HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: riyadth@boi.hp.com (Riyadth Al-Kazily)
Subject: RS PRO-38 mods - how?
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 19:14:24 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Company / Boise, Idaho

Hello,

    I am looking for scanner modifications for my RS PRO-38 scanner,
particularly to enable the missing frequency ranges if possible (ie,
to receive TV sound, FM, and whatever else is out there..).  I have
searched through the mods at garfield.catt.ncsu.edu, and have not
found anything that seems to match.

    Some things that I know about the scanner are that it is apparently
made by Uniden for Radio Shack.  It has a 80pin surface mount chip on
it's digital board labeled 'UNIDEN UC-1143', and a few places for more
surface mount components on the board.

    One, to the left of the chip, is next to what looks like a inductor
(cylindrical component, reads as 0.1ohms), the second is below the chip,
next to what looks like a capacitor (rectangular component, light brown
in color with no markings -- all resistors seem to have their values
correctly stated, so I am assuming this is a capacitor).  The last open
pad is between the power and ground lines (maybe for a filter cap?).
Also, there are two areas that look like solder bridges, near the lower
right of the board, far from the main IC.

    It looks like many of the IC's pins are unused.  I would guess that
this same chip is used as the heart of more than one scanner, and those
unused lines would perform more functions (such as an enhanced display--
this unit has a 2-digit LCD readout, and frequencies are scrolled across).
There is also a ceramic disc capacitor connecting two pins on the main
IC (spanning the entire chip), that looks like an afterthought (or maybe
to get rid of some noise?).

    Is there any information out there regarding the functions of this
IC?  Can I get the information I need from the manufacturer?  How have
others gone about getting information to perform modifications on their
equipment?  I would like to enable the missing frequency ranges (54-146MHz
and 174-406MHz), and would appreciate any help.

			-Riyadth
			riyadth@hpbs1904.boi.hp.com
			riyadth@hpdmd48.boi.hp.com

-- 
{  Riyadth Al-Kazily  riyadth@hpdmd48.boi.hp.com riyadth@hpbs1904.boi.hp.com  }
{  (208) 323-4987 work    | When am i going to have time to use all this      }
{  (208) 939-1168 home    | stuff I'm collecting?  More important, how can    }
{  DoD #295  1983 BMW R65 | I get more stuff?  Amiga 500+ (+ stuff, that is)  }
Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner
From: rdale@nyx.cs.du.edu (Robert P Dale)
Subject: Re: Weather Scans?
X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University
	of Denver for the Denver community.  The University has neither
	control over nor responsibility for the opinions of users.
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 92 03:13:14 GMT

In article <jeffries.719009054@pv6f14.vincent.iastate.edu> jeffries@iastate.edu (Anthony G Jeffries) writes:
>There are actually three frequencies in use for weather broadcasts.

There are actually SEVEN frequencies in use, 162.400/162.475/162.550 are
by far the most prevalent.  162.425/.450/.500/.525 are also available,
although as I recollect Canada has reservations on the secondary
frequencies so they are not used in border states.  From what
I've seen they usually are used as secondary/low power transmitters,
i.e. Marion IN rebroadcast of Ft Wayne's signal.

Rob
--
Robert P. Dale                          <>      rdale@attserv.atms.purdue.edu
Toledo, OH                              <>      74010.302@compuserve.com
Meteorology/Emergency Services          <>      N8GSK@K9IU.IN.USA.NOAM
From: aa617@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Scott Berringer)
Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner
Subject: Frequency lists wanted
Date: 11 Oct 1992 22:34:40 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
Reply-To: scanman@gnu.ai.mit.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: slc12.ins.cwru.edu


I am looking for ANY/ALL frequency lists that anyone may have laying
around doing nothing.

I would appreciate it if you could mail them to xx192@po.cwru.edu with
the list name in the Subject line.

Also, if aayone knows of ano other FTP sites for lists (other than
garfield.catt.ncsu.edu), please let me know...

Thanks, and Happy Scanning

-- 
Scott Berringer                                  _**_
SigOp: Radio Scanner SIG                        /____:-IIIIIIIIIIII
aa617@cleveland.Freenet.Edu                   >: 911 :-------------\
Scanner enthusiasts do it with frequency..     +-(O)----------(O)--+
Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner
From: billn@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson)
Subject: Re: Outside Antenna Cheap!
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Company, Corvallis, Oregon USA
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 19:31:12 GMT

dougvoss@vuse.vanderbilt.edu (Douglas Voss) writes:
: 
: >(Now the purists will tell you that the 75 ohm TV and the 50 ohm scanner
: >are not a good match, but since we are receiving not transmitting it 
: >doesn't make a whole lot of difference.)
: 
: I had been considering the exact same thing.  Just hadn't dared to try
: it....
: 
: Anyone feel qualified to explain to me the issues envolved in passing
: a 75 ohm feed into a scanner expecting a 50 ohm line?

In this case - it doesn't matter. The small signal loss due to the
mismatch at the scanner is swamped out by the gain of the amplifier.
You are far more likely to have a problem with rf overload due to
the strong signal.  

You may also get interference from the TV - depending on how well the
amplifier outputs are isolated. 

Bill
From: rats@cbnewsc.cb.att.com (RS PRO-2004)
Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner
Subject: Re: HR1674
Date: 16 Oct 92 16:14:03 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: AT&T


In <wb9omc.719178010@dynamo.ecn.purdue.edu> Duane P Mantick states:

|You know, after reading several articles by people reading that the
|Senate had passed it and the President signed it (and in the absense of
|my Senators responding to my mail) I figured it was true.

|Guess what?

|Senator Lugar's office called me a little while ago and told me that 
|the bill DIED in the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation.

|The Senate did NOT pass it.  The President did NOT sign it.  In order for it
|to be considered again, it will have to be REINTRODUCED all over again in
|the House.

|I asked the staffer to double check.  She did, it's dead, Jim.  :-)

|Unless some higher source can supersede that with something, I will
|consider that to be accurate.

|Duane

The NY Times of Oct. 9, "Ban on Eavesdropping Scanners Advances," by
Anthony Rameriz states:

	The bill was passed by the House of Rpresentatives Tuesday,
	approved by the Senate Wednesday, then sent to the White House
	for the signature of President Bush, who did not oppose the
	legislation.
	
Since HR1674 was passed quite awhile ago, was the cellular scanner ban
included in some other legislation passed on that Tuesday (Oct. 6)?

Further, the Chicago Sun-Times of Oct 11, "Law Seeks to Stop Cellular
Phone Snoops," by Cindy Skrzycki, states:

	Thomas Stanley, chief engineer of the FCC, said the new
	law may help, but he expects that those who want to tamper
	with scanners will get even more clever.
	
	"And," he said, "so will we."
	
Clearly, the FCC engineer thinks that a cellular scanner ban _DID_
pass. Maybe someone should call up the FCC and ask if they are to
start banning scanners?
Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner
From: johnw@bluemoon.rn.com (John L. Wilkerson Jr.)
Subject: Re: Signal codes	
Organization: Blue Moon BBS ((614) 868-998[024])
Date: Thu, 08 Oct 92 06:10:53 EDT

xdemsv@pds006.NoSubdomain.NoDomain (mark s vozar) writes:

> The local Bedford, Texas police use a code when dispatching officers.
> The terminology goes somthing like " We have a signal 21 in progress at
> ... ". This does not appear to relate to the normal 10 codes that are
> used. Does anyone have a list of what the various signal codes are?
> 
 
     Codes vary greatly from area to area.   Sometimes even from city to 
city.   I learned the codes in my area by just listening.   After awhile 
you can listen to the code, then listen to the resopnses of the officers 
on the scene; or in discussion of other incidents.   It takes awhile, but 
not that long.
 

--
           "A realist in a cruel world that wishes to destroy me.."
  ___                      _       _     __  _
 (   >      /            _//      ' )   /   // /
  __/______/_  ____      /         / / / o // /_  _  __  _   ________
 / /  (_) / /_/ / <_    /___ o    (_(_/ <_</_/ <_</_/ (_/_)_(_) / / <_
<_/     johnw@bluemoon.use.com     jwilkerson@delphi.com
        71140.77@compuserve.com
From: mkeiser@sccarace.EBay.Sun.COM (Mark Keiser)
Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner
Subject: Re: Earphones
Date: 8 Oct 92 21:03:25 GMT
Reply-To: mkeiser@sccarace.EBay.Sun.COM
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
NNTP-Posting-Host: sccarace.ebay.sun.com

The TELEX earphones used by the Secret Service are available at most Aircraft
Supply stores, for about $100.  The SS guys add a molded earpiece, which you can
have made to custom-fit your ear at any Beltone hearing aid center.

The PHONAC earpiece, a cordless model, is also available, but I have no idea where 
to get it.  It'll cost about $150 (earpiece and transmitter).  I had a friend in the
FBI who was throwing away some old radio harnesses, and he saved one for me I 
cannibalized for the Phonac set.
From: zari@ee.fit.edu (Kevin Zari)
Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner
Subject: freq
Summary: is this the right group?
Date: 11 Oct 92 21:36:53 GMT
Organization: Florida Tech, CP/EE Dept.

I need to obtain Short Wave radio Frequencies (station listings)
is this the right group to ask for them?

If so please e-mail any you have to me

zari@ee.fit.edu
Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner
From: crisp@netcom.com (Richard Crisp)
Subject: Re: anti-scanner bill
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 21:04:12 GMT

In article <10OCT199215544707@utkvx2.utk.edu> egw@utkvx2.utk.edu (Wolpert, Edward Greenwal) writes:
>In article <1992Oct9.103829.10420@uoft02.utoledo.edu>, cscon0151@uoft02.utoledo.edu writes...
>>smb@ulysses.att.com (Steven Bellovin) writes:
>>> According to a news story I just saw, Congress has passed the bill
>>> outlawing the sale of scanners that can pick up the cellular band.
>>> The sale of ``digital converters'' is also banned, in anticipation
>>> of next-generation units.  Bush is apparently expected to sign it.
>> 
>>I wonder if a diode 'locking out' the celluar band will suffice for this bill
>From my understanding, the bill has (is in the process of ) being writen to
>make sure that the scanners can not be modified... or at least easily modified.
>This includes the diode lock out.  However, I'm wondering about private
>projects
>that people can make... i.e. making your own homebrew cell phone reciever. All
>one needs is the freq range, some knowledge on electronics, and parts from the
>Shack.  Some of their books are also quite useful in this.  Will this be like
>transmitting on FM?  Anyone can, but you need a license if your power is above
>100mwatts.
>
>	Edward Wolpert
>
>>(soon to be law)?
>> 
>>BBrad Steinman
>>University of Toledo Computer Services
>
>>cscon0151@uoft02.utoledo.edu

Just remember that the older pre-86 tv's that would pick
up 83channels will tune cellular calls too. Just put it
on ch 80 or 81 or 82 or 83 (I can't remember which) and start
varying the fine tune. You will hear cmt in action!

-- 
Richard Crisp        Cupertino, Ca.           crisp@netcom.com
(415) 903-3832 wk  "Get rid of the bums!"   (408) 253 4541 fax
"one useless man is a disgrace, two are a law firm, and three?
The beginning of a Congress" -anonymous from the Internet.
Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner
From: dougvoss@vuse.vanderbilt.edu (Douglas Voss)
Subject: Re: Outside Antenna Cheap!
Organization: Vanderbilt University School of Engineering
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 04:43:50 GMT

In article <1992Oct15.023408.20401@wam.umd.edu> fireman@wam.umd.edu (Aaron Joseph Peterson) writes:

[stuff deleted]

>(Now the purists will tell you that the 75 ohm TV and the 50 ohm scanner
>are not a good match, but since we are receiving not transmitting it 
>doesn't make a whole lot of difference.)

I had been considering the exact same thing.  Just hadn't dared to try
it....

Anyone feel qualified to explain to me the issues envolved in passing
a 75 ohm feed into a scanner expecting a 50 ohm line?

-- 
Douglas Voss                                  dougvoss@vuse.vanderbilt.edu
Vanderbilt Univerisity
Computer Science Department
From: mellerso@uga.cc.uga.edu (Mike Ellerson)
Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner
Subject: Good 800mhz Antenna
Date: 16 Oct 92 13:10:14 GMT
Organization: University of Georgia
X-Xxmessage-Id: <A704377571010651@memac.ucns.uga.edu>
X-Xxdate: Fri, 16 Oct 92 09:10:13 GMT
X-Useragent: Nuntius v1.1.1d12

This works really well for 800mhz signals :	

1. Go to Radio Shack and buy a U75, U100, or U-120 . These are Corner
Reflector Yagis for UHF television reception. 

2. Drill two new holes in the antenna boom and mount the antenna
horizontally.

3. You will need a matching transformer to (RS Part 15-1140) to connect
the antenna cable to the antenna.

4. Use RG58/59 cable to connect the antenna to the scanner. The better
the cable the less loss you will have at these high frequencies.

5. Use a F to BNC adapter to connect the cable to the back of the scanner.

6. Have some one help you aim the antenna towards the signal source. You
may have to compromise here, unless you buy a rotor.	

7. You can improve on this somewhat buy purchasing an inline Coax
Amplifier (RS Part No. 15-1117) . Radio Shack now sells one of these that
goes up to around 1200MHZ. The one I just mentioned only goes to around
900MHZ or so. This will improve 800MHZ signals dramatically. The only
problem with this is that very strong signals may overload your radio.

This setup performs better than any omni directional antenna system I
have seen. The only drawback to this system, is that 49MHZ reception will
fall off . Everything else should be about what you are used to, but
remember, this antenna was designed for UHF use only.

ENJOY
From: haynes@cats.ucsc.edu (Jim Haynes)
Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner
Subject: Re: Bill to prohibit cellular scanners/receivers
Date: 9 Oct 1992 20:46:12 GMT
Organization: University of California; Santa Cruz
Distribution: na
NNTP-Posting-Host: hobbes.ucsc.edu


In article <1b4l88INN5ol@roche.csl.sri.com> dstine@cisco.com (David Stine) writes:
>Apparently, the paternalistic liberal cabal is about to pass and send onto the
I'd hardly call them the L-word.  Not even sure I would call it paternalistic.
It was passwd at the behest of the business community, not because anybody
argued it was good for the people.
-- 
haynes@cats.ucsc.edu
haynes@cats.bitnet

"Any clod can have the facts, but having opinions is an Art."
        Charles McCabe, San Francisco Chronicle
From: ajr3@cbnewsk.cb.att.com (arthur.j.riedlinger..iii)
Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner
Subject: icom r7000 for sale
Date: 16 Oct 92 20:08:40 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: AT&T


I recently won an ICOM R7000 receiver in a raffle and want to sell it to 
get a receiver capable of reception in the 2 to 30 Mhz range. The unit 
is in the original carton with the instruction manual, circuit info, and 
warranty registration. Asking price is $1000 plus shipping costs. For 
additional info send e-mail to the above address.
Art Riedlinger
From: mellerso@uga.cc.uga.edu (Mike Ellerson)
Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner
Subject: Best place to purchase pro 43
Date: 12 Oct 92 17:57:43 GMT
Organization: University of Georgia
X-Xxmessage-Id: <A6FF34D6A9010651@memac.ucns.uga.edu>
X-Xxdate: Mon, 12 Oct 92 13:57:42 GMT
X-Useragent: Nuntius v1.1.1d9

Where is the best place to purchase a PRO 43 ? Outside of Radio Shack
that is ....
From: steuer@clam.rutgers.edu (robert Steuer)
Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner
Subject: Need Advice/Mods for the PRO-2026 100Ch. Mobile Scanner
Date: 12 Oct 92 03:38:19 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner
Subject: Need Advice/Mods for the PRO-2026 100Ch. Mobile Scanner

Hi all,  I saw RS new scanner, the PRO-2026, which looks exactly like
the Uniden 760XLT :), big surpise.  Anyway, since it is probably the
same scanner, why is it only $199 when unidens model is about $260 or
thereabouts.  Is the performance worse than that of the BC-760XLT?
Also, are there any mods to restore 800 on the pro-2026 :) and if so,
what is the search rate, 12.5KHz or 30Khz like in the PRO-2004/5/6.
Any help would be appreciated.      Tnx, Rob

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Robert Steuer               Internet: steuer@clam.rutgers.edu               |
| Rutgers University          Amateur Radio: KF2EK@N3FOA.#EPA.PA.USA.NA       |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: aa519@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Scotty Meredith)
Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner
Subject: Re: Pro-37 for sale (2 days old!!)
Date: 8 Oct 1992 10:39:26 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: aa519@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Scotty Meredith)
NNTP-Posting-Host: slc12.ins.cwru.edu


In a previous article, horak@convex.com (David Horak) says:


>Since I don't have my Pro34 with me, I'll trust that you are correct.  But,
>even if you could pick up that frequency, it probably wouldn't do you much
>good. The greater Cleveland cellular network images will blow away most of
>the business/police/fire band anyway. I know a fireman who bought a Pro34
>so he could monitor 851.whatever and he kept getting cellular images on 
>those frequencies. Of course, if you would have bought the Pro2006, you
>wouldn't have to worry about cell images ;')  At any rate, if you're close
>to the transmitter and you are only .0025 off center, you should still hear
>the channel just fine.
>
>David
>
>
i took the handhelb back today, and got the 2006.  I had a 2005 a few years
ago, and traded it for some computer equipment.  I missed it, and have been
up most the night with my 2006.

-- 
The Last thing we look at, is the color of skin.
The first thing we notice is the beauty within.
We shall be free.                                  -Garth Brooks
Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner
From: eravin@panix.com (Ed Ravin)
Subject: Re: Scanner Ban is now law (Cellular coverage that is)
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 00:57:08 GMT
Organization: Not Just Another Pretty Face

In article <1992Oct9.184415.14422@porthos.cc.bellcore.com> whs70@dancer.uucp (22501-sohl) writes:
>
>The bill (section 9 of an FCC funding bill I think) that bans the
>manufacture or importation of radio scanners that can eavesdrop on
>cellular telephones was passed by both houses of congress and signed
>by the President.  This according to the 10/9 New York Times.

Does this apply to scanners that pick up cellular calls via IF-image
interference (i.e. when tuned 21.4 MhZ away from the actual signal)?
If so, compliance will cost a bit more than the president of Radio
Shack thinks, since every scanner will need to use triple conversion
or higher IF frequencies.  Can someone post the law so we armchair
lawyers can start writing our lawsuits against all the low-end
800 Mhz scanner manufacturers? (only 1/2 a :-)
-- 
Ed Ravin            | I like to think (it has to be!) of a cybernetic ecology
eravin@panix.com    | where we are free of our labors and joined back to nature
philabs!trintex!elr | returned to our mammal brothers and sisters,
+1 914 993 4737     | and all watched over by machines of loving grace
Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner
From: Bruce@Pixar.com (Bruce Perens)
Subject: Re: Pro-37 for sale (2 days old!!)
Organization: Pixar -- Point Richmond, California
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 01:20:14 GMT

In article <BvnLLI.LII@news.cso.uiuc.edu> berger@atropa (Mike Berger)  
writes:
> If it's been modified, why would they take it back, even with the box?

Well, do you think the Radio Shack salesman is going to open up the
unit and check for that little snipped diode lead? How silly.

And just what is it you have against the cellular band reception
modification? It is a simple, safe, and nearly fool-proof modification.
Just snip one wire. It makes your radio more capable, and thus
more valuable.

You aren't one of those iron-curtain fellas, are you? One of the people
who would like to tell me what stations I can listen to, and what  
information is prohibited. I sure hope that isn't where you're coming
from. If the cellular callers need privacy, they should scramble
their calls or use landline. I sure know not to discuss sensitive
matters on my ham radio. Why are cellular callers any different?

I didn't listen to cellular calls, except for a few minutes after I
cut that diode lead in my own radio, because they are _boring_.
Five minutes of listening to drug deals and people arranging
assignations with other people's spouses was enough! I'm more concerned
with the principle of the government restricting my freedom to listen
to the radio.
					Bruce Perens
Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner
From: jeffries@iastate.edu (Anthony G Jeffries)
Subject: Re: Weather Scans?
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames IA
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 20:44:14 GMT

In <1bf642INNpsc@matt.ksu.ksu.edu> worth@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Jason Worthington) 
writes:

>The other frequency for the National Weather Service is 162.4 Mhz.

There are actually three frequencies in use for weather broadcasts.  They are 
162.400 MHz, 162.475 MHz, and 162.550 MHz.
    
According to the resources I have, the weather service also has 162.425, 
162.450, 162.500, and 162.525 MHz available to them.
-- 
Anthony Glen Jeffries N0NRO  ><>   Amazing Grace, How Sweet The Sound!   ><>
Journalism and Mass Communication student  Iowa State University  Ames, IA
"For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to 
save the world through Him." John 3:17 (NIV)
Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner
From: st1td@elroy.uh.edu (Mucker, Matthew R.)
Subject: Building radio receivers
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: University of Houston
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 00:35:00 GMT

Okay guys, here's my question.  I would like to build a radio receiver that
I could tune from my computer.  I know there are products out there, etc. but
I want to build it myself because I enjoy playing with electronics.

The problem is I know very little about radio circuits (digital logic, on the
other hand...).  Could anyone point me in the right direction?  I need a place
to start to research, well, essentially building a mini-scanner that would be
controlled from a computer rather than by a keypad.

Please don't tell me how ridiculous this project is.  I won't listen.  Just
E-mail me your suggestions, and I will thank you all very much.  BTW, this
probably doesn't merit posting, as no one else is crazy (or stupid) enough
to try this.

Thanks for any and all help.  BTW, my main interest in in the 800MHz band.
I want to see if I can't follow trunked conversations by having my computer 
decode the digital frequency switching commands.  If you have any info on
building such, especially in the 800MHz band, let me know.

Thanks!
From: cchang@cs.tamu.edu (Charles Chang)
Subject: handheld scanner
Organization: Computer Science Dept., Texas A&M University
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 19:34:51 GMT

I am planning to buy a handheld scanner.  Can anyone tell
me about your experience with the handheld scanner that
you have used?  The modeles that I am interesed right now
are: Icom R1, AOR 1000, and Realistic Pro-43.
I welcome any other suggestions.
e-mail me of post it will be fine.

Xref: sparky alt.radio.scanner:2225 rec.radio.amateur.misc:17202