HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mraz@FOZZY.AUD.ALCATEL.COM (Kris Mraz)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: filter selection criteria
Date: 31 Aug 92 18:37:41 GMT

I believe there was a posting here a few months ago on this subject but since
I can't find it I'll ask again. 

This question concerns IF filter selection on radios that allow independent
selection of filters at two different IFs; for example, the Kenwood TS-850.
The TS-850 has an 8.83 Mhz IF and a 455 Khz IF. I believe it comes standard
with 6Khz and 2.7Khz filters for the 8.83 IF, and 12Khz, 6Khz, and 2.7Khz
filters for the 455 IF. I wish to add some additional filters to the radio.

Can someone explain, in general, the pros and cons of adding a filter in the
8.83 IF vs. the 455 IF?

The answer to that question may also answer these: Should I install the 
narrow CW filter in both the 8.83 and 455 IF's? Ie, put the 250 Hz filter in
the 455 IF and put the 270 Hz filter in the 8.83 IF. Should the filters always
be selected so that the same bandwidth is selected at both IF's for optimum
performance?

Another scenario: Say I want to add the narrow SSB filter (1.8 Khz), the 
wide CW filter (500 Hz) and the narrow CW filter (250/270 Hz). What's the best
way to arrange these filters in the two IF's? and why? (Assume any filter can
be placed in either IF).

Thanks,

Kris, AA5UO                     '~ ~`
mraz@rockdal.aud.alcatel.com      L  
                                   J
From: BRACKEN@VAX.LSE.AC.UK
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Alinco ALX-2E diagram wanted ... please
Date: 27 Aug 92 01:47:22 GMT
Article-I.D.: ucsd.9208271546.AA07242
Organization: UCSD Usenet Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu

Would anybody be prepared to send me a circuit diagram for an Alinco ALX-2E
as I can't get one in the UK as the dealers reckon that the rig is too old!
I am willing to pay the postage costs which would be incurred.
Thankyou

Dave, G1LCX.
From: doug@kronos.nisd.cam.unisys.com (Doug Hardie)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: Antennas in trees, anybody?
Date: 31 Aug 1992 15:43:35 -0700
Organization: UCSD Usenet Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu

> I would like to hear from anyone who has experience with putting mast-type 
> antennas in treetops. I live in the middle of 8 acres of woods, many of which
> are huge, sturdy oaks that would bend only in the rarest of conditions. I can't
> help but think what great antenna-holders they might make. I am assuming that
> a properly attached vertical would be almost no problem, but a 2 meter beam
> might be a horse of a different stable.

In the foothills of the Sierras in CA, there are a number of installations
for TV antennas just as you describe.  Typically, there are a few young
men who climb the tree and install something that looks similar to a 
chimney mount near the top of the tree.  A mast from the mount stands off
a foot or two and extends above the top of the tree.  A rotor and beam is
usually on top of the mast.

It is not expensive to have it installed if you get someone who has done it
many times before and is familiar with the problems you are likely to 
encounter at the top of the tree.  Going back down to get something is not
fun, and in pine trees, pulling something up by rope is not a lot easier.
I don't remember the costs I was quoted, but I remember being surprised how
low they were.

There are some problems with this approach.  Its only good for a few years.
The tree has a tendancy to either grow or die from being choked at its top.
If it grows, you get branches in the antenna which restricts rotation.  If
it dies, the top section (including antenna) can fall off.  Regardless,
it seems to be an acceptable risk because there are so many of them 
installed.

-- Doug  WA6VVV
From: bill@prijat.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: CC&R Contingencies, any advice?
Date: 3 Sep 92 17:49:54 GMT
Organization: Department of Computing Sciences

In article <Aug.29.14.37.26.1992.28792@pilot.njin.net>, ron@pilot.njin.net (Ron Natalie) writes:
|> 
|> As a seller (unless I was really, really, desperate) I would NEVER
|> accept a contingency (mortgage, inspection, ..) without a firm date
|> and cause.

