HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: witr@rwwa.COM (Robert Withrow)
Subject: Real Extras (was Real NoCodes)
Reply-To: witr@rwwa.com
Organization: R.W. Withrow Associates
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 22:22:36 GMT

Since I have been assured that the Real NoCodes is ``just humor'' by
the original poster, the I think we should have a little ``humor'' for
the extras.  I'm sure they won't mind.

			Real Extras

1) Real Extras use foul language on 20.  They collect NALs like
they are merit badges.

2) Real Extras are band police.  They enjoy walking on other hams
trasmissions with their own (unidentified) ones, to protect the
purity of the hobby.  Combining this with #1 gives extra points.

3) Real Extras don't know the regs.  But they are very positive about
their knowedge.

4) Real Extras cultivate exceptionally fine BO.  The truly accomplished
ones have bad breath that would gag a yak.

5) Real Extras generate harmonics when contesting on 10, and when a
neighbor complains about the TVI, they tell them that they have a FCC
license and to get lost and go buy a better TV.

6) Real Extras use full legal limit (plus a little) to talk to their buddy
across town.

7) Real Extras chase ambulances so they can offer their ``communications''
expertise.

8) Real Extras tune up on top of existing QSOs.

9) Real Extras join the pileup nomatter where the DX station is directing
his calls.

10) Real Extras have their repeaters ID at 30WPM.  So what if the FCC
doesn't like it?

Any contributions?

-- 
 Robert Withrow, Tel: +1 617 598 4480, Fax: +1 617 598 4430, Net: witr@rwwa.COM
 R.W. Withrow Associates, 21 Railroad Ave, Swampscott MA 01907-1821 USA
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: mellob@cary101.its.rpi.edu (Silly Putty)
Subject: ellicited comment on illegals 
Reply-To: mellob@rpi.edu
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY.
Distribution: world 
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 01:54:00 GMT


	My first irrational response would be to suggest you mind your own               business. But there are other ways to discuss this.

	First of all, there is no proof that this man "Joe" made these
	modifications. Nor is there any proof that "Joe" transmitted on
	these supposedly illegal channels. So in that case, it would be
	a waste of time for the FCC and a waste of a stamp for you.
	Thats the "technical" side of my comment.

	Over here, we have the ethical side. Maybe the term "rat" is
	strong but I think it would apply here. Is this guy bothering you
	in actuality? Or is it just the fact that you know he's doing it
	thats bugging you? In the latter case, I'd just have to say, live	
	with it. You're not a crusader and you can find better things to
	do with your time than trying to make the lives of illegal tech's
	miserable.

	From the Ham point of view, I respect the rules (for the most part)
	the government sets down to retain some sort of order in the radio
	spectrum. If somebosy else doesn't, then that is the FCC's 
	responsiblity. There has been quite enough B.S. going around (mostly
	in QST) about the "HAM COP" and Ham police and all that other
	related flaming about Hard Guy Hams who "take matters into their own
	hands." Imagine what would happen to that now-calming situation
	if us(we?) Hams started interfering not only with our fellow hams as
	before, but now interfering with other radio services!

	Bottom lines:
	a) Not your job, mon.
	b) MYOB

	
	Brett Mellor, N1LAG                   mellob@rpi.edu
	Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
	Troy, New York
 
		
	my views, blah blah blah blah blah, not schools.
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: hdavies@rx.xerox.com (Hugh J.E. Davies)
Subject: Re: Real hams?
Reply-To: hdavies@rx.xerox.com
Organization: Rank Xerox Ltd.
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 14:14:35 GMT

In article aa06911@ingate.microsoft.COM, a-kevinp@microsoft.COM (Kevin Purcell, Rho) writes:
>What is with these insults. I've been licensed as G8UDP for 13 years.
>
>72/73 Kevin, N7WIM / G8UDP
>a-kevinp@microsoft.com
>----------

[snip]

