20070123.ba v03_n999.bam.20070123 >From ???@??? Tue Jan 23 15:36:10 2007 -0600 Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 21:35:10 GMT From: Old Tube Radios To: Old Tube Radios Subject: BOATANCHORS digest 3999 Message-Id: <20070123213515.B476D3183CB@srvr1.theporch.com> BOATANCHORS Digest 3999 Topics covered in this issue include: 1) Mystery cable set by stuck in 50s 2) Re: [Milsurplus] QRMing the MilRadio Net by "Tom Rauch" 3) Re: [Milsurplus] QRMing the MilRadio Net by "Sandy W5TVW" 4) Re: 3685 Kc by "Sandy W5TVW" 5) Re: 3685 Kc by "Tom Rauch" 6) Re: 3685 Kc by "WA3GIN @ Arlington County, VA" 7) Re: 3685 Kc by 8) Re: [Milsurplus] QRMing the MilRadio Net by john 9) Re: [Milsurplus] QRMing the MilRadio Net by Al Klase 10) Re: 3685 Kc by "Arden Allen" 11) Re: 3685 Kc by "Tom Rauch" 12) Re: [Milsurplus] QRMing the MilRadio Net by "Sandy W5TVW" 13) RE: 3685 Kc by "WA3GIN in Alex. City, VA" 14) Re: [Milsurplus] QRMing the MilRadio Net by "Marty Reynolds' debris field" 15) Re: 3685 Kc by "Arden Allen" 16) Prosigns in Use in 1912?? by "David Stinson" 17) Re: Prosigns in Use in 1912?? by Neal McEwen 18) Wanted - WRL Globe Trotter xmtr. by "Art Lebermann" 19) Re: Prosigns in Use in 1912? by "David Stinson" ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2007 12:12:44 -0500 (EST) From: stuck in 50s Message-Id: <200701221712.l0MHCi0a019633@fracas.netboobie.org> To: Old Tube Radios Subject: Mystery cable set See it now @ http://qsl.asti.net/SURP.05/P1220125.JPG Guy got 'em as BC-375. Not. They sure don't mate with ww-2 english stuff. & whoever saw such engineering in plugs for a ham job? tnx for the noodling, Marty the 'rm ------------------------------ Message-ID: <022b01c73e4c$6913a440$640fa8c0@radioroom> From: "Tom Rauch" To: Old Tube Radios Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] QRMing the MilRadio Net Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2007 12:40:20 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >> > I know its contrary to the group opnion but I have to >> > wonder how much of >> > the QRM is deliberate?... > > Maybe the Irag Study Group could offer some helpful > advice...... :-( This all relates to people thinking they own what they don't and can't own. Other than bandplans and widely recognized calling frequencies that sort out incompatible modes or operating to prevent chaos, no one owns any frequency. It isn't homesteading. What is it with the 75 meter mentality?? It amazes me that will all the new room, the same bad attitudes that ruined 75 meters in the past have moved to the new segment. Outside of busting a bandplan or operating an illegal mode for the spectrum or an emergency, no one has priority based on what happened 24 hours or even 2.4 minutes before. VFO's work. Use 'em and life can be fun again. Whoever is operating first, if the operation isn't a violation of a bandplan or rule, has priority. 73 Tom ------------------------------ Message-ID: <005f01c73e61$b0db9980$88a0cdd1@gateway> From: "Sandy W5TVW" To: Old Tube Radios Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] QRMing the MilRadio Net Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2007 14:12:48 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit This feud has been going on for MANY years! The BIG problem is a handful of "anal orifices" who will insist on breaking up what they consider to be a menace to "their" SSB operation and "their" frequencies. I sold a Viking 500 transmitter I searched for a while to find and worked on like mad to get restored and going again. Instead of having fun, I (along with others) was accosted by these idiots who insisted on "flat-topping" us off the air. I got very tired of this after a long time and decided to give up "phone" operation almost entirely. (Operation here is 98% CW and 1.99% PSK, the other 0.001% SSB or AM 'phone!) This about 20 years ago! Along with this group of "QRMers" we have another "enlightened" group of SSBers and a few AMers, who are insisting on "hi-fidelity broadcast quality" audio. You may have heard their ultra wide signals on the bands? The "Anti AM" wannabe cops have not squealed like pigs at the antics of this bunch. Why not? I would say keep detailed records of WHO is interfering with the AM group on 3685, times, band conditions, etc. and submit your findings to the FCC repeatedly until they take notice of what is going on. Perhaps a ham lawyer or two can help with some "pro-bono" work to squelch this bunch of morons. My 2 pennies worth. It won't stop until someone applies some legal force to these dumbunnies. 