HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: root@june.cmp.rpi.edu (J.R. Ordon)
Subject: Re: W5YI report..
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 20:52:47 GMT

In article <1992Oct14.195445.5829@ttinews.tti.com> sorgatz@avatar.tti.com (sorgatz) writes:
> ..sez that there is a move afoot to petition the FCC for a change in
>Amateur license structure such that:
>
> There would be only Novice, No-code Tech, and General!  The request has
>not yet been given a docket number, but it seeks to eliminate the 13 & 20
>WPM CW requirements, giving current General and Advanced license holders
>the same privileges as Extras! Current Tech Plus (old Elem 3 Tech) would
>be grandfathered to General, and persons seeking a distinctive skills test
>could take the 13 or 20 WPM CW exams and earn an endorsement of 'CW Expert'
>or 'CW Master' which would NOT give them any additional frequency space.
>
> The petitioner has asked for a limit to inputs from the ARRL on the grounds 
>that the League has a vested interest in keeping incentive-licensing, since
>it is more lucrative to sell manuals/training aids for 5 classes of license
>than it would be to sell them for only 3 classes. Interesting point.
>
> It seems the bell is tolling...I favor this move, Technician is the biggest
>license class now. It is growing beyond all estimates and given a stricter
>more useful technical skills test, I see no excuse for excluding persons with
>"mere" 5 WPM cw skills from the lower HF bands. It does not violate the ITU
>requirements in any way and would lower the cost to government in issuing
>Amateur licenses, something that might just be relevant in these leaner
>economic times.
>
>  
>-Avatar-> (aka: Erik K. Sorgatz) KB6LUY           +-------------------------+
>TTI(sorgatz@soldev.tti.com)                       *   Think Eco, not EGO!   *
>3100 Ocean Park Blvd. Santa Monica, CA  90405     +-------------------------+
>(OPINIONS EXPRESSED DO NOT REFLECT THE VIEWS OF CITICORP OR ITS MANAGEMENT!)

I figured this would happen, as soon as the code-free tech rule was added.
The proposer of this crap must be some frustrated general or technician class
licensee that just can't (or won't try) to make the grade to advanced or extra.
I guess in the era of fairness (sorta like clintonomics), i not surprised at
this.

This proposer must figure that the extra class guys got their licenses thru 
cheating or bribes, certainly not by working at it.

If this becomes law, the bell has tolled, the end of Ham radio as we know it.
If you think 75 meters is a mess now, just wait!

The ham bands will be nothing more than glorified CB radio!
You probably won't need a license in 10 years (like CB!)

If this rulemaking proposal passes, they'll be alot of ham equipment going up 
for sale, and a lot of guys turning their licenses. The only good thing that
might happen is that used Ham equipment might be cheaper for the guys who 
decided to put up with all the silly-ness





As the old saying goes: "If you give'em an inch they'll take a mile!.



------------------------------
J.R. Ordon WV2N

The views here are my own & not my employers
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Discrimination (?)
From: isoper@matrix.cs.wright.edu
Date: 13 Oct 92 07:25:40 EDT
Organization: Wright State University College of Engineering and Computer Science
Nntp-Posting-User: isoper

Over the past several months I have noticed the use of the term Discrimination
to rebut a person's opinion. Why is it that everyone is so concerned with this?
Why is it wrong to form an opinion based upon one's personal like or dislike?
Does this mean that one has to conform to some quasi-standard setup by a person
or group?

Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: kd1hz@anomaly.sbs.risc.net (Michael P. Deignan)
Subject: Re: W5YI report..
Organization: The Rhode Island Internet Systems Cooperative Network
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 00:52:06 GMT

feg@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (forrest.e.gehrke) writes:

>OK, I agree that the CW requirement is becoming increasingly 
>anachronistic.  But how would you like this?  Keep the present
>classes and incentives but make the techical requirements increasingly
>higher.

I'm for that.

CW is just another facet of Amateur Radio. Today, with the plethora of
options that an amateur operator has to explore, why have only one means
by which people can move up to the top rung on the ladder?


