HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: weare@bostech.COM
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: UK phone patches are illegal ... BUT
Date: 22 Jul 1992 07:24:29 -0700
Organization: UCSD Usenet Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu

Ken Cochran writes:
> Do UK regulations contain the concept of a control operator.
> 

I just got my UK licence renewal and have the rules in front of me.  Note,
I'm not a lawyer, and get bored reading regulations, so don't necessarily
believe my interpretations.

No, there is no concept of control operator, just Licensee.  The
purposes of the UK license are stated as "self-training in
communication....of the Licensee" and "[meeting] the needs of
international disaster communications".  As part of the former, the
Licencee may permit "representatives of a User Service" to use the
licenced station.  "User Services" are defined as various specific
bodies, such as the British Red Cross and police forces.

In the British concept, both the licencee and his station are subject
to the licence terms, including location of the station (though
portable operation is permitted as is mobile.  Note mobile and maritime
mobile used to require a separate licence, as did ATV).  There are no
separate station and operator licences as in the US.

> Is there anyway communication with an unlicensed person is permitted
> if a licensed amateur has (remote ?) control over the transmitter
> used by the unlicensed person. ?

No.  Section 2. (8) allows use of the station only by the licensee
"personally", and *"in the presence of and under the direct supervision
of the Licensee"*, use by another UK licence holder, someone who has
passed the exams for a licence, but doesn't actually have one, a
licensed ham from "any other country", and the User Service
representatives I mentioned above.  There are also specific
prohibitions on use by  certain types of low-life.  Further, there are
restrictions on who the licensee may talk to (or even listen to) that
excludes unlicensed people.

Qualifiier:  this applies to non-club stations.  Club stations are
allowed to have non-licenced people speak into the microphone, if a
licenced person is physically present.  The licenced person must
operate the station and perform identification.  A non-licensed person
person may send "greetings messages" (whatever those are) of less than
two minutes duration, only one to each station (?!), and only to and
from stations in the UK, US, Canada, Falkland Islands (presumably not
the Malvinas), and Pitcairn.  I've been out of the UK for 10 years now,
so don't ask me why this is the way it is.

In general, the UK regs are much more restrictive than the US ones, and
things like phone patch are frowned upon.  Having lived in the US, I
can't see why they need to be, but it seemed to make sense when I lived
in the UK.

Hope this helps.

----
Jed Weare, NF1Z, G3VVH         weare@bostech.com
Boston Technology              (617) 246-9000 x3519
100 Quannapowitt Parkway
Wakefield, MA 01880.
From: slp9m@cc.usu.edu (Scott E. Parker   WA7VYJ)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: More Cushcraft R7
Date: 30 Jul 92 07:49:28 MDT
Organization: Utah State University

Ever since I first saw them advertised I've had a question in my mind about
these half-wave outfits.  My house sits on a lot that is not overly large, thus
the "no ground radials" feature is quite attractive.  However, what I look for
in an antenna of this type is a low radiation angle.  Hence my question: what's
the radiation pattern of these things look like?  I'd hope for something at
least as low as a 1/4 wave vertical over as-close-to-ideal-as-possible ground. 
(Which around here is "not very", unless I take a field trip, as I have on a
couple of FD outings, and plant my vertical in the Great Salt Lake.)  

I don't recall any ad I've read addressing the radiation pattern.  When I
opened my August QST I was encouraged to see that AA2Z had reviewed the R7 only
to be disappointed by a well-I-hooked-it-up-and-this-is-what-I-heard asessment. 
Not as much as an allusion to the question I wanted to see answered.

So, I throw it out to the antenna gurus on the net.  What kind of take off
angles can one expect from an antenna of this type?  Just what does the part of
the antenna that comes in the box work against?  What installation specific
factors affect the pattern (in elevation)?

Also...

In article <6NPooB2w164w@phsbbs.princeton.nj.us>, n2gj@phsbbs.princeton.nj.us 
 (Gerry Jurrens) writes (under the subject "Cushcraft R7 Installation"):

[stuff about installation and first impressions deleted]
      
> If anyone is interested, I will post other reports on this antenna, as I 
> gain more experience with it. 

I for one would like to hear more.  BTW Gerry, while you've got your manual
handy, what does it say about the concerns I've expressed above.

> Gerry Jurrens - Kingston, NJ  N2GJ@KB1BD.NJ.USA
 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Scott E. Parker   WA7VYJ           \      INTERNET: SLP9M@cc.usu.edu 
  Center for Atmospheric & Space Sciences    \     Twisted pair: (801) 750-2975 
           Utah State University              \            Home: (801) 753-3924
          Logan, UT    84322-4405              \
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Xref: sparky rec.radio.amateur.misc:13003 sci.electronics:13664
From: ehare@arrl.org (Ed Hare KA1CV)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,sci.electronics
Subject: ARRL "RFI" Products Resource List - Part 6 of 10
Date: 28 Jul 92 13:05:50 EDT
Organization: American Radio Relay League

The American Radio Relay League Technical Department is compiling a
directory of products that would be useful to an amateur experiencing
an interference problem. I am looking for additions to the companies
and products described in the attached list.

Please email any additions or corrections to ehare@arrl.org. Our news
feed has been a bit spotty of late and I don't want to miss any
information. 73, Ed

-----
Ed Hare, KA1CV                  ehare@arrl.org
or postal mail to ARRL HQ
-----

Telephone EMI filters

   AT&T                           Model: Z100B1
   (800) 222-3111
   Note: The Z100 and Z101A are now obsolete. They were effective for AM 
         Broadcast band signals. They are not effective at the upper HF 
         band (>10 MHz). The new AT&T telephone EMI/RFI filter is the 
         Z100B1. It is effective across the MF and HF range. This part 
         should be available at AT&T Phone Stores.

   Engineering Consulting         Model: TRIF
   583 Candlewood St
   Brea CA 92621
   (714) 671-2009

   Industrial Communications Engineers Model: 460 series telephone/audio
   POB 18495
   Indianapolis IN 46218-0495
   317-545-5412

   K-Com                          Model: RF-1 - modular
   POB 83                         Model: RF-2 - wired
   Randolph OH 44265
   (216) 325-2110   

   Kilo-Tec                       Model: KT-RTK kit
   POB 10
   Oak View CA 93022
   805-646-9645

   Measures, Richard
   6455 LaCumbre Rd
   Somis CA 93066
   805-482-3034

   N6YHY TVI Filters           Model: Zebra Telephone Filter
   928 Yellow Brick Rd
   Modesto CA 95351
   (209) 531-1236

   Sparrevohn Engineering         Model: F-1 single line
   143 Nieto Ave SW  #1           Model: F-2 two line
   Long Beach CA 90803
   (714) 642-7323
   (310) 433-7240

   TCE Labs                       Model: TP-5301 - one line, modular    
   RR9 Box 243D                   Model: TP-5302 - two line, modular 
   New Braunfels TX 78133  
   (800) KILL-TVI        

   Telecom Industries             Model: 831-W1
   1385 Akron St
   Copiage NY 11726
   (516) 789-5020

-----
Ed Hare, KA1CV                  ehare@arrl.org
American Radio Relay League
225 Main St.
Newington, CT  06111            There is no limit to what you can 
(203) 666-1541 - voice          accomplish if you don't care who
ARRL Laboratory Supervisor      gets the credit. - Harry S Truman
RFI, xmtr and rcvr testing  
-----
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: ka1gt@cbnewsm.cb.att.com (robert.m.atkins)
Subject: Old 73's & QST's - anyone want them?
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: nj
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 18:22:42 GMT

I have a stack (2-3ft) of old 73's and QST's (mostly 73's) from the late
70's and early 80's. If these are of interest to anyone they are welcome
to them - otherwise they will be recycled! Pick up from Bell Labs, Murray
Hill only - they are not worth the effort to ship anywhere.

===============================================================
Bob Atkins  AT&T Bell Labs  email (direct)  att!clockwise!rma
===============================================================
From: dbushong@wang.com (Dave Bushong)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: Is it "business" if I use and autopatch to...
Date: 28 Jul 92 19:47:36 GMT
Organization: Wang Labs, Lowell MA, USA

uri@watson.ibm.com (Uri Blumenthal) writes:

>In article <1992Jul24.164217.14130@mlb.semi.harris.com>, rliles@heimdall.mlb.semi.harris.com (Ray Liles) writes:
>|> Why is it everyone tries to ignore rules or find loop holes?

>Because some time after the rules are made:

>	1) Situation changes;

>	2) The equipment, usage of which the rules regulate, 
>	   gets changed;
>	
>|> If you simply checkout Part 97 you will find the following:
>|> 
>|> 97.115 Music prohibited.
>|> The transmission of music by an amateur station is forbidden.
>|> 
>|> Now, how simple can you get!  

>Has the thought ever occured to you, that by the time this
>particular ruling was adopted, there were no autopatches,
>and no music sound while put on hold?

>|> It didn't list any exceptions (autopatch music, etc.).  
>|> It doesn't allow *any* room for interpretation.  It doesn't say
>|> *broadcast*  it says *transmission* of music.  

>The strictest interpretation most often is not the smartest.

>Also, could you explain how your "transmission" is not
>"broadcasting" [since anybody tuned to your frequency
>can (and will :-) receive it]?

>Or are you "interpreting" that "broadcasting" must mean
>"commercial one-way transmission"? (:-)

>|> So, until the rules are changed, let's try to abide by them.

>So when the situation changes - let's bring the rules
>in sync with it.


Many times it is helpful to consult this book I have (you have
to know the alphabet to use it) called the dictionary:

transmission, n. ... 4.  The sending of modulated carrier waves
  from a transmitter.

broadcast, v. -tr. 1.  To transmit (a program) by radio or television.


Ergo(*), it would be VERY hard to explain how his "transmission"
is not "broadcasting".


But then maybe the definitions section of the rules makes a distinction.

Dave

-- 
==========================================================================
Dave Bushong, KZ1O@K1UGM.MA         +    No .sig, no tattoo, 
Wang Laboratories, Inc.             +        no bald spot, no nothin!!
Internet: dbushong@wang.com         +-------------------------------------
Project leader, OCR Products        + (reserved for future expansion)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.packet
From: friberg@mtu.edu (Kenneth W. Friberg)
Subject: PE1CHL history wanted
Organization: Michigan Technological University
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 00:47:36 GMT

I am in need of a current version of the history file for PE1CHL.  If any
one knows where I can find it, or knows what the add-ons to the attach
command are (specifically the attach packet option) I would be extremely
greteful for your assistance.

Thanks in advance
Ken Friberg n8pbe

Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: ogden_jon@macmail1.rtsg.mot.com
Subject: Re: Auto patch ... but without the phone ?
Organization: CSG Group
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 19:56:18 GMT

In article <Jul.21.16.43.12.1992.15023@pilot.njin.net> ron@pilot.njin.net (Ron
Natalie) writes:
>> E.G. is it permissible for me to set up an autopatch at home, with which
>> I can talk to my (as yet unlicensed) wife at home, so long as I remain
>> the (remote ?) control operator. (No phone company involved)  ?
>> 
>> Are such devices available and legal ?
>
It is legal, and there are some simplex autopatches available commercially.

Jon Ogden
KE9NA
From: mark@ve6mgs.uucp (Mark G. Salyzyn, VE6MGS)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: Amateurs on USENET List  Aug 1992
Date: 29 Jul 92 22:53:21 GMT
Organization: Amateur Packet Radio E-mail Gateway  VE6MGS

wpns@miki.pictel.com (Willie Smith) sez:
>The list maintainer might wish to email each of these folks to see if:
>
>1) They want to be on the list (personally I don't mind, but it might
>be courteous).  Yes it's freely available data, but someone could
>misuse this by building the Mother Of All Mailing Lists....
Ok, I have always had a mechanism for permanently hiding entries (10% of them
are permanently hidden). I indicate that entries can be removed by complaint,
but I guess I have been lax in suggesting in the list's header that I am
willing to permanently unlist entries. Anyone out there want their entry
hidden?

>2) The listed adress is anything reasonable.
Ooooooh, there are so many addresses that are unaddressible from somewhere
in this network. I'd hate to remove an entry that was placed due to
a carefully set up From: or Reply-To: header line just because I could
not access them :-) :-)

Seriously, I send reply mail to all who update the entries and will
remove them if I get a bounce (rare 2 in 9 months) and can not contact
the postmaster at the site. Entries that come from the news postings, I do
not confirm as that would make ME the `Mother Of All Junk Mailers'.
The list is made to reduce noise on rec.radio.amateur.misc, I will
NOT increase noise by mailing to the 3000 odd entries I have in my
copy of the list. But, enough hate mail on that point and I WILL
change my mind :-}

>Basically any address more than 6 months old is suspect, and any more than
>a year or two old is probably marginal at best.
I agree, so far no entry is older than 9 months. I have not written any
automatic software to modify the date in place for articles flowing in
r.r.a.m except for a periodic manual `bump' by me. Once that is in place, I
can then confidently put in automatic software to remove entries that
are old. In time, it will come, if necessity gravitates me towards it :-).

I still have to iron out all the bugs in the sorting and automatic
entry software before I can trust it to read from the news articles.
Manual entry still works for me (along the same note, I still can not
trust a car with a computer controlled ignition timing, I went through
3 engines and 2 starters in my Sable due to the computer getting it
30 degrees wrong!!! :-{ ).

I am not comfortable with sending e-mail to all entrants that are about to
be expired, I'd prefer to silently cut them off after 9 months ...

Send me mail if you disagree with any of this, Ciao, 73 de VE6MGS/Mark -sk-
From: myers@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Bob Myers)
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 19:33:18 GMT
Subject: Re: CRT radiation into ham rcvrs
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Fort Collins, CO, USA
From: jfw@ksr.com (John F. Woods)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: rec.shortwave
Date: 31 Jul 92 11:34:39 EDT

sci10019@nusunix2.nus.sg (YU HONG WEY) writes:
> Sorry if this article appears more than once but I'm new to this and
> I'm not sure as to how to go about sending mails. Can anyone please
> tell me what happened to rec.shortwave? Is it being transferred to 
> another newsgroup or is it being deleted from the list due to lack 
> of response? Please help. Thanks in advance.

Since my previous email answer bounced, I'm posting this:  it is now
rec.radio.shortwave.
From: gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: Thread to ham radio
Date: 22 Jul 92 12:49:27 GMT
Reply-To: gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Gannett Technologies Group

In article <103360097@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM> ron@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Ron Miller) writes:
>On a different scale, this lady's choice to (a) not wear a helmet and (b) to
>ride at dusk/dark in deer territory, severely traumatized about 12 people who
>came to her aid. These individual strangers contributed time, material and
>emotional energy on her behalf, all because they felt it to be right. 
>(and that the law requires rendering assistance.......)

While I firmly believe in helmets, I have a shattered Snell 90 that
probably saved my life in an encounter with a tree, I am puzzled by
your remark that the law requires rendering assistance. Is this a
Colorado law?  Many states have "good samaritan" laws that *protect*
people who *voluntarily* stop to render aid, but I've never heard of
a mandatory aid law.

Gary KE4ZV
From: michael@vk2bea.UUCP (Michael G. Katzmann)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: Morris Watch
Date: 29 Jul 92 13:27:23 GMT
Reply-To: michael@vk2bea.UUCP (Michael G. Katzmann)
Organization: Broadcast Sports Technology, Crofton. Maryland.

In article <550@bongo.UUCP> julian@bongo.UUCP (Julian Macassey) writes:
 >
 >
 >	The July 18th-24th 1992 edition of the Economist (U.S. Edition)
 >has a special section on "The Legal Proffesion". The World's second
 >oldest according to John Mortimer (who dat?).

John Mortimer is a writter and ex-barrister. He is the author of the
'Rumpole of the Bailey' series made by Themes TV (and shown on PBS here).

-- 
Michael Katzmann	  >	Broadcast Sports Technology Inc.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~	 <	Crofton, Maryland. U.S.A
Amateur Radio Stations:   >
NV3Z / VK2BEA / G4NYV	 <	opel!vk2bea!michael@uunet.uu.net
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: music over the radio
From: jangus@skyld.UUCP (Jeff Angus)
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 92 15:26:32 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: Grendel's Lair

nit nit nit....

The restriction is there to prevent people from acting as the local broadcast
station. Having the local headbanger station on in the background while talking
probably is illegal if you want to split hairs, it is more just bad operating
procedures. So is having a speech processor turned on so everyone can hear the
tv set, kids, your spouse, and the neighbors dog in the background.

Music on hold? I guess that belongs in the current "Is it business" autopatch
flames going on in another thread. Hint, most homes don't have music on hold.

xenon!skyld!jangus   < This space left blank intentionally. >
J Angus, PO Box 4425, Carson CA 90749-4425 voice (310) 324-6080

Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: stevew@netcom.com (Steven Wilson)
Subject: Re: ARRL Bulletin 68  ARLB068
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 92 14:57:18 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Summary: Good in theory...practice may be another thing...

In article <14tbd1INNd1u@network.ucsd.edu>, brian@ucsd.edu (Brian Kantor) writes:
> stuff deleted... 
> No, I believe you can have as much or MORE influence on any dues-
> supported organization by making your position known AND explaining
> that the error of their ways is why you will not support them with
> your membership.
> 
> In that way, you are making doubly sure that your point is understood.
> You have "put your money where your mouth is."
> 	- Brian

I can't agree with you here Brian,

Not being a member is like putting an attenuator pad in the coax
that is full on.  No-one is going to hear you.  

There are really two pieces to the puzzle to get your point accross.
One, you have to be a member because that lets you take part in the
second aspect..voting.  The folks who RUN the league are the directors.
They are elected officials.  The people that vote are the voices that
are heard.  (though phone calls do keep the issues ever present in
their minds ;-)

Steve KA6S 

/* The preceeding has been an unpaid political announcement ;-) */
From: ron@pilot.njin.net (Ron Natalie)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: 92 Camry Mobile
Date: 26 Jul 92 23:06:39 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

> The owners manual states at the front of the book to not
> install two-way radios and it repeats the statement in the section
> on air bags.  Certainly, I don't want to key the rig and have the
> air bag deploy...:-)

Antilitigation smoke screen.  Any car that is that succeptible to
RF is going to be a hazard anyhow.  What happens when the car
next to you keys his transmitter.  Also, someday people will
wake up and realize that mobile telephones are radios...

-Ron

The privacy of a phone with the convenience of a radio (or is it the
other way around?).
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: jeffj@cbnewsm.cb.att.com (jeffrey.n.jones)
Subject: Re: Nasty Hams
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 17:21:52 GMT

In article <712175037snx@w3vh.UUCP> rolfe@w3vh.UUCP (Rolfe Tessem) writes:
>jkearman@arrl.org writes in article <295@arrl.org>:
>> 
>> Jim, N5IAL, writes:
>>  
>> >I've been thinking about some of the things you've said, and have a few
>> >more comments here.....  this whole bit really bugs me....  there is no
>> >excuse, period, for people behaving that way --- it is NOT what Amateur
>> >Radio is all about.

I had an interesting experience on 20 meter CW the other day. I was having a 
nice QSO with a ham in Canada and after he turned it over to me another ham
sent LIDS. I thought may be he sent solid, so I sent ??. He sent lids again!
I didn't reply to him but did mention it to the ham in Canada. He said Ok then
I challenge that idiot here and now to a speed CW contest. So he signed with me
and I signed off and sent " Ok clown go ahead if you have the guts" ! The guy
in Canada started flying at about 50 wpm and then stopped. Dead silence!
I sent HI HI de AB6MB and he replied HI HI. Got a kick out of that. 

Jeff



-- 
 Jeff Jones  AB6MB         |      If we do not succeed,
 jeffj@seeker.mystic.com   |      then we run the risk of failure.
 Infolinc BBS 415-778-5929 |      Vice Pres. Dan Quayle
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,sci.electronics
From: tilden@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Robert Tilden)
Subject: Re: Whats a LEAD-CALCIUM battery?
Organization: Northwestern University, Evanston Illinois.
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 16:02:16 GMT

Hi,
	I have about a *ton* of calcium-lead plates stacked outside my
office at this very moment. They're left over from a liquid argon
calorimeter we built for an experiment at Fermilab. Calcium-lead is *much*
stiffer than ordinary lead plates, and (I gather) is used in lead-acid
batteries where the plates are large/unsupported/both. The calcium is a
rather minor component in the plate, and is mixed in only for the rigidity
it provides. We had to roll these plates from .25" thick to .2", and we had
a fairly difficult time of it because of the hardness. Our sheet size ended
up being about 4' by 8', and we were able to stack them on their long edge
with minimal support. 

-Bob Tilden
	tilden@nuhepl.phys.nwu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: ham@wam.umd.edu (Scott Richard Rosenfeld)
Subject: Re: AARL vs ARRL
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 12:17:22 GMT

Besides, if the ARRL changes its name to the AARL, everyone's QSL cards
will have to be reprinted because the ARRL logo will be invalid.  Think
of the costs to amateurs throughout the US!  And will Canada follow suit
by changing to the CARL instead of the CRRL?  I think not.

Seriously, if the ARRL thinks that changing its name to the AARL is going
to boost the ham population, they are becoming too much like government:

1)  How many non-hams care what ARRL/AARL really stands for?  Does the 
ARRL actually think that the ARRL is what entices people to join the ham
ranks?  No, it's the hams that introduce ham radio, and whatever their 
organization is called won't make a shred of difference.

2)  Changing the name of an organization doesn't change its population
or what it does.  It just changes its name - reprinting letterheads, 
making people remember something new, etc.

Can you imagine if Canadian hams joined CARL?  How about Canadian Ham
Amateurs Requiring Lots of Extra Services, or "CHARLES?"  Working for 
a government agency, you can have lots of fun with acronyms...

Scott  NF3I