Yeah, but that isn't a *real* license!	:o)
---


Regards,

Hugh, G0CNR.
------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't speak for Xerox. | It's no use being clever - we are all
Rank Xerox Centre, UK.   | clever here; just try to be kind - a
Huge.wgc1@rx.xerox.com   | little kind. (F.J. Foakes Jackson)


Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: pgc@csadfa.cs.adfa.oz.au (Phil Clark)
Subject: Re: 2m/70cm antenna
Organization: Australian Defence Force Academy, Canberra, Australia
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 00:14:11 GMT

From article <3064@eram.esi.COM.AU>, by dave@eram.esi.COM.AU (Dave Horsfall):
> 
> A genuine J-pole, or a Slim Jim [tm] ?  The latter is often called the
> former, to avoid petty trademark arguments.  And how come the venerable
> Slim Jim (a folded J pole, or an end-fed folded dipole) is never mentioned
> in USA publications?

Yes, I do know the difference between a "J" antenna and a "Slim-Jim". I refer
to the "J".

> Such a design appeared in "73" last year, called the "Copper Cactus."  It
> was made from copper pipe, and apparently worked on 70cm (but not as well
> as one would hope).

As I do not subscribe to "73" and rarely even see a copy (seen about 3 or 4 
in the last 6 years!) I was not aware of the article mentioned.

> | I hope to be able to publish these results (When I get time to write it up) 
> | in the journal of the Wireless Institute of Australia in the near future.
> 
> You'll want to mention prior art, of course :-)


Naturally, I make no claim as to design or development of the antenna itself,
merely to the selection of the matching point and the the performance measure-
ments such as return loss (VSWR) and polar patterns on both bands.

I would be interested to know if this information has been published and 
if so, where. My intent is to provide information to Autralian amateurs (and
aspiring amateurs) as I can not recall seeing this particlular information in 
any local widely read publications. (This is not to imply that "AR" is classed
as "widely read" :-) ).


> Incidentally, I used a genuine Slim Jim on 2 and 70 (before I knew better,
> just after I was licenced).  Seemed to work well.
> 

The present indications are that the antenna works on 70cm at least as well
as a "unity" gain (Odbd) antenna, but with a marked directional charateristic 
on that band. I would be interested to know if the point regarding 
directional characteristics has been mentioned in previous articles.

> Dave Horsfall (VK2KFU)         VK2KFU @ VK2RWI.NSW.AUS.OC
>statement  dave@esi.COM.AU                ...munnari!esi.COM.AU!dave


Phil Clark [VK1PC]         Department of Computer Science,     Phone: 
                           Australian Defence Force Academy,   +61 6 268 8157
Email:                     Northcott Drive, Campbell,          Fax:
pgc@csadfa.cs.adfa.oz.au   Canberra, Australia, 2600.          +61 6 268 8581
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Using electrical outlet ground as earth ground?????
Reply-To: gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 06:10:00 GMT

In article <1993Jan27.113234.5504@klaava.Helsinki.FI> stickler@klaava.Helsinki.FI (Patric M Stickler) writes:
>Does the ground socket of an electrical outlet provide a good (or at 
>least reasonable) path to earth ground? I.e. would I be able to hook
>up a three prong grounded plug with the two hot prongs removed in
>order to connect my rig to earth ground via the electrical outlet?

The third wire "ground" connection on outlets is intended to be an
electrical *safety* ground for DC or 50/60 cycle AC voltages. It is
not generally an effective RF ground. Even a short straight wire has
some inductance, and a long serpentine electrical cable looping from
outlet to outlet certainly has plenty. It will act as a high impedance
to RF and almost certainly will couple your signals into the electrical
wiring causing TVI, RFI, and other forms of I to other pieces of
electronic equipment plugged into the same branch circuit. 

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     |                     |
From: oler@rho.uleth.CA (Cary Oler)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Daily Solar Geophysical Data Broadcast for 21 January
Date: 22 Jan 93 22:18:32 GMT
Organization: UCSD Usenet Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: daemon@ucsd.edu

!!BEGIN!! (1.0) S.T.D. Solar Geophysical Data Broadcast for DAY 021, 01/21/93
10.7 FLUX=106.6  90-AVG=141        SSN=069      BKI=1213 1101  BAI=004
BGND-XRAY=B1.3     FLU1=7.0E+04  FLU10=9.6E+03  PKI=2313 2111  PAI=006
  BOU-DEV=007,019,006,025,008,005,002,008   DEV-AVG=010 NT     SWF=00:000
 XRAY-MAX= B2.1   @ 0001UT    XRAY-MIN= B1.2   @ 2203UT   XRAY-AVG= B1.4
NEUTN-MAX= +002%  @ 1835UT   NEUTN-MIN= -004%  @ 0735UT  NEUTN-AVG= -0.2%
  PCA-MAX= +2.2DB @ 2255UT     PCA-MIN= -0.2DB @ 0625UT    PCA-AVG= +0.8DB
BOUTF-MAX=55415NT @ 0630UT   BOUTF-MIN=55391NT @ 1937UT  BOUTF-AVG=55407NT
GOES7-MAX=P:+097NT@ 1904UT   GOES7-MIN=N:+002NT@ 1127UT  G7-AVG=+074,+031,+009
GOES6-MAX=P:+116NT@ 1859UT   GOES6-MIN=E:-007NT@ 2208UT  G6-AVG=+092,+002,+040
 FLUXFCST=STD:105,105,105;SESC:105,105,105 BAI/PAI-FCST=005,005,005/007,007,010
    KFCST=1112 2111 1112 3111  27DAY-AP=006,002   27DAY-KP=0223 2231 0011 1210
 WARNINGS=
   ALERTS=
!!END-DATA!!
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: jones@sj.ate.slb.com (Clark Jones)
Subject: Re: writing out -- --- .-. ... . in order to pass your exam
Organization: Schlumberger ATE, San Jose
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 93 00:52:13 GMT

S. A. Modena (samodena@csemail.cropsci.ncsu.edu) wrote:
: Are written theory exams available in Spanish?  In which language do
: the citizens of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico take their exams
: WHEN THEY USE ARRL-supplied examination supplies?  (Or W5YI?)

As an aside to this, the commercial tickets DO require a knowledge of
spoken "English".  When I took the test for my First Class Radiotelephone
License (that was back in '78, it's now called a General Class Radiotelephone
License) the examiner told me to "sit in the third seat in the first row".
He then observed where I sat, and had I sat in the wrong seat, I would have
failed right there.  (When I came back after lunch [it was a fairly long
exam to take all in one day ;-)], he didn't say which seat to sit in, so I
asked, and he said "I don't care.  Just pick one."

--
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are mine and not those of Schlumberger
because they are NOT covered by the patent agreement!

Alternate reply path:  jones@sjs.sj.ate.slb.com
Phone: (602) 345-3638
Snail: Clark Jones, Schlumberger Technologies, 7855 S. River Pkwy #116, Tempe,
       AZ  85284-1825
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: light-weihgt power supplies : Info. 
From: Steve_Wright@kcbbs.gen.nz (Steve Wright)
Date: 22 Jan 93 03:38:07 GMT
Organization: Kappa Crucis Unix BBS, Auckland, New Zealand

It's easy enough to convery a PC power supply and they're **cheap** !
From: oler@rho.uleth.CA (Cary Oler)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Daily Solar Geophysical Data Broadcast for 20 January
Date: 21 Jan 93 08:14:17 GMT
Organization: UCSD Usenet Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: daemon@ucsd.edu

!!BEGIN!! (1.0) S.T.D. Solar Geophysical Data Broadcast for DAY 020, 01/20/93
10.7 FLUX=110.0  90-AVG=141        SSN=065      BKI=3223 3310  BAI=009
BGND-XRAY=B1.7     FLU1=1.6E+05  FLU10=9.4E+03  PKI=3223 3322  PAI=010
  BOU-DEV=034,010,017,027,025,031,005,004   DEV-AVG=019 NT     SWF=00:000
 XRAY-MAX= B9.8   @ 1314UT    XRAY-MIN= B1.4   @ 2325UT   XRAY-AVG= B2.1
NEUTN-MAX= +001%  @ 2055UT   NEUTN-MIN= -004%  @ 1740UT  NEUTN-AVG= -1.0%
  PCA-MAX= +0.1DB @ 2025UT     PCA-MIN= -0.3DB @ 0930UT    PCA-AVG= -0.0DB
BOUTF-MAX=55417NT @ 1528UT   BOUTF-MIN=55400NT @ 2000UT  BOUTF-AVG=55410NT
GOES7-MAX=P:+098NT@ 2109UT   GOES7-MIN=N:-008NT@ 0853UT  G7-AVG=+069,+027,+007
GOES6-MAX=P:+123NT@ 1517UT   GOES6-MIN=E:-008NT@ 2201UT  G6-AVG=+088,+002,+038
 FLUXFCST=STD:105,105,105;SESC:105,105,105 BAI/PAI-FCST=015,005,005/015,010,010
    KFCST=3334 4333 1112 3111  27DAY-AP=008,006   27DAY-KP=2333 2221 0223 2231
 WARNINGS=
   ALERTS=
!!END-DATA!!
From: davos@engin.umich.edu (Alexander Slingeland)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: QRP amplifier ?
Date: 27 Jan 93 17:18:02 GMT
Organization: University of Michigan
NNTP-Posting-Host: ggbmac147.engin.umich.edu
X-UserAgent: Nuntius v1.1.1d9
X-XXMessage-ID: <A78C2F6B42018893@ggbmac147.engin.umich.edu>
X-XXDate: Wed, 27 Jan 93 19:24:11 GMT


I just finished building a QRP transciever for 40M and found that I still
have room
to spare in the case, so I was wondering if it would be worth building a
small
amplifier that would boost the current output from 1W to ~5W ? I hope
to try and do some DX from Asia, so I was thinking that I could use all
the
gain I can get (but still stay QRP, and small size).

If anyone has any applicable experience (I have none) or knows of where
plans for such
an amp. exist, please mail me.

73
Alexander Slingeland (N8SPG)
From: randall@informix.com (Randall Rhea)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: ICOM-725 Info. (was ICOM-726)
Date: 21 Jan 93 01:32:18 GMT
Organization: Informix Software, Inc.

k2ph@dxis.att.com (Bob Schreibmaier) writes:

>Has anyone had the opportunity to compare the 735 with the new 728?
>Their street price seems to be very comparable these days -- the
>728 may be about $50 cheaper.  Particularly, how do the receivers
>compare?

It depends on what you want to use the rig for.

I find that the receivers are nearly identical.  I've played with them 
next to each other and can hear no difference.   The specs are
almost identical.

If you are interested in working AM at all, (especially mobile) I 
would get a 735, as its noise limiter works on AM.   The 735 also  
has a notch filter, which is occasionally useful on 40m SSB to
get rid of heterodynes.  

For overall SSB mobile work, I think the 728 is better designed.
It is easier to change bands and frequencies.  The display is better
designed.   The AH-3 automatic antenna tuner also makes a great
combination with this rig.

73 DE KK6MY

-- 

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Randall Rhea                                        Informix Software, Inc. 
Project Manager, MIS Sales/Marketing Systems    uunet!pyramid!infmx!randall
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: k9un@cbnewse.cb.att.com (j.w.ague)
Subject: New ICOM IC W21AT
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 23:05:11 GMT

I saw that ICOM has a new dual bander - the W21AT - in the latest QST.
It looks more like the P2AT at al radios with the coloring and the
buttons (including an AI button). I called ICOM and ordered the brochure
and will report what I find out. I have been seriously considering the
W2AT but really like the display and the plentiful receive audio from
my wife's (ka9kdy) P2AT.  If W21AT has the same coverage (after the mods)
as the W2AT, I will probably go for it. Anyone else know anything about it?

Wes Ague  k9un
k9un@iw4os.att.com
Naperville, IL
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: kd1hz@anomaly.sbs.com (Michael P. Deignan)
Subject: Re: Unreal NoCodes
Organization: Small Business Systems, Incorporated, Smithfield, RI 02917
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1993 03:04:22 GMT

wpns@miki.pictel.com (Willie Smith) writes:

>Don't be too hard on Mikey folks, he used to be a lowly tech (N1LMB)
>himself (just upgraded in April),

Yup. But I did something about it. God knows I wanted to get rid of that
N1 call.


>and besides no-one wished him a
>Happy Birthday some 3 weeks ago.  He's closing in on 30, and he's
>getting his Old Fart routine in shape.  8*]

Yup.


MD
-- 
--  Michael P. Deignan, KD1HZ               ------------------------
--  Domain: mpd@anomaly.sbs.com             -  I'm not a bigot,    -
--    UUCP: ...!uunet!anomaly!mpd           -  I hate everyone...  -
-- Telebit: +1 401 455 0347                 ------------------------
From: kludge@grissom.larc.nasa.gov (Scott Dorsey)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: Burglars are brighter than you might think!
Date: 27 Jan 1993 19:36:19 GMT
Organization: NASA Langley Research Center and Reptile Farm
Distribution: na
NNTP-Posting-Host: grissom.larc.nasa.gov

In article <1993Jan27.184350.5273@linus.mitre.org> m14494@mwvm.mitre.org (Mike White) writes:
>Fred Lloyd  writes:
>>>  Beware of the Eavesdroppers...
>>  I make it a personal practice NEVER to discuss vacation plans over the air
>>  I don't even like to mention the fact that my wife is in the car with me >
>>  (meaning that the house is empty
>
>This is all good advice, but very, very scary.  What does it say
>about the society  we've created?  Think I'll go get me a big gun!
>No, no, that's not right; George is gone, Bill C. is in the White House.  Let's see; I'll go get me a sensitive, self-actualized, empowered house cat to guard my rig at home. ;-)

Nahh, I've got the solution.  Try a Collins R-390A, teamed up with a Johnson
Viking in a nice military steel rack cabinet.  I'd just like to see them try
to steal it.  It took six people to lift it up the front steps.
--scott
   (security through size and weight)
From: clemon@lemsys.UUCP (Craig Lemon VE3XCL)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: Real NoCodes
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 18:13:28 EST
Organization: Private UUCP "Twig" Node
X-Newsreader: Arn V1.00

In article <C1E2H5.G3G@anomaly.sbs.com>, Michael P. Deignan writes:

> >Mr. High and mighty, stay on HF.  We appreciate the over here on 2m. 
> 
> Nah, we stay on our private UHF repeater. 

        Somehow that doesn't surprise me.

> 
> MD
> -- 
> --  Michael P. Deignan, KD1HZ               ------------------------
> --  Domain: mpd@anomaly.sbs.com             -  I'm not a bigot,    -

.. -> ..                              I'm afraid I disagree.

> --    UUCP: ...!uunet!anomaly!mpd           -  I hate everyone...  -
> -- Telebit: +1 401 455 0347                 ------------------------

.. -> ..                           Except yourself and anyone "good" enough
                                   to be your friend (almost an oxymoron).

--
 Craig Lemon VE3XCL (Advanced) - Kitchener, Ontario. +1 519 741 0297
 clemon@lemsys.UUCP clemon%lemsys@xenitec.on.ca  | 1B Electrical Engineering
 TCP/IP: ve3xcl@ve3xcl.ampr.org [44.135.84.51]   |  University of Waterloo
 AX.25 Packet: ve3xcl@ve3euk.#SWON.ON.CAN.NA     | Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA
From: bill.nadzam@pcs.sj.ca.us (Bill Nadzam)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Antenna Question
Date: 23 Jan 93 11:44:00 GMT
Reply-To: bill.nadzam@pcs.sj.ca.us (Bill Nadzam)
Organization: PCS-BBS - San Jose, CA - 408-270-4085

MGSome years ago I cut and article out of one
MGof the Ham magazines on Coaxial Dipole
MGconstruction. I don't remember what magazine,
MGand I don't even know what year, but I wish
MGto build one of these antennas for 28.4 mHz,
MGand I have no idea what dimensions the
MGcoaxial section should be as opposed to the
MGwire ends. The antenna looked something like
MGthis when completed:
MG
MG  Wire	Coax		Coax	     Wire
MG-----------===============X=============----------
MG
MGX = Feedpoint with RG-8 Coax.
MG
MGThe part where the wire attached to the coax, the
MGcoax center conductor and braid were shorted together
MGand connected to the wire.
MG
MGAnyway, I could use formulas or actual dimensions
MGgathered from articles on such an antenna. Or maybe
MGthere are users of this antenna whom are familiar
MGwith its construction.
MG
MGI think this antenna might have been called a
MGDouble Bazooka also, but maybe not.
MG
MGAny help appreciated
MG73, WO7T Mark


  This antenna is called the Double Bazooka. It is made from
RG-58/u coax not RG-8/u and for best results uses 450 Ohm twin
lead at the ends, not just wire, but wire does work. This antenna
was desribed for many years in the ARRL Radio Handbook, but seems
to have been dropped. I do know that it is also in the ARRL antenna
compendium volume 1. If you nned it I would be glad to send you
a copy. If you have any older ARRL handooks around i.e. mid 70's
give a look in there too.
---
 . EZ 1.37 . 73 de Bill K8WN ..._._
From: jbloom@arrl.org (Jon Bloom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: DSP and The Future
Date: 22 Jan 93 16:42:16 EST
Organization: American Radio Relay League

In rec.radio.amateur.misc, wvhorn@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (William VanHorne) writes:
>Well folks, I spent part of last Saturday playing with daddy-ham's (W8UOF)
>latest toy: W9GR's DSP box (described in Sept. QST).  I'm impressed.  I found
[deleted]
>Given the *current* state of DSP technology, why do we need all those reception
>aids?  Why do we need multiple IF stages with filtering?  For that matter,
>why the heck do we even need to continue to use super-het receivers at all?  
>Couldn't we simply go to direct conversion with DSP processed audio?

Yes, but you give up a few things.  First, with direct conversion you
have no way of separating the 'opposite sideband' signals.  That is,
a signal 1 kHz below the LO and a signal 1 kHz above the LO are
indistinguishable.  (There is a way around this--see Rick Campbell's
article in January QST--but it presents its own problems.)

A more likely approach is do a conversion--either single or dual, as
needed, down to some relatively low IF, like maybe 100 kHz.  It's
pretty easy to do DSP at that frequency, particularly if you use some
simple, cheap filtering to bandlimit the 100-kHz signal to, say a 20
kHz bandwidth.

Of course, it may seem that at this point you've just about built the
reciver you were trying to replace, but that's not quite so.  Missing
from this scheme are: high-cost, phase-distorting crystal filters; all
of the multiple mixers and oscillators needed to make the passband
tuning/IF shift schemes; detector/demodulator.

In theory, all of the filtering and detection can be done in the DSP.
But there's a rub (you knew there would be, right?)  In order to
maintain an acceptable dynamic range, the DSP system has to do a high-
resolution A/D conversion--and calculations to match.  I suspect you
could get acceptable performance from a 16-bit system for a mid-quality
receiver.  But a really good receiver would probably need more.  Add the
fast A/D (note: the D/A doesn't need to be as fast, although fast D/As
aren't a problem anyway) to the fast processor needed to do significant
DSP, and you have a pretty costly result.

Still, DSP technology is fast moving, and I predict you'll see such
receiver technology become standard, and sooner rather than later.
-------
Jon Bloom, KE3Z              |  jbloom@arrl.org
American Radio Relay League  |     Justice is being allowed to do whatever
225 Main St.                 |     I like.  Injustice is whatever prevents
Newington, CT 06111          |     my doing so. -- Samuel Johnson