73, Sandy W5TVW ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Stinson" To: "Old Tube Radios" Sent: Monday, January 22, 2007 8:58 AM Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] QRMing the MilRadio Net > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Ray Fantini" > Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] QRMing the MilRadio Net > > >> I know its contrary to the group opnion but I have to wonder how much of >> the QRM is deliberate?... > > Mr. Hollingsworth had to get involved with the 3878 barbarians > when they made it plain they were going to run-off anyone on AM. > Don't know how much good it did; they're still there... > > Recently, I helped circulate an email calling on Extra > ops to come down to 3685- then in the middle of > 50 KCs of quiet spectrum- to start an AM calling freq > away from the QRM and antagonisms of 3880. > Right after the email was circulated, a group of half > a dozen SSB ops set up shop on 3686.5 KC > (a fractional freq in the middle of 50 KC of quiet??), > blatantly saying they had seen the email and that they > were going to "discourage the so-called window" > by parking there and complaining to Mr. Hollingsworth > about "deliberate AM interference." > They've already "turned me in," they claim. > > Here is something typical: > "...Have you got that new 4-1000 amp going yet?" > "No, but I'm working on it." > "Well, you need to make that a priority to help us > discourage the proclaimed (AM) window..." > > Two nights ago, I listened at 3685 for ten or 15 minutes, hearing > no one. I began to call "CQ." After a few minutes, > the whole group of SSB operators showed-up at once > and I heard: > > "... Yeah, he's down there. Have you got your amp on?" > "I'm warming it up now...." > "Helllllllo! Nothing like 500 watts to clear the band out." > > Well, it certainly cleared me out. > > So is this "deliberate?" > You bet it is. > Most of the SSB ops in the "gentleman's agreement" > window know what they're doing and > they either don't give a damn, or actively seek a conflict. > > I don't understand, especially with the band expansion, > why some people can't allow those with other interests > just a little room to live. I don't see AM ops on 3920, > or 14.335, though my license certainly gives me the right. > I don't want to be so inconsiderate; I want to get along > and give them room for their interests and ask only > that they give me the same consideration. > > But my biggest frustration is the AM ops! > I understand the immoral, selfish SSB barbarians. > But most AM ops go hide; they'd rather roll over > and play dead, hoping it will all go away or > that "Riley will handle it." WRONG. > I don't want a war, nor do I want to > "let Riley handle it." I want people to politely but > firmly insist that they have a right to operate > and get active (and strong) enough to stop this mess. > > If we roll over and hide from these school-yard bullies, > we can expect the same thing cowards always get. > > D.S. > > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.17.5/645 - Release Date: 1/22/2007 > 4:10 PM > > ------------------------------ Message-ID: <00a001c73e62$3d0f04a0$88a0cdd1@gateway> From: "Sandy W5TVW" To: Old Tube Radios Subject: Re: 3685 Kc Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2007 14:16:43 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Nope. Don't think a "QRM WAR" is the way to go. People tried that on 3880 over 20 years ago. It didn't work. BEST plan is to monitor, list what's going on, complain to FCC, if no action taken then get lawyers involved. It has to be something where these "nuts" lose licenses or money. 73, Sandy W5TVW ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ed Sieb" To: "Old Tube Radios" Sent: Monday, January 22, 2007 10:11 AM Subject: RE: 3685 Kc > Let them slawbukits squat all they want. Once we're done with them they'll > be squatting alright! I possess several high-power AM rigs, 1000W out, > and > my medium power rig is a measly pair of 813's modulated by 810's. I can > get on with Al, VE3AJM, who almost never runs less than 750W output, (a > GPT750, or an FRT501 running 4-400's). Let's see what the slawbukits do > with that! > > Ed, VA3ES > > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.17.5/645 - Release Date: 1/22/2007 > 4:10 PM > > ------------------------------ Message-ID: <02d501c73e63$edd0ff90$640fa8c0@radioroom> From: "Tom Rauch" To: Old Tube Radios Subject: Re: 3685 Kc Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2007 15:28:39 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=response Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Nope. Don't think a "QRM WAR" is the way to go. People > tried that on 3880 over 20 years ago. It didn't work. > BEST plan is to monitor, list what's going on, complain to > FCC, if no action taken then get lawyers involved. It has > to be something where these "nuts" lose licenses or money. That's the common sense approach and the right thing to do. Hollingsworth will get all over the people causing the problem. Just tape it, especially any plans to intentionally cause a problem, and send it to him. Follow the rules and it is very easy to win. 73 Tom ------------------------------ Message-ID: <45B520F1.6000702@erols.com> Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2007 15:39:13 -0500 From: "WA3GIN @ Arlington County, VA" MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Old Tube Radios CC: Old Tube Radios Subject: Re: 3685 Kc Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Yes, and now there is a great recording tool that is free and produces excellent MP3 or WAV files. Go to "http://audacity.sourceforge.net/" and download the free software. This program digitally records broadcast quality audio... 73, dave wa3gin ------------------------------ From: To: Old Tube Radios Subject: Re: 3685 Kc Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2007 14:57:55 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20070122205755.QISL28994.ibm56aec.bellsouth.net@mail.bellsouth.net> I so agree even though one at times has to bit his lip. I do know we can not get into a 'stand up you know what contest' with those that choose to do us harm. I believe Mr Hollingsworth eluded to the issue at Dayton this past year. If does though seem in this world that these types of brats don't go away, they just grow up physically and become card carrying jerks. And some of them are politicians. In thinking about this ie jerks, do any of you know lady jerks? I don't. I refer to them with another term. So it must be gender thing. Maybe hormone replacement is not such a bad idea for these fellows who evidently don't have their high octane levels of such from their youth anymore. You know what I mean? Lets hang in there, all of us. Yep, record it. Best way. Robert W4RL Pensacola > > From: "Tom Rauch" > Date: 2007/01/22 Mon PM 02:28:39 CST > To: Old Tube Radios > Subject: Re: 3685 Kc > > > Nope. Don't think a "QRM WAR" is the way to go. People > > tried that on 3880 over 20 years ago. It didn't work. > > BEST plan is to monitor, list what's going on, complain to > > FCC, if no action taken then get lawyers involved. It has > > to be something where these "nuts" lose licenses or money. > > That's the common sense approach and the right thing to do. > > Hollingsworth will get all over the people causing the > problem. Just tape it, especially any plans to intentionally > cause a problem, and send it to him. > > Follow the rules and it is very easy to win. > > 73 Tom > > ------------------------------ Message-Id: <6.2.1.2.2.20070122171751.034af8e0@pop-server.nc.rr.com> Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2007 17:18:23 -0500 To: Old Tube Radios From: john Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] QRMing the MilRadio Net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed We meed to understand WHY, they want to QRM, then maybe we can all get along! At 11:40 AM 1/22/2007, Arden Allen wrote: > > > I know its contrary to the group opnion but I have to wonder how much of > > > the QRM is deliberate?... > >Maybe the Irag Study Group could offer some helpful advice...... :-( > >Arden Allen >KB6NAX ------------------------------ Message-ID: <45B54379.40901@ar88.net> Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2007 18:06:33 -0500 From: Al Klase MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Old Tube Radios CC: Old Tube Radios Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] QRMing the MilRadio Net Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit john wrote: > > We meed to understand WHY, they want to QRM, then maybe we can all get > along! > I do wish the world were that simple and straight forward. I fear, however that the problem is deeply Freudian. These guys spend entirely too much of their lives impersonating the south end of a horse heading north. We all take our turn behaving that way, but most of us try to minimize our a**-hole behavior. My twenty-year take on 75-meter SSB is "Beam me up, Scotty. There's no intelligent life here!" I agree with those that suggest standing up for our privilege to operate AM anywhere in the phone bands, and document and report gross misbehavior to the FCC. I must admit that I previously bought into the gentlemen agreement approach because of AM's use of twice the bandwidth and extra QRM caused by the carrier, but that only works if there are gentlemen on both sides. But, let's not sink to their level. 73, Al -- Al Klase - N3FRQ Flemington, NJ http://www.skywaves.ar88.net/ ------------------------------ Message-ID: <004401c73e7a$ee0166f0$7fe47443@KB6NAX> From: "Arden Allen" To: Old Tube Radios Subject: Re: 3685 Kc Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2007 15:08:13 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit If folks really want to get the trouble makers off of 75 then I suggest the following: Just like security cameras record date and time what is needed is audio recordings with a time, date and listenig frequency code track being recorded simultaneously. Submitting such evidence along with observer's affidavits to the FCC and other legal avenues will get results if at all possible. But my bet is on the side of the synics. Most hams know how to operate a microphone and little else. What is needed is a project to equip every motivated operator with a shack compatible recording device that records on common media, like cassette tape or CDR, the simultaneous audio and time/date/frequency stamp. Some digital electronics and computer savy needed. Anyone have a better way to bring the mavericks to account? Arden Allen KB6NAX ------------------------------ Message-ID: <034601c73e82$324f0ae0$640fa8c0@radioroom> From: "Tom Rauch" To: Old Tube Radios Subject: Re: 3685 Kc Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2007 19:05:19 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > If folks really want to get the trouble makers off of 75 > then I suggest the > following: Just like security cameras record date and > time what is needed > is audio recordings with a time, date and listenig > frequency code track > being recorded simultaneously. Submitting such evidence > along with > observer's affidavits to the FCC and other legal avenues > will get results if > at all possible. But my bet is on the side of the synics. > Most hams know > how to operate a microphone and little else. There were some troublemakers from Texas who operated SSB down in the CW area of 160 "just because they could". I made recordings of them on another frequency when they stupidly were actually on the air laughing about QRM'ing people, plotting to move, and bragging about the problems they would cause. That, coupled with the fact they were violating a bandplan when they had lots of room elsewhere to operate that did not violate a bandplan, got them busted. A long term problem went away. The same thing would work for AM vs. SSB but we should all be aware if we stir the pot intentionally it could backfire. The best way to approach anything like this is to do the right thing and not encourage a fight or jamming back. Threats of "we should do this to them" could very easily backfire. ------------------------------ Message-ID: <002c01c73e89$4a5dc750$da9ecdd1@gateway> From: "Sandy W5TVW" To: Old Tube Radios Cc: "Old Tube Radios" Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] QRMing the MilRadio Net Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2007 18:56:15 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=response Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Amen to this! These guys do this for the same reason that the Spammers create SPAM: because they can! Maybe a muted attempt to do the same thing in a milder way than the absolutely insane Islamic suicide bombers. It's a weird world out there. 73, Sandy W5TVW ----- Original Message ----- From: "Al Klase" To: "Old Tube Radios" Cc: "Old Tube Radios" Sent: Monday, January 22, 2007 5:06 PM Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] QRMing the MilRadio Net > john wrote: >> >> We meed to understand WHY, they want to QRM, then maybe we can all get >> along! >> > I do wish the world were that simple and straight forward. I fear, > however that the problem is deeply Freudian. These guys spend entirely > too much of their lives impersonating the south end of a horse heading > north. We all take our turn behaving that way, but most of us try to > minimize our a**-hole behavior. My twenty-year take on 75-meter SSB is > "Beam me up, Scotty. There's no intelligent life here!" > > I agree with those that suggest standing up for our privilege to operate > AM anywhere in the phone bands, and document and report gross misbehavior > to the FCC. I must admit that I previously bought into the gentlemen > agreement approach because of AM's use of twice the bandwidth and extra > QRM caused by the carrier, but that only works if there are gentlemen on > both sides. > > But, let's not sink to their level. > > 73, > Al > > -- > Al Klase - N3FRQ > Flemington, NJ > http://www.skywaves.ar88.net/ > > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.17.5/645 - Release Date: 1/22/2007 > 4:10 PM > > ------------------------------ From: "WA3GIN in Alex. City, VA" To: Old Tube Radios Subject: RE: 3685 Kc Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2007 19:56:10 -0500 Message-ID: <000b01c73e89$490bf2f0$6301a8c0@TS480WA3GIN> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable These days you can record hours of audio on a flash memory stick or = 100GIG Hard Drive...initially record five minutes of the freq. you plan to use...then call your CQ, then have your QSO, all along recording. If = the QRM starts it will be abundantly clear who the perpetrators are and = you'll make it very easy for RH to perform his job. If you can't record or = don't have the PC to do it, get a buddy to do if for you... 73, dave wa3gin -----Original Message----- From: owner-boatanchors@theporch.com = [mailto:owner-boatanchors@theporch.com] On Behalf Of Tom Rauch Sent: Monday, January 22, 2007 7:05 PM To: Old Tube Radios Subject: Re: 3685 Kc > If folks really want to get the trouble makers off of 75=20 > then I suggest the > following: =20 ------------------------------ Message-ID: <2217.66.56.28.127.1169536817.squirrel@fracas.netboobie.org> Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 02:20:17 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] QRMing the MilRadio Net From: "Marty Reynolds' debris field" To: Old Tube Radios Cc: "Old Tube Radios" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit I swore off this thread. But just caved in. First I gotta say we work lotsa AM in these Atlanta parts. Southern gentlemen maybe? There's so much AM rolling in from the midwest we've had to move our rendesvous down a good bit fm the usual 3885 (test xtal freq. in every BC-611 geico-man cell-phone) But our usual haunt is a weekend SSB parking lot & we move some more - shared freq. theorem Now polite mutual inter-mode respect wasn't the case a couple of years past. In a way the following remedies are "sinking to their level," but the devil made me write this. Here comes three completely legit teasing MOs. 1. Neighboring AM stations held lengthy qsos noting they were running jurassic little mobiles like Elmacs & Harvey Wells. Four by one SSB lads cudn't break up a Johnson 500 & a Globe King in qso 2 blocks apart. 2. Run AM but listen USB on 75. & pretend there's no barbarians at the gate. Not too bad 3. Last have qsos on ur reconstructed 50s stations duplexed with conferenced cell phones. The fact that the psychopaths can't break up the communication links is seriously maddening. Caine Mutiny comes to mind. "Those guys," the qrm-ers, are that way because, in some cases, they're baited by our chatter about rice box mavens. Our bad. Then there's instancy of jealousy that we know which end of a fuse goes in first. Or how to read date codes on fahnestock clips. And there's no fixing the jealousy aberation. In closing, just had some ultra neat news. I'm trustee of W4RRW & danged if QST dint just publish we did fourth in 2A battery last field day. A cw-going TT Courier & a IC 703 on "weekend-borrowed" lighting batteries. A 40/15m & a 80/20m dipole. Four guys, a little beer, 2 tarp lean-tos, romping city-boy mutts. Add some fishing, & skinny-dipping in W4RRW(sk)'s 14 ac lake, maybe 14 of 24 hrs. operation. Dupe sheets si~, no dupe/score computers no. Attitude: those are for the other guys. Will we hunker for 2007 & go for the gold? Don't think so, above formula closed in on max-fun/min-$ as described. Hey y'all, don't forget all the old-time CX, OMRN, & AWA operating happenings on our doorstep ------------------------------ Message-ID: <003901c73ec9$944ad7f0$7be47443@KB6NAX> From: "Arden Allen" To: Old Tube Radios Subject: Re: 3685 Kc Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2007 23:20:30 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Threats of "we should do this to them" could very easily > backfire. I agree. If one is a protagonist in the disputes their credibility is called into question. One should be a silent observer and gather evidence that would hold up in a court of law. The complaint should fall on the accused like a ton of bricks. Arden Allen KB6NAX ------------------------------ Message-ID: <000c01c73f0f$f44a0720$fa01fea9@Default> From: "David Stinson" To: Old Tube Radios Subject: Prosigns in Use in 1912?? Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 11:00:10 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Does anyone know of a reference defining what radio prosigns and signals were in common use shipboard during April of 1912? I know the "Q" signals were codified in 1912, but no what month. Anyone know a source or can point me in the right direction? Thanks. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 09:09:36 -0800 (PST) From: Neal McEwen Subject: Re: Prosigns in Use in 1912?? To: Old Tube Radios MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-800659290-1169572176=:15042" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-ID: <539073.15042.qm@web81201.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --0-800659290-1169572176=:15042 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Here are the pro-signs from 1909 http://www.telegraph-office.com/pages/q-signals-1909.html David Stinson wrote: Does anyone know of a reference defining what radio prosigns and signals were in common use shipboard during April of 1912? I know the "Q" signals were codified in 1912, but no what month. Anyone know a source or can point me in the right direction? Thanks. 73 from Neal McEwen, K5RW, at the "Telegraph Office", nmcewen@sbcglobal.net visit http://www.telegraph-office.com -- A Web Page for Telegraph Key Collectors and Historians --0-800659290-1169572176=:15042 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ---REMAINDER OF MESSAGE TRUNCATED--- * * This post contains a forbidden message format * * (such as an attached file, a v-card, HTML formatting) * * Mail Lists at theporch.com only accept PLAIN TEXT * * If your postings display this message your mail program * * is not set to send PLAIN TEXT ONLY and needs adjusting * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * --0-800659290-1169572176=:15042-- ------------------------------ Message-ID: <380-220071223173436125@earthlink.net> From: "Art Lebermann" To: Old Tube Radios Subject: Wanted - WRL Globe Trotter xmtr. Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 09:34:36 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII I'm looking for a WRL Globe Trotter transmitter. This was the first transmitter from WRL, introduced in 1946. Any chance that someone on this list might have one, that they would be willing to sell? Thanks! Art Lebermann W6REQ ------------------------------ Message-ID: <004401c73f36$505b67e0$fa01fea9@Default> From: "David Stinson" To: Old Tube Radios Subject: Re: Prosigns in Use in 1912? Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 15:34:50 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Thank you to everyone who helped with this. Some of the source material is conflicting. Some sources say the "Q," which was attached to existing signals, was created in 1912 and formally adopted in July of 1913: "...in 1908, the British Post Office, despairing of action to agree an international code of abbreviations, issued its own list of two letter abbreviations intended for use between British coast stations and ships. The list, published in the PMG's Instructions to Wireless Telegraphists, included abbreviations RA to RZ and SA to SF. The next International Radiotelegraphic Convention, held in London in July 1912, adopted and extended the GPO abbreviations. "Q" was added as the first letter and so the "Q" code was born. The new code now ran from QRA to QRZ and QSA to QSX. On July 1st, 1913, the Q code finally became an official international information code..." (source: http://www.qsl.net/w5www/73.html#QZ ) However, a handbook published in 1909: "Handbook for Wireless Telegraph Operators & Working Installations licensed by His Majesty's Postmaster-General Revised Edition October 1909 " already codifies the "Q" signals (excerpt): "In the use of these abbreviations, the signal employed should be repeated three times. The addition of the mark of interrogation ..--.. indicates that the sentence is being put as a question. Thus --- "QRA QRA QRA Campania", indicates "I am the Campania." "QRA QRA QRA ..--.." indicates "What ship or coast station is that ?" Example of the use of this table between two stations A and B which have established communications:- A. QRA QRA QRA ..--.. (What ship is that ?) B. Campania. A. QRG QRG QRG ..--.. (What line do you belong to ?) B. Cunard. QRZ QRZ QRZ (Your signals are weak). A. would then increase power and make QRK QRK QRK ..--.. (How are signals ?) B. QRV QRV QRV (All right now). (source with list of Q sigs: http://www.telegraph-office.com/pages/q-signals-1909.html ) Has anyone an idea how to reconcile these points? Thanks, D.S. ------------------------------ End of BOATANCHORS Digest 3999 ******************************