HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rob@bsrofa.atr.bso.nl (Rob Faass)
Subject: Re: Antenna Tuner Question
Organization: Robert Faass
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL7]
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 19:59:51 GMT

Chuck Hanavin (hanavin@huey.udel.edu) wrote:
: In article <SWL-L%93012116060626@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU> RRS03@ALBNYDH2.BITNET writes:
: >From: Robert R. Stone
: >+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
: >With all the discussion of antennas and tuners, I wonder if someone would care
: >to differentiate tuners from preselectors. Most of the tuner discussion seems
: >to indicate that the main use of the tuner for SWL is in fact the same job the
: >preslector does - eliminating cross-band modulation. Since antenna impedence
: >is frequency dependent, perhaps they do the same thing.
: >+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
: >I also noted in Harry Helms recent book on SWL, he talks 'tuner' in the text
: >but shows a picture of a preselector.
: >+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
: 
: Yes a preselector is the same thing as an antenna tuner. However, 
: preselector is usually linked with reciever tuners, they generally
: can't handle much power. Where as "antenna tuners" are usually made
: for transmitting, but work just great as preselectors for recievers.
: 
: Chuck [WB3FJJ]

I do think this is not correct.

A preselector is a bandfilter, with sometimes a very narrow band. If the band-
width is smaller than an octave (1:2) you get rid of certain kinds of 
intermodulation. 

Because of the fact that any filter introduces loss, most
of the time an amplifier stage is included in an external preselector.

A tuner is a device which adapts a "random" antenne impedance to a coaxial 
(most of the time, could also be a balanced feed line of course) feedline.
This is done to accommodate a transmitters output stage impedance. 
Normally a tuner is constructed as a pi-filter and therefore a low-pass filter.
And a low pass filter is not narrow and therefore no help for intermodulation. 

For a receiver correct impedance matching of the antenna to the receiver 
front end is not required and is not guaranteed to give the best possible 
signal to noise ratio.

Robert.
-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Robert Faass				Email:	rob@bsrofa.atr.bso.nl
Oslostraat 1					
3267LC Goudswaard/Nieuwendijk		Phone:	+31-1866-2015
From: julian@bongo.tele.com (Julian Macassey)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave
Subject: Re: rec.radio.info and .shortwave
Date: 25 Jan 93 05:10:54 GMT
Organization: The hole in the wall. Hollywood

In article <1993Jan25.021331.15608@henson.cc.wwu.edu> n9248086@henson.cc.wwu.edu (Matthew Daniels) writes:
>As I suspected, information pertinent to this newsgroup is showing up in
>the rec.radio.info group and not in here.  I am not happy that I now have
>to read both groups and sift through a great deal of information that is
>NOT useful to me (I am not a ham, or a cb person).  This is very time
>consuming and inconvient.  I would appreciate it if info stuff could be
>posted here if it is relevant.


	I often point out when people with personal whims want to
fracture a group "For their convenience". If you make a sub group, it
just means we have another group to wade through. God it's tiresome.
Then what do we do when the moderators and originators of these "new
and improved" groups go away?

	Of course re the wrecked.radio.info group. I note a fair
amount of duplication from wrecked.radio.amateur.missed. Is it cross
posted so my newsreader dumps it? No, it is double posted so I have to
hit the N key. Geez - Soo convenient.

	
-- 
Julian Macassey at bongo. julian@bongo.tele.com Voice: (213) 653-4495
Paper Mail: 742 1/2 North Hayworth Avenue, Hollywood, California 90046-7142
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave
From: ae411@yfn.ysu.edu (Richard Baker)
Subject: Re: Sounds like Haiti patrol to me.
Reply-To: ae411@yfn.ysu.edu (Richard Baker)
Organization: St. Elizabeth Hospital, Youngstown, OH
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 06:12:40 GMT


In a previous article, cd651@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Wally L. Blume) says:

>
>
>   January 21, 1993 6236 kHz USB around 0500 UTC.
>I tuned to the above station and heard the USCG Cutter Galleton(?) working
>with 1717. The cutter would give 1717 a set of co-ordinates and a course.
>Sounded like this:
>   1717 this is Coast Guard Cutter Galleton
>   Cutter Galleton this is 17
>   17 this is Galleton I have two alpha contacts for you.
>       (ship's radio operator would then read of the co-ord. and course
>        for each contact and call each one contact #16 or #17...)
>
>   All of these co-ords. were within 75 miles of Port Au Prince. Later
>1717 called in to ask if contact #15 had lights. 1717 (female) was told
>that it was a radar contact. Since CG aircraft are numbered like 1717
>this sounds like a ship and aircraft team looking for boat people.
>   After leaving the radio for a couple of hours I came back to hear 
>a different callsign which was identifying itself as 1719 ( the cutter
>continued to call it 1717) And the cutter notifying 1717/1719 that it
>was headed back to Gitmo(Guantanimo Bay).
>   Sounds like Haiti to me. Am I wrong?
>-- 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

