HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: Steele.henr801c@xerox.COM
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Radio Shack Pro2006 vs AOR- AR2500
Date: 8 Oct 1992 15:49:54 -0700
Organization: UCSD Usenet Gateway
Reply-To: "Steele.Henr801c@xerox.com".henr801c@xerox.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu

All Scanner Enthusiasts (Hopefully on internet),
	Can anybody tell me if there are any SSB transmissions in the 1-1500Mhz
range? Military,Government,etc.?  I`d like to purchase a scanner with good
coverage and I`m considering the Radio Shack Pro2006 [$400] (25-950Mhz with
holes) and the AOR- AR2500 [$430] (1-1500Mhz). The Radio Shack radio only
covers AM/FM while the AOR covers AM/FM/SSB/CW.
	My question is:Do I need to receive SSB? I`d like to receive military
communications as well as the normal police, fire, etc. and I know the military
uses SSB in the HF bands, but I don`t know about 30Mhz and above.
	Any comments, from the more experienced, on the abilities of, or
modifications that can be done to, either of these two radios (or any others
that fit the bill) would be appreciated.  Sources of further information would
also be welcomed.
Thanks,
John (N2FTS)

8*227-1810 or (716)-427-1810
Steele.Henr801C@Xerox.com
~>: Corporate mail: 800-31A
~A: U.S. Mail:	Xerox,  1350 Jefferson Road,  M/S 800/31A, Rochester,
NY 14623
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: jeffl@comix.UUCP (Jeff Liebermann)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.packet
Subject: Re: ARRL RPTR Directory Stinks :-(
Summary: Open/closed repeaters
Keywords: Coordinators Editors
Date: Thu, 08 Oct 92 15:53:17 PDT
Followup-To: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Organization: COmmittee to Maintain Independent Xenix

In article <BvpIw7.4Jr@zero.com> steve@zero.com (Steve Urich) writes:
>	This book is a disgrace! :-( Someone is not doing their job
>	in editing, registration of new updates, and coordination.
(packet related complaints deleted)

While we're on the subject of ARRL Repeater Directory bashing, there's
another political bug in the directory.  The ARRL has unilaterally
decided that there are only two type of repeaters: open and closed.
The other published frequency lists show three types: open, closed,
and private.

Open	Anyone can use it.
Closed	Club or organization membership requested (not demanded).
Private	Not soliciting for additional members.

What this has done is given some club and organization sponsored
repeaters a bad name for operating "closed" systems that are in
reality available for anyone to use.

I do not fault the ARRL for not accepting random input from any
ham with entries and corrections.  I maintain a small frequency list
for the Monterey Bay area.  I average one change per week.  Have
pity on the poor guy at the ARRL and armtwist the frequency
co-ordination groups into supplying timely updates instead.


-- 
# Jeff Liebermann   Box 272     1540 Jackson Ave     Ben Lomond    CA   95005
# 408.336.2558 voice  wb6ssy@ki6eh.#nocal.ca.usa  wb6ssy.ampr.org [44.4.1.86]
# 408.699.0483 digital_pager    73557,2074  cis [don't]
# jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us  uunet!comix!jeffl  jeffl%comix@scruz.ucsc.edu
From: larryj@countach.telcom.tek.com (Larry Johnson)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: 10M Mobile Ant. Recommendations
Date: 16 Oct 92 19:17:49 GMT
Article-I.D.: tekgen.1419
Reply-To: larryj@countach.telcom.tek.com (Larry Johnson)
Organization: Tektronix, Inc., Beaverton,  OR.

I've been on 10M FM / 29.600 for a little over 20 years now, with much of
my activity from a mobile rig (and handie-talkie). I used a full size 
(95" whip) for several years, but changed to a Larsen base-loaded whip
after we found with our unscientific tests that the Larsen on the roof had
better field strength  at the receiving location in all directions except
one, where it was equal with the 1/4 wave whip. This test was done by 
having one ham watch the receiver limiter meter while I drove around in a
small circle at an open parking lot. I sure noticed  lots better performance
when I changed to the Larsen (we also tried an Antenna Specialists base-loaded
whip, which worked excellent as well.) Note that we used the Larsen Model
NMO-30, which is the 30-35 MHz antenna, which allowed us to use nearly the
full-size whip in the loading coil, instead of the 27-30 MHz coil, which would
have required that we chop off a lot of the whip.

29.3 was established by the JA's in the 1970s as a "Calling" Channel - read
"establish contact and QSY" channel. 10FM is used in Japan every 10 KHz 
starting at 29.01, and is quite busy (29.01 and 29.03 MHz are busy with
10M FM Packet BBS stations, 10M FM FAX, etc.)

29.60 is the main simplex channel, with many of us still using converted 
Motorola, GE, etc. single-channel radios. The ARRL Repeater directory has
tried to imply that it is now a Calling" channel, but it is the international
"Simplex" channel. Trying to explain 10FM operation for the last 20 years
to the ARRL has fallen on deaf ears, including 10M repeaters which have been
gone for more than 10 years. Repeaters are often unusable on 10 Meters, since
most groups refuse to use any kind of tone decoder so that the users can 
select _which_ repeater they wish to access. The repeaters used to be fun,
but are generally a frustrating waste now.

CU on 29.6 FM

Larry K7LJ / 7J1ACP
P
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: uri@watson.ibm.com (Uri Blumenthal)
Subject: ICOM Service is bad enough too!
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 18:07:45 GMT
Distribution: usa
Reply-To: uri@watson.ibm.com
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: You care?

Hello,
	I've heard a lot of Kenwood service bashing here
	(and probably well-justified), and at the same 
	time people seem to praise ICOM service and
	response time. So I naturally expected
	(according to the postings here),
	that shipping will take most of 
	the time and ICOM will do the
	job in couple of days...

	Well, here's my story:

	The rig's IC-2SRA. Mechanical problem - main dial
	broke off (during field operation).

	Sent to ICOM by UPS September 24. Rig arrived to
	there October 1st.

	So far several calls to ICOM got only: "Sorry,
	we didn't have a chance to look at it yet, but
	real soon now."   

	Well, as you can see, it has been two full weeks
	for ICOM to just hold the radio, and there's no
	way to know when they actually start LOOKING
	into it, to say nothing about FIXING.

	Maybe Kenwood is worse, but this still isn't
	very good, I think.  Comments?
-- 
Regards,
Uri.		uri@watson.ibm.com
------------
<Disclaimer>
From: jeffj@cbnewsm.cb.att.com (jeffrey.n.jones)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: Plans to build transceivers.
Date: 8 Oct 92 23:36:58 GMT
Article-I.D.: cbnewsm.1992Oct8.233658.20119
Distribution: usa
Organization: AT&T

In article <1992Oct8.155140.16974@odin.corp.sgi.com> adams@chuck.dallas.sgi.com (Charles Adams) writes:
>In article <1992Oct8.023159.24448@ke4zv.uucp>, gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman) writes:
>
>BTW I did finish the A&A, Oakhills Research, Tejas RF Technology,
>and MXM Industries QRP rigs.  For the inquiring minds.......
>
>Chuck Adams   K5FO at faster than a speeding bullet  70+wpm

Tell us more, tell us more! A review of these rigs would be great!

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
From: thomas@HERMES.CHEME.CORNELL.EDU (Thomas J Hirasuna)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Chem. Eng. Hams
Date: 15 Oct 92 18:46:00 GMT
Organization: UCSD Usenet Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu

Are there any amateurs here who are also chemical engineers who plan to 
attend the Amer. Inst. of Chem. Eng. Annual Meeting in Miami Beach, the
first week of November? I will be attending the meeting and am interesed
in meeting other hams who may be there. Thanks

73 de Tom KB2MZQ
thomas@cheme.tn.cornell.edu
Packet: kb2mzq @ wa2fqa.#wny.ny.usa.na
Dr. Thomas J. Hirasuna
School of Chemical Engineering
Olin Hall
Cornell University
Ithaca, NY  14853-5201
From: enders@bolshoi.cc.misu.NoDak.edu (Todd Enders)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: W5YI report..
Date: 16 Oct 92 02:35:34 GMT
Reply-To: enders@bolshoi.uucp
Organization: North Dakota Higher Education Computing Network


     I think the license restructuring proposal has merit, but I believe
there is a better alternative, based on the way things *used* to be, many
moons ago.  Herewith is what I'd like to see proposed:

     1.  Merge Novice, Tech+, General, and Advanced into a single HF license
         class, 5 wpm morse requirement, technical test level equivalent
         to the current advanced class.  HF band privliges equivalent to
         current advanced class.  Program to be phased in so that the lower
         classes have to take the additional theory tests before the old
         system expiration date, so everyone starts equal under the new
         system.  You don't test for the additional theory, you loose.

     2.  Keep the Extra class as it is now.  It has always been a badge of
         honour and prestige, and should be left as such.  The 20 wpm morse
         requirement for Extra has been in place since at least 1927, and if
         one is that hellbent on getting on those small slivers of bandwidth
         reserved for Extras, they probably already have an Extra, or will be
         willing to pay the tithe for one.  In any event, it should be kept
         as it was intended, a mark of prestige.

     3.  The no-code Tech should be the *only* entry level license.  The 
         argument about keeping the novice class as an alternate entry point
         for kids is something of a moot point.  If one can handle the theory
         for Novice, they are equally capable of handling the Tech theory.

     So there it is.  When the proposal gets an RM number and is opened up
for comments, I would hope that something along these lines is offered as
an amendment or counter proposal. I think this strategy benefits the most
without some of the strongest objections -- namely the elimination of the
Extra, and gaining additional benefits without working for them.  What do
you think?

Todd     WD0BCI (Old Tech)  enders@bolshoi.uucp
                            uunet!bolshoi!enders
From: tjonz@caliban.Corp.Sun.COM (Todd Jonz)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: W5YI report..
Date: 16 Oct 92 01:33:04 GMT
Reply-To: tjonz@caliban.Corp.Sun.COM
Distribution: usa
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
NNTP-Posting-Host: caliban.corp.sun.com

WV2N writes:

	> In article <1992Oct14.195445.5829@ttinews.tti.com> 		
	> sorgatz@avatar.tti.com (sorgatz) writes:
	>
	>	> 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
	>
	> If this becomes law, the bell has tolled, the end of Ham radio as we 
	> know it.

Now hold it just a minute here.  I'm confused.  I thought that the codeless 
Technician class license was the end of ham radio as we know it....


KB6JXT, Todd
From: oo7@ut-emx.uucp (Q. Burpington-Smythe)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: mail to ARRL
Date: 10 Oct 92 16:13:29 GMT
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas

dearnshaw@worldbank.org (Darrell Earnshaw) wonders:

>Recently, I've seen a posting that gives a list of email addresses for
>individuals and services located at the League. The question is, do any of
>these people regularly read thier mail?

>The reason behind this question is two messages that I've sent to the
>League; one to the DXCC desk, and one to an individual associated with
>the DXCC program. I didn't get a response from either of the messages,
>not even an acknowledgement that they had been read.

>Common courtesy aside, surely, it would be good PR for the League to at least
>issue an acknowledgment to anybody who mails in an inquiry. If the
>League does not wish to receive electronic mail, then I feel it should
>state its position clearly so we know where we stand.


Perhaps they are busy doing the many other things we expect them to do for 
a paltry $30/yr each.   I have e-mailed people there on a couple of occasions
and had very full, informative, courteous replies promptly.  Your mileage
obviously varied - but I've found the people there to be very helpful on a
number of occasions.  You have a good bargain in your membership when you
consider how many things the staffers there do free.  This message not paid
for by the ARRL.


Derek Wills (AA5BT, G3NMX)
Department of Astronomy, University of Texas, 
Austin TX 78712.  (512-471-1392)
oo7@astro.as.utexas.edu 
oo7@emx.utexas.edu
---------------------------------------------
Xref: sparky rec.radio.amateur.misc:17000 rec.boats:7106
From: mgknn@cbnewsk.cb.att.com (michael.g.kossor)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.boats
Subject: Information needed
Date: 14 Oct 92 14:17:26 GMT
Followup-To: poster
Distribution: usa
Organization: AT&T

I purchased a hand held marine radio made by Southern Marine Research
(SMR) at the last flea market. The unit was supposedly in "perfect working
condition" the last time the seller used it,  the batteries "just died"
so it could not be demonstrated"  Well....  the unit is wasted!  surprise,
surprise.
 
The unit does not receive or transmit although the receiver seems to
be functioning from the IF amp through the AF amp.  It seems to be a
problem with the PLL circuitry.  There are 2 chips used: TC9122 and 
a D65IC02.  I beleive thise chips decode the thumb wheel switches to 
control the VCO to produce the desired frequency.  The VCO appears to
be functioning but only static signals are observed on the TC9122 and
D65IC02.  

Does anyone have a pinout of either of these chips?  Or better yet,
does anyone have an address for Southern Marine Research ?   I never
heard of them.  Any information appreciated.

                                Mike, WA2EBY 

+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Mike Kossor, WA2EBY   |   13N. 12th Street   |  Kenilworth, NJ 07033 |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
From: lairdpg@lub001.lamar.edu
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: PCRTTY or other RTTY Software
Date: 10 Oct 92 18:02:11 GMT
Organization: Lamar University - Beaumont

In article <9210052030.AA28711@ucsd.edu>, IANR003@UNLVM.UNL.EDU (Michael Ruhrdanz) writes:
> I am looking for an IBM-PC type RTTY program that will work with an external
> RTTY-ASCII TU.  I have tried HAMCOM, but find my TU decodes better.  I have
> heard about a program called PCRTTY, but can't locate any information on it.
> 
> I am looking for a source for the PCRTTY program, or any comments concerning
> this or any other RTTY type program.  Can anyone out there help???????
> 
> Michael Ruhrdanz,  N0FER
> Section Emergency Coordinator, Nebraska

The author of RBB826.exe claims that this program can be used as a straight
RTTY Terminal.  It is basically an RTTY BBS Program in self-extractible form
and may be downloaded from The HAM Connection Server at 409-833-1795.  The
name to download is rbb826.exe from the main HAM Conference.

73's
Organization: Arizona State University
Date: Thursday, 15 Oct 1992 15:06:22 MST
From: <IADLRA@ASUACAD.BITNET>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject:    Help?: Weak Alinco DJ-F1

Any ideas or suggestions?...
My Alinco DJ-F1 HT used to work OK.  Recently it has compared poorly
with adjacent other-brand HT's in both reception and transmission.
We have tried new and recharged batteries.  Swapping antennae did
not change it.

Before I send it in for diagnosis and repair,...any ideas?

Thanks much.

'
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: gary@kimbark.uchicago.edu (Gary Mr.VAX Buchholz)
Subject: Re: kerchunking repeaters
Reply-To: gary@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 18:23:21 GMT

In article <9210151714.aa02817@crdec7.apgea.army.mil> wejones@crdec7.apgea.army.mil (Bill Jones) writes:
>    Nothing seems to annoy old timers more than hearing the frequent
>kerchunking of people keying up to see if the repeater is working, and I 
>don't know how many times I have heard it stated that this is illegal, such
>as in one of the novice exam questions.  In fact about 2-3 weeks ago
>someone made the statement in this forum to the effect that such 
>unidentified transmissions are illegal.  
>Any comments?
>B.J.    N3JLQ
>

Well Bill, if you live in a weenie city with weenie repeaters, kerchunking
is not necessary.

People who live in real cities, with repeaters with 5 or 10 receive sites
oftern need to kerchunk to wake up all the sleeping links.  The 
ACLR (KD9FA) repeater in Chicago, with multiple receive sites and links
from 2m to 220, 440, 1.2G and 10m takes a while to "come up" after it 
goes to sleep after non-use.

If you don't kerchunk repeaters with multiple receive sites that have
sleeping links, you will find that the first part of your transmission 
is cut off.  If you are putting out a call for someone ... you'll be 
out of luck.

Gary



-- 
Gary Buchholz / KE9ZM			Internet: gary@midway.uchicago.edu
University of Chicago			Packet:   KE9ZM@N9HSI.IL.USA.NA
Academic and Public Computing		
1155 East 60'th St., Chicago, Ill.	(312) 702-7611
From: gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: FRAUD ALERT - CD-ROM vendor
Date: 13 Oct 92 11:49:57 GMT
Reply-To: gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Gannett Technologies Group

In article <14570514@hpnmdla.sr.hp.com> alanb@hpnmdla.sr.hp.com (Alan Bloom) writes:
>
>"Labelling" and "labeling" are both correct in American English.
>If I am not mistaken, the one-L version is not correct in Britain.

Oh boy, oh boy, a spelling flame! I checked with the online dictionary
and it corrected my spelling of "labelling" to "labeling". Not content
to accept the word of a computer, however, I went to the big book on
the stand. It says the single 'l' is the preferred spelling and notes
that the 'll' is a britishism. (yes, small 'b')

Gary KE4ZV
From: jmeyers@ecst.csuchico.edu (Jeff Meyers)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: For those interested in W2A modification
Date: 15 Oct 92 06:03:05 GMT
Organization: California State University, Chico
NNTP-Posting-Host: psycho.ecst.csuchico.edu

I just modified a friend's Icom W2A this afternoon and came across something
to look for if you do the same.

I had pulled the single diode, and installed the two new ones ordered
from Icom.  Mod didn't work.  I checked all solder connections, re-
assembeled and mod didn't work.  I found that I had left a solder bridge
when removing the factory diode - fixed that, mod didn't work.  I reset
the CPU, mod didn't work.  Finally, I noticed that 5 of the 6 diodes
ordered from Icom (extras for friends) were labeled MP.  One that I had
installed was labeled MB.  Pulled that sucker out and threw in one of the
MP guys and mod WORKED!

I'm not 100% sure that the problem was the wrong diode.  But it sure
seems that way.  Moral of the story - check your parts before you start.

-- 
============================================================================
| Jeff Meyers      |  jmeyers@ecst.csuchico.edu      | 39x43'N  121x48'W   |
| Chico, Ca 95926  |  KD6DIS@KE6LW.#NOCAL.CA.USA.NA  | Grid: CN80-CM99 ??  |
============================================================================
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: rick@cs.sunysb.edu (Richard Spanbauer)
Subject: Re: Barry Electronics in NYC et al...
Organization: State University of New York, Stony Brook
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 12:33:44 GMT

In article <=lzz+cq@rpi.edu> night@acm.rpi.edu writes:
>In <1992Oct12.134903.5586@sbcs.sunysb.edu> rick@cs.sunysb.edu (Richard Spanbauer) writes:
>This isn't discrimination.  Age, sex, ethnicity are things a person can't
>change.  That's why decisions based on those factors are called discrimination.
>Smoking is something a person can control.  It falls in a similar category
>to the person's attitude towards his customers.

	discrimination: to act on the basis of prejudice
	prejudice: an adverse judgment or opinion formed beforehand
	  	   or without knowledge or examination of the facts.

	At least that is how the dictionary I have defines these terms.
	Whether or not prejudice is as a result of optional behavior is
	not a factor.  Would you consider discrimination against a person
	who was disabled as a result of optional behavior, eg a motorcycle
	accident, acceptable?  Same arguments about religion, ie it is an
	optional behavior.

	In general, people will find both myself and my family in the
	non smoking part of airplanes, restaurants, etc.  OTOH, we don't
	walk out of a restaurant if a seat in nonsmoking is unavailable.
	We do this less out of a tolerance for smoke, but for a tolerance
	of *people*.  If we all had a bit more tolerance for the next guy
	over, we might have a few less antenna ordinances :-)

	BTW, we would tolerate you habit of holding your breath when the
	first wisp of cigarette smoke passed by and probably would even
	accommodate your habit of passing out for lack of oxygen ;-) ;-)

>Trip Martin
>night@acm.rpi.edu

				73 -
					Rick Spanbauer, WB2CFV
					State University of New York
Xref: sparky rec.radio.amateur.misc:16648 alt.radio.scanner:2063
From: furuta@cs.umd.edu (Richard Furuta)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,alt.radio.scanner
Subject: Re: Status of manufacturing ban for radios/scanners covering cellular?
Date: 7 Oct 92 21:15:42 GMT
Followup-To: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Organization: U of Maryland, Dept. of Computer Science, Coll. Pk., MD 20742

In article <1992Oct7.151006.28172@porthos.cc.bellcore.com> whs70@dancer.uucp (22501-sohl) writes:
>According to today's newspaper, congress has adjourned for the year
>(they could come back into session if needed).  Does anyone know
>what ever happened to the proposed ban on the manufacture and sale
>of scanners/receivers capable of receiving cellular frequencies?
>
>The proposed legislation was (I believe) section 9 of a larger FCC
>funding bill.
>
>So, did the legislation become law?  Has it  (hopefully) died until
>no earlier than the next congress might take another crack at it?

I don't know what the current Congress did about this bill but if the
articles appearing recently in the Washington Post are any indicator, I
would suggest that you consider this bill to be a very real possibility
sooner or later even if no action was taken before adjournment.  The Post
has run two articles that I am aware of on the topic.  The first, several
months ago, ran on the front page of the paper and the second, within the
past two weeks, ran on the front page of the business section.  Both painted
scanner users as a lunatic fringe.  Indeed the most recent one seemed to
throw hams in as well, quoting someone (I think from Radio Shack) as saying
the modifications to the scanners were so trivial that even if instructions
were not readily available "any of the 500,000 hams could figure them out
quite easily" (a paraphrase).  Well I tend to doubt that, but in any case
sense I got from the most recent article was that the reporter seemed to
think that radio enthusiasts (including hams) were an odd bunch with
motivations not understandable to "normal folk" and that it was in the
public good to take away some of their toys.  The FCC official quoted in the
article sounded supportive of the legislation.

If the legislation is of interest to you I think it is a mistake to be
complacent.  I also think it is a mistake for us to focus on the technical
oddities of the law (e.g., it'll make older televisions illegal as well as
cellular telephones if read very strictly).  The *intent* of the legislation
is clear.  It'll be up to the FCC to *implement* the law.  I have no doubt
that they'll be able to do so in a quite technically precise fashion should
Congress direct them to do so.

					--Rick
					  N3JGF