end overload except that the offending
signal was not strong enough or close enough to cause initial front
end overload.  It was instead amplified within the receiver's
early stages until it did eventually cause an overload condition
in a downstream stage.

Both of these problems can be cured with tighter filter circuits
on the front end of the receiver, preferably before any active
devices.  Cavity filters work good for VHF/UHF but are expensive
and too narrow sometimes.  Another cure is reducing the RF gain.
If the spurious signals suddenly go away while turning down the
RF gain, suspect that intermod was occuring within the RF stages.
Vacuum tubes are not as susceptable to either of these problems,
I don't how susceptible the various flavors of FET's are compared
to bipolar transistors.

A related subject not curable with any of these methods is the external
mixing at dissimilar metalic joints which may create mixing products
outside of the receiver.  A local rusty rain gutter for instance.


Let's not followup to this with statements like 'go read some ARRL
book".  Please.


WA7LDV




--
[e-mail]          WA7LDV            I don't speak for Intel


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:14:59 1996
From: Jim Daneke <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: kenwood 450SAT
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 1996 15:17:07 -0700
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
To: Robert Newman <[e-mail]>

Robert Newman wrote:
>
>
> Would anyone know where to check for why, when I press my VOX switch with no
thi
> ng in my key jack, it goes to the transmit mode?  When I plug my key in it s
> tarts keying like I have my key closed but I dont.  Ive of course checked th
e
> cable for any shorts.

Check the mic connections for a short. That happened to me. Was a pain
to repair but it works fine now.

Jim KI0BB


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:15:00 1996
From: Jeff Goebel <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Kenwood DSP-100
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 07:52:10 -0500
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

I have noticed that the DSP-100 is greatly reduced in price.  I own a TS-690 a
nd
am wondering if this is a worthwhile addition to make to the rig.  Does anyone

have any experience with the DSP-100?  How well does it work?  I currently hav
e a
Timewave DSP-9 but I rarely use it with my TS-690 because it tends to make the

signals less pleasant to listen to.  The voices have a unnatural ringing quali
ty
to them.  It does reduce background noize though.

Anyway, how do the signals sound when using the DSP-100?

Thanks,

Jeff Goebel N0VHB
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:15:01 1996
From: Roberto Montoya <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Kenwood Th 45AT For Sale
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1996 15:28:20 -0700
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

In good condition. with batt. but no charger.

$145 plus shipping and COD.

will reply to private e-mail only

Thanks
NR5W
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:15:02 1996
From: [e-mail] (Karl Beckman)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Kenwood TM-241 mod - HELP!!!
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 1996 13:44:04 -0400
Message-ID: <CSLE87-2304961344040001@145.39.1.10>
References: <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] wrot
e:

> Thanks for reading this.
>
> I would like to mod my Kenwood TM-241  2mtr mobile rig for expanded transmit
> (153 Mhz for RACES).  I cut the green wire loop coming off of the display, b
ut
> that only opened it up to 151.995 mhz.  All the mods I have been able to fin
d
> say to put a 1N914 diode across D209, which is behind the tone button.  But
> there is already some kind of chip across D209, and when I install the diode
,
> nothing happens.  This mod worked fine on my older TM-231 because there was
> nothing in the way.  But this chip on the TM-241 seems to have an effect
on the
> mod.
>
> Does anyone have any ideas?
>
> 73 & thanks,
> Steve
> [e-mail]

It sounds like you are after something other than RACES, or you have
gotten some bad data.  If you read Part 97.407, you'll see that RACES
operation takes place INSIDE the amateur bands, specifically 144.50
-144.71 and 146-148 MHz.  There are NO frequencies authorized by the FCC
for RACES use in the area of 153 MHz.
--
Karl Beckman, P.E.                <      If our English language is so   >
Motorola Pvt Data Systems         <   precise, why do you drive on the   >
Schaumburg, IL  /  Parma, OH      <   parkway and park on the driveway?  >
[phone] / [phone]
**  Opinions expressed here do not represent the views of Motorola Inc. **
--
By sending unsolicited commercially-oriented e-mail to this address, the
sender agrees to pay a $100 fee to Motorola Inc for proofreading services.
--
Amateur radio WA8NVW                        NavyMARS NNN0VBH @ NOGBN.NOASI


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:15:03 1996
From: [e-mail] (Edward Vanderbosch)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: mailto:[e-mail]
Date: 27 Apr 96 23:09:45 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

add ham-equip


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:15:04 1996
From: [e-mail] (Douglas R Davis)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Manual for HTX-202 Radio Shack 2m HT
Date: 23 Apr 96 03:17:32 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

You can order a manual for your HTX-202 from:

 National Parts
 600 Tandy Technology Center
 Fort Worth, Texas  76102
 [phone]
 FAX use:  817-870-5737

Doug
KC8CGX


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:15:05 1996
From: jyfourri@grincheux_12.univ-lr.fr (FOURRIER Jean-Yves)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Mod for TM 255 ??
Date: 26 Apr 1996 15:26:02 GMT
Message-ID: <4lqpua$[e-mail]>

Hello , i am looking for mod in TM255 (full coverage and secret functions

Thanks for you reply
F1DOQ Dominique IOTA 032


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:15:06 1996
From: [e-mail] (Francois BONNET)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Mods for TH-415
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 22:11:10 GMT
Message-ID: <4lgsna$[e-mail]>

I'm searching some mods for TH-415   UHF kenwood HT.

Please Email at [e-mail]

73 de Francois F1ITT




From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:15:07 1996
From: "C.J. Luke" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: MORSE2 HARDWARE
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 1996 11:51:47 -0700
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

I have recently down-loaded the morse2.zip files from www.cdrom.com.  The
program makes reference to input/output to your rig but there is nothing
about the hardware.  If anyone knows where to find the info for building
this peice of equipment I would appreciate it if you would email the
info or source to me.
[e-mail]

Thanks


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:15:07 1996
From: [e-mail] (Dwight R. Hayes, Jr.)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Motorola HT90 UHF Conversion - Practical???
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 96 22:45:04 GMT
Message-ID: <4lmgqc$[e-mail]>

I bought a Motorola HT90 Handheld UHF radio and charger at a hamfest recently.

 I obtained the service manual for it with schematics, crystal freq.
equations, and tuning procedures.

It will require equiptment that I do not currently own to perform the tuning
as described in the manual.  Is there any place that will recrystal and tune
this radio down to an amateur freqency for a reasonable cost?

Thanks

Dwight R. Hayes, Jr.
KB8SEG
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:15:10 1996
From: [e-mail] (Matt C. Brinkhoff)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Motorola UHF Radius to 440?
Date: 22 Apr 1996 04:06:44 GMT
Message-ID: <4lf0kk$[e-mail]>

I have a UHF Radius (PN: D44LRA7PA5CK) I would like to move to the Amateur
440 band.  Is it possible to program the new freqs in w/o doing any tuning?

Has anyone done it before?

Thanks.

--
Matt C. Brinkhoff, KB0RXC
[e-mail]
http://incolor.inetnebr.com/mbrinkho
Lincoln, Nebraska [EN10]



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:15:11 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: National HRO Wanted
Date: 26 Apr 1996 00:23:33 GMT
Message-ID: <4lp525$[e-mail]>

        Looking for an early HRO in excellent to mint condition. Can you help? Dick D
oremus


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:15:12 1996
From: [e-mail] (History67)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Need copy of Manual for R.L.Drake SSR-1 reciever
Date: 26 Apr 1996 20:05:28 -0400
Message-ID: <4lroc8$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (History67)

can you help?  I need a photocopy fo the users manual for the R.L.Drake
ssr-1 general coverage reciever.  Please E-Mail [e-mail] if you
know where I might find one .$

Thanks

Sean N1WSC


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:15:13 1996
From: [e-mail] (ALLEN ELKS)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: NEED FT-8500 MODS
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 03:10:35 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Anyone have any Yaesu Ft-8500 MODS
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:15:14 1996
From: [e-mail] (Steven Fritts)
Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.scanner
Subject: Need info on Key Research PS 90
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 1996 00:23:19 GMT
Message-ID: <4lp57c$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Hello,

I picked up a mint Pro 2005 at a hamfest last week. The scanner has
the search and store moule which is a Key Research PS 90. Any info you
can give would be appreciated. Will be glad to pay for copying of the
manual.

Thanks,

Steve



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:15:15 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (Kelly Leavitt)
Subject: Re: Need opinion on Icom 2000H
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4ljpfl$[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 1996 18:34:00 GMT

Mike:
  I own an IC-2000H and am very pleased with it.  If you want to wire it
up for packet, you will have to get your hands on an RJ-45 connector.  I
found that I could use a good quality network patch cable (10Base-T) available
for about $10 from just about and computer store or catalog.  This gives you
a 10' cable with two ends on it.  Cut it in half, and you have 2 5' cables
that you can cobble up any way you need.  I use one for an extension in my
car when I work special events.  I also know of at least one person using
the 2000 for packet at 1200baud, so I know it works.  Good luck, and have fun.

73 de Kelly
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:15:16 1996
From: [e-mail] (Jim Kauffman)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Need opinion on Icom 2000H
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1996 22:44:29 -0400
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4ljpfl$[e-mail]>

In article <4ljpfl$[e-mail]>, Mike - KB9LPJ
<[e-mail]> wrote:

>    Hi.. I am wondering if anyone out there who
> has an Icom IC-2000H could help me out. I am
> wondering how you like it?? How does it preform ...
>
> 73's >> Mike de KB9LPJ

   Hi Mike,

I have two Yaesu FT-2400's and one IC-2000.  The 2000 has a few more
features than the 2400.  As far a performance goes, both are very good
radios.  The IC-2000 was designed to go after the FT-2400/2500 market.
I'd say that Icom did good with their radio, its a solid performer.  I get
good unsolicited audio comments.

Jim


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:15:17 1996
From: [e-mail] (Clint Bradford)
Date: 23 Apr 96 22:40:00
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Need Recommendation on Du
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>




>>Any other brand name I should look at (with better feature)? (i.e.
>>ICOM ....)

I wouldn't trade my STANDARD C558a for anything!
---
 * wcECHO 4.1 ~ AR-Net: ATTENTION to Details * Mira Loma, CA * 909-681-6221
--
|Fidonet:  Clint Bradford 1:2619/228
|Internet: [e-mail]
|
| Standard disclaimer: The views of this user are strictly his own.



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:15:18 1996
From: [e-mail] (Bill Bennett)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Need schematic ft208r
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 1996 15:43:07 GMT
Message-ID: <4litqc$[e-mail]>

I need a copy of a schematic for a yeasu ft208r
willing to pay copying and mailing costs
73
bill
kc6yox



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:15:18 1996
From: Richard Girling <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Need Varian TWT psu Manual / Schematic
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 10:53:09 +0100
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Can anyone help?

I neen a manual / schematic for a
Varian TWT PSU Type VPW2806L3

Many Thanks

Richard

[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:15:19 1996
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Portable HF vs. Tabletop HF Transceivers
Date: Fri, 19 Apr 96 08:24:44 GMT
Message-ID: <4l7q7g$[e-mail]>
References: <4l3q9n$[e-mail]>

   Mitchell <[e-mail]> wrote:

>I recently acquired my General ticket and am debating on a
>good first-time HF rig... Price is important, but features and
>quality are also essential.  Should I consider a portable,
>like an ICOM IC-706, Alinco DX-70T, or a lower priced table
>top ICOM or Kenwood.  What are some good used models to consider?

