Date: Thu, 11 Nov 93 16:31:18 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 #1337
To: Info-Hams
Info-Hams Digest Thu, 11 Nov 93 Volume 93 : Issue 1337
Today's Topics:
20m dipole on 80m
Domestic QSL Strategies (2 msgs)
homebrew help
How Sensitive Are Front-Ends?
Jameco Parts Catalog
Kenwood TM-742 remote control?
Need ALASKA for 75m WAS
RF in the shack (was Re: 80m on 20m dipole)
WANTED ICOM 726R
Wattmeter
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 19:19:09 GMT
From: news-mail-gateway@ucsd.edu
Subject: 20m dipole on 80m
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
Text item: Text_1
>Feedline radiation and "hot" station grounds are caused by unbalanced
>currents on the feedline. So long as everything is balanced, you
>shouldn't see a problem.
>AL N1AL
I agree with Al and everyone promoting ladder-line over coax on HF.
One reason for using ladder-line is very low losses even with very
high SWRs. But remember with very high SWRs, there can be some very
high voltages. One night the cat was playing with my ladder-line as
I started to tune up on CW. As I keyed down, the cat let out a squeal,
jumped four feet in the air, left the room, and never entered the
shack again. 600 watts into 3000 ohms gives around 4000 volts peak
to peak so be sure to take reasonable precautions. There is quite
a field very close to the transmission line which falls off to a
neglible value a few inches away IF THE CURRENTS ARE BALANCED as they
should be. This is normal and not considered to be "RF in the shack".
73, Cecil, kg7bk@indirect.com (I do not speak for Intel on Internet)
------------------------------
Date: 11 Nov 93 17:04:39 GMT
From: news-mail-gateway@ucsd.edu
Subject: Domestic QSL Strategies
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
>Possible slogan: "You ought to feel small if you've
>provided the wrong address for your call."
>Charles R. Hohenstein N9SQE
not bad...
how about:
to get your DX mail without fail (something) (something) (something)
[it PRACTICALLY WRITES ITSELF!]
bill wb9ivr
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1993 02:25:03 GMT
From: swrinde!emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary@network.ucsd.edu
Subject: Domestic QSL Strategies
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
In article <Charles.R.Hohenstein.1-091193111547@oldmac14.debartolo.lab.nd.edu> Charles.R.Hohenstein.1@nd.edu (Charles R. Hohenstein) writes:
>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.
Wayne's right. The median age for US amateurs is still in the mid-50s.
That means there are a bunch shaking hands with the grim reaper every
year. The FCC doesn't normally purge their database even if they are
notified of the death, rare, and with 10 year licenses there can be
amateurs listed who've been dead a long time. Worse, there are bootleggers
using dead men's calls, and living ham's calls for that matter. I recently
received a bunch of QSLs for 20 meter CW contacts I supposedly made. I
*know* that's the work of a bootlegger.
>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.
>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. 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.
>4. Does anyone have any golden advice about how to proceed in such
>situations?
It depends on how desperately you want the QSL. The first step of course
is to confirm the address during the contact. This is where an online
database can be handy, though just keeping the callbook next to the rig
works too. Ask for the correct address, or read them the callbook entry
and ask for confirmation. Note, however, that many hams do not QSL. So
even if the address is correct you may still not get a card. They may
*say* they'll QSL during the contact, but they may not mean it. Sending
a pre-addressed, pre-filled out QSL with a stamp on it will often get
a reply. If you are a serious collector of postal cards, you'll have
a supply of fill in the blanks cards for this purpose. I QSL only
sporadically, and only for certain kinds of contacts such as satellite
contacts. Sending me a prepared card to drop in the mail is much
more likely to get a response if we've chatted on HF.
If the contact has come and gone and you learn you don't have a valid
address, consult the various online phonebooks. The phone company is
a much greater stickler for keeping current information. If you find
several people with the same last name in the contact's area, call
them. The odds are they may be related to the ham and may have the
correct address. If that doesn't work, try the credit bureau. For
a fee they can turn up the address of anyone who has a credit history.
As a last resort, contact a skip tracing firm. Most bail bondsmen can
refer you to a good one.
The best thing to do is to realize that you aren't going to get 100%
returns no matter what you do. Just relax and enjoy the contacts for
what they are, a chance to chat with a distant stranger over the radio.
Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV |"If 10% is good enough | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems | for Jesus, it's good | uunet!rsiatl!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way | enough for Uncle Sam."| emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
Lawrenceville, GA 30244 | -Ray Stevens |
------------------------------
Date: 11 Nov 93 18:02:59 GMT
From: ogicse!emory!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!cs.utexas.edu!cactus.org!majec@network.ucsd.edu
Subject: homebrew help
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
I am thinking about a project to put in a swr protection circuit in my
QRP radio. It is a TEN-TEC pm2. A direct conversion 1 watt vfo/crystal
transceiver.
I am using a 10 ohm resistor in the dc line to the collector on the
final, and when I have it tuned for the antenna I take the resistor
out and close up the line. Crude I will admit. This is only a
temporary fix and will not be good for portable operation such as
camping etc. So....
Any suggestions for a protection circuit would be appreciated as i am
very new to the sport of ham homebrew and need some elmering on most
things.
Thanks
Ed Guinn
KB5RUF/AG
majec@cactus.org
------------------------------
Date: 11 Nov 1993 00:36:58 GMT
From: mimbres.cs.unm.edu!ncar!gatech!howland.reston.ans.net!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!eff!news.kei.com!yeshua.marcam.com!zip.eecs.umich.edu!destroyer!news1.oakland.edu!argo.acs.oakland.edu@nmt.edu
Subject: How Sensitive Are Front-Ends?
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
In article <1993Nov9.145034.17948@ke4zv.atl.ga.us>, gary@ke4zv.atl.ga.us (Gary Coffman) writes:
>I run 2 meters, 70 cm, and cellphone in my truck. I use a Comet
>triplexer and a Comet dualband antenna. It's worked fine, but
>...
>Note that I'm using a dualband antenna for three bands. That's
>not ideal, but it seems to perform well with the cellphone.
>Comet does make a triband antenna, but it's a good bit taller.
Your TXing with your cellular on a dualband antenna? I should try
using my 144/440/900MHz triband antenna with cellular (very high
gain on 900). Cellular TXs around 823-850, will using a 902-928
antenna damage my cellphone?
--
Steve Kuo, N8OPH, sdkuo@oakland.edu
------------------------------
Date: 9 Nov 93 19:30:48 GMT
From: munnari.oz.au!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!msuinfo!netnews.upenn.edu!gopher.cs.uofs.edu!triangle.cs.uofs.edu!bill@network.ucsd.edu
Subject: Jameco Parts Catalog
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
In article <gila005-051193124625@right.dom.uab.edu>, gila005@uabdpo.dpo.uab.edu (Steve Holland) writes:
|> I had heard rumors Jameco was coming out with a components catalog.
|> Got mine yesterday. No chip capacitors, but 20 and 40 watt 2 meter
|> power amplifier kits, about $2 a watt output, 2 meter transceiver
|> kit, and some other ham kits including some 20 and 40 meter QRP
|> kits.
Sounds like they've become a Ramsey distributor to me!!
bill KB3YV
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1993 06:07:59 GMT
From: library.ucla.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!usc!cs.utexas.edu!utnut!torn!nott!cunews!freenet.carleton.ca!Freenet.carleton.ca!aj467@network.ucsd.edu
Subject: Kenwood TM-742 remote control?
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
Try Kenwood America or your local dealer. he radio can be remotely
controlled when in repeater mode, with dtmf on the second band, and using
dtmf codes for function changes, a friend has the 741 and can do it with
his nothing so crude as putting the mike on the speaker, the audio can be
cross-band repeated both ways, we use his 741 for cross band linking to
his 950 for 10 mtr openings and remote 40 mtr contacts etc. We haven't
figured out how to control the 950 ... yet. It may require a hybrid
controller of sorts. Someone on here was talking about being in remote and
hearing dtmf and their frequency taking off, or the band changing. This is
the function for remote control.
Sorry I can't help more, but it is in there. It may jusy be lost in the
technical translation from Japanese to English. Experiment and have fun.
73 et bcnu de VE3NJW Bill in Ottawa ...-.-
--
Bill VE3NJW Advanced Amateur
Packet Address : VE3NJW@VE3KYT.#EON.ON.CAN
Freenet Address: aj467@Freenet.Carleton.ca
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1993 04:42:30 GMT
From: munnari.oz.au!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!darwin.sura.net!perot.mtsu.edu!raider!theporch!jackatak!root@network.ucsd.edu
Subject: Need ALASKA for 75m WAS
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
mosier@fagan.uncg.edu (Stephen Mosier) writes:
> I need one more QSO/QSL for the 75m Extra-class WAS award.
Me too..although I need FIVE...
However, I am trying to do this from a mobile, and 75-meter mobile is
a real trip!
> Alaska stations with Extra-class formatted calls
Hawaii
Oregon
Arizona
New Jersey...(who'd have thunk it? ;^)
> that would like to come up
> on the GERITOL net on 3768 kHz some evening?
Preferably on the weekend when 0800Z won't toally wipe us out for the
rest of the week! ;^)
> you'll be busy for awhile, but its FUN!!
*That* it is...
73, Jack, W4PPT/mobile
+--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--+
| Jack GF Hill |Voice: (615) 459-2636 - Ham Call: W4PPT |
| P. O. Box 1685 |Modem: (615) 377-5980 - Bicycling and SCUBA Diving |
| Brentwood, TN 37024|Fax: (615) 459-0038 - Life Member - ARRL |
| root@jackatak.raider.net - "Plus ca changer, plus c'est la meme chose" |
+--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--+
------------------------------
Date: 11 Nov 93 20:24:34 GMT
From: ogicse!uwm.edu!spool.mu.edu!sdd.hp.com!col.hp.com!srgenprp!alanb@network.ucsd.edu
Subject: RF in the shack (was Re: 80m on 20m dipole)
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
Pete Rossi (rossi@VFL.Paramax.COM) wrote:
: I have an odd "RF in the shack" problem on 80 meters. I am using a full-size
: 80 meter dipole. Fed with coax. No balun. No tuner. The antenna wire is
: about 35 feet above the ground. The coax drops straight down from the center
: to the ground and then runs along the ground about 30 feet to the basement
: window. The "hot" end of the dipole runs about 10 feet away from the house
: along the side of the property from a pole in the backyard to a tree in the
: front yard. This puts a good portion of the antenna wire almost 35 feet
: directly above me. This may be part of the problem.
: Anyway... Right now the dipole is tuned for 1:1 SWR around 3800. Anywhere
: from about 3700-3900 the SWR is below 1.5:1, however I have severe 80 meter RF
: getting into everything in the shack. If I go down to the CW part of the
: band the SWR goes up over 3:1, but ** the RF problem goes away ** !! ??
It may not be a coincidence that your feedline is about 65 feet long -- almost
an exact 1/4 wave on 80 meters. Here's a schematic of your antenna:
<----- 65 feet -----> <----- 65 feet ----->
____________________ ____________________
| | ^
| | |
| | |
| | 65 feet
| | |
| | |
| | V
TRANSMITTER
I assume the coax is connected directly to the antenna -- i.e. the center
conductor goes to one half of the dipole and the shield goes to the other.
Since the coax shield is resonant on 80 meters, the same as the antenna
wire, the antenna return current is just as likely to flow on the shield
as the antenna, so you have lots of feedline currents. That may well be
what is causing your "RF in the shack."
Why is the SWR better at frequencies with the RF problem? It's hard to say,
but with the antenna so close to the ground and so close to other conducting
objects, you undoubtedly are not getting the impedance you would have if the
antenna were in "free space." Evidently you the feedline current is such
as to make the antenna closer to 50 ohms. When you change frequency to where
the feedline is no longer resonant, the SWR goes up.
I would recommend either (1) installing a 1:1 balun at the antenna feed
point (top of coax) or (2) changing the coax to a non-resonant length.
If the SWR is then unacceptably high, then prune the antenna wire length
to bring it back into tune.
You might also try a VERY SHORT, fat ground wire to a good ground rod.
Since you are on a long-wavelength band, and the radio shack is in the
basement, you might be able to get a low-enough impedance ground to do
some good.
By the way, 35 feet is pretty low for an 80 meter dipole. If you could
figure out how to get it up higher, you'd probably get better DX.
Good luck!
AL N1AL
------------------------------
Date: 11 Nov 93 21:09:50 GMT
From: icd.ab.com!icd.ab.com!bjp@uunet.uu.net
Subject: WANTED ICOM 726R
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
Must be in good condition and priced fairly. Looking to work
shuttle missions. Also what accessories it comes with.
Thanks,
Brian Pennebaker N8RPA
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1993 16:54:24 GMT
From: sdd.hp.com!spool.mu.edu!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!mcrcim.mcgill.edu!sifon!wouff@network.ucsd.edu
Subject: Wattmeter
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
I have the "business end" (load) of a calorimetric type RF wattmeter.
Unfortunately this unit is missing its indicator and manual.
Specifics:
RF Wattmeter Model # 641N, SN 794D
Impedance: 50 Ohms
Frequency Range: 0 - 3000 MHz
Power: 0 - 300 Watts
Manufacturer: M. C. Jones Electronics Co., Inc.
Bristol, Conn., USA
The indicator connects to the load housing via a 4 pin Jones socket.
The load has been checked (SWR) on a network analyzer and is still useful.
Does anyone out there recognize this unit? Does anyone have a manual
for it? I would like to reconstruct the indicator (with modern components)
and I would like to know the details of the sensing elements (thermistors,
thermocouples, etc. ??) in the load and their connection to the 4 pin Jones
socket.
Thanks,
de ...wouff...
~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~
wouff@ee470.ee.mcgill.ca Tel. # 1-514-398-7149
Ken Fraser VE2KLF FAX # 1-514-398-4470
DEPARTMENT OF ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING, McGill University
3480 University Street, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H3A 2A7
~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1993 15:35:15 GMT
From: news.kpc.com!amd!netcomsv!netcom.com!greg@decwrl.dec.com
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
References <1993Nov10.170617.17372@sequent.com>, <1993Nov10.214815.9804@anasazi.com>, <CGC1AC.7s3@walter.bellcore.com>com.c
Subject : Re: Antenna Restrictions -- again!
In article <CGC1AC.7s3@walter.bellcore.com> whs70@dancer.cc.bellcore.com (sohl,william h) writes:
>
>> (2) the 30 days was from when they received permission. I would bet
>> that the antenna would have to be up for at least a year before
>> a court would agree with you rather than them (at least, that's
>> what MY lawyer said when I asked about this).
>
>I think it is difficult to say that "the 30 days was from when they
>received permission" without having actually read the CC&Rs. It may
It's not difficult at all. Because CC&R's are fairly standard in
their wording and prepared from standard templates. Unless someone
made a colossal blunder, the idea is this:
If the Board takes no action within 30 days after a request for an
architectural approval is received, then approval is granted. This
is to prevent boards which only meet every 90 days from holding up
construction projects unduly. However, you can't put something up
and if nobody notices in thirty days, it stands. That's just not
the way it works.
Also, the Board can also take 'action' that amounts to inaction. They
can deny the request pending further information. They can stipulate
that your neighbors must agree. They can request drawings. Or they
can just say 'no' and let you appeal.
These things are stacked in favor of the Associations.
Although this individual may have buffaloed the association VP,
if the managment company is worth its salt, the property manager
will point out that such is not how it works. It may well come
around again.
Greg
------------------------------
Date: 10 Nov 1993 14:51:32 GMT
From: yeshua.marcam.com!wrdis02.robins.af.mil!sberman@uunet.uu.net
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
References <2b9l9lINN8pr@flop.ENGR.ORST.EDU>, <WY1Z.93Nov5141317@splinter.coe.northeastern.edu>, <4808@eram.esi.COM.AU>
Subject : Re: Questions about Yaesu FT-411E
Dave Horsfall (dave@esi.COM.AU) wrote:
: In article <WY1Z.93Nov5141317@splinter.coe.northeastern.edu>,
: wy1z@splinter.coe.northeastern.edu (Scott Ehrlich) writes:
: | Unless I am mistaken, I think the only real difference between the 411 and
: | 411E is that the 411E has the Tone Encode/Decode board built-in, where
: | it is extra for the 411.
: And I thought it was because they fixed some receiver problem...
: --
: Dave Horsfall (VK2KFU) VK2KFU @ VK2RWI.NSW.AUS.OC PGP 2.3
: dave@esi.COM.AU ...munnari!esi.COM.AU!dave available
As another 411 (unadorned) owner, I have to come down on the intermod
side. My factory 411 has the encode/decode, but does have intermod
problems occasionally (usually at Ham-Fests where there's more RF
flying than Voice of America).
--Steve, KD4YLB ... - . ...- .
------------------------------
Date: 11 Nov 93 16:41:40 GMT
From: ogicse!uwm.edu!linac!att!cbnewse!parnass@network.ucsd.edu
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
References <1993Nov8.230739.14660@ke4zv.atl.ga.us>, <2boouf$12m3@msuinfo.cl.msu.edu>, <931110.85727.EDELLERS@delphi.com>
Subject : Re: Radio Shack HTs
EDELLERS@delphi.com (Ed Ellers) said:
> SOME of the Realistic scanners come out of the Uniden/Bearcat line,
> while others are done in-house by Tandy.
> Check the FCC ID on the unit to be sure -- AA0
> means a Tandy design, AMW means Uniden.
Which model scanners do you think were manufactured by Tandy?
Most of them were made by GRE. GRE made some scanners for other
companies, like SBE and Handic, too.
You might find a Tandy designation on the FCC ID, but I don't
think that infers Tandy actually manufactured the scanner
in a Tandy factory.
--
==============================================================================
Copyright 1993, Bob Parnass, AJ9S
AT&T Bell Laboratories - parnass@ih4gp.att.com - (708)979-5414
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 1993 20:53:17 GMT
From: munnari.oz.au!spool.mu.edu!darwin.sura.net!rsg1.er.usgs.gov!dgg.cr.usgs.gov!bodoh@network.ucsd.edu
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
References <2blvdg$13fa@msuinfo.cl.msu.edu>, <1993Nov8.230739.14660@ke4zv.atl.ga.us>, <2boouf$12m3@msuinfo.cl.msu.edu>
Subject : Re: Radio Shack HTs
In article <2boouf$12m3@msuinfo.cl.msu.edu>, cravitma@pacific.uucp (Matthew B Cravit) writes:
|>
|> 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
Some of their scanners are made by Uniden, such as the PRO-35 and PRO-46. Most
of their scanners are made by GRE. After having oned many Uniden scanners
and several GRE/RS scanners, I think that GRE makes the better scanner. Two
of the most popular scanners (PRO-2004/2005/2006 and PRO-43) are made by
GRE.
--
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+ Tom Bodoh - Sr. systems software engineer, Hughes STX, N0YGT +
+ USGS/EROS Data Center, Sioux Falls, SD, USA 57198 (605) 594-6830 +
+ Internet; bodoh@dgg.cr.usgs.gov (152.61.192.66) +
+ "Welcome back my friends to the show that never ends!" EL&P +
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
------------------------------
End of Info-Hams Digest V93 #1337
******************************
******************************