Article: 94854 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: "Henry Kolesnik" Subject: odd variable capacitor ? Message-ID: Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2005 13:10:15 GMT Please take a look at alt.binaries.schematics.electronic tnx -- 73 Hank WD5JFR Article: 94855 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: "Heytubeguy" Subject: FA: BUNNELL TELEGR. SOUNDER-WORKING Message-ID: Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2005 14:25:33 GMT Antique J H Bunnell telegrapher's sounder in working condition + other stuff too. See at: http://search.ebay.com/_W0QQfgtpZ1QQfrppZ25QQsassZheytubeguy Tnx for looking heytubeguy Article: 94856 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew Subject: Re: Battery quality/life/efficiency/MostBangForTheBuck/whatever References: <11ml9kr9dfi6dce@corp.supernews.com> From: dougmc@frenzy.com (Doug McLaren) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2005 17:35:33 GMT In article <11ml9kr9dfi6dce@corp.supernews.com>, Roy Lewallen wrote: | Only a few rules of thumb can be put forth: | | 1. For heavy drain applications such as photoflash or an HT, alkalines | last many times longer than "heavy duty" carbon-zinc types, so the | latter is seldom an economical choice for those applications. Likewise | for applications with moderate but constant drain such as a GPS | receiver. Carbon-zinc is probably more economical (unless you use | alkalines from Costco or other discount store) ... well, if you're looking for the most bang-for-your-buck, you SHOULD be getting the non name brand alkalines :) Personally, I've not found carbon-zinc batteries to be more economical, unless you're not actually using them. | But I don't use carbon-zinc for anything. Me neither. | 3. Modern NiMH cells have about the same capacity as alkaline cells In my experience, the alkaline cells have higher capacities, about twice as high. | more at very high currents -- and the capacity is quite constant | over a wide range of discharge conditions. And this is very true. The alkalines suffer greatly if you discharge at a high rate, where the NiMH cells do just fine. | A down side is the high self-discharge rate -- they're not a good | choice for something like a flashlight that's used only | occasionally. Yup. NiCd cells are better, but still nowhere near as good as alkaline or lithium cells with regard to self discharge rates. -- Doug McLaren, dougmc@frenzy.com `Ever heard of .cshrc? That's a city in Bosnia. Right?' -- Discussion in comp.os.linux.misc on the intuitiveness of commands Article: 94857 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: "Caveat Lector" References: <1131391418.216925.65650@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: Battery quality/life/efficiency/MostBangForTheBuck/whatever Message-ID: <_TObf.17590$i%.12187@fed1read07> Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2005 12:35:32 -0800 Of possible interest The Great Battery Shootout! by Dave Etchells URL: http://www.imaging-resource.com/ACCS/BATTS/BATTS.HTM -- CL -- I doubt, therefore I might be ! "K7ITM" wrote in message news:1131391418.216925.65650@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com... > Even with moderately high self-discharge rates, I'm finding NiMH AAs to > be a good solution for most applications where I use AAs. I just cycle > them through the recharger occasionally. I have enough extras, and > recharging is so fast, that it's not a problem to me if I forget and > let a set discharge to where I have to put in a new set. Noteable > exceptions: very low drain devices like smoke detectors and remote > control transmitters that will run for a year or more on alkalines. > Digital cameras, particularly, show off the advantages of the NiMHs: > alkalines just don't cut it in mine (unuseable after five or ten > pictures, compared with dozens for one charge on NiMHs), though I've > heard that the alkalines specially designed for digital cameras are at > least useable. > > There's a lot of misinformation about batteries of various kinds out > there. I've found http://www.batteryuniversity.com/ to be an easy to > understand source of generally very good information about a lot of > different types of batteries. It mostly covers rechargables, but > there's some info about alkalines in there. > > A friend who uses alkalines in his insulin pump told me he was > surprised to find that, in that particular application, he's seeing a > significant difference between standard Duracell and Energizer alkaline > AAs. "Your mileage may vary." > > Cheers, > Tom > Article: 94858 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: "The Magnum" Subject: Re: The FAQ - because no-one has an alternative one. Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2005 20:58:47 -0000 Message-ID: References: <1131116439.255278.104600@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <9jbnm1tne70t07vanlm9gdcm0i5hgq732d@4ax.com> <51lnm1pddpiph0ei9081g8ouhajt17721u@4ax.com> <_Pobf.4907$2y.3846@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net> "Ralph Mowery" wrote in message news:Pkxbf.5807$m81.1059@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net... > > Thanks for that. So the theory i get so far is anyone can build an Amateur > > radio but they cant "repair" a CB radio.... lol.. it is a crazy world > > > > > > See comments above about license not needed any more for CB repair in the > US. > > It used to be the Amateur tests were about on par with the comercial class > licenses. The main differance was just the regulatory rules and not the > electrical part. That was about 1972 when I passed the 1 st class license. > The way they are now anyone with a good memory can pass the tests. My wife > passed the Technichan class about 1987 or 88 just by memorizing the Q&A > pool. She doesn't know or care about the technical part of radio. I would guess a fair amount dont really care about the technical side or would want to build their own radio and linear. You would have to be pretty dedicated for that. I would also guess at most Amateurs are happy just talking legally with a licence and a stock bought radio and antenna. Not that theres anything wrong with that, it just depends on how serious you take the hobby. Like the M3 foundation licence. It suits a lot of people who are.. disillusioned with CB and want to go Amateur but not really wishing to get so involved with the whole technical side of things. There are some good M3 people out there whatever the old school say, but i agree they will never be on a par with a full licence holder but is that such a terrible thing. Article: 94859 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: novatech@eskimo.com (Steven Swift) Subject: Sentry projects in Elementary Electronics Magazine. Date: 7 Nov 2005 22:08:44 GMT Message-ID: While cleaning out this weekend, I found a small collection of printed circuit boards that I got from Elementary Electronics 1967-68. They're not really worth anything, but it would be fun to know what they are. I can't find them using Google. The dates are scratched on the boards and the names are part of the etch. 1: Sentry Multivibrator, May 1968 2: Sentry Lo-Frequency Oscillator, March 1968 3: Sentry Hi-Lo Bander, July 1968 4: Looks like a wireless mic, no name (has 9V, ANT, SW and MIC on the etch), Sentry, Nov 1967 These were distributed via blister pack (IRC). Just curious. Steve. -- Steven D. Swift, novatech@eskimo.com, http://www.novatech-instr.com NOVATECH INSTRUMENTS, INC. P.O. Box 55997 206.301.8986, fax 206.363.4367 Seattle, Washington 98155 USA Article: 94860 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: "Ralph Mowery" References: <1131116439.255278.104600@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <9jbnm1tne70t07vanlm9gdcm0i5hgq732d@4ax.com> <51lnm1pddpiph0ei9081g8ouhajt17721u@4ax.com> <_Pobf.4907$2y.3846@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net> Subject: Re: The FAQ - because no-one has an alternative one. Message-ID: <0KRbf.6157$m81.2342@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net> Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2005 23:49:16 GMT > > I would guess a fair amount dont really care about the technical side or > would want to build their own radio and linear. You would have to be pretty > dedicated for that. I would also guess at most Amateurs are happy just > talking legally with a licence and a stock bought radio and antenna. Not > that theres anything wrong with that, it just depends on how serious you > take the hobby. Like the M3 foundation licence. It suits a lot of people who > are.. disillusioned with CB and want to go Amateur but not really wishing to > get so involved with the whole technical side of things. There are some good > M3 people out there whatever the old school say, but i agree they will never > be on a par with a full licence holder but is that such a terrible thing. > I don't have any problem with the ones that just want to talk. There are many good hams in public service providing communications for emergencies. I know one ham that got his license many years ago so he could fly his radio controled airplane and use 6 meters where there were few others using that frequency. I do wish that the test could be hands on for a few simple things such as installing a coax connector and and using a simple SWR meter. Also it should be required to have a ARRL handbook or equivilent in the shack. Would not even have to be a new one, but one 10 years old would be ok. Not that many would really read it but it could answer some simple questions. Article: 94861 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: "Steve Nosko" Subject: Re: Problem with soldering gun Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2005 17:36:13 -0600 Message-ID: References: <43607616$0$5437$626a14ce@news.free.fr> <1131146762.783222.263940@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> This is important. There are TWO things to consider. Wattage and heat capacity. Small tips have low heat capacity. A 100W old fashioned "big birtha", the kind with the 1/2 inch diameter, 2-1/2 inch long tip will out perform ANY "gun" when trying to do large work. You need that stored up heat to heat a large thing. Steve N. "Highland Ham" wrote in message news:S4-dnTHigJRKmfHeRVnytA@pipex.net... > Suggest you buy a butane (cigarette lighter gas) soldering iron with > adjustable gas flow to change temperature. > These irons come with different kathalytic burner bits and have a capacity > of well over 100 Watts equivalent. > Electric soldering guns are prone to failure and don't sink much heat into > the object to be soldered. > > Frank GM0CSZ / KN6WH > ============================================== > >I bought a Weller gun recently to unsolder some can capacitors from a > > steel chassis. I was totally dissapointed Article: 94862 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: "Steve Nosko" Subject: Re: Problem with soldering gun Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2005 17:33:10 -0600 Message-ID: References: <43607616$0$5437$626a14ce@news.free.fr> <1131146762.783222.263940@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> wrote in message news:1131146762.783222.263940@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > I bought a Weller gun recently to unsolder some can capacitors from a > steel chassis. I was totally dissapointed ... Well of course. Even with my 40 year ole Weller it would be a bad idea. Guns are for small work only-- always was, always will be. Steve N. Article: 94863 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: novatech@eskimo.com (Steven Swift) Subject: Re: common phase DDS? Date: 8 Nov 2005 00:11:29 GMT Message-ID: References: <1131046890.957368.30760@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <11mkvr51b580j2c@corp.supernews.com> <1131074562.118742.138810@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1131117843.238495.5290@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com> <1131125228.327446.292290@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> clifto writes: >eternalsquire@comcast.net wrote: >> Then how come wall clocks based on WWVB work so well anywhere in CONUS? >To my knowledge they don't use the WWVB carrier as a frequency reference, >like this DDS scheme appears to do. Tracking the carrier would require the clock receiver to be on all the time. All the clocks I have, including my DCF77 unit, read the time code and set the clock. If the signal is weak, they keep trying for 5 minutes or so. The most common is every 4 hours. They then free run >from an on-board crystal between sets. With the upgrade to WWVB, there is at least one period in the whole US were the code can be recovered. This is a lot easier than recovering the carrier. Clocks only display seconds, and sometimes only minutes, so gettting the code right is pretty easy. When you first set up a clock or change the battery, it might take a diurnal period to get the time set. Over the years I have noticed misreads-- 1 minute off, or 1 hour off-- which are corrected at next read period. Steve. -- Steven D. Swift, novatech@eskimo.com, http://www.novatech-instr.com NOVATECH INSTRUMENTS, INC. P.O. Box 55997 206.301.8986, fax 206.363.4367 Seattle, Washington 98155 USA Article: 94864 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: Roy Lewallen Subject: Re: Battery quality/life/efficiency/MostBangForTheBuck/whatever Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2005 16:23:05 -0800 Message-ID: <11mvrvaqm6l117a@corp.supernews.com> References: <1131391418.216925.65650@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <69q443-r6d.ln1@remote.clifto.com> clifto wrote: > . . . > Doug McLaren mentioned his experience that alkalines have higher > capacities than rechargeables, but I'm finding that my new Eveready > 2500 mAH NiMH batteries compete quite well with a fresh set of Energizers. > KenRockwell.com lists alkalines at 2700 to 3135 mAH, sounds reasonable. The capacity of alkaline cells is much more dependent on discharge rate than that of NiMH cells. Note the capacities of alkalines shown at the bottom of the list at http://www.imaging-resource.com/ACCS/BATTS/BATTS.HTM. With the 5 ohm load used for those tests, the alkalines have less than 800 mAh capacity. The capacities you quote would be obtainable only at much lower current drains. But I didn't look carefully at the page to see if he used a different cutoff voltage for the alkalines. A NiMH cell is just about fully discharged when its voltage reaches 1.0 volt, so that's a common cutoff voltage for testing and using NiMH cells. But an alkaline cell still has considerable energy remaining at that voltage -- a device has to function properly down to 0.9 volt, or at high drain more like 0.8 volt per cell to extract all the energy from it. This is yet one more confounding factor in trying to compare cells of different chemistries. Performance depends heavily on the particular application and conditions of use, so a single answer to which is best, or even which has the greater capacity, simply isn't possible. You don't need to take my word for any of this -- data sheets for common cells are readily available on the web, and it takes only a few minutes and a bit of poking on a calculator to discover