Be careful buying a used mobile rig.  If it was actually used mobile,
it probably took more of a beating than its "full-size" cousins.

There are many good used desktop rigs around.  Why not give Ten-Tec a
call and see what they have in stock?  Depending on your budget, a
Corsair, Corsair II or Paragon might be a good choice.  They also have
a free trial period and probably the best customer service on the
planet.

73,
Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:15:21 1996
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: QST conflict of interest Again!
Date: 22 Apr 1996 12:23:10 -0400
Message-ID: <4lgbpe$[e-mail]>
References: <4lbeoq$[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Gary Coffman) writes:

>It is technical fact. Eimac's zero bias triodes are the result of wanting

>tubes that can be used in simple and low cost amplifiers. You claimed as
>much above when you noted that they allow amplifiers without a screen
>supply (or a bias supply). They are not driven by technical performance
>since they don't have either the power gain or the linearity of tetrode
>amplifiers.

That's untrue Gary, and exactly what this article would have readers
believe.

No "rule" makes tetrodes "cleaner" than grounded grid triodes. There are
some types of tetrodes that have exceptionally low distortion, such as the
4CX1500A ....but there are also triodes designed for low IMD.

Point in fact? The exceptionally clean 4CX1500A tetrode and the standard
3X1500A7 triode have identical third order SSB IMD performance of  -40 db.

>The popularity of triodes in GG amplifiers for amateur service is
>driven by the FCC limit on power gain in external amplifiers for
>HF Part 97 operation, the lax distortion requirements for amateur
>HF linear amplifiers, the wide availability of 100 watt class
>exciters, and the lack of skill and knowledge among amateurs
>as to the proper tuning and operation of power amplifiers, IE the
>tune for maximum smoke syndrome.

That's how Hams usually tune their tetrodes also, maximum smoke! Tetrodes
are LESS forgiving of mistuning, require regulated supplies, are less
compatible with Ham power level exciters, and offer no guarantee of IMD
improvement.

>At VHF, where higher power gain
>is usually wanted (and permitted), where a stricter linearity
>standard is imposed, and where the skills of operators using high
>power tube amps is usually higher, tetrode amplifiers are almost
>universally used.

Untrue. The main reason is drive power and cheap tube availability, not
IMD. The most common tube at VHF is a 4CX250 family tube. Third and fifth
order products are only -25 dB down with this "clean tetrode". A 3CX800
"dirty triode" will produce -36 dB third and -42 dB fifth order products.

>If you want to argue that triodes are technically superior to
>tetrodes, I think even Eimac would take exception since they
>wrote the book on power tetrodes. And don't forget that Svetlana
>makes triodes too. Are you accusing the author of denigrating
>his own products as well?

I'm not accusing anything. I'm speaking facts.

Triodes and tetrodes have almost identical IMD performance when the tubes
are properly designed. As a general rule, triodes have superior
performance in amateur type service. These are the true facts.

>I really don't understand why you are upset about this article.
>It seems as if some personal ox of yours must have been gored
>for you to raise these ill founded objections to the article
>so strongly.

Yet another personal comment!!!! While my objection is to the technical
inaccuracy of the tetrode area of the article and to the use of the
misinformation to directly promote the author's tetrode, the standard
retort by people unfamiliar with the technical facts about tubes are
usually similar to the above personal comment.

Let me make clear (AGAIN) exactly what my concerns are:

1.) Claiming Eimac's zero bias tubes were not "performance driven". There
is no technical support for that statement. It must be the author's
personal opinion since it is contrary to fact.

2.) Claiming tetrodes are some sort of "new revolution" in design.
Tetrodes were around long before zero bias triodes became popular. Zero
bias triodes became popular because:
a.) They were more cost effective to manufacture
b.) They offered superior performance in HF amateur applications
c.) The support circuitry was much lower cost and more forgiving of design
and operating error.

3.) Using a free article in a membership journel as a marketing platform
by making technically false or misleading statements.

Please don't "turn" my objection to technical or factual errors into
something "personal". Personal comments have no place in a discussion of
fact.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:15:22 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: QST conflict of interest Again!
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 96 11:50:12 PDT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4ledgu$[e-mail]>  <4lghc4$[e-mail]>


In Article<4lghc4$[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]> writes:
> Technical articles should be based on fact, not hyperbole.
>
> I am puzzled why more of us don't share that view.

Probably because we don't agree with you that the article was in
fact a horribly technically inaccurate advertising ploy. It was
a nice historical overview of amplifier tubes used in amateur
and commercial designs over several decades. Very little hard
technical data one way or the other was presented to be upset
about.

Gary



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:15:23 1996
From: Gary - KJ6Q <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: QST conflict of interest Again!
Date: 22 Apr 1996 20:15:32 GMT
Message-ID: <4lgpd4$[e-mail]>
References: <4kski8$[e-mail]> <4ktr27$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]><4kski8$[e-mail]> <4ktr27$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4l9hei$[e-mail]> <4ledgu$[e-mail]> <4lgml3$[e-mail]>

[e-mail] (WB3U) wrote:
>   [e-mail] (Joe Subich) wrote:
>
>QST should print a correction to the statements in the article
>relating to this point, and should probably apologize to Eimac as
>well.
>
>Very sloppy work.
>
>73,
>Jack  WB3U

WHY don't YOU come off this bullshit juvenile thread and get a life? How
many past articles would you suggest as reasonable that I provide from
QST and other magazines to show that this is not really uncommon. QST is
*NOT* a "newspaper*, or other similar publication with different
standards of journalism - it is a magazine presenting material to a
relatively narrow cross section of special interest individuals. Who
would be better qualified to present a useful article relating to a
specific facet of Amateur radio, some one well down on the technology
ladder, or an engineer or manufacturer DIRECTLY involved with the element
in question? This is *NOTHING* but senseless bitching!

--
Gary... KJ6Q...I am the NRA  | The NRA doesn't vote - but it's
============================ | MEMBERS do, *ABUNDANTLY!"
Those who choose to "beat    |==================================
their swords into plowshares"| "It's *EASY* to be a liberal, it's
will end up *PLOWING* for    | OTHER people's money you are giving
those who DON'T!             | away! (or living off of!)




From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:15:25 1996
From: [e-mail] (Joe Subich)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: QST conflict of interest Again!
Date: 23 Apr 1996 05:03:02 GMT
Message-ID: <4lhoa6$[e-mail]>
References: <4ledgu$[e-mail]><4ledgu$[e-mail]> <4lgbsm$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

In message <4lgbsm$[e-mail]> - [e-mail] (W8JI
Tom)22 Apr 1996 12:24:54 -0400 writes:
:>
:>I have not seen the article Joe. Do they regulate thee screen and grid
:>bias? How do they drive the tubes, cathode or grid? Do they monitor
the
:>screen current and protect it?
:>

Tom, the screen and grid are both regulated supplies.  The screen at
about 350 volts with voltage foldback as the current increases (to
prevent the screen from dissipating excess power).  The grid is also
regulated (zener diode).

The tube is grid drive with an untuned resistive termination (50 Ohms
with a slight inductance by using a mix of non-inductive and wire wound
resistors).

While I now have a spare pair of 8875s for my MLA-2500, I think I blew
one of my "good" tubes in the old HF mailforwarding days (haven't had
a chance to work with it since moving) so I'm looking at the 4CX800A
retrofit as a bit of future protection.

:>By the way, thank you for the direct reply to my question. I suspected
:>there was a bit of "marketing" involved in the article.

W6TC was marketing manager for Eimac for many years before retiring in
approximately 1990.  He joined Svetlana, USA shortly after that as VP of
marketing.  I just saw him again last week at the NAB convention in
Las Vegas.  Svetlana are introducing some interesting products for the
broadcast field (including a multi-beam Inductive Output Tube class
device for UHF TV (HDTV) service).

:>Doesn't QST watch for that?

I would have expected the editors at QST to have pulled the last two
paragraphs of George's article.  In my opinion, they were not called
for, supported by the facts, or justified in what was, otherwise,
generally an interesting history of the high power vacuum tube in
amateur radio.

--
73,
    ... Joe Subich, AD8I
        ([e-mail])



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:15:27 1996
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: QST conflict of interest Again!
Date: 23 Apr 1996 07:21:44 -0400
Message-ID: <4lieg8$[e-mail]>
References: <4lhoa6$[e-mail]>

Hi Joe,
Thanks to you too for a breath of honest technical reasoning in a
strangely emotional thread!

For a moment I thought the uni-bomber was here, hi.

In article <4lhoa6$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Joe Subich)
writes:

>Tom, the screen and grid are both regulated supplies.  The screen at
>about 350 volts with voltage foldback as the current increases (to
>prevent the screen from dissipating excess power).  The grid is also
>regulated (zener diode).
>
>The tube is grid drive with an untuned resistive termination (50 Ohms
>with a slight inductance by using a mix of non-inductive and wire wound
>resistors).

What is the grid bias voltage of the tube and the class of the stage?

I find it strange that all these tubes require a 50 ohm grid resistor to
develop correct grid voltage swing with a 100 watt exciter. That almost
seems too good to be true. I am trying to help three people get 4CX1600's
running. One guy's amp only needs ten watts of drive!  Of course many
solid state exciters get trashy when turned down that far. A FT1000D I
measured had horrid IMD measurements at ten watts, as did an IC751A.

My worry is that the series of articles stemming from incorrect design
parameters (with values mainly selected to make the tube look appealing)
will result in some nasty signals on the air. The "standard" 50 grid
resistor *seems* like a case of "stick this part there" engineering.

>While I now have a spare pair of 8875s for my MLA-2500, I think I blew
>one of my "good" tubes in the old HF mailforwarding days (haven't had
>a chance to work with it since moving) so I'm looking at the 4CX800A
>retrofit as a bit of future protection.

>W6TC was marketing manager for Eimac for many years before retiring in
>approximately 1990.  He joined Svetlana, USA shortly after that as VP of
>marketing.

It would be nice to see some tetrode articles explaining proper design,
rather than written exclusively as marketing tools. But then salesmen
aren't always good engineers, or vice versa.

>:>Doesn't QST watch for that?
>
>I would have expected the editors at QST to have pulled the last two
>paragraphs of George's article.  In my opinion, they were not called
>for, supported by the facts, or justified in what was, otherwise,
>generally an interesting history of the high power vacuum tube in
>amateur radio.

The facts support your opinion Joe. It was a shame a well written article
became a marketing tool, and especially shameful incorrect information
unrelated to the subject crept in. I found the thinly veiled and false
denigration of Eimac zero bias triodes tasteless. There is no reason for
that type of nasty and untruthful marketing.

Anyway, what was the grid bias of the tube and class of operation? Did the
author include a screen meter? Was there an energy storage component at
the screen to improve dynamic regulation during voice peaks?

Tetrode circuits are a real design pain compared to triodes, and I've
never seen any of the "marketing tools" the author has gotten published
properly address tetrode design. Of course that may be because I have "an
Ox that was gored, or a tempest in a tea pot, or a bad hair day".

Or it could be because IMD related splatter from poor designs annoys me.

73,
Tom


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:15:29 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: QST conflict of interest Again!
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
References: <4lhoa6$[e-mail]> <4lieg8$[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1996 18:23:38 GMT

In article <4lieg8$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) writ
es:
>In article <4lhoa6$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Joe Subich)
>writes:
>
>>Tom, the screen and grid are both regulated supplies.  The screen at
>>about 350 volts with voltage foldback as the current increases (to
>>prevent the screen from dissipating excess power).  The grid is also
>>regulated (zener diode).
>>
>>The tube is grid drive with an untuned resistive termination (50 Ohms
>>with a slight inductance by using a mix of non-inductive and wire wound
>>resistors).

