Article: 93454 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: Winlink 2000 QRM Subject: Winlink and QRM Message-ID: Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2005 14:51:49 GMT Winlink and QRM - read info here: http://www.zerobeat.net/bandgrab.shtml Article: 93455 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: "Travis Jordan" References: Subject: Re: Winlink and QRM Message-ID: Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2005 17:01:19 GMT Winlink 2000 QRM wrote: > Winlink and QRM - read info here: Sorry, but this sounds like the same complaint that the AM'ers had about SSB when it first started up on HF. I can certainly see the utility in the application. Article: 93456 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: "helmsman@mindspring.com" Subject: Re: Winlink and QRM Message-ID: References: Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2005 18:26:10 GMT "Travis Jordan" wrote: >Winlink 2000 QRM wrote: >> Winlink and QRM - read info here: > >Sorry, but this sounds like the same complaint that the AM'ers had about >SSB when it first started up on HF. I can certainly see the utility in >the application. > Put it on the garage door frequencies! Article: 93457 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: "xpyttl" References: Subject: Re: Winlink and QRM Message-ID: Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2005 14:38:06 -0400 "Travis Jordan" wrote in message news:z5gve.204849$JA.54611@fe01.news.easynews.com... > > Sorry, but this sounds like the same complaint that the AM'ers had about > SSB when it first started up on HF. I can certainly see the utility in > the application. Not exactly. On HF, it is fairly unusual that you can hear both sides of a conversation, unlike VHF where if I can hear one station, I can usually hear the other. So when I want to call someone, I listen first. Hearing nothing, I send QRL? (or on phone, "is this frequency in use"). If the station I can't hear gets my QRL, he sends C and I go off looking for another frequency. Very few, if any, digis actually listen first. Even if they did, they don't have a way to say "Is this frequency in use" and understand the response. And even if they could, they really don't have the opportunity to change frequency, since they need to call on the frequency that the remote robot is listening. It seems as if it would be very difficult to make these automated stations be friendly to other users. That being said, it looks as if Winlink 2000 is going to be come a significant part of our emergency response, which is one of the reasons we have access to these frequencies to begin with. We should be looking at reasonable solutions, perhaps developing new technologies to enable this sort of capability, rather than just flaming. Both the pro and con in this argument are absolutely unwilling to listen to/believe the other side. We amateurs need to get our act together and figure out how we can expand the use of a technology like Winlink 2000 without making these automated systems even more of a nuisance than they already are. .. Article: 93458 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: fmmck@aol.com (Fred McKenzie) Subject: Re: Looking for SAV16L datasheet Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2005 15:11:07 -0400 Message-ID: References: <1119451427.642167.164730@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <42BA9733.70902@bloomer.net> <1119567636.499759.305530@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> In article <1119567636.499759.305530@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>, "HamVenezuela" wrote: > I'll keep trying. HamVenezuela- There is some limited data at http://www.mmatthes.com/e/modul/module.html It appears to be a five watt module for use in a walkie-talkie transmitter made by Toshiba. However, it is not listed in the current Toshiba catalog at http://www.toshiba.com/taec/cgi-bin/display.cgi?table=Category&CategoryID=7255 so you might contact Toshiba directly and ask them to E-Mail you the PDF file for the S-AV16L. 73, Fred, K4DII Article: 93459 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: David Stinson Subject: Re: Winlink and QRM References: Message-ID: <83jve.9167$jX6.1969@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net> Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2005 20:23:32 GMT xpyttl wrote: > That being said, it looks as if Winlink 2000 is going to be come a > significant part of our emergency response, which is one of the reasons we > have access to these frequencies to begin with. We should be looking at > reasonable solutions, perhaps developing new technologies to enable this > sort of capability, rather than just flaming. > > Both the pro and con in this argument are absolutely unwilling to listen > to/believe the other side. We amateurs need to get our act together and > figure out how we can expand the use of a technology like Winlink 2000 > without making these automated systems even more of a nuisance than they > already are. There's plenty of space. We just don't manage it worth a darn. If you listen to the ham bands, you'll find that the vast majority of our allocation is wasted. For instance: you could put every CW QSO during Sweepstakes into about 75 KC of spectrum and have lots of elbow room. For phone, probably 100-125 KCs would be a big plenty. People want their freqs to end in "5" or "0" and that is just poor spectrum management. Look at ten and six meters, even at the peak of the sunspot cycle; 90% of it is empty, wasted space. Every major city has 100+ repeater pairs allocated, twenty or thirty repeaters on the air and maybe *three* that get any sustained use. That's pitiful and a matter of *ego,* not communication. 75 meters is "crowded" only because of our 5-n-10 KC mindset. Our problem is ego and "we've always done it this way," not a lack of spectrum. We're going to either make room for new and enhanced modes or we're going to be swept aside like blacksmiths and locomotive boiler makers, guys. The times is passin' us by.... Article: 93460 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: "Woody" References: Subject: Re: Winlink and QRM /Nice long rant Message-ID: <7ckve.385$B82.126@trnddc04> Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2005 21:41:23 GMT Well.... first things first, of course.. why are we always posting such discussion in all these groups for commerce? Second, and I quote.... "Whatchu talkin' 'bout Willis?" > If the station I can't hear gets my QRL, he sends C and I go off looking > for another frequency. I would normally bypass these things but I've been thinking about getting another HF rig lately....and I've been considering why I keep selling them off, trying to warrant a purchase again. I'm thinking it has to do with the words "purpose" and "use". So, I'm looking at getting back into it and doing something besides setting up a radio and just randomly playing with it or gluing the vfo on some nonsense gathering place. So here are my questions and observations for your perusal and general flaming. >From the original link posted: That the HISTORICALLY HIGH LEVEL OF INTERFERENCE BY PACTOR STATIONS to everyone else has demonstrated time and time again that even the operator-controlled Winlink Pactor stations don't care if a frequency is busy (because they can easily take it away), in their passion to get their email from the Internet, so they MUST NOT BE ALLOWED to mix with hams trying to COMMUNICATE WITH EACH OTHER! Q: Someone please take a minute and point out a single coherent thought or plausible point in the above statement. Bearing in mind that tuning to any random freq can find people squawking over each other like the noise in a crowded room, or a CW freq sounding like my kid running down the "try me" aisle in the toy dept... When did it become impossible for my station to hear 2 other stations that can't hear each other? Next, from the original link posted. That ham radio is a HOBBY, not a quasi-commercial email "service" as Winlink provides, and that ham radio, from the very beginning, has always been mainly about hams communicating with other hams, and not about being used for unattended email gateways to the Internet, mostly for a few sailors, because the FCC Maritime Radio Frequencies were set aside for that purpose and are underused. Observation: If it serves a legitimate purpose and assists a single sailor, military or civilian, it serves a greater purpose than your latest blathering, contest, or quasi-award. The author can 'pucker up and plant one' on that statement. Again, if it is a ham station to ham station, WHERE is the plausible point?? ..... I think I hear a tiny voice yelling "ME, ME, ME... I shall rule the world!" Also from the original like posted: That all unattended wideband digital operations, of any type, MUST be confined to the current sub-bands for automatically controlled digital stations, and not allowed to use any frequency they wish just in order to avoid having to wait a short time for a clear frequency in the sub-bands. Observation: I think SHOULD is a better word. Also take the entire point and reverse it, maybe they feel the same way in a crowded band. Why can't YOU wait a short time for a clear frequency?? [I shall rule the world!!] Also, if you [and Winlink, and Amateur radio in general] wake up and smell the ALE, then you again have a moot point. If you've ever been on a radio, you realize that attended or unattended matters not; due to world dominators. The problem you're having is with courtesy, not digital ops. Good luck freeing the world of jerks and morons. [and from experience, a dense population infiltration such as the one in ham radio would be a good place to point yer scattergun when you start.] There's lots of people with lots of free time to build up their personal anger levels for whatever reason, then look for a [safe] place to vent frustrations. It's the same with the www. Also, if you paid any attention to Riley at any point, you'd know that he already said APCO25 is fair game on the phone bands, so you are actually showing up on Saturday for the Friday night fights. Sorry you missed us, but thanks for coming out. And again from the link..... To stop this attempted takeover, *[ I WILL START MY OWN ]* EVERYONE ELSE needs to vote NOT to agree to the Winlink request, so ARRL does not get the wrong impression that the "majority" of hams