HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rice@ttd.teradyne.com
Subject: Re: 430mhz band under th
Organization: Teradyne Inc., Telecommunications Division
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 92 18:19:06 GMT

In article <1992Dec30.062020.24365@ssc.com>, tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) writes:
>>In article <725556607.AA00000@therose.pdx.com> Larry.Lund@p12.f79.n105.z1.fidonet.org (Larry Lund) writes:
>>>I know if I wanted to transmit on a particular frequency, and it was a
>>>private/closed repeater that, that would not stop me. When I got my license
>>>back in 87' there was nothing in the rules that I remember telling me I was
>>>only allowed to tramsmit on certain frequencies between 440-450 Sorry charlie
>>>I ain't buying it! 
>>
> 
> 
> Larry.....don't you recall the discussions we had about this on Fidonet's
> Ham echo?  Some guy with a new tech license would show up, complaining
> because he had been chased off a 440 MHz repeater that this was
> somehow illegal.
> 
> Maybe the following has some bearing here:
> 
> 97.205  Repeater station.
>  
>      (c) Where the transmissions of a repeater cause harmful
> interference to another repeater, the two station licensees are
> equally and fully responsible for resolving the interference UNLESS
> THE OPERATION OF ONE STATION IS RECOMMENDED BY A FREQUENCY
> COORDINATOR AND THE OPERATION OF THE OTHER STATION IS NOT.  In that
> case, the licensee of the non-coordinated repeater has primary
> responsibility to resolve the interference.
>      (d) A repeater may be automatically controlled.
>      (e) Ancillary functions of a repeater that are available to
> users on the input channel are not considered remotely controlled
> functions of the station.  LIMITING THE USE OF A REPEATER TO ONLY
> CERTAIN USER STATIONS IS PERMISSIBLE.
>  
> (CAPITALIZED EMPHASIS IS MINE)
> 

Where does this say ANYTHING about simplex operation between non repeater
users ? All it talks about is mutual interference between the two repeaters.

> 
> The whole idea with coordination is ensuring that a variety of
> spectrum usage is protected.  This means that if I have a frequency
> coordinated for my UHF link or repeater input or whatever, and
> it is a closed system, then you can probably get into some hot
> water if you and your buddies repeatedly operate simplex there.
> 

Not if your repeater isn't in use at the time.


> (Larry is a nice guy and I know he wouldn't do that)

I wouldn't either, but that's not the point. The point is that you are 
trying to put rules in Part 97 that don't exist.

> 
> Of course, the local coordinator also has the right to assign
> several closed repeaters to one freq pair, each with their own PL.
> But that is just one option.
> 

And under that same theory, simplex activity and repeaters can (and do) 
co-exist quite well on the same frequency.


--------

   John Rice -  K9IJ         |  "Did I say that ?" I must have, but It was    
   rice@ttd.teradyne.com     |   MY opinion only, no one else's...Especially  
   (708)-940-9000 - (work)   |   Not my Employer's.... Licensed since 1959
   (708)-438-5065 - (bbs )   |   Ex: K8YZR, KH6GHC, WB9CSP, W9MMB, WA1TXV
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: gcouger@olesun.okstate.edu (Gordon Couger)
Subject: Re: Exploding Air Bags? Locking Anti-Lock Brakes?
Organization: Oklahoma State University, Stillwater
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 05:08:01 GMT

In article <1992Dec22.132832.7217@porthos.cc.bellcore.com> whs70@dancer.cc.bellcore.com (sohl,william h) writes:
>In article <h-s279j@rpi.edu> abelson@rpi.edu writes:
>>In article <1992Dec21.151315.1663@porthos.cc.bellcore.com>, whs70@dancer.cc.bellcore.com (sohl,william h) writes:
>> 
>I have a friend in the industry, I'm going to ask him about the subject
>and see if he knows of any minimum standards that a vehicle must/should
>be capable of withstanding relative to exposure to RF, regardless of the
>source (eg. Ham, Police, Cellular, etc.)  Anything I learn I'll post
>as a follow-up.
>
I have discussed the problems with one of the principals in setting the
ASAE, ASE, and hopefully the ISO standards for networking of computers
used on offroad and farm machinery about the problems of interference 
btween the computers and radios. He was of the opinion that any computer
that caused radio interference or any computer network that couldn't 
exist in a 100 watt envornment was broken. 

Gordon
Gordon Couger
AB5Dg   Agriculture Engineering Oklahoma State University
gcouger@olesun.agen.okstate.edu 405-744-6514 day 744-2794 evenings
From: dave@eram.esi.COM.AU (Dave Horsfall)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: Phonetics
Date: 21 Dec 92 22:40:12 GMT
Organization: Pacific ESI, Sydney, AUSTRALIA
X-Disclaimer: "Me, speak for us?"
X-Witty-Saying: "Mobius strip - see other side for instructions"

In article <6027025@FORUM.VA.GOV>,
    BRITTINGHAM.RICHARD_A@FORUM.VA.GOV writes:

| Could anyone help with phonetics for WD4AEF. Thanks.

Sure!  Whiskey Delta 4 Alfa Echo Foxtrot!  Glad to be of assistance!

Now if it was _mnemonics_ you wanted, as opposed to _phonetics_ ...

-- 
Dave Horsfall (VK2KFU)         VK2KFU @ VK2RWI.NSW.AUS.OC
dave@esi.COM.AU                ...munnari!esi.COM.AU!dave
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: mjpujol@jemez.eece.unm.edu (Matt Pujol)
Subject: Re: Apartment antennas?
Date: Fri, 25 Dec 92 00:35:39 GMT
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque

As an apartment dweller,I am lucky to have a 40' by 70' carport structure 
right outside my 2nd floor window.  I took the handbook advice and tried the
end fed random wire ( referred to as the Zepp in some quarters ).  Turned out 
to be somewhat directive on the higher bands and didn't like to tune 30 mtrs.
Also,it had a tendncy to be real noisy on 40 and 75.  In additon, having a 
few feet of antenna in the shack proved shocking at times.  The best and 
my current recommendation is a loop of whatever length you can manage and feed 
it with coax to a tuner.  The coax tends to keep the rf outside and the loop 
is nice and quiet.

I say, put it up, try it, tell me what happens.

Matt WD5ACR/A....the A is for apartment
 



Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: hyx1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Harry Y Xu)
Subject: Best QRP Band?
Keywords: QRP
Reply-To: hyx1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Harry Y Xu)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1992 05:47:20 GMT

Happy Holidays.

Is there such thing as the BEST HF QRP band?  One with good propagation 
and the least QRM/QRN?

Tnx,
Harry Xu     | "The belief in a supernatural source of evil is not necessary;
(KB2LHA/AG)  |  men alone are quite capable of every wickedness." --J. Conrad
From: andyw@aspen32.cray.com (Andy Warner)
Subject: Re: 430mhz band under th
Originator: andyw@aspen32
Organization: Cray Research, Inc.
Date: 28 Dec 92 10:55:07 CST


[loads of repeater-ese deleted...]

So if I remember correctly, the original poster was talking about
the potential loss of 430 throughout Europe. Does anyone
know any more about this ?

-- 
andyw.	N0REN/G1XRL

andyw@aspen.cray.com	Andy Warner, Cray Research, Inc.	(612) 683-5835
From: MROWEN%STLAWU.BITNET@cunyvm.cuny.edu (Michael Owen W9IP)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Weak-signal VHF
Date: 22 Dec 92 14:58:49 GMT
Organization: UCSD Usenet Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: daemon@ucsd.edu

Regarding sources of information on "the other" VHF,
I said to look at the VHF Manual.  I messed up - the ARRL
Operating Manual is what I meant.  It's considerably more
up-to-date than the VHF manual.  The VHF chapter in the
Operating Manual bears a close resemblance to a portion
of the VHF Companion because the latter was taken from the
former.

"Listen first..." is by far the best advice in general.
On VHF, however, there are some things you often can't
learn from listening - such as propagation mechanisms,
equipment requirements, and contest rules.

Michael Owen W9IP
MROWEN@STLAWU
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: acm139@ccs.northeastern.edu (Scott Ehrlich)
Subject: AEA Isoloop comments wanted
Organization: College of CS, Northeastern U
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 16:27:38 GMT

After having spoken with a friend of mine about the possibility of my
purchasing a new HT (remember? I had asked the net about the Alinco DJ-580T,
Kenwood TH-78A, and Yaesu FT-530 - of which, from the responses, the Alinco
won for durability, while the Yaesu won for features), my friend convinced
me that for about the same about I was going to spend (about $700 for the
Yaesu), I could purchase an HF rig.  This did make sense.  Please don't get
the idea that because I was ready to put down $700 for a new HT that I have
money to throw around, for that is farthest from the truth.

Anyway, considering that ham radio is all about antennas :)  , and considering
the fact that I live in an apartment where I cannot put anything out the
window :(   , I'd really appreciate any and all comments regarding the 
AEA Isoloop antenna.  Is it worth the approximate $300?  I have already read
one favorable review of the antenna from the October 1992 issue of 73 mag.
Other reviews would be very helpful.

Thanks much in advance.

I can worry about the HF rig later :)

73, Happy Holidays (Hanukkah, Christmas, others), and Happy New Year, too!

Scott, WY1Z

P.S. If possibly, please forward your replies to the e-mail address in my .sig

|=============================================================================|
| Scott Ehrlich 		 Internet: wy1z@meceng.coe.northeastern.edu   |
| Amateur Radio: WY1Z            Packet Radio: WY1Z @ K1UGM.MA.USA.NA	      |
|    				      					      |
|              ======        ==    					      |
|                ||          ||           				      |
|        ===================//           				      |
|           \_/		         ******************************************** |
|                                * DAH DAH DIT DIT DIT  DIT DIT DIT DAH DAH * |
|         ========		 *					    * |
|				 *	   dit dit dit dah dit dah	    * |
| Dedicated to Mr. Morse	 ******************************************** |
|									      |
|--------------------------------------------------			      |
|Disclaimer: Stop making excuses.  That's my job! |			      |
|=============================================================================|
From: kludge@grissom.larc.nasa.gov (Scott Dorsey)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: 6 Meter Radio Shack HTs!
Date: 26 Dec 1992 19:21:58 GMT
Organization: NASA Langley Research Center and Reptile Farm
NNTP-Posting-Host: grissom.larc.nasa.gov

spikes@hpscit.sc.hp.com (Bill Spikes) writes:
>
>These GOTTA be modifiable to 6 meters. The output power should be raised
>up a bit too. Somebody on the net has already posted about this a few moons
>ago, and there must be others that have tried this. Any help, pointers to
>someone, or stories would be appreciated. A 6 meter HT for 25 bucks! (or 40)
>I hope to learn from somebody elses mistakes here before I butcher her radios.

I don't know about the RS units, but I have a pair of Teenage Mutant Ninja
Turtles rigs, which have a four-transistor FM transmitter and one of the
worst receivers I have ever seen.  About 10 mW output on 6M; I changed the
crystal and tweaked the output coil on the transmitter and fiddled with the
LC constant on the receiver to get it to the right general frequency.  It's
enough to hit the 6M repeater on base, though the antenna is visible from
my office window so we aren't talking serious DX performance here).  It's
definitely worth the $20 that I paid for two 6M rigs, and while there was
a good deal of work involved, it's worth it just to write "Teenage Mutant
Ninja Turtle Transceiver" on the back of the QSL card...
--scott
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: MSUORANTA@FINABO.ABO.FI (Mika Suoranta Tkkk)
Subject: Re: Apartment antennas?
Organization: Turku School of Economics, Finland
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 12:12:57 GMT
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.24

In <1992Dec21.090530.22051@ptsfa.PacBell.COM> dmturne@ptsfa.PacBell.COM writes:

>  In article <1992Dec20.215539.4383@sequent.com> edw@sequent.com (Ed Wright) writes:
>  >The Dick Smith Co-Tanger is Vertical and Horizontal Diamond phased single
>  >element array capable of absorbing up to 1KW for periods of time. 
>  >The Co-Tanger's novel design based on traditional solutions allows it to used
>  >on any band. Yup ! just hook it up and load it up. The Folded array design 
>  >allows the Co-Tanger to occupy a very small physical space while  providing
>  >a large electical surprize in terms of bandwidth.

	Who needs an antenna capable of absorbing 1kW if is is 
	going to be used in an apartment? I wouldn't like to
	be there when your next door neighbor or landlord comes
	to visit you after a few QRO QSO's while there was a
	football game on TV....

>  
>  For all its marvelous properties the Co-Tanger has but one drawback:
>  its price. It is listed in the 1985/6 Dick Smith catalog (p. 31) for
>  $395.00!
>  


	$400 ??? Some "limited space" antenna for a price of a
	yagi beam! I would rather live with a 5-band vertical or
	a G5RV, open wire feedline and a good tuner, than put
	my money to some bu****it. If it ain't a big antenna, it 
	ain't working....




>  
>  -- 
>  Dave Turner	(510) 823-2001	{att,bellcore,sun,ames,decwrl}!pacbell!dmturne


 --------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Mika Suoranta, Leirikatu 11, SF-20360 Turku, Finland,  tel. +358-21-382637
 Graduate Student, Turku School of Economics, Ham Radio OH1NZQ CEPT-Class 1
 Internet e-mail MSUORANTA@FINABO.ABO.FI  Packet Radio OH1NZQ@OH1RBU.FIN.EU
 --------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: chandler@beagle.UUCP (Jim Chandler)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: 430mhz band under th
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 92 10:25:51 PST
Distribution: world
Organization: Total and Complete Disorganization

Larry.Mc.Donald@ofa123.fidonet.org writes:
> 
> The rest has all 
> been privatised by hams who wanted "private" systems or were looking 
> to make a buck off of the ham bands. Sure, there are plenty of 
> repeaters that I can use, for $15 a month.  Someday I'm afraid that 
> the FCC will notice this and think "Why not give this band to the real 
> businesses?" and it will be gone.  

Just an editorial comment.  Anyone who would charge for use of their repeater
just does not understand amateur radio.  It is their equipment and I they can 
do what they like, but it kind of defeats the purpose.  I can see charging
a slight ($25) YEARLY fee for autopatch priveledges for equipment upkeep and
phone bill, but I disagree with a monthly fee.  This 'privatizing' will get
amatuer radio in trouble some day.  If one wants a personal communication 
system, then get a cellular phone.  If you want to meet new and interesting
people, then become a ham.  Just my two cents worth.  Flames to /dev/null.
BTW, good luck on finding repeaters to use Larry and thanks for bringing this
point up.

------------
Jim Chandler, KD6IRV
jwc@sactoh0.sac.ca.us
sactoh0!beagle!chandler
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: bwilkins@iat.holonet.net (Bob Wilkins n6fri)
Subject: Re: 430mhz band under th
Organization: the cAVe group
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 02:12:23 GMT

whs70@dancer.cc.bellcore.com (sohl,william h) writes:

: BUT, it is on a coordinated frequency assignment that belongs to ALL hams.
: Frankly, I fail to see how any closed system can keep anyone off their
: system.  It shouldn't be all that difficult to determine the appropriate
: PL and or CTSCC feewquencies needed to gain access and use the repeater.
: Bottom line as I see it is that one applies for and gains a repeater
: assignment.  In no way should that be viewed as permission to exclude
: others.  There is a finite amount of money that hams have available
: and well it might be nice if we could all make donations to support
: every repeater, that just ain't financially able to happen.  What a
: great show we make for the newcommers (especially young hams) when we
: say...sure you can use the repeater, just fork over $15 a month.
: 
Do you want to sit at a table with ten friends ..ok $15.00 or do you want
to sit with 100 friends then its only $1.50 a month. Clubs do this all the
time. If you look at the drive time usage of a repeater only about 5 to 10
users can really use it. So you get what you pay for.

: Perhaps it is time to have frequency coordinators look towards 
: approving repeater assignments for open repeaters to make such
: repeaters more generally available where they may not be today.

In the san francisco bay area where all the 2 meter 220 and 440 repeater
pairs are in use , there are more open 440 repeaters than 2 meters and 220
repeaters combined. The coordinator has worked hard to achieve that goal.
It takes a willingness on the part of the repeater trustee to operate his
system in an open environment. Most open repeaters use pl or ctcss. Most
of the repeater usage is on the closed systems as the members are
contributing towards their repeater. Of the 40 repeaters on 1280 MHz only
2 are closed. 

:  Guess if I take a trip to LA, I might as well leave
: my 2m HT home for all the good it'll do me in the LA area. 
: Or maybe I
: need to pay ahead of time to "subscribe" to the use of some of the
: repeaters.  Personally, this sure isn't the joint mutual support and
: cooperation that I've always viewed as a fundamental basis of the ham
: radio community.

  Bring you 2 meter handy ...be sure it has pl. Some
times after listening to the racket you may not want to partisipate !
Itenerant use is typically allowed on most repeaters..hey if you get
kicked off one, there are a hundred more to try. Don't you allways pick
the table you want to sit at in a cafeteria ? You make certain judgements
... its the same way when you have a choice of repeaters. They are not all
the same ! Have fun :>

-- 
Bob Wilkins    n6fri          voice 440.250+ 100pl san francisco bay area
bwilkins@holonet.net          packet n6fri @ w6pw.#nocal.ca.us
From: v027197@stortek.com (George Noyes)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: 829 Tube caps
Date: 22 Dec 92 23:32:38 GMT
Organization: Storage Technology Corp.  Louisville, CO

In article <EP7=HZ0TU@linac.fnal.gov> carlson@linac.fnal.gov (Kermit Carlson) writes:
>       Although most designs get between 50 and 75 watts out of
> this tube, when I was in high school I was getting 175 watts of
> clean power CW/FM at 2 meters; until one day during a particularly
> long winded transmittion (longer than 20 seconds on FM) I managed
> to burn dime-size holes in the plates..... 
>
>                                          73
>
>                                            Kermit W9XA


Hmmmm, maybe that's why most designs are only designed for 50 to 75 watts
output???!!!m  :-) :-)  (100w should still be "comfortable" level).

de George, W1XE
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: phr@telebit.com (Paul Rubin)
Subject: Re: 430 mhz band under th (now repeater costs)
Organization: Telebit Corporation; Sunnyvale, CA, USA
	<POPOVICH.93Jan1151315@morningside.cs.columbia.edu>
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 06:40:55 GMT

Around here (Sunnyvale), 440 seems more popular than 2 meters.  When I
was shopping for an HT, people told me to just get 440 and not bother
with 2m.  I guess "nobody uses 2m because it's too crowded".  This
must mean that there are lots of inactive repeaters tying up channels.
I don't know firsthand what the situation is since I took the advice
and bought a 440-only radio.  Do I guess right?
From: paul@n3eop.pgh.pa.us (paul)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: 6 Meter Radio Shack HTs!
Date: 18 Dec 92 16:37:10 GMT
Organization: CrossRoads in Elizabeth, PA

spikes@hpscit.sc.hp.com (Bill Spikes) writes:

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

If you can find someone that has a copy of the August '87 Ham Radio 
magazine, it has complete instructions for conversion.  I would highly 
recommend getting the service manual; you can order it from your local 
Shack.

Overview of conversion for TRC-501:

Pull crystals: RX (X2) and TX (X3); send them when ordering rocks for the 
new freqs, and be sure to tell them what freq the old rocks are for.

Install new xtals, and peak L6, L5, and L1 for max field strength.  
(These are clustered below X3.)  Repeat until max RF generated.

Deviation control is RV1.

RX: Peak L4 and L2; L3 may need a slight touch up.

Rewax all coils when done.
From: taylor@tix.timeplex.COM (Seth Taylor)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: How to subscribe to info-hams?
Date: 28 Dec 92 17:43:37 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: daemon@ucsd.edu

simply send a msg as follows to listserv@ucsd.edu......

subject: 

add taylor@tix.timeplex.com info-hams

......nothing else no other text, just end with a " . " on a line
by itself.

substitute your login for mine of course and subject line can be blank.
Also, to unsubscribe, substitute "delete" for "add".

gud luck.

KC2WE
Xref: sparky rec.radio.amateur.misc:21589 news.answers:4839
From: mikef@pacifier.rain.com (Mike Freeman)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: RE: writing out -- --- .-. ... . in order to pass your exam
Date: 27 Dec 92 18:00:26 GMT
Article-I.D.: pacifier.1992Dec27.180026.6333
Organization: Pacifier BBS

In article <1992Dec23.093950.21714@ke4zv.uucp> gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman) writes:
>>people try to copy by writing down the dots/dashes.  None of them were
>>able to pass the test this way.  I think if you can't copy the normal 
>>way, you probably can't do it by adding another translation step.
>
>Old Sammy Morse thought putting the dots and dashes down on paper and
>"reading" the code *was* the normal way. It's the way he invented it
>and did it. If it's good enough for old Sammy.....
>
Right.  Although I personally believe that it's better copying
letters, it's interesting to contemplate the above.

I believe (if my memory hasn't suffered a case of CRS syndrome)
that Morse contemplated automating the process so that the dots
and dashes (and, in his case, the spaces) would be transcribed
onto a moving strip of paper by a machine.  It was by accident,
if I recall correctly, that telegraphers discovered that one
could read the code in the head and write it down on paper by
listening to the machine.

Happy Holidays, all!
-- 
Mike Freeman <K7UIJ>    |       Internet: mikef@pacifier.rain.com
301 N.E. 107th Street   |         or freeman@watsun.cc.columbia.edu
Vancouver, WA 98685 USA |       GEnie: M.FREEMAN11
Telephone (206)574-8221 |       I doubt, therefore I might be!