There's also a 20 ohm cathode resistor giving negative feedback to the
amplifier.

>What is the grid bias voltage of the tube and the class of the stage?

-56 volts, class AB1. Here are the parameters in full:

Plate voltage   2200
Screen voltage   350
Grid voltage     -56
Zero-signal plate current 170 mA
Single-tone plate current 550 mA
Single-tone screen current 25 mA
Zero-signal plate diss    370 W
Drive power                60 W
Plate input power        1200 W
Plate output power        750 W
Efficiency                62.5%
Power gain               10.97 db

>I find it strange that all these tubes require a 50 ohm grid resistor to
>develop correct grid voltage swing with a 100 watt exciter. That almost
>seems too good to be true. I am trying to help three people get 4CX1600's
>running. One guy's amp only needs ten watts of drive!  Of course many
>solid state exciters get trashy when turned down that far. A FT1000D I
>measured had horrid IMD measurements at ten watts, as did an IC751A.

This amp requires 60 watts of drive. That's 54.77 volts across the
50 ohm grid resistor.

>My worry is that the series of articles stemming from incorrect design
>parameters (with values mainly selected to make the tube look appealing)
>will result in some nasty signals on the air. The "standard" 50 grid
>resistor *seems* like a case of "stick this part there" engineering.

Then perhaps you should look at the ARRL lab test data on the conversion
(available on oak.oakland.edu). Second order products are down 50 db and
third order products are down 68 db for single tone transmit on a frequency
of 14.175 MHz at rated operating conditions. On the two tone test, worst
case products are -38 db at 2 kHz from the carrier, and no more than -48 db
at 4 kHz from the carrier. Not too shabby for a simple untuned input amp,
and better than the MLA2500 did with the original pair of 8875 GG triodes.

>>I would have expected the editors at QST to have pulled the last two
>>paragraphs of George's article.  In my opinion, they were not called
>>for, supported by the facts, or justified in what was, otherwise,
>>generally an interesting history of the high power vacuum tube in
>>amateur radio.
>
>The facts support your opinion Joe. It was a shame a well written article
>became a marketing tool, and especially shameful incorrect information
>unrelated to the subject crept in. I found the thinly veiled and false
>denigration of Eimac zero bias triodes tasteless. There is no reason for
>that type of nasty and untruthful marketing.
>
>Anyway, what was the grid bias of the tube and class of operation? Did the
>author include a screen meter? Was there an energy storage component at
>the screen to improve dynamic regulation during voice peaks?
>
>Tetrode circuits are a real design pain compared to triodes, and I've
>never seen any of the "marketing tools" the author has gotten published
>properly address tetrode design. Of course that may be because I have "an
>Ox that was gored, or a tempest in a tea pot, or a bad hair day".

It certainly must be, since you don't have a technical leg to stand
on with your criticisms of the articles.

Gary

--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | Due to provider problems
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | with previous uucp address
es
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | Email to [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:15:30 1996
From: [e-mail] (Joe Subich)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: QST conflict of interest Again!
Date: 27 Apr 1996 14:42:50 GMT
Message-ID: <4ltbpa$[e-mail]>
References: <4lhoa6$[e-mail]><4lhoa6$[e-mail]> <4lieg8$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

In message <4lieg8$[e-mail]> - [e-mail] (W8JI
Tom)23 Apr 1996 07:21:44 -0400 writes:
:>
:>Anyway, what was the grid bias of the tube and class of operation? Did the
:>author include a screen meter? Was there an energy storage component at
:>the screen to improve dynamic regulation during voice peaks?
:>

The control grid is biased at -56 Volts.  The article does not make any
reference to operating class of the tube (the data packet from ARRL does
not provide the information either).

The MLA-2500 grid current position on the multimeter was converted to
read screen current (60 mA full scale).  The screen uses a regulated
supply (voltage doubler from the 120 volt transformer winding to a
zener diode/pass transistor regulator).  I have no idea how the
regulator
performs under dynamic conditions.

:>I find it strange that all these tubes require a 50 ohm grid resistor to
:>develop correct grid voltage swing with a 100 watt exciter. That almost
:>seems too good to be true. I am trying to help three people get 4CX1600's
:>running.

The article looks "formula" in that it simply uses a 50 Ohm grid
resistor
rather than matching the grid resistor to the operating class and using
a
resistive "L" pad (or other attenuator) to match the available drive.
Such a design would also allow the modified amplifier to be "scaled" to
match 100 Watt rigs, 150 Watt rigs or 200 Watt rigs (FT-1000).

:>Tetrode circuits are a real design pain compared to triodes, and I've
:>never seen any of the "marketing tools" the author has gotten published
:>properly address tetrode design.

The conversion article wasn't written by Badger.  However, the author
does
acknowlege his assistance.  I suspect some of Badger's "tetrode centric"
view is due to the fact that his company doesn't make 3CX400/8874,
3CX800,
3CX1200 or 3CX1500A7/8877 devices.  I suppose the additional complexity
of
proper tetrode design isn't as much of a burden in industrial
applications
where the operation is at a single frequency and consistent power level
(RF heating, etc.).  There one needn't be as concerned with input
matching
over a wide frequency range or IMD.

--
73,
    ... Joe Subich, AD8I
        ([e-mail])



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:15:31 1996
From: Gary - KJ6Q <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: QST conflict of interest Again!
Date: 27 Apr 1996 03:39:12 GMT
Message-ID: <4ls4t0$[e-mail]>
References: <4lhoa6$[e-mail]> <4lieg8$[e-mail]>

[e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) wrote:

>Ox that was gored, or a tempest in a tea pot, or a bad hair day".
>
>Or it could be because IMD related splatter from poor designs annoys me.
>
>73,
>Tom

"SPLATTER" annoys *YOU*? I am amazed you are able to find time to
operate, what with being so involved critiqing QST, covering your
(gasp!) "findings" here on the Internet - and finally "SPLATTERING" this
newsgroup with non-issues. Lighten up! We are duly impressed with your
powers of observation and ability to communicate - as well as your
generally broad scope of knowledge. Let's move on to more interesting and
appropriate subjects than QST's editing policies...
--
Gary... KJ6Q...I am the NRA



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:15:32 1996
From: [e-mail] (Ed Gallup)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Radio Atlas 400XHF
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 96 21:16:27 GMT
Message-ID: <4lgsv1$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>,
   [e-mail] (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Francisco_Deir=F3_Couto_Borges?=) wrote:
>I'd like to have some information about the new radio transceiver Atlas
400XHF

     Atlas Radio is out of business.  The 400 is not available and will not
be.

  Ed


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:15:35 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner,alt.radio.scanner.uk,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.scanner
Subject: Re: Realistic Pro-43 tips and tweeks
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 96 20:51:32 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

On 4/17/96 3:38PM, in message <[e-mail]>,
David Prince <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Is it possible to reprogramme the Pro-43 to scan outside of its
> set limits ie, below 68Mhz and above 999Mhz?
>