want to sacrifice the frequencies they use for communicating, so that the less-than-1%, that are Winlink users, don't have to wait longer than 90 seconds to receive an email on HF or can't send picture attachments to the Internet. Q: STILL trying to understand why he keeps saying "stop hams from communicating so that hams can communicate!" and "I'm not gonna wait 90 seconds on a bunch just because they can't wait 90 seconds!" You know what... I think Winlink has something wrong....maybe... there're WITCHES!! Everyone chant and point at Winlink... "witch, witch, witch...." Come to think of it... that pesky ECHOLINK is still going on too! Where's my echolink pitch-fork? C'mon, let's get 'em! Bunch of internet-connected morons sucking up my drivel time... LET'S GET ON THE INTERNET AND COMPLAIN, ESPECIALLY IN ALL THE PLACES WE SHOULDN'T BE! Hahahaha.... this is too funny. [NOTE: If the author wants real results, he should get on Winlink and email his concerns to the Winlink users... that will complete his hypocritical circle and restore balance to the universe.] Also, IF THEY CONSIST OF LESS THAN 1%, HOW THE HECK ARE THEY IN YOUR WAY, BUBBA?? All you want is to have your 100%, right? Why can't people just understand that? It's a mad, mad, mad, world... Researching the author, I see he is a QRP fan.... leaving me to wonder.... WHY would he want to purposefully limit himself to barely enough power to communicate when he has available a perfectly good 50-100w radio market?? That will give him plenty of power to be heard and not too much to drown anyone out. I'm betting he operates QRP wherever he wishes, forcing others to WAIT while the do-good folks "give in" feeling sorry and letting the little guy have the time/freq.... what a power rush that must be. Then again, it could be that he's simply experimenting and enjoying the hobby in the fashion he CHOSE by right, etc.... Nah, couldn't be that. Before anyone jumps on that, be advised that I've already experienced the common orations on the post-nuclear advantages of QRP training. Here's a news-flash boys... after the smoke clears, your QRP station will either be lost in the new and improved noise floor, or be one of the new big-guns on the suddenly quiet bands.... so I still miss the point. But do I make a hole for you when I hear you? Yes, I do. [Refer to that courtesy thing mentioned above.] Also, if anyone wonders/cares, I have few "friends" on the local repeater too, since I only use it for communicating when a telephone isn't suitable, or whatever the rules suggest. Curse me for using simplex instead of the repeater most of the time! See, I had this stupid idea, that the repeater is only useful to me when the communication requirements exceed simplex range. I must be a fool. It seems that contacting my wife on the repeater [preceeded by paging tones to my alert monitor...OMG!!!] then making my contact, passing necessary info and clearing the frequency is just absurd to the local jaw-breakers who inevitably pounce on any break in the silence, almost demanding attention. How rude I am for not sitting in my hot car in a parking lot for an extra 15 minutes every time I need to tell someone something simple and move on. Don't get me wrong, I love to chat, ragchewing on a repeater [or HF] is no problem to me, but not every time I key a mic for goodness sakes! But, I digress... I had a bumper sticker one time.... "I love Jesus, it's his groupies I can't stand.", and I wish I could find an analogous "I love radio, it's the operators I can't stand." So, with my failure to "get it" along with my apparent stupidity, I now relinquish the floor to whomever. rb Article: 93461 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: Ken Scharf Subject: Re: Looking for 12V tube Rx project info References: <1119556572.530653.109680@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> Message-ID: <3Rkve.6758$Bm.4442@bignews5.bellsouth.net> Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2005 18:26:07 -0400 LenAnderson@ieee.org wrote: >> I am looking for a nice schematic, and perhaps additional info, on a 12V >>(fil. & plate) tube superhet Rx; just something fairly simple for CW/SSB >>reception without bells and whistles, and preferably for 75M/40M reception. >> >> Can anyone point me to info on this? Thanks. > > > Operating tube plates down to 12 VDC supply is pushing things a > bit far, to be honest with you. > > Setchell-Carlson managed to do it with loctal-base tubes running > off of a 24/28 VDC aircraft bus back in WW2 times. No dynamotor, > just that cute little box referred to as a "range receiver" or > BC-1206. > > I bought a couple of them many years ago, surplus, principally > to get the nice compact 3-gang variable capacitor. Fired one > up in the company lab at 26 VDC and it was still in-spec although > those specs weren't the best. At 24 VDC the spec rating was > marginal. At 22 VDC it was below spec...but then the filaments > were also running cooler at 11 V each. > > Don't remember what the IF (135 KHz) BW was, but, running with > a crystal-controlled converter ahead of it, the 195 to 500 KHz > tuning range could cover 75 or 40 meters no problem. A thought. > > LenAnderson@ieee.org > I've got one of those in the junk box. I was thinking of converting it to solid state using cascaded (J310-311 and 2N2222) transistors, perhaps a differential set of J310's for the mixer and a single J310 for the oscillator. Not sure about the audio and detector stages yet. There was an article in an old '73 magazine on converting one of those sets to solid state and adding a crystal controled converter to receive 40 meters. I've misplaced that issue though. Article: 93462 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: "Woody" References: <83jve.9167$jX6.1969@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net> Subject: Re: Winlink and QRM Message-ID: Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2005 22:50:47 GMT Wow, someone with a clue.... Thank you, David. A smart person once said that if the answer to any question is "Because that's the way we always do it.", then it's time to seriously consider changing the way you do it. rb Article: 93463 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: Odo Of Bayeux Subject: Re: Re: Winlink and QRM /Nice long rant Message-ID: References: <7ckve.385$B82.126@trnddc04> Date: Sun, 26 Jun 2005 12:59:44 GMT On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 21:41:23 GMT, "Woody" wrote: >That the HISTORICALLY HIGH LEVEL OF INTERFERENCE BY PACTOR STATIONS to >everyone else has demonstrated time and time again that even the >operator-controlled Winlink Pactor stations don't care if a frequency is >busy (because they can easily take it away), in their passion to get their >email from the Internet, so they MUST NOT BE ALLOWED to mix with hams trying >to COMMUNICATE WITH EACH OTHER! > >Q: Someone please take a minute and point out a single coherent thought or >plausible point in the above statement. It sounds like you have a severe case of "Comprehension Deficit," OM! >Bearing in mind that tuning to any >random freq can find people squawking over each other like the noise in a >crowded room, or a CW freq sounding like my kid running down the "try me" >aisle in the toy dept... When did it become impossible for my station to >hear 2 other stations that can't hear each other? Oh yeah... THAT was REALLY "coherent." LOL! If people got ON the radio 5% as much as they speculated about it, we would ALL be better off! Article: 93464 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew Message-ID: <42BEF1BF.7060805@ieee.org> From: Richard Subject: N2PK's Vector Network Analyzer Date: Sun, 26 Jun 2005 18:16:14 GMT If you missed it see: http://users.adelphia.net/~n2pk/ I would like to build one so I asked on the use net http://groups.yahoo.com/group/N2PK-VNA/ if anyone had a parts kit. The response I received to date has been an offer for the PCB's and someone else looking for a parts kit. If there are a number of us, we would do best with a group buy. If you have the desire to build one and want to form a group let me know. Please note the delete.this. in my return email address. Richard W9PE Article: 93465 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: straydog Subject: Re: How big has Somerset, PA hamfest been in the past? Date: Sun, 26 Jun 2005 18:56:30 +0000 Message-ID: References: On Fri, 24 Jun 2005, Galen Watts wrote: > Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2005 08:25:27 -0400 > From: Galen Watts > To: straydog > Newsgroups: rec.radio.swap, rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors, > rec.radio.amateur.equipment, rec.radio.amateur.homebrew > Subject: Re: How big has Somerset, PA hamfest been in the past? > > straydog wrote: >> >> I think July 17, is the next Somerset PA hamfest and I've been thinking >> about going. Its a long drive from here (southern Delaware) and I was >> wondering how big and how good it has been in the past. Anyone got any >> recollections from the past? >> >> Art, w4pon > > They have pictures of last year's fest at > http://www.k3smt.org/hf2004/ > > -W8LNA > Thanks for the info... I had a look. W4PON Article: 93466 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: "Dale Parfitt" References: <42BEF1BF.7060805@ieee.org> Subject: Re: N2PK's Vector Network Analyzer Message-ID: <3ZIve.5060$xL1.169@trnddc08> Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2005 01:51:59 GMT "Richard" wrote in message news:42BEF1BF.7060805@ieee.org... > If you missed it see: > http://users.adelphia.net/~n2pk/ > > I would like to build one so I asked on the > use net > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/N2PK-VNA/ > if anyone had a parts kit. > > The response I received to date has been > an offer for the PCB's and someone else > looking for a parts kit. > > If there are a number of us, we would do best > with a group buy. If you have the desire to > build one and want to form a group let me know. > > Please note the delete.this. > in my return email address. > > Richard W9PE > Greg Ordy did both a kit offering and completed boards about a year ago. Not sure if he has more planned or not- it was a labor of love. Dale W4OP Article: 93467 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: Ken Scharf Subject: Re: Looking for 12V tube Rx project info References: <1119556572.530653.109680@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <3Rkve.6758$Bm.4442@bignews5.bellsouth.net> <1119748538.259718.166300@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> Message-ID: Date: Sun, 26 Jun 2005 22:29:46 -0400 LenAnderson@ieee.org wrote: > From: Ken Scharf on Jun 25, 6:26 pm > > >>LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote: >> >>>>I am looking for a nice schematic, and perhaps additional info, on a 12V >>>>(fil. & plate) tube superhet Rx; just something fairly simple for CW/SSB >>>>reception without bells and whistles, and preferably for 75M/40M reception. >> >>>> Can anyone point me to info on this? Thanks. >> >>> Setchell-Carlson managed to do it with loctal-base tubes running >>> off of a 24/28 VDC aircraft bus back in WW2 times. No dynamotor, >>> just that cute little box referred to as a "range receiver" or >>> BC-1206. > > >>> Don't remember what the IF (135 KHz) BW was, but, running with >>> a crystal-controlled converter ahead of it, the 195 to 500 KHz >>> tuning range could cover 75 or 40 meters no problem. A thought. >> >>I've got one of those in the junk box. I was thinking of converting >>it to solid state using cascaded (J310-311 and 2N2222) transistors, >>perhaps a differential set of J310's for the mixer and a single J310 >>for the oscillator. Not sure about the audio and detector stages yet. >>There was an article in an old '73 magazine on converting one of those >>sets to solid state and adding a crystal controled converter to receive >>40 meters. I've misplaced that issue though. > > > Converting a "Q5-er" from tubes to FETs would be rather easy. > No real need for the 2N2222s. Would have gobs of space left over > inside an already compact box. > > If the 135 KHz IF has an equivalent total Q of 100, the BW would > be about 1.3 KHz, not all that swift for CW and too shart for SSB. > > However, the BC-1206 tuning range of 195 to 500 KHz results in > an image at the converter input of 390 to 1000 KHz away from the > desired band. That's worse than the 910 KHz image of an old > 455 KHz IF. > > The BC-1206 tuning drive wouldn't be fine enough for today's > narrowband style of operating so that would need a fair amount > of mechanical rework. User's choice there. > > The linear-in-capacity rotation of the 3-gang variable is good > for an RX Noise Bridge having an expanded parallel-C range... > which is what I used them for. :-) > > LenAnderson@ieee.org > If I convert it to solid state, I'll probably use it for it's original purpose as an aircraft NDB receiver. Although I don't fly anymore, I have a private pilot's license and still like to listen in. Most NDB's just send their call signs in A2 morse, but some also have live weather reports as well. Only problem is that it only goes up to 400khz and IIRC some of the NDB's in this area are a bit higher in frequency, I could modifiy the tuning range a bit. Article: 93468 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: Ken Scharf Subject: Re: Looking for 12V tube Rx project info References: <1119556572.530653.109680@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <3Rkve.6758$Bm.4442@bignews5.bellsouth.net> <1119748538.259718.166300@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> Message-ID: Date: Sun, 26 Jun 2005 22:41:26 -0400 LenAnderson@ieee.org wrote: > From: Ken Scharf on Jun 25, 6:26 pm > > >>LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote: >> >>>>I am looking for a nice schematic, and perhaps additional info, on a 12V >>>>(fil. & plate) tube superhet Rx; just something fairly simple for CW/SSB >>>>reception without bells and whistles, and preferably for 75M/40M reception. >> >>>> Can anyone point me to info on this? Thanks. >> >>> Setchell-Carlson managed to do it with loctal-base tubes running >>> off of a 24/28 VDC aircraft bus back in WW2 times. No dynamotor, >>> just that cute little box referred to as a "range receiver" or >>> BC-1206. > > >>> Don't remember what the IF (135 KHz) BW was, but, running with >>> a crystal-controlled converter ahead of it, the 195 to 500 KHz >>> tuning range could cover 75 or 40 meters no problem. A thought. >> >>I've got one of those in the junk box. I was thinking of converting >>it to solid state using cascaded (J310-311 and 2N2222) transistors, >>perhaps a differential set of J310's for the mixer and a single J310 >>for the oscillator. Not sure about the audio and detector stages yet. >>There was an article in an old '73 magazine on converting one of those >>sets to solid state and adding a crystal controled converter to receive >>40 meters. I've misplaced that issue though. > > > Converting a "Q5-er" from tubes to FETs would be rather easy. > No real need for the 2N2222s. Would have gobs of space left over > inside an already compact box. This is the idea of a cascade fet-bipolar circuit. The drain of the fet drives the emitter of the bipolar and the bipolar's base is biased so that the base sits about half way up the power supply (two resistors). The fet is self biased with a source resistor for the desired current. The gain of this circuit is higher than a fet by itself, and the output impedance will be higher. ____ __ ->|_ \_/ | | > > If the 135 KHz IF has an equivalent total Q of 100, the BW would > be about 1.3 KHz, not all that swift for CW and too shart for SSB. > The AnArc-5 Q5'ers had 6 tuned circuits in their If but the '1206 only has 3 or 4. So it's BW might be a tad wider. The 1206 also has no bfo. > However, the BC-1206 tuning range of 195 to 500 KHz results in > an image at the converter input of 390 to 1000 KHz away from the > desired band. That's worse than the 910 KHz image of an old > 455 KHz IF. > The 1206's dial only goes up to 400khz, but it tunes past that. Maybe it goes to 420 or 450khz, I don't think it goes as high as 500khz. (so maybe I don't have to expand the range for my needs). > The BC-1206 tuning drive wouldn't be fine enough for today's > narrowband style of operating so that would need a fair amount > of mechanical rework. User's choice there. > The vernier drive isn't that bad. I could put an elcheapo 1.5" vernier dial to drive the tuning knob (if I modify the drive to remove the 180 degree stop). But I think all it really needs is a better bigger knob. > The linear-in-capacity rotation of the 3-gang variable is good > for an RX Noise Bridge having an expanded parallel-C range... > which is what I used them for. :-) > True, but the rig is just to cute to canabilze. > LenAnderson@ieee.org > Article: 93469 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: "obsidan ball" References: Subject: Re: Winlink and QRM Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2005 07:04:29 -0400 Message-ID: "Winlink 2000 QRM" wrote in message news:dkrqb1d6uq9t4eg1hdf6ue0nm6frp1gjq8@4ax.com... > Winlink and QRM - read info here: (much bs snipped) Not only is you petition date expired, you're beginning to sound alot like k1man, and that's bad. ;) Article: 93470 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: "Henry Kolesnik" Subject: rec.radio.amateur.antenna ?? Message-ID: Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2005 00:32:10 GMT I can make a post to the antenna group and wonder if anyone else has experienced the problem? tnx -- 73 Hank WD5JFR Article: 93471 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: "Henry Kolesnik" References: Subject: Re: rec.radio.amateur.antenna ?? Message-ID: Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2005 01:46:25 GMT Chuck I had a typo.. It should have said "I can't make a post to the antenna group... I didn't see my post to this group either but I see your response.. I wonder what is wrong with my newsgroups now that I can't see my own post? tnx Hank "Chuck Olson" wrote in message news:LMydndjnr4rBOV3fRVn-qQ@comcast.com... > > "Henry Kolesnik" wrote in message > news:eU0we.407$U61.382@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com... >> I can make a post to the antenna group and wonder if anyone else has >> experienced the problem? >> tnx >> >> -- >> >> 73 >> Hank WD5JFR >> > Congratulations, I can too. > > Article: 93472 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: drwxr-xr-x Subject: Re: rec.radio.amateur.antenna ?? Date: 28 Jun 2005 02:15:36 GMT Message-ID: References: On Tue, 28 Jun 2005 01:46:25 GMT, Henry Kolesnik wrote: > Chuck > I had a typo.. > It should have said "I can't make a post to the antenna group... > I didn't see my post to this group either but I see your response.. > I wonder what is wrong with my newsgroups now that I can't see my own post? > tnx > Hank Could it be: http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/usenet/brox.html or, could it be: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 ? Article: 93473 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: drwxr-xr-x Subject: Re: Lightning and sporadic-E Date: 28 Jun 2005 02:17:18 GMT Message-ID: References: On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 17:02:28 -0400, Johnson wrote: > This is the first paragraph of an article in the June 9th issue of Nature, > pages 799-801 -- the authors have demonstrated that lightning intensifies > the sporadic-E layer. Full article is available at your library. And this has _WHAT_ to do with homebrew? Article: 93482 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: Roy Lewallen Subject: Re: rec.radio.amateur.antenna ?? Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2005 14:21:07 -0700 Message-ID: <11c3fq6jaop8p12@corp.supernews.com> References: Chuck Olson wrote: > Sorry, Hank, > > I thought maybe you might be one of the current generation of young-uns who > don't seem to be able to understand the meaning of the contracted "do not" > or "can not", and I tried to poke a little fun in your direction. I know > it's not cool to criticize the statement "I could care less" when the > intended meaning is "couldn't care less", but sometimes I just can't control > myself. > . . . You just can't get too picky with a language in which "fat chance" and "slim chance" mean the same thing. Roy Lewallen, W7EL Article: 93483 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: "Dan/W4NTI" References: <11c2t5ar6q6ht38@corp.supernews.com> Subject: Re: Winlink and QRM Message-ID: <3Mjwe.13222$pa3.6933@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net> Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2005 22:00:31 GMT "Joel Kolstad" wrote in message news:11c2t5ar6q6ht38@corp.supernews.com... > "xpyttl" wrote in message > news:jwhve.6227$B_3.4079@fe05.lga... >> Very few, if any, digis actually listen first. > > Yes, with "Winlink over Pactor III" being a very noticeable offender here, > in > that it happens to be so popular at the moment. > >> It seems as if it would be very difficult to make these >> automated stations be friendly to other users. > > SCAMP intends to address this, and it is a very important problem to be > "fixed." There are many people who dislike the idea of using any amateur > radio bands for linking Internet data/e-mail/etc. at all (my hypothesis is > that they must not have been all that thrilled with packetmail either, but > the > Internet is the straw that's breaking their backs), but of those who > aren't > 100% opposed to the idea to begin with, Winlink not presently using busy > detectors is a legitimate complaint. > >> Both the pro and con in this argument are absolutely unwilling to listen >> to/believe the other side. > > There's a lot of this going on, to be sure, but the fact that SCAMP is > making > slow and steady progress suggests that there are some level heads that > will > (hopefully) prevail. > > ---Joel Kolstad > > Put me down in the unconvinced column. I am against ANY un-attented digital system in any segement other than that set aside for its SOLE use. Dan/W4NTI Article: 93484 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: Tim Wescott Subject: Re: 2400 Baud modem chip Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2005 15:03:19 -0700 Message-ID: <11c3i8rev777g6e@corp.supernews.com> References: Mebart wrote: > Can someone suggest a chip for a 2400 MSK modem (which is FSK at 2400 > baud with the frequencies being 2400 and 1200 Hz). I'd like a simple > chip that is suitable for a radio application. > > > I'd like something simple, like the old (discontinued) MX614 chip. > > > Thanks, > > > Art > Decoding MSK as FSK will give you way less than optimum bit error rate vs. noise. Unless the MSK is coming in on an FM channel you should consider decoding it as PSK. DsPIC + code -- that's a single-chip solution, and in current production! -- ------------------------------------------- Tim Wescott Wescott Design Services http://www.wescottdesign.com Article: 93485 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: "Heriberto" Subject: JOHNSON PART Nº 520-9 8-76. CRYSTAL? HELP !! Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2005 20:54:45 -0300 Message-ID: <42c1e0fa_1@x-privat.org> Hi: I have a part JoHnson Nro.520-9 8-76 it aparently a Crystal, but it has 3 pines, not 2 pines. Anyone how wich element it is? In top has write " T152.815" in the side "Johnson 520-9 8 -76 CAYM" Excusme my bad english- Very elemental-. Sorry Regards from Argentina Heriberto LU6DBU Article: 93486 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2005 20:29:45 -0400 From: -ex- Subject: Re: JOHNSON PART =?ISO-8859-1?Q?N=BA_520-9__8-76=2E___?= References: <42c1e0fa_1@x-privat.org> Message-ID: <7bbb0$42c1eb7c$4232bd1a$24351@COQUI.NET> Heriberto wrote: > Hi: > I have a part JoHnson Nro.520-9 8-76 it aparently a Crystal, but it > has 3 pines, not 2 pines. Anyone how wich element it is? > In top has write " T152.815" in the side "Johnson 520-9 8 -76 > CAYM" > Excusme my bad english- Very elemental-. Sorry > > Regards from Argentina > Heriberto > LU6DBU > > > > > It would seem to be a 152.815 TRANSMIT xtal...the fundamental freq of course would be something different. The third wire could be a ground for the case of the xtal. A mi me parece un cristal de 152.815 Mcs de salida para un transmisor. La frecuencia basica será algo diferente, depende en el modelo del equipo, su frec. IF, etc. El alambre tercero sería una conecxion aterrizada del casco del cristal. 8-76 mas probable significa la fecha de fabricacion. Article: 93487 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: "AAA RF Products" Subject: FA: 100 SMA Male Connectors for RG-58 coax Message-ID: Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2005 19:37:06 -0700 Please see: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=7285&item=7527262089&rd=1&ssPageName=WDVW web: www.aaarfproducts.com email: sales@aaarfproducts.com call: 949 481 3154 fax: 949 388 5448 mail: AAA RF Products, 949 Calle Amanecer, san Clemente, CA 92673 USA Article: 93488 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: hexter@blazenet.net (Gudmundur) Subject: Re: ch3 video to uhf upconversion Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 05:51:25 -0000 Message-ID: <11c4dmt8p5nncb4@corp.supernews.com> References: <1118551002.975808.12970@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> In article <1118551002.975808.12970@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>, eternalsquire@comcast.net says... > >Hi all, > >It's me again, attempting yet another mad science project, and I have >practically googled the subject to death before thinking of asking this >group for help: > >I am wanting to put video (preferably color but will settle for >grayscale) onto a UHF TV channel for inhouse use only. I am >considering doing it as follows: > >1) Convert output of a VGA card to composite video using resistive >combiner > (found a few on net). > And what magic resistive combiner makes VGA into NTSC??? There is no such thing. There are active models which do this, but if your VGA output is 640X480 or more, then NTSC will make the video suck. NTSC does not have the bandwidth. Yes you can take a properly modulated channel 3 signal, run it into a balanced mixer (well almost any mixer) and add your favorite local oscillator signal and get 2 signals in the uhf band. LO + ch3 and LO - ch3. Good luck. Here's looking at ya or at least the unviewable signal. >2) Place composite video on VHF channel 3 using a game modulator. > >3) Upconvert the video signal on VHF to UHF by with a local oscillator >whose frequence is the difference between the channels. I'd use an >active mixer circuit from the VHF/UHF part of the Handbook to do this. > >4) To test functionality, attempt to tune in using either an analog TV >receiver or a TV tuner card. > >Question is this: > >Is point 3, upconverting video from VHF to UHF, a generally workable >technique? > >Any other gotchas or pitfalls to my intended approach? > >Thanks in advance, > >The Eternal Squire > Article: 93489 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: hexter@blazenet.net (Gudmundur) Subject: Re: How to turn a radio into a time-bomb??? Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 05:54:27 -0000 Message-ID: <11c4dsjbq89ogf8@corp.supernews.com> References: <2d5631c0.0506082158.39fb1c20@posting.google.com> In article <2d5631c0.0506082158.39fb1c20@posting.google.com>, pie_garnishment@lycos.com says... > >I'm an assassin and have to kill a mafia boss.I want to blow him up >with a radio bomb. > >What do I need ? Better bait, and a more powerful trolling motor. Article: 93490 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 03:24:31 -0400 From: -ex- Subject: Re: How to turn a radio into a time-bomb??? References: <2d5631c0.0506082158.39fb1c20@posting.google.com> <11c4dsjbq89ogf8@corp.supernews.com> Message-ID: <66a1c$42c24cb3$4232bd3c$15514@COQUI.NET> Gudmundur wrote: > In article <2d5631c0.0506082158.39fb1c20@posting.google.com>, > pie_garnishment@lycos.com says... > >>I'm an assassin and have to kill a mafia boss.I want to blow him up >>with a radio bomb. >> >>What do I need ? > > > Better bait, and a more powerful trolling motor. Hey, doubtful he's still taking in comments on a month old de-trolled post that has been nixxed by every usenet server in the universe...except yours. You could have probably gotten a place of presence on his Website, maybe a photo?. No wait...that was also wacked a month ago. You weren't quick enough. Dammit. Don't respond to trolls unless you can do it with good comedy within 24 hours....unless you are like me and will reply to anything. -Bill Article: 93491 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: "Heytubeguy" Subject: FA:Last Day:McMurdo Silver 5C(RARE),Sig Shifter.. Message-ID: Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 13:05:48 GMT A working, very rare, very good condition, Mc Murdo Silver 5C + a Meissner Signal Shifter + a complete set of coils: see at : http://search.ebay.com/_W0QQfgtpZ1QQfrppZ25QQsassZheytubeguy Tnx for looing: heytubeguy Article: 93492 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: Tim Wescott Subject: Re: Tuned Preselectors - Looking for info Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 09:48:27 -0700 Message-ID: <11c5k6denqari6e@corp.supernews.com> References: <1120007234.663298.322430@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> dkelly42@cox.net wrote: > I think part of the reason for little information or enthusiam is the > diodes tendancy for IMD on strong signals. This increases the > complexity of the circuit. You might check with the ARRL and see if any > information is available from past QEX articles. I am researching the > same thing for a HF preselector. I am going to experiment with solid > state relays. Just a suggestion. Try the Vishay site > as(http://www.vishay.com/solid-state-relays/). I have found little info > on varactor tuned pre-selectors > Are those things specified for RF? I wouldn't touch them with a 10-foot pole if they aren't. If you're planning on tuning by switching elements in and out have you considered PIN diodes? If you have them either all the way on or all the way off they should be less susceptable to IMD than varactors. Furthermore, I understand that if you're cheap you can use the old 1N400x series of power diodes at HF (I haven't tried this, though). -- ------------------------------------------- Tim Wescott Wescott Design Services http://www.wescottdesign.com Article: 93493 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew Message-ID: <42C2D380.C3F9AEC6@earthlink.net> From: "Michael A. Terrell" Subject: Re: How to turn a radio into a time-bomb??? References: <2d5631c0.0506082158.39fb1c20@posting.google.com> <11c4dsjbq89ogf8@corp.supernews.com> <66a1c$42c24cb3$4232bd3c$15514@COQUI.NET> Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 17:00:00 GMT -ex- wrote: > > Don't respond to trolls unless you can do it with good comedy within 24 > hours....unless you are like me and will reply to anything. > > -Bill Or anybody! ;-) -- Former professional electron wrangler. Michael A. Terrell Central Florida Article: 93494 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew Message-ID: <42C2D464.1FF6734C@earthlink.net> From: "Michael A. Terrell" Subject: Re: ch3 video to uhf upconversion References: <1118551002.975808.12970@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <11c4dmt8p5nncb4@corp.supernews.com> Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 17:03:49 GMT Gudmundur wrote: > > In article <1118551002.975808.12970@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>, > eternalsquire@comcast.net says... > > > >Hi all, > > > >It's me again, attempting yet another mad science project, and I have > >practically googled the subject to death before thinking of asking this > >group for help: > > > >I am wanting to put video (preferably color but will settle for > >grayscale) onto a UHF TV channel for inhouse use only. I am > >considering doing it as follows: > > > >1) Convert output of a VGA card to composite video using resistive > >combiner > > (found a few on net). > > > > And what magic resistive combiner makes VGA into NTSC??? There is > no such thing. There are active models which do this, but if your > VGA output is 640X480 or more, then NTSC will make the video suck. > NTSC does not have the bandwidth. Yes you can take a properly modulated > channel 3 signal, run it into a balanced mixer (well almost any mixer) > and add your favorite local oscillator signal and get 2 signals in > the uhf band. LO + ch3 and LO - ch3. > > Good luck. Here's looking at ya or at least the unviewable signal. There are a number of video cards with a NTSC video output in the S-video format. I still have a couple I used in old PCs to drive a Commodore 1701 monitor to trick people. My Commodore 128 was connected to an IBM PC Junior monitor in CGA mode. The look on people's faces was worth the effort. -- Former professional electron wrangler. Michael A. Terrell Central Florida Article: 93495 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: Tim Wescott Subject: Re: 2400 Baud modem chip Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 13:58:54 -0700 Message-ID: <11c62s1h5tjob0e@corp.supernews.com> References: <11c3i8rev777g6e@corp.supernews.com> Mebart wrote: >>Decoding MSK as FSK will give you way less than optimum bit error rate >>vs. noise. Unless the MSK is coming in on an FM channel you should >>consider decoding it as PSK. >> > > > I did find a chip that does 2400 baud MSK. But, why should I use a PSK > method? > > PSK transmits one frequency, but inverts the amplitude of the > modulation to represent a 1 (or 0). > > PSK has an advantage in bandwidth, which has less noise due to the > narrower bandwidth. But, can a PSK modem actually decode MSK better? > > The ap is amplitude modulated VHF and I want the best weak signal > perfirmance I can get. The AM carrier wastes some transmit power and > has a disadvantage over a single sideband supressed carrier. But, it > is still many db better than a very wasteful fm mode. > > Anyway, I can't control the transmitters, so I'm stuck with AM. > > Having the carrier received with the sidebands establishes the center > frequency, so the tuning in the receiver is not quite so critical. AM > is really quite practical in this case. > > Can you tell me some more about decoding the signal as though it was > PSK? > > Thanks, > > Art It acts as offset quadrature PSK with the bits weighted to be 1/2 cosines instead of rectangular pulses. You decode it just the way I said. If you can find them the following two papers are quite useful. One of them (the one from the IEEE Comm. Soc. IIRC) is easy enough that you can just about design a demodulator straight from the paper. [1] R. De Buda: "Coherent Demodulation of Frequency Shift Keying with Low Deviation Ratio" -- IEEE Transactions, 1972, COM-20, pp. 429-435. [2] S. Pasupathy: "Minimum Shift Keying: A Spectrally Efficient Modulation" -- IEEE Communications Society Magazine, July 1979, Vol 17, #4, pp 14-22. And if you live in Worcester, MA, and you're wondering why I know: [3] Tim Wescott: "A DGPS Radiobeacon Receiver for Minimum Shift Keying with Soft Decision Capabilities" -- Master's Thesis, Worcester Polytechnic Institute, 1990. Stop by the library there -- I believe they'll have a copy. Here's a summary of the reasoning (taken from Chapter 3 of [3] -- I like the author). This is much better with pictures (the clearer paper of [1] and [2] uses pictures, as does [3]): The way that MSK works is to have FSK signal with a frequency shift that is exactly 1/2 the baud rate. Thus the phase shift from one bit time to the next is 90 degrees (1/4 of a circle). Now consider a quadrature, offset PSK with 1/2 cosine weighting (really, do). Thus even-numbered bits are transmitted as either positive-going or negative-going cosine waves multiplied by the carrier, each one lasting for exactly 1/2 cycle of the cosine, and the cosine having a frequency of (bit rate/4). Odd-numbered bits are transmitted as either positive-going or negative going _sine_ waves multiplied by the quadrature of the carrier. Take your bitstream, and make two signals a_i(t) and a_q(t). The signal a_i(t) is +1 if it's corresponding bit is 1, -1 if the bit is 0, and it only changes on boundaries of t = 2*k*T where T is the baud rate and k is the bit number. The signal a_q(t) is similar, but it changes on boundaries of t = (2*k+1)*T. Then the transmitted signal is equal to s(t) = a_i(t)*cos(pi*t/(2*T))*cos(2*pi*f*t) + a_q(t)*sin(pi*t/(2*T))*sin(2*pi*f*t) (1) where f is the carrier frequency (1200Hz in your case). If you grind through those high school trig identities (1) becomes: s(t) = cos(2*pi*f*t + b(t)*pi*t/(2*T) + phi(t)) (2) where at any given moment b(t) = a_i(t) * a_q(t) and phi(t) = (a_i(t) + a_q(t))*pi/2. Assuming I haven't messed up my expression for phi(t) (the value I gave for it in my thesis is clearly a typo, I'm guessing here) this is a phase continuous FSK signal who's frequency is the carrier + 1/4 the baud rate for two consecutive 1's or two consecutive 0's, and carrier - 1/4 baud for a 1 followed by a 0 or visa-versa. That's what MSK _is_, from a OQPSK sense, there's more about demodulating it -- let me know if you can't find the articles, or anything sensible on the web -- I'm thinking of scanning this stuff in... ------------------------------------------- Tim Wescott Wescott Design Services http://www.wescottdesign.com Article: 93496 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: "Heriberto" References: <42c1e0fa_1@x-privat.org> <7bbb0$42c1eb7c$4232bd1a$24351@COQUI.NET> Subject: Re: JOHNSON PART Nº 520-9 8-76. CRYSTAL? HELP !! Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 18:12:07 -0300 Message-ID: <42c30c58$1_1@x-privat.org> Thanks for your help Heriberto "-ex-" escribió en el mensaje news:7bbb0$42c1eb7c$4232bd1a$24351@COQUI.NET... > Heriberto wrote: > > > Hi: > > I have a part JoHnson Nro.520-9 8-76 it aparently a Crystal, but it > > has 3 pines, not 2 pines. Anyone how wich element it is? > > In top has write " T152.815" in the side "Johnson 520-9 8 -76 > > CAYM" > > Excusme my bad english- Very elemental-. Sorry > > > > Regards from Argentina > > Heriberto > > LU6DBU > > > > > > > > > > > It would seem to be a 152.815 TRANSMIT xtal...the fundamental freq of > course would be something different. The third wire could be a ground > for the case of the xtal. > > A mi me parece un cristal de 152.815 Mcs de salida para un transmisor. > La frecuencia basica será algo diferente, depende en el modelo del > equipo, su frec. IF, etc. El alambre tercero sería una conecxion > aterrizada del casco del cristal. 8-76 mas probable significa la fecha > de fabricacion. > Article: 93497 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: hexter@blazenet.net (Gudmundur) Subject: Re: ch3 video to uhf upconversion Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 23:25:30 -0000 Message-ID: <11c6bfaki39tt96@corp.supernews.com> References: <1118551002.975808.12970@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <11c4dmt8p5nncb4@corp.supernews.com> <42C2D464.1FF6734C@earthlink.net> In article <42C2D464.1FF6734C@earthlink.net>, mike.terrell@earthlink.net says... > >Gudmundur wrote: > There are a number of video cards with a NTSC video output in the >S-video format. I still have a couple I used in old PCs to drive a >Commodore 1701 monitor to trick people. My Commodore 128 was connected >to an IBM PC Junior monitor in CGA mode. The look on people's faces was >worth the effort. > Come to think of it, yes, my ATI all-in-wonder card can do that. It has the S-video jack. One of my oldies but moldies was Genius Video >from Kye. It plugged into the auxilliary connector of the SVGA card and allowed an NTSC compatible capture, with NTSC in/out RCA connectors. It has been so long since I have used them I totally forgot! >-- >Former professional electron wrangler. > >Michael A. Terrell >Central Florida Article: 93498 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: The Old Man Subject: Re: Winlink and QRM Message-ID: References: <11c2t5ar6q6ht38@corp.supernews.com> <3Mjwe.13222$pa3.6933@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net> Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 23:27:12 GMT On Tue, 28 Jun 2005 22:00:31 GMT, "Dan/W4NTI" wrote: >Put me down in the unconvinced column. I am against ANY un-attented digital >system in any segement other than that set aside for its SOLE use. But Dan THAT would make too much SENSE! (grin) The trouble is that the unattended robot train has already left the station. ARRL deliberately did this without carefully coinsidering the monster that they created and now that they persuaded the FCC to go along with it, the problem is too late to remedy. One can only hope that they will learn from this horrendous blunder. Looking at the latest proposal from this same committee, (segmenting by bandwidth only) I see only more stupidity being foisted on a majority by a small group in a smoke-filled room. Most of us are finding out what they did each time, only after the damage is done. WHERE is even the basic polling of radio amateurs? Did they ask amateurs in other countries that will be affected by this? Do 40m CW ops REALLY want to be HEMMED IN to the bottom 35 khZ? OK the rules don't SAY that will happen, but if you give the Mexican and VE SSB pests and the digital ops and MORE rope than they