ecn-ec:wn9nbt@pur-ee.UUCP (08/11/83)
#R:ihuxf:-57300:ecn-ec:19900001:37777777600:341 ecn-ec!wn9nbt Jul 12 10:20:00 1983 There is more to scanners than listening to cops. An inexpensive scanner can be used to monitor several ham bands at the cost of only one receiver. By the way, as soon as someone gets their hands on one of the new Regency programable scanners I'd be most interested in seeing comments and/or evaluations on it.....Dave Chasey -- WN9NBT
chris@hplvle.UUCP (chris) (01/15/85)
Sorry to be so long in replying, but the route from notes to me had been constipated for over a month...... I have been usin the TAPR board for about a year, and like it and its documentation so much, I bought another (no, not the company). The GLB initially had several poor design problems ( cannot talk and listen at the same time) though I understand this problem has been worked upon for present/future revisions. Other options include VADCG (vancouver club) boards, and TRS-80 software versions (no HDLC chip), which may be worth considering. I believe the reason TAPR gets most press will be obvious when you get the kit: absolutely first class design, accessable to the "bearded experimenter", great documentation, good modem design, flexibility in every feature, and plenty of features in software and hardware. I am sold on the TAPR kit, a great job for a non-profit club activity. An off shoot version is also available built and tested from AEA for about $500.00, and I think TAPR will build for you for a price. Present and future plans include coast-to-coast digital VHF/UHF links, ongoing 6 meter meteor scatter tests, level 3 (ISO OSI model) software design and development (including a write-off contest between the datagram vs virtual circuit factions). Its a great way to combine computers and ham radio, and there's lots of work to be done in this new mode. - 73's, chris (WD5IBS) hpfcla!hplvla!chris Hewlett-Packard LID PO Box 301 Loveland, Colo 80537
chris@hplvla.UUCP (chris) (03/29/85)
If you have access to the British journal "Wireless World", I believe you will find a 2 or 3 part series about a home 1.6 Ghz satellite receiver system described, sometime in the last several years. I am sorry I have no more specific information, but I remember photocopying the series, which I have since lost.....Good Luck....Chris
ron@hpfcmt.UUCP (ron) (04/16/85)
Re: Navy TTY sigs and news. I haven't tried anything like this but if your goal is to decrypt the news from the fleetsat you'd get a better news dump from any of your local radio stations even if you listened for only 2 minutes. The exercise is interesting but the content isn't. Ron Miller (An ex-swabbie) H-P Ft. Collins Systems Div at :... ihnp4!hpfcla!ron-m
caf@omen.UUCP (Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX) (04/20/85)
)Re: Navy TTY sigs and news. ) )I haven't tried anything like this but if your goal is to decrypt the )news from the fleetsat you'd get a better news dump from any of your local )radio stations even if you listened for only 2 minutes. ) )The exercise is interesting but the content isn't. There used to be news and WX at 170 Hz reverse shift 100 wpm on 6425 2690 8457 4334 (freqs approximate) sent by the coast guard. Interesting copy if you want to know all about the ionosphere and Alaska WX. Haven't tried these freqs for several years so don't know if they are still in use. -- Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX ..!tektronix!reed!omen!caf Omen Technology Inc 17505-V NW Sauvie IS RD Portland OR 97231 Voice: 503-621-3406 Modem: 503-621-3746
chris@hplvla.UUCP (chris) (05/06/85)
Well, I cannot answer for your feelings of being burned, but there is something which everyone must remember about TAPR: they are NOT in business! TAPR is a nonprofit R&D corporation, and they all have other jobs, with the phone secretary being the only paid employee. Their interest in making the TNC's is strictly to promote packet radio, ham radio, and in this they have been diligent and successful. Ham radio will grow because TAPR has done what the commercial radio manufacturers will not or cannot do: produce first class products for a decent price, forming a bridge between the radio and the computer which most hobbyists can afford. When they sold the rights to Heathkit and AEA on the TNC 1 design, it was for a strictly nominal ammount. Now, as the progress in packet makes a less expensive form of TNC available, more people yet can afford the mode, and TAPR had lots of money tied up in the remaining kits. As a naive buyer, would you prefer to send your dollars to an unknown outfit in Tucson or to Heathkit? Well, its my guess that after Heathkit came out with a $299 kit with cabinet, few TAPR TNCs sold at the old price, and TAPR had to clear out its inventory. All the "bearded experimenters" who were able to take the plunge already had their TNC's (I own 3) and the more cautious users preferred the bigger name of Heath. TAPR will be spending more time yet developing 9600 baud modem boards, and possibly even 220 MHz RF decks for high speed packet, boosting both the computer-ham radio link and the use of the 220 band. I have lots of respect for those guys, both technically and personally, for continuing their efforts in an environment which would probably dishearten and tire me, especially after I already spent 8 hours at my regular job, and 4 years developing first class equipment for marginally grateful ham community. -chris, WD5IBS hpfcla!hplvla!chris
dick@hpfcmt.UUCP (dick) (05/09/85)
In the May issue of "73" magazine I saw an ad for a microphone/earphone combination for use with HTs. It used a press to talk switch and the cost was about $100. It claimed a space age technology but looks very much like an earphone that doubles as a microphone to amplify the sound available in your ear canal when you speak. I don't know how this works, but folks here in the office speculate that this might be something like the earphones used by the secret service. (Never saw one of those guys with a boom mike) This device was available for the ICOM-02AT and was advertised as a good solution for noisy environments. I don't want to think about what could happen to your ear if you crash while using this thing. (The proof is left as an exercise for the student...... 73s dick anderson hp fort collins
ron@brl-tgr.ARPA (Ron Natalie <ron>) (05/23/85)
> In the May issue of "73" magazine I saw an ad for a microphone/earphone > combination for use with HTs. It used a press to talk switch and the cost > was about $100. It claimed a space age technology but looks very much like > an earphone that doubles as a microphone to amplify the sound available in > your ear canal when you speak. I don't know how this works, but folks here in > the office speculate that this might be something like the earphones used by the > secret service. (Never saw one of those guys with a boom mike) > A guy tried to sell some to us once. If it's the same thing it's called an Ear-Mike (how creative) and it's made by a company in suburban Washington (as I recall). Interesting idea, I can't say I understand the big advantage.