begin 664 pro-43.mod
M1E)/33H@350N($%)4EDL($U!4EE,04Y$#0H-"E1/.B!!3ED@4%)/+30S($]7
M3D524R!)3E1%4D535$5$($E.(%)%4U1/4DE.1R!42$4@0TU4($9215%514Y#
M2453#0H-"D=2145424Y'4R!&14Q,3U<@4%)/+30S($]73D524R$A(2!)($I5
M4U0@3T)404E.140@35D@3U=.(%!23RTT,PT*2$%.1$A%3$0@1E)/32!2041)
M3R!32$%#2R!43T1!62!!3D0@5$A/54=(5"!42$%4($DG1"!005-3($].($$@
M#0I154E#2R!!3D0@4TE-4$Q%(%!23T-%1%5212!/3B!(3U<@5$\@4D535$]2
M12!42$4@0T5,3%5,05(@1E)%45,-"DE.(%1(25,@3$E45$Q%($I%5T5,+@T*
M#0I35$50(#$M(%)%34]612!42$4@0D%45$5262!#3TU005)4345.5"!#3U9%
M4B!!3D0@5$A%($)!5%1%4ED@4$%#2PT*("`@("`@("!&4D]-(%1(12!30T%.
M3D52+B!!3%-/(%)%34]612!42$4@(E)50D)%4B!$54-+244B($%.5$5.3D$-
M"B`@("`@("`@050@5$A)4R!424U%+@T*#0I35$50(#(M($9)3D0@02!33T94
M($-,3U1(($%.1"!34%)%040@250@3U54($].($$@4U5)5$%"3$4@0D5.0T@-
M"B`@("`@("`@04Y$($Q!62!42$4@4T-!3DY%4B!&04-%($1/5TX@3TX@5$A%
M($-,3U1(+B!214U/5D4@*#0I#0H@("`@("`@($),04-+($-/3$]2140@4$A)
M3$Q)4%,@4T-215=3($923TT@5$A%($)!0TL@04Y$(%-%5"!42$5-#0H@("`@
M("`@($%3241%+B!'14Y43%D@3$E&5"!42$4@0D%#2R!&4D]-(%1(12!30T%.
M3D52($%.1"!3150@250-"B`@("`@("`@05-)1$4@04Q33RX-"@T*4U1%4"`S
M+2!/3D-%($E.4TE$12!42$4@4T-!3DY%4B!93U4@5TE,3"!"12!'4D5%5$5$
M($)9($$@4U1!0TL@3T8-"B`@("`@("`@*#,I(%`N0RY"3T%21%,N($E4(%=)
M3$P@0D4@3D5#15-305)9(%1/(%)%34]612!42$4@5$]0(%173PT*("`@("`@
M("!!3D0@02!32$E%3$0@5$\@1T%)3B!!0T-%4U,@5$\@5$A%($E.1D%-3U53
M(%!23T=204U-24Y'(`T*("`@("`@("!$24]$15,@3D585"!43R!42$4@0U!5
M($-(25`@3TX@5$A%($E.3D52+4U/4U0@4"Y#+D)/05)$+@T*("`@("`@("!4
M2$E3(%`N0RY"3T%21"!)4R!)3B!214%,2519(%1(12!"04-+(%-)1$4@3T8@
M5$A%($M%64)/05)$+@T*#0I35$50(#0M(%)%34]612`H-BD@4TU!3$P@4$A)
M3$Q)4%,@4T-215=3($923TT@5$A%(%1/4"!0+D,N0D]!4D0@04Y$#0H@("`@
M("`@($%.1"!$25,M0T].3D5#5"!42$4@*#(I($-/3DY%0U1/4E,@3D585"!4
M3R!42$4@4TA)14Q$140@05)%00T*("`@("`@("!)3B!42$4@34E$1$Q%($]&
M(%1(12!54%!%4B!"3T%21"X@3D585"!#05)%1E5,3%D@1$4M4T],1$52#0H@
M("`@("`@(%1(12!!3E1%3DY!($-/3DY%0U1)3TY3(%1(12!/551%4B!32$E%
M3$0@5$%"($%.1"!42$4@24Y.15(-"B`@("`@("`@0T].3D5#5$E/3B!&4D]-
M(%1(12!"3D,@0T].3D5#5$]2(%1/(%1(12!0+D,N0D]!4D0N($=%3E1,60T*
M("`@("`@("!04ED@55`@5TE42"!93U52($9)3D=%4E,@3TX@5$A)4R!"3T%2
M1"!/3B!42$4@0D%45$5262`-"B`@("`@("`@0T].3D5#5$]2($5.1"X@5$A%
M(%504$52($)/05)$(%=)3$P@3$E&5"!!5T%9($923TT@5$A%#0H@("`@("`@
M(")35$%#2R(@4T54($E4($%3241%+B!42$4@3D585"!42$E.1R!43R!214U/
M5D4@25,@5$A%(%173PT*("`@("`@("!334%,3"!02$E,3$E04R!30U)%5U,@
M4T5#55))3D<@5$A%($U)1$1,12!0+D,N0D]!4D0@5$\@5$A%#0H@("`@("`@
M($923TY4($A!3$8@3T8@5$A%($-!4T4N3$E&5"!42$E3($)/05)$(%50($=%
M3E1,62!!3D0@34]610T*("`@("`@("!)5"!43R!42$4@4TE$12!33R!!4R!4
M3R!'04E.($-,14%2($%#0T534R!43R!42$4@4TA)14Q$($].#0H@("`@("`@
M(%1(12!)3DY%4BU-3U-4(%`N0RY"3T%21"X@250@25,@3D]4($Y%0T534T%2
M62!43R!43U1!3$Q9#0H@("`@("`@($1)4RU#3TY.14-4(%1(12!314-/3D0@
M0D]!4D0@1E)/32!42$4@2T590D]!4D0L($I54U0@4U=)3D<-"B`@("`@("`@
M250@3U54($]&(%1(12!705DN#0H-"E-415`@-2T@54Y33TQ$15(@5$A%("@T
M*2!404)3($].(%1(12!#3U).15)3($]&(%1(12!32$E%3$0@04Y$(%)%34]6
M10T*("`@("`@("!)5"X@3D585"!,3T-!5$4@5$A%($-052!#2$E0("A42$4@
M3$%21T4@4U%505)%($-(25`@4D]51TA,60T*("`@("`@("!)3B!42$4@0T5.
M5$52($]&(%1(12!+15E"3T%21"!0+D,N0D]!4D0I($%.1"!43U=!4D13(%1(
M12`-"B`@("`@("`@0D%45$5262!#3TY.14-43U(@64]5(%=)3$P@4T5%($$@
M4D]7($]&(%0M22U.+5D@4U521D%#10T*("`@("`@("!-3U5.5$5$($1)3T1%
M4RX@5$A%62!!4D4@3E5-0D52140@5TE42"!!(%-)3$LM4T-2145.($%.1`T*
M("`@("`@("!42$4@1$E/1$4@3E5-0D52140@1#0@25,@5$A%($].12!43R!2
M14U/5D4N($1/($Y/5"!44ED@5$\-"B`@("`@("`@0U)54T@@5$A)4R!005)4
M+"!)3E-414%$(%5312!!(%--04Q,(%=!5%1!1T4@25)/3B!7251(($$-"B`@
M("`@("`@1DE.12!425`@04Y$($1%+5-/3$1%4B!)5"X@*$D@2$%612!&3U5.
M1"!42$%4($$@5$]/5$A024-+#0H@("`@("`@(%=/4DM3(%=%3$P@05,@02!0
M4EE"05(I+B!!1E1%4B!42$4@1$E/1$4@25,@4D5-3U9%1"!404M%#0H@("`@
M("`@($$@1T]/1"!,3T]+($%23U5.1"!&3U(@04Y9(%-(3U)44R!/4B!33TQ$
M15(@0E))1$=%4R!!3D0@248-"B`@("`@("`@04Q,($E3(%=%3$P@4D4M05-3
M14U"3$4@64]54B!30T%.3D52(%)%5D524TE.1R!42$4@04)/5D4-"B`@("`@
M("`@4%)/0T5$55)%+@T*#0I35$50(#8M($%&5$52($E.4U1!3$Q)3D<@5$A%
M($)!5%1%4DE%4R!!3D0@04Y414Y.02`H64]5($1)1"!214U%34)%4@T*("`@
M("`@("!43R!215-/3$1%4B!42$4@0DY#($-/3DY%0U1/4B!43R!42$4@55!0
M15(@4"Y#+D)/05)$($1)1$XG5`T*("`@("`@("!93U4_*2!455).($].(%1(
M12!30T%.3D52($%.1"!'3R!43R!42$4@4%)/1U)!34U)3D<@34]$12X-"B`@
M("`@("`@2$E4($Q)34E4($].0T4@04Y$(%=(14X@(DQ/(B!)4R!$25-03$%9
M140@2T59($E.(#@V-RXP,#`@04Y$#0H@("`@("`@($A)5"!%3E1%4BX@*$E&
M(%E/55(@34]$(%=!4R!354-%4U-&54PL(#@V-RXP,#`@5TE,3"!"10T*("`@
M("`@("!$25-03$%9140L($E&($Y/5"!'3R!"04-+($%.1"!212U#2$5#2R!9
M3U52(%=/4DLN*2!.15A4($A)5`T*("`@("`@("!,24U)5"!!1T%)3B!!3D0@
M(DA)(B!724Q,($)%($1)4U!,05E%1"X@2T59($E.(#@Y-BXP,#`@04Y$#0H@
M("`@("`@($A)5"!%3E1%4BX@4%)%4U-)3D<@5$A%($Q)34E4(%-7251#2"!2
M15!%051%1$Q9(%=)3$P@5$]'1TQ%#0H@("`@("`@($)%5%=%14X@(DQ/(B!!
M3D0@(DA)(B!,24U)5%,N($A)5"!42$4@55`@3U(@1$]73B!!4E)/5R!!3D0-
M"B`@("`@("`@64]5(%=)3$P@4U1!4E0@4TE&5$E.1R!42%)/54=((%1(12`B
M1D]20DE$1$5.(B!&4D51545.0TE%4RX-"@T*("`@("`@("!214U%34)%4B!4
M2$4@14-002!/1B`Q.3@V($9/4D))1%,@5$A%($U/3DE43U))3D<@3T8@0T5,
M3%5,05(-"B`@("`@("`@34]"24Q%(%1%3$502$].15,@04Y$(%1(25,@24Y&
M3U)-051)3TX@25,@4%)/5DE$140@1D]2#0H@("`@("`@(")%1%5#051)3TY!
M3"!055)03U-%4R!/3DQ9(BXN+BXN+BXN+BXN+BXN+BXN2$%04%D@4T-!3DY)
M3D<-"@T*#0H-"AH:&AH:&AH:&AH:&AH:&AH:&AH:&AH:&AH:&AH:&AH:&AH:
6&AH:&AH:&AH:&AH:&AH:&AH:&AH:&AH:
`
end



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:15:36 1996
From: ()
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: REC.MOD FOR IC-2700H  (AL COPP) KF4GKV
Date: 24 Apr 1996 15:17:41 GMT
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4llgml$[e-mail]>

I RECENTLY PURCHASED A ICOM 2700H I NEED SOME INFORMATION ON RECEIVE EXPANSION
OR ANY OTHER MODS, ALSO I NEED INFORMATION ON FT8500 MH39 MODS.


THANKS FOR READING THIS POSTING,
AL COPP KF4GKV




From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:15:37 1996
From: [e-mail] (Dana Rodakis)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Repeater Linking
Date: 23 Apr 96 14:54:05 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Sorry if this has been covered before, but I am hearing alot
lately about linking repeater systems via the internet.
Anyone have any information about required software and
hardware interfacing, and what server on the internet needs
to be accessed.

Thanks in advance for any help.  Please reply directly via
e-mail since I don't subscribe to all the lists.

73,
Dana Rodakis, AJ1R
St. Petersburg, Florida
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:15:38 1996
From: Steve Siegel <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: RFI in Toyota 4Runner
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 1996 00:55:41 -0400
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

[e-mail] wrote:
>
> About to buy a new support bracket for my Icom 706 in the form of a Toyota
> 4-Runner. Anybody out there with a 95 or 96 4Runner running HF and VHF mobil
e?
> What problems or successes? Short of jury-rigging the 706 into the vehicle a
nd
> plopping a magmount HF antenna on the roof before I sign on the dotted line,
> what bands might provide a problem for the internal Toyota computer?
>
> Thanks in advance
>
> Mel, KJ9C
> [e-mail]

I've mounted a Kenwood TM-733A under the driver seat in my 1990 4Runner.
Used the remote kit and mounted the display on the steering column.  I used a
Comet WS-1 window mount and a Diamond 770 dual band ant. on the rear left
passenger door.  I can reach out the drivers windows to fold the ant. over
when entering garages.

The 4Runner is the V6 with EFI.  The computer is mounted behind the front
passenger kick panel.  I've run the VHF on 50 watts with no EFI problems at
all.

Good choice in vehicles.  I just hit 120,000 miles and still going strong.
*************************************
*73 de N3WUU            Steve Siegel*
*[e-mail]                   *
*************************************


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:15:39 1996
From: [e-mail] (dave sims)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: RS-232 to TTL converter cables available
Date: 26 Apr 1996 18:38:12 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

RS-232 to TTL converter cables are now available.  These cables are
the same cables that are included with the EZ Clone software for
programming amateur radios.  These general purpose cables can be used
for connecting computers with serial ports to electronic circuits and
devices with TTL interfaces.  The cable can also be used for other
radio programming uses.

More info at http://www.acsys.com or [e-mail]

--
dave sims
[e-mail]
kc5jkn
http://www.acsys.com - EZ Clone, software for programming amateur radios



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:15:40 1996
From: [e-mail] (DARRYL LINKOW)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Saturn 6 tuning - HELP!!
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 96 10:31:00 -0800
Distribution: world
Reply-To: [e-mail] (DARRYL LINKOW)


Hello all and thanks for reading this.  I just acquired an old
Saturn 6 antenna and am having a difficult time getting the SWR
down below 2.5 to 1.  I am using the MFJ-259 analyzer.  I am just
curious if perhaps part of the antenna is missing?  There are two
screws attached to a piece of phenolic board.  I have attached the
shield and center conductor of some RG-58 coax to these screws as
the feedpoint.  I am just curious if perhaps there is a tuning
device (other than the capacitor plate adjustment) or a balun that
should be connected to these screws on the phenolic board that
might be missing?  Also, might anyone have an instruction sheet or
manual that came with the antenna that I might get a copy of?  Any
help would be appreciated.
                 73, Darryl KE6IHA

---
 * OLX 2.2 * Darryl Linkow [phone]  9 am - 5 pm PDT


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:15:42 1996
From: [e-mail] (Vic Klein)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Saturn 6 tuning - HELP!!
Date: 26 Apr 1996 14:42:53 GMT
Message-ID: <4lqndd$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (
DARRYL LINKOW) says:
>
>
>Hello all and thanks for reading this.  I just acquired an old
>Saturn 6 antenna and am having a difficult time getting the SWR
>down below 2.5 to 1.  I am using the MFJ-259 analyzer.  I am just
>curious if perhaps part of the antenna is missing?  There are two
>screws attached to a piece of phenolic board.  I have attached the
>shield and center conductor of some RG-58 coax to these screws as
>the feedpoint.  I am just curious if perhaps there is a tuning
>device (other than the capacitor plate adjustment) or a balun that
>should be connected to these screws on the phenolic board that
>might be missing?  Also, might anyone have an instruction sheet or
>manual that came with the antenna that I might get a copy of?  Any
>help would be appreciated.