have already taken, 40m CW could become a thing of the past. YMMV The Old Man Article: 93499 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: Roy Lewallen Subject: Re: Winlink and QRM Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 18:22:31 -0700 Message-ID: <11c6iaql7nofha8@corp.supernews.com> References: <11c2t5ar6q6ht38@corp.supernews.com> <3Mjwe.13222$pa3.6933@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net> I assumed you contacted your ARRL division director to make your views known? That's the mechanism by which decisions they make get input from everyday amateurs, so those amateurs' views can be represented in the "smoke-filled room". After the ARRL's decision, how did your director explain to you how and why the decisions were made? Or do you just sit and grouse and not bother to make your views known to someone who can actually do something about it? P.S. If you identify yourself to your ARRL director only as "The Old Man", he's probably not going to pay much attention to you. And rightly so. Roy Lewallen, W7EL The Old Man wrote: > On Tue, 28 Jun 2005 22:00:31 GMT, "Dan/W4NTI" > wrote: > > >>Put me down in the unconvinced column. I am against ANY un-attented digital >>system in any segement other than that set aside for its SOLE use. > > > But Dan THAT would make too much SENSE! (grin) > > The trouble is that the unattended robot train has already left the > station. > ARRL deliberately did this without carefully coinsidering the monster > that they created and now that they persuaded the FCC to go along > with it, the problem is too late to remedy. > > One can only hope that they will learn from this horrendous blunder. > Looking at the latest proposal from this same committee, (segmenting > by bandwidth only) I see only more stupidity being foisted on a > majority by a small group in a smoke-filled room. > > Most of us are finding out what they did each time, only after the > damage is done. > > WHERE is even the basic polling of radio amateurs? > Did they ask amateurs in other countries that will be affected > by this? > > Do 40m CW ops REALLY want to be HEMMED IN to the bottom 35 khZ? > OK the rules don't SAY that will happen, but if you give the > Mexican and VE SSB pests and the digital ops and MORE rope than > they have already taken, 40m CW could become a thing of the > past. > > YMMV > > The Old Man > Article: 93500 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: "La Crevette" Subject: Data acquisition with Tektronix 492 ? Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 08:14:30 +0200 Message-ID: <42c38da9$0$12684$626a14ce@news.free.fr> Hi, it is possible to use the J104 accessory connector of my Tektronix 492, for data acquisition on a PC or Printer ? Thanks Alain Article: 93501 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: "La Crevette" References: <42c38da9$0$12684$626a14ce@news.free.fr> Subject: Re: Data acquisition with Tektronix 492 ? Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 10:14:55 +0200 Message-ID: <42c3a9df$0$9291$626a14ce@news.free.fr> Hi, Ok thank you for your information. Unfortunately, I do not have the GPIB port on my 492 (I do not have the suffix "P") Cordially Alain "John Miles" a écrit dans le message de news: MPG.1d2d39a6f93bf47a9896d6@news-central.giganews.com... > In article <42c38da9$0$12684$626a14ce@news.free.fr>, spirou@nospam.fr > says... >> Hi, >> it is possible to use the J104 accessory connector of my Tektronix 492, >> for >> data acquisition on a PC or Printer ? >> Thanks Alain >> >> >> > > No; that connector is useful only for hookup of a factory test rig. > Someone was selling an outboard CPU module on eBay a few months ago that > had a GPIB port; it went for big bucks, and it was the only one I've > seen in probably 7-8 years of watching the market. > > You will need to trade up to a P-suffix model for any type of data > acquisition or digital plotting. > > -- jm > > ------------------------------------------------------ > http://www.qsl.net/ke5fx > Note: My E-mail address has been altered to avoid spam > ------------------------------------------------------ Article: 93502 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: Winlink and QRM Date: 30 Jun 2005 08:57:50 -0400 Message-ID: References: <3Mjwe.13222$pa3.6933@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net> <11c6iaql7nofha8@corp.supernews.com> Roy Lewallen wrote: >I assumed you contacted your ARRL division director to make your views >known? That's the mechanism by which decisions they make get input from >everyday amateurs, so those amateurs' views can be represented in the >"smoke-filled room". >From my perspective, I can copy CW very well with a narrow filter, even with a large amount of QRM from a digital system. And, the digital system is probably not going to be able to deal with my interference half as well as I can deal with its. Since I am reading this on rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors, where it is crossposted, may I recommend the use of the audio filter on the Collins R-390A? It is frighteningly effective at getting rid of this trash. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." Article: 93503 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: "J. Reed" Subject: Re: FM conversion article in HR or QST or 73's Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 08:48:22 -0400 Message-ID: References: <1120058681.420519.312450@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> The most practical FM detector, for both fidelity and cost would be a phase-locked-loop chip... wrote in message news:1120058681.420519.312450@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com... > Hi All, > > Anyone recall or have a copy of the articles in Ham Radio, QST, or 73's > which has the 455KHz FM detector and the other information for Cb > conversion to 10m FM? > > I recall that Melco did some kits, I recall the article but can not > locate it in my library. > > I believe I saw a FM demodulator either HR or HR Horzion. > > thanks de KJ4UO. > Article: 93504 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: Eskay Subject: Re: FM conversion article in HR or QST or 73's References: <1120058681.420519.312450@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> Message-ID: <1us86mrvyksk3.ov15ybr1jesy.dlg@40tude.net> Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 13:23:45 GMT On 29 Jun 2005 08:24:41 -0700, pdrunen@aol.com wrote: > Hi All, > > Anyone recall or have a copy of the articles in Ham Radio, QST, or 73's > which has the 455KHz FM detector and the other information for Cb > conversion to 10m FM? > > I recall that Melco did some kits, I recall the article but can not > locate it in my library. > > I believe I saw a FM demodulator either HR or HR Horzion. > > thanks de KJ4UO. HR magazine for Februari 1983 had an article on CB to 10M FM conversion written by VE3AQN and VE3FIT, 7 pages in total. Will copy and E-mail to you on request. reply to siebk NO at Spam mycybernet.net remove the obvious and close up the spaces Article: 93505 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: et472@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Michael Black) Subject: Re: FM conversion article in HR or QST or 73's Date: 30 Jun 2005 13:37:56 GMT Message-ID: References: <1120058681.420519.312450@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> "J. Reed" (jhreed@chilitech.net) writes: > The most practical FM detector, for both fidelity and cost would be a > phase-locked-loop chip... > Well there was an article in QST by Bob Heil about converting a CB set to FM, I'm pretty sure it was in 1981. As I said here back in 1998: Converting a CB set to FM, once the conversion to the appropriate section of the 10M band has been accomplished, would consist of FM'ing the transmitter (I can't remember, but I assume the articles disable the AM modulation of the final amplifier, and feed some of the audio to the VCO), and adding an FM detector to the receiver. The two articles I can remember used IC detectors, which would add some IF amplification and limiting before the detector. One thing worth considering is that you can easily scrounge up a 455KHz FM IF strip from a cordless phone, or a 49MHz superhet walkie talkie. I wouldn't say fidelity is an issue here, given that it's narrow deviation we are talking about and that's not a problem to get a linear discrimator. YOu probably will get a better results with a full FM IF strip, and those are really easy to pull from various things, either just the IC (any old TV set will have one for the sound demodulator, at least in North America), or for that matter any FM "stereo receiver", or as a full IF strip. The advantage of the latter is that the discrimator is already aligned, and you get not only the demodulator IC but the needed IF transformers and FM-bandwidth filter(s). You can find such strips in cordless phones (I found some a few weeks ago that were for 2.4GHz, and they still had defineable IF strips with 10.7MHz and then 455KHz conversions), or those 49MHz walkie talkies, or older cellphones (which have the advantage of being cheap and don't have high integration in the ICs). I've never found a scanner in the garbage, but they too would have such IF strips. Even commercial 2-way equipment had such IF strips, and even recent ones may (though since I'm not familiar with recent equipment I don't know if they are still going down to 455KHz.) Michael VE2BVW > > wrote in message > news:1120058681.420519.312450@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com... >> Hi All, >> >> Anyone recall or have a copy of the articles in Ham Radio, QST, or 73's >> which has the 455KHz FM detector and the other information for Cb >> conversion to 10m FM? >> >> I recall that Melco did some kits, I recall the article but can not >> locate it in my library. >> >> I believe I saw a FM demodulator either HR or HR Horzion. >> >> thanks de KJ4UO. >> > > Article: 93506 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: "xpyttl" References: <11c2t5ar6q6ht38@corp.supernews.com> <3Mjwe.13222$pa3.6933@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net> <11c6iaql7nofha8@corp.supernews.com> Subject: Re: Winlink and QRM Message-ID: Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 10:25:09 -0400 "Roy Lewallen" wrote in message news:11c6iaql7nofha8@corp.supernews.com... >I assumed you contacted your ARRL division director to make your views >known? Good answer, Roy. But I'm pretty sure that "The Old Man" isn't a League member, or if he is, he takes no part in his Section. He said: >> Most of us are finding out what they did each time, only after the damage >> is done. Certainly I heard about it well before hand, and expressed some concern, in this case to our vice-director who happened to be dealing with this particular issue. I got some additional feedback which reduced, but did not eliminate, my concerns. I suspect if "The Old Man" was on the radar of his section or division folks as someone who was reasonably active, he would have had plenty of opportunity for input early on. Most directors send out emails about stuff like this to anyone in their division they suspect is active. Actually, if I recall there was even a mention of this happening in QST well ahead of time, but there is a lot of stuff in QST and something like this is easy to miss. Most folks, though, would rather bitch than take a few minutes to educate their representatives. Kind of a shame, really, that so many folks can spend so much energy bitching, but are unwilling to spend even a little energy to make amateur radio better. .. Article: 93507 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: "Joel Kolstad" Subject: Re: Winlink and QRM Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 08:16:28 -0700 Message-ID: <11c833vl4cc0a75@corp.supernews.com> References: <3Mjwe.13222$pa3.6933@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net> <11c6iaql7nofha8@corp.supernews.com> "Scott Dorsey" wrote in message news:da0q8e$1uf$1@panix2.panix.com... > And, the digital system is probably not going to be able to deal with > my interference half as well as I can deal with its. A frequency-hopping spread spectrum system with a reasonable amount of error correction won't be bothered much at all by iCW, as a matter of fact. :-) Article: 93508 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: Tim Wescott Subject: Re: 2400 Baud modem chip Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 08:46:37 -0700 Message-ID: <11c84v0dg1nmt9b@corp.supernews.com> References: <11c3i8rev777g6e@corp.supernews.com> <11c62s1h5tjob0e@corp.supernews.com> Mebart wrote: > OK, I can see it working better in principle, but, without software > writing, how do I do it??? > > I've never seen a PSK modem chip. I had a tough time finding an MSK > chip! It seems that software is the only presently accepted way to > create a psk decoder. I have googled for PSK MODEM, and found mentions > of it, but I cannot find a hardware solution. > > Do you know of a chip that does it (public domain)? > > Thanks. > > Art > > > Without software, no. When I built the radio for my thesis I started with an analog demodulator which occupied a 4.5x6 inch prototyping board -- I think it had 6-12 chips on it, and it had problems with thermal stability which is why the final version of the radio used a processor for the demodulation. I'm eyeing my thesis, and my brand-new scanner. I keep thinking "36 pages? NO!". If I get the spare time I'll scan this in but right now I have a shortage on both time and round tuits. You indicated on another one of your postings that you had found a suitable FSK chip -- this will work for you, but with far more noise sensitivity. But: if you started with that chip you could get a working device _now_; later on when you got all of the other bugs worked out you could circle around to the detector and upgrade it to something better. What's this for, by the way? -- ------------------------------------------- Tim Wescott Wescott Design Services http://www.wescottdesign.com Article: 93509 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: "JB" Subject: Re: Tuned Preselectors - Looking for info Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 08:42:33 -0700 Message-ID: References: <1120007234.663298.322430@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Dittos. Also most electrically tuned circuits suffer from lower Q and strays. It is hard enough to build hi Q cavities let alone try to emulate one. It might be more worth while to build a motorized cavity or electrical band switching of helicals, but who has room for all that? Many manufacturers have concentrated on making RF stages that can withstand very high levels without intermod. Of course none of this will help you if you are at a congested site with mixes in transmitters without circulators. At HF it is practical to build a bandswitched set of bandpass filters much like the ones found in some radios. Toroids can make them small enough, but again you need to be careful not to overload them. wrote in message news:1120007234.663298.322430@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > I think part of the reason for little information or enthusiam is the > diodes tendancy for IMD on strong signals. This increases the > complexity of the circuit. You might check with the ARRL and see if any > information is available from past QEX articles. I am researching the > same thing for a HF preselector. I am going to experiment with solid > state relays. Just a suggestion. Try the Vishay site > as(http://www.vishay.com/solid-state-relays/). I have found little info > on varactor tuned pre-selectors > Article: 93510 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: "JB" Subject: Re: sound override from 2 way radio into car radio speakers? Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 09:11:14 -0700 Message-ID: References: Switching on the speakers is risky. I have actually just paralleled the outputs of radios and stereos at the speaker with no problem as long as everything was DC blocked and the voltages present never exceed what the PA stages could handle. I also did this by building a mixer stereo preamp that would take input from earphone jacks from an HT and portable scanner into the car stereo after its own volume control. The source radios had their own volume control and the stereo had its volume control. All this so I could run in a pickup truck. I had no muting, but this could be done with COR switching of mute gates. An aftermarket add on may be more viable with stereos that have preamp outputs to various amps, but COR usually needs to be brought out of the radio. I do remember seeing such a thing but not lately. It was activated by RF sensing so only muted when transmitting. "Jerry" wrote in message news:FSnue.1455$_m1.1103@bignews6.bellsouth.net... > > "FrankW" wrote in message > news:yOmdncYRm6sAvSXfRVn-oQ@magma.ca... > > Anyone every heard of a device that would override > > the speaker of a stock stereo from a CB? > > Something that would cut out the sound from the > > stock car radio and put the CB sound into the stock speaker > > Thanks in advance > > How about a relay? > > J > > > > Article: 93511 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: "JB" Subject: Re: How to turn a radio into a time-bomb??? Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 09:12:59 -0700 Message-ID: References: <2d5631c0.0506082158.39fb1c20@posting.google.com> <11c4dsjbq89ogf8@corp.supernews.com> But how do you get him to sit on the radio? "Gudmundur" wrote in message news:11c4dsjbq89ogf8@corp.supernews.com... > In article <2d5631c0.0506082158.39fb1c20@posting.google.com>, > pie_garnishment@lycos.com says... > > > >I'm an assassin and have to kill a mafia boss.I want to blow him up > >with a radio bomb. > > > >What do I need ? > > Better bait, and a more powerful trolling motor. > Article: 93512 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: Winlink and QRM Date: 30 Jun 2005 12:31:46 -0400 Message-ID: References: <11c6iaql7nofha8@corp.supernews.com> <11c833vl4cc0a75@corp.supernews.com> Joel Kolstad wrote: >"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message >news:da0q8e$1uf$1@panix2.panix.com... >> And, the digital system is probably not going to be able to deal with >> my interference half as well as I can deal with its. > >A frequency-hopping spread spectrum system with a reasonable amount of error >correction won't be bothered much at all by iCW, as a matter of fact. :-) Yes, but a frequency hopping system should recognize that this individual channel is currently not good, and stop using it! --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." Article: 93513 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: Gary Morton Subject: Re: WTB "The VHF/UHF DX Book Edited by Ian White, G3SEK" References: <1120119724.168589.257130@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> Message-ID: Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 16:57:21 GMT MarkAren wrote: > Hi All, > > Anyone got a copy in good condition for sale ? > > Ian, got a spare copy ? > > Can pay using PayPal, US$ chq, UK pounds chq or NZ$ chq. I may have > some euros kicking around also. > > Thanks, > > Mark. > Try Waters and Stanton. I have just ordered a copy yesterday. I checked by phone that they had some copies in stock. The RSGB appear to have sold out and no longer have it available at radio rallies. 73 --Gary Article: 93514 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: "Joel Kolstad" Subject: Re: Winlink and QRM Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 13:25:27 -0700 Message-ID: <11c8l79pfoqh60b@corp.supernews.com> References: <11c6iaql7nofha8@corp.supernews.com> <11c833vl4cc0a75@corp.supernews.com> "Scott Dorsey" wrote in message news:da16pi$nvb$1@panix2.panix.com... > Joel Kolstad wrote: > >A frequency-hopping spread spectrum system with a reasonable amount of error > >correction won't be bothered much at all by iCW, as a matter of fact. :-) > Yes, but a frequency hopping system should recognize that this individual > channel is currently not good, and stop using it! If it can, certainly... but it's the standard "near-far" problem in that you may be able to hear the interferer (the FHSS system) but he can't hear you. :-( Article: 93515 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: "Dale Parfitt" Subject: CB -->6M Conversion? Message-ID: Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 21:23:03 GMT After seeing the post re CB to 10M FM conversion I got to wondering if anyone is aware of a conversion for the Hy Gain 02A boards to 6M AM or FM (Melco and many others used this board for the 10M FM conversion). I still have some boards left. I built many of the Melco kits years back and another from HR or 73 that has 10M digital readout, noise squelch and repeater splits- still have the rig and in use. Dale W4OP Article: 93516 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: Tim Wescott Subject: Re: CB -->6M Conversion? Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 15:13:54 -0700 Message-ID: <11c8rl13ppop7e6@corp.supernews.com> References: Dale Parfitt wrote: > After seeing the post re CB to 10M FM conversion I got to wondering if > anyone is aware of a conversion for the Hy Gain 02A boards to 6M AM or FM > (Melco and many others used this board for the 10M FM conversion). I still > have some boards left. > I built many of the Melco kits years back and another from HR or 73 that > has 10M digital readout, noise squelch and repeater splits- still have the > rig and in use. > > Dale W4OP > > That would be quite a bit more difficult -- Going from 27MHz CB to 29MHz amatuer radio bands is just a 10% frequency change. Going from 27MHz to 50MHz is almost a doubling, and with older components it may require not just different component values but even different circuit topologies to make it successful. But it would be interesting if anyone made it work... -- ------------------------------------------- Tim Wescott Wescott Design Services http://www.wescottdesign.com Article: 93517 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: "Clinton" Subject: Yaesu FT-8800R Message-ID: Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 22:32:24 GMT Does anyone have a schematic for the FT-8800R computer interface cable? Thanks VE7KNL --- Remove _nospam_ to reply via email. Article: 93518 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: et472@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Michael Black) Subject: Re: CB -->6M Conversion? Date: 30 Jun 2005 23:38:45 GMT Message-ID: References: "Dale Parfitt" (par@parelectronics.com) writes: > After seeing the post re CB to 10M FM conversion I got to wondering if > anyone is aware of a conversion for the Hy Gain 02A boards to 6M AM or FM > (Melco and many others used this board for the 10M FM conversion). I still > have some boards left. > I built many of the Melco kits years back and another from HR or 73 that > has 10M digital readout, noise squelch and repeater splits- still have the > rig and in use. > > Dale W4OP > > Yes, there was such a conversion article in "73", I want to say 1982, but it might have been a year or two later. That's as specific as I can get. The premise was that since the CB sets had high side injection, the image was close to the 6meter band. YOu had to modify the output circuits of the transmitter, and the front end of the receiver, but the PLL was almost there. A shift of a few MHz, if I recall, and the solution I'm picturing is a putting in a crystal oscillator to mix the VCO down to frequency where the variable divider kicks in. (As standard, again from memory, the 10.240MHz oscillator that is divided down to be the reference in the PLL is normally used in this premixer.) I seem to recall some years back finding a bibliography of all those CB to ham conversion articles somewhere on the internet. It might be worth doing some searching to narrow down exactly when that 6M conversion article was. Michael VE2BVW Article: 93519 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: lager-no-spam@cotse.net.invalid Subject: Re: Winlink and QRM Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 22:43:15 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: References: <11c2t5ar6q6ht38@corp.supernews.com> <3Mjwe.13222$pa3.6933@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net> Yet another one with an internet purchased diploma. Dr Ace... hahaha The redneck from Bloomington. What happened with you and Chris (N9GJC) anyway? Did he get sick of your lies to TRACY?? Everyone does know that your real name is Tracy dont they??? Check into this everyone. His name is NOT Ace, it is Tracy. But then again, if my parents gave me a name that was meant for a woman, I guess I would go by something else too. WH2T is another KK9L. You all know him. They guy from Danville Indiana that thinks he has a Ph.D too. WH2T the wannabe Ph.D and Jay Wright KK9L the other wannabe Ph.D that likes little boys and making illegal substances in Clayton Indiana. What is wrong with you people? Has ham radio really gotten this bad? Dan/W4NTI wrote: > "Joel Kolstad" wrote in message > news:11c2t5ar6q6ht38@corp.supernews.com... > > "xpyttl" wrote in message > > news:jwhve.6227$B_3.4079@fe05.lga... > >> Very few, if any, digis actually listen first. > > > > Yes, with "Winlink over Pactor III" being a very noticeable offender here, > > in > > that it happens to be so popular at the moment. > > > >> It seems as if it would be very difficult to make these > >> automated stations be friendly to other users. > > > > SCAMP intends to address this, and it is a very important problem to be > > "fixed." There are many people who dislike the idea of using any amateur > > radio bands for linking Internet data/e-mail/etc. at all (my hypothesis is > > that they must not have been all that thrilled with packetmail either, but > > the > > Internet is the straw that's breaking their backs), but of those who > > aren't > > 100% opposed to the idea to begin with, Winlink not presently using busy > > detectors is a legitimate complaint. > > > >> Both the pro and con in this argument are absolutely unwilling to listen > >> to/believe the other side. > > > > There's a lot of this going on, to be sure, but the fact that SCAMP is > > making > > slow and steady progress suggests that there are some level heads that > > will > > (hopefully) prevail. > > > > ---Joel Kolstad > > > > > Put me down in the unconvinced column. I am against ANY un-attented digital > system in any segement other than that set aside for its SOLE use. > > Dan/W4NTI Article: 93520 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew Message-ID: Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 22:44:55 -0400 (EDT) References: <11c2t5ar6q6ht38@corp.supernews.com> <3Mjwe.13222$pa3.6933@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net> Subject: Re: Winlink and QRM From: Yet another one with an internet purchased diploma. Dr Ace... hahaha The redneck from Bloomington. What happened with you and Chris (N9GJC) anyway? Did he get sick of your lies to TRACY?? Everyone does know that your real name is Tracy dont they??? Check into this everyone. His name is NOT Ace, it is Tracy. But then again, if my parents gave me a name that was meant for a woman, I guess I would go by something else too. WH2T is another KK9L. You all know him. They guy from Danville Indiana that thinks he has a Ph.D too. WH2T the wannabe Ph.D and Jay Wright KK9L the other wannabe Ph.D that likes little boys and making illegal substances in Clayton Indiana. What is wrong with you people? Has ham radio really gotten this bad???????????? Dan/W4NTI wrote: > "Joel Kolstad" wrote in message > news:11c2t5ar6q6ht38@corp.supernews.com... > > "xpyttl" wrote in message > > news:jwhve.6227$B_3.4079@fe05.lga... > >> Very few, if any, digis actually listen first. > > > > Yes, with "Winlink over Pactor III" being a very noticeable offender here, > > in > > that it happens to be so popular at the moment. > > > >> It seems as if it would be very difficult to make these > >> automated stations be friendly to other users. > > > > SCAMP intends to address this, and it is a very important problem to be > > "fixed." There are many people who dislike the idea of using any amateur > > radio bands for linking Internet data/e-mail/etc. at all (my hypothesis is > > that they must not have been all that thrilled with packetmail either, but > > the > > Internet is the straw that's breaking their backs), but of those who > > aren't > > 100% opposed to the idea to begin with, Winlink not presently using busy > > detectors is a legitimate complaint. > > > >> Both the pro and con in this argument are absolutely unwilling to listen > >> to/believe the other side. > > > > There's a lot of this going on, to be sure, but the fact that SCAMP is > > making > > slow and steady progress suggests that there are some level heads that > > will > > (hopefully) prevail. > > > > ---Joel Kolstad > > > > > Put me down in the unconvinced column. I am against ANY un-attented digital > system in any segement other than that set aside for its SOLE use. > > Dan/W4NTI Article: 93521 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: Eskay Subject: Re: CB -->6M Conversion? References: Message-ID: <1gly5eje3e4ru$.1rrx94b7qo00a.dlg@40tude.net> Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2005 13:11:57 GMT On Thu, 30 Jun 2005 21:23:03 GMT, Dale Parfitt wrote: > After seeing the post re CB to 10M FM conversion I got to wondering if > anyone is aware of a conversion for the Hy Gain 02A boards to 6M AM or FM > (Melco and many others used this board for the 10M FM conversion). I still > have some boards left. > I built many of the Melco kits years back and another from HR or 73 that > has 10M digital readout, noise squelch and repeater splits- still have the > rig and in use. > > Dale W4OP James Patterson KB5LF had an article in 73 Mag back in February 1985. It also used the HY-Gain boards. 5 pages and I will scan on request. See my E-mail address under the CB to 10 listing. 73 de VE3JUA Article: 93522 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew Date: Sat, 02 Jul 2005 00:26:24 +1000 From: atec Subject: Re: CB -->6M Conversion? References: <1gly5eje3e4ru$.1rrx94b7qo00a.dlg@40tude.net> Message-ID: <42c55237$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au> Eskay wrote: > On Thu, 30 Jun 2005 21:23:03 GMT, Dale Parfitt wrote: > > >>After seeing the post re CB to 10M FM conversion I got to wondering if >>anyone is aware of a conversion for the Hy Gain 02A boards to 6M AM or FM >>(Melco and many others used this board for the 10M FM conversion). I still >>have some boards left. >>I built many of the Melco kits years back and another from HR or 73 that >>has 10M digital readout, noise squelch and repeater splits- still have the >>rig and in use. >> >>Dale W4OP > > > James Patterson KB5LF had an article in 73 Mag back in February 1985. > It also used the HY-Gain boards. > 5 pages and I will scan on request. > See my E-mail address under the CB to 10 listing. > 73 de VE3JUA http://members.tripod.com/~Malzev/radiodoc/sixmeter.htm