As a seller, unless I was really in a bind and needed to sell the house
yesterday (an occurance that doesn't seem to show up often) I would just
can the offer and wait for a non-ham to come along.  Hams don't make up 
a high enough percentage of the available public to make taking this kind
of contingency necessary.

bill   KB3YV

(And I do know of what I speak.  My wife does this stuff for a living.)

-- 

     Bill Gunshannon          |        If this statement wasn't here,
     bill@platypus.uofs.edu   |  This space would be left intentionally blank
     bill@tuatara.uofs.edu    |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>
From: gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: Speaking Of Q-Codes...
Date: 26 Aug 92 15:32:42 GMT
Reply-To: gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Gannett Technologies Group

In article <1992Aug25.085437.8483@vax.oxford.ac.uk> malcolm@vax.oxford.ac.uk writes:
>In article <1992Aug25.003345.1309@n8emr.cmhnet.org>,
>gws@n8emr.cmhnet.org (Gary Sanders) writes: 
>>  
>> I saw that show as well. I was never sure if it was QSL or something 
>> in spanish.. The officers accent was heavy making it difficult 
>> to understand him. 
>>  
>
>Gary's comment hits very close to my thoughts on the matter. To be honest, it
>does not matter one ha'penny-worth (cent/dime/nickel-worth to most of you) to
>me whether pro-words or pro-signs are used ... but I note with interest that
>no-one has mentioned the matter of pro-words being language dependent whereas
>pro-signs are not. OK on VHF all parties will probably speak the same language
>and English is "Universal" but in noisy international HF voice contacts I can
>see good cause to use pro-signs.

Malcolm, as you should know, the spoken alphabet varies from language to
language too. That's why we have an international set of phonetics. The
British Zed and the American Zee are examples, as are the English Que
and the Spanish Kay. The problem with any spoken system is that the 
phonomes are different for speakers of different languages. Thus the
three word Q S L when spoken is likely to be more confusing than the
standard spoken proword Roger.

Gary KE4ZV
From: Claton.Cadmus@f100.n282.z1.tdkt.kksys.com (Claton Cadmus)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Your Book
Date: 27 Aug 92 14:54:03 GMT

MAC>Yes!  I was treated well by Kodak and by RCA when I was a "junior scientist
MAC>Ended up writing a popular astrophotography handbook full of recommendation
MAC>for Kodak products, and innovative uses for them.

I loved your book. Great programs for exposure etc.
Just wanted to say hello, and thanks for the effort.

Didn't realize you were a ham(?) If so what's your call and
frequent haunts?

Sincerely, Claton Cadmus

Packet:         KA0GKC@WB0GDB.MN.USA.NA
Fido Netmail:   Claton Cadmus  1:282/100
Internet Email: Claton.Cadmus@f100.n282.z1.tdkt.kksys.com

 * SLMR 2.1a * Can I use my AM radio after noon?

 * Origin: HAM>link< RBBS 612/HAM-0000 Saint Paul, MN (K0TG) (1:282/100)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: ken@swbatl.sbc.com (Ken Gianino 5-9081)
Subject: Re: Need help identifying a manufacturer based on very little info
Organization: Southwestern Bell Advanced Technology Laboratory
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 92 15:05:39 GMT

In article <87637@netnews.upenn.edu> yee@mipgsun.mipg.upenn.edu (Conway Yee) writes:
>
>I heard from an acquaintance about some ham radio gear (probably HF)
>which supposedly has RF performance which far outshines the big boys
>(Yaesu, Kenwood, Icom, etc.)  You do not get all the bells and
>whistles (e.g. the ability to automatically make coffee after the rig
>senses that you have had a long night's contesting).  The cost of the
>rig is about $1800.  Supposedly the manufacturer is based in
>Washington (state, I think) and is a military contractor.  Apparently,
>they got into financial difficulties and started making ham gear to
>save the company.  They took all their experience making military gear
>and put it into ham gear.  Does this ring any bells with anybody?
>
>
>
>-- 
>411 Blockley Hall      |                    Conway Yee, N2JWQ
>418 Service Drive      | yee@ming.mipg.upenn.edu    (preferred)
>Philadelphia, PA 19104 | cy5@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (forwarded to above)
>(215) 662-6780         |


