HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mab3474@zeus.tamu.edu (Myles Barkman-KG5AI Tx A&M Univ.)
Subject: Re: Pro-2006
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: Texas A&M University, Academic Computing Services
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 07:33:00 GMT

In article <1b27j4INN3rk@uwm.edu>, retzer@convex.csd.uwm.edu writes...
>	 (1) Is there any way of restoring the 520-760 gap, allowing
>	     for contiuous coverage from 25-1300? 
No.  The circuitry is not there to even attempt to receive there.  The CPU
was not programmed to accept those frequencies even with a simple mod.
The IF of this radio lies in this band and you would here a lot of birdies 
here even if you could listen there.
> 
>         (2) What exactly is in this range, ie. is it worth worrying
>	     about?
TV translators and TV stations.  If there was anything "good" to listen to 
there, they wouldn't leave it out.  This was not the case years ago.
Manufacturers have been leaving out good bands like military aircraft and
220 MHz ham bands out for a long time.  But to answer the question, no.
Unless you don't already have a TV, you aren't missing anything.
******************************************************************************
* Namenet   : Myles Barkman   aka 'Scanman'             Texas A&M University *
* Hamnet    : KG5AI          V.P. of W5AC-TAMU ARC        College Station TX *
* Internet  : mab3474@venus.tamu.edu      RACES                              *
* Bitnet    : mab3474@tamvenus                ARES                           *
* Packetnet : kg5ai@w5ac.tx.usa.na               SKYWARN                     *
* ICBMnet   : 30.606 N 96.316 W           Where are all the tornadoes?       *
******************************************************************************
From: billn@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson)
Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner
Subject: Re: BC 200XLT mods?
Date: 16 Oct 92 20:04:39 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Company, Corvallis, Oregon USA

rjd@cup.portal.com (R J Decker) writes:
: The device labeled 103 is a surface mount 10K ohm resistor - EEE.
: 103 = 10*3 = 10,000

10**3 is 1000, not 10,000.

Bill
From: 6500hage@ucsbuxa.ucsb.edu (William F. Hagen)
Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner
Subject: Re: REstriction!
Date: 13 Oct 92 20:27:25 GMT


I will give you next!. Because some police use 800mhz and will
now have privacy, all the police and fire will want{ privacy and it
will become illegal to scan any band except the ham bands{w3. Then it will be illegalto own a scanner unless you have a ham license. Then, routine inspections will become necessary of your shack, and your papers will not be in order{~r. (did you hear the heels click?)

Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner
From: tim@ais.org (Tim Tyler)
Subject: Re: 131.550 (?)
Organization: UMCC
Distribution: na
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 06:25:17 GMT

  The system is called ACARS, & is used to amend flight plans, send        
administrative messages back to the company, etc.


-- 
 Tim Tyler   Internet: tim@ais.org  MCI Mail: 442-5735  C$erve: 72571,1005
P.O. Box 443     Packet: KA8VIR @KA8UNZ.#SEMI.MI.USA.NA
Ypsilanti MI
48197-0443                  PADI, USPA, AFCEA, INEOA, P226, VFR700, etc.
From: arb2@bunny.gte.com (Alan R. Bugos)
Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner
Subject: Mods for PRO-38
Date: 7 Oct 92 17:14:53 GMT
Organization: GTEL



************************************************************

Does anyone have mods for a PRO-38 handheld scanner?



arb2@gte.com
From: jpotts@hpspdla.spd.HP.COM (John Potts)
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 13:37:37 GMT
Subject: Re: USAF callsigns
Organization: HP Stanford Park - Palo Alto, CA
Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner

/ hpspdla:alt.radio.scanner / tim@ais.org (Tim Tyler) /  1:00 pm  Oct  6, 1992 /
In article <Bvoq75.pA@ais.org> tim@ais.org (Tim Tyler) writes:
> 
>   REACH ##### are Air Materiel Command (formerly MAC) aircraft.
>
>    I've got some sort of mental block concerning A,M,C,  It actually is the
>Air Movement Command.

-- 
> Tim Tyler   Internet: tim@ais.org  MCI Mail: 442-5735  C$erve: 72571,1005
>P.O. Box 443     Packet: KA8VIR @KA8UNZ.#SEMI.MI.USA.NA
>Ypsilanti MI
>48197-0443                  PADI, USPA, AFCEA, INEOA, P226, VFR700, etc.
----------

The new MAC command is not the Air Movement Command but is called the
Air Mobility Command.



