HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: tstader@aol.COM
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: (none)
Date: 29 Dec 92 15:40:41 GMT
Organization: UCSD Usenet Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: daemon@ucsd.edu

From root Tue Dec 29 10:40:44 1992
From: tstader@aol.com
X-Mailer: America Online Mailer
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
Subject: RE: 430mhz band under th
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 92 10:40:44 EST

I really don't understand why anyone WOULD NOT want to have an open repeater!
As someone pointed out... there is plenty of spectrum for those who are
elitists!

Now I don't consider a system that is PL'd to be considered closed. Some
locations (high atop a cell-site) almost have to have some way of filtering
out some of the IMs out there! The WB1GOF repeater is PL'd... but our little
"man-in-the-can" voice announces our 88.5 PL during ids'. The role of our
repeater is for emergency public service and would be self-defeating if it
was CLOSED! 

IMHO those that choose to close their systems are also self-defeating in an
amateur sense! Is the only reason there are closing their systems is because
they don't get money from users? I don't disagree that point... it does
indeed cost money. Do they put massive lists in their TNCs to exclude someone
from digipeating thru them too! What does it show to any newcomer to the
hobby.... that you are an SOB... I did it on my own, you want to do it... do
it on your own!

If you find there are not enough people out there that want to contribute to
your operation... then maybe you ought to look at what you provide! Maybe a
little salesmanship on your part will get you some cash flow. Not everybody
wants to provide an autopatch for their system... but if you've got good
coverage... how about providing access to public safety via a landline...
publish it... now you're going to get people who think you are doing a great
service. We've never asked for a "repeater access fee", yet we have gotten
donations. I am pretty sure that if we spread the word that we are looking at
upgrading our system... we would get donations again.

Changing your attitude about the users out there will go a long way. If you
have ever worked in the consumer business... you should know that "the
customer is always right"! Repeater owners, trustees, etc.... the users ARE
YOUR CUSTOMERS!

73 for now.... c u on the shortwaves
Terry Stader - KA8SCP
America Online Ham Radio Club Host
Internet: tstader@aol.com (files <28K)  or
          tstader@attmail.com ( files >28K)
KA8SCP@WA1PHY.#EMA.MA.USA.NOAM
ka8scp@ka8scp.ampr.org [44.56.4.82] Mac
ka8scp-1@ka8scp-1.ampr.org [44.56.4.120] DOS Clone
(they're BOTH pc's!)
442.450 (+5), PL-88.5 WB1GOF Repeater, PART (Police Amateur Radio Team of
Westford, Massachusetts)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: shea4460@vms.macc.wisc.edu (Shea)
Subject: How to build a Quadrifilar Ant.
Organization:  University of Wisconsin Academic Computing Center
Date: 30 DEC 92 21:32:57    

Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: phr@telebit.com (Paul Rubin)
Subject: Re: 6 Meter Radio Shack HTs!
Organization: Telebit Corporation; Sunnyvale, CA, USA
	<1hibcmINNsaa@rave.larc.nasa.gov>
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 11:54:45 GMT

In article <1hibcmINNsaa@rave.larc.nasa.gov> kludge@grissom.larc.nasa.gov (Scott Dorsey) writes:

   I don't know about the RS units, but I have a pair of Teenage Mutant Ninja
   Turtles rigs, which have a four-transistor FM transmitter and one of the
   worst receivers I have ever seen.  About 10 mW output on 6M; I changed the
   crystal and tweaked the output coil on the transmitter and fiddled with the
   LC constant on the receiver to get it to the right general frequency.  It's
   enough to hit the 6M repeater on base, though the antenna is visible from
   my office window so we aren't talking serious DX performance here).  ...

Did you somehow get the xmit and receive to be on separate frequencies,
for use with the repeater?  If so, how?  Does the crystal control
the xmit only, with the receiver tuned by an LC circuit?  How selective
is it?

There are some cheapo Tozai walkies at the local Walgreen's for
$10 a pair; I'm likely to go pick up a set to play with...

Also, where does one get crystals nowadays?  Thanks.
From: grund@calypso.som.cwru.edu (Victor Grund)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: HT Power Options
Date: 1 Jan 1993 05:04:10 GMT
Organization: International Business Machines, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: calypso.som.cwru.edu
X-Post-Machine: calypso.som.cwru.edu


What is the difference between a typical HT's standard NiCD battery
pack and loading the typical Ht's dry cell pack with NiCD (AA-size, or
whatever's appropriate) batteries?  Just wondering.

73 and Happy New Year,
Victor
--
Victor D. Grund  (WA1TING)  | grund@pyrite.som.cwru.edu 
IBM Cleveland               | grund@vnet.ibm.com        
RISC System/6000 & AIX      | Vnet: DETVMIC1(VGRUND)         
(216) 664-7381              | CIS:  72440,1163
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: End fed 1/4 wave 80 meter antenna
Reply-To: gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1992 16:00:02 GMT

In article <randall.725156306@seashore> randall@informix.com (Randall Rhea) writes:
>alanb@hpnmdla.sr.hp.com (Alan Bloom) writes:
>
>>You'll need to decouple the station ground.  Either use a good earth
>>ground with a VERY short ground wire (a few feet) or use a quarter-
>>wave counterpoise wire attached to the station ground terminal.  
>
>What is a good Earth ground?   According to the books I read, 
>you can't get a good earth ground unless you live next to a salt
>marsh.

A good Earth ground is a ground whose impedance is at least 10 times
less than the radiation resistance of the antenna. For a physically
short, electrically loaded, vertical monopole, that means a ground
with an impedance of a few hundredths of an ohm or less. For a dipole,
that means about 2 ohms. Now a ground impedance of 2 ohms is fairly 
easy to get, but 2/100ths of an ohm is a totally different story.

The National Electrical Code intimates that a single 8 foot ground
rod in average soil will give a maximum of 25 ohms resistance. Rods
in parallel act like resistors in parallel, so two rods would give
12.5 ohms and four rods would give 6.25 ohms, and 8 rods would give
3.125 ohms. That's fine for a dipole, but not good enough for a short
vertical. Note that soil conductivity matters, and a salt marsh would
have a lower resistance per rod than dry rocky soil. Physically larger
antennas also generally have higher radiation resistances. So a long
wire, rhombic, square, or Vee beam would perform better over poor
ground than shorter antennas. In fact, the Beverage design *depends*
on poor ground conductivity to give it directionality.

Note too that buried radials are highly effective improvers of ground
conductivity. For the purpose of making RF connection to the Earth,
shallowly buried radials are at least as effective as deeply driven
rods because of the skin effect. For maximum effect, rods or radials
should be placed no closer than 4 feet apart since single rods engage
a cylinder of earth about 2 feet in diameter and overlaps just reduce
the maximum possible coupling to Earth of the rods.

Gary

-- 
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | uunet!rsiatl!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary      
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     | emory!ke4zv!gary@gatech.edu
From: Sean.Reigle@f203.n103.z1.fidonet.org
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: HTX-202
X-Sender: newtout 0.02 Nov 17 1992
Date: 23 Dec 92  02:57:02

Does anyone have any reports/comments on the Radio Shack HTX-202? Does it work 
well? Any problems using it?

Sean.Reigle@f203.n103.z1.fidonet.org

--- GEcho 1.00
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: jreese@NeoSoft.com (Jim Reese)
Subject: Re: 430mhz band under th
Organization: NeoSoft Communications Services -- (713) 684-5900
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1992 17:24:25 GMT

In article <sPJewB1w165w@beagle.UUCP> chandler@beagle.UUCP (Jim Chandler) writes:
>Just an editorial comment.  Anyone who would charge for use of their repeater
>just does not understand amateur radio.  

No Jim, you don't understand what it takes to keep a repeater on the air.  It's
not that I'm insensitive to the users, but I have to buy my family Christmas
gifts, too.  Keeping a repeater on the air can cost hundreds, even thousands
of dollars a year.  It's not the responsibility of the trustee to carry the
financial burden alone.  If there are users who get the benefits of the 
radio system, they should help pay for it.  

It's funny that most hams wouldn't think about coming over to my house at
three in the morning expecting to be able to use my HF station for free, but
they will kerchunk MY repeater at three in the morning and EXPECT it to be 
there.  There's no difference, and it's no cheaper for the repeater owner.

If you want a free repeater, put one on yourself.  Otherwise, help the guy 
who built the radio, scouted the site, and keeps the sucker working for you
to talk on.

-- 
     Jim Reese, WD5IYT            | "Real Texans never refer to trouble
  jreese@sugar.neosoft.com        |  as deep doo-doo"  --Molly Ivins
From: henryk@MILORI.CCIT.ARIZONA.EDU
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: 10m AM
Date: 4 Jan 93 01:29:29 GMT
Reply-To: henryk@MILORI.CCIT.ARIZONA.EDU
Distribution: usa,local
Organization: University of Arizona

I understand that the 10 meter AM band is from 29.0 to 29.2 MHz, and also 
know that a lot of people are using converted CB radios thereby "channelizing"
this mode into 19 or 20 channels with 10 kHz steps.  My questions are:
What are the frequencies used?  Is there a calling frequency?
CB radios have gaps in between channels...  are CB radios generally modified
to use the upper channels to avoid this?

TNX
Henry Knoepfle
KB7NIE
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: j_otterson@star.enet.dec.com (Jeff Otterson/N1KDO)
Subject: Re: FT530 mods wanted!
Reply-To: j_otterson@star.enet.dec.com
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation, Nashua, NH, USA
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 14:05:55 GMT


This is copied verbatim from the mod sheet I received with my rig...

YAESU FT-530

Expanded Receive 110-180, 300-500 MHz
Expanded Transmit 130-180, 400-470 MHz

NOT LEGAL IN U.S.A - FOR EXPORT ONLY

o Remove Antenna and Battery.
o Remove four screws on bottom holding battery track.
o Remove the four (black) screws holding rear case.
o Slowly... open the front cover from tranceiver and lay both halves on table.
o Note positioning of white paper insulator in right half of radio and lift out
  (don't throw away)
o Carefully locate Jumper Pad 13 and remove solder.
o Re-install white paper insulator, make sure ground tab slides through the 
  paper insulator.
o Close radio back up (Careful not to pinch the ribbon cable near lithium 
  battery when closing halves).
o Re-install the four (black) screws holding rear case.
o Re-install the four (small silver) screws on bottom holding battery track to
  radio body.
o Attach Antenna and Battery.
o Turn off Radio.... Press and hold both arrow keys while turning on the Radio.
o Modification Complete.

------------------------
|                      |
|                      |
|                      |
|                      |
|           ---        |
|           | |        |
|           ---       /
|           ---      /
|           | |     /                         2 (|)  (|) 1
|           ---    /                          4 (|)  (|) 3
|                 /  <---  Jumpers are here   6 (|)  (|) 5
|              o /                            8 (|)  (|) 7
-----------------             Blowup --->    10 (|)  (|) 9
                                             12 (|)  (|) 11
                                             14 (|)  (|) 13
                                             16 (|)  (|) 15
-

In side the rig, it really did not look quite like that ...    more like this:

...  12 (|)  (|) 11 
           (|) 13
      16 (|)  (|) 15

In addition to the published receive expansion, it also receives 800-950 MHz...
trunking radio, cell phone (I would *never* listen to that), 33cm ham band...

Have fun!


/---------------------------------------------------------------------\
| Jeff Otterson                  |  The opinions expressed here are   |
| j_otterson@star.enet.dec.com   |  mine.  Noone else should be held  |
| Digital Equipment Corporation  |  responsible for my actions.       |
| 110 Spit Brook Rd. Nashua,  NH |  CENSORSHIP IS THE TOOL OF TYRANTS |
\---------------------------------------------------------------------/
From: Erik@tdkt.kksys.com (Erik Jacobson)
Sender: FredGate@tdkt.kksys.com
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: HTX-202
Date: Fri, 25 Dec 1992 01:10:36 -0600

Sean.Reigle@f203.n103.z1.fidonet.org wrote:

 SR> Does anyone have any reports/comments on the Radio Shack HTX-202? Does it
 SR> work well? Any problems using it?

I own one myself.  It was my first radio.  (Right now I own a Yeasu FT-470 and a
HTX-202).

The HTX-202 has a "true fm" quality -- some people have said it sounds better
than many base radios.  After I got the 470, I still liked to use the HTX-202
because it just "felt right" to me.  This may be due to the fact that it was my
first radio, but it is FAIRLY easy to use, and seems to be built tough.

The 202 doesn't have a ton of whistles on it.  The display isn't the best thing
in the world to look at: but it works well.  I would have liked to see the
keypad light up.  The manual that came with my 202 was NOT very good.  It was
very disapointing actually.  They may have taken care of that problem(??).

I haven't had a problem with it yet.  Right now it is doing packet radio.  It's
doing a fine job, I might add.

If you have any specific questions, I might be able to help ya'.

Erik@tdkt.kksys.com

 * Origin: Dark Knight's Table - N0SVX - Minnetonka, MN (1:282/31)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: gws
Subject: Propagation Forecast Bulletin 52  ARLP052
Organization: HAM BBS, 614-895-2553 
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 92 03:30:36 GMT


============================================================== 
| 	Automatic relayed from packet radio via              | 
| N8EMR's Ham BBS, 614-895-2553                              |
==============================================================

ZCZC AP60
QST de W1AW
Propagation Forecast Bulletin 52  ARLP052
>From Tad Cook, KT7H
Seattle, WA  December 24, 1992
To all radio amateurs

SB PROP ARL ARLP052
ARLP052 Propagation de KT7H

Last week was uneventful in terms of solar activity.  There was a
moderate disturbance on December 17 from 1800-2100 UTC, when the
Boulder K index went to four and five.  The only other time that the
K index went above three was at 1200 UTC on the 20th.  Solar flux
continued to drop slowly.

There is a possibility of a disturbance on December 26, and another
less severe upset on January 4.  The flux should continue to drop
until it reaches 115 around January 2, then rise again to around 155
on January 10 and 11.

During 1992 we saw solar activity continue to drop from the July,
1989 peak, but during the latter part of this year the solar flux
made a bit of a rally.  What does 1993 hold?  Average solar flux
values should be about 20 points lower a year from now, and another
15 points lower in December 1995, as the cycle drops toward a
probable minimum of activity around early 1997.  The next peak of
solar activity should be around the turn of the century.

The author welcomes correspondence from anyone interested in solar
activity and radio propagation, whether via letter or packet radio.
When writing via the mail, be sure to include a stamped return
envelope.  The packet address is KT7H at N7DUO.WA.USA.NA, and the
mail address is 5519 12 Ave NE, Seattle, WA 98105-3505.

Sunspot Numbers from December 17 to 23 were 157, 157, 162, 150, 140,
125 and 120 with a mean of 144.4.  10.7 cm flux was 150.3, 149.8,
147, 148, 145.4, 142.1 and 144, with a mean of 146.7.
NNNN
From: david@stat.com (David Dodell)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: 430 mhz band under th (now repeater costs)
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 92 11:43:14 MST
Reply-To: david@stat.com (David Dodell)
Distribution: world
Organization: Stat Gateway Service, WB7TPY

gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman) writes:

> 97.101(b) also says "Each station licensee and each control operator must 
> cooperate in selecting transmitting channels and in making the most effective
> use of the amateur service frequencies." That also seems pretty clear,
> frequency usage must be on the basis of *most effective use*. That seems
> to paint small closed and private repeaters into a pretty tight corner
> when the spectrum is needed for more effective uses such as an open machine
> that serves a larger user base.
 
How do you judge the * most effective use * ???  I think this can become 
subjective.  Some of the "closed" machines that I use are busier then the 
open machines.  Some of the open UHF machines in Phoenix have no user 
base, and sit idle for hours at a time.  The closed machines usually are 
busier.  So I guess the open machines should shut down to make more room 
for the closed machines?
 
I think each have their place.  Some of the closed machines I use could 
not operate effectively if everyone and his brother had the control 
codes.  The remote base features would become totally useless.
 
david

   -------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Internet: david@stat.com                  FAX: +1 (602) 451-1165
      Bitnet: ATW1H@ASUACAD                     FidoNet=> 1:114/15
                Amateur Packet ax25: wb7tpy@wb7tpy.az.usa.na
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: RE: writing out -- --- .-. ... . in order to pass your exam
Reply-To: gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Gannett Technologies Group
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 21:18:14 GMT

In article <14570570@hpnmdla.sr.hp.com> alanb@hpnmdla.sr.hp.com (Alan Bloom) writes:
>In rec.radio.amateur.misc, gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman) writes:
>
>>Old Sammy Morse thought putting the dots and dashes down on paper and
>>"reading" the code *was* the normal way. It's the way he invented it
>>and did it. If it's good enough for old Sammy.....
>
>But the dots and dashes were written down by a machine, not by hand.

That's true, Ole Sam though machine transcription was best. He was
ahead of his time. :-)

Gary

-- 
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | uunet!rsiatl!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary      
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     | ke4zv!gary@gatech.edu
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: rcanders@nyx.cs.du.edu (Rod Anderson)
Subject: Re: 430mhz band under th
X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University
	of Denver for the Denver community.  The University has neither
	control over nor responsibility for the opinions of users.
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 92 02:13:45 GMT

In article <C03nuL.58o@iat.holonet.net> bwilkins@iat.holonet.net (Bob Wilkins n6fri) writes:
>
>There are even bigger tracts of spectrum from 431 MHz to 433 MHz and 435


426-432 AYV
432-432.1 EME  and weak signal CW
432.1-432.3 mixed mode and weak signals
432.3-432.4 propagation beacons
432.4-433.0 mixed mode and weak signals


>MHz to 438 MHz   Thats about 5 megahertz of spectrum for all kinds of

 435mHz to 438 mHz is satellite only 


>amateur activity that does not include repeaters! How about side-band and
>satelite activity or just plain old fm simplex.
                                         ^
                                   please not on these frequencies

From the band plans in the 92-93 ARRL Repeater Directory page 36


Rod Anderson   N0NZO     rcanders@nyx.cs.du.edu
From: rkolsen@uswnvg.com (Rick Olsen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: 430mhz band under th
Date: 29 Dec 92 19:13:33 GMT
Organization: U S WEST NewVector Group, Inc.
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5

I'll add my two cents in hr as well.  I have been involved with remote
base operation for 29 years now.  Note I said remote base.  This because
the system that was referred to in the original message is not a
repeater but a remote base.

Actually it is a collection of several remotes.  I know. I was a member
of that organization when I lived in Fullerton.  The system was designed
as a collection of HF SSB remotes that allow access to the HF bands by
individuals who, because of restrictive covenants, were denied the
ability to erect antennas and operate on HF frequencies.

These remotes are very expensive.  The equipment consists of very
expensive controllers, large rotatable yagis at various heights from 40
to 70 feet, and radios like FT767s and TS940s that are accessed and
controlled via a UHF link.  In some cases a high site (Sierra Peak) was
used as the main UHF access port for the users and was linked via full
duplex UHF links to the HF SSB site.

The UHF repeaters, oddly enough, are not closed and are used by many
local amateurs.  The HF SSB features are often used by hams to run code
practice on 10 meters and for 80m SSB ragchews late in the evening with
open access on UHF to any amateur who happens along.

This is not what I would call a closed system.  Yes, memebers are asked
to share in the costs of maintaining and upgrading the system and
control of the equipment is restricted to members only as well.  This is
not without precedence in Federal regulations.  For example, it is legal
for a private pilot to ask his passengers to help defray the costs of
the flight, whether it be an aircraft owned by the pilot or simply
rented for the day.

In like manner the FCC does not prohibit the sharing of costs associated
with maintaining and operating common equipment.

The bottom line is that there is something for everyone in ham radio and
we should respect the desires and efforts of others.  I, for one,
applaud those who expend their time and money on behalf of those living
in restrictive environments.

73 de Rick, N6NR
From: gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: Info on Yaesu FT726?
Date: 20 Dec 92 13:36:20 GMT
Reply-To: gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Gannett Technologies Group

In article <168C0DA6E.R0264@vmcms.csuohio.edu> R0264@vmcms.csuohio.edu writes:
>In ARRL Handbook, 1989, The ft726 is described as an example of using
>transversion for multimode vhf and uhf, with an if of 28 Mhz, for a
>rig that has both vhf, uhf, and hf at 10 and 15 meters.  Looks like
>a good idea, but how come Yaesu no longer offers such a rig?
>Are they available used? -- and at what kind of price? -- and is
>there something wrong with the whole concept?
>Phil, WD8IZA

The FT726 has been superceded by the FT736R. It includes as standard
equipment most of the things that were optional in the FT726 including
the satellite unit and both the 2 meter and 440 modules. Optional are
a 6 meter module and a 1.2 GHz module. It is also improved in other
ways. It no longer uses a 28 MHz first IF for image and birdie suppression
reasons, instead it follows the current design trend of having a high first
IF frequency. That means the 10 meter module is now an up conversion. Street 
price for a new one is around $1400. Used FT726s can sometimes be found in 
the $500 range.

There's nothing wrong with the concept of a multiband multimode VHF/UHF rig
as witness there are 3 currently available, one from each of the major
Japanese manufacturers, Kenwood TS790A, Icom IC970, and Yaesu FT736R.
I've owned the Kenwood (bleech), drooled over the Icom (expensive), and
currently operate a Yaesu FT736R.

Gary KE4ZV