 This might be of interest to others, so I'm posting it to the net. 
 I think the company you are talking about is:
      
          SGC Inc.
          Bellevue, WA
          tel (206) 746-6310

 The new radio is their SG-2000 and it, along with their whole product
 line, is in the current AES catalog.  List price is shown as $1995.
 If the SG-230 auto-tuner I have is any indication, construction and
 reliability should be excellent.  Of note is the 150W average rating
 of the transmitter.  It uses two push-pull output amplifiers and a
 ferrite combining transformer.  Very rugged.

 Kachina Communications (Sedona, AZ tel 602-282-4837) also has a new HF
 entry in the under $2000-and-US-made category.  It is the KC-103 and
 it has a tuning "knob" in addition to the keyboard.  Not having a 
 rotary tuning encoder is probably the single biggest drawback to using
 commercial HF gear on the Ham bands.

 Transworld (Escondido, CA  tel.619-747-1079) has recently introduced
 a very nice replacement for their longstanding TW-100 series (I forget
 the new model's name).  With plug-in options like FED STD-1045 ALE,
 it is a technological step ahead of most amateur equipment.  Pricing
 unknown.

 Then of course there is the Harris RF-3200 series -radio of choice
 at W1AW.  Prices start somewhere above $3500.

 Ken WB0QNA
From: jordan@ll.mit.edu (Mike Jordan)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: 240v AC -> 12v DC 5A PSU required
Date: 2 Sep 92 17:59:29 GMT
Organization: MIT Lincoln Laboratory



I have a friend who makes frequent trips to the UK.  While there, he needs to be
 able to run a 12v TV and Camcorder in the house, not just in the car.  He needs
 something that will supply at least 3.5 amps.  I think 5 amps would be a
 comfortable margin.  He is not really technical enough to build one, especially
 to withstand the rigours of travel.

Looking round the Ham stores here, I've seen various switching supplies, by
 Astron and others, that will do the job for about $40-50 - from 110v ac.  The
 cheapest for a 240v model is $90, and is beefier than he needs - 12amps.

What do hams in the UK do for medium-duty power supplies?

If anyone can give me pointers to stores and/or prices in the UK for this stuff,
 I would be very grateful.

Please reply by E-mail directly to JORDAN @ LL.MIT.EDU

Thanks

Mike Jordan     G4ASQ/KC1RP
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc

In rec.radio.amateur.misc, bill@prijat.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:

>In article <179cdiINNk1h@stanley.cis.Brown.EDU>, robinson@porter.geo.brown.edu (Darrin Robinson) writes:
>|> using Q codes... and I mean ham Q codes...

>Hams have been responsible for a lot of things in common use today, but 
>Q-codes isn't one of them.  Q (and Z) Signals were developed for/by the
>Military ...

Q codes are commercial, Z codes are military.  (Which is not to say the
military don't also use Q codes.)

AL N1AL

Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: jwl@sedist.cray.com (Jim Lynch)
Subject: Re: Most fitting commercial callsigns
Organization: Cray Research, Inc.
Date: 2 Sep 92 13:05:10 CDT

In article <9209011809.AA06239@lanmail.NCSC.NAVY.MIL>, Mahan_Stephen@lanmail.ncsc.navy.MIL writes:
|> 
|> I recall long ago reading about the only commercial station west of the 
|> Mississippi using a W prefix callsign--station WACO in (you guessed it) 
|> Waco, Texas.
|> 
|> 
|> steve
|> KD4NGU

Please let's not get the "who can name the most w prefix calls west
of the Mississippi" discussion going again.  If you are interested, dig
through the archives for the thread a few months ago,  it went on "forever".

Jim.
-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jim Lynch, Sales Analyst,  Cray Research, Inc. / ARS: K4GVO
Southeast District, Phone: (404) 631-2254, Email: jwl@sedist.cray.com
Suite 270, 200 Westpark Drive, Peachtree City, GA 30269
From: cookav@catipult.anatcp.rockwell.COM
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: FCC Form 610
Date: 25 Aug 92 03:07:54 GMT
Article-I.D.: catipult.9208251642.AA057f
Organization: UCSD Usenet Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu

Another data point in the FCC form 610 discussion:

Went to HRO last Saturday and asked them for a 610.  They had just received
a new bundle (500?) of the newly revised (March 1992) 610 form, and were
very happy to give me one.

The FCC will send more than one, if you ask, and they have revised the form
every time the examination system has changed.

Personal note: I needed the form for the XYL, who took element 2 and 
element 3A at the National Hamvention last weekend.  She missed 1 question
on element 3A.  In 5-6 weeks, she will be KD6??? and our ranks will grow 
by one more...
73




Alan V. Cook
Rockwell International
(714) 762-0843
(714) 762-0662 - FAX
From: jay@zen.CAc.stratus.COM (Jay Appell)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Alinco Telephone Number
Date: 3 Sep 92 14:02:00 GMT
Organization: UCSD Usenet Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu


The number is 310-618-8616

Jay Appell   Jay_Appell@cac.stratus.com
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: dearnsha@wizard.worldbank.org
Subject: Re: WANTED: ROM code for Sep/92 QST article
Organization: The World Bank
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 19:09:25 GMT

John, the source code was posted on this (or the .packet) newsgroup
a couple of days ago. I managed to save a copy, if you still need it.
Send me an em, and I'll send the code.


-- Darrell NR3Y
From: tipping@phys.ksu.edu (Tracy N. Tipping)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: Most fitting commercial callsigns
Date: 2 Sep 1992 14:03:53 GMT
Organization: Department of Physics, Kansas State University, Manhattan KS, USA
Distribution: na
NNTP-Posting-Host: bose.phys.ksu.edu

In article <1992Sep2.132143.12499@cbfsb.cb.att.com> feg@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (forrest.e.gehrke) writes:
>
>It may not be apt, but it's west of the Mississippi: WCCO in Minneapolis.
>I forgot the call but I believe there is another one in FortWorth.
>I'm sure there are more.
>
>Forrest Gehrke k2bt
>
The one in Fort Worth is WBAP (clear channel 820).  Also west of the 
Mississippi are WWN (I think) and WFAA in Dallas, WIBW in Topeka, KS, 
and a lot of others that I can't remeber right now (check the M Street 
Journal).

Tracy

--
=====================================================================
tipping@phys.ksu.edu              |		Elevators smell quite
tipping@ksuvm.bitnet		  |		different to midgets.
=====================================================================
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: djenkins@wang.com (Dave Jenkins)
Subject: Re: Uselessness of ARES/RACES
Organization: Wang Labs, Lowell MA, USA
Date: Wed, 02 Sep 92 21:48:03 GMT

jbs@rti.rti.org writes:

>I was pleased to see signs along the interstate through (I believe it was)
>Massachussetts indicating that someone with some sort of emergency services
>organization monitored 146.52 - it didn't say anything else (except I think
>there may have been a call sign given as well), so I wonder what non-hams
>made of it...

>Anybody in MA know any particulars on this service?

Yes.  It is Route 495 through Westford.  The sign also has an '*' on it.  The
Westford (MA) Police monitor 146.52 with a DTMF squelch set for '*'.  I think
the callsign used is WB1GOF, but the callbook server lists no information, so
I may be wrong.

When you bring it up they ID and ask the nature of the emergency, copy the
details and sign off.  The whole QSO takes about a minute.  Then they either
dispatch someone or relay the message to the State Police.  I have used this
to report hazardous debris (like a 6-foot 2x4 in the center lane).  It works
great, they are very clear and good at copying traffic.
From: jkearman@arrl.org (Jim Kearman)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: TECHAMS REUNION
Summary: Hutch Tech HS (Buffalo, NY) Ham Club Reunion 9/12
Date: 3 Sep 92 00:26:48 GMT
Article-I.D.: arrl.500

If you went to Hutch Tech, are interested in ham radio,
and can make it to the Hamburg Hamfest next weekend,
we're having a reunion there.

E-mail me for details. 73,

Jim Kearman, KR1S (ex-WB2EDW), Class of '65
jkearman@arrl.org
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: rdewan@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Rajiv Dewan)
Subject: Re: RG 8 atten @ 20 Mhz?
Organization: Northwestern University, Evanston Illinois.
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 14:05:52 GMT

In article <20360089@hplsla.hp.com> tomb@hplsla.hp.com (Tom Bruhns) writes:
>rdewan@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Rajiv Dewan) writes:
>
>>I do not remember the attenuation at 20MHz, but at 7MHz it is about
>>0.8db per 100 feet for the foam dielectric RG8 cable and about 1.6db/100ft
>>for RG58 cable.  Further, the graphs seemed to be, more or less, straight 
>>lines and so log-linear interpolation for other frequencies should work 
>>well.
>
>At the risk of starting a discussion that will get out of hand...
>Rajiv's observation is correct.  Maybe it will be easier for some

Your observation is correct Tom, if not already, it will get of hand after
this one.  To be picky, picky, picky :)

>to remember if you realize that almost all the loss in decent coax
>is because of "copper" resistance, not losses in the dielectric.
>The conductor loss goes at the square root of frequency, since that's
>how the skin depth varies, as long as the conductors are thicker
>than, say, a couple times the skin depth.  These are good approximations
>in the HF and VHF regions for all but the tiniest cables or for very
>lossy dielectrics.  Note that this also tells you why foam coax or
>9913 is lower loss:  the lower dielectric constant requires a larger
>center conductor, which has lower resistance.  
>
>So, to a good approximation, the ratio
>
>      sqrt(f) / (dB/100ft)

The above should be Log(f) / (dB/100ft) since we have to take logs to
get to dB. The factor of ten for conversion from log to Db and 1/2 for
the square root are parts of the constant. 

This approximation is correct to the extent that the losses are restricted 
to resistive skin losses.  Which is also to the extent to which the curves 
in the above mentioned graphs are straight lines.   

>
>is constant for a given coax over the HF and VHF ranges.
>
>73, K7ITM
>

Rajiv                                 
aa9ch    
Address: r-dewan@nwu.edu
Phone:   None. Only CW.
From: n4hy@idacrd.UUCP (Bob McGwier)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: PL-259's and ANY Coax
Date: 1 Sep 92 14:16:34 GMT
Organization: idacrd, princeton, nj

Just say NO!

I change all PL-259's to N type on all VHF+ equipment I own.

BMc
From: markz@ssc.wa.com (Mark Zenier)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: Cellular Frequencies
Date: 31 Aug 92 19:00:31 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: SSC, Inc.,  Seattle, WA
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL3

maynard@groo.msc.cornell.edu (Maynard J. Handley) writes:
: Is cellular
: communication by simple FM (that TV audio uses) and not an AM signal (that
: would use less bandwidth).

Yes.  You want an FM signal so that the capture effect works and the
receivers only get the strongest signal.  Otherwise you couldn't
reuse frequencies.  The rationale behind the whole system.
AM would make huge amounts of hetrodynes, just like 27 MHz CB, and
SSB would be pretty picky, given the 900 MHz operating frequency.
(And even more prone to pick up adjacent transmissions.)

: As I understand TV, the audio and
: visual signals go out at two separate frequencies. So are we saying that
: the TV receives the cellular signal at the audio frequency and simply plays
: it as a sound? Doesn't it care that there is no video present? 

Most TV sets that have the upper channels would care.  They use
the Intercarrier system where the sound transmission is fed all
the way through the video detector and treated as a 4.5 MHz subcarrier.
With no video carrier, you will only get sound out of the TV set if
two signals in the passband differ by 4.5 MHz and create intermodulation
products in the video detector.  So you usually hear two signals at once.
Add a simulated video carrier into the IF amplifier, (45.75 MHz, usually)
and your TV set is now a double conversion superhet receiver.

[ObDisclaimer:  The ECPA says you can't do this]

I gather newer TV sets use a seperate VHF sound IF to get cleaner sound, 
but they wouldn't get the high channels anyway.  Or would squelch on the
video signal.

Mark Zenier  markz@ssc.wa.com  
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: carlson@linac.fnal.gov (Kermit Carlson)
Subject: Re: Aircraft Mike Plugs
Keywords: Microphone Jack 
Organization: Fermiland, Batavia, IL
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 14:32:17 GMT

In article <9208281251.AA06326@opus.xyplex.com> sasminkey@eng.xyplex.com writes:
>Andy Jackson recently asked...
>
> >Does anyone know where I can find a supplier for jack plugs and
> >sockets for the microphone/push-to-talk of "standard" aircraft headsets?
> >(By "standard", this includes David Clark headsets, at least!)
> >As far as I can determine, the plug is 3/16" (about 4.8mm) diameter,
> >[and 28 or 29 mm long - sorry to mix units!]  - it is NOT 1/4" diameter as
> >is the headphone plug..
>
>A while back, I was looking for this type of jack so I could use my David
>Clark headset in my station. The local electronics supply shop could special
>order one - it was listed as a military-type jack in the component catalogs,
>but it cost something around $30 to $40 for just one!  While contemplating
>the cost/benefit of this (I guess hams are cheap), I noticed that the
>microphone jack on the back of a Drake T4X is exactly what I needed!  I
>proceeded to swap that microphone jack for a standard 1/4-inch jack so now
>the Drake could take standard microphones, and I could use the military
>jack for my D-C headset.
>
>Now to get back to a general source of these jacks/plugs, perhaps Drake would
>still stock them (I see from a recent posting that they still stock an old
>T/R relay), or perhaps another military radio builder like Collins or Gates
>might have them. Also, perhaps old "boat anchor" military radio sets seen at
>flea markets might have them. Andy, I realize this might not do you much good
>in the Netherlands, so send me email if you want me to start a search for you
>over here.
>
>73,
> - Scott


     I might suggest a discount aircraft-parts supplier like Chief
Aircraft in Grants Pass, Oregon. Their number is 1-800-447-3408. These
little connectors can range from $4 at Dayton to about $15 from a
large discount operation to $45 through a electronics parts vendor.
I simply suggest Chief as an example of a low-cost/new part pricing.
Many other avionic parts suppliers advertise in "Trade-a-Plane"
which can be found at most general aviation airport/flight schools
on the coffee table. Your local avionics shop will also have them
in stock or available by short-term order. Most larger airports
have an public avionics shop... anybody doing aircraft repair will
know where the shop is located :*))

                                            73 Kermit W9XA
                                               Cessna N51411


Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: aaa33750@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Arnett)
Subject: HELP! SAREX video blurb needed!
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 13:50:38 GMT

Help!  We need a video taped blurb on SAREX or similar amateur radio
activities that is directed towards people who think space is neat (not 
radio necessarily.)  Just need 0.5 to 5 minutes of video to slip into
the campus space society's NASA film night.  We have access to video
editing equip. if needed.  Will pay ot ship or copy.

Thanks in advance,
Drew Arnett  kb9fko@uiuc.edu   (217)384-4857
Synton ARC  University of Illinois