Date: Tue, 7 Dec 93 04:30:08 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 #1432
To: Info-Hams
Info-Hams Digest Tue, 7 Dec 93 Volume 93 : Issue 1432
Today's Topics:
Direct from Hubble spacewalk coms logged this evening
RACES Bulletin #303
W5YI's coverage of "temporary callsigns"
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: 6 Dec 93 08:52:12 GMT
From: usc!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!MathWorks.Com!transfer.stratus.com!jjmhome!pig!die@network.ucsd.edu
Subject: Direct from Hubble spacewalk coms logged this evening
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
Several of us located in different parts of the US were able to
hear the UHF suit to orbiter communications from the two crew members
during the Hubble solar array repair eva Sunday evening.
Solid copy was first logged on orbit 59 by John Trollinger in
Norfolk Va who used a 12 turn helix to pick the signal up. A minute
after he reported hearing KT on 279.0 I was also able to log the carrier
in Lexington Mass (but too weak to hear the voice) on a dipole in the
clear about 30 feet above the ground with a screen reflector behind it
facing south feeding a GASFET preamp directly mounted at the antenna (a
turnstile).
A weak carrier on 279.0 was also noted in Dallas Texas during
orbit 59 by Lyn Kennedy.
During orbit 60 at 2:34 AM EST Richard Crisp heard the signal
from San Jose California using a 6 turn helix directly feeding a R-7100.
He was able to recover AM voice and heard quite a strong signal.
Later that pass I saw signal on both 259.7 and 279.0 from Lexington
Mass and was able to observe the FM cardio telemetry on 8 khz subcarriers
(approximate - I did not make exact measurement) on the 259.7 signal
alternating with what sounded like 10-20 second bursts of about 300 baud fsk
which I presume is some kind of suit telemetry. The heart rate was
considerably elevated - I would guess that installing solar panels in
space is really hard work. AOS in Lexington was 2:45:20 AM (approx)
and LOS was 2:55:50 (also approx). I noticed about a 100-200 hz fming
of the AM carrier frequency by the audio - there must be some
power decoupling problems in the radio.
I was able to get more than enough signal on the 279.0 KT link
to receive AM voice on this pass but there was not much talking. John
Trollinger was able to hear this pass well too.
I tried to find the orbiter to suit link on 296.8 but heard
nothing. Unfortunately this freq is obscured at my QTH by a strong
cable leak (video sidebands) and weak signals are not visible over this.
John Trollinger in Norfolk also reported negative luck hearing 296.8.
The two suit to orbiter links are continuous carrier and can be
readily id'd by the characteristic doppler shift. I presume the orbiter
to suit link is not continuous but keyed by the shuttle audio system.
The 259.7 link was about 3 khz higher in freq than the the 279.0 link
which seemed about on freq.
I shall have to dig up my reference material about the links
I'd be curious to know the EIRP of the suits. I have often heard
the shuttle on UHF in the past during launch on high inclination
missions and occasionally during other parts of missions during which they
left the transmitter on. But this was the first time I have heard
comms from the actual EVA suits.
The video on NASA select has been spectacular. And I have the
delusion (not had time to measure) that the signal is a couple of db
stronger on F2/13 than it usually is. Or the video is less noisy for
some other reason (not that it is ever terribly noisy - this is just
a videophile observation - it is well over threshold on my dishes
and always has been except when I used a 5.5 footer).
Some day I'll try 2M SAREX if there ever are any passes one can
communicate on without special prior arrangement.
David I. Emery - N1PRE - Lexington Mass.
Former senior technical consultant (and currently unemployed drunken bum)
Internet: jjmhome!pig!die@transfer.stratus.com (preferred) or die@world.std.com
UUCP: ...uunet!stratus.com!jjmhome!pig!die Phone + fax: 1+(617)-863-9986
------------------------------
Date: 7 Dec 93 07:00:26 GMT
From: news-mail-gateway@ucsd.edu
Subject: RACES Bulletin #303
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
Bid : $RACESBUL.303
TO: ALL ES, CD, AND PUBLIC SAFETY DIRECTORS VIA AMATEUR RADIO
INFO: ALL RACES OPERATORS IN CALIFORNIA
INFO: ALL AMATEUR RADIO OPERATORS
FROM: CA STATE OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES (W6SIG@WA6NWE.CA)
2800 MEADOWVIEW RD., SACRAMENTO, CA 95832 916-262-1600
LANDLINE BBS OPEN TO ALL 916-262-1657
RACESBUL.303 RELEASE DATE: December 6, 1993
SUBJECT: MGT - Team building - Part 3/3
At our own site we opened the doors to volunteers in 1985
and accepted fifteen after screening eighteen applicants. We have
never advertised since. Word of mouth is the best recruiter. If
you are doing things that appeal to the type of people you want
doing them, they will come. They naturally tend to be the type
that will be a credit to our organization. They tend to be
producers because they see what the others are doing with and for
you. They tend to require little training. Most of the training
needed has nothing to do with communications but concentrates on
your organization and procedures. You may be pleasantly surprised
at the duties and the unexpected talents they bring with them, as
well as the duties for which they will volunteer.
If your mission is clearly defined and you express your
goals and personal expectations, you will not be swamped with
applicants. You will get quality -- not quantity. Don't be
reluctant to state that up front. This tends to discourage the
joiners, ID card collectors, the "wanna bees" and the like.
Regrettably, it is the latter that gives volunteers a bad name.
Properly stated and administered, as their manager you can avoid
or minimize that problem.
EOM
Station of Origin:W6WWW@KD6XZ.#NOCAL.USA.NA
-----------------
RACES Bulletins are archived on the Internet at ucsd.edu in hamradio/races
and can be retrieved using FTP.
------------------------------
Date: 2 Dec 1993 21:47:41 GMT
From: qualcomm.com!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!uwm.edu!msuinfo!arctic2!cravitma@network.ucsd.edu
Subject: W5YI's coverage of "temporary callsigns"
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
In article <1993Dec2.163624.5800@cs.brown.edu> md@maxcy2.maxcy.brown.edu (Michael P. Deignan) writes:
>
>The only other "pitfall" is that if you are licensing hundreds of new
>hams each year, that eventually as a contact VE your /AT identifiers
>are going to get really large. KD1HZ/AT12345 may be a bit much for
>someone to pound out on a key, but nothing is perfect.
>
How about doing this : KD1HZ/T(year)(number). So the first ham you
license next year would be KD1HZ/T931. The 500'th would be KD1HZ/T93500.
Or, if you wanted to keep the call signs shorter, use hexadecimal.
(So, that 500th ham would have the temporary call sign KD1HZ/T931F4.)
You would then be able to license 4,096 hams per year before the
suffix became 7 characters.
Or, going further, how about simply using 1 digit from the year. Calls
would repeat every 10 years, but if you make the temp. callsign only
valid 10 years (like FCC licenses are now) and make them
non-renewable, that should present no problem. So then that 500th ham
would only need to use KD1HZ/T31F4. Much more reasonable.
I like it though. Simple and workable idea.
73,
Matthew (Waiting for my callsign - 4 weeks and counting)
--
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..."
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 93 17:25:31 GMT
From: mnemosyne.cs.du.edu!nyx10!jmaynard@uunet.uu.net
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
References <8kmRDc1w165w@opus-ovh.spk.wa.us>, <2dvabk$3og@mailer.fsu.edu>, <gregCHMBrt.Err@netcom.com>
Subject : Re: ARRL's callsign admin position
In article <gregCHMBrt.Err@netcom.com>, Greg Bullough <greg@netcom.com> wrote:
>As far as I can tell, the ARRL's position is that they are the one and only
>voice of Amateur Radio in the US,
They _are_ the only organization for _all_ hams. I may not agree with them all
the time, but there simply is no alternative.
> 1) The League's history of opposing any petition which does not
> come through them, as a matter of routine (a.k.a. 'not invented
> here' syndrome')
Bosh. They have supported many petitions they did not originate; one example
that springs immediately to mind is the one about restricting responsibility
for retransmitted communications, which was originated by a couple of hams
here in Texas, K5FOG and N5GAR.
> 2) Having been told by League officers and staffers that if I
> left the ARRL, I was giving up all of my representation in
> Washington (as if I don't vote in Federal elections?).
...but your representation as a voter is not necessarily the same, or even
close to the same, as your representation as a ham via ARRL. ARRL has the only
ham radio lobbyist in Washington.
> 3) Having watched, over the years, the ARRL's vigorous
> opposition to anyone or anything which presumed to encroach
> on 'its' territory. Particularly unfortunate, IMO, have been
> some of the underhanded efforts to silence anyone who would
> either compete for a role or present an opposing opinion.
Such as? (Wayne Green is an oft-cited example, but if he's the best you can
come up with, you simply don't have a case: he's consistently predicted doom
and gloom, and been consistently wrong. He's no more than the Howard Stern of
ham magazines.)
>In the ARRL's defense, I think that much of this has been in the honest
>belief that it is necessary to present the FCC bureaucracy with a united
>front. The latter is probably sensible, where possible.
More than just sensible: essential.
> However, the
>League, in its zeal to do the best thing for the hobby, has all too
>often forgotten that this is a pluralistic society.
As a democratic organization, it is obliged to follow the wishes of the
majority of its members. If you don't like what it's done, then use the
mechanisms in place to change it.
>It seems to me that the Board of Directors would do well, in presenting
>position papers to the FCC, to pursue a policy of also bringing forward
>an occasional 'dissenting opinion,' from within the ranks of amateur
>radio. In doing so, they would increase their stock by demonstrating that
>they truly ARE representative of amateur radio as a whole.
No; this would destroy their credibility totally. It would present the League
as being uncontrollably wishy-washy.
--
Jay Maynard, EMT-P, K5ZC, PP-ASEL | Never ascribe to malice that which can
jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu | adequately be explained by stupidity.
"The road to Usenet is littered with dead horses." -- Jack Hamilton
------------------------------
End of Info-Hams Digest V93 #1432
******************************
******************************