Date: Sun, 27 Feb 94 04:30:07 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 #214
To: Info-Hams


Info-Hams Digest            Sun, 27 Feb 94       Volume 94 : Issue  214

Today's Topics:
                           Online Reptr DB
                           Yaesu 2400H recs
                             YAESU FT-470

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: 26 Feb 94 21:22:12 GMT
From: news-mail-gateway@ucsd.edu
Subject: Online Reptr DB
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu

Hi All,

If the ARRL is making a loud noise about the Online Repeater Project, how
much of EXPLOSION did they make when the Online Callbook came out?  IMHO
there is no difference between the ARRL callbook and the Callbook, except
ease of use.  Both Callbooks were targeted for different individuals.  For
those with internet access, the on-line callbook is perfect, for those without
internet access, use the printed version!  Both versions supply the same
information!

The on-line repeater project will, in addition to listing freqs, city, state,
trustee,etc will also give geographical coordinates and other information
that will be of help to the traveler (assuming that routes are planned in
advance).

Once again, these two repeater sources will be targeted at different
people.

I agree, that the printed version is great for the glove compartment, and
handy to have, if you wander off the beaten path while on vacation, but the
ARRL should not prevent another source of this information from being
withheld from the public.

Copyrights are somewhat like patents:  You change the format, even a little,
and you have and you have something different.  If you add more information,
you have changed the whole thing.

Can you imagine what size the ARRL repeater guide would have to be to have the
same information that the on-line guide will have (my glove compartment is
not big enough ;-) ).

Personally, I'm all in favor of the on-line version.  I say go ahead with it!

My .02 worth.

Lynn Geitgey  KB0LRB

------------------------------

Date: 27 Feb 94 03:10:07 GMT
From: news-mail-gateway@ucsd.edu
Subject: Yaesu 2400H recs
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu

Hi,

   I've been using a HT as my all around 2M rig, but
   have been itching to get a mobile rig.  I've been
   eyeing the Yaesu 2400H and now that it is $50 off
   ($299.95) it seems like it may be time to scratch
   that itch.

   I would appreciate feedback from those who have
   the 2400 as to what they like or dislike about the
   rig.  I'm also open to any other suggestions on the
   choice of a 2M mobile rig.   Thanks.

                        -- Rich N1QVT
--
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Richard A. Cuti                        Voice: 617-942-2000 x3309   |
| TASC                                Internet: racuti@tasc.com      |
| 55 Walkers Brook Drive            Compu$erve: 76170,420            |
| Reading, MA 01867              Amateur Radio: N1QVT                |
|                                                                    |
|         (Opinions are strictly those of me, myself and I)          |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: 26 Feb 1994 11:44:38 GMT
From: mvb.saic.com!unogate!news.service.uci.edu!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!EU.net!news.forth.gr!helios.intranet.gr!phaethon!demetre@network.ucsd.edu
Subject: YAESU FT-470
To: info-hams@ucsd.edu

CQ Netters,

While browsing through some modification files for the FT-470
I spotted a hardware modification that clames that the set is
able to be converted to cover 1.25 m and 23 cm bands in place
of the original 2 m and 70 cm bands !!!
Has anyone tried such a modification ? has it worked ? if yes
at what expence (receiver censitivity) ??
Please reply via e-mail to: demetre@intranet.gr

73's

------------------------------

End of Info-Hams Digest V94 #214
******************************
******************************