MD
-- 
--  Michael P. Deignan                      / Sex is hereditary. If your 
--  Domain: mpd@anomaly.sbs.com            /  parents never had it, chances 
--    UUCP: ...!uunet!rayssd!anomaly!mpd  /   are you won't either...
-- Telebit: +1 401 455 0347              /
From: Jim_Sollows@mindlink.bc.ca (Jim Sollows)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Help modifying comm UHF rig
Date: 15 Oct 92 16:56:13 GMT
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Distribution: world

I have a Wilson Model WU1516 12 channel synthesized commercial radio. It
is currently calibrated to operate in the 520MHz range and I would like
to drop it down to the UHF ham band. Does anyone know what adjustments
have to be made? I have a freq counter and scope.
******************************************************************************
**

           Jim Sollows            Internet JIM_SOLLOWS@MINDLINK.#VANC.BC.CA
            VE7JLS                 Packet   VE7JLS@VE7KIT.#VANC.BC.CA.NA.

******************************************************************************
**
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: lapp@waterloo.hp.com (David Lapp)
Subject: Re: FT-470 & ICOM HS-10 Headset problem
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 14:25:23 GMT
Organization: HP Panacom Div Waterloo ON Canada
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1.4 PL6]

Gary Coffman (gary@ke4zv.uucp) wrote:
: 
: Well, Icom and Yaesu both use the leaky PTT method, but Icom units use
: about a 10k leak and Yaesu wants about 2.2k. My older FT470 works fine
: with my older Icom accessories, but I've seen this problem with other
: units. Sounds like Yaesu changed something that's requiring a higher
: current draw on the leak in the newer radio to activate the PTT. I'd
: suggest changing the leak resistor in the HS-10 to a lower value and
: see if that works. You'll have to up the mic gain to make up for the
: extra load.
:
How (in general terms) does the 'leaky PTT' method work ?

Thanks,

Dave Lapp
lapp@waterloo.hp.com 
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: pas@jupitercmc.ca (Peter Stokes)
Subject: Radio Shack Discone any good for ham?
Reply-To: pas@jupiter.ic.cmc.ca
Organization: Canadian Microelectronics Corporation
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 19:45:45 GMT


TOPIC: Radio Shack Discone any good for HAM?

Hi.   I have a Pro-2006 scanner which I want to equip with
a better antenna than the telescoping whip.   I'm prepared 
to mount something on the roof of my house to do the job.
Sometime in the near future I plan to get my amateur license 
and buy a handheld transceiver.   I notice Radio Shack sells
a Discone antenna that works from 100 Mhz to 1Ghz and can
also be used to transmit up to 200 watts in the 140 and 
440 amateur bands.   I suspect this antenna is a reasonable
one for my scanner (as far as all purpose wide band antennas go).   
My question is:  how does it fair as a amateur radio antenna?
Is it of the total joke, casual hobbyist or serious hobbyist 
category?   

Thanks in advance for any advice on this.

Peter
From: benjy@benjy.cc.vt.edu (Ben E. Cline)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: 610 form returned
Date: 8 Oct 92 11:49:31 GMT

You can imagine my surprise when I received a letter
from the WCARS/VEC returning the 610 form that I 
had submitted at a recent upgrade session.  I used
an old 610 form and checked the box asking for a
new callsign.  The new 610 forms have a place for
the applicant to initial the request for a callsign
change while the old forms don't.  The note from the
VEC asked me to initial the callsign change request
and to return it.

I figure this will delay my new license about a week.  So
if you plan to ask for a new callsign using the old 610,
initial beside of box 2e and avoid delay.

Benjy, KD4FOI
From: RPH0470@TNTECH.BITNET
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Need info on scanner mods...
Date: 12 Oct 1992 16:49:52 -0700
Organization: UCSD Usenet Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu

Hey, gang!

I'm looking for info on some (allegedly possible) modifications to the
Uniden/Bearcat BC200XLT scanner.  Specifically, I'd like to know how to:

   *  Restore cellular freqs (currently not available)

   *  Increase scanning speed

   *  Turn off the low-battery safety shutoff "feature"

I have been told that Grove Electronics sent out instructions for these mods
to their customers; my local radio dealer didn't.  Can anyone out there tell
me if these mods are indeed possible, and if so, how to accomplish them?