The Saturn-6 antenna, also called the Halo as I recall, had an
optional impedance-matching transformer that mounted at the feed
area. It attached to the screws you mentioned and had a SO-239
coax fitting on the bottom. Alternatively, the antenna came with
instructions for fabricating an impedance-matching balun out of
RG-58 coax. Alas, I cannot recall the details (perhaps someone else
will?) but you made a "Y" of a certain length and dropped the cable
assembly down the mast.

I carried such an antenna on the back of 2 different cars for years
and used a much-modified Heath Sixer as a mobile rig before 2mFM
was popular. Always got strange looks with that birdcage affair...
some thought it was some sort of radar!

=Vic=
WA4THR


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:15:43 1996
From: [e-mail] (Karl-Heinz Merscher)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Standard C 508 A
Date: 22 Apr 96 12:46:54 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Karl-Heinz Merscher)



Hello friends:

Anybody out there who runs the STANDARD baby C 508 A. Does this radio
has a 1750 Hz tone burst for opening repeaters in good old Europe?
How do you like this puppy?
I read that it has a very low power consumtion, is this true?
E. g. you can monitor a frequency with a power safe option around 3 weeks ...

I look forward to receive your comments!

Thanks

AA1KD, Charlie


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:15:44 1996
From: Karl-Heinz Merscher <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Standard C 508 A
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 15:27:41 +0000
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Hi OM,

does anybody out there using a Standard C 508 A HT?
Has this small puppy a tone burst 1750 Hz for opening repaters in Europe?
How about the power consumption? Is it true that the radio whould
monitor in the power safe mode about three weeks?? I can't belief it ?!
How do you like your C 508 A? Would you buy it again?

Thanks in advance

de AA1KD, Karl-Heinz


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:15:45 1996
From: [e-mail] (Robert Wood)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: SWAN 1200Z ??
Date: 20 Apr 1996 02:10:19 GMT
Message-ID: <4l9h2b$[e-mail]>

Anyone know the tubes inside a SWAN 1200Z??  # of?  power?
73  Robert WB5CRG


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:15:46 1996
From: Kevin Elliott <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Telex Boom Headset ???
Date: 22 Apr 1996 19:38:02 -0700
Message-ID: <4lhfqa$[e-mail]>

Does anyone have the tech sheet for the CB-100 Telex-Hygain boom headset?
I would like to have the following specs.  Impedance, pin-out, element
type. If you would be so kind as to supply me this information I would be
forever in your debt.

--
Just a poor old ham looking for a contact QRZ de KG0MN.
A true lover of R.L. Drake and Company
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
kevinel                                   __  __     ____  ___       ___ ____
[e-mail]                     /__)/__) / / / / /_  /\  / /_    /
                                        /   / \  / / / / /__ /  \/ /___  /----
---------------------------------------------------------------------------


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:15:47 1996
From: [e-mail] (D.W.Hemphill KC5NG)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: TR7600 manual
Date: 23 Apr 1996 20:31:45 GMT
Message-ID: <4ljenh$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Keywords: Kenwood, manual,tr7600

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>
>Does anyone have a manual for the Kenwood TR7600?  I will pay postage and c
>opy
>costs.
>
>Thanks!  John Payne N4FLJ

I have the owner's manual AND the service manual for the
TR-7600 (along with the radio and the RM-76 controller,
and the RM-76 service manual).  E-mail me your address,
and I'll copy what you need and send it to you (but it
will be about three weeks, if you can wait that long).
73 de KC5NG (Dean Hemphill, Lake Dallas, TX)




From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:15:47 1996
From: Rolfe Tessem <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: TS-870 given Bad Report in Rad.Com review
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1996 10:12:19 -0400
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
To: John M Sonley <[e-mail]>

John M Sonley wrote:
>
> I was planning to buy the new TS-870 until I read the Peter Hart review
> in Radio Communication April 1996. He stated that the "close-in dynamic
> range was particularly poor"

Is this review available online anywhere?

Rolfe
W3VH
--
Rolfe Tessem            |       Lucky Duck Productions, Inc.
[e-mail]           |       96 Morton Street
[phone]          |       New York, NY 10014


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:15:48 1996
From: [e-mail] (Cesar P dos Santos)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: TS-870 review
Date: 23 Apr 96 17:42:19 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

I have just take a look on the Peter Hart review on RADCOMM (RSGB) about the
TS870.
I find his results very interesting as I've just bought one.
My main use for it is in the 40 and 80Meters and despite the measurements
(that I do not have any questions about its accuracy), up to now I have not
found any problems relating to blocking in SSB.
Yesterday night I was in 7.194MHz just between two broadcasting stations
(~20 dB over nine ) listening to two US stations (S3-5) and I did not find
any problem. However when I changed to CW I did find that the noise level
did increase and splatters did occur in the nearby frequency.
A quickly analysis  between the schematics of the 850 and the 870  showed
that the two radios have in general the same set of IF filters. So that
brings me to my  questions:
Assuming they have not change the mixing levels, what have changed among the
two radios? Note that I have no questions about the DSP in the end of the chai
n.
Does any one could explain how the CW signal paths that seem to be routed
through the same set of filters as in the case of SSB  do show some
degradation that I could not detect in SSB?
Further if the 3KHz (8.8MHz) filter is supposed to cut 70dB at 5KHz how
could I have  an interference 10KHz AWAY as I have found in CW?

Anyway I hope KENWOOD will address the subject very soon because as the
reviewers have mentioned the 870 has one of the best audio (in Amateur
radio) I have listened in the past 20 years.

THANKING IN ADVANCE FOR YOUR  TIME IN READING THIS

73'S from
CESAR (PY1BY   ex G5CZU,ex PY1EFV)
e-mail [e-mail]




From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:15:50 1996
From: [e-mail] (Cesar P dos Santos)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re:TS-870S
Date: 23 Apr 96 16:33:52 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

On  26 Mar 96 10:36:03 -0800
Robert Young  asked:
>Subject: Kenwood TS-870S Mods Wanted
>
>Wanted:
>
>I'm looking for any mods for the Kenwood TS-870S.
>I need the extended TX/RX mod (ie Mars/CAP) for this radio.
>The new Yaesu FT-1000MP uses a software mod for expanded
>coverage and I was wondering if the Kenwood TS-870 does
>likewise. I would also appreciate any comments good or bad
>this radio as I missed the recent QST review.
>
>Thanks!
>
>73 de N9MSS Bob
>
>------------------------------

The TS-870S did not seem to have the nice features of  the Yaesu radio. Just
looking at its schematics, it appears that it has the same Mars/Cap
alteration as did the 850 and 450. The only difference is that  there is no
diodes to cut but only resistors. I did not find any others menus besides
the calibration menu (N.R.+SSB on power on). There is another menu ??
(N.R.+CW on power on) just shows the word READY and 3 possibles positions
but no further indication, besides an error code for the DSP. ANY
Suggestions ???

73's
From PY1 BY
(cesar).

_____________________________
As I have no get this in any Ham-digest I hace received I'm sending it again



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:15:50 1996
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Tucker TVI Filter
Date: 23 Apr 1996 11:39:35 -0400
Message-ID: <4litjn$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

Hi Lee,
In a message dated 96-04-23 10:17:36 EDT, you write:
>
>A good source for good High Pass filters?  Where do you find ferrite
cores
>these days?  Any help would be appreciated.  TU
>
>Lee

I can tell you a **poor source** for TVI filters, Tucker electronics.

The Tucker low-pass filter my friend bought was in a pretty looking, heavy
case. But the case had paint on the cover mounting edges and insulating
washers under the cover screws. It had long wire lead conventional disk
capacitors and toroids as the filter element. The construction was
unthinkably POOR for a VHF-UHF filter.

It had severe case radiation, and poor VHF-UHF attenuation. It actually
CAUSED TVI in my friend's installation!

We replaced it with a jumper and TVI was reduced, we added an old Bencher
and the TVI went away!

73 Tom



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:15:51 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: Re: Viking Ranger
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 1996 15:08:32 GMT

Ken ...The days of $100 Rangers are ancient history unless you find
someone who doesn't know what's going on! What is fair? There is no
fairness in the antique business.


Kenneth D. Grimm ([e-mail]) wrote:
: Bob Ludlum wrote:
: >
: > Would someone venture a guess as to a fair selling price for an
: > operational Johnson Viking Ranger transmitter?
: >
: > Bob K4LXA

: Between $100 and $275, depending on condition.

: 73,
: Ken
: --
: ___________________________________________________________

:        Kenneth D. Grimm                 K4XL
:        [e-mail]
: ___________________________________________________________

--
Steve Ellington [e-mail]  Louisville, Ky


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:15:52 1996
From: "Steve Fuller, KB5FIP" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew
Subject: Want Mods for the Alinco DR-610T
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1996 10:10:42 -0600
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Does anyone know what the mods are for the Alinco DR-610T?

Steve Fuller
KB5FIP
email address:  [e-mail]
Bus. phone:  [phone]
home phone:  [phone]


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:15:53 1996
From: [e-mail] (Gary Zabriskie)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Want to Buy Kenwood IF-10C
Date: 24 Apr 96 20:01:13 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

I am desperately looking for a Kenwood IF-10C for use with my Kenwood
Ts-140S. I would like to use computer control of functions in the radio.

A gentlemen in Canada was going to send one to me to look at but I have
not heard back from him.  I wish Kenwood would produce a final run of
these devices.  I think I read elsewhere on this newgroup that there
isn't anything fancy to what is needed, just a couple of chips?  Is there
a specific circuit board that goes in the radio, or just the chips? Does
someone have the manual &/or schematic for the IF-10C that would be
willing to send or fax me a copy?  Please reply directly to me via my
e-mail address which is:   [e-mail]

Thank you.

Gary Zabriskie,  N7ARE
St. George, Utah (Utah's Dixie)


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:15:54 1996
From: [e-mail] (Larry S)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Want: Cushcraft DX-120 2 Meter Antenna All or Parts
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 1996 15:58:57 GMT
Message-ID: <3180f2a6.2778564@news>

I am in need of parts and pieces of the CushCraft DX-120
2 meter antenna. Would like to find some complete antennas
still in the box, but can use parts and pieces, let me know
what you have.   Thanks!
Larry   WA5NTF


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:15:55 1996
From: [e-mail] (Michael A. Mathis)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Wanted: Icom IC Z1A and IC W31A mods
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 1996 20:06:17 GMT
Message-ID: <4lm1h2$[e-mail]>

Can anyone give me pointers to any mods for these models? I am interested
in CAPS and MARS mods. Thanks.
_________
 Michael A. Mathis
 [e-mail]
 312 650 3921 pager




From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:15:55 1996
From: [e-mail] (JRW)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Wanted: Manual for HTX-202 Radio Shack 2m HT
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 96 05:03:06 GMT
Message-ID: <4lcfc3$[e-mail]>
References: <4kv917$[e-mail]> <4l9dvo$[e-mail]>

In article <4l9dvo$[e-mail]>, n3vqv <@postoffice.ptd.net> wrote:
>David Dobrin <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>
>> I have recently acquired an HTX-202 HT Sans manual. I am looking for a
>> manual or instruction sheet. I would be happy to
>> pay for copy/mailing fees. I have figured out a lot of the commands, but
>> would like information on the following codes:
>> Thanks,
=SNIP=
>> Dave KD6AOF Westchester, CA
>>

Dave --

I can't help you personally, but your local Radio Shaft, er, Shack can...

Give 'em the catalog number, & ask a rep to order you one. It'll probably run
you about $3 - $5, but at least you'll have one.