	I'd say right on target. The cutter you heard would be the
USCGC Galletin (WHEC-721), International callsign "NJOR", a high
endurance cutter (the largest except for ice breakers). Address for
the ship is:
		Radioman in Charge (RMIC)
		USCGC Galletin (WHEC-721)
		FPO  A.E.   09570-3908

	Why not try for a PFC return? I recently QSL'ed the ship on
it's MARS station.

	Coast Guard aircraft 1717 & 1719 are both HC130H's, the 17 is
out of Clearwater Air Station, and the 19 is out of Elizabeth City Air.

	It is Coast Guard comms, the only odd thing is that they used
ID's in the clear. Most of the WHEC's use tactical call signs, like the
Navy: Letter, number, letter, esp. when tasked on something like this.
I'd say it was a nice find.


Richard D. Baker (xx159@yfn.ysu.edu)
		 SWL Sig Sysop
		 aka ae411@yfn.ysu.edu

>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave
From: sci10019@nusunix1.nus.sg (YU HONG WEY)
Subject: Radio Iraq International
Organization: National University of Singapore
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 03:17:02 GMT


 I managed to pick up Radio Iraq International a few days ago. Has
 anyone corresponded with the station before? I think this is one of
 the rarer stations being heard here and I don't want to miss the
 chance of getting a QSL card from them. Thanks. 73's.

 ====================================================================
                 A member of the Australian Radio DX Club
 ====================================================================
From: randall@informix.com (Randall Rhea)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave
Subject: Re: Antennas: general question
Date: 22 Jan 93 02:36:07 GMT
Organization: Informix Software, Inc.

Ah, antennas for SWL.  I guess I'll throw my two bits in.

The first thing is that the whip that comes with many shortwave
radios is not nearly long enough.  You will find that the performance
of the radio will improve dramatically with a wire that is only
15 or 20 feet long.  You can buy a "portable shortwave antenna"
at Radio Shack that is actually a spool of wire with a little clip
at the end for clipping to the built-in whip.  If you want to 
save $8.95, just cut a length of thin, insulated wire, bare one
end of it, and attach it to the whip.  (If you have an external
antenna connector, use it instead)  In general, the longer the
wire, the better.  Be careful that the other end of the wire
does not come into contact with electrical sources.

In general, a horizonal antenna is better than a vertical antenna.
They tend to have less noise.  Of course, if you can put up a 50-foot
vertical antenna and only a 10-foot horizonal one in your location,
you may want to give the vertical a try.  Experiment with what works
best in your location.

Antennas work better outdoors than indoors.  Try to get it outside
if possible.  If not, get it up high, like in the attic.

A horizontal dipole is a very good SWL antenna.  It is cut
to the band you wish to listen to.  ( The formula is 468/frequency_MHz =
length in feet)  I feed dipoles with ladder line (or 300 ohm cable)
and use an antenna tuner to tune it to my listening frequency.  As
a ham, I can also use this antenna to transmit on many different
bands.  If you have an antenna tuner, it doesn't really matter
what the length of the dipole is, as long as each side is the same
length.  (I've had success with 20 feet to 90 feet)  I really do
like this antenna, since it is very easy to build and put up,
and inexpensive (except for the tuner, which runs around $70-100).

An antenna tuner with a random wire can cut down on noise somewhat.
I find that they're more effective with dipoles.

You can also use an antenna tuner with a loop.  I have had good luck
with a 40 foot loop of wire, tuned with a tuner.  Loops tend to have
the best noise cancelling properties.  The problem is that a loop
must be tuned carefully to the exact frequency ... they are not
broadbanded for receiving like dipoles.

I have two of the Palomar Engineer's loops, one for the AM BCB
and one for 1700-4000 KHz.  They are expensive ... $90 for the
tuner/amplifier and $90 for each loop.  The BCB one is very
effective at nulling signals and cancelling noise.  I can
hear KBOI (670) despite a local 50 KW station nearby, KNBR. (680)
I would recommend one to AM BCB DXers.  I would not recommend the
other loop (160m - 80m), as it is not sensitive enough.  They are
quite small and fit nicely on the desk.