-------------------------------------------------------------------------
       John Potts			jpotts@hpspdla.spd.hp.com
HP Stanford Park Division		   (415)-857-8219	
	Bldg 6U				Telnet 1-857-8219
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner
From: toshea@erc.cat.syr.edu (Timothy Oshea)
Subject: AOR-900 Purchase
Originator: toshea@erc.cat.syr.edu
Organization: Electronic Resource Center, Syracuse
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 92 12:07:07 EDT

 I am currently in the market for a portable scanner and have been considering
an AOR brand 900 model.  I would like to hear some pros and cons on this model of scanner and the brand itself.  If someone can offer a comprable scanner 
(handheld) I would also be interested.  I know that the author of the FAQ
was not an avid supporter of AORs.  
Any replies would be welcome.
Tim

Direct Mail to : toshea@erc.cat.syr.edu

Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner
From: emmerthal@bluezz.enet.dec.com (Roy Emmerthal)
Subject: Will an antenna rotor help ?
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 23:53:34 GMT

   I have an old antenna rotor laying around and I'm wondering if it would make 
sense to add it to the scanner antenna (Channel Master 5094A) I 
recently installed on my roof.  The reason I ask is that there are a few freqs 
that come in with a reasonable amount of static but can still be listened to.  
I'm wondering if repositioning the antenna could possibly cut down on some of 
the static present on distant signals.  The scanner is a PRO-2006.

Thanks,

Roy


Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner
From: fwbent@watmsg.uwaterloo.ca (Fred Bent)
Subject: Re: Pro-2006
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 17:01:09 GMT

In article <horak.718645403@convex.convex.com> horak@convex.com (David Horak) writes:
>In <9OCT199202331873@zeus.tamu.edu> mab3474@zeus.tamu.edu (Myles Barkman-KG5AI Tx A&M Univ.) writes:
>
>>In article <1b27j4INN3rk@uwm.edu>, retzer@convex.csd.uwm.edu writes...
>>>	 (1) Is there any way of restoring the 520-760 gap, allowing
>>>	     for contiuous coverage from 25-1300? 
>>No.  The circuitry is not there to even attempt to receive there.  The CPU
>>was not programmed to accept those frequencies even with a simple mod.
>>The IF of this radio lies in this band and you would here a lot of birdies 
>>here even if you could listen there.
>
>At least for now, UHF TV dominates this range, but........... what about 
>the future?  Will the FCC lop off some more of the UHF band like they have 
 ^^^^^^^^^^

Well, you are forgetting about the new, and hopefully wonderful HDTV
(High Definition Television).  Hopefully the FCC, and DOC will go with
the technically superior method.  From what I have heard they will
more than likely use the UHF TV Band for these transmissions.

>DONE BEFORE?  If I wanted to listen to this band, would the GRE SUPER 
>CONVERTER (400 MHz down converter) work for this band?  In other words, 
>would it convert 520-760 down to 120-360?  
>
>David

Fred
From: dingman+@cs.cmu.edu (Christopher Dingman)
Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner
Subject: Re: Pro 43 charger
Date: 11 Oct 92 17:14:34 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon

In article <1992Oct11.081529.20470@njitgw.njit.edu> dbm@cats.njit.edu (Dean McDermott - WB2CMN) writes:
>
> I received my Pro 43 charger yesterday (20-188). After charging batteries for
> 20 hours I wanted to see how long radio would operate on a full charge. So I
> turned on the scanner and started timing. In 4 hours and 8 mins the display
> started to flash. I consider this a very very short time.
>
>
>In the past I have seen postings about this subject and the short operating
>time has been blaimed on the incorect charger. Has anyone else had this
>problem aftr getting the correct charger?
>
>
>dbm@cats.njit.edu

I never bought the particular adapter that RS was selling, but here's what I
found out when checking the life of my PRO43:

When I first used my universal adapter (RS 273-1650) I could only get a couple 
of hours out of a charge (2hrs 30mins was the average).  After checking each
battery on a low charge under load, and trying some tricks suggested by
robd@shotgun.wv.tek.com (Rob Dixon) [Thanks Rob!], I discovered that two of 
the batteries were worthless.