chris@hplvla.UUCP (chris) (06/10/85)
As mentioned, Motorola, GE, RCA and maybe Johnson, are the best choices. The two low-cost brands mentioned in the original posting are the ones he gags at, not the MOT, GE, etc. Sorry if it wasn't clear. -chris
mikey@trsvax (08/07/85)
I notice you specify sharp points on the umbrella leads. Isn't there a controversy on sharp points vs balls on lightning arresters? I remember reading that the conflict goes all the way back to Ben Franklin and the King of England. mikey at trsvax KA5MJQ
jrc@hpcnof.UUCP (08/31/85)
An interesting comment... which suggests that we need a net similar to this via packet radio --- with NO commercial interests. Maybe using micros as well as UNIX. Is there anything out there (in packet land) comparable to USENET? Jim Conrad, KQ7B hplabs!hpfcla!hpcnoa!j_conrad
roger@hpfcla.UUCP (10/31/85)
/***** hpfcmt:net.ham-radio / brl-tgr!FAC0395%UOFT01.B / 6:23 am Oct 24, 1985*/ <<<<<<<<<<<<!!!!!!!!! FLAME !!!!!!!!!>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >By all means, if you work Tony -T77C, do include a greenstamp. I >believe that his QSL's are the sole source of income for the >entire island. >N8AAT /* ---------- */ Since when has Amateur Radio become a "source of income"?! I can understand helping a much desired DX station with postage by including an IRC (International Reply Coupon), but sending US$ to subsidize somebody's income is both against the principles of amateur radio and in violation of the law. Amateur Radio is a hobby. Let's not turn it into a business! Roger Jollis KU6I/0 Fort Collins, Colorado
roger@hpfcla.UUCP (11/08/85)
>Depends on what you think of as ham radio. I rather enjoy reading about >that sort of thing, as it has something technical to it. On the other >hand, if I have to read (thank G*d for rn's kill files!) one more >article about lower-than-30MHZ-conversations-with-some-unknown-little- >forsaken-island-using-some-foreign-manufactured-rice-rocket-hooked-up- >to-some-store-bought-heap-of-aluminum-for-a-grand-total-of-10-seconds-to >exchange-signal-reports, I'll puke. > >Ham radio is a diverse hobby. I'm in it for the technical aspects, and >to learn more about radio, television, digital, and other modes of >communications. If I just want to talk to somebody, I'll use the >telephone. Its cheaper and more reliable. > > BRAVO!!! I agree whole heartedly with Brian. What ever happend to the Ham Radio of build it yourself/fix it yourself. These days the majority of the rigs we hear on the air are Japanese rice-boxes operated by glorified CB appliance operators. What about perpetuating a pool of "trained radio technicians." Wasn't this part of Ham Radio (or something to that effect) the reason for Ham Radio in the first place? What about the propagation of international brotherhood? Since when does "Your five-nine in Ohio 73..." propagate brotherhood? Have you ever tried to demonstrate the hobby to a newcomer on a conversation such as that?! What kind of accomplishment is it to contact "some-unknown-little-foresaken-island" using maximum legal power and a big store-bought antenna just to exchange false (usually) signal reports? Some suggest removing the code requirement. If that's done, then really what would be the difference between Amateur Radio and CB, other than the fact that skip is legalized on Ham Radio. The day that is done, I send my license in for cancellation! >So please! Tolerate the not-ham-radio-the way-the-ARRL-invented-it >traffic as well as the more traditional stuff here in ham-rado. Some of >us like it! > > Brian Kantor, WB6CYT > Whoever said that the ARRL is the god of amateur radio? They seem to have put themselves in that position for the primary reasons of self-propagation. Afterall, the more unsophisticated amateurs there are, the more suckers there are likely to be who will send that good-for-nothing organization membership fees. I learned early, I quit after one year. They are the biggest offender of commercialization of amateur radio. Their magazine (not a journal by any means!) used to have some good technical articles. Now it is mainly filled with useless statistics and adds for Japanese junk! To conclude my flame, I'm all for technical talk on this note category! Technical discussion is part of the hobby. As far as political debates, I feel that it should find another category since it is not at all related to amateur radio. Roger Jollis KU6I Fort Collins, Colorado DE KU6I QRQ QSX 3520 KHZ K "We're all entitled to our own opinions." Any opinions here stated are entirely my own and in no way reflect the policies or opinions of my employer.
jhs@mitre-bedford.ARPA (11/12/85)
C'mon guys! Dx chasing really DOES foster brotherhood, especially if conducted via a "dx net". I feel really GOOD when I hear the net control helping the two parties to a contact to figure out that each is giving the other a 5 by 9 report, even though they can't hear each other directly. This spirit of brotherhood and cooperation is the essence of modern-day ham radio. Alas. 73, John S., W3IKG
scott@hpuslma.UUCP (11/14/85)
Roger, Aren't you being a little bit hard on the ARRL and their "commercialized maga- zine?" I just received my Tech license recently and still enjoy seeing the ads for the many new and different products on the marketplace. Maybe we should write to ARRL and request more technical articles, but at the same time I believe they have done a good job over the years promoting and protecting the rights and privileges of us Hams. By the way I was WA0BNM back in the early '60's. Jim Scott N0GLP
ron@brl-sem.ARPA (Ron Natalie <ron>) (11/16/85)
> Aren't you being a little bit hard on the ARRL and their "commercialized maga- > zine?" I just received my Tech license recently and still enjoy seeing the > ads for the many new and different products on the marketplace. Maybe we > should write to ARRL and request more technical articles, but at the same time > I believe they have done a good job over the years promoting and protecting the > rights and privileges of us Hams. By the way I was WA0BNM back in the early > '60's. > It's just another BYTE. Recent ARRL "protection" stands are about as serving to the amateur community as Jerry Pournelle is to the advancement of computer science (read the recent analysis of the need for auxiliary operation below 220MHz). We launched a letter writing campaign to QST editors back in 1980 about the technical quality of the articles and even suggest and volunteered to help with things like technical review of articles and means for getting better technically qualified writers. The answer, which was even more galling than just inaction, was that they felt that they were doing a superlative job. Sure, that's why in the period of a year we had an article on how to build a TouchTone decoder using 24 PLLs (for those who don't know, there were chips to do that, albeit exensive... $14. But if you were going to do it with discreet PLL chips, you can you only need seven (there are only seven tones) and an article on a microcomputer application for blind amateurs that sent numbers to them as a slow series of beeps. Perhaps, some form of encoding (Morse?) would be more appropriate. Glad I didn't blow the bucks on a life membership. -Ron
mikey@techsup (01/07/86)
I think you'll find that most power companies will respond fairly soon to a 'noisy' transformer. From what I was told by a power company official, a 'noisy' transformer is a failure getting ready to happen. Not only could the power company open up a can of worms if there was a problem with loss of property or life from a failure that was known to be imminent, but I'm sure a 'noisy' transformer is not as effecient as a correctly functioning one. Also, the cost of rewinding a transformer before it blows and damages the core is considerably less than after the failure. mikey N1DVJ trsvax!techsup!bbimg!mikey
kward@npqc (01/15/86)
/* Written 7:11 am Jan 9, 1986 by ihu1h.UUC!parnass in npqc:net.ham-radio */ > About a year ago, I queried the group about getting a schematic > for a Uniden CR2021 ....... Can anyone help out? > Jim, wa1uou > <jberets@bbn-vax.arpa> See if you can order a service manual for a Realistic DX400 from Radio Shack. It's a CR2021 clone. /* End of text from npqc:net.ham-radio */ This service manual is available from Radio Shack, One of the better ones too, I must say. It is 72 pages with fold out schematic, and sells for $8.25. Part Number is MS-2000207, catalog# 20-207. Parts orders or quotes: Radio Shack National Parts 900 E. Northside Dr. Ft. Worth, TX 76102 (817) 870-5600 Attn: Customer Service Dept. Hope this helps... Keith Ward trsvax!techsup!npqc!kward Radio Shack National Parts #0048 (817) 870-5650
mikey@techsup (02/02/86)
I read on a BBS (un-named) that there was a group up in Oregon that was busting the HBO stuff durring their test runs in under 30 hours. The stuff I read went on to say that what made it easy was that they would just go get a copy of the movie being shown and once that they know the 'answer in the back of the book' finding the question was easy. mikey trsvax!techsup!bbimg!mikey