Please reply by email to RPH0470@TNTECH.BITNET, or snail-mail to:

        Richard Hosker
        PO Box 6083 TTU
        Cookeville, TN 38505


advTHANKSance

                                        Richard
From: phantom@pro-haven.cts.com (Tiffany Keller)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: W5YI report..
Date: 16 Oct 92 02:27:23 GMT
Article-I.D.: pro-have.jf77504
Organization: ProLine [pro-haven] - Pariahs' Haven BBS, 409/693-8262, 9600-300

In <1992Oct15.130349.1610@wam.umd.edu>
ham@wam.umd.edu (Scott Richard Rosenfeld) writes:

% Just like real life, are the ham bands.  Being able to do 5 WPM gives HF
% privileges.  10 meters can be a lot of fun, as can 15, 40, and 80 meter CW.
% BUT the point behind incentive licensing is that if you want more, you have
% to work for it.  No, I can't say that a higher-class license makes one ham 
% better than another, because it's not true.
% 
% What I CAN say is that if I want to work on the little section of the 20
% meter phone band allocated to Extras only, because they're not very heavily
% used, and I want to work some DX in the clear, I will WORK to get that 
% privilege.  That's just the point - it's a PRIVILEGE, not a right.
% 
% If you are happy with your privileges granted by your license, great!  If
% you find that you would like to build and launch your own satellite, you
% should have to work for that privilege.
% 
% Incentive licensing, especially the code part, show how much dedication and
% desire one has to upgrade and receive a greater set of privileges.  The
% no-code license has been a great thing for Ham Radio.  But anyone can 
% memorize the answers to written tests, given enough time and a standard
% question pool.  It doesn't take a law degree to be a good litigator or
% prosecutor.  It doesn't take an engineering degree to be able to design
% stuff. It just means that you have put in the time and effort to earn 
% a certain status, for which one can command respect.  That's why incentive
% licensing exists.  If you want more, you have to work more.
% 



        Well said, Scott! :-)

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Internet:  phantom@pro-haven.cts.com           KJ5??  (new call soon.....)       
UUCP:      crash!pro-haven!phantom             Try 28.440MHz.....                       
        For the latest breaking Aggie Jokes, Dial 1-800-AGGIE-IQ.....
".....and for the first time in twenty years in Waxahachie, Texas.....
......it rained!"   The Rocky and Bullwinkle Show
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
From: tanaka@osklns.UCSD.EDU (Junichi Tanaka)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: KH2Y (WW SSB) cancelled !!
Date: 9 Oct 1992 22:29:01 -0700
Organization: UCSD Usenet Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu

Dear Net 

We are *very* sorry to announce that we decided our cancellation of our KH2Y
, M/M operation at Guam in coming WW SSB contest, as informed before.
It is because one member's *serious sickness*.

I hope to be on the air in WW CW contest as KH2S, M/S.

Hope your good luck in the contest.

Oct 10 1992

de jh4rhf/kh2s

Jun. Tanaka
tanaka@osklns.kek.ac.jp

From: ron@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Ron Miller)
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 14:44:28 GMT
Subject: Re: Re: Barry Electronics in NYC et al...
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Fort Collins, CO, USA
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc

Re: Smoking

My wife is so allergic to cigarette smoke that if I go into a store (or
any other location) where people are smoking, when I go home I have
to change AND WASH my clothes and take a shower to get the smoke out
of my hair.

Not many places are worth that kind of trouble.  Ham stores included.

FYI,
Ron
NW0U
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: mikef@pacifier.rain.com (Mike Freeman)
Subject: Re: OOAS Award (Was Smoking Kits and DX-20)
Organization: Pacifier BBS
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992 17:09:13 GMT

In article <607@arrl.org> jkearman@arrl.org (Jim Kearman) writes:
>Jim Kearman said:
> 
>;> the second harmonic--I had more states confirmed via OO 
>;> notices than QSL cards), and got back on the air. I later sold
>;
>;Steve Mosier said:
>; 
>;Gee, Jim, I didn't know we could use those for WAS.  Can we also use 
>;them for DXCC?
>; 

[Material concerning "contest" rules deleted]

>
>Applications will be accepted through December 31, 1992.
>Decisions of the biased judge (me) may be final. Good
>luck!
>

ROTFL/LMAO!!!!!

-- 
Mike Freeman <K7UIJ>    |       Internet: mikef@pacifier.rain.com
301 N.E. 107th Street   |         or freeman@watsun.cc.columbia.edu
Vancouver, WA 98685 USA |       GEnie: M.FREEMAN11
Telephone (206)574-8221 |       Loose bits sink chips!
From: jeffj@cbnewsm.cb.att.com (jeffrey.n.jones)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: W5YI report..
Date: 14 Oct 92 23:57:49 GMT
Article-I.D.: cbnewsm.1992Oct14.235749.6068
Distribution: usa
Organization: AT&T

In article <Bw4s30.20H@mail.boi.hp.com> jhays@boi.hp.com (John_D. Hays) writes:
>In article <1992Oct14.195445.5829@ttinews.tti.com> sorgatz@avatar.tti.com (sorgatz) writes:
>>
>> There would be only Novice, No-code Tech, and General!  The request has
>>not yet been given a docket number, but it seeks to eliminate the 13 & 20
>>WPM CW requirements, giving current General and Advanced license holders
>>the same privileges as Extras! Current Tech Plus (old Elem 3 Tech) would
>>be grandfathered to General, and persons seeking a distinctive skills test
>>could take the 13 or 20 WPM CW exams and earn an endorsement of 'CW Expert'
>>or 'CW Master' which would NOT give them any additional frequency space.

Now this seems like a reasonable way to go. After passing 5 written tests
and 3 code tests to get my Extra I couldn't help but wonder now what was 
that all about. You could easily distill those 5 tests down into 3 and 
not lose anything. A truely erratic series of questions is covered in 
those series of tests. Going to be interesting to see how the ARRL and 
Wayne Green react to this! I am totally in favor of the above series
licenses and think it is about time. I do feel that the General should
focus on the theory and the basics of constructing your own rig. Now
that would be usefull! 73!

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
From: mwgordon@nyx.cs.du.edu (Mike Gordon)
Subject: Motorola Minitor help needed
Keywords: Motorola Minitor Pager
 
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix @ U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 92 04:55:05 GMT



    I recently picked up a couple Motorla Minitor pagers at a fest, and I
have a whole lot of qustions about them.  I hope someone out here on the
net can help.

    Who has the lowest price on the tone reeds?  Motorola wants $45 per
reed, which is assinine.
    These pagers are the "3 tone" ones.  They take 3 reeds to allow the
pagers to decode 2 different paging tones.  It was explained that this
is for rescue/fire or battalion/department type combinations.  According to
the guy I bought the units from, one reed is the common first tone between
the 2 pages.  Does anyone have more info on this?  If the numbers on the
pager are 215 and 212, is the common tone a "2" or a "21"?  How are the
reeds numbered?  How is the common reed different than the individual
reads?  Neither of the pagers has any reeds in them, which socket is for
the common reed?
    The organization I'm setting these up for is a small self-funded
transport service for disabled university students.  We're going to
hook a paging encoder onto our business band base station so that riders
can call in and page a driver to pick them up.  This system will be used
on weekends and late at night, when we don't have a dispatcher.  Does
anyone know of an encoder that interfaces with the phone system and costs
less than $1000?  Being that we're self-funded, it's hard to come up
with that kind of money to support 2 pagers (no matter how important
they are).
    Unfortunately, neither of chargers I got are working.  One is a
regular charger, and one has an audio amp and external antenna.  Neither
of them wants to put out a constant voltage.  They fluctuate between about
5 and .5 volts.  Each time I put the voltmeter on the charging contacts,
the voltage is different, but it does hold to that volage until I take the
leads off.  Voltage regulator?  Capacitors? Any ideas?

   Any help would be GREATLY appreciated.

Mike Gordon  N9LOI  99681084@uwwvax.uww.edu
From: tjonz@caliban.Corp.Sun.COM (Todd Jonz)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: IC-901A
Date: 9 Oct 92 22:40:03 GMT
Reply-To: tjonz@caliban.Corp.Sun.COM
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
NNTP-Posting-Host: caliban.corp.sun.com

paul@n3eop.pgh.pa.us writes:

	> I could get into a 10 SSB module, and a 430 SSB opens up some 
	> interesting possibilities for mobile OSCAR...

Except that the 22 element crossed Yagi arrays keep making my Volkswagon tip
over....  ;-)


Todd, KB6JXT
Xref: sparky rec.radio.amateur.misc:16797 rec.radio.amateur.policy:1755
From: gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy
Subject: Re: ARRL DIGITAL COMMITTE REVISED REPORT 9/26/92
Date: 10 Oct 92 13:55:32 GMT
Reply-To: gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Gannett Technologies Group

In article <1992Oct9.172028.24915@news.acns.nwu.edu> rdewan@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Rajiv Dewan) writes:
>In article <1992Oct9.115103.1@skyler.mavd.honeywell.com> estey@skyler.mavd.honeywell.com writes:
>>
>>
>>                        Report and Recommendation 
>>                 to the ARRL Board of Directors, from the 
>>        ARRL Committee on Amateur Radio Digital Communications
>>                            September 26, 1992
>> 
>
>All of the report has been deleted for brevity
 
>>        30  M:  10.140  -       10.150  MHz
>
>TWENTY PERCENT OF THE BAND SPACE!  I think that this way too much  
>on a band that is a haven for non-contesting cw operators.
>How about *no* allocations on this band.  Consider the fact that 
>the max power is 200W.  This would heighten the hidden transmitter problem
>in AX.25 style (or any carrier sense multiple access) operation.