After returning them and getting two that *worked* I found I had about 4 hrs 
per charge.  Hmmm, not very long. (This was after charging for ~18 hrs with 
the scanner off).

Next I tried charging six batteries in a separate charger.  Hooray!  Average 
discharge time is now 7 hrs, 45 mins!!!  Almost double the time when "charged"
using the scanner charge jack.  Now I just use the "PWR" jack on the scanner
and leave the batteries in the charger.  Inconvenient, but I like having the
extra time.

NOTE:  All tests were conducted using Pittsburgh police/fire/rescue channels
as a monitor load (i.e. not "squelch off" testing), but the load probably 
averages out to be close to the same.  Seems there's *always* somebody talking
around here! :-)  Besides, it's more fun to listen to.

						- Chris

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|  Christopher P. Dingman                                                  |
|  Electrical and Computer Eng. Dept.                  dingman@ece.cmu.edu |
|  Carnegie Mellon University                          (412) 268-7119      |
|  5000 Forbes Ave                                                         |
|  Pittsburgh, PA  15213                                                   |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
From: ag684@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Mark Stephany)
Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner
Subject: Re: Pro-2006 Mods??
Date: 10 Oct 1992 05:26:50 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: slc10.ins.cwru.edu


I'm not the author I just came across this on the net.



==============

 
 
	 		PRO-2006 Modifications
	
NOTE: The Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986 makes it
unlawful to monitor mobile telephones, including cellular. The following
modification is intended only to restore continuous 760-1300 MHz
coverage as originally provided by the design of the PRO-2006
microprocessor.
 
BE SURE TO TEST YOUR PRO-2006 FULLY BEFORE ATTEMPTING THIS
MODIFICATION. ANY MODIFICATION MAY VOID YOUR WARRENTY.
 
		824-851, 869-896 MHz Frequency Restoration
		
Tools Required: small Phillips screwdriver, small wire cutters.
 
Procedure: With the power cord unplugged, remove the two rear
cabinet screws holding the upper cover. Lift off the upper cover,
being careful not to stretch the speaker leads. Examine the inner,
right-hand-corner of the front panel to find two glass diodes, labelled
D503 (upper diode) and D502 (lower diode).
 
Using the clippers, very carefully snip the visible lead of the lower
diode (D502) at its bend and slightly separate the cut ends. If it is
ever necessary to send the radio back for warrenty repair, the diode
leads should be carefully resoldered.
 
Reassemble, plug in AC cord, turn on scanner, and press RESET.
 
			Keyboard Beep Delete
			
With the top cover removed as described above, locate connector CN3, 
a 15-pin connector with colored wires at the front of the main circuit
board. There are two precedures which will stop the beep tone from
being heard through the speaker; read both to decide which procedure
you want to follow.
 
(1) Find the center grey wire coming from CN3 and cut it midway to
disable the beep tone. You may wish to solder a resistor in series
to reduce the beep volume, a trimpot to vary the volume of the beep
tone, or a minature switch to choose between beep and no beep.
 
				(or)
				
(2) Using a pair of needle-nose pliers, CAREFULLY pry the plug from CN3,
revealing a row of pins. Locate the center pin (#8) which corresponds 
to the grey wire and bend it down flat, disabling the beep circuit.
Reinsert the plug. The pin may be erected again later to restore the
beep tone if desired.
 
This completes the restoration procedure. Reattach the cover and replace
the screws.
 
 
============================



-- 
There is nothing worse than sitting around listening old war
stories, with a bunch of people that were never in the war.
                          --- Mark S. Ag684 8-92
From: James_Zuchelli@qm.claris.com (James Zuchelli)
Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner
Subject: Re: Building radio receivers
Date: 15 Oct 92 22:08:49 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Claris Corp

In article <14OCT199219353355@elroy.uh.edu>, st1td@elroy.uh.edu (Mucker, Matthew R.) writes:
> 
> 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.
> 

(deleted)

A few years ago I talked to some people who built a TV board for the Mac 
(receives TV, has screen capture,etc.) and one of the people said their 
engineers were able tolisten to police calls, etc.

One good start might be to contact some of the companies who build these
boards for Macs and/or PC's and ask aobut radio reception. 

My guess is that you would havew to do some custom code and maybe make some
adjustments to the adjustable parts of the tuners, but then you would be
able to get at least some acnner frequencies.

There was an article in some electronics magazine earlier this year for a 
spectrum monitor you could build for the PC that I believe would meet some
of your requirements.

