HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: laborde@oak.Jpl.Nasa.Gov (Gregory R. LaBorde)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: New Licensees: When did you test?
Date: 12 Jan 1993 21:47:43 GMT
Organization: Reliability Engineering Section, JPL
Distribution: usa
Expires: 1/30/93
NNTP-Posting-Host: oak.jpl.nasa.gov

In article <1993Jan12.180514.8514@shearson.com> mjohnsto@jenny.shearson.com (Mike Johnston) writes:
>I know the FCC is saying 90-120 days for new hams, but
>I'm hoping this is a worst case scenario. Knowing the way the government
>estimates things (like deficits) this is probably way off.

If Mike knows how the Government estimates things than he must know that 90-120
days probably represents the BEST case.

-grl.
-----
From: ed@imp.pnl.GOV
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: QSL Route info for: T28IO and FM/FE1LBG
Date: 4 Jan 93 18:06:03 GMT
Organization: UCSD Usenet Gateway
Reply-To: ew_kleckner@pnlg.pnl.gov
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: daemon@ucsd.edu

I wonder if anyone has QSL routes for T28IO (Tuvulu) and FM/FE1LBG (Bernard,
St. Joseph, Martinique)???  FE1LBG is not in '93 Call Book.  Please direct
replies to N7YQR@amsat.org.

Thanks and 73,
	Ed
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook)
Subject: Re: 430mhz band under th
Organization: very little
Date: Mon, 04 Jan 1993 03:59:12 GMT

In article <1993Jan02.200308.16355@eng.umd.edu> chuck@eng.umd.edu (Chuck Harris - WA3UQV) writes:
>In article <1992Dec28.235602.1@ttd.teradyne.com> rice@ttd.teradyne.com writes:
>>Excuse Me ? "Invited" to use the spectrum. Where does the FCC say that ANY
>>Amateur has to be INVITED to transmit on a frequency? This kind of attitude
>>is a good part of What's wrong with ham radio today. Some people think they
>>have a god given right to a portion of the spectrum. It's theirs - they 
>>paid for it - an no one's going to take it away from them. Pure unadulterated
>>BULLSHIT.
>
>In article <8228@lib.tmc.edu> jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard) writes:
>>This kind of attitude is a good part of What's wrong with ham radio today.
>>Some people think they have a god given right to use other people's equipment.
>>It's using ham spectrum and they can use it if they damned well please. Pure
>>unadulterated BULLSHIT.
>>
>>Your argument boils down to "If they want to spend $10K on a sophisticated
>>repeater system, they have to make it a public utility". There are two
>
>If you want to park your $10K machine on a public frequency, then you should
>expect it to be used as a public utility.  If you are not expecting that,
>then you should move out of the way so that others can use the frequency.


But this assumes that there is only ONE appropriate use for our VHF/UHF
freqs....open FM voice repeaters!

One of the goals of good frequency coordination is to insure that
spectrum as used for a VARIETY of purposes....links, open repeaters,
closed repeaters, packet, ATV, radio control, etc.

>
>This "I own the frequency" crap IS the largest problem with Ham radio today.
>Nothing compels you to put up a repeater.  You do so, in part out of public
>service, in part out technical interest, and in part out of stroking your own
>ego.  Nothing wrong with that.  The rest of the Ham commumity puts up with your
>hogging of the frequency with your repeater because it expects to be able to
>use it from time to time when it wishes to, or needs to.

Nope!  This only applies to SOME of the types of uses that spectrum
is coordinated for.
>
>No one expects to use your autopatch for free; so control your access codes.
>If you find that someone spends a great deal of time on your machine, remind
>that person that it costs a lot of money to run a repeater, and you can use
>all the help you can get, but don't expect to be able to force that individual
>to pay.  This is not a commercial venture.  If you still can't deal with your
>"great act of charity", then take your repeater down, and let someone else use
>the allocation.  There are plenty of hams out there who would love to put up an
>open repeater on your pair!
>

If the closed repeater annoys you so much, then go use an open one.

>
>


-- 
 Tad Cook     |  Phone:  206-527-4089  (home)     |   MCI Mail: 3288544   
 Seattle, WA  |  Packet: KT7H @ N7DUO.WA.USA.NA   |   3288544@mcimail.com 
              |  Internet: tad@ssc.com           or...sumax!ole!ssc!tad   
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: gsfm@pool.info.sunyit.edu (Seymour Morris)
Subject: Re: W5YI - Economical with the truth?
Organization: State University of New York -- Institute of Technology
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 14:29:42 GMT

In article <".7-Jan-93.12:26:57".*.Iain_Philipps.Bridge_House@RXUK.Xerox.com> G0RDI.Bridge_House@rxuk.xerox.com writes:
>Folks,
>
>I just got a package from W5YI through the mail; you know the sort of thing
>.... subscription offers for The W5YI Report, Ham education books, etc. Also
>included was a rather cute square piece of paper, headed `CONGRATULATIONS!' A
>real attention grabber.
>
>At the risk of boring some folks, reproduced here is the portion of the text of
>this document with which I take issue:-
>
>"Congratulations! on the recent upgrading of your amateur radio operator
>license! We note, however, that you upgraded without having your most recent
>FCC amateur radio operator license in your possesion. While this is perfectly
>legal, the FCC does not allow VEC's to forward amateur radio upgrade (Form 610)
>applications to them for new license issuance without a photocopy of the
>applicant's most pervious license attached. In view of this, we are HOLDING
>your FCC FORM 610 application here at the VEC Office until we receive a copy
>FROM YOU of your most previous amateur radio operator license.
>
>We want you to receive your upgraded license AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE. You CANNOT
>receive your new amateur operator license without the previous license
>photocopy being attached to your pending application being held here at the VEC
>Office ......"
>
>Now, what, precisely is my problem?
>
>I started on the trail of a U.S. amatuer license 18-Nov-92. At the session that
>day, for one reason or another, I had time only to get through enough elements
>to take me up to General class.  A (very) few days later; 21-Nov-92, in fact, I
>attended a further session, completing the remaining elements to take me to
>Extra class. Of course, at the second session, I needed to fill out another
>'610. I did so, taking great care to complete the section which requested
>information on any pending application which was as yet unactioned by the FCC.
>My assumption was that they (the FCC) would be able to use that data to quickly
>tie up my two '610s. Seems I was mistaken.


D
D
D
D
D
D
D
No. You have to follow the directions given by W5YI. Send him your latest
license photocopy when you get it.  The FCC only works on one application at a time.

>
>OK - who can cite the FCC regulations cited by W5YI?
>
>73     -     Iain
>G0RDI
>
>g0rdi.bridgehouse@rxuk.xerox.com
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: Ham transmissions-a hypothetical situation
From: hpb@hpb.cis.pitt.edu (Harry Bloomberg)
Date: 5 Jan 93 14:37:24 GMT
Followup-To: rec.radio.amateur.policy
Organization: University of Pittsburgh

In article <1993Jan5.085312.22208@ringer.cs.utsa.edu> sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth) writes:
>
>Say I'm a ham operator (hopefully in the next few months!) and I have a
>favorite frequency (not claiming it of course) that I like to conduct
>QSO's on.  My friends have shortwave receivers and I tell them to tune
>to that frequency if they want to hear me on the radio.
>
>Is this legal??
>
   It's legal only if discussed in rec.radio.amateur.policy. :-)

Harry Bloomberg WA3TBL
hpb@vms.cis.pitt.edu
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: squrppi@krk.fi (Sami Reijonen)
Subject: Re: DJ580 mod
Organization: Radio Club of Kauniainen (OH2NRG)
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1993 00:20:07 GMT

squrppi@krk.fi (Sami Reijonen) writes:
: This modification widens the listening area to 130 - 179.995MHz and to

Happily, I didn't check the message well enough and I forgot to add a small
and useless line:

The mod is the soft mod #212

Thanks to Dave Jenkins for his kind reminder..
-- 
Connect 3141592653590/V93Ter/LapLAND/Mnp666/Vryfast

squrppi@krk.fi
OH2KEA (KP 20 KF)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: intermod, overload, desense?
Reply-To: gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 13:17:46 GMT

In article <1is80mINNb0r@clover.csv.warwick.ac.uk> esrlb@csv.warwick.ac.uk (Mr S Browne) writes:
>In article <1993Jan9.141959.17257@ke4zv.uucp> gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman) writes:
>>If you want to build a notch filter, install a Tee in your
>>antenna feedline, attach the feedline to an FM broadcast
>>receiver, and attach a length of coax to the odd leg that
>>is slightly more than a quarterwave at the offending
>                         ^^^^^^^^^^^
>>station's frequency. Short this cable at it's free end.
>                      ^^^^^
>>
>>Ant----------T-------radio
>>             |
>>             |
>>           short
>
>Seems to me that it's an open-circuited quarter wave stub that's needed.
>In the diagram above, the short would be transformed by the quarter wave
>section to look like an open circuit at the tee, and therefore little
>effect at the frequency it's cut for would result. If it was open circuit
>at the far end, it would transform to  a short at the tee end, however.
>If it were a half wave in length, you'd want it to be shorted.
>Velocity factor of the cable needs to be taken into account, of course.

Yipe! You're right Simon.

Gary

-- 
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | uunet!rsiatl!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary      
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     | emory!ke4zv!gary@gatech.edu
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: harp@bnr.ca (Alan Harp)
Subject: Re: Dayton Hamfest Camping
Keywords: Dayton
Organization: Bell-Northern Research, Research Triangle Park, NC
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 14:48:38 GMT

In article <1993Jan7.172559.25744@cbfsb.cb.att.com> wb2qoq@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (r.j.anderson) writes:
>I am looking for campground suggestions from anyone who has camped in the Daytonarea for the Hamvention. The last time (1991) my wife and I camped in our 20 ft.trailer at the Enon Beach campground, approx. 20 miles east of Dayton, right
>off of Rt.70, near Springfield. It was sort of a run down campground, sites
>were close together. I am thinking about making reservations at a campground
>for this years Hamvention. Are there any recommended campgrounds from readers
>of this newsgroup.
>TNX Rick Anderson WB2QOQ  (please e-mail to rja@zeppo.att.com)
I have always stayed at the Dayton KOA for the hamfest.  The shuttle
bus makes it very convenient.  It fills up fast.  All hookups are gone
on Wednsday or thursday before the hamfest.  They don't take reservations.
They do have an open field that they put spill over campers in.  They don't
turn anyone away. 

As for Springfield, since I have relatives there I have used one just
East of Springfield on old route 40.  I think it was called hidden oaks.
The place is nice with a few exceptions.  I never tried to stay there
during the hamfest.  Everytime I was there it wasn't crowded at all.
I do believe that there is or was some controversey over ownership,
forclosure, or something.  They did some silly things like get rid 
of all the picnic tables at the camp site etc. So before you go there
be sure it is open.  It is a long way to the hamfest from there.

****************************************************************************
* Alan Harp K4PB     *     Bell-Northern Research      *   CW FOREVER      *
* mail: harp@bnr.ca  *   Research Triangle Park, NC    *                   *
****************************************************************************
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: Antenna recommendations needed
From: fred-mckenzie@ksc.nasa.gov (Fred McKenzie)
Date: 12 Jan 93 09:49:41 EST
Followup-To: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Distribution: world
Organization: NASA/Kennedy Space Center, Florida

In article <1993Jan11.155125.12537@shearson.com>,
mjohnsto@jenny.shearson.com (Mike Johnston) wrote:
> I've finally gotten the ok from my landlady to install a rooftop antenna
> on my house. (YIPPEE!) The antenna will be used for 2m/440 operation. I'm
> a complete newcomer to the field and am impatiently awaiting my tickets 
> arrival and I need to do *SOMETHING* to take the edge off my anxiety.
> I want to put something up that will offer respectable performance without
> making the house look like a CIA substation. I'd like to spend no more
> than $100 for a antenna that will accomplish this. (Not counting cable etc).

MJ-

As you noted, there are several dual-band antennas on the market.  They
will probably all work well.  However, I would stay away from the Radio
Shack Discone, unless I really needed it for the other frequencies it
covers.  It is reported to be a good antenna for scanning, but doesn't have
nearly the gain of the dual band antennas.

73, Fred, K4DII

fred-mckenzie@ksc.nasa.gov
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: bwilkins@iat.holonet.net (Bob Wilkins n6fri)
Subject: Re: WWV Phone number?
Organization: the cAVe group
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 02:13:22 GMT

rfc@allegra.att.com (Robert F. Casey) writes:
: In article <930106.091519@3Mail.3Com.COM> Peter_Simpson@3mail.3com.COM writes:
: >
: >I seem to have misplaced the telephone number for WWV's time
: >service. Could some kind person who knows it, please email me
: >the number (I seem to remember it's a toll call to Colorado)
: 
: 1-303-499-7111
: 
: Same audio you get on the radio.  (least it sounds the same!)
 
Is there a propagation delay via phone line ?

-- 
Bob Wilkins    n6fri          voice 440.250+ 100pl san francisco bay area
bwilkins@holonet.net          packet n6fri @ w6pw.#nocal.ca.usa.na
 
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: Jeff.Anderson@launchpad.unc.edu (Jeffrey Brian Anderoson)
Subject: Yaesu FT 5100 Reviews??
Organization: University of North Carolina Extended Bulletin Board Service
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 17:56:33 GMT

Does anyone have any good or bad comments about the Yaesu 5100 Dual Band
mobile rig??? I am thinking of getting one, but would like to check with
others who already have one of the units first.

Also - has anyone tried the extended recieve mod for the 5100?? I helped a
friend modify his and an interesting thing happens when you are done...the
initial recieve range on the VHF side now starts at 20.00 MHz. I don't
imagine the thing could actually recieve much down there but would love to
be proven wrong. There's a lot of activity on 42 MHz around here that I
would like to monitor using the 5100. I would love to hear from anyone
about being able to hear or not hear in that range. Thanks - Jeff - KD4JIA
--
   The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of
     North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Campus Office for Information
        Technology, or the Experimental Bulletin Board Service.
           internet:  laUNChpad.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: phr@telebit.com (Paul Rubin)
Subject: Re: WANTED: Repeater controller comments
Organization: Telebit Corporation; Sunnyvale, CA, USA
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 03:00:51 GMT

Why can't someone make a repeater controller out of a simple 
personal computer (286 class), with maybe a relay box controlled
by the parallel port, and perhaps a Soundblaster to do voice ID
and sample the audio input for tone decoding etc?  What do those
fancy repeater controller boxes get for you besides nice packaging
with RF shielding (admittedly worth something)?
From: fletcher@moho.uwyo.EDU (Walter Reid Fletcher)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Suggested ARRL 70 cm band plan ...
Date: 12 Jan 93 10:49:00 GMT
Organization: UCSD Usenet Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: daemon@ucsd.edu

In Info-Hams V93 #49, I quoted:
>"OOOOkay kitty cats.  ...

As part of a table, I listed:
>438.000 - 444.000   Another ATV allocation that overlaps the next entry...

I hereby amend it to read:
>438.000 - 444.000   Another ATV and repeater link allocation that overlaps
>                    the next entry

Not that it makes any difference.  I was pointing out the 433-435 subband.

Reid (my beak),
WB7CJO
Xref: sparky rec.radio.amateur.misc:21797 rec.aviation.misc:1183
From: jaap@cs.ruu.nl (Jaap Romers)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.aviation.misc
Subject: Freq's wanted for Tampa area
Keywords: freq,air
Date: 5 Jan 93 12:29:58 GMT
Organization: Utrecht University, Dept. of Computer Science


Hi,

I will visit Florida end of this month and I am looking for frequencies
(Tower/Approach) of airports in the Tampa area.
I am interested in Tampa Int Airport, St. Petersburg Int. Airport
and the USAF Airbase (is it McDill ??).

Thanks in advance.

jaap
From: cookav@catipult.anatcp.rockwell.COM
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Hot Rigs
Date: 5 Jan 93 17:13:30 GMT
Organization: UCSD Usenet Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: daemon@ucsd.edu

N7XVS Writes:
>I would think a system you could call and enter the serial number through a
>touch-tone phone would not be that complicated.  It could even be tied into
>packet and/or the internet.

I say:
This is true, and the system exists.  Whenever I'm offered a suspiciously low
price on used gear (Ham, Computer, Firearms, or Automobiles) I make it a point
to check the National Crime Information Computer to see if it is listed as
stolen.  I access it via a touch-tone phone call to whatever police agency
serves the local where I'm standing at the time, but I believe that a rotary-
dial phone would work just as well.

I have had a little reluctance in some locations, but usually speaking with
the Desk Sergeant gets the gear checked for me.  If they start running when I
mention that I need to check if the stuff is stolen (for insurance purposes,
you understand:)) then I note the license plate, the descreption, etc. and
make the call.  I get a lot of response when that happens.

73
____________________________-:!:-____________________________________
Alan V. Cook                    Internet: AVCOOK@ananov.remnet.ab.com
Rockwell International        Ham Packet: N7CEU @ WF6O
(714) 762-0843                       DoD: #0701
              Alternate Internet: Cookav@catipult.anatcp.rockwell.com
From: William=E.=Newkirk%Pubs%GenAv.Mlb@ns14.cca.CR.rockwell.COM
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: License delays
Date: 7 Jan 93 15:42:29 GMT
Organization: UCSD Usenet Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: daemon@ucsd.edu

>        More likely be W5YI *and* the ARRL.....I took my upgrade with the
>ARRL and to date, it has been almost 12 weeks now.....for an UPGRADE!!!
>ARRRRGGHHHHH!!! ;-)  I've called the FCC and if you think Mr. W5YI himself is
>rude, you might get a real kick talking to these idiots.....

the ARRL/VEC folks can defend themselves on whether or not they sell names and 
addresses of newly minted hams.  I believe the answer will be NO from the VEC.

Probably the style of answer you get is a function of how you pose the 
question.  and i can imagine people getting pretty short when you have a day 
full of obnoxious, selfish questioners calling in......

>        Then again, there's this one guy here that tested a week *after* I
>did (with the W5YI VE Team...) and got his call (Tech) about two weeks
>ago.....the lam-o excuse I got from the FCC was that they only had 2 people

i dunno if telling the truth makes it an "excuse".  Could be there was 
something with *your* session that caused a delay.

>processing applications for both amateur *and* business licenses and only *1*
>keyer to punch it all into the computer.  From what I understand, they fire
>and hire on a Very regular basis (could it be an efficiency thing?) and that
>if we want anything done about it to, "Write to the congressmen and tell them
>we [the FCC] are understaffed!"

it would take more than just adding people if they don't have the additional 
tools to let those people get the work done (additional computer terminal, 
would be one). 

>        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 other guy lives a charmed life.  or the FCC is holding yours up for a 
Really Good Call Sign (not!).

>        Don't get me wrong, I really am happy for the guy bein' a new ham and
>all, but 12 weeks is just a tad excessive.....It should not be taking this
>long.....

if anything we want the delays to be longer.  this indicates a sustained 
growth in the amateur service and would demand the commission add additional 
staffing to process the larger numbers of applications.

Probably we need to work on moving the prime time for amateur radio classes 
from the Fall to the Spring.  Miss the christmas vacation holes that way.

73, bill wb9ivr
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: omh@cs.brown.edu (Owen M. Hartnett)
Subject: Licensing changes for change of address?
Organization: Brown University Department of Computer Science
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 03:44:27 GMT

I've been licensed for quite some time, but I listen much more than
transmit.  I've moved recently and I'm wondering if Form 630 is the
correct one to let the FCC know about my change of address.

Sorry to ask such a dumb question, but have you tried getting a form 630
from the FCC lately.  You go through a voice mail hurdle (at long distance)
then they never send the form.  They put you through the hassle then ignore
you.

Thanks,
_owen

Owen Hartnett				omh@cs.brown.edu
"FAITH, n. Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks
		without knowledge, of things without parallel."
			-Ambrose Bierce - The Devil's Dictionary