-- 

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Randall Rhea                                        Informix Software, Inc. 
Project Manager, MIS Sales/Marketing Systems    uunet!pyramid!infmx!randall
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave
From: hanavin@huey.udel.edu (Chuck Hanavin)
Subject: Re: Antenna Tuner Question
Organization: University of Delaware, Newark
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 12:34:54 GMT

In article <SWL-L%93012116060626@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU> RRS03@ALBNYDH2.BITNET writes:
>From: Robert R. Stone
>+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
>With all the discussion of antennas and tuners, I wonder if someone would care
>to differentiate tuners from preselectors. Most of the tuner discussion seems
>to indicate that the main use of the tuner for SWL is in fact the same job the
>preslector does - eliminating cross-band modulation. Since antenna impedence
>is frequency dependent, perhaps they do the same thing.
>+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
>I also noted in Harry Helms recent book on SWL, he talks 'tuner' in the text
>but shows a picture of a preselector.
>+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

Yes a preselector is the same thing as an antenna tuner. However, 
preselector is usually linked with reciever tuners, they generally
can't handle much power. Where as "antenna tuners" are usually made
for transmitting, but work just great as preselectors for recievers.

Chuck [WB3FJJ]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave
From: wdp@gagme.chi.il.us (Bill Pfeiffer)
Subject: Re: rec.radio.info and .shortwave
Originator: wdp@gagme
Organization: Gagme Public Access UNIX, Chicago, Illinois.
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 00:54:15 GMT

When Mark first started rec.radio.info, I had my diffferences with
him.  But after several communications with him (and Paul) via e-mail,
I have come to understand him to be a fair and decent fellow.

I often wonder if this constant adding of groups will ever stop, too.
Heck it is almost impossible NOT to get passage of any group these
days.  As the moderator of rec.radio.broadcasting,  was initially
dismayed at the prospect of yet another radio group.  I felt that
beteween rec*shortwave, rec*noncomm and rec*broadcasting the subject
is pretty much covered.  I still feel that way, to some extent, but as
long as there seems to be an endless supply of bandwidth and a
relatively easy confirmation process for new groups (and no process
what-so-ever for alt.* groups), the proliferation will continue.

Rec.radio.info may not be *needed*, but then again, half (or better)
of the groups on Usenet are not *needed* either.  What about
rec.kites?  Rec.radio.info *does* provide a service to peple who
do not want to wade through three groups to get information.

Also, as Paul has pointed out, rec*info is brand-new.  It will settle,
with time, into a rhythm of its own, offering radio people a place to
go for specific things.  

Please stop whining about your sad state of affairs having to read an
extra newsgroup (which you don't anyway).  The vast majority of us
are on this net for free, or for some token access fee.  So, please,
unless you are a site-admin or in some other way involved with the
costs and mechanics of making this net happen, relax and enjoy the
ride.  What skin is it off yor nose if rec.radio.info exists or not?

Those who care about bandwidth and net usage should start by figuring
out how to use an editor and trim some of the 'miles and miles' of
quoted and re-quoted text in your followups.  In other words, before
you whine about those terrible people who start newsgroups, clean up
YOUR net-act.  

This is not meant as a flame to any one poster, just a commentary on
the hoards of net-hitchhikers complaining about the music on the radio
of the car that is driving them all over the world for free.

Peace

William Pfeiffer
Moderator - rec.radio.broadcasting - Internet Radio Journal
To submit articles send them to rrb@airwaves.chi.il.us
To subscribe, send e-mail to journal@airwaves.chi.il.us
 
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave
From: irvine@uxh.cso.uiuc.edu (Brent Irvine)
Subject: Forbes & Drake
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 18:08:41 GMT


I cannot find the article on the newsstand!

	Which issue was it in? [I will look it up at the library...]

Brent

-- 
+-------------------------+--------------------------------+-----------------+
| Brent L. Irvine         | For a mere $50 these personal  | Ak! Its 1992 tax|
| irvine@uxh.cso.uiuc.edu | opinions can also be yours!    |  season! Yuck!  |
+-------------------------+--------------------------------+-----------------+
From: Wayne.Hardman@f301.n670.z3.fidonet.org (Wayne Hardman)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave
Subject: op.desert storm mk.2.
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 14:45:01

re *?;S%?5current ops does anyone have h.f. freqs in use at present.
I have some primes but could use a little help to make best use of
imfor(???mation.

thankyou

wayne

 * Origin: Tassie DataBank, 4 Lines, D'bridge Tasmania, 7.0 Gigs  (3:670/301)
From: Jeff.Seale@f4016.n282.z1.tdkt.kksys.com (Jeff Seale)
Sender: FredGate@tdkt.kksys.com
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave
Subject: ATC Freqs.
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 23:25:04 -0600

Re: Air Traffic Control Signals
By: Nitin Sane #0 @1:282/31 FIDOnet     
 
> Hi netter,
> Does anybody knows what kind of modulation is used by Air Traffic Controls al
> over the world??  Is it legal to recieve those signals?? Are they scrambled??
> Is there any published source for their frequencies???
> Thanks in advance.

If you're talking about trans-atlantic signals, they will pop up just about
anywhere on the SW utility bands. The most common route control centers are
at New York City and Gander, Newfoundland. When not working traffic, they
broadcast recordings of weather info for their coverage areas. Most
frequencies of this nature use the USB mode for transmission.

Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave
From: binkley@let.rug.nl (P.A. Binkley)
Subject: Re: Antennas: general question
Organization: Faculteit der Letteren, Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, NL
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 13:41:09 GMT

In article <9350085@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM> myers@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Bob Myers) writes:
>From: myers@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Bob Myers)
>Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1993 20:15:47 GMT
>Subject: Re: Antennas: general question
>> > I'd tend more to agree with Harry Helms; for a simple, easy-to-install
>> > *broadband* antenna for receive-only use, there isn't much that will beat
>> > a random-wire, given that you've got some form of tuner for it.
>> > ...
>> 
>> Could you elaborate a bit on why tuners are useful for receiving
>> applications?  Given a low-noise front end with rather high input
>> impedance, say in the neighborhood of 500 ohms for an "external
>> antenna" port on a SW receiver, the SNR should be pretty much set
>> by external noise.  Absolute power into the receiver may not make
>> much difference.  (I suppose this is similar to the active antenna
>> situation.)
>
>The tuner certainly isn't an absolute necessity - most people will get 
>completely acceptable results without it.  But there are times (and 
>frequencies!) where the tuner can help out, and since they're so cheap
>and/or easy to build, I generally keep one around!
>
>Bob M.
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave
From: rich@troll1.msfc.nasa.gov (Rich Krum)
Subject: Re: Supporting long wire antennas in the cente
Reply-To: rich@troll1.msfc.nasa.gov
Organization: Boeing Computer Support Services
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 18:35:41 GMT

Long wires can be supported several ways.  Plastic pipe is one possibility.
Nylon rope is another.  A metal pole with appropriate insulators will work,
especially if you raise the center feed point.  From your description I cannot
tell if it is an end-fed or center-fed antenna.  If it is end-fed, ignore
the sag unless it is a safety hazard.  Center-fed, you could make an "inverted-
vee" antenna, by raising the center till the legs are at about 45-60 degrees.

What bothers you about the sag? Some sagging is not a big deal.  A drop of a 
foot or two will be no big deal and should not screw up performance.  Reasonably 
strong antenna wire strung between two ridgid points with a strong spring to allow
thermal expansion/contraction should be able to take quite a bit of pull.  
I usually use #14 copper or copperweld stranded wire, and get less than 2 feet
sag without "excessive" tension.

E-mail me with more details/better description of your situation.

--Rich


---
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"My opinions are my own, and my employer (Boeing Computer Support Services)
 denies any responsibility for me, all opinions in general, and anything 
 I may say, do, or be otherwise associated with outside of work for them.
 -- Use at your own risk, your mileage may vary, no news is good news."

 E-MAIL REPLY TO:  rich@troll1.msfc.nasa.gov     PLEASE KEEP IT "G" RATED
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave
From: golchowy@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (Gerald Olchowy)
Subject: Re: Atheist country?
Organization: University of Toronto Chemistry Department
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 16:57:37 GMT

In article <30615@optima.cs.arizona.edu> bakken@cs.arizona.edu (Dave Bakken) writes:
>In article <C1HJvn.FtK@mach1.wlu.ca> scooper6@mach1.wlu.ca (stephen cooper 9209 U) writes:
>>>The CRTC will not license them because they only broadcast one point of view.
>>
>>This is true.  The CRTC was asking people if they wanted channels such as
>>the all-Nazi channel or the all-racist channel or the all-satanist channel.
>>This is because they would also have to be granted licences if the
>>completely Christian channels were granted.
>
>This Canadian censorship bothers me.  If they can afford to broadcast
>on TV they ought to be allowed to.  I'd much rather skinhead Nazis
>waste their money on TV than more dangerous things.
>

There is no censorship...any religious organization can buy time on
Vision or on any other TV station that sells time, and I think Vision
even has a budget to offer free time or reduced rates to groups who
are deemed worthy who lack the ability to pay.  

With the advent of newer technologies which will allow for hundreds
of direct-broadcast-satellite-channels (which really will make the current
policy obsolete) the CRTC is reviewing its policies...

Gerald

Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave
From: paulb@harley.tti.com (Paul Blumstein)
Subject: Re: How to QSL?
Keywords: QSL
Organization: Black Belt Motorcyclists Association
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 01:06:44 GMT

In article <1993Jan27.233912.4841@henson.cc.wwu.edu> n7044623@henson.cc.wwu.edu (Gary Burlingame) writes:
+I know hams register somehow and get their QSLs automatically by their call
+sign, but how do shortwave listeners do it?  For instance, you see in the
+WRTH "V.by QSL-card or letter".  What information do they expect to see?
+Once I thought I heard that you should include a short description of what
+you heard, when, frequency, etc.  Is that really necessary?
+
+So, specifically what do you say to request a QSL?   

gimme!  all kidding aside, different stations have different policies
for verifying.  You should write a note saying that you have picked
up their station on your shortwave radio.  It helps to include a
brief desrcription of what you heard (some stations require it) so
that there was no mistake that it was their station.  Include,
date and time, frequency and reception conditions.  For major
stations, put the date and time in UTC.  Remember, you may be listening
tonight, but they are broadcasting tomorrow.  I.e, incremnt the
date at 0000.  For major stations, give the reception conditions
in SINPO code.  That is a five digit number from 11111 to 55555
where a 1 is worst to 5 is best.  The S=Signal STrength, I=
Interference, N= (Atmospheric) noise, P = Propagation (i.e.,
fading), O= overall reception.

A local (i.e., non-international station) doesn't know from UTC
or SINPO so it is best to use their local time and put the reception
into words.  It is also best to send them a report in their language
as not everyone speaks English.

Ideally, you should include return postage.  This could be in
the form of stamps of their country or IRCs (int'l reply coupons)
that the Post Office gouges you for.  SOme people use an American
Dollar, which is usually illegal and subject to theft.  Giving
your constructive opinion of a show is always appreciated.
Sometimes saying what kind of receiver and antenna helps their
engineers get a better feel on how they are getting out.

One important point:  Always ask for verification, if you want it.
Some SWLs send a reception report and assume that the station 
knows that they want one.  That is not true.  Ask!

And be patient.  Verification can take 2 months to 2 years;
if you get one at all.
____________________________________________________________________________
 Paul Blumstein, paulb@harley.tti.com, DoD #36, ABATE, AMA, HOG, KD6LAA
            Transaction Technology, Inc., Santa Monica, CA
From: levin@cosmic.physics.utah.edu (Chris Levin)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave
Subject: RTTY Reception
Keywords: packet rtty tty mfj modem
Date: 23 Jan 93 05:43:11 GMT
Distribution: rec.radio.shortwave
Organization: Cosmic Ray Physics Group, University of Utah

Hi,
 
I am hoping that someone can help me with the following problem....
 
I reciently get a MFJ Multimode Data Controller, model MFJ-1278 and I
am having some problems with it.
 
The VHF packet has been working fine on 2 meters and so has morse
code in the ham bands.  However, I have had no luck at all decoding
and RTTY signals.  Does anyone have any advice on this???
 
Also, I really don't want to spend 70.00 on the comms software that
MFJ is selling.  Does anyone know of a freeware or shareware program
that I can evaluate before buying?  I am really interested in 
receiving weather fax pictures.
 
Last, does anyone have any TTY type freqencys that are receivable in the
Salt Lake City, UT area. (I am looking for VHF since my scanner is much
better than my shortwave receiver).
 
Thanks in advance for any help.
 
Please respond via e-mail since I often miss messages here.  I will
of course post a summary of responses for other users to read.
 
Thanks again.
 
Chris Levin
levin@cosmic.physics.utah.edu