HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: bryanw@iastate.edu (Bryan J Welch)
Subject: Car Antenna - Mag or glass?
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames, IA
Distribution: usa
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 21:56:43 GMT


I have a small hatchback and would like to rig up my DJ-580T to work in the 
car.  I borrowed a friend's magmount antenna and got good results.  Then he 
told me that the length of cable can greatly degrade the signal.  I don't 
want to install a permanent mount, so my question is this:

Which is better: A glass mount with no rear ground plane (since there's 
nothing behind my back window on my hatchback) or
		 a mag mount antenna, with about 6 feet of extra cable?

I like the glass mount better myself, and from what I've heard, with either
choice I'll go for a Larson Antenna.

Any opinions will be greatly appreciated.

-Bryan
-- 
Bryan Welch	N0SFG
Center for Nondestructive Evaluation
Internet: bryanw@iastate.edu, bwelch@cnde.iastate.edu
From: staggsd@walker-pcgw.army.mil (1LT David Staggs)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: (none)
Date: 20 Dec 92 08:18:22 GMT
Organization: UCSD Usenet Gateway
Reply-To: staggsd@walker-pcgw.army.mil
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: daemon@ucsd.edu

Subject: License delays

> >         I still don't get it...One guy tests a week *after* I do...for a
> > brand new license...I test a week before for an Upgrade...and *he* gets his
> > first.....
>
> The FCC should give priority to new licensees.  A new licensee can't
> use his privileges until he gets his license, you can.

I agree, new hams should have a priority.  If you already have a license, at
least you can use what privs you currently have.  But then again, I am
partial.  For me, I have been waiting for about 10 weeks for my first license.
I am puzzled why it does take so long.  But, I have not questioned why.
Hopefully I will get it for Xmas.  It would be a nice Xmas present.  An
automated license format would be nice. However, it would put an extra burden
on the VE's who already volunteer to give exams.  I would not go around biting
the hand that feeds me. :)  It would be nice if they could make it a voluntary
thing.  I am sure the FCC is not blowing us off.  I think they are doing the
best they can.  As the saying goes, you can't please everyone all the time.

Regards,
Dave

- still waiting for my first :)
- Internet : staggsd@walker-pcgw.army.mil (Taegu, Korea)
********************************************
* All the world indeeds a stage......      *
********************************************
From: J024330@LMSC5.IS.LMSC.LOCKHEED.COM
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Need Tech test info
Date: 14 Dec 92 20:18:03 GMT
Organization: Lockheed Missiles & Space Company, Inc.

Does anyone know of an FTP site where I can get a file to train my wife
for her tech license?

Chris Colvin
N6GDL
From: MROWEN%STLAWU.BITNET@cunyvm.cuny.edu (Michael Owen W9IP)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: About transverters (was Weak signal VHF)
Date: 16 Dec 92 12:59:48 GMT
Organization: UCSD Usenet Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: daemon@ucsd.edu

>>It's true that transverters are harder to come by than the multi-mode
>>VHF/UHF rigs.  But most of my friends who are serious moonbounce /
>>weak-signal types use transverters.  The reason is that you can get
>>much better performance from a good HF radio than the available
>>SSB/CW VHF/UHF transceivers.

>Well that *used* to be true, but with the advent of the FT736R and
>the IC275/475 class multimodes, it's now a tossup as to which performs
>better. The most lacking quality of early multimodes was receiver
>selectivity. That's now much better with narrow filters available
>and with IF shift/passband tuning and tunable notches on the newer
>multimode rigs. They're the equal of a transverter and HF rig, and
>a lot cheaper if you're buying everything new.

>Gary KE4ZV

Rx selectivity may have been the limitation of _early_ multimode
rigs, but today the weakness is dynamic range.  Single-band and multi-
band VHF-only rigs still don't stack up to a good HF transceiver +
transverter combination when it comes to DR.  The only exception may
may be the Icom IC-575 (6 meters) which is really pretty robust.  A
good transverter (w/DBM) whose overall gain has been reduced to about
10-12 dB, mated with an '850-class transceiver, will give you <<2 dB noise
figure and +8 dBm 3rd-order intercept.  These figures are much better
than can be gotten with an IC-275 or FT-736.  For some of the gory
details, see NCJ a couple of months ago as well as next issue (or maybe
the one after that?).

Another factor to consider in _really_ weak signal work (ie EME) is RX
synthesizer noise.  Although close-in noise spectral photos have been
appearing in QST for a while, it's still hard to compare numbers.
Nevertheless, the VHF-only boxes have notoriously dirtier synthesizers
than, say, a TS-850.  Transverters, with their crystal LOs, generally
don't degrade this figure.

Lastly, Geoff Webb asked about sources for transverters.  For 6 meters,
the Tokyo Hi-Power HX-650 looks marvelous.  50 watts, dual switchable
preamps (high/low gain), DBM, $500 +/-.  On 2 meters, the SSB
Electronics transverter is available commercially, but its price is
absurd (ca. $1,000).  Sinclabs (Ontario) makes old-style (dual-gate
MOSFET, I think) units for 144 & 222.  They're much like the now-
defunct Microwave Modules.  For 432, Down East Microwave makes a great
no-tune transverter, kit or preassembled.

Whew, that was long.  Sorry.

Michael Owen W9IP
MROWEN@STLAWU
From: woods@glas.rtsg.mot.COM (Simon Woodworth)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: Halogen Lamp/Dimmer causes interference Help!
Date: 14 Dec 92 11:45:37 GMT
Organization: UCSD Usenet Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: daemon@ucsd.edu

In Info-Hams Digest V92 #1308 Jerry S. Weiss writes: 

>You just switch between cycles to keep the noise low.  The more cycles that
>conduct (averaged over time) cause the bulbs to burn brighter.  Just adjust
>the duty cycle to vary the amount of light.  There are probably some glue
>chips around designed to implement this cheaply.  You get more discrete
>changes this way, but the noise reduction is worth the additional circuity.

This'll work, but the resultant flicker is quite unpleasant.
Think about it: suppose you wanted to cut a bulb down to half-
brightness using this method. Then you'd want to remove every
second cycle completely to cut the power to the bulb. You can
actually try this by sticking a diode in the live feed to the
bulb. As you'll see, the bulb flickers noticeably. Given that the
US electricity supply is 60 Hz, as against 50 Hz here in Ireland,
the flicker will be much less noticeable down to half power, but
once the number of on-cycles falls to less than 24 per second,
you'll no longer have a smooth dimming effect.
   Cheers,
   Simon Woodworth.

=================================================================
Simon Woodworth.                |  woods@glas.rtsg.mot.com
Motorola (Ireland) Ltd.,        |  Don't blame my employers
Cork, Ireland.                  |  for anything I say! :-)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
"No matter where you go, there you are!"
- USS Excelsior bridge dedication plaque.
=================================================================

From: perry@hpfcmgw.FC.HP.COM (Perry Scott)
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 02:06:28 GMT
Subject: Re: IRF 511 as RF Power Amp
Organization: HP Fort Collins, CO
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc

>    	In the April '89 QST Doug DeMaw wrote about using 
>    the IRF 511 Mosfet as a RF Power amplifier.  Wes Hayward then 
>    wrote an excellent follow-up article in the Nov '89 QST.  I'm 
>    wondering if anyone has experimented with these transistors and 
>    circuits.  Specifically,  I'm puzzled by the fact that neither 
>    DeMaw nor Hayward seems to have run into trouble with these 
>    transistors' considerable input capacitance -- the 511 has about 
>    100 pF and the IRF 530 that Hayward used has about 900pF!  
>
>    	Also, any thoughts, anecdotes, or suggestions regarding 
>    these transistors' tendency toward self-destruction from static 
>    electricity, too high Vgs, and parasitic oscillations?
>    	Thanks for your help.
>    	Sherm Lovell, WY7F

I've often lusted after the new power MOSFETS too.  I think you'd have
to build an input circuit to deal with the input capacity you've
discovered.  I don't know if input capacity is specified on these
devices - they are meant for DC/audio, where it isn't a problem.
Therefore, the parts may not be interchangeable.  (Basically, I think
DeMaw is in drugs on this one if he didn't include something to resonate
the input capacity.  Or, maybe this was meant for QRP stage where high
SWR is a don't-care.)

Or go one better.  Use one of the 500v VDS MOSFETS.  Feed it directly
from the mains (do you know you have a multi-KVA transformer that
supplies 240 VCT?  :-) Current is low, the power supply is cheap.
Passing it through a 1:4 unbal is a smaller proposition than the big
clunky power supply transformer.

Comments?

Perry Scott
AA0ET
From: v111qheg@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu (P.VASILION)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: RE: DXERS
Date: 17 Dec 92 17:48:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In regards to a message recently posted on this newsgroup on DX'ers and our
practices, a few corrections must be mentioned. 

	First, the major DX tests exclude the WARC band for several reasons.
One, the power limit for 30, 17 and 12 meters was 200 watts, last time I read
the rule book. Secondly, the bands are too small to accomidate the amount of
activity that a test generates. Thirdly, and most importantly, we did not
have the WARC bands until recently and it is easier to consider the regular
band for operation (160 - 10). From a contester's standpoint, we have enough
problems setting up a multi-single, multi-two, or multi-multi station AND
figuring out when to run JA and Europe and when to hunt mults!
	Field Day does now operate on the WARC bands, so if your looking for
a rag-chew, and suddenly hear at 2:00 "CQ CQ Field Day from November Four
Romeo Juliet" dont be surprised!
	Finally, instead of yelling to limit contesters, why not bear with us
on the few weekends we invade the SSB portion of the band. After all, this 
*IS* a hobby! I hope we all can be tolerant of each other's favorite modes of
operating.

GL es DX de			CQWWSSB 1992		CQWWCW 1992			
Peter KB2NMV		   KB2NMV (s.o.) 380,546    KN2M (m.s.) 3.4 M
KB2NMV@KE2VW.#WNY.NY.USA.NA
V111QHEG@UBVMS.CC.BUFFALO.EDU
Western NY DX Assoc.
From: ron@topaz.bds.com (Ron Natalie)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: FCC woes, what can be done?
Date: 17 Dec 1992 00:29:51 GMT
Organization: BDS Systems
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: topaz.bds.com
Keywords: FCC

> All that is left for the FCC to 
> do is enter the information into the computer, and print out and mail
> the licenses.
>
> And now, they can't even do THAT acceptably.

I don't know, eight weeks isn't bad turnaround for a government agency.
You should also notice that you don't currently pay the GOVERNMENT anything
for your amateur license.  (Any fee you pay went to the VEC).

> The answer may be that hams do the licensing as well.  It won't solve
> the FCC's problems.

Actually, the way the FAA gets around their long delays is to issue temporary
permits in the field.  Actually there were some discussions (PRB3) of private
issuance of call signs, but that turned out to be a rather large fiasco.

-Ron
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: oppedahl@panix.com (Carl Oppedahl)
Subject: Re: 6 Meter Radio Shack HTs!
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 05:19:52 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC

In <1992Dec17.192643.10086@cbnewsm.cb.att.com> jeffj@cbnewsm.cb.att.com (jeffrey.n.jones) writes:

>In article <1992Dec17.113000.1@vaxb.acs.unt.edu> wday@vaxb.acs.unt.edu writes:
>> spikes@hpscit.sc.hp.com (Bill Spikes) writes:
>>> Long post about modifying Radio Shack TRC-503 and TRC-505 walkie talkies
>>> to 6 meters.
>>> Took them apart as soon as we got home. The 5 channel one is synthesized
>>> and dual conversion! I couldn't tell for sure if the xtal controlled
>>> single channel one was dual conv. or not. It had enough cans. Also about
>>> 10 transistors and 3 ICs. They both have squelch, although the control
>>> is NOT brought out of the case. Neither 'manual' has a schematic in it
>>> but they may be available, according to the salescritter.
>>
>>> These GOTTA be modifiable to 6 meters. The output power should be raised
>>> up a bit too. Somebody on the net has already posted about this a few moons
>>> ago, and there must be others that have tried this. Any help, pointers to
>>> someone, or stories would be appreciated. A 6 meter HT for 25 bucks! (or 40)
>>> I hope to learn from somebody elses mistakes here before I butcher her radios.

>Are these AM, FM or SSB? 

They are FM, as is every consumer electronic product on the 49-MHz
frequencies ... baby monitors, cordless phones, kiddie walkie-talkies ...


Carl Oppedahl AA2KW  (intellectual property lawyer)
30 Rockefeller Plaza
New York, NY  10112-0228
voice 212-408-2578     fax 212-765-2519
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: tjf@beta.lanl.gov (Tom J Farish)
Subject: Online Repeater Directory?
Organization: Los Alamos National Laboratory
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 18:05:12 GMT

Hi...I wondered if there was an internet ftp'able / readable listing
of repeters freq's.  If anyone knows of such, would you please e-mail
or post?  If locals are available, I am particularly interested in
Oakland/Livermore Ca area, Denver/Boulder Co area and Richland/Tri-Cities
Wa area.  Thanks!

-Tom KD5??? (Licence in the mail)
From: gcouger@olesun.okstate.edu (Gordon Couger)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Need docs on Butternut trap vertical
Date: 13 Dec 92 06:41:03 GMT
Organization: Oklahoma State University, Stillwater

I picked up a Butternut trap vertical at a ham fest with
no documetation. I will be glad to pay cost of copying and
postage.
Thanks
Gordon
Gordon Couger
AB5Dg   Agriculture Engineering Oklahoma State University
gcouger@olesun.agen.okstate.edu 405-744-6514 day 744-2794 evenings   
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: ham@wam.umd.edu (Scott Richard Rosenfeld)
Subject: Re: writing out -- --- .-. ... . in order to pass your exam
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1992 15:54:29 GMT

In article <1992Dec20.20549.6534@ms.uky.edu> miles@ms.uky.edu (Stephen D. Grant) writes:
>at a recent W5YI VEC testing, a female wrote down all .'s and -'s and
>was allowed to do so. she got her general (while 4 others struggled).
>i was going to use this "cheat" method myself. is it legal or not?
>i'm confused.
>

I myself am a W5YI and Laurel VEC volunteer examiner, and I have given probably
1000 code tests over the past 6 years.  This is a very gray area, although 
the general belief here:

One must COPY the code.  I used to think that writing down dots and dashes
was OK.  After some discussion, I realized that this is not actually "Compre-
hension."  People don't copy like this on the air, nor is it feasible.  
Writing down dots & dashes I can probably do 40 wpm, but only later can I
go back and figure it out...

It's a matter or interpretation, I say "NO."

Scott NF3I

Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: MSUORANTA@FINABO.ABO.FI (Mika Suoranta Tkkk)
Subject: Icom IC-02E modifications needed
Organization: Turku School of Economics, Finland
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 22:07:04 GMT
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.24


	I would like to expand frequency range of my brand
	new very old (serial number below 2000!) IC-02E to
	receive, among other freq's, Meteosat on 130..140 MHz
	range. 

	All modification info I've so far seen is for the 
	IC-02AT or -02A. Is there anyone in "netland" who
	has been working with an old 02E? I would assume the
	modifications are nothing special, just some diodes
	to add/remove here and there, and perhaps some undocumented
	jumper wires etc....

				73 and thanks

					Mika OH1NZQ
		



 -------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Mika Suoranta, Leirikatu 11, SF-20360 Turku, Finland, tel. +358-21-382637
 Internet e-mail MSUORANTA@FINABO.ABO.FI Packet Radio OH1NZQ@OH1RBI.FIN.EU
 -------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                          
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: laborde@oak.Jpl.Nasa.Gov (Gregory R. LaBorde)
Subject: Re: Is the ICOMR1 a good receiver
Organization: Reliability Engineering Section, JPL
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 23:42:58 GMT
Expires: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 08:00:00 GMT

>I say:
>
>This sounds more like an intermodulation problem than a selectivity 
>problem, as the selectivity will remain the same regardless of the MDS 
>of the rig. Anybody tried it in truly ugly RF environments? What does 
>its front-end(s) look like?

No, unfortunately this sort of behaviour is not an intermod problem. I know
because the R1 _also_ has an intermod problem. I'll give you a concrete 
example: Pasadena PD uses 482.3375 for dispatch, with .4375, .5375, and .6375
as their other operational channels. .5375 will lock up with a transmission
on .3375, and the signal will bleed through clearly enough to be easily
deciphered. I often have it lock up on a channel and am uncertain as to which
PPD frequency is in use. Poor selectivity, I'd say. Now when it passes across
the input to .4375 on 485.4375, it tends to stop alot. LAPD has a frequency
at 506.7375 (21.4 away), which is used for license info type stuff. This is
clearly intelligible on 485.4375. Imaging, I'd say. Finally, the paging inter-
mod and ghost signals which are symptomatic of intermod are rampant through the
VHF-Hi band. Is LA an ugly enough RF environment for you?

Now I have a question concerning the R1. I too have heard that attenuation can
really help its intermod and selectivity problems. I have found that use of a
selected antenna tuned for the band of interest (a duck antenna for an Icom
air-band handheld, for example) greatly improves performance. A previous post
said that a 20dB attenuator at the antenna will help. Can anyone be more 
precise about the kind and value of attenuator to use (or justify 20 dB)? I
was thinking more like 10 dB, but I don't really know. I want to reduce the
interference without killing the signal.

Thanks,

-Greg
From: kallits@wkuvx1.bitnet
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Milwaukee 2m frequencies
Date: 12 Dec 92 17:31:09 CST
Organization: Western Kentucky University, Bowling Green, KY


I will be spending some time in the Milwaukee area in January-February
1993.  Can anyone give me some local 2 meter repeater and packet
frequencies?  Any help would be appreciated.

                                           Thanks,
                                           Tim Kallio

Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: whs70@dancer.cc.bellcore.com (sohl,william h)
Subject: Re: scanner news group
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 92 15:22:27 GMT

In article <n_k2vhg@rpi.edu> mellob@rpi.edu writes:
>
>
>> From: LAPORTEJ@wl.aecl.CA
>> Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
>> Subject: Scanner news group
>> Date: 14 Dec 92 17:50:31 GMT
>> Organization: UCSD Usenet Gateway
>> Lines: 9
>> Message-ID: <01GSB1GZV2SY95NNDC@wl.aecl.ca>
>> NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
>> Originator: daemon@ucsd.edu
>
>> I recently saw reference to a news group alt.radio.scanner.
>> I have no access to this group it seems. There is no such listing
>> for this newsgroup on my system. I have full Internet capability
>> ie FTP /Telcom etc. Can anyone advise if this group exist?
>> Is it archived on a machine I can FTP to? Who may be the moderator?
>> Who could I e-maul inquiries to? Tnx for any help in advance.
>> As this is outside the scope of this digest possibly the best would 
>> be to respond via e-mail to Laportej@wl.aecl.ca .I do read the disgest
>> for this newsgroup daily..
>
> I think everybody wouldbe interested in this info and i know I would,
>	I apparently do not have the option to subscribe to alt.radio.scanner 		         either. So please POST it if you GOT it.

Yes it does exist, it is an unmoderated newsgroup, but that is all
I know about it.  It is available at my site (gateway), but you'd
best check with someone at your site as to how to get it or why
it isn't available where you are.  

I do know that some sites/companies do not accept alt... groups at
all, which could be some of the problem in the distribution, but
that's totally out of my area of knowledge.

Standard Disclaimer- Any opinions, etc. are mine and NOT my employer's.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Sohl (K2UNK) BELLCORE (Bell Communications Research, Inc.)
Morristown, NJ             email via UUCP      bcr!cc!whs70
201-829-2879 Weekdays      email via Internet  whs70@cc.bellcore.com

Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: miles@ms.uky.edu (Stephen D. Grant)
Subject: Re: FCC woes, what can be done?
Keywords: FCC
Organization: University of Kentucky, USA. -5 GMT
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 05:06:20 GMT
Distribution: usa

Why not establish a computerized data-base that could electronically issue
the license upon passing the test? Have the VEC enter the data from the exam
site. Sounds possible to me.

Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: miles@ms.uky.edu (Stephen D. Grant)
Subject: Best 2m compact HT? Help Quickly!
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 00:26:42 GMT
Organization: University of Kentucky, USA. -5 GMT

I am going to order a 2 meter comapct HT in the next few days.
Please help me decide on which one. Which is the best?
I am looking at the:

 Yaesu FT415 @ $299
 Alinco DJ1T/HP (?) @ $309
 Icom IC2PAT (?) @ $329
 Standard CA168 (?) @ $299

sorry about non-exact model numbers, all from memory.
and also the Kenwood H28 (?) @ $339

which should I buy?
thanks in advance!!
From: fcr@ll.mit.edu (Frank Robey)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: TS-820
Date: 11 Dec 92 18:29:57 GMT
Article-I.D.: ll.1992Dec11.182957.6402
Organization: MIT Lincoln Laboratory

>Leonard, KB2R:  "Any other satisfied (or not) 820 owners out there?"

I too purchased a used TS820, and am pleased with it for the most part.

In article <1992Dec7.230614.19375@nntpd2.cxo.dec.com> little@nuts2u.enet.dec.com (nuts2u::little) writes:
>
>Oh yeah, one other thing although not really a complaint, just a note to
>other 820S owners.  When mine arrived, the digital display was acting very
>weird.  Wrong frequency displayed, missing parts of digits, one digit
>completely missing, etc.  This apparently is pretty common with this rig. 
>Fortunately the fix is trivial.  Simply open up the radio and clean and/or
>re-seat the connectors going to the board that controls the digital display
>unit.  The display works perfectly now. :-)
>

I had this same problem, but it was not so simple to fix.  Reseating the 
connectors did not do it.  The digital display boards and all of the other
boards that are in the rig were not properly cleaned when the rig was first
built.  There was solder flux left on the boards that had turned gummy
in some spots, and chalky in others.  I ended up cleaning the display boards
to get rid of the flux and then they worked with the exception of one
digit where the problem was traced to a bad driver transistor.  Replaced
that, and the display was back.  

The flux really messed up the noise figure of the receiver though.  I cleaned
the input filter board, and the if board, so that now the lower
frequency bands are working fairly well, but still have not
got the problem fixed on 10-20 meters.  The audio on these bands is just
below the noise level, so I get a headache trying to listen.  This was a
radio that was sold to me in "perfect" condition.  I only paid $400 for
the TS-820S and the VFO-820 though, so I am not complaining too much.

Frank Robey
fcr@ll.mit.edu
KA1YLB
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc