HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: samodena@csemail.cropsci.ncsu.edu (S. A. Modena)
Subject: Re: Carolina Windom
Organization: Crop Science Dept., NCSU, Raleigh, NC 27695-7620
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 19:58:13 GMT

In article <1076@auratek.UUCP> epacyna@auratek.UUCP (Edward Pacyna) writes:
>I have heard reference to an antenna called the Carolina Windom. I have not
>been able to find any details/description of this antenna. Can someone out
>there provide a short summary/diagram?
>
>Thanks in advance.

The antenna is made and sold by RadioWorks of Virginia (see their ads in
QST, 73, CQ)....send them $1 for their catalog and you will see that the
ad include a diagram of the antenna.

Steve
---
+------------------------------------------------------------------+
|     In person:  Steve Modena     AB4EL                           |
|     On phone:   (919) 515-5328                                   |
|     At e-mail:  nmodena@unity.ncsu.edu                           | 
|                 samodena@csemail.cropsci.ncsu.edu                |
|                 [ either email address is read each day ]        |
|     By snail:   Crop Sci Dept, Box 7620, NCSU, Raleigh, NC 27695 |
+------------------------------------------------------------------+
         Lighten UP!  It's just a computer doing that to you.    (c)
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
From: regnad@hal.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Paul Prescott)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: DSP and the Future
Date: 28 Jan 93 07:43:48 GMT
Organization: The Land of Forgotten Technology
NNTP-Posting-Host: hal.ai.mit.edu


OK, a couple of things....  I know there is nothing "magic" about 455 KHz,
but it *is* about the most commonly used IF for HF work.  And I was
definately oversimplifying whan I mentioned "receivers with a decent front
end".  What I was trying to imply was that many of the "veteran" HF
receivers (SP-600, R-390, HRO, etc.) used a 455 KHz IF and some of them
already have IF out jacks, so hanging a DSP box capable of dealing with
455 KHz would "revitalize" these radios like nobodies business.  :)
I also realize that, with present technology, dealing with 455 KHz
directly is a bit of a stretch.  But the technology *is* advancing, and
who says the first step can't be a 455 to 50-75 (or therabouts) KHz mixer
stage in the interim?

Paul Prescott
N1AAC
regnad@gnu.ai.mit.edu
From: vbreault@rinhp750.gmr.com (Val Breault)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: No-codes
Date: 28 Jan 93 16:04:12 GMT
Organization: General Motors Research Labs
In-reply-to: alanb@hpnmdla.sr.hp.com's message of 27 Jan 93 22:47:05 GMT

In article <14570603@hpnmdla.sr.hp.com> alanb@hpnmdla.sr.hp.com (Alan Bloom) writes:

   In rec.radio.amateur.misc, mellob@cary115.its.rpi.edu (Elmer Fudd) writes:
   >	It's understandable that no-code technicians would be aggravated
   >	by being designated as such. This is why I refer to a no-code
   >	tech as simply a "Technician." And refer to a Technician as a
   >	"Technician Plus HF" or simply a "Tech Plus." 

   So how would you translate this sentence into Politically Correct language?

	"No-code Technicians may not transmit on the 10 meter band."

   The only way I can think of is:

	"Non-Technician-Plus Technicians may not transmit on the
	10 meter band."

   Or maybe:

	"Non-Technician-Pluss's may not..."

You're making it needlessly clumsy by using a double negative Al.

Howabout:

"The 10 meter band is only available to those Technicians that have shown 
 the ability to receive Morse code at 5 wpm."

If you wanted to make it exclusionary then how about:

"Technicians may not transmit on the 10 meter band unless they have shown
 the ability to receive Morse code at 5 wpm."

For what it's worth, and lest anyone forget;  I'm proud of my Extra Class
license and use CW almost exclusively when operating on HF.  However, I 
still fail to see where the ability to use Morse code has ANY bearing on
one's ability to operate on the phone subbands.  I would *MUCH* rather
see the emphasis shifted off of Morse code and onto a more relevant
subject.  I *DO* agree that some amount of effort should be required
in order to upgrade to higher classes of licenses.  I believe that people
value most those things that they had to sacrifice the most to obtain.
Currently, the Morse code requirement meets that in principle, but it
still isn't otherwise relevant.

... that's how I see it
--
-val-

Val Breault - GM Research - vbreault@gmr.com - N8OEF            \      /|
Instrumentation dept., 30500 Mound Rd., Warren, MI 48090-9055    \    / |
The opinions expressed by the author do not necessarily reflect   \  /__|
those of GMR or those of the General Motors Corporation.           \/   |___
 
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: markz@ssc.com (Mark Zenier)
Subject: Meteor Scatter CQ W3OTC (Was Re: Radio/Satellite Tracking)
Organization: SSC, Inc.,  Seattle, WA
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 06:05:05 GMT
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]

Gary Coffman (gary@ke4zv.uucp) wrote:
: In article <9301181210.aa09774@ingate.microsoft.COM> a-kevinp@microsoft.COM (Kevin Purcell, Rho) writes:
: >Any hams doing [Meteor Scatter? ]

: There's a W0 named Ralph, he's an AMSAT mover and shaker, who has done
: experiments with this system. A friend of mine in Indianapolis and I
: have talked about setting up a 6 meter packet system and just pinging
: away to test the idea, but nothing has come of it as yet. 

W3OTC, Robert Carpenter, (who is on the net from NIST), wrote an article 
in QEX several years back.  Comparing data rates between 6 meters and 2 
using Ax.25.

: From what I've read, the average meteor trail lasts a few seconds, but
: there are thousands of them every day. A system has to be persistent to
: get through since there's no way of predicting when a meteor will lay
: a trail in the right place for your path, but data should move over the
: course of the day. This has seemed such an obvious replacement for HF
: BBS forwarding that I'm surprised no one is doing it on a regular basis.

One idea I had was to site the master station in the area that uses
TV channel 2 and use the video carrier for the beacon.  Don't they 
offset adjacent stations by 10 kHz on each channel so you could
monitor with a narrow band receiver.


Mark Zenier  markz@ssc.wa.com  

Xref: sparky rec.radio.amateur.misc:22944 rec.radio.amateur.packet:3558
From: tener@cs.widener.edu (Stuart Tener)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.packet
Subject: Re: NEED HELP FINDING OLD CALLSIGN
Date: 22 Jan 1993 04:07:40 -0500
Organization: Widener University CS Department, Chester PA
NNTP-Posting-Host: lucy.cs.widener.edu

Trying 128.205.32.2...
Connected to callsign.cs.buffalo.edu.
Escape character is '^]'.
Callbook v1.3  Bug reports to bowen@cs.buffalo.edu  Type 'help' for help
>> call n9jen
Call-Sign: N9JEN                    Class: GENERAL
Previously: KA9VTP                  Class: TECHNICIAN
Real Name: DYSON A HUNT             Birthday: DEC 27, 1949
Mailing Address: 5250 WILLIAMS RD, HARTFORD, WI  53027
Station Address: SAME AS MAILING ADDRESS
Valid From: OCT 2, 1990             To: OCT 2, 2000
Records Last Processed: OCT 2, 1990
>> quit

In the future you can telnet to "callsign.cs.buffalo.edu 2000"
and do callsign database lookups via your own terminal.

there is also another database server:
ham.njit.edu 2000

both are accurate, thow buffalo has newer software.

thank you,

stuart b. tener
tener@cs.widener.edu
(215)-338-6005
From: dadams@cray.com (David Adams)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: Ham on Rescue 911
Date: 27 Jan 93 21:45:06 GMT
Reply-To: dadams@cray.com
Organization: Cray Research, Inc.

In article 2912@hemlock.cray.com, dadams@cray.com (David Adams) writes:
|In article l7u@spool.mu.edu, jason@studsys.mscs.mu.edu (Jason Hanson) writes:
||Did anyone see the ham from G-land on tonight's episode of Rescue 911?  They
||showed him using CW and also showed a wall of QSL cards.
||-- 
||Jason Hanson         |   915 W. Wisconsin Ave #1010   |     (414) 288-2179
||Marquette University |   Milwaukee, WI 53233-2373     |     Ham Radio: N9LEA/AA
||--  jason@studsys.mscs.mu.edu       ==+==       n9lea@n0ary.#nocal.ca.usa.na  --
|
|
|Yep.  I saw that.

And too bad it wasn't a case where the ham was comming to the rescue.

---
--David C. Adams  Statistician  Cray Research Inc.  dadams@cray.com
___________________________________________________________________
       Old Sourdoughs never die.  They just ferment away.
From: pjml@swmis.nerc-swindon.ac.UK (Pete Lucas)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Burglars are brighter than you might think!
Date: 28 Jan 93 11:03:25 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: daemon@ucsd.edu


In article <63757@mimsy.umd.edu> furuta@cs.umd.edu (Richard Furuta) writes:
>This snippet from the February Auto-Call gave me a bit of a pause.  I
>thought the warning might be of interest to others as well:
>
>	Beware of the Eavesdroppers
>
>	Last summer I discussed over a local repeater my plans for a trip
>	to Florida with my family.  When we returned, our home had been
>	burglarized.  ..........

This is precisely the reason I am 'Particulars witheld' in the callbook,
and why I use disguise-antennas on all my vehicles, and have no stickers,
callsign-plates or anything like that visible to the outside world.
 
   Pete 'Nobody knows I am a Ham' Lucas    G6WBJ    PJML@uk.ac.nsw.swmis
From: jason@studsys.mscs.mu.edu (Jason Hanson)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: Real NoCodes
Date: 26 Jan 93 14:58:18 GMT
Article-I.D.: spool.1k3jia$l8k
Distribution: usa
Organization: Marquette University - Department MSCS
NNTP-Posting-Host: studsys.mscs.mu.edu

In article <1993Jan24.170416.965@mixcom.com> kevin.jessup <kevin.jessup@mixcom.mixcom.com> writes:
>There are many general class and higher HAMs here where I work and in the
>surrounding area (Milwaukee) and I've found them to be very helpfull.
>Most do not have Deignan's attitude and are happy to help anyone with
>a desire to learn more about HAM radio.  
>
>So far the only "flames" I've received regarding any HAM radio questions 
>I've had have come via Email.  I think such flaming is more a phenomenon 
>of INTERNET rather than HAM radio in general.  You'll find such attitude 
>problems in any USENET conference.  Most of them you just have to ignore.

I think you hit the nail on the head Kevin!  Most of the hams on the air are
genuinely nice guys (there are always a few B0Z0s) but there seems to be more
wiseguys on INTERNET.  I am confident that you will find the ham community here
in Wisconsin very friendly.  I recently came to Milwaukee and the hams here
have treated me great, not unlike I lived here from day one.  (And I have found
that I am not an exception!)

Jason
ex KB9GHZ (/N)
now N9LEA (/AA) yep, still waiting!

-- 
Jason Hanson         |   915 W. Wisconsin Ave #1010   |     (414) 288-2179
Marquette University |   Milwaukee, WI 53233-2373     |     Ham Radio: N9LEA/AA
--  jason@studsys.mscs.mu.edu       ==+==       n9lea@n0ary.#nocal.ca.usa.na  --
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 03:06:18 GMT

julian@bongo.tele.com (Julian Macassey) writes:

>	You mean I have had an honest to goodness no-code licence (two
>actually) longer than this myopic redneck has been an amateur of any
>kind?

Well, gee, Julian, do you normally just rely on a single source, or did
you bother to check on a previous 2x3 call issued beforehand?

Or, do you only condemn others who make gross generalizations?

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: oopdavid@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu (D.RODMAN)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: Ham Radio Causes Cancer!
Date: 23 Jan 93 12:54:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <14570593@hpnmdla.sr.hp.com>, alanb@hpnmdla.sr.hp.com (Alan Bloom) writes...
>Some time ago, several people asked me for a copy of Dr Milham's
>famous paper supposedly showing that amateur radio causes cancer.
>I recently found my copy, so if anyone wants me to photocopy it for
>them, send me an SASE (with a note about what it's for!)
> 
>I also wrote an article for our local ham club newsletter debunking
>the article.  If there's interest, I'll see if I can find it and
>post it.
> 
>AL N1AL
Gentlemen, lets get a few things straight.  First, Dr. Milham did not report
that amateur radio causes cancer.  He did perform a statistical analysis
of death certificates in his west coast area and compared causes of death
with avocation.  He did find that several diseases had a higher than expected
rate of occurence than the normal population.  Those diseases were 
predominantly types of leukemia and lymphoma.  Anyone who feels that this 
article purports our hobby is lethal and rebukes its contents should also
consider other noteworthy publications concerning electromagnetic fields.

Secondly, Dr. Milham has been a speaker, with me, at a Hamfest in LA
several years ago.  His information was well received by the audience.

Third, the data is not conclusive enough yet to condemn any single source
of electromagnetic field as cancer promoting.  Promotion, that is the 
correct technical work here.  But recent European data is highly suggestive
that 50 Hz fields are again associated with increased risk of childhood
leukemia.  Readers should try to understand this concept:  Use of ham
equipment has such low frequency fields, like any appliance with a 
large transformer.  The use of such equipment generally places some portion
of the body in a fairly strong magnetic area.  That exposure hour after
hour, while listening to our equipment is similar in strength to those
fields commonly assiciated with other leukemias.  One must be careful
not to make the wrong conclusion.  The field is ASSOCIATED with increased
risk of cancer in these studies.  The general rate is very LOW.  It is 
statistically IMPOSSIBLE to separate what cancer (leukemia) arises from
the field and what cancer would have occurred anyway.

As a member of the ARRL committee on RF hazards, I ask anyone interested
in this topic to refer to our opinions on the matter in ARRL publications, 
like the antenna handbook.

73, Dave (KN2M)
ARRL Technical Advisor
From: levin@bbn.com (Joel B Levin)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: illegals (was: Re: Radio Shack Business Band Radio)
Date: 25 Jan 93 18:39:48 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: bbn.com

In <FOROZCO.93Jan22173548@dante.nmsu.edu>
  forozco@nmsu.edu (OROZCO) writes:
|Here is my story about Radio Shack and their 2m rig:
|
|One day i went to get a serial port adapter for my computer, and when
|i was waiting for the guy to go get it from the back of the store, I
|asked the other employee to let me see the 2 meter rig. . . .  I
|think that if someone wants to try out a rig, the Radio Shack people
|should at least request a copy of the ham radio license. 

It may be that the employee is a licensed ham (or less good, but
possible, some other employee on premises).  The manager of the store
I visit most frequently is a long time ham.  If said ham is around he
or she may act as control operator while anyone with our without a
license uses the radio.

(I'm not saying that's the case the poster describes, but certainly is
a possible scenario that would / might be legal.)

	/J
=
Nets: levin@bbn.com  | "How does a mouse let me move the cursor anywhere 
pots: (617)873-3463  |  I want?"  "What are address busses?"  "How do 
              N1MNF  |  icons work?"              --Time-Life Books
From: kp2a+@andrew.cmu.edu (Keith Poole)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: NIR-10 DSP Noise Reduction Unit
Date: 26 Jan 93 19:23:09 GMT
Organization: Graduate School of Industrial Administr., Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA

I am thinking of buying a DSP "box" (my work keeps me too busy to build
anything so I have to buy a commercial product).  I am tempted to spring
for the $349.95 to buy the NIR-10 from JPS Communications.  Has anyone
purchased one and is it worth the money?  Specifically, how does it perform
on cleaning up CW reception.

73 & Thanks.

Keith Poole (K7MOA/3)
From: ve3buu@iinus1.ibm.com
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Through-the-glass antennas
Date: 27 Jan 93 18:39:32 GMT
Organization: UCSD Usenet Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: daemon@ucsd.edu

jab0684@usl.edu (Boudreaux Jean A) writes:

>Gary mentions concerns about cleaning and glue application.  I can assure
>you the glass was thoroughly cleaned with ammonia based cleaner.  The
>method of applying the antenna, was real simple, no extra glue, just rmove
>the protective plastic film and apply.  So I repeat my warning, avoid this ant

I can assure you that, when properly applied, it is next to impossible
to remove it. I went through a "touchless" car wash with my antenna
in place, in the mistaken belief that nothing would "touch" it.
At the end of the line there is a giant vacuum-cleaner-looking thing
that blows the water off the car. It does NOT touch the car, but it
CLEARS THE ROOF BY ABOUT 5"!!! Well, the stainless steel whip bent about
20 degrees before the whole external part popped off the glass. I had to
straighten out the rod in a vice! If you think it is be easy to put
a permanent bend in one of those whips, just try it! The glue is
truly amazing!

Bill, VE3BUU     Internet: ve3buu@vnet.ibm.com
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: marcbg@feenix.metronet.com (Marc Grant)
Subject: Re: What To Do About Intermod
Organization: Tx Metronet Communications Services, Dallas Tx
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 03:48:08 GMT

In article <C1BAMu.162@ms.uky.edu> johnr@mik.uky.edu (John S. Roberts, Jr.) writes:
>I have a TH78 and a Diamond 7 something dual band car antenna.  It has 3 db  
>gain on 2 meters and 5 db gain on 440.  I get intermod like crazy!  Mostly is  
>pager type things, but can be just about anything.  What can I do?  Is the  
>problem that my radio is designed to be used with a less sensitive antenna than  
>the diamond, or is there some other reason.

Your biggest problem is that you are using an antenna which is designed
for a mobile rig, not a talkie.  The front end of the TH78 is very broad,
and when you try to pack so much into such a small size your asking for
trouble when you increase the signal into the front end.  My suggestion? 
Get an antenna with less gain, or get a real mobile rig and use the talkie
for its intended purpose - to carry around with you.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Marc Grant                                                 Amateur Call: N5MEI
Phone# 214/530-9488                       Internet: marcbg@feenix.metronet.com
From: clemon@lemsys.UUCP (Craig Lemon VE3XCL)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: Real NoCodes
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 18:20:33 EST
Organization: Private UUCP "Twig" Node
X-Newsreader: Arn V1.00

In article <C1E2nu.GA3@anomaly.sbs.com>, Tony Pelliccio writes:

> clemon@lemsys.UUCP (Craig Lemon VE3XCL) writes:

[ my initial response deleted ]

        I posted a public response to the original instigating article of
this thread, but on consideration, I sent a cancel message right along
behind it because I decided that I wasn't going to lower myself to your
boot-licking toady level and pick on other hams, regardless of their
license class, just because they've done silly things.  Obviously your news
transport system isn't on-the-ball.

> Well, seems that the DOC up in Canada made the same mistakes the FCC here
> in the states did. So much for brains I guess. 
> 
> Tony

        So why exactly are you picking on _all_ no-codes?  Why does copying
code make you better?  YES there are morons on the air, YES there are
converted "CB'ers" that have to resist the urge not to say 10-4 anymore,
and YES there is a learning curve where a new ham has to learn the
terminology and local customs - no-code or not.  I'm sorry but no-code !=
CB.  At least the converted CBer's are making an attempt to drop their
"bad" habits.  Since we are moving into the digital age, there is no _need_
for code anywhere, although it can be used.  As I'm sure you know, since
you're such a big fan of it, it is still used by people who _enjoy_ working
CW for it's challenge.  Code is going to die sooner or later. 
Comunications is evolving, period.  Some people will keep it alive for
entertainment, but that percentage will probably grow smaller and smaller
as time goes on.  In Canada, the theory tests (Advanced level) supposedly
got harder since the code was removed, to compensate.  Even at that, I
found them trivial at best.

         So why don't you tell me again why YOU are a better person than I?
 Why YOU are undoubtedly a better ham than I?  Because you can copy code? 
Not necessarily.  You said yourself you hang around on your private UHF
repeater.  I bet that code comes in handy there.  I also noticed that you
had absolutely no response to my post (that shouldn't even have made it
there) defending yourself or your story.  You could only manage to make a
futile crack at the DOC.  Pitiful.

--
 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: staggsd@walker-pcgw.army.mil (1LT David Staggs)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Stop the bickering, please...
Date: 28 Jan 93 03:42:58 GMT
Organization: UCSD Usenet Gateway
Reply-To: staggsd@walker-pcgw.army.mil
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: daemon@ucsd.edu


 After reading all the messages about No Codes, I think it is interesting that
 people would waste others time by writing such messages.  The best thing to do
 is to stop writing these messages.  Who cares what type of license a fellow
 ham has?  You cannot please everyone all the time.  And this discussion (or
 bitterness) does no good.  If some people think No Codes are scum of the
 Earth, then fine.  Life goes on.  But please don't waste others time by
 feeding the fire.  It is talk like this that may convince others not to become
 a ham.  So, please.  Enough is enough.  I think others will thank you for it.

 Regards,
 Dave
 KD6QKF/HL9ST (Korea)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: jfh@netcom.com (Jack Hamilton)
Subject: Northern California license classes?
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 06:24:52 GMT

There is a weekend-long license class (for the no-code license) offered in 
Sacramento on the last weekend of every month by a woman from Costa Mesa.
Has anyone out there taken the class?  Is it any good?  Are there any other
"do it at a sitting" classes around here?  I've asked around, but not been
able to find any.

-- 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Jack Hamilton   jfh@netcom.com   P. O. Box 281107   SF, CA   94128-1107
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc