Date: Sat, 11 Dec 93 16:42:17 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 #1451
To: Info-Hams
Info-Hams Digest Sat, 11 Dec 93 Volume 93 : Issue 1451
Today's Topics:
"Re: Hypocondriac, etc.....
6CW4
ARRL's callsign admin position (2 msgs)
HELP!
Legal Question about 97.403
Mountaintoppers wanted in Southeast
Readership Report for the Radio-Related Usenet Newsgroups
RS telescopic antenna with HT
Scratchi, January, 1960 (2 msgs)
W3EAX World Wide Web Server
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: 12 Dec 93 00:07:12 GMT
From: news-mail-gateway@ucsd.edu
Subject: "Re: Hypocondriac, etc.....
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
There has been a running battle of decimal points and dipoles and ....
concerning the field strength from an FM station at the U of Alaska on a
70-foot tower.
At the risk of appearing stupid, I make the following submission.
1) The station was "said" to be on 104.1 MHz. There **can't** be a station
on that freq at the U of AK, since they have station KUAC on 104.7 MHz and
the FCC requires 800 kHz between local stations. There IS a station KSUA
on 103.9 MHz at College, AK, licensed to Student Media, Inc.
1a) KUAC has 10.5 kW Effective Radiated Power (ERP) at 440 feet above
average terrain (HAAT). It is thus very unlikely to be on a 70-foot tower.
1b) There is conflicting data on KSUA. The 1994 M Street Radio Directory says
that they have 1 kW ERP at 120 feet HAAT, my older FCC data says they had
3kW at 0 feet HAAT, and had applied for 25 kW (height not given).
2) I will now do a calculation based on 1 kW ERP.
3) The station seems to have circular polarization, so the total ERP is
2 kW.
4a) The concept of ERP makes calculation of field strength IN THE MAXIMUM LOBE
a very simple task. Just assume that the same power was radiated from an
optimally-oriented dipole. To simplify further, increase the power by
2.14 dB and assume an isotropic radiator. ERPiso = 2 * 1.6 = 3.2 kW
4b) To obtain the power density at any distance, merely divide the isotropic-
radiator ERP by the surface area of a sphere of the desired radius. This is
because an isotropic radiator equally illuminates every part of the sphere.
Area of sphere of radius 300 m = 4 pi (300)^2 = 1 130 940 m^2
Main-lobe power density at 300 m distance = 3.2*10^3 / 1.1*10^6 =
= 2.9 W/m^2
= 0.29 mW/cm^2
5) This is nearly a worst-case number. One can imagine reflections increasing
the field, but one can also imaging absorbing matter and shielding
obstructions. While NOT BEING AN EXPERT IN THIS TECHNICAL AREA, I wouldn't
expect to see fields as high as twice the number calculated. At ground level
I'd expect to see much, much less, since the radiating elements are always
near the top of an FM station's tower and the antenna's main lobe is pointed
at the horizon (nearly).
Wasn't this simple? Wasn't this correct?
Bob w3otc@amsat.org
------------------------------
Date: 11 Dec 93 22:55:14 GMT
From: news-mail-gateway@ucsd.edu
Subject: 6CW4
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
Al, N1AL, takes me to task for slandering the 6CW4 regarding intermod.
Al, I guess that we will both agree that it is POSSIBLE to build a poor
converter with any technology, and that was often the case, Way Back When,
from my experience. I suspect that people ran their 6CW4 at too low power
(remember, they were RCA's answer to early transistors) to handle big sigs.
Even more likely, the following stage died from too big sigs and not enough
LO injection.
73, Bob
------------------------------
Date: 10 Dec 93 13:39:01 EST
From: psinntp!arrl.org@uunet.uu.net
Subject: ARRL's callsign admin position
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
In rec.radio.amateur.misc, dan@mystis.wariat.org
(Dan Pickersgill N8PKV) writes:
>As I said, I have been impressed of late and am considering sending the
>ARRL a dues check. However there are many organizations that represent a
>good number of amateurs (W5YI as an example).
Dan,
I am pleased that you are considering supporting the ARRL. In spite
of the fact that we don't always do everything exactly the way
*everyone* would like, I feel that there are many important things
that we are doing that deserve support.
>But, maybe you are right, we need a second national ham group. Anyone
>wanna help me start one?
I am indeed interested; my choice to work here stems from a strong
desire to give back to ham radio a bit more that it has given me.
My loyalty is NOT to the ARRL, but to the concept that we try to
embody. If you are really willing to do all of what it takes to
put together a better national organization, (assuming it really
does come out better), you will have my support. I am glad that you,
too, share the same sense of dedication to Amateur Radio and are willing to
make some of the personal sacrifices of your personal time that will
go into forming such an organization!
Before I jump in, though, I would like to have some idea of the
goals of your proposed organization. Do you have a charter? A rough
draft of the bylaws? I am especially interested in the ways it would
be *different* from the several other major ham-radio organzations?
I what way would it be different from the ARRL? If you are going to
use the same political structure, why would yours work any differently
from ours, or QCWA's, or NARA's. (I am not really sure what W5YI is, but
let's include him/them as an organization for the sake of discussion.)
What major flaws do you perceive in the ARRL and the other organzations
and how would you structure the organization you are proposing to
overcome those flaws. And, IMHO, the most important question -- please
explain to me why it is better for Amateur Radio to create a new
organization from scratch than to identify the problems in the existing
structures and make them a more effective tool for the Good of All.
This should make for an interesting discussion; I am sure the usenet
amateur community will be patient waiting for your answers and more
information. We all do understand that developing answers to these
questions could not be an off-the-cuff sort of thing. It takes
hundreds of hours, and many thousands of dollars in legal fees and
other "incorporation" fees to put together a national not-for-profit
organization. It is nice to see that there are those willing to
make these sacrifices. Speaking of dollars, I *will* join the first
year, just as soon as all of the paperwork makes it a viable
organization, but I am not sure I will sign up every year, and
the first time you do anything I don't like, it is over. :-).
73 and Happy Holidays from ARRL HQ! Ed
-----
Ed Hare, KA1CV ehare@arrl.org
American Radio Relay League
225 Main St.
Newington, CT 06111 My posts and views do not necessarily
(203) 666-1541 - voice represent the policy of the ARRL,
ARRL Laboratory Supervisor but I can probably get in trouble
RFI, xmtr and rcvr testing for them anyway!
-----
------------------------------
Date: 9 Dec 93 12:38:40 EST
From: mvb.saic.com!unogate!news.service.uci.edu!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!pipex!sunic!psinntp!psinntp!arrl.org@network.ucsd.edu
Subject: ARRL's callsign admin position
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
In rec.radio.amateur.misc, dan@mystis.wariat.org (Dan Pickersgill N8PKV) writes:
>I can agree to some of what you said. United front and all. But before
>the ARRL desides what _all_ amateurs want, maybe they could come out of
>the board room and ask a few of us?
In my experience, ARRL Directors spend considerably more time asking
amateurs what they want than they spend "in the board room." Most
Directors spend quite a few of their weekends making themselves
available at hamfests and conventions throughout their Division, just
so the members can buttonhole them and tell them what they should be
doing. It's not their fault that all too few mwmbers bother to do so.
Let me ask you this... do you complain that your Congressperson doesn't
listen to you, even if you haven't bothered to send them a letter or
otherwise contact them? Of course not (I hope)! Nor should you expect
ARRL Directors to be clairvoyant. You need to *talk* to them. Of
course, your Director may not feel compelled to give much weight to a
nonmember's complaints. (Then again, he may--I don't know.)
When ARRL presents itself to Washington as "representing amateurs,"
it does so in the same sense that NRA represents gun owners, or that
AARP represents older Americans. No one believes that all those
eligible to be members of these organizations are, in fact, members,
or that all members of these organizations agree with every policy
position of the organization. That would be ludicrous. But in each
case, the organization is the pre-eminent representative of the
community in question: amateurs for ARRL, gun owners for NRA, and
older Americans for AARP.
It is also the case that ARRL members represent a good cross-section
of the amateur population. From that you can resonably extrapolate
that the desires of the ARRL membership in all probability reflect the
desires of the amateur population at large. At least, there is no
*better* indication of those wishes. Therefore, when ARRL policy
reflects the merbership's wishes, it most likely reflects the wishes
of the community as a whole, too.
So, the bottom line is this: ARRL members who contact their Directors
to let their thoughts be heard have a disproportionate influence over
the direction of Amateur Radio. But since full ARRL membership is open
to anyone with a license, and since the Directors can easily be
contacted, anyone who doesn't make their voice heard has only themselves
to blame.
------
Jon Bloom, KE3Z | jbloom@arrl.org
American Radio Relay League |
225 Main St., Newington CT 06111 |
------------------------------
Date: 11 Dec 93 22:26:42 GMT
From: news-mail-gateway@ucsd.edu
Subject: HELP!
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
I have been trying to subscribe to this list with no luck...
I have tried
subscribe info-hams
sub info-hams
I have sent the request to LISTSERV@UCSD.EDU
..... to INFO-HAMS-REQUEST@UCSD.EDU
Any other ideas?
Thanks
Kevin Muenzler (WB5RUE)
muenzlerk@uthscsa.edu
------------------------------
Date: 8 Dec 1993 15:10:14 GMT
From: elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!msuinfo!arctic2!cravitma@decwrl.dec.com
Subject: Legal Question about 97.403
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
In article <3Tu7Dc3w165w@pinetree.org> gordon@pinetree.org (Gordon Dewis) writes:
>
>I would assume that in the definitions section of the FCC rules there
>would actually be a definition for "these rules". I don't have a copy of
>the FCC rules since I'm not an American, but that would make sense to me
>
This is not explicitly stated in the rules, but I would tend to infer
that "these rules" implies ALL FCC rules. (ie All parts of 47 C.F.R.)*.
When they are talking about just part 97, the terminology used seems
to be "this Part".
/Matthew
(* - C.F.R. = Code of Federal Regulations)
--
Matthew Cravit | All opinions expressed here are
Michigan State University | my own. I don't speak for Michigan
East Lansing, MI 48825 | State, and they don't speak for me
E-Mail: cravitma@cps.msu.edu | (thank goodness).
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 06:43:12 GMT
From: netcomsv!netcom.com!thales@decwrl.dec.com
Subject: Mountaintoppers wanted in Southeast
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
Hello,
I'm looking for hams interested in mountaintopping in the Southern Appalachians
and vicinity (GA, NC, SC, TN). If you are interested in backpacking in and
staying 1-2 nights (or more!), please contact me.
I live in Athens, GA, but would meet anywhere within a 4 hour drive. Pick
your favorite mountain and lets go (I like winter camping). The January VHF
contest would be a perfect time to go.
Thanks.
Brad
ke4fok
--
thales@netcom.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 18:20:40 GMT
From: library.ucla.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!avdms8.msfc.nasa.gov!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!news.unomaha.edu!news@network.ucsd.edu
Subject: Readership Report for the Radio-Related Usenet Newsgroups
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
The following is reprinted from news.lists, with only the radio-related
newsgroups (and the first newsgroup for comparison) included.
>From: reid@decwrl.DEC.COM (Brian Reid)
>Newsgroups: news.lists
>Subject: USENET Readership report for Nov 93
>Date: 5 Dec 1993 05:53:45 GMT
>Organization: DEC Network Systems Laboratory
>Summary: data for all groups
>Keywords: arbitron, statistics, full
This is the full set of data from the USENET readership report for Nov 93.
Explanations of the figures are in a companion posting.
+-- Estimated total number of people who read the group, worldwide.
| +-- Actual number of readers in sampled population
| | +-- Propagation: how many sites receive this group at all
| | | +-- Recent traffic (messages per month)
| | | | +-- Recent traffic (kilobytes per month)
| | | | | +-- Crossposting percentage
| | | | | | +-- Cost ratio: $US/month/rdr
| | | | | | | +-- Share: % of newsrders
| | | | | | | | who read this group.
V V V V V V V V
1 450000 6139 90% 2 24.1 100% 0.00 11.9% news.announce.newusers
206 79000 1064 78% 1313 2942.4 8% 0.05 2.1% rec.radio.amateur.misc
300 68000 914 78% 742 1761.7 6% 0.03 1.8% rec.radio.shortwave
380 62000 843 76% 369 371.6 5% 0.01 1.6% rec.radio.swap
529 54000 724 60% 311 711.1 21% 0.01 1.4% alt.radio.scanner
654 47000 638 75% 1196 2361.9 1% 0.06 1.2% rec.radio.amateur.policy
891 39000 532 65% 126 879.3 5% 0.02 1.0% rec.radio.info
907 39000 527 76% 55 72.2 4% 0.00 1.0% rec.radio.noncomm
962 38000 509 53% 563 912.7 13% 0.02 1.0% rec.radio.scanner
1000 37000 496 73% 81 213.4 7% 0.01 1.0% rec.radio.cb
1008 37000 494 57% 205 345.9 10% 0.01 1.0% rec.radio.amateur.homebrew
1066 35000 473 58% 327 592.8 5% 0.02 0.9% rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc
1071 35000 470 56% 275 447.5 0% 0.01 0.9% rec.radio.amateur.antenna
1149 33000 442 56% 308 440.7 5% 0.01 0.9% rec.radio.amateur.equipment
1166 32000 436 54% 101 234.6 2% 0.01 0.8% alt.radio.pirate
1195 31000 425 56% 81 463.2 45% 0.01 0.8% rec.radio.amateur.space
1200 31000 423 67% 289 632.2 1% 0.02 0.8% rec.radio.broadcasting
1695 21000 278 53% - - - - 0.5% rec.radio.amateur.packet
2046 15000 200 32% 15 18.0 50% 0.00 0.4% rec.ham-radio
2061 15000 197 31% - - - - 0.4% rec.ham-radio.swap
2235 11000 152 34% 78 99.4 0% 0.00 0.3% alt.radio.networks.npr
2530 4100 56 17% 67 177.1 56% 0.01 0.1% aus.radio
Several positive trends continue this month. Readership is up
dramatically in all active newsgroups (closely following Usenet's
predicted exponential growth patterns). The top newsgroup this month is
rec.radio.amateur.misc, by a significant margin, followed by
rec.radio.shortwave. Other newsgroups with extremely strong showings
are rec.radio.swap and rec.radio.amateur.policy (meeting their
respective goals of keeping for-sale messages and extended legal
debate out of the main discussion newsgroup). Currently,
rec.radio.amateur.homebrew leads the other new rec.radio.amateur
newsgroups by a significant margin. The recently-created
rec.radio.scanner is slowly gaining in readership as well, and should
eventually overtake alt.radio.scanner, which it supersedes. It is
expected that the newly-created newsgroups will continue to grow in
readership like previously-created newsgroups such as rec.radio.info
and settle out at about 60-70% propagation. If these new radio-related
newsgroups still haven't reached your site, please ask your news
administrator to create them (refer him/her to the new newsgroup
announcements by Dave Lawrence in news.announce.newgroups or the
messages posted to the new newsgroups piling up in "junk" :-). Especially
point out to him/her that cost/per-reader/per-month is significantly
down in all newsgroups.
The defunct newsgroup rec.radio.amateur.packet has been rmgrouped as of
September 21st, 1993, and is no longer connected to the PACKET-RADIO
mailing list. Netters interested in packet-radio discussion should use
rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc and the HAM-DIGITAL mailing list.
Propagation has continued to gradually drop in the old newsgroup, down
4 points from last month. There is a Usenet Request for Discussion
(RFD) tentatively scheduled for January 1994, to either reconsider the
rec.radio.amateur.digital.tcp-ip vote, merge all digital interests into
rec.radio.amateur.digital, or possibly even revert back to
rec.radio.amateur.packet. Watch news.announce.newsgroups (or subscribe
to the rec.radio.amateur Working Group mailing list at
rra-wg-request@amdahl.com) for further developments.
Note also that the defunct rec.ham-radio hierarchy reappears this month.
If the newsgroups are still active at your site, please try to persuade your
your news administrators to delete them as these groups have been rendered
obsolete (for about 3 years now) by the rec.radio.amateur hierarchy.
--
73, Paul W. Schleck, KD3FU
pschleck@unomaha.edu
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 08 Dec 1993 13:15:20 -0600
From: nntp.ucsb.edu!mustang.mst6.lanl.gov!nntp-server.caltech.edu!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!cs.utexas.edu!utah-morgan!hellgate.utah.edu!cc.usu.edu!sy_j.pgh.wec.com!user@@
Subject: RS telescopic antenna with HT
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
has anybody out there tried using the telescoping antenna sold by
radio shack (with bnc connector) in place of the stock rubber duck
antenna on an HT ? does it transmit and receive better ? what
HT did you try that on ?
please email replies if possible.
thanks in advance.
jerry
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 15:01:13 GMT
From: spsgate!mogate!newsgate!news@uunet.uu.net
Subject: Scratchi, January, 1960
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
In article <gregCHoovK.KDH@netcom.com> greg@netcom.com (Greg Bullough) writes:
> In article <VBREAULT.93Dec7112925@rinhp750.gmr.com> vbreault@rinhp750.gmr.com
(Val Breault) writes:
> >
> >Races? Are you sure you read the article? I've just re-read it and
> >found no reference to race at all. I was able to find the word
> >"black" used in "black leather jackets" but that's it.
> >
> >Scratchi, in my minds eye, is an enthusiastic though semi-literate
> >middle aged man. I would guess he was a cajun, but that may be just
> >the way I inferred the dialect. The world is not perfect. There are
> >lots of Scratchis out there, and some of them want to make a contribution.
>
> Sorry, but you know not whereof you speak.
>
Wait a minute...aren't YOU letting YOUR predjudices show a little? How can you
tell someone else what to infer into the piece? Just because you inferred
something into it that you apparently found offensive doesn't mean Val or
anyone else has to find it offensive as well. You're judging it from your
cultural background but others may find something equally valid based on
theirs. Lighten up a little, huh? And let's take this discussion to a more
appropriate newsgroup like alt.pc.cops.
And now let's return this newsgroup to normal amateur use, OK?...
Mark AA7TA
------------------------------
Date: 11 Dec 93 22:18:09 GMT
From: news-mail-gateway@ucsd.edu
Subject: Scratchi, January, 1960
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
I believe it was L. Ron Hubbard that said something like "The purpose of Art
is to evoke a reaction in the viewer." ...
>I think there is. The specific pidgin idiom used is one which was commonly
>used by Americans to mimic Japanese.
AND Scratchi's supposed to be from there - English ain't his native language
and probably learned in the school of hard knocks to boot. Work with folks
from various parts of the world and if I were to write down what they say in
the way i hear them say it, I'd have to use an approach like the one used for
Scratchi as well.
<wait a minute...why am i defending a cartoon character here...>
Greg, you're the one missing the point of the Scratchi posting.
1) It was to show that nothing new is going on.
2) It WAS funny because it's still true today....
Sometimes you can't make a point from the inside. You have to do it from "the
outside" and Hastafisti Scratchi, The Old Man, and probably others are
vehicles to do this.
These vehicles need characterization to work. This means you may have to
write a character speaking in a dialect or flaw that can emphasize such a
difference. F'instance:
Tiny Toon Adventures. A Popular Childrens Show.
Plucky Duck speaks with a lisp.
Fifi La Fume speaks with a French accent (and it's the same
sort of pidgin French used for Pepe LePew as in things like
"un pole cat d'skunk sans pew".)
Shirley Loon is a valley girl or some junk, f'sure.
Fowlmouth Rooster can only be heard saying every 3rd word at times
due to language considerations.
Buster & Babs Bunny (no relation) do Impersonations that rely on
stereotypical bases for the audience to recognize who's being
played on today.
Hay, Arnold S. has a whole career based on his way of speaking phrases like
"Hasta la vista, baby", or "I'll be back" or "Big Mistake" (yeah, i'm one
of the 100 people that saw "Last Action Hero".)
How about the folks that are involved with Citizen's Band stuff or the new
guys that have had to read over "robert's" signature files the last few weeks?
I don't recall seeing any righteous indignation there - the C. W. McCall song
"Convoy" wouldn't work if there wasn't a "typical" model of things like
Truckers and CB Radio Operator Jargon to work with either.
I won't even touch the sort of thing you could create if you based a written
stereotype of an amateur radio operator based on packet radio bulletins.
your concern, while valid is misplaced. go listen to some recent George
Carlin schtick (sp?) on language and its changes to protect the information
receiver from hearing "displeasing" things (such as the "shell shock" to
"post-traumatic stress disorder" change...) and Meredith Wilson's "The Music
Man" to hear how language itself can be a music of sorts...
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 17:47:58 GMT
From: news.kpc.com!amd!netcomsv!netcom.com!jfh@decwrl.dec.com
Subject: W3EAX World Wide Web Server
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
tedwards@w3eax.umd.edu (Thomas N3HAU) wrote:
>W3EAX, The University of Maryland Amateur Radio Club is running
>a World Wide Web hypertext page at URL:
>
> http://w3eax.umd.edu/w3eax.html
>
>Give it a try!
It works with www but not with lynx. Any idea why? Files I've viewed at
other sites work with both.
--
----------------------------------------------------
Jack Hamilton POB 281107 SF CA 94128 USA
jfh@netcom.com kd6ttl@w6pw.#nocal.ca.us.na
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 14:47:48 GMT
From: gatech!udel!gvls1!rossi@uunet.uu.net
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
References <2dlr9s$ec4@mojo.eng.umd.edu>, <1993Dec7.183422.29800@cs.brown.edu>, <jfhCHoy5J.3Gy@netcom.com>
Subject : Re: W5YI's coverage of "temporary callsigns"
In article <jfhCHoy5J.3Gy@netcom.com> jfh@netcom.com (Jack Hamilton) writes:
>md@maxcy2.maxcy.brown.edu (Michael P. Deignan) wrote:
>
>>> You can't do it this way. (HINT: Ever wonder why /AT isn't used for
>>> technician upgrades?)
>>
>>No, I'm clueless. Why isn't /AT used for tech upgrades?
>
>Because it could be confused with a usage of the form KD6TTL/ZL1. The US
>"owns" prefixes AG, AE, and AA, so KD6TTL/AG wouldn't appear to be from
>another country, but we don't own AT (which is not assigned, according to
>my Callbook).
The "AT" prefix is part of the ATA-AWZ block of international prefixes
which is assigned to India.
Unlike the K, N, and W prefix blocks which are allocated entirely to
United States, the "A" prefix block is split among several countries.
AAA-ALZ United States of America
AMA-AQZ Spain
APA-ASZ Pakistan
ATA-AWZ India
AXA-AXZ Australia
AYA-AZZ Argentina
A2A-A2Z Botswana
A3A-A3Z Tonga
A4A-A4Z Oman
A5A-A5Z Bhutan
A6A-A6Z United Arab Emirates
A7A-A7Z Qatar
A8A-A8Z Liberia
A9A-A9Z Bahrain
=================================================================
Pete Rossi - WA3NNA rossi@vfl.paramax.COM
Unisys Corporation - Government Systems Group
Valley Forge Engineering Center - Paoli, Pennsylvania
=================================================================
------------------------------
End of Info-Hams Digest V93 #1451
******************************
******************************