Date: Thu, 11 Nov 93 00:30:20 PST
From: Info-Hams Mailing List and Newsgroup <info-hams@ucsd.edu>
Errors-To: Info-Hams-Errors@UCSD.Edu
Reply-To: Info-Hams@UCSD.Edu
Precedence: Bulk
Subject: Info-Hams Digest V93 #1334
To: Info-Hams
Info-Hams Digest Thu, 11 Nov 93 Volume 93 : Issue 1334
Today's Topics:
(none)
440 amp kit
80m on 20m dipole (2 msgs)
Antenna Restrictions -- again!
Daily Solar Geophysical Data Broadcast for 10 November
Domestic QSL Strategies (3 msgs)
Fun with Radio Shack
help with different TH28A modifications?
License Datapoints
YAESU delers in Santa Barbara area.
Send Replies or notes for publication to: <Info-Hams@UCSD.Edu>
Send subscription requests to: <Info-Hams-REQUEST@UCSD.Edu>
Problems you can't solve otherwise to brian@ucsd.edu.
Archives of past issues of the Info-Hams Digest are available
(by FTP only) from UCSD.Edu in directory "mailarchives/info-hams".
We trust that readers are intelligent enough to realize that all text
herein consists of personal comments and does not represent the official
policies or positions of any party. Your mileage may vary. So there.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 11 Nov 93 02:11:28 GMT
From: news-mail-gateway@ucsd.edu
Subject: (none)
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
mygod guys, enough is enough, is enough,is enough...I mean when does it end, my disk storage space has erupted....please kill the message...bye
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 1993 19:01:04 GMT
From: sdd.hp.com!cs.utexas.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!usenet.ucs.indiana.edu!silver.ucs.indiana.edu!djadams@network.ucsd.edu
Subject: 440 amp kit
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
Greetings! I'm buying a TR-3600A for 70cm which puts out about
1.5 W. I'd like to up this a bit whilst at home, so I was wondering
if someone could point me to a QUALITY 440Mhz amp kit? Any help
would be appreciated.
Dave
David J Adams, N9UXU Internet: djadams@silver.ucs.indiana.edu
Amiga User and Flow Cytometry Advocate
Looking for a mobile 2m and/or 70cm rig
Conure Society of America. "Push the button Frank..."
--- -. .-.. -.-- .- -- .. --. .-
------------------------------
Date: 10 Nov 93 19:09:04 GMT
From: news.cs.indiana.edu!usenet.ucs.indiana.edu!master.cs.rose-hulman.edu!news@rutgers.rutgers.edu
Subject: 80m on 20m dipole
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
It has been said that...
> >>loss it is likely to put RF in the shack. The only way to fix this is
> > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
There will be little "rf in the shack" if the line currents are balanced
on the portion of the line which is in the shack.
Old timers may tell you that you can use a couple of small lightbulbs in
many cases to see if the currents are the same. Of course you cud use two
ammeters, but...
My wire antenna is 135 feet long and fed with 300-Ohm transmitting twin
lead. It goes from the feed point at a 90-degree angle. As it runs
through a crawlspace, I have dressed it away from any metallic objects
(by at least 10 conductor spacings).
As I use it from 80 meters to six meters I'll bet thw SWR exceeds 10:1 on
some bands.
It don't beat my tribander, but in contests it's a lot less directional.
Some call this antenna a center fed Zepp. I call it a doublet or flattop.
On 75 , I call it a dipole. On 40 meters I call it two half waves in
phase (gain abt 1.8 dB or so).
On SIX METERS, I call it a piece of luck.
73 de Jack, K9CUN
------------------------------
Date: 9 Nov 1993 22:38:03 GMT
From: organpipe.uug.arizona.edu!helium!hlester@uunet.uu.net
Subject: 80m on 20m dipole
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
In article <1993Nov9.150614.3294@osuunx.ucc.okstate.edu> gcouger@olesun.okstate.edu (Gordon Couger) writes:
>are able to match it. Also if you go to open line to get away from the
>loss it is likely to put RF in the shack. The only way to fix this is
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
This has not been my experience. I say the benefits of open wire/ladder line
far outweighs its disadvantages. There seems to be a lot of fear about this
stuff.
Howard KE7QJ
------------------------------
Date: 10 Nov 93 20:40:24 GMT
From: ogicse!uwm.edu!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!sdd.hp.com!col.hp.com!srgenprp!alanb@network.ucsd.edu
Subject: Antenna Restrictions -- again!
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
Bruce Toback (btoback@netcom.com) wrote:
: I'm considering buying a home in a PUD (planned-unit development) that has
: a deed restriction on antennas. (The restriction is part of the CC&Rs.)
: The antenna restriction forbids _any_ antenna that is higher than the
: roofline of the house.
: I'd normally assume that I'd be out of luck, but for one thing: about half
: the houses in the development do have TV antennas that are above the
: roofline ...
I agree with another reply that you should try to get permission nailed
down before you buy the house.
But for people who have already purchased a house in your situation, I
would recommend one of those mini-beams that are about the size of a TV
antenna. Probably nobody will be the wiser. For the lower bands, use
the "TV" antenna guy wires as inverted VEE's. If you use 4 guy wires, you
could load two of them up on 80 meters and the other two on 40 meters,
and feed both with one piece of coax. (Of course you will need insulators
in the guy wires at appropriate places.)
If you want to really play it safe, put up a real TV antenna and load
up the guy wires with a tuner on all bands. A totally invisible
ham antenna!
AL N1AL
------------------------------
Date: 11 Nov 93 03:24:28 GMT
From: news-mail-gateway@ucsd.edu
Subject: Daily Solar Geophysical Data Broadcast for 10 November
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
!!BEGIN!! (1.0) S.T.D. Solar Geophysical Data Broadcast for DAY 314, 11/10/93
10.7 FLUX=090.0 90-AVG=093 SSN=040 BKI=2332 3221 BAI=009
BGND-XRAY=A7.7 FLU1=7.1E+05 FLU10=1.2E+04 PKI=3333 3331 PAI=011
BOU-DEV=017,024,036,014,025,011,010,006 DEV-AVG=017 NT SWF=00:000
XRAY-MAX= B3.7 @ 1639UT XRAY-MIN= A6.5 @ 0723UT XRAY-AVG= B1.2
NEUTN-MAX= +004% @ 0925UT NEUTN-MIN= -002% @ 1655UT NEUTN-AVG= +0.9%
PCA-MAX= +0.1DB @ 1510UT PCA-MIN= -0.6DB @ 2250UT PCA-AVG= -0.0DB
BOUTF-MAX=55363NT @ 0008UT BOUTF-MIN=55340NT @ 1827UT BOUTF-AVG=55354NT
GOES7-MAX=P:+000NT@ 0000UT GOES7-MIN=N:+000NT@ 0000UT G7-AVG=+063,+000,+000
GOES6-MAX=P:+108NT@ 1651UT GOES6-MIN=N:-067NT@ 0927UT G6-AVG=+086,+018,-039
FLUXFCST=STD:090,085,085;SESC:090,085,085 BAI/PAI-FCST=005,005,010/010,010,010
KFCST=0004 4000 0005 5000 27DAY-AP=008,005 27DAY-KP=3222 2221 2221 2111
WARNINGS=
ALERTS=
!!END-DATA!!
NOTE: The Effective Sunspot Number for 09 NOV 93 was 33.7.
The Full Kp Indices for 09 NOV 93 are: 2+ 3- 2+ 3- 2o 2o 3- 2+
------------------------------
Date: 9 Nov 93 20:02:44 GMT
From: sdd.hp.com!col.hp.com!srgenprp!alanb@hplabs.hp.com
Subject: Domestic QSL Strategies
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
Charles R. Hohenstein (Charles.R.Hohenstein.1@nd.edu) wrote:
: 1. Does it help a lot to use something like the Buckmaster CD ROM in place
: of a printed call book, or do a lot of addresses still turn out to be
: wrong?
I maintain a database of all the hams here in Sonoma County CA. It is
absolutely amazing how many hams move without telling the FCC. Heck, we
even have members of the local club (and at least one Board member!) who
moved without sending the club a change of address.
Buckmaster and the Callbook both get their data from the FCC. The Callbook
may be slightly better because they do enter any corrections they may
receive. I believe Buckmaster just uses the straight FCC list.
AL N1AL
------------------------------
Date: 10 Nov 93 22:10:42 GMT
From: ogicse!emory!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!spool.mu.edu!news.nd.edu!NewsWatcher@network.ucsd.edu
Subject: Domestic QSL Strategies
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
In article <1993Nov10.022503.20167@ke4zv.atl.ga.us>, gary@ke4zv.atl.ga.us
(Gary Coffman) wrote:
>
> In article <Charles.R.Hohenstein.1-091193111547@oldmac14.debartolo.lab.nd.edu> Charles.R.Hohenstein.1@nd.edu (Charles R. Hohenstein) writes:
> >So here are my questions:
> >
> >1. Does it help a lot to use something like the Buckmaster CD ROM in place
> >of a printed call book, or do a lot of addresses still turn out to be
> >wrong?
>
> No it doesn't help. Both get their information from the same place, the
> FCC database. The problem is that people don't notify the FCC when they
> move, or die. Many hams don't even realize they are *required* to notify
> the FCC when they change mailing addresses. Of course the most recent
> edition of either the paper or computer callbook is of some help in that
> it has a list of more recent licensees, and does have any address changes
> for older hams that the FCC has received.
Well, maybe there is a way to get more people to update their addresses
with the FCC. Heaven knows, we have people who are willing to beat other
requirements and regulations to death. Maybe we could jump on people who
don't update their addresses instead of no-coders for a change.
>
> >3. Suppose that an amateur doesn't even know that his call book address is
> >invalid. How can I or anyone else let him know, if the whole problem is
> >that the guy can't be reached? Maybe the League should share the last known
> >address for ARRL members, but that sounds like a lot of work.
>
> It also wouldn't be a popular idea with some League members. Divulging
> mailing lists is a sore point with some. They consider that confidential
> information.
But surely they would be wrong. The addresses of licensed radio amateurs
constitute public information (which the FCC can and does share with
Buckmaster et al.). If the League has some of the same information in a
more accurate form, and decided to share it for the purpose of helping
radio amateurs fulfill their duty to provide their current addresses, I
don't see how anyone could bitch about a breach of confidential
information. The issue wouldn't even come up if these licensees had kept
the FCC up to date, as was their responsibility. Of course, whether the
League would have the resources to do such a thing is an entirely different
issue.
It wouldn't be surprising if a large number of amateurs didn't
> know whether their callbook address were correct or in error. Take me for
> example, I haven't bought a new callbook since 1967. I recently bought the
> SAM database, and my address is correct, but between 1968 and 1992 I have
> no idea whether the callbook was printing correct information or not.
Maybe the League should start to publicize this issue with some sort of
campaign, then. Possible slogan: "You ought to feel small if you've
provided the wrong address for your call." Well, maybe they could come up
with something a little better.
Thanks, incidentally, for your other suggestions.
Charles R. Hohenstein
N9SQE
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 1993 19:07:51 GMT
From: sdd.hp.com!col.hp.com!news.dtc.hp.com!hpscit.sc.hp.com!cupnews0.cup.hp.com!jholly@network.ucsd.edu
Subject: Domestic QSL Strategies
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
Charles R. Hohenstein (Charles.R.Hohenstein.1@nd.edu) wrote:
: I am a recently-licensed radio amateur and don't have a lot of experience
: with QSLing, but on the advice of a few articles I read, I sent out a bunch
: of QSLs with stamped, self-addressed envelopes to increase the return rate.
: I was surprised to discover that the big problem was not people who
: wouldn't reply, but people with bad addresses in the call book. A major
: number of QSLs have come back stamped "return to sender," "forwarding order
: expired" or something similar.
: Obviously, I know now to ask more consistently whether the address in the
: callbook is good. But in at least one case, I have asked someone this, been
: assured that the callbook address is o.k., and still had my QSL returned by
: the post office. Wayne Green claims that many people in the call book are
: actually dead, not merely relocated.
: So here are my questions:
: 1. Does it help a lot to use something like the Buckmaster CD ROM in place
: of a printed call book, or do a lot of addresses still turn out to be
: wrong?
What is the year of your call book? Buckmaster gets their data from the
FCC database the same as the Callbook. I'm not sure what the update cycle
on Buckmaster is, but if it is not more timely than the Callbook you
might get the same answer. Are you on, or can get access to a DX packet
cluster? Some of them have the Buckmaster ROM on line. Bottom line, if
the ham does not send in a Form 610 for address change, none of the
call info will be correct. Some people don't send in change of address
info.
: 2. The ARRL Operating Manual says that I can't send domestic QSLs to
: bureaus for incoming DX QSLs. Does the League, then, maintain a domestic
: QSL bureau? Sorry if this is an ignorant question, but the Operating Manual
: doesn't mention one, unless I missed something (which is entirely
: possible).
Not ignorant. But the answer is no. I wish this was so, but I guess they
would be buried worse than they are now. And once the cards leave Newington,
it is dedicated volunteers all the way.
: 3. Suppose that an amateur doesn't even know that his call book address is
: invalid. How can I or anyone else let him know, if the whole problem is
: that the guy can't be reached? Maybe the League should share the last known
: address for ARRL members, but that sounds like a lot of work.
Outside of working him again, not much can be done. Is there a white page
thing on the standard BBS packet? But there is no gaurentee the guy would
be listed. For the real answer, see #1 above. Maybe some don't realize the
Callbook address comes from their license info.
: 4. Does anyone have any golden advice about how to proceed in such
: situations?
If you need the state, work another and send the card to him. Eventually
you will work someone that has a current address, or at least a current
forwarding.
Jim, WA6SDM
jholly@cup.hp.com
------------------------------
Date: 9 Nov 93 13:44:06
From: sdd.hp.com!nigel.msen.com!ilium!rcsuna.gmr.com!rcsuna.gmr.com!vbreault@network.ucsd.edu
Subject: Fun with Radio Shack
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
In article <2bogl8$km0@oak.oakland.edu> prvalko@vela.acs.oakland.edu (prvalko) writes:
Typically, the fact that Hams are about the cheapest SOBs on earth, sure
comes out in this thread.
<stuff deleted>
I wonder where all these whiners would go if RS just closed shop
like they seem to want?
Hi Paul...
I can't understand some people, but then again, maybe I'm just dense.
In "the good old days", the years following WWII and the Korean war
there were a LOT of electronic experimenters about. As would be expected
in our free market system, there were in turn a LOT of electronic parts
suppliers. That's not true any more. We have no more Olsens there
is no more Layfayette.... Cripe, even Silversteins is gone (a real
Detroit landmark - acres of war surplus "stuff"). So what is left?
Who's going to provide competition and therefore keep the level of service
high and the prices low? Well, being in a large metropolitan area I can
get to a commercial parts supplier within half an hour but that's not true
everywhere. In Traverse City where I like to vacation, the fine folks in
the Cherryland Amateur Radio Club have three choices: Wait until they have
a trip downstate, Wait for mail order or go to the Traverse City Radio
Shack store. (For what it's worth, the folks at the T.C. RS are a fine
bunch and try very hard to excel.)
I've been behind the RS counter several times a week for a bit over a
year now.... I've kinda gotten accustomed to the occasional "Radio Shack
Customer-Droid". (Insert an appropriate number of smilies here.........
.............................................) The next several hundred
customers are a real delight to deal with. If I didn't enjoy the people
I wouldn't work there.
Of course, if someone really doesn't like dealing with Radio Shack then
that's fine with me too. I understand that one store can't be the answer
to everyones needs. If enough folks in a geographic area feel that
there is a better solution then I encourage them to find some capital
and start a business that meets those needs. Judging by the paupacy of
electronic hobbiest stores, I guess RS is at least doing "okay".
I don't travel much anymore and I wonder to the net: How well served
are the electronic hobbiests in your part of the world? If you needed
a small part or maybe an oddball component like a video mixer, outdoor
telephone bell or wireless microphone, what are your non-Radio Shack
choices? (no fair researching this one... it's gotta be off the top
of your head)
--
Val Breault - N8OEF - vbreault@gmr.com \ /|
Instrumentation dept GM NAO R&D Center \ / |
My opinions are not necessarily those of \ /__|
GMR nor of the General Motors Corporation \/ |___
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 93 23:05:47 EST
From: noc.near.net!news.delphi.com!usenet@uunet.uu.net
Subject: help with different TH28A modifications?
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
Sean, I checked a TH28 mod file that I copied says that the F and LOW
keys should be hit for wide-band UHF recieve. If that does not work,
I'd try resetting the microprocessor after clipping D9.
--Leigh/KM6JE, the compulsive mod file collector.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 09 Nov 1993 17:17:08 -0700
From: orca.es.com!cnn.sim.es.com!msanders.sim.es.com!user@uunet.uu.net
Subject: License Datapoints
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
In article <1993Nov8.215252.25913@picker.com>, BUSH@engvax.picker.com (JOHN
BUSH) wrote:
> Have your YL look for her license in about 6-7 weeks. I took my test
> (cleveland, Ohio) in Sept.; received license this Friday -- elapsed time was 6
> wks and 5 days.
>
> > My wife just passed her exams for a technician amateur license on Nov 5.
> > How long did it take for those of you who have received new licenses lately
> > to receive them from the date you took your exam?
My two boys took their tests on 15 Sept and received them on 1 Nov: 6
weeks 5 days.
Milt
--
=========================================================================
Opinions, thoughts, &cetera are my own (when I can remember them).
KB7MSF
------------------------------
Date: 9 Nov 93 01:10:47 GMT
From: gatech!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!library.ucla.edu!nntp.ucsb.edu!mcl!usvein@rutgers.rutgers.edu
Subject: YAESU delers in Santa Barbara area.
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
iI am looking for Yaesu dealers in Santa Barbara ( or LA ) area. I am interested in handheld tranceivers. Where is the nearest or cheapest ones ?
Write to Svein Vetti (Norwegian) e-mail : usvein@mcl.mcl.ucsb.edu
------------------------------
Date: 10 Nov 1993 09:43:50 -0800
From: cs.utexas.edu!asuvax!chnews!ornews.intel.com!ornews.intel.com!not-for-mail@uunet.uu.net
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
References <CG8AH6.B1q@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu>, <1993Nov9.150614.3294@osuunx.ucc.okstate.edu>, <2bp64b$kuq@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu>m
Subject : Ladder Line (was: 80m on 20m dipole)
In article <2bp64b$kuq@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu> hlester@helium.gas.uug.arizona.edu (howard n lester) writes:
>In article <1993Nov9.150614.3294@osuunx.ucc.okstate.edu> gcouger@olesun.okstate.edu (Gordon Couger) writes:
>>are able to match it. Also if you go to open line to get away from the
>>loss it is likely to put RF in the shack. The only way to fix this is
>This has not been my experience. I say the benefits of open wire/ladder line
>far outweighs its disadvantages. There seems to be a lot of fear about this
>stuff.
Yes, fear of the unknown. Ladder line is very mysterious stuff and comes
from the dark past. Days of beeswax and dirigibles, ozone and wobulators,
black magic and witchcraft. Few hams these days have any idea of how to
get this strange and awkward wire from the outside of the house to the
inside. There are rumors and folklore about what may happen if the stuff
should so much as come near a non-noble metal or perhaps run the same
course as another conductor. The dreaded "RF in the shack!" may cause
lighting to dim and waver. Solid state rigs may chatter their relays
while their digital displays go crazy and all the LED's wink on and off
as the daemons released by the ladder line play with their logic.
If you do decide to tempt fate and fool with the Devil, do not succumb
to the modern 1" plastic 450 ohm line. Only real, handmade 600 ohm
ladder line with solid copper #12 conductors space 6" apart using oak or
ash spacers dipped in beeswax will appease the spirits of the ether.
You must then hang this line straight down for exactly one quarter wave
length from the cockpit of your dirigible where it shall be connected to
a real wobulator with tickler coil wound on glazed porcelain. At the
lower end of the ladder line connect a one half wave length of Litz wire
to one wire only. The other wire of the ladder line must remain free
and unconnected for the spirits to use. Now fly your dirigible fast
enough that the Litz wire trails straight back but not so fast that the
ladder line may become bent and not hang straight down. Activate the
rotary spark gap and begin pounding the dime sized silver contacts of
your key. Enter the realm of the shadow world.
--
zardoz@ornews.intel.com WA7LDV
------------------------------
Date: 9 Nov 1993 16:31:36 GMT
From: swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!cs.uiuc.edu!news1.oakland.edu!vela.acs.oakland.edu!prvalko@network.ucsd.edu
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
References <gregCFz6KF.DGz@netcom.com>, <1993Nov5.231254.15145@es.dupont.com>, <VBREAULT.93Nov8111110@rinhp750.gmr.com>.edu
Subject : Re: Fun with Radio Shack
Val,
Typically, the fact that Hams are about the cheapest SOBs on earth, sure
comes out in this thread. I did not buy the catalog when I first went
to get one and found out it was $3. I waited until I needed something
(a $7 antenna for my car) bought it and the catalog with the $3 coupon
in it. I wonder where all these whiners would go if RS just closed shop
like they seem to want?
73 zjl
------------------------------
Date: 9 Nov 1993 18:53:03 GMT
From: sdd.hp.com!spool.mu.edu!uwm.edu!msuinfo!pacific!cravitma@network.ucsd.edu
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
References <CG6JDz.C5v@apollo.hp.com>, <2blvdg$13fa@msuinfo.cl.msu.edu>, <1993Nov8.230739.14660@ke4zv.atl.ga.us>
Subject : Re: Radio Shack HTs
In article <1993Nov8.230739.14660@ke4zv.atl.ga.us> gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman) writes:
>In article <2blvdg$13fa@msuinfo.cl.msu.edu> cravitma@pepper.uucp (Matthew B Cravit) writes:
>>In article <CG6JDz.C5v@apollo.hp.com> scofield@apollo.HP.COM () writes:
>>>Possible stupid question: who makes the HTX-202?
>>
>>I have been told that it is made by Icom, but this was by an R.S.
>>salesdroid, so I could be wrong.
>
>Well they say "Made in Korea for Tandy Corp", so I don't think Icom
>is involved. I heard they were made by the same company that makes
>their scanners.
>
>Gary
Are R.S. scanners still made by Uniden? If not, does anyone know who
makes the scanners for R.S.? My local salesdroid had no idea when I
asked him this.
/MC
--
Matthew Cravit | "So I sent him to ask of the
Michigan State University | owl, if he's there, how to
East Lansing, MI 48825 | loosen a jar from the nose
E-Mail: cravitma@cps.msu.edu | of a bear..."
------------------------------
End of Info-Hams Digest V93 #1334
******************************
******************************