This is exactly the section of the 30 meter band *currently* being used
by the STA stations. It's consistently been the most useful band during
the STA period. A casual listening survey of the band indicates that there
are *currently* more packet signals in this small segment than there are
CW signals in the entire 30 meter band. I think you protest too much.

>>        160M:   1.810   -       1.820   MH
>>                                 
>
>Whoa!! This is just about the hub of cw activity on this band.  Of my
>last 10 cw contacts on this band, eight are in this segment.  In my mind
>this is like requesting 50Kcs in the 28.3 to 28.5 band.  

No, it's like requesting 10 kHz in the 28.1 to 28.3 MHz band. In fact,
the request on 10 meters is for 69 kHz in that segment. There's
already a unique 10 kHz of DX window on 160, another small window in
a sparsely populated band is not excessive. You still have 40 kHz of
CW *exclusive* bandwidth, something no other amateur band shares, and
150 kHz of mixed mode space. Buy another crystal for crying out loud.

Gary KE4ZV
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: unbham@jupiter.sun.csd.unb.ca (UNB Amateur Radio)
Subject: Re: W5YI report..
Organization: University of New Brunswick
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 03:28:48 GMT

In article <1992Oct14.210518.24730@lambda.msfc.nasa.gov> rich@theophilus.msfc.nasa.gov writes:
>As one of those "no-code tech" wanna-bees--
>
>boring.  Packet, VHF, and UHF is where the technical challenge is.  CW should
>rightfully remain a permitted operating mode, but I fail to see where 20 WPM
>necessarily makes me a better person--hell, I cant even type that fast--the
>technical skill, self-policing, and other features of Ham radio is what attracts

I agree - the real fun is in the unexplored territory...   What about leaving
the most advanced license at around 12-13wpm.  This is not an insurmountable
challenge.. takes about 3 weeks of active preparation...  In Canada, our
5wpm license gives 160m and 80m.  Only with knowing 12wpm do you get 
the rest (including 10)...   No codes, of course, get vhf and up...


>
>Let's kill the sill S#$t that runs about in the world, and get to the techie
>stuff--if the 80m Ol' Pharts want to camp there forever, its fine by me--
>I plan to have fun (legally and within the rules) elsewhere.
>

I have a story to tell about the 80 folk... I was trying to check into a
80m net here in the maritimes -- well, I had a faulty audio cable that was
giving out rasping sounds...  Anyways, needless to say I couldn't check in.
But later I went down to the lower end of the band to see if I couldfind out
the problem and I passed by a couple of people talking about the net saying
this like "that *&^*&% doesn't even know how to use his radio.. what a stupid
... ad nauseum... "       Talk about a mess...  And all of these people
talking were up there in years...  I don't care what anyone says, just
because I got my first license as a no-code, I feel my operating practices
and desire to learn more (I am the pres. of the unb amateur radio club --
a very active bunch on everything from vhf/hf packet, cw, rtty, vhf,
basically whatever we can get our hands on...) make me a 'better ham'
than many people I hear fouling up the airwaves...



Maybe we should get with the times... instead of having to demonstrate
the gymnastics of learning something trivial like code (I have my
full license.. I am not a 'soon-to-be'.), why not demonstrate *ability*
in electronics.  Shouldn't we be able to focus testing on design than
on code...   

On a lighter note, I am pretty amused by all of the "learn code in an after-
noon...", "Learn code by hypnosis", etc tapes...  

hmmmmm

73 de ve1djb
Derek
(via VE1UNB)

Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: kludge@grissom.larc.nasa.gov (Scott Dorsey)
Subject: Antenna System Tuning
Organization: NASA Langley Research Center and Reptile Farm
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 15:08:41 GMT

Yesterday evening, I discovered that if you hang a wet sheet on each leg of
a 40M dipole, it seems to fall nicely right above the 80M band.  You can add
and subtract wet underwear from either side to get it right into resonance.
I rather suspect that the resistive losses are fairly high, but you're
probably running more power than you really need anyway.
--scott

I don't notice the laundry drying any faster, though.
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc