Date: Sun, 16 Jan 94 12:30:40 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 V94 #44
To: Info-Hams
Info-Hams Digest Sun, 16 Jan 94 Volume 94 : Issue 44
Today's Topics:
ANS-015 BULLETINS
BALUN problem. Was: DIPOLES FED BY LADDER LINE
cancer from ham radio
DIPOLES FED BY LADDER LINE (3 msgs)
Learning Morse - which letters to start?
Need SuperMorse
New QRZ Ham Radio CDROM
safety of HT antennas
Short 160m Dipole
WANTED: HP8640B/A signal generator
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: 16 Jan 94 18:13:10 GMT
From: news-mail-gateway@ucsd.edu
Subject: ANS-015 BULLETINS
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
SB SAT @ AMSAT $ANS-014.01
AMSAT-NA OPPOSES INSTANT LICENSING
HR AMSAT NEWS SERVICE BULLETIN 014.01 FROM AMSAT HQ
SILVER SPRING, MD JANUARY 15, 1994
TO ALL RADIO AMATEURS BT
BID: $ANS-014.01
AMSAT-NA OPPOSES FCC "INSTANT LICENSING" PROPOSAL
AMSAT-NA has filed comments with the FCC in opposition to the "instant
licensing" proposal contained in a Notice of Proposed Rule Making, PR
Docket 93-267. Under the FCC's proposal, unlicensed persons who pass an
amateur license examination for the first time would immediately be
permitted to operate for up to 120 days, using self-assigned call signs,
while waiting for their licenses to arrive.
In its comments, AMSAT-NA cited the potential for abuse by persons who may
never have had any intention of taking an examination, as well as the
impossibility of verifying the self-assigned calls since they would not be
registered in any database. The "guaranteed anonymity" of a self-assigned
call sign system would, in AMSAT-NA's words, multiply the potential for
interference by unlicensed persons with amateur radio operation. This is
particularly relevant to the Amateur-satellite service, AMSAT-NA went on to
say, because the 2M, 10M and 70CM bands, which presently contain the most
popular satellite uplinks and downlinks, are also among the most likely to
be affected by such interference. The international nature of satellite
operation means that problems could be caused for amateurs, and govern-
mental authorities, in other countries as well as in the United States.
As an alternative to "instant licensing," AMSAT-NA urged the FCC to pursue
the use of electronic filing and processing of amateur license applic-
ations. AMSAT-NA's comments in PR Docket 93-267 generally paralleled those
of ARRL, with special emphasis on the problems which would be caused for
the Amateur-satellite service.
/EX
SB SAT @ AMSAT $ANS-014.02
CORRECTED STS-60 KEPS
HR AMSAT NEWS SERVICE BULLETIN 014.02 FROM AMSAT HQ
SILVER SPRING, MD JANUARY 15, 1994
TO ALL RADIO AMATEURS BT
BID: $ANS-014.02
WA5DID Provides Corrected STS-60 SAREX Keplerian Elements
In last week's ANS-008 SAREX bulletin, the STS-60 keplerian elements con-
tained an incorrect epoch date. Please use the following keplerian set
provided by Lou McFadin (WA5DID) and Gil Carman (WA5NOM).
STS-60
1 00060U 94034.56756353 .00033600 00000-0 25200-3 0 47
2 00060 57.0033 215.8607 0010675 264.1500 95.8328 15.72291901 26
Satellite: STS-60
Catalog number: 00060
Epoch time: 94034.56756353 (03-FEB-94 13:37:17.49 UTC)
Element set: 004
Inclination: 57.0033 deg
RA of node: 215.8607 deg Space Shuttle Flight STS-60
Eccentricity: .0010675 Prelaunch Element set JSC-004
Arg of perigee: 264.1500 deg Launch: 03-FEB-94 12:10 UTC
Mean anomaly: 95.8328 deg
Mean motion: 15.72291901 rev/day Gil Carman, WA5NOM
Decay rate: 3.3600e-04 rev/day*2 NASA Johnson Space Center
Epoch rev: 2
Checksum: 254
The AMSAT News Service would like to thank WA5DID and WA5NOM for the
updated and corrected keplerian elements for STS-60.
/EX
SB SAT @ AMSAT $ANS-014.03
TAPR HAS A NEW ADDRESS!
HR AMSAT NEWS SERVICE BULLETIN 014.03 FROM AMSAT HQ
SILVER SPRING, MD JANUARY 15, 1994
TO ALL RADIO AMATEURS BT
BID: $ANS-014.03
Tucson Amateur Packet Radio (TAPR) Association Has Moved!
Tucson Amateur Packet Radio has moved its offices. The new mailing address is:
Tucson Amateur Packet Radio
8987-309 E. Tanque Verde Rd. #337
Tucson, AZ 85749-9399
The voice telephone number is (817) 383-0000. This number has a voice mail
system attached and is available 24 hours a day. A FAX server will be
operational within the next few weeks to automatically fax information to
you.
The incoming FAX number is (817) 566-2544.
More information on the office move will be published in the Winter, 1994
edition of Packet Status Register.
[The AMSAT News Service (ANS) would like to thank Bob Nielsen (W6SWE) for
this bulletin item. W6SWE can be reached at the following address:
Internet: w6swe@tapr.org, or, w6swe@wb7tls.az.usa.na]
/EX
SB SAT @ AMSAT $ANS-014.04
WEEKLY OSCAR STATUS REPORTS
HR AMSAT NEWS SERVICE BULLETIN 014.04 FROM AMSAT HQ
SILVER SPRING, MD JANUARY 15, 1994
TO ALL RADIO AMATEURS BT
BID: $ANS-014.04
Weekly OSCAR Status Reports: 14-JAN-94
AO-13: Current Transponder Operating Schedule:
L QST *** AO-13 TRANSPONDER SCHEDULE *** 1993 Dec 27-Jan 31
Mode-B : MA 0 to MA 180 | OFF
Mode-B : MA 180 to MA 220 |
Mode-S : MA 220 to MA 230 |<- S transponder; B trsp. is OFF
Mode-BS : MA 230 to MA 250 | Blon/Blat 240/-5
Mode-B : MA 250 to MA 256 | OFF
Omnis : MA 250 to MA 150 | Move to attitude 180/0, 31-Jan-94
L QST *** AO-13 TRANSPONDER SCHEDULE *** 1994 Jan 31-Apr 04
Mode-B : MA 0 to MA 90 |
Mode-BS : MA 90 to MA 120 |
Mode-S : MA 120 to MA 145 |<- S transponder; B trsp. is OFF
Mode-S : MA 145 to MA 150 |<- S beacon only
Mode-BS : MA 150 to MA 180 | Blon/Blat 180/0
Mode-B : MA 180 to MA 256 |
Omnis : MA 230 to MA 30 | Move to attitude 240/0, Apr 04
Poor Sun angle and battery testing need maximum OFF time.
[G3RUH/DB2OS/VK5AGR]
FO-20: The following is the current FO-20 operating schedule:
From January '94 thru March '94, the analog mode and the
digital mode will be on alternately for a week at a time.
ANALOG MODE:
26-JAN-94 8:20 -TO- 02-FEB-94 6:50 UTC
09-FEB-94 7:15 -TO- 16-FEB-94 7:40 UTC
23-FEB-94 8:05 -TO- 02-MAR-94 6:40 UTC
09-MAR-94 7:05 -TO- 16-MAR-94 7:30 UTC
23-MAR-94 7:52 -TO- 30-MAR-94 8:15 UTC
DIGITAL MODE: Unless otherwise noted above.
[Kazu Sakamoto (JJ1WTK) qga02014@niftyserve.or.jp]
AO-16: Operating normally. [WH6I]
LO-19: Operating normally. [WH6I]
KO-23: Up and running. Busy as usual. [WH6I]
PoSAT: Appears to still be on it's commercial frequency. There was a
message regarding amateur service that indicated it will be on
amateur frequencies at the end of the month. [WH6I]
ITAMSAT: On 1200 Baud, currently collecting WOD data. A note on the bird
indicates that the BBS will return to operation soon. [WH6I]
MIR: Cosmonauts Vasili Tsibliev and Alexander Serebrov returned Friday,
14-JAN-94, to Earth after six months in space on-board MIR Russian
space station. The TM-17 Soyuz spacecraft landed at 08:18 UTC in
Karaganda. The two cosmonauts have been in space from 01-JUL-93.
The Personal Messaging System (PMS) on-board MIR continues working
under the callsign R0MIR-1, operated by the actual crew that arrived
last Saturday in TM-18 Soyuz. [LW2DTZ]
The AMSAT NEWS Service (ANS) is looking for volunteers to contribute weekly
OSCAR status reports. If you have a favorite OSCAR which you work on a
regular basis and would like to contribute to this bulletin, please send
your observations to WD0HHU at his CompuServe address of 70524,2272, on
INTERNET at wd0hhu@amsat.org, or to his local packet BBS in the Denver, CO
area, WD0HHU @ W0LJF.#NECO.CO.USA.NOAM. Also, if you find that the current
set of orbital elements are not generating the correct AOS/LOS times at
your QTH, PLEASE INCLUDE THAT INFORMATION AS WELL. The information you
provide will be of value to all OSCAR enthusiasts.
/EX
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 1994 13:03:36 GMT
From: elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!swrinde!emory!wa4mei.ping.com!ke4zv!gary@ames.arpa
Subject: BALUN problem. Was: DIPOLES FED BY LADDER LINE
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
In article <2h3omc$ag7@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu> ignacy@ux2.cso.uiuc.edu (Ignacy Misztal) writes:
>
>One extra question: how to feed such an antenna? If through an unbalanced
>tuner, shack will be RF hot. If also through a balun, the balun may have
>excessive losses and even generate harmonic. In my case, I tried to feed
>undersized dipole on 80 through a 1 KW air balun. The balun gets warm and
>the performance at 100W out is similar to .5W out with a regular dipol. I
>think that at SWR 10 and above, which would be normal for a ladder-fed
>dipole, multi-KW balun is needed to handle just 100W. The best option
>would be a symetric tuner, which is clumsy to build. Any comments?
Correct. Use of a balun is a kludge when feeding with ladder line. A
balanced tuner is best. They aren't necessarily clumsy to build, but
you do need some components that aren't as readily available today such
as split stator or differential capacitors. Of course you can just
use a swinging link, but that is clumsy.
Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV | You make it, | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems | we break it. | uunet!rsiatl!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way | Guaranteed! | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
Lawrenceville, GA 30244 | |
------------------------------
Date: 14 Jan 1994 11:48:01 -0800
From: munnari.oz.au!sgiblab!swrinde!emory!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!library.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!nic.csu.net!nic-nac.CSU.net!ctp.org!not-for-mail@network.ucsd.edu
Subject: cancer from ham radio
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
kelvin@thed.usup.uk22.bull.co.uk (Kelvin J. Hill) writes:
> In <taaronCJK1MF.3xr@netcom.com> taaron@netcom.com (taaron@netcom.com) writes:
>
>
> >Tell me, if ham radio causes cancer, why is it that all the ham radio
> >club meetings are filled with old people with few health problems other
> >than normal ones for their age?
>
> 'Cause all the young ones have already died? :-) (I think)
>
Nahh...it's because all of the youngin's are experimenting with UHF and
higher stuff while the OMs are chasing DX below 30 MHz :-)
Perhaps having your antenna 75 feet above your head instead of six inches
makes a difference <grin>
(The above is to be taken lightly. Your mileage should not vary!)
--
Gary T. Lau, N6MMM // garlau@eis.calstate.edu
California Technology Project/Cal State Univ. // garlau@ctp.org
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 1994 13:28:03 GMT
From: agate!howland.reston.ans.net!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!emory!wa4mei.ping.com!ke4zv!gary@ames.arpa
Subject: DIPOLES FED BY LADDER LINE
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
In article <Pine.3.05.9401132151.A8820-a100000@booz.bah.com> k1zat@bah.COM (J. D. Delancy) writes:
>MAYNARD@URIACC.URI.EDU (MAYNARD@URIACC.URI.EDU) wrote:
>
>: feed line, for 80-10 meters (much cheaper, incidently, than building
>: from scratch with current wire prices!).
>
>Have you considered the possibility of using electric fence wire for
>antenna building material? You can get a 1000 foot roll for about
>twelve bucks from places like Southern States feedstores or probably
>just about any farm supply house.
>
>I know there are gonna be some out there that will poo-poo the
>idea of electric fence wire for antennas (it wont last, it rusts,
>doesn't have the strength that hard drawn copper has, etc). But let me
>tell you, I've used the same dipole on 75 made from electric fence
>wire for 3 or 4 years without any indication of failure, stretch, rust
>or anything else.
Fence wire is 18 gauge steel, so it's conductivity for RF isn't nearly
as good as copper stranded antenna wire. And it doesn't like to flex
across long spans, being designed to be tightly strung between fence
posts. But it is cheap. I've used it. I've got a quarter mile roll
in the barn right now. There's about 10% or so more loss than copper,
but that isn't really significant if you get 3 db or more gain from
the larger antenna the cheap wire allows.
Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV | You make it, | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems | we break it. | uunet!rsiatl!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way | Guaranteed! | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
Lawrenceville, GA 30244 | |
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 1994 15:32:53 -0500
From: sgiblab!sdd.hp.com!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.intercon.com!uhog.mit.edu!news.mtholyoke.edu!news.byu.edu!hamblin.math.byu.edu!yvax.byu.edu!cunyvm!@@munnari.oz.au
Subject: DIPOLES FED BY LADDER LINE
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
In article <1994Jan14.132803.10423@ke4zv.atl.ga.us>, gary@ke4zv.atl.ga.us
(Gary Coffman) wrote, in part:
>
> Fence wire is 18 gauge steel, so it's conductivity for RF isn't nearly
> as good as copper stranded antenna wire. And it doesn't like to flex
> across long spans, being designed to be tightly strung between fence
> posts. But it is cheap. I've used it. I've got a quarter mile roll
> in the barn right now. There's about 10% or so more loss than copper,
> but that isn't really significant if you get 3 db or more gain from
> the larger antenna the cheap wire allows.
>
The loss in the steel wire ought to buy you some additional bandwidth on
the antenna (lower Q). Note my earlier post on the 12-ga stuff we use for
the fences: it's galvanized, and most of the current should flow in the
zinc, with maybe even more loss, but again probably not significant.
--
73 de John Taylor W3ZID
rohvm1.mah48d@rohmhaas.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 1994 08:12:29 -0500
From: swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!news.umbc.edu!eff!news.kei.com!news.byu.edu!hamblin.math.byu.edu!yvax.byu.edu!cunyvm!rohvm1!@@elroy.jpl.nasa.gov
Subject: DIPOLES FED BY LADDER LINE
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
In article <Pine.3.05.9401132151.A8820-a100000@booz.bah.com>, k1zat@bah.COM
(J. D. Delancy) wrote, in part:
>
> Have you considered the possibility of using electric fence wire for
> antenna building material?
>
> I know there are gonna be some out there that will poo-poo the
> idea of electric fence wire for antennas (it wont last, it rusts,
> doesn't have the strength that hard drawn copper has, etc). But let me
> tell you, I've used the same dipole on 75 made from electric fence
> wire for 3 or 4 years without any indication of failure, stretch, rust
> or anything else.
The roll of Number 12 galvanized that I picked up the other day (for
fencing, not antennas) _will not_ stretch or break, believe me! In
general, this stuff resists rust fairly well, whereas some of the lighter
gauges we've used rust quickly. Of course, it's hard to straighten, and
takes some effort to get a good solder joint.
Never thought of using it for antennas, but should work. Thanks for the
tip.
--
73 de John Taylor W3ZID
rohvm1.mah48d@rohmhaas.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 1994 22:43:45 GMT
From: ucsnews!newshub.sdsu.edu!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!news.csuohio.edu!garfield.csuohio.edu!mike@network.ucsd.edu
Subject: Learning Morse - which letters to start?
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
I recently passed my Tech Plus, and used the Novice morse code tapes
you can get at Radio Shlep, about 15 bux but worth it. They are by
Gordon West. He starts out at 0 wpm, first letter is E (.). After
first 2 tapes you are ready for 5WPM easy. Last two tapes take you
all the way to 13WPM. I went to first part of third tape, and
the 5WPM test was pretty easy.
--
^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^ Catch the WAVE v^v^v^v^v^v
Mike Mayer - Senior Technical Support Engineer
Visual Numerics, Inc. 32915 Aurora Rd. Suite 160, Solon OH 44139 USA
Email: mayer@pvi.com Human: 216-248-4900 Fax: 216-248-2733
v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 1994 19:49:09 GMT
From: netcomsv!netcom.com!wy1z@decwrl.dec.com
Subject: Need SuperMorse
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
In article <2h4gpc$jg3@mailhost.interaccess.com> hopken@interaccess.com (Ken Hopkins) writes:
>Hi Scott. I don't know where it is on internet but I do have the program.
>If you don't find it elsewhere, let me know. I'm sure there's a way I
>can send you a message with the file attached. I think that's called MIME.
Hello right back. I'm not sure if this was directed to me, but I was
telling someone else that they could get it on world.std.com in the
directory pub/hamradio/pc/theory-and-morse
The file is: sm404.zip (this is the latest version).
But thanks anyway.
>--
> =================================================
> Ken Hopkins WA9WCP | Internet - HOPKEN@interaccess.com
> Disaster Team - | AMPRnet - 44.72.1.162
> American Red Cross | AX.25 - WA9WCP@W9ZMR.IL.USA
--
===============================================================================
| Scott Ehrlich Internet: wy1z@neu.edu BITNET: wy1z@NUHUB |
| Amateur Radio: wy1z AX.25: wy1z@k1ugm.ma.usa.na |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Maintainer of the Boston Amateur Radio Club hamradio FTP area on |
| the World - world.std.com pub/hamradio |
===============================================================================
------------------------------
Date: 15 Jan 1994 04:26:16 GMT
From: munnari.oz.au!sgiblab!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!noc.near.net!news.delphi.com!gilbaronw0mn@network.ucsd.edu
Subject: New QRZ Ham Radio CDROM
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
>Announcing the new QRZ! Windows Ham Radio CDROM
>
>Well, we've finally finished it and there are a bunch of new features.
>First off, in addition to the DOS search program, we now have a
Have you corrected the birthdates. All of the listings for Rochester
Minnesota for instance list the Birth Date as 1 day after the
actual. How did such an error get in the thing?
Gil Baron, El Baron Rojo, W0MN Rochester,MN
"Bailar es Vivir"
PGP2.3 key at key servers or upon request
------------------------------
Date: 15 Jan 1994 10:08:29 +1100
From: munnari.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!sserve!pmss!sleeper!orb.apana.org.au!orb.apana.org.au!not-for-mail@network.ucsd.edu
Subject: safety of HT antennas
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
On a local TV current affairs program last week there was a story about
a guy who works for Motorola testing cellular phones who has developed
a brain tumour about his right ear. He attributes this to the cell-mutation
effects of highly localised RF radiation emanating from the celphone
antennas.
It was stated in the story that this person was testing mobile celphones
long before they went into production, and that the power levels used
were much higher than are used now in commercial production.
This raises questions about amateur and commercial HT's as well. I'm
a freight train driver, and we use fixed-frequency HT's all the time for
communication. I am considering getting an amateur license and purchasing
a HT, so I am wondering about the health effects of having a transmitting
antenna so close to the brain.
Is there anything that can be done to minimise the ammount of RF radiated
around the brain by handheld transmitters? Perhaps different antenna
styles, or maybe running the output of the HT to a seperate, fixed
antenna on a car roof? This is not very appropriate for field use, so
what could we do to get the field strength near the brain as low as
possible besides reducing transmit wattage.
I don't necessarily believe that there are problems, but then again we
don't really have any proof one way or the other.
What do you all think? Have any of you had any minor or major health
problems that may have been caused by using hand-held transmitters in
close proximity to your head?
I'd be interested in reading your comments.
Craig, the Freight Raver.
--
Craig Dewick [Freight Raver Craig] (craig@orb.apana.org.au).
- Swimming in the MUSIQUARIUM of Life -
Always striving for a secure long-term future in an insecure short-term world.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 1994 13:30:16 GMT
From: elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!pipex!uknet!doc.ic.ac.uk!syma!mpfb8@ames.arpa
Subject: Short 160m Dipole
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
Hi all. Wonder if anyone has ideas on this subject or practical
experience. In my "average" town lot here in the UK I feel fortunate to
have a 3 ele tribander on a 55ft tower with space to put up a 40m
dipole which I occasionally convert to a 80m dipole to get on that band.
For RSGB 160m contests I manage to get up a full size dipole by hanging
it from the boom of my beam and trailing it all around the garden! It
works pretty well but can't leave it up permanantly 'cos someone will
hang themselves.
What I would like to do is get up a 160m dipole, SHORTENED to the length
of, say, an 80m dipole so that I could leave it up permanantly - perhaps
fixed to a pole on the chimney.
I have thought about inserting some L in the centre of each leg to
effectively lengthen it but when you work out the values, the coil would
be large / long / lots of turns if it were to be low loss / high Q.
Wonder if anyone has any novel ideas to shorten the length of a
the said dipole???
Yes, I know I could load the tower / beam or even try a true
vertical but the earth is very poor around here and verticals are
useless. Also there would be big problems trying to get radials down so
a dipole is the answer but it's too long!!
Any ideas / comments etc would be appreciated.
Either E-mail or post here if you think others would be interested.
Tnx, GD DX and 73's...Peter, G4BVH.
------------------------------
Date: 16 Jan 94 19:01:29 GMT
From: ogicse!uwm.edu!cs.utexas.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!news.acns.nwu.edu!merle!jeanniel@network.ucsd.edu
Subject: WANTED: HP8640B/A signal generator
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
I am looking for HP8640B or A signal generator
------------------------------
Date: 14 Jan 1994 17:44:47 GMT
From: swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!concert!inxs.concert.net!rock.concert.net!mikewood@network.ucsd.edu
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu
References <1994Jan5.125300.21517@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu>, <2guq97$mds@inxs.concert.net>, <1994Jan12.162136.17158@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu>
Subject : Re: Repeater database?
In article <1994Jan12.162136.17158@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu>,
Jay Maynard <jmaynard@nyx10.cs.du.edu> wrote:
>
>> The REAL reason this information isn't given out is that
>>Cordination Groups want to wield their coordination POWER without
>>fear of any questioning their declarations. With all the data on
>>a repeater (lat/lon/haat/erp , etc ) you could challenge or even
>>ignore their refusal to coordinate a repeater on a frequency you
>>have chosen.
>
>This sounds like the ravings of somoene who had a coordination denied, or who
>wants to start a repeater war and not have the FCC come explain the situation
>to him. You obviously have not been on the other side of the table.
>
Bad guess Jay. Never had one denied . I have had several "coordinated "
over the years. Wrong on the repeater war too. I don't even use them
locally .....just when travelling to a Hamfest in an unfamiliar area.
Since you say I have obviously been on the opposite of the table , then
you PROBABLY ARE on the opposite side of the table... a frequency
coorrdinator. So I suppose you are going to tell us that you are totally
non-political in all your decisions .....strictly first come first
serve , etc.
>> I suspect less than 1% of the so called coordinated
>>repeaters in operation today have any sort of REAL engineering
>>study including contour maps done on them. Most have been 'coordinated
>>' by either first come first served ---- or Good Ole Boys Network
>>methods.
>
>First come first served is the only way that coordinators can operate and not
>get their collective butts sued off. Don't believe me? I've been there,
>again, and so have others. As for the kind of real engineering studies you
>advocate, do you know how much time and effort goes into producing a contour
>map? Multiply that by a thousand repeaters in Texas. It's prohibitive. We
>coordinate repeaters based on 85-mile seperation, and will waive that if the
>trustee of the existing system will agree in writing.
>
I do contour studies professionally as a communications system engineer..so
yes I DO KNOW what is involved in doing a proper study. I also
know that a decent one can be done in an hour or so with out
a computer..just radial lines in a topo map. If you are just
drawing 85 mile radius circles on a map you aren't really
coordinating ...you are just OFFICIATING. If a job is worth
doing it should be done right.
>>This information is publicly available for EVERY commercial radio
>> and televion station in the USA and there is absolutely no reason other
>>than small minded POWERMONGERING politics that this isn't available
>>for amateur repeaters.
>
>How about time and money? Are you volunteering to run all those contour
>studies, or pay to have them done?
>
YOU are already the volunteer. Why aren't you doing ANY kind of study?
Why do you need HAAT if are just drawing a constant circle on a map?
A simple contour would take an hour or so (less in FLAT areas ).
Now to the meat of the matter ....the INFORMATION I am referring
to is LAT/LON/HAAT/ERP for all the commercial stations mentioned.
This thread is about WHY LAT/LON/HAAT/ERP info is being
witheld by people/groups like you and yours. I am not asking
or suggesting that engineering studies be released. JUST
LAT/LON/HAAT/ERP.
>>I dare ANY so called coordinating group to prove me wrong by PUBLISHING
>>there engineering studies for all their "coordinated" repeaters.
>
>They don't exist to the degree you want, nor are they ever likely to in the
>amateur service.
>
If you are just drawing 85 mi. radius circles THEY DON'T EXIST TO
ANY DEGREE.....
>>All we'll probably hear is eithe silence or a crescendo of flames
>>about how their "integrity " has been insulted....but the engineering
>>studies generally don't exist so we will never see them!
>
>No flames about integrity here; just cold, hard reality. Then again, you sound
>like you've been hit by reality before, and didn't like it.
Well the hard cold reality is coordinating groups do not want
to publish this information because they cannot justify the
ARBITRARY AND POLITICAL manner in which they pass out frequencies
if the FACTS are publicly available.
A final note : Until the FCC requires CTCSS (or similar) instead
of carrier squelch on Amateur repeaters, this debate will
continue forever. Carrier squelch repeaters are archaic and
the root cause of many repeater interference problems.
CTCSS is cheaper than DTMF to install/build in radios.
Alternatively the ARRL and coordinators should make this
part of the coordination scheme. Since there are no technical
regulations regarding coordination it could be done.
Again the problem is POLITICAL . EXISTING coordinated
repeater owners and users don't want to be burdened
by CTCSS on their repeaters and mobiles.....unless
it's to keep out "strangers".
Mike Wood Internet: mikewood@rock.concert.net
The Signal Group
P.O. Box 1979 ***Avoid company disclaimers by owning the company ***
Wake Forest, NC 27588
Phone: 919-556-8477 Fax: 919-556-0115
B
B
B
------------------------------
End of Info-Hams Digest V94 #44
******************************
******************************