-JRW4
KB5ZBR



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:15:56 1996
From: [e-mail] (Jim Flanders)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Wanted: Manual for HTX-202 Radio Shack 2m HT
Date: 26 Apr 1996 16:24:17 GMT
Message-ID: <4lqtbh$[e-mail]>
References: <4kv917$[e-mail]> <4l9dvo$[e-mail]> <4ldn8p$[e-mail]>

For ANY Radio Shack manual, all you have to do is go into any
Radio Shack and order it.  The manual will be shipped to you in 3 to
7 days.
    W0oog/5


In article <4ldn8p$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>
>Seems to me I saw a posting that said the Manuals are
>on the TANDY www site.
>
>73
>
>



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:15:57 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (dale b. allen)
Subject: Re: Wanted:R390A manual
References: <4lgfoe$[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 1996 12:50:32 GMT
Message-ID: <4lijmo$[e-mail]>

In article <4lgfoe$[e-mail]>,
   [e-mail] (Ken N2SQW) wrote:
>Path:
newsgate.melpar.esys.com!uunet!in2.uu.net!panix!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howla
nd.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com
!not-for-mail
>From: [e-mail] (Ken N2SQW)
>Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
>Subject: Wanted:R390A manual
>Date: 22 Apr 1996 13:30:54 -0400
>Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
>Lines: 4
>Sender: [e-mail]
>Message-ID: <4lgfoe$[e-mail]>
>Reply-To: [e-mail] (Ken N2SQW)
>NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
>Status: N
>
>I need a manual for the R390A. I have one for the R390, bu tthere are
>enough differences to require the proper manual. Original or photocopy, it
>doesn't matter, as long as it's readable.
>Thanks, Ken

Ken, I bought mine from Fair Radio Sales in Lima OH. It is an excellent copy.
Call them at [phone]. Dale

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+ Dale B. Allen  [phone]  Internet: [e-mail] +
+ E-Systems, Falls Church Division    FAX: [phone]         +
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:15:58 1996
From: rfburns <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Wanted:R390A manual
Date: 25 Apr 1996 03:30:19 GMT
Message-ID: <4lmrkb$[e-mail]>
References: <4lgfoe$[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]

CONSULT FAIR RADIO SALE IN OHIO
I JUST GOT A COPY FOR A R392 RECEIVER
THEY WILL HAVE IT AT A GOOD PRICE
NEED IFO EMAIL BACK
DOUG



From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:15:59 1996
From: Joe Balch <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: WTB Like New ICOM 781
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 1996 17:33:08 -0400
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

I want to buy a like new IC-781 this week at a reasonable price.  JOE, AD4BB i
n Roswell, GA


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:16:00 1996
From: [e-mail] (Donald Hellen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: WTB QRP CW Rig, Either Heath or Ten Tec
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1996 00:51:32 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

I am looking to either homebrew a 5W or less transmitter and
receiver or buy a commercial one.  I only _need_ 40/80 M,
but will consider an all band rig also.  CW is my primary
mode, and can be the only one in this rig.  SSB is optional.
Email response if you have one as I do not have time to
check groups regularly.
Donald Hellen
Made of only the finest electrons and the purest
ascii text to bring you the utmost email pleasure.

[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:16:01 1996
From: "Thomas W. Castle" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: WTB> Ft-990 Filters
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 1996 00:19:22 -0400
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Hi Tom here... I am looking for the 500hz & 2Kz filters for the
Yaesu Ft-990. If you have either or both or any other acc., that
I might be interested in; contact me via e-mail or packet. On
packet KD4QHH@K4DPZ Gainsville - Fla.

Tnx De Tom
73




From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:16:02 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Yaesu FT-101E Bands
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
From: "Bill  (AA4FM/0)" <[e-mail]>
Date: 22 Apr 96 22:32:07 CDT
References: <4lbj50$[e-mail]> <4lc1no$[e-mail]> <4le1ga$[e-mail]> <4lgam5$[e-mail]>

The FT-101E was (and still is) an EXCELLENT radio for the money. If only
those darn sweep tubes didn't keep creeping up in price!

I think that Yaesu knew exactly what they were doing when they provided
the capability to operate on the Children's Band.

They were greedy!  Why not make a buck?  Let's add 11 meter capabilty!
We can sell to U.S. hams AND CBers. We don't care!  Just take the
money and run!

I still have my 101E and use it when I'm not on the KWM-2A, but somehow I
still feel a bit embarassed when I say "rig here is FT-101E".  You know
that it shouldn't be that way.

Bill
AA4FM/0
Eudora, Kansas, USA





From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:16:03 1996
From: [e-mail] (Frank Wargocki)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Yaesu FT-101E Bands
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1996 10:21:36 -0400
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4lbj50$[e-mail]> <4lc1no$[e-mail]> <4le1ga$[e-mail]> <4lgam5$[e-mail]> <4lgk5v$[e-mail]>

In article <4lgk5v$[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (WB3U) wrote:

>    [e-mail] (Don Montgomery) wrote:
>
> >I used to have FT101EE.  All one had to do was clip the brown jumper
> >on the bandswitch and you were instantly on 11 meters, where most of
> >the FT101(X)s are these days.
>
> Are you sure you had the EE model?  Mine didn't even have a factory-
> installed crystal for 11M.  The TX lockout jumper was only used to
> prevent transmission on the 10 MHz WWV band.
>
> 73,
> Jack  WB3U

As I recall, thinking back a few years: The EE model lacked some of the
E's features, such as the RF processor, some of the 10m segments, and the
160m band.  The earlier E's did have 11m capability (when the wire was
clipped) and the FCC clamped down on Yaesu and required them to remove the
11m circuitry in later E models, allowing the addition of a user-set
auxiliary band.  Yaesu eventually called the non-11m version the FT-101F,
one of which I still use.

FYI, addition of the WARC bands is straightforward.  The old Fox-Tango
club sold a conversion kit, but I was able to recreate most of the steps
after they faded away.  The 10.1 MHz band can be added instantly by
jumpering a few wires from the bandswitch and sharing the 40m taps on the
transmit tuned circuits.  The trick is some tight soldering.  17 and 12m
are set by installing the right crystals and re-tuning the oscillators.
The manual gives instructions for calculating the crystal frequencies and
I ordered them from JAN.  I used the auxiliary band for 17 and removed the
10D (29.5-30.0 MHz) crystal to use that band for 12m.

73,
Frank, AB0G


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:16:05 1996
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Yaesu FT-101E Bands
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 96 19:49:29 GMT
Message-ID: <4lrdan$[e-mail]>
References: <4lbj50$[e-mail]> <4lc1no$[e-mail]> <4le1ga$[e-mail]> <4lgam5$[e-mail]> <4lgk5v$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

   [e-mail] (Frank Wargocki) wrote:

>As I recall, thinking back a few years: The EE model lacked some of
>the E's features, such as the RF processor, some of the 10m segments,
>and the 160m band.

At the time my EE was produced, the only difference between the E and
EE was the speech processor.  Frequency coverage was exactly the same
(my EE had 160M and all of 10M).  My unit was not modified and the
coverage and features were (are) verified by the owner's manual.

>The earlier E's did have 11m capability (when the wire was clipped)
>and the FCC clamped down on Yaesu and required them to remove the
>11m circuitry in later E models, allowing the addition of a user-set
>auxiliary band.  Yaesu eventually called the non-11m version the
>FT-101F, one of which I still use.

Someone wrote me in e-mail to say that their EE also had 11M on the
bandswitch.  However, my late model EE definitely did not.  So, you
are obviously right.  There must have been a change in the 11M
coverage of the E and EE models sometime during the production run
that did not result in a model number change.  This would explain the
confusion on this point.

Do you know if there were any differences between the late model E
and the F versions other than the model number?

73,
Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:16:06 1996
From: [e-mail] (Frank Wargocki)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Yaesu FT-101E Bands
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 96 02:22:25 GMT
Message-ID: <4lrkks$[e-mail]>
References: <4lbj50$[e-mail]> <4lc1no$[e-mail]> <4le1ga$[e-mail]> <4lgam5$[e-mail]> <4lgk5v$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4lrdan$[e-mail]>

In article <4lrdan$[e-mail]>,
   [e-mail] (WB3U) wrote:

>Do you know if there were any differences between the late model E
>and the F versions other than the model number?
>
>73,
>Jack  WB3U

No, there weren't.  I had forgotten about the EX model which is the one
without 160m and the upper 10m segments.


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:16:07 1996
From: Shelby Merrick <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Yaesu FT-757 gxII info wanted
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 1996 15:41:34 -0400
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4l75ue$[e-mail]>

KC7FYS wrote:
>
> Hello,
> I just purchased a good cond ft757 in JA and I am looking for the english
> manual for the thing--and also anyone who has interesting anecdotes about
> mods, QRV, etc, with this rig.  I am going to install the CW filter when
> it arrives.  Any tips.  Please email me.
> Jonathan 7j1awl/kc7fys

I just bought one at a hamfest less than a month ago.  I had to buy manuals fo
r mine
straight from yaesu.  The owner's manual is $7.31 and the service manual is $1
5.69.
 Shipping was 4.00 for a grand total of $27.00.  Their number is 310-404-2700.
Also, their's a little black switch behind the dial when you take the case off
.
Flip this and it opens up the transmitter for all freqs.  Mine was turned on w
hen I
bought it.

73's
Shelby KE4AKA


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:16:08 1996
From: Shelby Merrick <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Yaesu FT-757 gxII info wanted
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 1996 15:38:20 -0400
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4l75ue$[e-mail]>

KC7FYS wrote:
>
> Hello,
> I just purchased a good cond ft757 in JA and I am looking for the english
> manual for the thing--and also anyone who has interesting anecdotes about
> mods, QRV, etc, with this rig.  I am going to install the CW filter when
> it arrives.  Any tips.  Please email me.
> Jonathan 7j1awl/kc7fys

I just bought one at a hamfest less than a month ago.  I had to buy manuals fo
r mine from
straight from yaesu.  The owner's manual is $7.31 and the service manual is $1
5.69.
Shipping was 4.00 for a grand total of $27.00.  Their number is 310-404-2700.

73's
Shelby KE4AKA


From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:16:09 1996
From: [e-mail] (W. Hodgins)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Yaesu FT-757 gxII info wanted
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1996 14:21:49 GMT
Message-ID: <4lo1qc$[e-mail]>
References: <4l75ue$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

Shelby Merrick <[e-mail]> wrote:

>KC7FYS wrote:
>>
>> Hello,
>> I just purchased a good cond ft757 in JA and I am looking for the english
>> manual for the thing--and also anyone who has interesting anecdotes about
>> mods, QRV, etc, with this rig.  I am going to install the CW filter when
>> it arrives.  Any tips.  Please email me.
>> Jonathan 7j1awl/kc7fys

>I just bought one at a hamfest less than a month ago.  I had to buy manuals f
or mine
>straight from yaesu.  The owner's manual is $7.31 and the service manual is $
15.69.
> Shipping was 4.00 for a grand total of $27.00.  Their number is 310-404-2700
.
>Also, their's a little black switch behind the dial when you take the case of
f.
>Flip this and it opens up the transmitter for all freqs.  Mine was turned on
when I
>bought it.

>73's
>Shelby KE4AKA

I too recently bought a used Ft-757 Gx11 (with manuals). I have not
yet  transmitted (waiting for antenna).  What position should the
switch you mentioned be in to ensure I stay within ham bands?




From [e-mail] Sun Apr 28 13:16:10 1996
From: [e-mail] (Conway Yee)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Yaesu FT101 Mods/Help
Date: 26 Apr 1996 03:43:12 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4lcbe3$[e-mail]> <4lmfd2$[e-mail]>

[e-mail] wrote:
>I have a Yaesu FT101 and would like information on the modifications
>that can be done on this rig mainly with WARC bands. I am interested
>in other mods too.

In the US, IRC in Florida still sells the WARC modification kit for
the 101.  They sell most years of the old FoxTango newsletters which
contains mods for many Yaesu rigs of the era.
--
                                  |       73 de Conway Yee, N2JWQ  | DON'T
                                  | EMAIL     : [e-mail] | TREAD
                                  | TELEPHONE :                    |  ON
                                  | FAX       :                    |  ME!


From [e-mail] Mon Apr 29 16:40:21 1996
From: [e-mail] (Jim Kauffman)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: 5/8 (2m) wave MFJ vs. Larsen?
Date: Sun, 28 Apr 1996 13:48:18 -0400
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <41a7cc$335a.183@NEWS>

In article <41a7cc$335a.183@NEWS>, [e-mail] (Dan Mouer) wrote:

> I have an HTX-202 (1 watt low, 5 watt hi).
>
> I am looking to get a 5/8 wave mag mount ant. but I don't know which one I
> should get.  Maybe even a 5/8 @ RadShak would be enough, I don't know and
> that's why I'm posting this here.
> Any info is appreciated.
> Thanks.
>
> -Dan.

Dan,

   Don,t waste your money!  You are going to get the Larsen now or after
you've given up on the other two antennas you mentioned.  So I say get it
now and save money in the long run.

   I f you really want a good signal, go with a through the roof
installation with Larsen equipment.  If you live in the city use a 1/4
wave, otherwise install the 5/8.

Jim, N7TTO


From [e-mail] Mon Apr 29 16:40:22 1996
From: steve Dobak <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: 5/8 (2m) wave MFJ vs. Larsen?
Date: Sat, 27 Apr 1996 17:52:43 -0400
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <41a7cc$335a.183@NEWS>

Dan Mouer wrote:
>
> I have an HTX-202 (1 watt low, 5 watt hi).
>
> I am looking to get a 5/8 wave mag mount ant. but I don't know which one I
> should get.  Maybe even a 5/8 @ RadShak would be enough, I don't know and
> that's why I'm posting this here.
>
> 1.  What I want/need to know is does MFJ, Larsen, and RS ants have magnetic
>      mounts (~5" dia) that would allow me to exchange the 5/8 with a 1/4?
>
> 2.  Which would you recommend? What would you say is the "quality/$" index?
>
> 3.  What is the gain on a 1/4 and a 5/8 wave?
>
> 3.  Are these calculations correct...(assume P_in = 1 watt)
>
>      3dB Gain:      10*log(Power Gain) = dB
>                         ==> P_out = P_in * 10^(3/10)
>                                P_out = 1.99 watt
>
>      6dB Gain:      10*log(Power Gain) = dB
>                         ==> P_out = P_in * 10^(6/10)
>                                P_out = 3.98 watt
>
> Any info is appreciated.
> Thanks.
>
> -Dan.I had a mfj 5/8 wave mobel antenna and it worked almost as well as the
rubber ducky ant that came with
 my handheld and I could bring just as many repeaters up if I unscrewed the wh
ip and took it off the
mount as when the whip was on the mount, after giving up in fustration trying
to get the s-w-r somewhat
acceptable and trying to get the whip to show some gain over the coax and mag
mount I went to the local radio
shack and tried theirs out, I put it on, the swr was good and it worked, by th
e way you will find that the
5/8 wave ant has benifits when trying to access distant repeaters, espically o
n handhelds..
                                             Steve  WB3AMG


From [e-mail] Mon Apr 29 16:40:23 1996
From: Paul Christensen <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: CW Crystals - Marshfield, MO - Question
Date: Sun, 28 Apr 1996 09:17:48 -0700
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

I am awaiting 25 FT-243 crystals from him.  It's now been more than two months
.
Is this typical?

-Paul, N9AZ


From [e-mail] Mon Apr 29 16:40:24 1996
From: [e-mail] (Jim Lill)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: DVR 2-2, any wayu to improve?
Date: 28 Apr 1996 20:13:41 GMT
Message-ID: <4m0jhl$[e-mail]>

The Kantronics DVR 2-2 is frankly, a piece of junk. I think even "K" is
ashamed of it. Anyway, I inherited 2 of them and want to use them as an
IF radio for a 1268MHz link. Anyone have an tips on how to tighten the
DVR up a bit. The site(s) would be near an IM alley where the DVR
directly on an antenna failed *very* miserably. Before even wasting any
time with them as an IF unit, I'd like to improve them. Any ideas?

TIA    -Jim

--

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Jim Lill         [e-mail]
http://www.vectorbd.com/users/jpll
    wa2zkd@wb2psi.#wny.usa.na



From [e-mail] Mon Apr 29 16:40:25 1996
From: "J.D. Taliaferro" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Expansion cards for FR101S
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 1996 08:15:26 -0700
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Greetings,

I'm looking for the expansion cards for an FR 101-S.  Thereare three of
them:  The FM card, Yaesu# PB-1269; the 6 meter card, PB-1305;  and the
2 meter card, PB-1306.

Please send any info as to where I could find them, price, etc.

I can be reached as follows:  day 901-427-4774, night 901-658-9471
        Email: [e-mail]

Thanks for your assistance,

J.D. Taliaferro, KE4RKI


From [e-mail] Mon Apr 29 16:40:26 1996
From: [e-mail] (James Brannigan)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: F/S: Cleaning out Shack!!!!
Date: 29 Apr 1996 03:33:37 GMT
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4m1dah$[e-mail]>

The listing is from Jerry WA2ZBN

1.  Kenwood 820S                     $700
    110-220v es 12v Power supply
    cw filter preamp mike and footswitch

2.  Kenwood 440 All Mode             $800
    USB-LSB with encoder and decoder

3.  Kenwood 2 Meter All Mode         $800
4.  Henry 2002A  2 Meter Amp.
    25w in 850w out                 $1000
5.  Yaesu 757GX with auto tuner      $800
6.  Hustler Mobile-Xmas tree         $150
    coils for 160-10M
7.  Kawasaki 3900 Generator 25 Amps
    110-220 Volts w/ Meters         $1000
8.  Ameco PT2 Preamp                 $110
9.  Autek CW audio filter            $ 75
10. Mimic CW paddle on Marble stand  $ 75
11. Drake phone patch                $ 75
12. Mosley Traps for TA-33           $ 10 ea.
    Feedline Harness                 $ 25
    Mosley Traps for TA-36           $ 10 ea.
    Feedline Harness                 $ 25
13. Electro Voice 630 Mic            $ 50
14. Astatic 336L                     $ 50
15. Electrovoice 664                 $ 75
16. Electrovoice 632                 $ 50
17. Argone AR54 Crystal Mic          $ 75
18. Turner Dynamic Mic               $ 75
19. D-104 w/ stand                   $ 75
20. Slim X777S Crystal Mike          $ 35
21. T32 Antique Mic                  $ 75

Call Jerry WA2ZBN at [phone]
after 6PM only...

Not responsible for typos
Do NOT reply to me, please.....
73, Jim WB2TPS







From [e-mail] Mon Apr 29 16:40:27 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: For Sale - Hy-Gain V-2S  Two Meter Antenna
Date: Sun, 28 Apr 96 23:33:39 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

I have a Hy-Gain V-2S antenna for sale. In excellent condition. I also have
instruction manual. I bought the antenna new and the only reason it's up
for sale is because I just put up a 2 meter/ 440 antenna.

Price is $40. You pay the shipping. Email [e-mail]

Thanks - Ron   KC2SF



From [e-mail] Mon Apr 29 16:40:28 1996
From: John Black <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: misc.forsale.non-computer,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.shortwave,rec.radio.swap,triangle.radio
Subject: FS: Racal 6790/GM
Date: 28 Apr 1996 14:24:19 GMT
Message-ID: <4lvv2k$lti$[e-mail]>

Racal 6790/GM receiver for sale. Excellent condition, 7.9, 3.4, 1.6,
5 filters +SSB.  RS232 interface with connector and serial cable.
Radio tunes from 0-30MHZ, tuning and LCD readout to 1hz. Selectable
AGC threshold and times, All mode including FM (ISB optional),
built-in test system which calibrates filters.
Comes also with complete operation and maintenance manual.
Radio is rack mountable, appprox 19"w x 6-1/2"h x 20"d.
Can be computer controlled using terminal program , or one such as
Visual Radio.
Asking $1500 plus shipping. (Tucker Electronics was selling for
$1500 without RS232 interface and fewer filters.)
A really great radio for LW and VLF DX, too.

Please reply via E-mail ifinterested.
J. Black KB5AG    [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Mon Apr 29 16:40:30 1996
From: [e-mail] (Anonymous)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: FT-50R info.
Date: 28 Apr 1996 19:25:43 GMT
Message-ID: <4m0gnn$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4l8lhg$[e-mail]>



I have purchased the FT-50R and yes it is a pretty cool little
"radidio".  I does have a built in game if yo press the MR button
while turning the radio on. I have also modified the radio to transmit
out of band.. MARs and CAPs ...Here is the information everyone needs
to modify it:

1.  remove the battery pack
2.  remove the two screws contained under the Battery safety sticker
      on the back of the radio.
3.  remove the key board (instuctions on how to remove the keyboard are
      in the owners manual)
4.  by removing the keyboard, it will reveal three jumper pads 1,2,&3
5.  Only jumper pad #1 will be bridged by soldier.
6.  remove the soldier from jumper #1
7.  now, put the radio back together
8.  reset the master cpu... instruction in owners manual.
9.  reset the extended receive,.. see the owners manual.
10  you now have a modified radio.
any questions e-mail me







In article <4l8lhg$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
says...
>
>The web page is advertising a MARS/CAPS mod, so even Yaesu here in the
>US does not have it so far.  They have promised to send it as soon as
>they have it.
>
>Has anyone used one yet?  I am waiting for the local radio shop to get
>their shipment in.  The radio sounds to good to be true.  Is it?
>
>Chuck <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>>Well I held one. It is the same case as the 40 and 10's The radio
uses
>>the same batt's and case. The 50 also comes with an unadvertised
featur
>e:
>>a game. Just turn it on by pressing MR and power at the same time and
>>there you are. Very neat sounds and moving numbers on the screen.
Pause
>
>>is the Ch knob (push it down) and the game keeps score.
>
>
>>I know of no mods for the 50, yet.
>
>>                                        CS
>
>
>
>>--
>>Man-Servent Hecubus Fan Club of America.
>
>                 Opinions Expresses Are Entirely My Own.
>             In Fact It Is Rare That Anybody Agrees With Me.
>
>Mike Penner             |   "Firearms Stand Next In Importance To The
>Lucent Technologies     |    Constitution Itself.  They Are The
American
>[e-mail]       |    People's Liberty Teeth."  George
Washington
>
>



From [e-mail] Mon Apr 29 16:40:31 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.space
From: [e-mail] (Rob Janssen)
Subject: Re: FT-736R vs TS-790 vs IC-820H
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4kur8k$[e-mail]> <4lmee0$[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 1996 20:12:35 GMT

In <4lmee0$[e-mail]> LLEDLOW <[e-mail]
heed.com> writes:

>I've used both the FT-736 and TS-790.  I own the latter.  Ergonomically
>it can be a bit difficult to get used to, but it's a good rig.  The
>FT-736 is very goo, too, and perhaps easier to learn to use.  Trouble is,
>it's more expensive.

Apparently pricing is different in the USA.
In Europe, a TS-790 is much more expensive than a similar FT-736 setup.
(two bands, mains supply)

Rob
--
+------------------------------------+--------------------------------------+
| Rob Janssen         [e-mail] | BBS: [phone] (2300-0730 local) |
| AMPRnet:       [e-mail] | AX.25 BBS: PE1CHL@PI8WNO.#UTR.NLD.EU |
+------------------------------------+--------------------------------------+


From [e-mail] Mon Apr 29 16:40:32 1996
From: [e-mail] (Doug Daniels)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Help with Alinco DR-150T Mobile
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 1996 06:35:02 GMT
Message-ID: <4m1d8j$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

I'm unable to permanently program the repeater offsets into
memory. I have the manual but the translation from Japanese
to English must have skipped a cog.
I can enter the freq. into memory ok. I can punch in the 60
Kilohertz (-) offset, and as long as I don't move from that
display I can transmit with the shift OK. The next time I
return to that frequency, the shift is gone. Can anyone
help?

Dougd.



From [e-mail] Mon Apr 29 16:40:33 1996
From: [e-mail] (Mike Mentuck)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: How can I adjust the LCD contrast of FT-51R ?
Date: 27 Apr 1996 12:12:22 GMT
Message-ID: <4lt2v6$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>
>How ?
I had a problem with my 51r - the contrast was getting pretty bad, and some of

the LCD segments were unreadable in the cold.  I sent it back to Yaesu, and
they replaced the display.  Now it works just fine, although when it's dark,
and the backlight is on, it's best when looking straight on.

Good luck w/ you unit.



From [e-mail] Mon Apr 29 16:40:34 1996
From: [e-mail] (Clint Bradford)
Date: 28 Apr 96 10:00:00
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: HTX202 low audio with
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>





:     I'm sure I saw a reference to a fix for this problem, but I haven't
:   been able to locate it via any of the www search engines.  A friend has
:   an HTX202 that he uses with the remote speaker/mic, and even though his
:   signal is S9, the audio is very low.  I hope that someone can point me
:   to a fix for his problem.

Sounds silly, but make sure he's speaking into the microphone - located
in the bottom-right of the RS Speaker-mike. Makes a world of difference!


[e-mail]
---
 * TLX v4.00 * ATTENTION to Details AMATEUR RADIO BBS - 909/681-6221
 * wcECHO 4.1 ~ AR-Net: ATTENTION to Details * Mira Loma, CA * 909-681-6221
--
|Fidonet:  Clint Bradford 1:2619/228
|Internet: [e-mail]
|
| Standard disclaimer: The views of this user are strictly his own.



From [e-mail] Mon Apr 29 16:40:35 1996
From: Asmartuser <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Hy-gain DX88 questions
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 1996 16:48:15 -0700
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Anyone can tell me experiencies with this kind of antenna?
What about the expansion kit for 160 m.?

Any suggestion will be appreciated.



73,
IZ2ADI, Maurizio


From [e-mail] Mon Apr 29 16:40:36 1996
From: rfburns <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: IC 471 METER DROP AFTER WARMUP
Date: 28 Apr 1996 23:50:34 GMT
Message-ID: <4m108a$[e-mail]>

ANYONE HAVE THIS HAPPEN TO THEM
AFTER THE RADIO HAS BEEN ON FOR A WHILE
THE METER GRADUALLY FALLS
THE LOCAL REPEATER COMES IN AT ALMOST 60 OVER
WHEN I FIRST TURN IT ON AFTER IT HAS BEEN ON FOR A FEW HOURS
IT DROPS TO LESS THAN 20 OVER
IT DOES NOT LOSE SENSITIVITY
AS CHECKED WITH A MARGINAL REPEATER
ITS WEIRD HAVENT HAD THE RADIO LONG AND STILL COVERED
BY THE DEALER AS USED WARRANTY
WOULD LIKE INPUT
DOUG



From [e-mail] Mon Apr 29 16:40:37 1996
From: [e-mail] (BillN9HH)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: ICOM AH-2 Info Please
Date: 27 Apr 1996 08:08:21 -0400
Message-ID: <4lt2nl$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (BillN9HH)

I don't know if they are identical internally, but functionally, the AH-2
and AH-3 tuners are equivalent.  The AH-2 has an external controller that
connects to the rigs computer interface and ALC lines for control while
band changing and tuning up.  This interface is used with rigs such as the
IC735.  Most newer ICOM (IC737, etc) rigs have the ability to control the
tuner directly thru a four pin molex connector that matches the one on the
AH-2.  I'm using an AH-2 with a 737 and it works just fine.  When the AH-2
is plugged in, the 737's internal tuner is disabled.

Have not tried it, but think you could go ahead and use the external
controller with these newer rigs, in which case any internal antenna tuner
would still function, giving and even wider matching range.

I don't think extending the control cable a reasonable amount would be a
problem.


From [e-mail] Mon Apr 29 16:40:38 1996
From: [e-mail] (John Maultsby)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Info on TS-50
Date: Sun, 28 Apr 1996 06:13:17 GMT
Message-ID: <4lv290$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

Norm Hammar <[e-mail]> wrote:

>I have a Kenwood TS-50, and notice that the fan comes on regularly when
>transmitting. Is this normal...or do I need to make an adjustment
>somewhere?  I notice it at both 100 and 50 watts output. Any help would
>be greatly appreciated. [e-mail]

Sounds perfectly normal. Mine did the same, when I had one.  (Had to sell it
to pay rent a few years ago.. <sigh>)

Now if they fan DIDN'T come on, then I'd start worrying.. :)


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
| John Maultsby  ([e-mail])  | www.mindspring.com/~maultsby
|
| Amateur callsign: AB5WH (ex-KE4CLW)           | Live in Charlotte, NC!
|
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-



From [e-mail] Mon Apr 29 16:40:39 1996
From: [e-mail] (Parf)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: intermod vs overload
Date: 28 Apr 1996 23:17:48 -0400
Message-ID: <4m1ccs$[e-mail]>
References: <4lobmd$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Parf)

Hi Jim,
A nice lucid explaination- probably better and in more depth than what is
sen in the Handbooks.
Our company makes RF filters to reduce or eliminate this problem in the
V/U spectrum. Although we sell tons of them it is interesting that many
people are not clear on what is causing the problem or believe that the
pagers etc. are @ fault when in reality it's the amateur manufacturers
opening up the front ends for general coverage receive in an ever
increasing RFI environment.- a lot to ask of any radio!

73,  Dale WA2YPY


From [e-mail] Mon Apr 29 16:40:41 1996
From: Bill Meara <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: KPC-3 Problem - HELP!
Date: 28 Apr 1996 12:33:49 GMT
Message-ID: <4lvojd$[e-mail]>

Help!  My KPC-3 TNC suddenly lost the ability to go into Command mode.
I'm using PACTERM software.  When I type Control C, instead of getting
"CMD:", I get a heart!  I appreciate the sentiment, but would really
prefer to be in the command mode!  I tried a hard reboot, but that didn't
help. Any ideas?

73  Bill,  N2CQR/HI8



From [e-mail] Mon Apr 29 16:40:41 1996
From: [e-mail] (Micha W.)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Morse Keys Wanted
Date: 26 Apr 1996 23:29:35 GMT
Message-ID: <4lrm8v$[e-mail]>

Hello,
I am searching for used Keys from all over the World.
( for using not for collecting - still doing CW HI )
please drop me a line at [e-mail]
73 de Michael



From [e-mail] Mon Apr 29 16:40:42 1996
From: [e-mail] (Christof A. Schumann)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Distribution: world
Subject: Morse-Code-Trainer for PC?
Date: 28 Apr 1996 21:55:46 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

I got a lot of morse-code-trainers for the Mac - thank you!
But does anybody have one of these programs for the PC - a morse-code-trainer
for DOS or WINDOWS?

[e-mail]

Thank you!

cs


From [e-mail] Mon Apr 29 16:40:43 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: National HRO Wanted
Date: 27 Apr 1996 18:09:44 GMT
Message-ID: <4ltnt8$[e-mail]>

        Still looking for an excellent to mint early National HRO. Please e-mail to l
et me know what you
have. Dick Doremus


From [e-mail] Mon Apr 29 16:40:44 1996
From: [e-mail] (Chris Dorn)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Questions on Drake SW4A and SPR4
Date: 28 Apr 1996 19:31:03 GMT
Message-ID: <4m0h1n$[e-mail]>

Hello,
   I am looking for info and/or experience with the Drake SW4A and the
SPR4. I have a Drake catalog from 1977 listing the SPR4 and its specs,
and it looks interesting. Any comments on performance, current
availablity, and prices?
   I don't have a lot on the SW4A. I understand that it came out in 1966,
and I am guessing that it was modeled on the R4A. Is that correct?
Obviously it is a tube RX, but how was the performance with this one?
Again, I am interested in availablity and prices for the SW4A.
Thanks very much,
Chris VE6RDC



From [e-mail] Mon Apr 29 16:40:45 1996
From: Bill Nadzam <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Swan 250 Mods
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 1996 10:53:40 -0700
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]

There is a kit made by S & S Engineering. Cost is about $70
Or with case and all $100. This gives you the last 4 digits of the
frequency. So instead of reading 14.204.6 you'll see 204.6... Good enough.
Anyway this kit will work with any rig. S&S engineering can be called
at 1-301-416-0661


[e-mail] wrote:

> I'm wondering if there is any sort of a mod or add-in
> available which would give me a direct digital frequency
> readout which could be installed in this venerable beast.


--
----------------------------------------------
Name: Bill Nadzam "K8WN"
E-mail: [e-mail] (Bill Nadzam)
----------------------------------------------


From [e-mail] Mon Apr 29 16:40:46 1996
From: [e-mail] (BillV21572)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Telex Headset advice???
Date: 28 Apr 1996 12:00:11 -0400
Message-ID: <4m04mb$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (BillV21572)

I just picked up a Telex Headset that I'd like to use (if possible) with
my
Kenwood TS-520S.  The only identification on this thing is the number
"1201-02".  The headset consists of a pair of headphones and a boom mike,
attached to 2 - 1/4" phone jacks, one gray, one red.  The gray phone jack
is
for the phones, the red must be for the mike.  Anyone with any knowledge
of
whether the mike is a "high impedance" (50k Ohm) design suitable for my
Kenwood?
thanks and 73 de Bill
Bill Vanstralen  KA9HLN  St. Paul, MN  [phone]  [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Mon Apr 29 16:40:47 1996
From: Bill Crocker <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Wide Band Rec HT's?
Date: Sun, 28 Apr 1996 16:56:48 -0200
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Can someone please provide a list of HT's that have WIDE band receive,
including the 800-MHz. band?

Thanks, Bill Crocker


From [e-mail] Mon Apr 29 16:40:48 1996
From: [e-mail] (Dave Marling)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Yaesu FLDX2000 Linear - info wanted
Date: Sun, 28 Apr 1996 20:27:54
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Keywords: Yaesu FLDX2000

I would appreciate information on the YAESU FLDX2000 linear amplifier.  What
tube or tubes does it use?  What is the power output?  What is/was the
reliability?  Any other general info as well would be appreciated.  Please
email me at:  [e-mail]

Thank you.

Dave (VE1VQ)