YOu might also want to contact some amateur radio people (cross post this
on the amateur radio newsgroups) as they probably know of any work being done
in this area.

Whatever you find out, please post it here.

James Zuchelli
----------------------
The above is my personal opinion and not that of Claris Corp. or my Empoler.
From: billn@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson)
Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner
Subject: Re: anti-scanner bill
Date: 12 Oct 92 22:50:17 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Company, Corvallis, Oregon USA

: In article <10OCT199215544707@utkvx2.utk.edu> egw@utkvx2.utk.edu (Wolpert, Edward Greenwal) writes:

: >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.

Actually - at least in the US, the 100 mw limit only applies to the AM
broadcast band. It may also apply to the CB band - it used to.

Bill
From: armille@afterlife.ncsc.mil (A. Ray Miller)
Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner
Subject: Re: REstriction!
Date: 16 Oct 92 23:44:33 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: The Great Beyond



The question was raised about Al Gore's position on HR1674 and the cellular
scanner ban.  According to his office he supported it.
-- 

A. Ray Miller
armille@afterlife.ncsc.mil
Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner
From: egw@utkvx2.utk.edu (Wolpert, Edward Greenwal)
Subject: Pro-37 info wanted and Knox Tn freq's
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: University of Tennessee Computing Center
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 13:08:00 GMT

Hello there. 
I've recently bought a pro-37 on sale from the Shack, and I have a few
questions...
	1) Does anyone have the mods for it that they can send me, post, or
	   supply the ftp site for?
	2) I live in Knoxville TN, and I was currious in the possibility of
	   police/fire/other freq's that are not listed in the Shack's book
	   of scanner freq's.
	3) Is there are FAQ list for this group.  (This is my first post,)
	4) Does it make any sense to buy a car aten. for my hand held?
	5) (Finally) do those aten. add-ons really improve the signal?
Please send info to:
	wolpert@lead.chem.utk.edu   (Instead of just replying to my other
account listed here.)
If there is enough requests, I'll repost what I get rather than send my
responses individually.  Thanks!
		Edward Wolpert
wolpert@lead.chem.utk.edu
egw@utkvx.utk.edu
ned@neon.chem.utk.edu
pa153568@utkvm1.utk.edu


 largeuy
Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner
From: billn@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson)
Subject: Re: REstriction!
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Company, Corvallis, Oregon USA
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 18:59:53 GMT

wb9omc@dynamo.ecn.purdue.edu (Duane P Mantick) writes:
: 
: 	The cowards in Washington passed the thing near the end of session
: and have not responded to my requests, and unless forced, probably won't
: until after the election.
: 
: 	Since it appears that it was passed and signed, it seems obvious
: that we are going to have to approach the problem of our disintegrating
: rights from a different angle.
: 
: 	We should NOT stand by and watch all this shit take effect without
: fighting back, and I am just fighting mad enough to do it.

Just how many of you complaining about this have been in favor of the
War on Drugs and Civil Forfeiture or Gun Control/banning (including the   
bans on automatic weapons and "assault weapons")?  All of you who were,
or still are, in favor of one of the above is a hypocrite.

Bah!  Go away and cry at home - you are getting exactly what you deserve.

... deleted ...

: 	If any of you are attached to the Clinton/Gore campaign or know 
: someone who is, get the word to them NOW.  Point out what has happened and
: give them some ammunition to use to get Bush OUT of the White House.

There is a good chance that Gore voted for the ban. Clinton and Gore both
appear to believe that government should be running more of our lives - not
less.

: 	If we stand by and let the cellular lobby roll over us....if we
: stand by and play dead on HR1674, we will start losing our rights
: to free radio reception just as William suggested.  Every special interest
: group will come out of the woodwork....

They did that years ago. But, of course, you didn't pay attention -  did you?

Bill
From: rja@newbirth.Eng.Sun.COM (Robert Allen)
Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner
Subject: Re: Is ICOM-R100 Good?
Date: 13 Oct 92 00:47:54 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mt. View, Ca.
NNTP-Posting-Host: newbirth

In article <1992Oct12.183512.14414@twisto.eng.hou.compaq.com> nguyen@aladdin.eng.hou.compaq.com (Nghia Nguyen) writes:
>Greetings,
>
>I was going to purchase an AR-2500. However after reading
>the comments on this net about the product, I am now
>considering an ICOM R100 as an alternative for a bit
>more money.
>
>Can someone give me some general advices about the R100?

    I've played with one in a local store.  Some random comments
    are:

    * It seems to have the same number of memories and scan modes
      as the R1 and R7000.  In most respects of internal operation
      it seems to be very much like either of those radios.

    * The user interface is a pain in the butt to use: you have to
      punch a function key before you can enter frequencies.  The
      writing on the buttons is small and hard to see.

    * The display and audio are very nice.

    * There are 3 antenna inputs on the back, which are mandatory
      to use for 3 different sets of frequencies it covers.  This
      is nice, but does require a bit of effor to get set up.

    * It runs on 12 volts DC (battery power).  You must either have
      a 12 volt power supply, or a 12 volt battery to run it off of,
      or you'll have to buy the 120V AC transformer.

    * There is a builtin preamp and attenuator for use in noisy
      auto-type environments.  I don't know how well they work.
> 
    Based on literature I've read:
>Does it have the SSB/BFO mode? What is the actual 
>freq. coverage .vs. claimed?

    No, it definately does not have SSB mode.  EEB offers a mod
    for this, but it's very expensive and you might as well just
    buy a shortwave receiver to start with.

    The advertisement I have says the US model receives 
    100kHz-1856MHz continuous, with the receiver specs
    guaranteed from 500kHz-1800Mhz.  This is much better
    than the R1, which is only guaranteed for 500kHz-905MHz,
    even though it's advertised as getting 100kHz-1300MHz.
>
>Is the range continuous? How much memory does it have?

    In the US model the range is continuous.  There are
    100 memory channels, plus 10 pairs of scan edge memories
    for scanning from frequency X to frequency Y, where
    X and Y can be different for each pair.  There is also
    a priority channel, but if it's like the R1 I'm not
    sure how useful it is.

    Note that although many tuning steps are advertised,
    the literature I have applies some restrictions:

    100-521.5kHz and 1.630-904.9995MHz = 1, 5, 8, 10, 12.5,
	20, or 25kHz (no 30 MHz for cellular, but there is
	10, which can be used for cellular).

    522-1629.5kHz and 1.630-904.9995MHz = 1, 5, 8, 9, 10, 12.5,
	20, or 25kHz.

    905-1856MHz = 12.5, 20, or 25Mhz
--
Robert Allen, rja@sun.com		DISCLAIMER: I said it, not my company.
		    Samuel Addams: Brewer, Patriot.															        "The right to brew beer is the right to be free!" - me
Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner
From: horak@convex.com (David Horak)
Subject: Re: HR1674
Organization: CONVEX Computer Corporation, Richardson, Tx., USA
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 20:29:37 GMT
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

In <wb9omc.719257670@dynamo.ecn.purdue.edu> wb9omc@dynamo.ecn.purdue.edu (Duane P Mantick) writes:

>	Obviously, there is a credibility problem SOMEWHERE.  I will
>be unhappy if I find that the Senator's staffers are either lying or just
>that stupid.
>	If anyone has a good contact number within the FCC for such
>questions, now is the time to call it.....or perhaps somebody else should
>call THEIR senator's offices and see what THEY say.
>	I think we need to know....
>Duane

I just called Senator Bentsen's office and his secretary said it died in
committee.  I called Senator Gramm's office and his secratary said the
Washington office would get back to me today or Monday :-(  Anyway, looks 
like the "law" is a bunch of hype.....so far.

David Horak
Dallas, Texas
Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner
From: billn@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson)
Subject: Re: Building a receiver revisited
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Company, Corvallis, Oregon USA
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 19:34:31 GMT

st1td@rosie.uh.edu (Mucker, Matthew R.) writes:
: Well, after only one day, my post about building receivers has had no answers
: but three "forward what you get to me!" responses.
: 
: So I'll try another tactic.  If any of you have any scanner schematics and
: would be willing to mail them to me (so I can get an idea of what's in the
: guts of these babies), please E-mail me and I'll send you my address.

For anyone who wants a schematic of a scanner - trot down to your local
Rat Shack and tell them you want to order a manual for a PRO-37  or a
PRO-2006. If the sales-jerk doesn't know how to handle it, demand to talk
to the manager. If that person? does not know what you are talking about,
have him/her call the regional sales manager for directions on how to
do so.

Bill
Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner