Date: Wed, 6 Apr 94 16:07:20 PDT 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 #385 To: Info-Hams Info-Hams Digest Wed, 6 Apr 94 Volume 94 : Issue 385 Today's Topics: 73 (2 msgs) [News] NOAA/NWS To Expand Weather Radio Coverage Cable channel 18.. Conn. Commission: ARRL Discriminates Against Gays Forwarding: PCBoard Artwork and LASER Printers FT-530 DC CONNECTOR Gammer and speeling heinous operating (2 msgs) Heinous operating techniques (AGAIN!) How phasing SSB Exciters Work (Was: RF and AF speech pr Password=?/for callsign.cs.buffalo.edu (2 msgs) STOP SENDING HAMS ON USENET CRAP !!! 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 Apr 94 17:00:34 GMT From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!swrinde!gatech!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!zip.eecs.umich.edu!yeshua.marcam.com!charnel!psgrain!news.tek.com!gvgpsa.gvg.tek.com!gold.gvg.tek.com!gold!cleveland@network.ucsd.edu Subject: 73 To: info-hams@ucsd.edu Recently >|David R. Tucker KG2S 8P9CL drt@world.std.com| replied to the "73's" war thread: >It's not confusing or ambiguous. If you don't like it, don't use it. But >if someone foregoes the simple substitution you happen to use, and >says "seventy-threes" on a repeater, what's the big deal? Oh David, poor David, You really do miss the point don't you. It's not a linguistic issue at all, it's a religious issue, and you'll never win that one by using logic. 73 Grover ************************************************************************ * Grover Cleveland WT6P@KE6LW.#NOCAL.CA * * Instructional Designer v(916) 478-3153 * * The Grass Valley Group Inc. - A Tektronix Company f(916) 478-3831 * * Grass Valley, California DoD 7388 * ************************************************************************ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 6 Apr 94 17:25:39 GMT From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!torn!nott!dgbt!clark.dgim.doc.ca!news@network.ucsd.edu Subject: 73 To: info-hams@ucsd.edu Russell Lee (George@golflima.demon.co.uk) wrote: : Yes, I think you are quite correct. *73* should not have an *s* nor a : *best* or *very*. Whats all this nonsense with *KN* when *K* is : all thats needed? 73 : -- : Russell Lee G6GL There is a difference between "K" and "KN". "KN" signifies 'over to you only' whereas "K" signifies "over to you' and any other station is invited to break in. Jim, VE3XJ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 6 Apr 1994 17:00:59 GMT From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!darwin.sura.net!rsg1.er.usgs.gov!dgg.cr.usgs.gov!bodoh@network.ucsd.edu Subject: [News] NOAA/NWS To Expand Weather Radio Coverage To: info-hams@ucsd.edu In article <1994Apr6.081311.29757@ke4zv.atl.ga.us>, gary@ke4zv.atl.ga.us (Gary Coffman) writes: |> Since I live in the area of the tornados, I'll say that Al Gore doesn't |> know what he's talking about. (no surprise) The area of the tornados |> is served well by 3 NWS stations, and numerous broadcast stations tied |> to the EBS system. The problem is that people weren't listening to the |> warnings being issued. |>... |> (When some regional reporting station relayed over your local |> NWS automated transmitter is saying partly cloudy, and you've |> got 4 inches of partly cloudy on the ground and more falling, |> you begin to lose confidence in the system.) |> |> Gary More people should buy weather alert weather radios. In tornado weather, I monitor TV, weather radio (NOAA) and the ham/civil defense spotters. It is scary sometimes when you consider the delays. The typical delay between when the spotter(s) verify the tornado on the ground and when the NOAA station sounds the alert can be 1-2 minutes. I have seen 10 minute delays between when it is sighted and when a tornado warning is broadcast on TV. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 6 Apr 94 13:29:22 -0500 From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!swrinde!gatech!news.byu.edu!news.mtholyoke.edu!nic.umass.edu!noc.near.net!news.delphi.com!usenet@network.ucsd.edu Subject: Cable channel 18.. To: info-hams@ucsd.edu Aaron Smith <wolfman@p-cove.UUCP> writes: > I don't know how much this has been discussed here, but I would like to >know what I can do about our cable system. There is a real bad cable leak >in our town. If I tune to 145.25 while in my car, I can even hear their >continuous carrier, thats how bad it is.. Who do I talke to or contact >about getting this problem fixed? Whenever someone transmits they get >into everyones channel 18 in about a half mile radius. Noone has really >complained to the cable company yet, probably because here it's a pay >station (PASS.. joy) and I don't think many people subscribe to it.. I agree with Tony -- cable systems these days are positively paranoid about "egress" problems because the FCC has been cracking down hard on operators that don't fix their leaks. When you call be sure to ask for the chief technician (they say "technician" in the cable biz, not "engineer" as in broadcasting) and tell him whatever you can about where you heard the carrier. -- Ed Ellers, KD4AWQ ------------------------------ Date: 6 Apr 1994 15:30:03 -0400 From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!usc!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.ans.net!hp81.prod.aol.net!search01.news.aol.com!not-for-mail@network.ucsd.edu Subject: Conn. Commission: ARRL Discriminates Against Gays To: info-hams@ucsd.edu In article <204315Z05041994@anon.penet.fi>, an87806@anon.penet.fi writes: Too long to reprint, but the article said that the ARRL discriminates against gays. Well good for the ARRL! Ham radio is not about somebody's sexual orientation. It is about a radio hobby. I am getting sick and tired to the gays throwing their lifestyle in my face. I sure don't want them pushing their lifestyle into my hobby. I don't push my lifestyle into theirs. ARRL, thanks for standing up to the radicals! Keep up the fight! ------------------------------ Date: 6 Apr 94 17:36:32 GMT From: news-mail-gateway@ucsd.edu Subject: Forwarding: PCBoard Artwork and LASER Printers To: info-hams@ucsd.edu From: David Shalita:ES AE:Xerox Sender: D.R. Shalita:ES AE:Xerox Subject: PCBoard Artwork and LASER Printers Date: 6-April-94 (Wednesday) 8:17:55 PDT Answer to: David Shalita:ES AE:Xerox In reply to: D.R. Shalita:ES AE:Xerox Note: Hi, I'm attempting to make at home, small PCBoard artwork for QRP and Homebrew projects using TONER TRANSFER IRON-ON mylar film products. I am a PADS Shareware User, and now will also try using EASYTRAX to generate the PCBoard artwork files. Just as I am getting started; My old dot matrix printer died, so MUST purchase a replacement printer. This will be my personal printer, so on small budget, am trying to purchase the most capable compatible printer my dollars will buy. A Laser Printer is a must since I will be using the IRON-ON toner transfer materials. Am I correct in assuming that less costly INKJET printers are not usable, unless I copied every PCBoard image onto the IRON-ON sheets on a plain paper copier....knowing that there will be inaccuracies from copying? An HP 4L (1 mbyte ram) or an EPSON ACTION LASER 1500 (1 mbyte ram) seem to be 2 possible affordable printers. I am concerned that both printers may not have enough ram memory for PCBoard artwork and GIF files for fun. My PCBoard files from PADS seem to be around 240 kbytes when output using the HPIIP mode. GIF files seem to be from 80 to 700 kbytes. Ram memory versus file size....? Is anyone out there doing PCBoard artwork on either of these LASERS or an other brand that is equivalent or less expensive and equally usable? Another question. What software will work to do the INVERTING of the arwork image? I do not see that capability in PADS and am not sure with EASYTRAX. Some Shareware Paint program? Any thoughts will be very helpful. Thanks and 73 Dave w6mik ------------------------------ Date: 6 Apr 94 21:31:10 GMT From: news-mail-gateway@ucsd.edu Subject: FT-530 DC CONNECTOR To: info-hams@ucsd.edu I made a mistake in my previous post... The part number for the connector is E-DC-6 And Yeasu's phone number is (310) 404-2700 Sorry for any inconvenience... Pierre ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 6 Apr 1994 13:54:21 GMT From: emba-news.uvm.edu!griffin.emba.uvm.edu!gdavis@uunet.uu.net Subject: Gammer and speeling To: info-hams@ucsd.edu Yes, yoous guys are right on. Yous see I have a bad editor and just am not eble to make me postings come out right. Besudes yous can't persecute me.. I got A in enish at collage. I steel think hams cant speel to gud. -- ******** Gary E. Davis***** WQ1F ***** The most common of all follies is to believe passionately in the palpably not true. It is the chief occupation of mankind.-H.L.Mencken ------------------------------ Date: 6 Apr 94 18:45:21 GMT From: dog.ee.lbl.gov!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!pacbell.com!att-out!cbnewsh!ostroy@ucbvax.berkeley.edu Subject: heinous operating To: info-hams@ucsd.edu bote@access1.digex.net (John Boteler) wrote: >ostroy@cbnewsh.cb.att.com (Dan Ostroy ) writes: >>One alternative, simply keying up and making a transmission, >>more often than not, >>results in even more wasted time. >Why? I have heard an argument similar to yours for >using "Here is" or a variant, but I need to know >why transmitting only a callsign results in >more wasted time than a transmission, a pause, >and another transmission. Well, I'll take a shot at an explanation. Try this scenario: 4 stations (A through D) each want to check in and each has 2 or 3 traffic items to list. A and B both key up at the same time, give their calls, and go straight into listing their traffic. Both are about equal signal strength, so no one really gets through. A only had 2 to list so he stops first. Then the tail end of B is heard, listing his third piece of traffic, but no one knows who he was. When he is done, C and D commence, and the same thing happens. After them, maybe a few more stations would try to checkin. To prevent chaos, the Net control would have to step in after every few stations to get repeats on what he had missed. This is the scenario I had in mind by "more often than not, ...even more wasted time." The argument was given that the stronger station will be heard over the weaker. My observation has been that the dueling stations are evenly matched nearly half the time, and neither is intelligible. Don't get me wrong. I don't want to be in the position of defending the practice, but I have observed that "here is" seems to work. It appears to enable more stations to check in before the net control has to come back, and that makes for better efficiency. One net I know of has developed the practice of saying "good evening Joe", dropping the carrier, then proceeding with callsign and traffic list. (Assuming Joe is the name of the net control station.) Hard to believe how annoying it is to hear "good evening Joe" thirty or forty times. I'm not sure how your net works on 147.18; does each station check in with only a callsign, then wait for the net control to come back later and ask if he has anything to list? If this is the case, then certainly it makes no sense to put "here is" before the call, if the call is all you are sending. But if the initial call also includes an info list of some variable length, then my A-D scenario above seems like a real strong possibility. -- Dan Ostroy - K2UL - AT&T Bell Labs, Holmdel, NJ USA 908-949-5922 d.ostroy@att.com ------------------------------ Date: 6 Apr 94 21:03:31 GMT From: sdd.hp.com!col.hp.com!fc.hp.com!myers@hplabs.hp.com Subject: heinous operating To: info-hams@ucsd.edu Dan Ostroy (ostroy@cbnewsh.cb.att.com) wrote: > Well, I'll take a shot at an explanation. Try this scenario: 4 stations > (A through D) each want to check in and each has 2 or 3 traffic items to > list. So what's wrong with using the method I mentioned earlier (check-in via suffix), plus adding either "with traffic" or "no traffic"? You SHOULD NOT be listing each and every piece of traffic separately at check-in; this DOES waste time, possibly delaying someone with more important traffic than yours (which would be flagged at check-in something like, "EW, emergency traffic" and presumably net control is enough on the ball to drop everything else and take your traffic first). Only after the stations are recognized and net control is trying to get the traffic routing sorted out would you be asked for the gory details. Our local traffic net uses a slight modification of this; since local traffic that is outbound almost always is being sent to a regional net (in our case, the Twelfth Region Net), a station with such traffic is encouraged to simply use something like "EW, for Twelfth Region Net" or even better "EW, for TWN" when checking in. If your net control prefers to know how big a load he or she is dealing with, then your check-in might be "EW with 2" or some such in place of the simple "with traffic". But in any event, I've always though that the "This is" practice is an utter abomination. If they can hear the "This is", they would also hear your suffix; if they don't hear it, you still haven't prevented doubling. The goal is to use the time/bandwidth EFFICIENTLY. Bob Myers KC0EW Hewlett-Packard Co. |Opinions expressed here are not Advanced Systems Div. |those of my employer or any other myers@fc.hp.com Fort Collins, Colorado |sentient life-form on this planet. ------------------------------ Date: 6 Apr 94 13:58:28 From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!swrinde!gatech!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!zip.eecs.umich.edu!zip.eecs.umich.edu!hideg@network.ucsd.edu Subject: Heinous operating techniques (AGAIN!) To: info-hams@ucsd.edu >Thank you for elegantly proving my argument for me. >Why double the check-in time in the first place >with an extraneous phrase? Efficient communications >demand deleting extraneous verbiage and cutting >to the core of the message. Efficiaent communications also demands standardization. This works quite well for our net. I guess your mileage may vary. It doesn't double the check-in time. On the Southeastern Michigan Traffic Net, stations checking in have additional information beyond their callsigns to give NCS (no traffic, traffic for so-and-so, etc.). If we didn't require this little check for doubling, there would be many more repeats on information needed. We've had people do it both ways, and the "this is" method has proven to be the better method. I guess you should use whatever works. This works for us. --Steve, N8HSC Retired Net Manager, SEMTN. ------------------------------ Date: 6 Apr 94 19:02:30 GMT From: sdd.hp.com!col.hp.com!srgenprp!alanb@hplabs.hp.com Subject: How phasing SSB Exciters Work (Was: RF and AF speech pr To: info-hams@ucsd.edu David Hough (dave@llondel.demon.co.uk) wrote: > In article <CnrLxD.Hww@srgenprp.sr.hp.com> alanb@sr.hp.com (Alan Bloom) writes: > >I have often thought, though, that the Weaver method would be well-suited > >to implementation in a DSP, since you can get mathematically perfect > >carrier suppression. > Not sure if it is the most efficient way though, and you are limited in your > output frequency - or were you only thinking of doing the audio stages in the > DSP and converting the 'mixed' output back to analogue for injection into > the RF mixers? I figured you could do it at a low "RF" frequency of a few 10's of kHz and then heterodyne it up to the radio's IF frequency. David Stockton (dstock@hpqmoca.sqf.hp.com) wrote: : David Hough (dave@llondel.demon.co.uk) wrote: : : Why not use a Weaver (Third Method) exciter? ... : This avoids the need for broadband (multi-octave) phase shifters but : still leaves the need for precise amplitude matching to get accurate : cancellation of the unwanted sideband. The required amplitude and phase : matching to get comparable suppression to a reasonable quality filter : exciter are both severe. You can adjust to get best cancellation, but : this still needs it to be stable and for all frequencies to cancel at : the same position of the adjuster. Except that the "unwanted sideband" does not fall into an adjacent channel as it does with the "first" and "second" methods of SSB generation. Since the unwanted sideband folds back into the wanted sideband, poor rejection shows up as audio distortion, rather than adjacent-channel interference. A Weaver SSB generator should achieve around 40 dB suppression which amounts to around 1% distortion. I think that's rather better than most SSB rigs currently achieve. : An attractive compromise is to use a phasing source (polyphase : network, weaver or whatever) to get modest suppression of the unwanted : sideband, the clipper section of the RF speech processor, and finally a : wide-ish lower than usual filter. We get the sum of the suppression : factors of the two systems, ... less the amount of clipping used. If the phasing generator has 30 dB suppression, there is 20 dB of clipping, and the post-clipping filter has 30 dB suppression, you get a total of 40 dB suppression, not 60. However I agree it shouldn't be hard to get such a system to be plenty good enough. AL N1AL ------------------------------ Date: 6 Apr 1994 18:52:08 GMT From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!swrinde!emory!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!news.umbc.edu!haven.umd.edu!cs.umd.edu!newsfeed.gsfc.nasa.gov!bolt.gsfc.nasa.gov!user@network.ucsd.edu Subject: Password=?/for callsign.cs.buffalo.edu To: info-hams@ucsd.edu Got in, but then did not know password! Not welcome! Dick ------------------------------ Date: 6 Apr 1994 19:25:15 GMT From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!math.ohio-state.edu!hobbes.physics.uiowa.edu!news.uiowa.edu!panda@network.ucsd.edu Subject: Password=?/for callsign.cs.buffalo.edu To: info-hams@ucsd.edu In note <RICHARD_BOLT-060494135237@bolt.gsfc.nasa.gov>, RICHARD_BOLT@CCMAIL. GSFC.NASA.GOV (Dick Bolt) writes: >Got in, but then did not know password! Not welcome! Dick If you just want the callsign server telnet to callsign.cs.buffalo.edu 2000. No password is required on that port. However the 'buffalo' callsign server is from April 1993 and is out of date. There is a more up to date server (October 1993) at pc.usl.edu 2000. Both servers work exactly the same. --- _________________________________________ The opinions in this post are mine and my cat's, not my employer's. scottm@csg.mot.com (Scott F. Migaldi) ------------------------------ Date: 31 Mar 1994 16:18:11 +1000 From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!munnari.oz.au!yoyo.aarnet.edu.au!news.adelaide.edu.au!news.cs.su.oz.au!metro!news.ci.com.au!eram.esi.com.au!not-for-mail@network.ucsd.edu Subject: STOP SENDING HAMS ON USENET CRAP !!! To: info-hams@ucsd.edu In article <764973671snx@bsdihi.atr.bso.nl>, dihi@bsdihi.atr.bso.nl (Dick Hissink) writes: | It happens again and again. Every couple of weeks six tremendous large | files with AMATEURS ON USENET. This times each part from the six even Every couple of weeks? I doubt it. | AMATEURS ON USENET: Those interested can download the latest updated | version by ftp form server.... Excuse me, but USENET does not necessarily imply access to FTP etc. | What do Y'all think of my idea?? I could go along with reducing the frequency of the postings, or perhaps confining them to rec.radio.info. I guess you get this via a mailing list, right? -- Dave Horsfall (VK2KFU) VK2KFU @ VK2AAB.NSW.AUS.OC PGP 2.3 dave@esi.COM.AU ...munnari!esi.COM.AU!dave available ------------------------------ Date: 6 Apr 94 18:21:28 GMT From: sdd.hp.com!col.hp.com!fc.hp.com!myers@hplabs.hp.com To: info-hams@ucsd.edu References <bote.765267957@access1>, <HIDEG.94Apr4011228@spsd10b.erim.org>, <bote.765611050@access3> Subject : Re: Heinous operating techniques (AGAIN!) John Boteler (bote@access.digex.net) wrote: > Yes, the smart operator knows how to eliminate > inefficient practices such as "This is" and > get right to the job at hand. He does not > need to vary the length of "This is" because > such a mechanism is already in place: his > callsign, which could require less time to say, > such as "NF3I", or more time to say, such as > "KA6WWY". Even in the latter case, there's no need to take the longer time; the practice only shows up in such situations as net check-in, in which case the full legal ID isn't needed. KA6WWY could just check in as "WWY" on the first go-round, and when net control gets back around to acknowledging the check-ins either note the full call (if recognized) or ask for the full call (if it wasn't). For example, I might participate in the following exchange when checking into the local traffic net: "N0XXX, net control, now taking check-ins for the Northern Colorado Traffic Net...." "EW" "EW, net control" "KC0EW, Bob, Loveland, no traffic" Or if net control recognizes the call (or maybe just my voice): "Recognize KC0EW...Bob, any traffic?" "No traffic" ...since control already in this case knows who and where I am. If I had emergency traffic, of course, I would certainly state that as early as possible - probably when first checking in. There's NOTHING more frustrating than trying to sort out three overlapping attempts at checking in, each of which consisted solely of "This is"! :-) Bob Myers KC0EW Hewlett-Packard Co. |Opinions expressed here are not Advanced Systems Div. |those of my employer or any other myers@fc.hp.com Fort Collins, Colorado |sentient life-form on this planet. ------------------------------ Date: (null) From: (null) -- +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ + 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 V94 #385 ****************************** ******************************