this from the curves. Roy Lewallen, W7EL Article: 94865 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew Message-ID: <436FFB49.8000201@nettally.com> From: **THE-RFI-EMI-GUY** Subject: Re: Battery quality/life/efficiency/MostBangForTheBuck/whatever References: <1131377966.562233.245430@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2005 01:10:21 GMT Harry; 9 cells is really an odd (no pun intended) number of cells. Are you sure that all were from the same date code. For example an 8 pack is a common purchase, so if you take 8 from one pack and the 9th from another, you might have an older cell in the bunch. Secondly, I have seen several products that mechanically chafe the battery wrapper. If this happens a cell will short out and overheat. My family and I were in NYC the week of the big blackout , we left just before it happened!. As it happens. I bought some copper top batteries >from a street vendor 12 for a buck. I got to the hotel and my son noticed they were chinese imitations called "powercells". They weighed in at about a third of a duracell and lasted about 20%!! I bet there were some unhappy campers in Manhattan when those batteries gave out! Joe hhc314@yahoo.com wrote: >snip > > >let me clarify what I mean by a bad experience. My hand-held Lorain >receiver uses (IIRC) 9 AA cells connected in series. Using Duracells, >I've twice had one of the 9 batteries prematurely fail, with the >remaining 8 only partially discharged. Consequently you replace all 9 >cells. > > snip >Harry C. > > > -- Joe Leikhim K4SAT "The RFI-EMI-GUY" "Follow The Money" Article: 94866 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: "Henry Kolesnik" References: Subject: Re: odd variable capacitor ? Message-ID: Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2005 03:37:04 GMT After checking out the patent no. 1626391, I misread the number previously. It was patent in 1927 so I guess it was for TRF receivers, giving them a wider tuning range and perhaps a neater dial cal. Does anyone recall who might have used them? tnx -- 73 Hank WD5JFR "Henry Kolesnik" wrote in message news:XmIbf.13980$Zv5.4652@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net... > Please take a look at > alt.binaries.schematics.electronic > > tnx > > > -- > > 73 > Hank WD5JFR > > > > Article: 94867 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: Spike Subject: Re: The FAQ - because no-one has an alternative one. Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2005 08:11:18 +0000 Message-ID: <56n0n1l3sndpim3jvoinp83jdt4g7n333g@4ax.com> References: <9jbnm1tne70t07vanlm9gdcm0i5hgq732d@4ax.com> <51lnm1pddpiph0ei9081g8ouhajt17721u@4ax.com> <_Pobf.4907$2y.3846@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net> <0KRbf.6157$m81.2342@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net> Ralph Mowery wrote: >Also it >should be required to have a ARRL handbook or equivilent in the shack. >Would not even have to be a new one, but one 10 years old would be ok. Not >that many would really read it but it could answer some simple questions. My Handbook (not ARRL) is much older, but I wasn't aware of any change in the physics in the interim. Why choose ten years? The Admiralty handbook is still relevant - and can answer questions - even if the units have changed. You appear to be a newcomer. from Aero Spike Article: 94868 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: lucifer@eternal-flames.gov Subject: Re: The FAQ - because no-one has an alternative one. Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2005 09:05:07 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <7nq0n1d2ntmq71a1opjjknh4st59gh1002@4ax.com> References: <9jbnm1tne70t07vanlm9gdcm0i5hgq732d@4ax.com> <51lnm1pddpiph0ei9081g8ouhajt17721u@4ax.com> <_Pobf.4907$2y.3846@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net> <0KRbf.6157$m81.2342@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net> On Mon, 07 Nov 2005 23:49:16 GMT, "Ralph Mowery" wrote: >Also it should be required to have a ARRL handbook or equivilent in the shack. >Would not even have to be a new one, but one 10 years old would be ok They don't even need to *buy* a suitable book. Both the current US Army and USMC Radio Communications manuals are available for free download on the net. Nick. Article: 94869 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: Paul Keinanen Subject: Re: High-insulation 1:1 wideband transformer? Message-ID: References: <1131400856.737888.155950@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2005 11:24:42 +0200 On 7 Nov 2005 14:00:56 -0800, "SpamHog" wrote: >I am very tempted to use either a toroid or a couple of ferrite rods >with 1:1 windings made of... spark plug wire?! The stuff takes 30kV >pulses without even blinking, If I use non-resistive type, an >appropriate container, and keep it all dry, breakdown voltage between >incoming and outgoing coax could exceed 50kV. A low-ohm, low-Z >grounding could help ensure that it's not easily exceeded. The real question is the grounding impedance. You might even be able to measure the grounding resistance at DC or 50/60 Hz, but measuring the grounding impedance at a few hundred kHz might be a bit problematic. Assuming the direct lightning hit is about 10-30 kA, a grounding impedance of only 1 ohm would create a potential difference of 10-30 kV. I do not know your mains wiring practises, but assuming that a separate mains grounding electrode is used for each house, the grounding impedance should be measured between the antenna ground and house ground. If not, the grounding impedance should be measured against some distant point. Assuming that the house has a separate grounding electrode and your antenna will get a hit, which is conducted to ground. Due to the finite ground resistance, the house grounding electrode will move to an elevated potential (several kV) compared to the surrounding (mains neutral, telephone and CATV). Thus, I think that the 50 kV isolation between your antenna and receiver is more than enough and I would guess that more damage would be caused due to the mains neutral, telephone and CATV connections to your equipment. Paul OH3LWR Article: 94870 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: "Mike" Subject: Naval connection? You qualify for RNARS membership! Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2005 12:02:10 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: Membership of the Royal Naval Amateur Radio Society (RNARS) is open to all who have an interest in any facet of amateur radio and who are serving or who have served in the following: Royal Navy Royal Marines Royal Naval Reserve Royal Marine Reserve Women's Royal Naval Service Royal Naval Auxiliary Service Royal Fleet Auxiliary Merchant Navy Sea Cadets Corps Nautical Training Corps MOD (Navy) Commonwealth and Foreign Navies NON-MEMBERS can purchase RNARS commodities. Details and membership application form is available online at http://www.rnars.org.uk Article: 94871 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: "PowerHouse Communications" References: <1131116439.255278.104600@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <9jbnm1tne70t07vanlm9gdcm0i5hgq732d@4ax.com> <51lnm1pddpiph0ei9081g8ouhajt17721u@4ax.com> <_Pobf.4907$2y.3846@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net> Subject: Re: The FAQ - because no-one has an alternative one. Message-ID: Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2005 06:47:10 -0600 "The Magnum" wrote in message news:dkm150$qa5$1@newsg1.svr.pol.co.uk... > > "PowerHouse Communications" wrote in message > news:CXtbf.9915$7s1.1097@fe04.lga... > > > > "The Magnum" wrote in message > > news:dkldtm$72s$1@news7.svr.pol.co.uk... > > > I wonder where the law stands as far as CB radio's go. Are CB's allowed > to > > > be repaired by the average CB'er who has the knowledge or are they only > > > repairable by a qualified technician of some kind. I ask along the lines > > of > > > the UK but would find the answer for America just as interesting. > > > > > > > I'm not sure why this thread is even being cross-posted into a CB group, > but > > Because its a question about CB's ?????????? > No, not your question, the whole thread, which was a rant about "Ham Radio". Had nothing to do with CB, except for a brief reference. Article: 94872 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: "PowerHouse Communications" References: <1131116439.255278.104600@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <9jbnm1tne70t07vanlm9gdcm0i5hgq732d@4ax.com> <51lnm1pddpiph0ei9081g8ouhajt17721u@4ax.com> <_Pobf.4907$2y.3846@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net> Subject: Re: The FAQ - because no-one has an alternative one. Message-ID: <4G1cf.60878$RG4.18241@fe05.lga> Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2005 07:25:13 -0600 "Ralph Mowery" wrote in message news:dpvbf.5770$m81.1857@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net... > > I'm not sure why this thread is even being cross-posted into a CB group, > but > > to answer your question, in the US, the radio must be serviced by a > > qualified, licensed individual. That is the "legal" way of doing it > anyway. > > It doesn't happen very often, but that is another story for another > time... > > > > > > Get a new rule book like one that is newer than say about 10 or so years. > The CB radios in the US has not required a license to repair them in many > years. The GROL is the replacement for the 1st and 2 nd class licenses that > used to be required to repair many transmitters. For about 95 % of the > transmitters in the US it is now worthless and not needed. Some companies > may require it as they think they are getting someone that may know > something. Now it is only needed for : > OK, if you want to get technical, a "license" per-say is not needed, though they still need to be "certified as technically qualified to perform transmitter maintenance and repair duties in the private land mobile services and fixed services by an organization or committee representative of users in those services." - Reference FCC Part 95, Section 95.424 subsection "b". And as the question that was asked, in relation to the US: "Are CB's allowed to be repaired by the average CB'er who has the knowledge or are they only repairable by a qualified technician of some kind[?]" The answer to the first part of the question is still NO, and the second part is still, YES. The "average CB'er who has the knowledge" can NOT service their own CB, legally. They would need to be "certified" to do so "by an organization or committee representative of users in [the CB service]." Article: 94873 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: "The Magnum" Subject: Re: The FAQ - because no-one has an alternative one. Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2005 17:18:53 -0000 Message-ID: References: <1131116439.255278.104600@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <9jbnm1tne70t07vanlm9gdcm0i5hgq732d@4ax.com> <51lnm1pddpiph0ei9081g8ouhajt17721u@4ax.com> <_Pobf.4907$2y.3846@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net> <0KRbf.6157$m81.2342@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net> "Ralph Mowery" wrote in message news:0KRbf.6157$m81.2342@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net... > > > > I would guess a fair amount dont really care about the technical side or > > would want to build their own radio and linear. You would have to be > pretty > > dedicated for that. I would also guess at most Amateurs are happy just > > talking legally with a licence and a stock bought radio and antenna. Not > > that theres anything wrong with that, it just depends on how serious you > > take the hobby. Like the M3 foundation licence. It suits a lot of people > who > > are.. disillusioned with CB and want to go Amateur but not really wishing > to > > get so involved with the whole technical side of things. There are some > good > > M3 people out there whatever the old school say, but i agree they will > never > > be on a par with a full licence holder but is that such a terrible thing. > > > > I don't have any problem with the ones that just want to talk. There are > many good hams in public service providing communications for emergencies. > I know one ham that got his license many years ago so he could fly his radio > controled airplane and use 6 meters where there were few others using that > frequency. > > I do wish that the test could be hands on for a few simple things such as > installing a coax connector and and using a simple SWR meter. Also it > should be required to have a ARRL handbook or equivilent in the shack. > Would not even have to be a new one, but one 10 years old would be ok. Not > that many would really read it but it could answer some simple questions. I quite agree. I also personally think to obtain a CB licence (UK im talking here) there should be a small test.. nothing complicated, just wiring on a PL259 correctly and how to use a SWR meter (as you say for Amateur too). Thats two basic things ive seen either ignored or very badly done.. ie. someone twisting the inner and outer of the co-ax together and shoving it through the hole in the PL.... then they wonder why the radio they just bought off you wont get out.... or someone say..swred an antenna?? whats that then?? sheesh.. Exceedingly unlikely now as to all intents and purposes the CB band isnt of interest to the authorities that be. Oh well............... Article: 94874 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: "The Magnum" Subject: Re: The FAQ - because no-one has an alternative one. Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2005 17:23:01 -0000 Message-ID: References: <1131116439.255278.104600@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <9jbnm1tne70t07vanlm9gdcm0i5hgq732d@4ax.com> <51lnm1pddpiph0ei9081g8ouhajt17721u@4ax.com> <_Pobf.4907$2y.3846@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net> "PowerHouse Communications" wrote in message news:t61cf.871$GT3.448@fe02.lga... > > "The Magnum" wrote in message > news:dkm150$qa5$1@newsg1.svr.pol.co.uk... > > > > "PowerHouse Communications" wrote in message > > news:CXtbf.9915$7s1.1097@fe04.lga... > > > > > > "The Magnum" wrote in message > > > news:dkldtm$72s$1@news7.svr.pol.co.uk... > > > > I wonder where the law stands as far as CB radio's go. Are CB's > allowed > > to > > > > be repaired by the average CB'er who has the knowledge or are they > only > > > > repairable by a qualified technician of some kind. I ask along the > lines > > > of > > > > the UK but would find the answer for America just as interesting. > > > > > > > > > > I'm not sure why this thread is even being cross-posted into a CB group, > > but > > > > Because its a question about CB's ?????????? > > > > No, not your question, the whole thread, which was a rant about "Ham Radio". > Had nothing to do with CB, except for a brief reference. Oh right.... mind you theres that much Ham stuff on the website is it a problem? I just read it with some interest and ask points that i think might be relevent. Theres more stuff about liars and army service on this group though for some reason. That i dont get. Regards, Graham Article: 94875 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: "Ralph Mowery" References: <9jbnm1tne70t07vanlm9gdcm0i5hgq732d@4ax.com> <51lnm1pddpiph0ei9081g8ouhajt17721u@4ax.com> <_Pobf.4907$2y.3846@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net> <0KRbf.6157$m81.2342@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net> <56n0n1l3sndpim3jvoinp83jdt4g7n333g@4ax.com> Subject: Re: The FAQ - because no-one has an alternative one. Message-ID: Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2005 23:44:39 GMT "Spike" wrote in message news:56n0n1l3sndpim3jvoinp83jdt4g7n333g@4ax.com... > > Ralph Mowery wrote: > > >Also it > >should be required to have a ARRL handbook or equivilent in the shack. > >Would not even have to be a new one, but one 10 years old would be ok. Not > >that many would really read it but it could answer some simple questions. > > My Handbook (not ARRL) is much older, but I wasn't aware of any change > in the physics in the interim. Why choose ten years? The Admiralty > handbook is still relevant - and can answer questions - even if the > units have changed. You appear to be a newcomer. > > from > Aero Spike The 10 year number for the book was just one out of the air. Older would have been just fine. My first ARRL hand book was bought in 1966. I did not get a ham license untuil about 1972. Had a 1 st class radiotelephone license around the same time. I have only used RTTY with an old mechanical unit, been keeping up a repeater for close to 30 years, I did write a rtty program for an old 8080 processor when I got tired of hearing the noise, used a few of the newer digital modes with the computer, worked a few of the OSCARs, active on 144 and 432 ssb. I do work some of the low bands also. Guess that still makes me a newcomer to many. Article: 94876 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew Subject: Re: odd variable capacitor ? References: From: haynes@alumni.uark.edu (Jim Haynes) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2005 03:13:52 GMT There was an article in Antique Radio Classified some years ago that made me aware of capacitors with tapered plates. You can look up that patent online www.uspto.gov, click on search under patents, click on patent number search, put in the number, and when it tells you click on images. You have to have a tiff viewer plugin in your web browser to read them. That particular patent seems to apply to a capacitor with flat plates, so perhaps there was a pending patent on the tapered plates. A variable capacitor with semicircular plates and the axis of rotation going through the middle and flat plates gives of course a linear relationship between capacitance and angular rotation. By altering the plate shape a bit and moving the axis of rotation off-center you can get a capacitor that tunes straight-line wavelength. Wavelength is proportional to the square root of capacitance. In the early days of radio wavelength was often specified instead of frequency. You can make a variable capacitor that is straight-line frequency, which rotation has to be proportional to the reciprocal of the square root of capacitance. With flat plates this requires a fairly radical plate shape, with the axis of rotation very far off center. As a result there has to be a lot of empty space for those long narrow plates to swing around. I'll post a picture of one of these to that binaries group. So a way to get around the odd plate shape and the space it occupies is to use plates of tapered thickness. It would be nice if you got straight-line something, but even if you don't you have something where the stations are more spread out than they are with straight line capacitance. I have an old TRF receiver of the vintage of multiple knobs and 01A tubes that uses capacitors like this. -- jhhaynes at earthlink dot net Article: 94877 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: Spike Subject: Re: The FAQ - because no-one has an alternative one. Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2005 08:39:13 +0000 Message-ID: References: <_Pobf.4907$2y.3846@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net> <0KRbf.6157$m81.2342@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net> <56n0n1l3sndpim3jvoinp83jdt4g7n333g@4ax.com> Ralph Mowery wrote: > >"Spike" wrote: > >> My Handbook (not ARRL) is much older, but I wasn't aware of any change >> in the physics in the interim. Why choose ten years? The Admiralty >> handbook is still relevant - and can answer questions - even if the >> units have changed. You appear to be a newcomer. > >The 10 year number for the book was just one out of the air. The problem with that is it essentially means that every now and then, in order to keep within the licence terms, one has to purchase a book. Here in the UK we have problems with an organisation that has put itself in the position of 'representing all UK amateurs', and which sells books. It clearly does not do the former, and merely to add to its coffers as part of the licencing conditions is a battle which it has recently fought and looks like losing heavily. >Older would have been just fine. >My first ARRL hand book was bought in 1966. Then why specify a time limit? Or even to have such a book in the first place? >I did >not get a ham license untuil about 1972. Had a 1 st class radiotelephone >license around the same time. I have only used RTTY with an old mechanical >unit, been keeping up a repeater for close to 30 years, I did write a rtty >program for an old 8080 processor when I got tired of hearing the noise, >used a few of the newer digital modes with the computer, worked a few of the >OSCARs, active on 144 and 432 ssb. I do work some of the low bands also. >Guess that still makes me a newcomer to many. There is nothing wrong with your Amateur CV. The issue - at least for us in the UK - is the grasping self-interest of the 'national society', which has been so clearly revealed by recent events, and to which your proposal would add succour; that was really the point of my post. from Aero Spike Article: 94878 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: Roy Lewallen Subject: Re: The FAQ - because no-one has an alternative one. Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2005 02:20:53 -0800 Message-ID: <11n3jc8jkp8qce6@corp.supernews.com> References: <_Pobf.4907$2y.3846@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net> <0KRbf.6157$m81.2342@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net> <56n0n1l3sndpim3jvoinp83jdt4g7n333g@4ax.com> How come all the self-proclaimed "real amateurs" huffing and puffing on this thread sign their postings only with a "handle" and not a call sign? Are they really amateurs at all? Roy Lewallen, W7EL Article: 94879 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: Paul Keinanen Subject: Re: High-insulation 1:1 wideband transformer? Message-ID: References: <1131400856.737888.155950@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1131535067.157988.28320@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2005 16:42:11 +0200 On 9 Nov 2005 03:17:47 -0800, "SpamHog" wrote: >In my case, my shack is at the ground floor of a 9-story building, the >antenna is on top, and all grounds are pretty heavy duty and bonded - >but not low impedance. I had assumed that you lived on the ground level and had the antenna feed point somewhere further in the garden. In your actual case, assuming that the separate grounding wires come directly down from the roof and connected to the grounding of your apartment at the ground level and assuming that the lightning bolt rise time would be 1 kA/us. A thick wire has an inductance about 1 uH/m, thus, there would be a voltage gradient about 1 kV/m along the grounding wire. If the antenna system grounding wire from the roof is 30 m long, the isolation transformer primary side potential would be 30 kV above the building neutral bar and also 30 kV above your apartment potential as well as 30 kV above the isolation transformer secondary. The building ground bar potential will be somewhere above the average potential of the surrounding countryside. With 50 kV isolation at the transformer, nearly 2 kA/us rise times could be tolerated. To reduce the grounding wire inductance, several grounding wires would be required well separated from each other. Paul OH3LWR Article: 94880 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: Paul Keinanen Subject: Re: High-insulation 1:1 wideband transformer? Message-ID: References: <1131400856.737888.155950@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1131535711.402451.270170@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2005 16:42:18 +0200 On 9 Nov 2005 03:28:31 -0800, "SpamHog" wrote: >I forgot to mention... the grounding is via two massive, parallel >steel flue lines, each a foot in diameter, that drop straight to a big >pig-iron furnace underground, all bonded to the common building ground. That should reduce the inductance considerably and thus the antenna structure would be much closer to the building grounding bar potential during a lightning hit. Paul OH3LWR Article: 94881 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: "Ralph Mowery" References: <1131116439.255278.104600@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <9jbnm1tne70t07vanlm9gdcm0i5hgq732d@4ax.com> <51lnm1pddpiph0ei9081g8ouhajt17721u@4ax.com> <_Pobf.4907$2y.3846@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net> <4G1cf.60878$RG4.18241@fe05.lga> Subject: Re: The FAQ - because no-one has an alternative one. Message-ID: Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2005 23:29:58 GMT > > > > OK, if you want to get technical, a "license" per-say is not needed, though > they still need to be "certified as technically qualified to perform > transmitter maintenance and repair duties in the private land mobile > services and fixed services by an organization or committee representative > of users in those services." - Reference FCC Part 95, Section 95.424 > subsection "b". > > And as the question that was asked, in relation to the US: > "Are CB's allowed to be repaired by the average CB'er who has the knowledge > or are they only repairable by a qualified technician of some kind[?]" > The answer to the first part of the question is still NO, and the second > part is still, YES. The "average CB'er who has the knowledge" can NOT > service their own CB, legally. They would need to be "certified" to do so > "by an organization or committee representative of users in [the CB > service]." > Don't leave out the word "should". It does not say MUST. Article: 94882 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: "Henry Kolesnik" References: Subject: Re: odd variable capacitor ? Message-ID: Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 01:13:08 GMT Jim Who made your TRF with this cap and are the dials calibrated, if so f or wavelength? tnx -- 73 Hank WD5JFR "Jim Haynes" wrote in message news:QPdcf.6064$2y.358@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net... > There was an article in Antique Radio Classified some years ago that > made me aware of capacitors with tapered plates. > > You can look up that patent online www.uspto.gov, click on search > under patents, click on patent number search, put in the number, > and when it tells you click on images. You have to have a tiff viewer > plugin in your web browser to read them. That particular patent seems > to apply to a capacitor with flat plates, so perhaps there was a pending > patent on the tapered plates. > > A variable capacitor with semicircular plates and the axis of rotation > going through the middle and flat plates gives of course a linear > relationship between capacitance and angular rotation. By altering the > plate shape a bit and moving the axis of rotation off-center you can > get a capacitor that tunes straight-line wavelength. Wavelength is > proportional to the square root of capacitance. In the early days of > radio wavelength was often specified instead of frequency. > > You can make a variable capacitor that is straight-line frequency, which > rotation has to be proportional to the reciprocal of the square root of > capacitance. With flat plates this requires a fairly radical plate > shape, with the axis of rotation very far off center. As a result there > has to be a lot of empty space for those long narrow plates to swing > around. > I'll post a picture of one of these to that binaries group. > > So a way to get around the odd plate shape and the space it occupies > is to use plates of tapered thickness. It would be nice if you got > straight-line something, but even if you don't you have something > where the stations are more spread out than they are with straight > line capacitance. > > I have an old TRF receiver of the vintage of multiple knobs and 01A tubes > that uses capacitors like this. > -- > > jhhaynes at earthlink dot net > Article: 94883 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: Roy Lewallen Subject: Re: Battery quality/life/efficiency/MostBangForTheBuck/whatever Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2005 21:31:40 -0800 Message-ID: <11n5mpv9t1rqk5a@corp.supernews.com> References: <1131391418.216925.65650@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <69q443-r6d.ln1@remote.clifto.com> clifto wrote: > . . . > Roy Lewallen mentions Costco; they haven't had their particular brand > (40 for $10) for literally years here, all they sell is Duracells now > and they want 25% more than Menard's and the Ray-O-Vacs. > . . . That's too bad. I just got back from Costco, where I found their store brand Kirkland AA alkalines at $9.59 for 48. They also had Duracells, 16 for $8.19. Roy Lewallen, W7EL Article: 94884 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: "west" Subject: Tube Bench Supply Message-ID: Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 05:33:08 GMT I need to buy or build a bench power supply to test & design various tube equipment (audio & ham). I would like it to be something like a Heathkit HP-23 with voltage & current meters. The major problem with the supplies I've come across such as the HP-23, is that the B+ current is appx. 100ma. The bias & filament supplies are OK, but at times I need around 400ma for the B+ out. Is there such a PS available, perhaps with tube regulation & rectification or do I need to build from scratch? Any answers will be most appreciated. Cordially, west AF4GC Article: 94885 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: Roy Lewallen Subject: Re: The FAQ - because no-one has an alternative one. Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 02:09:01 -0800 Message-ID: <11n67208m80jfd9@corp.supernews.com> References: <_Pobf.4907$2y.3846@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net> <0KRbf.6157$m81.2342@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net> <56n0n1l3sndpim3jvoinp83jdt4g7n333g@4ax.com> <11n3jc8jkp8qce6@corp.supernews.com> <1131601236.250700.67440@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> eternalsquire@comcast.net wrote: > There are two extremely legitimate reason for using a nym on the net, > even if one is a ham: privacy and safety. Need I say more? Shame and embarrassment are two others. Roy Lewallen, W7EL Article: 94886 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: lucifer@eternal-flames.gov Subject: Re: The FAQ - because no-one has an alternative one. Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 10:47:23 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <3096n1djlvdgr0q2idsv1dqi9h8hsm201q@4ax.com> References: <0KRbf.6157$m81.2342@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net> <56n0n1l3sndpim3jvoinp83jdt4g7n333g@4ax.com> <11n3jc8jkp8qce6@corp.supernews.com> <1131601236.250700.67440@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <11n67208m80jfd9@corp.supernews.com> On Thu, 10 Nov 2005 02:09:01 -0800, Roy Lewallen wrote: >eternalsquire@comcast.net wrote: >> There are two extremely legitimate reason for using a nym on the net, >> even if one is a ham: privacy and safety. Need I say more? > >Shame and embarrassment are two others. > >Roy Lewallen, W7EL Then of course there are those who have great difficulty in recognising the difference between radio - where callsigns are required - and the internet - where they are not. But they are more to be pitied than criticised. Their gaining of an amateur callsign was often the only qualification they've gained in their whole miserable life. They are so anally obsessed with it, they have it printed on anything containing their name and address, also their car licence plates. Frequently they have it embroidered onto their pyjama-jackets. But enough about Americans.... Nick. Article: 94887 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: Ceriel Nosforit Subject: Controller for handheld scanner Message-ID: Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 18:21:25 +0200 Heya, I'm going to build a controller for an IC-R5 handheld radio scanner for a computer science (digitech) project. The idea is to be able to type in the frequency I want in my computer and then have an electric motor dial in that frequency on my scanner. I'll be using a stepping motor and some controller the circuit design of which seems to be a homebrew of the polytechnic school I attend. What I'll be doing is programming the logic of the controller and writing a computer application for Linux which tells the controller what to do. My question is; do you know of any projects similar to this? I'm mostly looking for inspiration and pitfalls to avoid. Any comments and insight you might have is most welcome. Now the following part probably isn't relevant here, but I just wanted to tell what I intended to do with it. On the computer-side of this I intend to have some more advanced functions. My program will be able to accept a list or range of frequencies and then tell the controller to dial them in order. The headphone output of the scanner is sent to the microphone jack on the computer. My program 'listens' for any sound and if it find a signal it stops telling the controller to dial frequencies, freezing on the signal. Since the scanner has an automatic function (Auto squelch) to be silent when there's no signal and only make sound when there is a signal, this isn't very difficult to do. The audio is sent to speech recognition software, and if something intelligible comes out it listens and logs what it hears. If there is nothing intelligible there, it tells the controller to keep dialing. Alternatively it could listen for digital transmissions and attempt to decode what digital mode it is in, and log the output of that. There's no end to the things I could do with this thing, but primarily I intend to have the logs written to the root window of my desktop, creating a cool effect that will earn me geek points like crazy. =) Attacking number stations to unveil matters of national security is just a side-project. Eheh. (Please note that I'm X-posting this, but I'll still be checking both groups for replies so feel free to post to only one of them.) -- Nosforit Article: 94888 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: "Steve Drury" Subject: Calling all TV repair men - VSP9427 wanted Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 21:34:11 -0000 Message-ID: <4373bcd0$1_2@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com> I'm trying to locate a VSP9427B I/C manufactured by Micronas, it's used as a front end video decoder in wide screen TV. Does any one know what make and model uses the chip? I'm looking for one to build a frame store (freeze frame etc) for amateur TV use. Cheers, Steve G6ALU ~~~~~ Return address g6alu@tiscali.co.uk.remove - remove the .remove!~~~~~ Article: 94889 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: et472@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Michael Black) Subject: Re: Tube Bench Supply Date: 10 Nov 2005 21:50:48 GMT Message-ID: References: <1131657252.025698.74890@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> (hhc314@yahoo.com) writes: > I own a Heathkit IP-17 which had identical rating to the HP-23 that you > have. For higher amounts of current, I cobbled together the combination > of a Variac, a salvaged TV set power transformer, bridge rectifier, and > filter capacitors to do the job. > > Although unregulated, it performed its job well for many years. > There have been a few threads recently about regulated tube supplies, and each time I see them, I keep wanting to post "but most supplies in the days of tubes were not regulated". It's almost as if people have lost that fact, so used to solid state where regulation is the norm, though regulation there often means a different thing. Now it's used to get a low impedance out of the power supply, or because the devices are finicky over a wide range of voltages (or outright can be damaged by too much voltage, as in the case of ttl). Of course, three terminal regulators made it easy to add regulation to just about any sold state design decades ago. But of course, for most consumer equipment there were no regulators (though that may mean little since there was little consumer electronics around the house up till about forty years ago) If there was regulation it was a VR tube, and for a specific stage or stages, liked an oscillator stage that would change frequency with voltage variation, rather than making the whole supply regulated. It was in the lab that most regulated supplies were seen. All that test equipment is a prime example. You wanted reproduceability for that DC coupled scope, so you'd want it well regulated. I guess in the lab you'd see variable voltage regulated supplies but that would have been the key place. Michael VE2BVW Article: 94890 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew Subject: Re: Source for PLL and Divider Chips? From: Steveo Date: 11 Nov 2005 00:58:05 GMT Message-ID: <20051110195805.444$Xq@newsreader.com> References: "Leland C. Scott" wrote: > Does anybody have a cheap source, in the USA, for the MC12179 or MC12179D > PLL chip? If not is there a replacement available? Also does anybody know > if there is a 24 pin DIP version of the 74HC4059 chip and who sells it? > > 73 de > Leland C. Scott > KC8LDO > Try this: http://tinyurl.com/dm4bn Article: 94891 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew Subject: Re: odd variable capacitor ? References: From: haynes@alumni.uark.edu (Jim Haynes) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 04:33:54 GMT In article , Henry Kolesnik wrote: > >Jim >Who made your TRF with this cap and are the dials calibrated, if so f or >wavelength? >tnx Well, it's a mystery. There is no manufacturer's name on it anywhere. And all the parts are from various well-known parts vendors (except no labels on the coils). There are several theories: Might be a home-built set - if so, it's incredibly well done, including an engraved front panel Might be built from a kit - but then you'd think the kit manufacturer would have put a name on it somewhere. Might be a factory-built set for some department-store chain that was to attach their own brand label, tho there is no evidence that one ever was attached. Might be a factory-built set and the maker is deliberately non-identified to avoid paying royalties on the Neutrodyne patents. Which could also apply to a kit. I read some early superhets were sold as kits to get around paying patent royalties. Someone suggested a fly-by-night manufacturer, who would come into a village with a wagon load of receivers, and secretly bring another wagon with a transmitter. The transmitter would assure they had a good signal while they were selling the receivers; and once they were all sold they could move on. However this receiver is certainly not shoddily constructed. Any other theories? -- jhhaynes at earthlink dot net Article: 94892 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew Subject: Re: odd variable capacitor ? References: From: haynes@alumni.uark.edu (Jim Haynes) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 04:34:44 GMT In article , Henry Kolesnik wrote: >Jim >Who made your TRF with this cap and are the dials calibrated, if so f or >wavelength? >tnx The dials are not calibrated in frequency or wavelength. They look like National vernier dials, calibrated 0-100. -- jhhaynes at earthlink dot net Article: 94893 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: lucifer@eternal-flames.gov Subject: Re: The FAQ - because no-one has an alternative one. Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 08:43:31 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <0KRbf.6157$m81.2342@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net> <56n0n1l3sndpim3jvoinp83jdt4g7n333g@4ax.com> <11n3jc8jkp8qce6@corp.supernews.com> <1131601236.250700.67440@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <11n67208m80jfd9@corp.supernews.com> <3096n1djlvdgr0q2idsv1dqi9h8hsm201q@4ax.com> <1131694672.489954.115870@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> On 10 Nov 2005 23:37:52 -0800, eternalsquire@comcast.net wrote: >But there is no such thing as true UK cuisine, it is all bangers and >wellingtons and steak and kidney pie washed down with lots and lots and >lots of Guiness. But the beer - Guinness or otherwise - must be warm. Any vegetables must be boiled long enough for whatever taste/texture they originally had, to be completely lost - including the salads - and the meat must be so messed about with that you can't tell if it was steak or kidney. Nick - Who actually likes the people living that side of the pond. Article: 94894 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: "Henry Kolesnik" References: Subject: Re: odd variable capacitor ? Message-ID: <7n0df.15196$q%.10041@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com> Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 12:44:51 GMT I never heard of the transmitter scam before and I would think that people would have wanted to hear their favorite 2 or 3 stations. I wonder how they did the scam? Hank "Jim Haynes" wrote in message news:SaVcf.7676$AS6.7074@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net... > In article , > Henry Kolesnik wrote: >> >>Jim >>Who made your TRF with this cap and are the dials calibrated, if so f or >>wavelength? >>tnx > > Well, it's a mystery. There is no manufacturer's name on it anywhere. > And > all the parts are from various well-known parts vendors (except no labels > on the coils). There are several theories: > Might be a home-built set - if so, it's incredibly well done, including > an engraved front panel > Might be built from a kit - but then you'd think the kit manufacturer > would have put a name on it somewhere. > Might be a factory-built set for some department-store chain that was > to attach their own brand label, tho there is no evidence that one > ever was attached. > Might be a factory-built set and the maker is deliberately > non-identified > to avoid paying royalties on the Neutrodyne patents. Which could > also > apply to a kit. I read some early superhets were sold as kits to get > around paying patent royalties. > Someone suggested a fly-by-night manufacturer, who would come into a > village with a wagon load of receivers, and secretly bring another > wagon with a transmitter. The transmitter would assure they had a > good signal while they were selling the receivers; and once they were > all sold they could move on. However this receiver is certainly not > shoddily constructed. > > Any other theories? > -- > > jhhaynes at earthlink dot net > Article: 94895 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: Dave Subject: Re: FAQ, just what is Ham Radio? References: <1131719903.005850.10610@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Message-ID: Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 14:45:32 GMT Thank you Mr Bean, an interesting read :-) Dave Polymath wrote: > What is Ham Radio? > > Ham Radio is a technical pursuit for those who > are interested in the science of radio wave > propagation and who are also interested in the > way that their radios function. It has a long-standing > tradition of providing a source of engineers who > are born naturals. > > Ham Radio awakens in its aficionados a whole-life > fascination with all things technical and gives > an all-abiding curiosity to improve one's scientific > knowledge. It's a great swimming pool, please dive in! > > This excitement causes a wish to share the experience > with ones fellow man, and shows itself in the > gentlemanly traditions of Ham Radio. > > Radio Hams are in a unique privileged position in that > they can construct and operate their own equipment! No-one > else has this privilege. Users, such as broadcasters, > the po lice and armed farces, CBers and mobile phone > users have to purchase ready-made gear. Manufacturers > are not licensed to operate their gear. Radio Hams > are qualified to design, build and then > operate their own pieces of equipment. They do this > with gusto, and also repair and modify their own > equipment. This is a privilege well worth the effort > to gain, and one to be jealously guarded. > > The excitement that drives a Radio Ham starts with > relatively simple technologies at first, perhaps making > his own Wimshurst machine and primary cells. Small pieces > of test equipment follow, possibly multimeters and signal > generators. Then comes receivers and transmitters. It is with > the latter that communication with like-minded technically > motivated people takes off. The scope for technical > development grows with the years > and now encompasses DSP and DDS. There is also a great deal > of excitement in the areas of computer programming to > be learnt and applied. > > The technical excitement motivates Radio Hams to compete > with each other to determine who has designed and manufactured > the best-quality station. This competitiveness is found in DXing, > competitions and fox-hunts. > > -----OOOOO---- > > However, beware! A Ham Radio licence is such a > desirable thing to have that there are large > numbers of people who wish to be thought of > as Radio Hams when, in fact, they are nothing > of the kind! Usually such people are a > variation of the CB Radio hobbyist; they buy their > radios off the shelf and send them back to be > repaired; they are not interested in technical discussion > and sneer at those who are; they have no idea how > their radios work inside and have no wish to find out; > they are free with rather silly personal insults; > they have not satisfied any technical qualification > and their licences prevent the use of > self-designed-and-built equipment. > > These CB types engage in the competitive activities > with their Cheque-Book-purchased off-the-shelf radios > in a forlorn effort to prove that they are Radio Hams. > > No _REAL_ Radio Hams are deceived by such people! > > -----ooooo----- > > One infallible way to disambiguate the CB Radio Hobbyist > from the _REAL_ Radio Ham is to solicit their view of the > difference between CB Radio and Ham Radio. A Radio Ham will > perceive Ham Radio to be a technical pursuit and will > perceive CB Radio to be a social communications facility > no different in essence to a land-line telephone or a > GSM mobile in the hands of a 6-year-old. Thus a Radio Ham > could also hold a CB licence safe in the knowledge that > such a licence says no more about him than having a land-line > telephone, whilst continuing to regard Ham Radio as a separate > technical pursuit. > > A CB Radio hobbyist, on the other hand, sees no difference between > a Ham Radio licence and a CB Radio licence. To him, they are > sisters-under-the-skin. Wrongly, the CB Radio Hobbyist then > tries to classify himself as the equal of the Radio > Ham when, in fact, he is nothing of the kind. A sure sign of > a CB Radio hobbyist is if he holds, or has ever held, a licence > issued under the gangrenous degeneration that is the > M3/CB Fools' Licence scheme. > > -----ooooo----- > > One group of people who claim to be of the standard of > Radio Hams but who are in reality nothing more than an > apology for the failure of a CBer are those class B > licensees who falsely proclaimed that they were against > the use of a Morse Test to control access to the HF > bands, until, that is, a test was introduced at their > intellectual level, the intellectual level of 6-year-olds. > > 6 year-olds simply lack the mathematical tool kit to > enable them to handle even the simplest algebraic manipulation > for Ohm's Law and thus, the disgraceful Class Ber's in > the aforementioned category are not Radio Hams by any stretch > of the imagination! > > Remember - A sure sign of a CB Radio hobbyist is if he holds, > or has ever held, a licence issued under the gangrenous > degeneration that is the M3/CB Fools' Licence scheme! > Article: 94896 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: hanavin@stimpy.eecis.udel.edu (Chuck Hanavin) Subject: Re: 1936 vintage rig Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 15:10:30 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <1131716834.266593.323410@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> In article <1131716834.266593.323410@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>, MadEngineer wrote: >Hi All, > > >Can any old-timers out there help me with any information regarding >what he might have built? I thought I might try to either find or >build a similar rig as a gift, or at least present him with the plans >the equipment was based on. > >Thanks, 73, >Glenn Dixon AC7ZN > I'm Not really an old timer yet :) but you can get the complete QST's from 1930-1939 on CDROM from the ARRL. That'll be a nice gift, Im sure there are plans in there to build a similar rig.. 73 Article: 94897 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: "The Magnum" Subject: Re: The FAQ - because no-one has an alternative one. Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 17:53:12 -0000 Message-ID: References: <0KRbf.6157$m81.2342@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net> <56n0n1l3sndpim3jvoinp83jdt4g7n333g@4ax.com> <11n3jc8jkp8qce6@corp.supernews.com> <1131601236.250700.67440@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <11n67208m80jfd9@corp.supernews.com> <3096n1djlvdgr0q2idsv1dqi9h8hsm201q@4ax.com> <1131694672.489954.115870@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> wrote in message news:1131694672.489954.115870@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > But there is no such thing as true UK cuisine, it is all bangers and > wellingtons and steak and kidney pie washed down with lots and lots and > lots of Guiness. > > But enough about Brits, who are otherwise creators of fine cars, time > traveler shows, absurdist sitcoms, and who invented the art of sarcasm. > > The Eternal Squire I thought Guinness was the drink of the Irish... I personally cant stand the stuff, surely its a "nice cup of tea"... Steak and Kidney is Rank...Much better mince beef and onion, or chicken and mushroom where it comes to pies... As for fine cars?? that surely is sarcasm ;o) .... "you have learned well young Jedi"... Regards, Graham Article: 94898 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: "The Magnum" Subject: Re: The FAQ - because no-one has an alternative one. Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 17:58:22 -0000 Message-ID: References: <0KRbf.6157$m81.2342@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net> <56n0n1l3sndpim3jvoinp83jdt4g7n333g@4ax.com> <11n3jc8jkp8qce6@corp.supernews.com> <1131601236.250700.67440@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <11n67208m80jfd9@corp.supernews.com> <3096n1djlvdgr0q2idsv1dqi9h8hsm201q@4ax.com> <1131694672.489954.115870@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> wrote in message news:k9m8n1h57d4dkdgrk2ffn42jq8c8os9ren@4ax.com... > On 10 Nov 2005 23:37:52 -0800, eternalsquire@comcast.net wrote: > > >But there is no such thing as true UK cuisine, it is all bangers and > >wellingtons and steak and kidney pie washed down with lots and lots and > >lots of Guiness. > > But the beer - Guinness or otherwise - must be warm. > Any vegetables must be boiled long enough for whatever taste/texture > they originally had, to be completely lost - including the salads - > and the meat must be so messed about with that you can't tell if it > was steak or kidney. > > Nick - Who actually likes the people living that side of the pond. Messed about with?? normally they come in chunks of pure cut steak but the kidney... uuurgh.. hate it in any shape or form. If your speaking from experience you must have visited some really dodgy restaurants while you were over here. As far as salads go.. they arent cooked they are simply washed and put on the plate. Fancy boiling a salad.. lol... Graham... who also likes "most" Americans ;o) Article: 94899 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: lucifer@eternal-flames.gov Subject: Re: The FAQ - because no-one has an alternative one. Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 18:56:29 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <72q9n1hr70kdr5j8o64sogknoguu5am604@4ax.com> References: <56n0n1l3sndpim3jvoinp83jdt4g7n333g@4ax.com> <11n3jc8jkp8qce6@corp.supernews.com> <1131601236.250700.67440@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <11n67208m80jfd9@corp.supernews.com> <3096n1djlvdgr0q2idsv1dqi9h8hsm201q@4ax.com> <1131694672.489954.115870@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 17:58:22 -0000, "The Magnum" wrote: >Messed about with?? normally they come in chunks of pure cut steak but the >kidney... uuurgh.. hate it in any shape or form. If your speaking from >experience you must have visited some really dodgy restaurants while you >were over here. I am over here old son... As a glance at the message header would tell you. >As far as salads go.. they arent cooked they are simply >washed and put on the plate. Fancy boiling a salad.. lol... You might want to try: http://tinyurl.com/7fpqx I was merely agreeing with our colonial cousin, that English cuisine was not up to much. >Graham... who also likes "most" Americans ;o) Old Nick. Article: 94900 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: microwaves@blueyonder.co.uk (Peter) Subject: Re: The FAQ - because no-one has an alternative one. Message-ID: <4374f11e.21260931@news.blueyonder.co.uk> References: <0KRbf.6157$m81.2342@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net> <56n0n1l3sndpim3jvoinp83jdt4g7n333g@4ax.com> <11n3jc8jkp8qce6@corp.supernews.com> <1131601236.250700.67440@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <11n67208m80jfd9@corp.supernews.com> Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 19:29:55 GMT On Thu, 10 Nov 2005 02:09:01 -0800, Roy Lewallen wrote: >Shame and embarrassment are two others. > >Roy Lewallen, W7EL You got in one Rod :-) Peter, G3PHO Article: 94901 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: microwaves@blueyonder.co.uk (Peter) Subject: Re: FAQ, just what is Ham Radio? Message-ID: <4376f24b.21562134@news.blueyonder.co.uk> References: <1131719903.005850.10610@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 19:38:44 GMT On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 14:45:32 GMT, Dave wrote: >Thank you Mr Bean, an interesting read :-) > >Dave I know you jest with the praise Dave but why quote Bean's diatribe again in full? Many of us have kill filed Bean in the hope we never see any of his stuff again so it comes as a shock to the system to see his verbal;garbage once more... it hasn't changed in years. I won' t see Beanie's reply to this post as he's in my kill file but I guess it will contain the words " You behave like a child... grow up OM!" He has macro keys on his computer to generate most of this stuff.. 73 Peter, G3PHO Article: 94902 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: microwaves@blueyonder.co.uk (Peter) Subject: Re: The FAQ - because no-one has an alternative one. Message-ID: <4375f163.21329670@news.blueyonder.co.uk> References: <0KRbf.6157$m81.2342@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net> <56n0n1l3sndpim3jvoinp83jdt4g7n333g@4ax.com> <11n3jc8jkp8qce6@corp.supernews.com> <1131601236.250700.67440@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <11n67208m80jfd9@corp.supernews.com> <3096n1djlvdgr0q2idsv1dqi9h8hsm201q@4ax.com> <1131694672.489954.115870@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 19:58:08 GMT On 10 Nov 2005 23:37:52 -0800, eternalsquire@comcast.net wrote: >But there is no such thing as true UK cuisine, it is all bangers and >wellingtons and steak and kidney pie washed down with lots and lots and >lots of Guiness. Guiness is NOT a UK drink... those Irish folk invented that, begorrah! The UK national drink is tea , made with milk, hot water (and tea of course)... none of the iced tea you Texans seem to like. :-) Steak and kidney pie is actually better washed down with one of the Aussie lagers! Peter, G3PHO Article: 94903 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: Lancer Subject: Re: The FAQ - because no-one has an alternative one. Message-ID: <4374fb62.20112312@2355323778> References: <0KRbf.6157$m81.2342@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net> <56n0n1l3sndpim3jvoinp83jdt4g7n333g@4ax.com> <11n3jc8jkp8qce6@corp.supernews.com> <1131601236.250700.67440@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <11n67208m80jfd9@corp.supernews.com> <3096n1djlvdgr0q2idsv1dqi9h8hsm201q@4ax.com> <1131694672.489954.115870@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <4375f163.21329670@news.blueyonder.co.uk> Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 20:13:59 GMT On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 19:58:08 GMT, microwaves@blueyonder.co.uk (Peter) wrote: >On 10 Nov 2005 23:37:52 -0800, eternalsquire@comcast.net wrote: > >>But there is no such thing as true UK cuisine, it is all bangers and >>wellingtons and steak and kidney pie washed down with lots and lots and >>lots of Guiness. > > >Guiness is NOT a UK drink... those Irish folk invented that, begorrah! > >The UK national drink is tea , made with milk, hot water (and tea of >course)... none of the iced tea you Texans seem to like. :-) > >Steak and kidney pie is actually better washed down with one of the >Aussie lagers! > >Peter, G3PHO Isn't Ireland a part of the U.K? Article: 94904 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: lucifer@eternal-flames.gov Subject: Re: The FAQ - because no-one has an alternative one. Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 20:59:55 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <0KRbf.6157$m81.2342@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net> <56n0n1l3sndpim3jvoinp83jdt4g7n333g@4ax.com> <11n3jc8jkp8qce6@corp.supernews.com> <1131601236.250700.67440@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <11n67208m80jfd9@corp.supernews.com> <3096n1djlvdgr0q2idsv1dqi9h8hsm201q@4ax.com> <1131694672.489954.115870@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <4375f163.21329670@news.blueyonder.co.uk> On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 19:58:08 GMT, microwaves@blueyonder.co.uk (Peter) wrote: >Guiness is NOT a UK drink... those Irish folk invented that, begorrah! > >The UK national drink is tea , made with milk, hot water (and tea of >course)... none of the iced tea you Texans seem to like. :-) > >Steak and kidney pie is actually better washed down with one of the >Aussie lagers! > >Peter, G3PHO Have you not been watching the TV lately Peter? For something that "is not a UK drink" Guinness is getting an awful lot of advertising in prime-time spots. I like the new 'Rhythm of Life' advert... I also quite like cold Guinness (or Murphy's). Certainly better than those pansy Aussie drinks, as drunk by those damned pansy Aussies. ;-) Nick - Winning new friends everywhere. p.s. Guinness is owned by a UK brewer now you know. Article: 94905 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: lucifer@eternal-flames.gov Subject: Re: The FAQ - because no-one has an alternative one. Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 21:06:47 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <0r1an19e59ti8cds43jko1eai7kdhum5p5@4ax.com> References: <0KRbf.6157$m81.2342@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net> <56n0n1l3sndpim3jvoinp83jdt4g7n333g@4ax.com> <11n3jc8jkp8qce6@corp.supernews.com> <1131601236.250700.67440@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <11n67208m80jfd9@corp.supernews.com> <4374f11e.21260931@news.blueyonder.co.uk> On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 19:29:55 GMT, microwaves@blueyonder.co.uk (Peter) wrote: >On Thu, 10 Nov 2005 02:09:01 -0800, Roy Lewallen >wrote: > >>Shame and embarrassment are two others. >> >>Roy Lewallen, W7EL > > >You got in one Rod :-) > >Peter, G3PHO I heard a rumour that you've got it in a tatto on your chest Peter... And! Have inked it onto your driving licence and passport... That's naughty you know. Nick. Article: 94906 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: "The Magnum" Subject: Re: The FAQ - because no-one has an alternative one. Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 21:35:11 -0000 Message-ID: References: <0KRbf.6157$m81.2342@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net> <56n0n1l3sndpim3jvoinp83jdt4g7n333g@4ax.com> <11n3jc8jkp8qce6@corp.supernews.com> <1131601236.250700.67440@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <11n67208m80jfd9@corp.supernews.com> <3096n1djlvdgr0q2idsv1dqi9h8hsm201q@4ax.com> <1131694672.489954.115870@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <4375f163.21329670@news.blueyonder.co.uk> <4374fb62.20112312@2355323778> "Lancer" wrote in message news:4374fb62.20112312@2355323778... > On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 19:58:08 GMT, microwaves@blueyonder.co.uk (Peter) > wrote: > > >On 10 Nov 2005 23:37:52 -0800, eternalsquire@comcast.net wrote: > > > >>But there is no such thing as true UK cuisine, it is all bangers and > >>wellingtons and steak and kidney pie washed down with lots and lots and > >>lots of Guiness. > > > > > >Guiness is NOT a UK drink... those Irish folk invented that, begorrah! > > > >The UK national drink is tea , made with milk, hot water (and tea of > >course)... none of the iced tea you Texans seem to like. :-) > > > >Steak and kidney pie is actually better washed down with one of the > >Aussie lagers! > > > >Peter, G3PHO > > Isn't Ireland a part of the U.K? Southern Ireland isnt. And most of Northern Ireland would disagree too.... Article: 94907 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew Subject: Call for Entries: Home Meadmakers Competition, Feb 2006 IMA Meadfest From: Oskaar Message-ID: Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 21:56:36 GMT Hi All, I'm posting this in this brewing group because I know that there are many brewers who also make wine and mead. I'm looking to get an idea of how many people are planning on entering the competition. Please let us know if you'll be entering any meads. As mentioned above the meads will be judged by commercial mead makers, BJCP certifed Judges and other mead-centric folks. The competition is Feb. 10 - 11 2006 in Boulder, CO. If you have questions about the competition or are uncertain about how to enter, this is the place to find out. For more information go to: http://www.meadfest.com Thanks for your time and consideration Oskaar, your friendly Home Meadmaker Competition Committee Chairman Article: 94908 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: "DrDeath" Subject: Re: The FAQ - because no-one has an alternative one. Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 18:32:50 -0600 Message-ID: <11nae1jjnfdrg0f@corp.supernews.com> References: <0KRbf.6157$m81.2342@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net> <56n0n1l3sndpim3jvoinp83jdt4g7n333g@4ax.com> <11n3jc8jkp8qce6@corp.supernews.com> <1131601236.250700.67440@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <11n67208m80jfd9@corp.supernews.com> <3096n1djlvdgr0q2idsv1dqi9h8hsm201q@4ax.com> <1131694672.489954.115870@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> wrote in message news:1131694672.489954.115870@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > But there is no such thing as true UK cuisine, it is all bangers and > wellingtons and steak and kidney pie washed down with lots and lots and > lots of Guiness. > > But enough about Brits, who are otherwise creators of fine cars, time > traveler shows, absurdist sitcoms, and who invented the art of sarcasm. > > The Eternal Squire > Don't forget they invented the Lucas electrical system (I owned an MGB) and whitworth tools (I also currently own a pre-unit Triumph).LOL Article: 94909 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: "DrDeath" Subject: Re: The FAQ - because no-one has an alternative one. Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 18:41:03 -0600 Message-ID: <11naeh4b9em7eba@corp.supernews.com> References: <0KRbf.6157$m81.2342@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net> <56n0n1l3sndpim3jvoinp83jdt4g7n333g@4ax.com> <11n3jc8jkp8qce6@corp.supernews.com> <1131601236.250700.67440@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <11n67208m80jfd9@corp.supernews.com> <3096n1djlvdgr0q2idsv1dqi9h8hsm201q@4ax.com> <1131694672.489954.115870@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> wrote in message news:k9m8n1h57d4dkdgrk2ffn42jq8c8os9ren@4ax.com... > On 10 Nov 2005 23:37:52 -0800, eternalsquire@comcast.net wrote: > >>But there is no such thing as true UK cuisine, it is all bangers and >>wellingtons and steak and kidney pie washed down with lots and lots and >>lots of Guiness. > > But the beer - Guinness or otherwise - must be warm. > Any vegetables must be boiled long enough for whatever taste/texture > they originally had, to be completely lost - including the salads - > and the meat must be so messed about with that you can't tell if it > was steak or kidney. > > Nick - Who actually likes the people living that side of the pond. > Warm beer sucks, but throughout history that is the way it has always been consumed. I like the people living on that side of the pond. Have they done something personal to you that you hate an entire country? Article: 94911 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: Dr. Anton T. Squeegee Subject: Re: Call for Entries: Home Meadmakers Competition, Feb 2006 IMA Meadfest Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 19:17:43 -0800 Message-ID: References: [This followup was posted to rec.radio.amateur.homebrew and a copy was sent to the cited author.] In article , oskaar@gotmead.com says... > Hi All, > > I'm posting this in this brewing group because I know that there are many > brewers who also make wine and mead. You have the wrong newsgroup. Look at the group name once again for a clue: rec.RADIO.AMATEUR.homebrew. Homebrewing has a different meaning in the context of amateur radio. It refers to the design and construction of radio or electronic test equipment from scratch. As much as I personally like mead, I can say with confidence that you need to double-check your newsgroup names before you post. Keep the peace(es). -- Dr. Anton T. Squeegee, Director, Dutch Surrealist Plumbing Institute. (Known to some as Bruce Lane, ARS KC7GR, kyrrin (a/t) bluefeathertech[d=o=t]calm -- www.bluefeathertech.com "If Salvador Dali had owned a computer, would it have been equipped with surreal ports?" Article: 94912 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew Subject: Re: Call for Entries: Home Meadmakers Competition, Feb 2006 IMA Meadfest From: Oskaar References: Message-ID: Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 03:42:01 GMT Whoopsie! Well, bring a homebrewed radio with you to the meadfest and I'll be happy to pour you a glass of mead! Anyone is welcome. Sorry for the off-topic post! cheers, Oskaar Dr. Anton T. Squeegee wrote in news:MPG.1ddefeb6ae08b30d9896de@192.168.42.131: > [This followup was posted to rec.radio.amateur.homebrew and a copy was > sent to the cited author.] > > In article , > oskaar@gotmead.com says... > >> Hi All, >> >> I'm posting this in this brewing group because I know that there are >> many brewers who also make wine and mead. > > > > You have the wrong newsgroup. Look at the group name once again > for a clue: rec.RADIO.AMATEUR.homebrew. > > Homebrewing has a different meaning in the context of amateur > radio. It refers to the design and construction of radio or electronic > test equipment from scratch. > > As much as I personally like mead, I can say with confidence that > you need to double-check your newsgroup names before you post. > > Keep the peace(es). > > Article: 94913 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: Russ Subject: Re: The FAQ - because no-one has an alternative one. Message-ID: <1av2n1pkijtv0rcisfv4kakcqcejabt2bl@4ax.com> References: <0KRbf.6157$m81.2342@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net> <56n0n1l3sndpim3jvoinp83jdt4g7n333g@4ax.com> <11n3jc8jkp8qce6@corp.supernews.com> <1131601236.250700.67440@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <11n67208m80jfd9@corp.supernews.com> <3096n1djlvdgr0q2idsv1dqi9h8hsm201q@4ax.com> <1131694672.489954.115870@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <11nae1jjnfdrg0f@corp.supernews.com> Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 04:44:47 GMT On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 18:32:50 -0600, "DrDeath" wrote: > wrote in message >news:1131694672.489954.115870@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... >> But there is no such thing as true UK cuisine, it is all bangers and >> wellingtons and steak and kidney pie washed down with lots and lots and >> lots of Guiness. >> >> But enough about Brits, who are otherwise creators of fine cars, time >> traveler shows, absurdist sitcoms, and who invented the art of sarcasm. >> >> The Eternal Squire >> > >Don't forget they invented the Lucas electrical system (I owned an MGB) and >whitworth tools (I also currently own a pre-unit Triumph).LOL > Ahh, Joseph Lucas...the prince of darkness. The warm beer bit comes >from having Lucas also build refrigerators. I too have been the victim of a string of British motorcars. Triumphs and Austins and the odd Lotus. I even race-prepped them. I also get around to flying aboard BAE-146s every once in a while. Just like British sports cars they are. Fast enough, handles like a housefly, not all that comfortable and as noisy as hell with the gates open. R Article: 94914 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: Jim Mueller Subject: Re: odd variable capacitor ? Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 21:46:52 -0700 Message-ID: References: <7n0df.15196$q%.10041@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com> On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 12:44:51 +0000, Henry Kolesnik wrote: > I never heard of the transmitter scam before and I would think that people > would have wanted to hear their favorite 2 or 3 stations. I wonder how they > did the scam? > Hank > "Jim Haynes" wrote in message > news:SaVcf.7676$AS6.7074@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net... >> In article , >> Henry Kolesnik wrote: How could they have 2 or 3 favorite stations if they didn't have a radio? -- Jim Mueller wrongname@nospam.com To get my real email address, replace wrongname with eportiz. Then replace nospam with sacbeemail. Article: 94915 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 01:34:57 -0400 From: Bill Subject: Re: odd variable capacitor ? References: <7n0df.15196$q%.10041@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com> Message-ID: <1c0e4$43757f03$4232bd2e$1386@COQUI.NET> Jim Mueller wrote: > How could they have 2 or 3 favorite stations if they didn't have a radio? > I know it sounds silly but I work in cable tv and everybody seems to have some 'favorite' oddball channel that they are demanding be carried as part of their service. -Bill Article: 94916 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: "xrongor" Subject: Re: odd variable capacitor ? Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 23:56:32 -0700 Message-ID: References: <7n0df.15196$q%.10041@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com> well, if you had more than one transmitter, you could simply act as a repeater and boost the signal on as many stations as you had transmitters. but i just dont see it actually happening. sounds crazy. randy "Henry Kolesnik" wrote in message news:7n0df.15196$q%.10041@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com... >I never heard of the transmitter scam before and I would think that people >would have wanted to hear their favorite 2 or 3 stations. I wonder how >they did the scam? > Hank Article: 94917 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: Dana Subject: Re: FAQ Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 03:02:56 -0500 Message-ID: References: <1129903535.253354.121770@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> The mistake the FCC made was dropping the code requirment down to 5 wpm. Lots of nivices squeeked under the wire. On Tue, 25 Oct 2005, The Magnum wrote: > >>> Yet another reason I will never obtain a ham ticket. >> >> Good news for ham radio! > > Yep, there will be no one left on Ham soon after all the old farts have > died... > >>> You seem to think that >>> your little piece of paper raises your IQ. >> >> Yet with you cber IQ you couldn't pass the test even though the answers >> to the questions are available. > > Try taking an IQ test and i bet theres hardly any difference between you and > most people on CB. The only test you would outshine most CBers would be > radio related... > > > Article: 94918 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: lucifer@eternal-flames.gov Subject: Re: The FAQ - because no-one has an alternative one. Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 08:14:04 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <56n0n1l3sndpim3jvoinp83jdt4g7n333g@4ax.com> <11n3jc8jkp8qce6@corp.supernews.com> <1131601236.250700.67440@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <11n67208m80jfd9@corp.supernews.com> <3096n1djlvdgr0q2idsv1dqi9h8hsm201q@4ax.com> <1131694672.489954.115870@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <11naeh4b9em7eba@corp.supernews.com> On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 18:41:03 -0600, "DrDeath" wrote: >Have they done something >personal to you that you hate an entire country? D'oh! What country are you referring to? Only in case you haven't been reading previous postings, or hadn't looked at the message header... I am English. HTH NIck. Article: 94919 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew Subject: Re: The FAQ - because no-one has an alternative one. From: Steveo Date: 12 Nov 2005 08:23:51 GMT Message-ID: <20051112032351.715$WZ@newsreader.com> References: <56n0n1l3sndpim3jvoinp83jdt4g7n333g@4ax.com> <11n3jc8jkp8qce6@corp.supernews.com> <1131601236.250700.67440@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <11n67208m80jfd9@corp.supernews.com> <3096n1djlvdgr0q2idsv1dqi9h8hsm201q@4ax.com> <1131694672.489954.115870@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <11naeh4b9em7eba@corp.supernews.com> lucifer@eternal-flames.gov wrote: > HTH > > NIck. > >From Nicks Deli? You guys make a pretty good corn-beef'd sandwich. Still running that special on baklava? Article: 94920 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: "realradioham" References: <_Pobf.4907$2y.3846@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net> <0KRbf.6157$m81.2342@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net> <56n0n1l3sndpim3jvoinp83jdt4g7n333g@4ax.com> <11n3jc8jkp8qce6@corp.supernews.com> <1131759013.090249.164400@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: The FAQ - because no-one has an alternative one. Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 08:56:44 -0000 Message-ID: <4375ae4a$1_2@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com> "Polymath" wrote in message news:1131759013.090249.164400@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com... the difference between a _REAL_ Radio Ham > and a CBer-Masquerading-As-A-Radio-Ham? So what does that make me??????????? rrh Article: 94921 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: "The Magnum" Subject: Re: FAQ Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 12:08:12 -0000 Message-ID: References: <1129903535.253354.121770@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1129905039.542653.237720@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <56mil11d1o9mpajvcsq8fnfocq43gv0te1@4ax.com> <11loti63r2mj524@corp.supernews.com> "Dana" wrote in message news:Pine.NEB.4.63.0511120301370.9170@panix1.panix.com... > The mistake the FCC made was dropping the code requirment down to 5 wpm. > Lots of nivices squeeked under the wire. What is this absurd fascination with Morse Code? Wouldnt you rather just talk to people? I know all about the arguements about it getting through when all else fails but is it really life and death?? If i cant get through on the radio I use a Phone or the Internet. After all its just a hobby. Besides, doesnt all that dot dot dot.. dash dash dash give you a headache after a while?? Dont get me wrong, im not having a go at Amateurs im just asking the question.. why is it so important? Regards, Graham Article: 94922 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: "The Magnum" Subject: Re: The FAQ - because no-one has an alternative one. Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 12:31:47 -0000 Message-ID: References: <_Pobf.4907$2y.3846@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net> <0KRbf.6157$m81.2342@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net> <56n0n1l3sndpim3jvoinp83jdt4g7n333g@4ax.com> <11n3jc8jkp8qce6@corp.supernews.com> <1131759013.090249.164400@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <1131764121.650140.292100@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com> wrote in message news:1131764121.650140.292100@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com... > Polymath, you have my profound apologies on behalf of the entire > worldwide ham community for the harm you have suffered. And as I just > said in a seperate thread, it is things like this that make me think > that while governments have a right to demand the addresses of licensed > hams, it no longer has the right to publish them. That goes *double* > for hams who happen to be minors... Sadly, depravity no longer limited > to any single walk of life, and anonymity on the net is an importand > safety measure that should now go hand in hand with exercising the > right to free speech. One thing you must take on board Poly is that these threats that anyone receives arent from just Amateurs/CB'ers. They are from people who use a radio just like they use forums.. to upset and bully people and to force their sometimes vile views upon people. These people are in both Amateur and CB circles. Its not a CB fault, its down pure and simply to "nut jobs" which the majority of CB'ers and Amateurs arent. Unfortunately if you take a stand against these people and your personal info is easily available for these nut jobs then im afraid sometimes you will get threats upon yourself. Just because you post your replys with merely a "Handle" or first name doesnt mean your a cowering hiding lowlife, quite often its because people dont wish to have this s_it from nut jobs thrust upon them. You can still make a valid point without using your traceable details. I know you shouldnt have to worry about such things but we live in the real world. As for the nut jobs... sometimes simply ignoring them is the best thing to do. They crave the attention. If you dont give them the attention they move on. Whatever you say to them they will never change....... 73's Graham Article: 94923 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: class-a-pkearn-zuuzpk@multi-band-cb-is-here---its-as-easy-as-they-say.br.eircom.ie.net (zhpPK ) Subject: Re: FAQ, just what is Ham Radio? Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 13:39:25 GMT Message-ID: <4375f03b.76992518@news.iol.ie> References: <1131719903.005850.10610@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1131731647.609112.91470@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> "an old friend" wrote: > you suose you could enlighten us what you get out posting a reporting > this drivel! who is ''US'' that you talk about ? are you some sort of SHOP STEWARD or WHAT ? Article: 94924 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: class-a-pkearn-zuuzpk@multi-band-cb-is-here---its-as-easy-as-they-say.br.eircom.ie.net (zjjPK ) Subject: Re: FAQ Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 13:51:37 GMT Message-ID: <4375f34c.77777845@news.iol.ie> References: <11m1uj3tniis6b5@corp.supernews.com> <11m3gl19ubk2259@corp.supernews.com> <1130618638.849629.218260@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <5vqdnbys6tnhff7enZ2dnUVZ_tCdnZ2d@giganews.com> Jock. wrote: > Yes, but he's a Yank. oh ... didnt know that. Article: 94925 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: class-a-pkearn-zuuzpk@multi-band-cb-is-here---its-as-easy-as-they-say.br.eircom.ie.net (zjjPK ) Subject: Re: FAQ Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 14:02:05 GMT Message-ID: <4375f3e4.77929901@news.iol.ie> References: <1129903535.253354.121770@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1129905039.542653.237720@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <56mil11d1o9mpajvcsq8fnfocq43gv0te1@4ax.com> <11loti63r2mj524@corp.supernews.com> Dana wrote: > The mistake the FCC made was dropping the code requirment down to 5 wpm. > Lots of nivices squeeked under the wire. the mistake every authority has made is.... when you cheapen a licence , you get lower standards of behaviour being displayed by the licensees. when those who have licences did very little to get that licence they will treat that licence with very little respect. when those licensees are governed by rules/regulations then their behaviour may well become the subject of complaints. complaints must be investigated. this costs money. end result.... lowering the 'cost of administration' allows cb'ers onto amateur bands. cb'ers on amateur bands will cause problems. problems cause complaints. complaints cause investigations. investigations cost money. money that was hoped to have been saved in the first place !! and a lot of this behaviour can be put down to ONE THING. (even the interview with an rsgb president on the arrl website shows this) the plan to get rid of compulsory morse testing for hf access. Article: 94926 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: class-a-pkearn-zuuzpk@multi-band-cb-is-here---its-as-easy-as-they-say.br.eircom.ie.net (zjjPK ) Subject: Re: FAQ Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 14:02:48 GMT Message-ID: <4375f5e3.78440683@news.iol.ie> References: <1129903535.253354.121770@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1129905039.542653.237720@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <56mil11d1o9mpajvcsq8fnfocq43gv0te1@4ax.com> <11loti63r2mj524@corp.supernews.com> "The Magnum" wrote: > > "Dana" wrote in message > news:Pine.NEB.4.63.0511120301370.9170@panix1.panix.com... > > The mistake the FCC made was dropping the code requirment down to 5 wpm. > > Lots of nivices squeeked under the wire. > > What is this absurd fascination with Morse Code? Wouldnt you rather just its not absurd. if you did the morse test you would understand. Article: 94927 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: class-a-pkearn-zuuzpk@multi-band-cb-is-here---its-as-easy-as-they-say.br.eircom.ie.net (zjjPK ) Subject: Re: A different FAQ Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 14:08:48 GMT Message-ID: <4375f6f8.78717547@news.iol.ie> References: <1131138140.860248.93140@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> eternalsquire@comcast.net wrote: > limb, or potentially so, unlicensed people may use the signals MAYDAY > or PAN respectively to call out for help or to warn away on any radio if memory serves me... its a PAN-PAN (spoken three times) > 10) How is amateur radio different from other competing informal radio > operation? > > Some countries do authorize citizen, family, or remote control radio > services restricted to the use of government type-accepted equipment > having fixed frequency channels, limited power, limited antenna size > and/or height, and limited maximum distance. > > Amateur radio is distinguished from these services by virtue of its > special characteristics: a) potentially unlimited range, b) no > restrictions to type-accepted equipment, c) transmission may take > place anywhere within the designated band, d) international > communications are allowed. you left out governed by national legislatio + internationl conventions Article: 94928 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: class-a-pkearn-zuuzpk@multi-band-cb-is-here---its-as-easy-as-they-say.br.eircom.ie.net (zjjPK ) Subject: Re: Naval connection? You qualify for RNARS membership! Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 14:10:18 GMT Message-ID: <4375f78e.78867810@news.iol.ie> References: "Mike" wrote: > > Details and membership application form is available online at > http://www.rnars.org.uk do i get membership for travelling on the B+I & SEALINK ferries as a young lad ?????????? Article: 94929 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: "The Magnum" Subject: Re: FAQ Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 14:58:21 -0000 Message-ID: References: <1129903535.253354.121770@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1129905039.542653.237720@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <56mil11d1o9mpajvcsq8fnfocq43gv0te1@4ax.com> <11loti63r2mj524@corp.supernews.com> <4375f5e3.78440683@news.iol.ie> "zjjPK " wrote in message news:4375f5e3.78440683@news.iol.ie... > "The Magnum" wrote: > > > > > "Dana" wrote in message > > news:Pine.NEB.4.63.0511120301370.9170@panix1.panix.com... > > > The mistake the FCC made was dropping the code requirment down to 5 wpm. > > > Lots of nivices squeeked under the wire. > > > > What is this absurd fascination with Morse Code? Wouldnt you rather just > > > its not absurd. > > if you did the morse test you would understand. Then can you explain it to me then? Im not being flippant, I actually want to know why its important and why, in your words, it drops the quality of people who chose to become Amateur if they don't do morse... why does it make them any less of a good Amateur?... and why do you think that because morse might be dropped the band will become full of CB people who will wreak havoc? And why do you class all CB'ers as the same? Article: 94930 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: class-a-pkearn-zuuzpk@multi-band-cb-is-here---its-as-easy-as-they-say.br.eircom.ie.net (zarPK) Subject: Re: FAQ Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 17:32:43 GMT Message-ID: <437626ab.540424@news.iol.ie> References: <1129903535.253354.121770@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1129905039.542653.237720@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <56mil11d1o9mpajvcsq8fnfocq43gv0te1@4ax.com> <11loti63r2mj524@corp.supernews.com> <4375f5e3.78440683@news.iol.ie> "The Magnum" wrote: > Then can you explain it to me then? Im not being flippant, I actually want > to know why its important and why, in your words, it drops the quality of > people who chose to become Amateur if they don't do morse... why does it > make them any less of a good Amateur?... and why do you think that because > morse might be dropped the band will become full of CB people who will wreak > havoc? And why do you class all CB'ers as the same? all you have to do is observe the behaviour on this newsgroup. the outrageous foul language used. and then listen to 40m by even attempting to do the morse test shows an attempt and willingness to improve. something that 2500 showed they didnt have when they ran away. and worse... they showed it to the authorities. Article: 94931 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: class-a-pkearn-zuuzpk@multi-band-cb-is-here---its-as-easy-as-they-say.br.eircom.ie.net (zarPK) Subject: Re: FAQ Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 17:35:58 GMT Message-ID: <4376275c.717882@news.iol.ie> References: <1129903535.253354.121770@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1129905039.542653.237720@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <56mil11d1o9mpajvcsq8fnfocq43gv0te1@4ax.com> <11loti63r2mj524@corp.supernews.com> <4375f3e4.77929901@news.iol.ie> <1131815524.194690.37610@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> "an_old_friend" wrote: > > zjjPK wrote: > > Dana wrote: > > > > > The mistake the FCC made was dropping the code requirment down to 5 wpm. > > > Lots of nivices squeeked under the wire. > > > > the mistake every authority has made is.... > > > > when you cheapen a licence , you get lower standards of behaviour being > > displayed by the licensees. > > suppositions and unsuported never listened to the bands in the last two years then ? > > > > when those who have licences did very little to get that licence they will > > treat that licence with very little respect. > > again suposition never listened to the bands in the last two years then ? > > > > > when those licensees are governed by rules/regulations then their > > behaviour may well become the subject of complaints. > > > > complaints must be investigated. > > this costs money. > > not realy the FCC did not bother with complaints for many years > > that is why the bands got trashy and they will continue to get 'trashy' if 'u' are given a licence for almost no-effort then that licence is worthless because when lost ..it represents no-amount of effort. Article: 94932 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: class-a-pkearn-zuuzpk@multi-band-cb-is-here---its-as-easy-as-they-say.br.eircom.ie.net (zarPK) Subject: Re: FAQ, just what is Ham Radio? Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 17:37:16 GMT Message-ID: <43762817.904522@news.iol.ie> References: <1131719903.005850.10610@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1131731647.609112.91470@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <4375f03b.76992518@news.iol.ie> <1131816097.135014.66360@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> "an_old_friend" wrote: > > who is ''US'' that you talk about ? > you don't know > sheessh i suppose the fact that i asked wasnt enough for you to supply an answer ? > > are you some sort of SHOP STEWARD or WHAT ? > nope didnt think so. Article: 94933 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: "Walter Raleigh" References: <1131719903.005850.10610@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1131731647.609112.91470@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <4375f03b.76992518@news.iol.ie> <1131816097.135014.66360@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: FAQ, just what is Ham Radio? Message-ID: Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 18:19:53 -0000 "an_old_friend" wrote in message news:1131816097.135014.66360@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com... Don't worry, it's just another example of the Doobalin illiterati returning to the fold after a far too brief absence... -- 73s de Walter R. Article: 94934 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: "The Magnum" Subject: Re: FAQ Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 19:22:45 -0000 Message-ID: References: <1129903535.253354.121770@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1129905039.542653.237720@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <56mil11d1o9mpajvcsq8fnfocq43gv0te1@4ax.com> <11loti63r2mj524@corp.supernews.com> <4375f3e4.77929901@news.iol.ie> "zjjPK " wrote in message news:4375f3e4.77929901@news.iol.ie... > Dana wrote: > > > The mistake the FCC made was dropping the code requirment down to 5 wpm. > > Lots of nivices squeeked under the wire. Lol, great command of the English language there. I wonder if his morse is as bad........ > the mistake every authority has made is.... > > when you cheapen a licence , you get lower standards of behaviour being > displayed by the licensees. I disagree. There might be one or two idiots but that doesnt fall completely at the ease of getting the licence. > when those who have licences did very little to get that licence they will > treat that licence with very little respect. Once again, after showing a willingness to actually bother to get licenced, being it easy or not, they have to purchase the said equipment. Surely your not saying CB'ers who dont give a rats ass about Amateur are spending their hard earnt? money on Amateur kit, and getting registered so you can find out who and where they are... just to mess about and upset a few advanced Amateurs? Seems a very strange way of going about things. Surely these idiot users are more likely the completely unlicenced users on stolen radios or kids messing about on parents radios while they are out rather than someone who wants to become a "first step" Amateur? Also quite a few people who gain M3 licences or whatever the equivelent in the US surely would go on to intermediate and so on rather than just stop there. A few will yes but many will want to progress. > when those licensees are governed by rules/regulations then their > behaviour may well become the subject of complaints. Or maybe not....... your now trying to say Amateurs above the entry level never cause interference or mess about sometimes on the air.... b-ll-cks. > complaints must be investigated. > this costs money. yes........ > end result.... > lowering the 'cost of administration' allows cb'ers onto amateur bands. Err, whats wrong with CBers becoming radio Amateurs? Its happened for years and years....long before the licence was made easier. And most of them became perfectly respected Amateurs. > cb'ers on amateur bands will cause problems. NO....idiots on Amateur bands will cause problems. Or do you tar all CB radio users with the same brush? > problems cause complaints. Yes......... > complaints cause investigations. Yes............ > investigations cost money. Yes...... > money that was hoped to have been saved in the first place !! Saved for what? The fully licenced Annual Amateur Jamboree ? > and a lot of this behaviour can be put down to ONE THING. > (even the interview with an rsgb president on the arrl website shows this) Oh in that case it must be right then..... > the plan to get rid of compulsory morse testing for hf access. For gods sake... morse isnt the "be all and end all of radio", its an old out-dated form of communication which had its use in the past but is now just a form of elitist snobbery. Also trying to say anyone who doesnt want to learn morse is basically a "scumbag" shows Bigotry beyond contempt. Why not welcome the new Amateurs and encorage them to advance rather than look down on them. The licence was made easier because the userbase of Amateur was drastically on the decline. It was done to encorage more people to get involved and keep the "hobby" alive. Regards, Graham Article: 94935 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: Bill Janssen Subject: Re: 1936 vintage rig References: <1131716834.266593.323410@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <9fadne4s7-K2HejenZ2dnUVZ_tOdnZ2d@comcast.com> Message-ID: <0mrdf.2322$lg.133@news01.roc.ny> Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 19:26:52 GMT This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------070504040208000808030500 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit gb wrote: >"MadEngineer" wrote in message >news:1131716834.266593.323410@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com... > > >>Hi All, >> >>My father, W7GEG, got his ticket in 1936 when he was in high school. >>Like many others, he built his first rig. His transmitter was based on >>an 809 tube and had plug-in coils to switch bands. His receiver was a >>three-tube regenerative, but he doesn't remember the tube types. He >>worked mainly 40 meters. According to my dad, both designs were very >>popular at the time. >> >>The rig worked the first time, and was a thrilling experience for him. >>"I probably wouldn't have gone into a technical career had the radio >>not worked," he told me. He holds a PhD in physics. >> >>Can any old-timers out there help me with any information regarding >>what he might have built? I thought I might try to either find or >>build a similar rig as a gift, or at least present him with the plans >>the equipment was based on. >> >>Thanks, 73, >>Glenn Dixon AC7ZN >> >> >> > >Glenn- Google search for "GlowBugs" > >Here is an 809 used as a final amplifier in a homebrew design (AB0CW) >http://www.qsl.net/ab0cw/809pa.htm > >The 807 was also a very popular tube of that era >http://www.qsl.net/ab4yd/myprojects/index.htm > >http://www.qsl.net/ab4yd/myprojects/80m_807_a/final.jpg > >Some transmitter designs >http://www.mines.uidaho.edu/%7eglowbugs/tx/index.html > > > > And if you decide you need some parts I am sure that I and others can come up with most. Post your need here and some body will have what you need. Bill K7NOM --------------070504040208000808030500 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit gb wrote:
"MadEngineer" <glenn.b.dixon@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:1131716834.266593.323410@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
  
Hi All,

My father, W7GEG, got his ticket in 1936 when he was in high school.
Like many others, he built his first rig.  His transmitter was based on
an 809 tube and had plug-in coils to switch bands.  His receiver was a
three-tube regenerative, but he doesn't remember the tube types.  He
worked mainly 40 meters.  According to my dad, both designs were very
popular at the time.

The rig worked the first time, and was a thrilling experience for him.
"I probably wouldn't have gone into a technical career had the radio
not worked," he told me.  He holds a PhD in physics.

Can any old-timers out there help me with any information regarding
what he might have built?  I thought I might try to either find or
build a similar rig as a gift, or at least present him with the plans
the equipment was based on.

Thanks, 73,
Glenn Dixon AC7ZN

    

Glenn- Google search for "GlowBugs"

Here is an 809 used as a final amplifier in a homebrew design (AB0CW)
http://www.qsl.net/ab0cw/809pa.htm

The 807 was also a very popular tube of that era
http://www.qsl.net/ab4yd/myprojects/index.htm

http://www.qsl.net/ab4yd/myprojects/80m_807_a/final.jpg

Some transmitter designs
http://www.mines.uidaho.edu/%7eglowbugs/tx/index.html


  
And if you decide you need some parts I am sure that I and others can come up
with most. Post your need here and some body will have what you need.

Bill K7NOM
--------------070504040208000808030500-- Article: 94936 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: "Walter Raleigh" References: <1131719903.005850.10610@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1131731647.609112.91470@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <4375f03b.76992518@news.iol.ie> Subject: Re: FAQ, just what is Ham Radio? Message-ID: Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 02:09:38 -0000 "zhpPK " wrote in message news:4375f03b.76992518@news.iol.ie... > "an old friend" wrote: > >> you suose you could enlighten us what you get out posting a reporting >> this drivel! > > > who is ''US'' that you talk about ? > > > are you some sort of SHOP STEWARD or WHAT ? Bearing in mind the mis-spellings et al., perhaps Paul, before you resume cyber-stalking G8OSN, you could enlighten us as to what right you have above the previous poster, to speak on behalf of all the participants here? A weak argument, based on a weak initial post methinks... Just being fair... -- 73s de Walter R. Article: 94937 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: "Walter Raleigh" References: <1131719903.005850.10610@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1131731647.609112.91470@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <4375f03b.76992518@news.iol.ie> <1131816097.135014.66360@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <1131830838.965951.205690@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: FAQ, just what is Ham Radio? Message-ID: Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 02:13:35 -0000 "an_old_friend" wrote in message news:1131830838.965951.205690@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > > sorry but some where in there info stopped being tranfered? who > returning? if you would be so kind Paul Kearney EI7GM aka Rumpelstilskin, google for more, a search by "pkearn", a segment of his mail address used most frequently is most effective. Be warned, boredom may set in rather quickly.... -- 73s de Walter R. Article: 94938 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: gadge Subject: Re: FAQ, just what is Ham Radio? Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 10:31:51 +0000 Message-ID: References: <1131719903.005850.10610@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 06:38:23 -0800, Polymath wrote: > > A CB Radio hobbyist, on the other hand, sees no difference between a Ham > Radio licence and a CB Radio licence. To him, they are > sisters-under-the-skin. I'm not a cb'er, never was and never will be and ham radio still looks like cb to me! Why is that? > Wrongly, the CB Radio Hobbyist then tries to > classify himself as the equal of the Radio Ham when, in fact, he is > nothing of the kind. A sure sign of a CB Radio hobbyist is if he holds, or > has ever held, a licence issued under the gangrenous degeneration that is > the M3/CB Fools' Licence scheme. There are many ex/current cb'ers who are G/M0 class and proud of it. > -----ooooo----- > > One group of people who claim to be of the standard of Radio Hams but who > are in reality nothing more than an apology for the failure of a CBer are > those class B licensees who falsely proclaimed that they were against the > use of a Morse Test to control access to the HF bands, until, that is, a > test was introduced at their intellectual level, the intellectual level of > 6-year-olds. Rubbish. Some of us have passed electronics course/exams at BSC honours level and yet we are not interested in the slightest with morse. > 6 year-olds simply lack the mathematical tool kit to enable them to handle > even the simplest algebraic manipulation for Ohm's Law and thus, And how good are you with tensors old chap. the > disgraceful Class Ber's in the aforementioned category are not Radio Hams > by any stretch of the imagination! You mistakenly ascribe too much to the ability to *jerk* a morse key old boy. > > Remember - A sure sign of a CB Radio hobbyist is if he holds, or has ever > held, a licence issued under the gangrenous degeneration that is the M3/CB > Fools' Licence scheme! Article: 94939 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: Nedlar Subject: Re: FAQ, just what is Ham Radio? Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 15:01:05 +0000 Message-ID: References: <1131719903.005850.10610@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1131731647.609112.91470@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <4375f03b.76992518@news.iol.ie> On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 02:09:38 -0000, "Walter Raleigh" wrote: >? > >Bearing in mind the mis-spellings et al., perhaps Paul, before you resume >cyber-stalking G8OSN, you could enlighten us as to what right you have above >the previous poster, to speak on behalf of all the participants here? A weak >argument, based on a weak initial post methinks... There you go again....attempting to think... > >Just being fair... Just being honest... Article: 94940 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: Nedlar Subject: Re: FAQ, just what is Ham Radio? Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 15:05:02 +0000 Message-ID: <5alen1tng61m8uqgq4sj4do54ka3t0mu7v@4ax.com> References: <1131719903.005850.10610@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 10:31:51 +0000, gadge wrote: > >I'm not a cb'er, never was and never will be and ham radio still looks >like cb to me! Why is that? Because the amateur bands are now full of brain-dead, non-technical CBrs. > >There are many ex/current cb'ers who are G/M0 class and proud of it. That's why 'ham radio still looks like CB' , as you so correctly put it. >Rubbish. Some of us have passed electronics course/exams at BSC honours >level and yet we are not interested in the slightest with morse. That old excuse has been around for decades. It's just as dishonest now as it's always been. It's usually trotted out by CBrs and the lazy-arsed. Article: 94941 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: Jock. Subject: Re: FAQ, just what is Ham Radio? Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 15:54:15 +0000 Message-ID: References: <1131719903.005850.10610@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 10:31:51 +0000, gadge wrote: >I'm not a cb'er, never was and never will be and ham radio still looks >like cb to me! Why is that? Delighted to hear it. "Ham" radio looks like CB because of the number of CB-ers now infesting it. >Rubbish. Some of us have passed electronics course/exams at BSC honours >level.... Nothing to do with radio, amateur or otherwise. -- 73 de Jock. Aircraft stay in the sky in much the same way that bricks don't. Article: 94942 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: class-a-pkearn-zuuzpk@multi-band-cb-is-here---its-as-easy-as-they-say.br.eircom.ie.net (zarPK) Subject: Re: FAQ, just what is Ham Radio? Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 16:09:56 GMT Message-ID: <4377649e.81947528@news.iol.ie> References: <1131719903.005850.10610@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1131731647.609112.91470@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <4375f03b.76992518@news.iol.ie> "Walter Raleigh" wrote: > > who is ''US'' that you talk about ? > > > > > > are you some sort of SHOP STEWARD or WHAT ? > > Bearing in mind the mis-spellings et al., perhaps Paul, before you resume whaton earth are you on about ? the other bloke used the term US **not me** open your eyes please !! > ______________ _____, you could enlighten us as to what right you have above i sincerely hope for your sake that no such crime exists. i also sincerely hope that you look in the mirror. > the previous poster, to speak on behalf of all the participants here? A weak > argument, based on a weak initial post methinks... > > Just being fair... fair ? FAIR ! bwwwwwwwwaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh youre the one who publishes my name on here and yet REFUSES to do the same with YOUR OWN NAME ! you also pub;lish a comment about automatics and 'jackeen ethnic cleansing' and refuse to clarify if this is some threat ! Article: 94943 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: class-a-pkearn-zuuzpk@multi-band-cb-is-here---its-as-easy-as-they-say.br.eircom.ie.net (zarPK) Subject: Re: FAQ Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 16:14:12 GMT Message-ID: <43776650.82381970@news.iol.ie> References: <1129903535.253354.121770@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1129905039.542653.237720@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <56mil11d1o9mpajvcsq8fnfocq43gv0te1@4ax.com> <11loti63r2mj524@corp.supernews.com> <4375f3e4.77929901@news.iol.ie> "The Magnum" wrote: > just a form of elitist snobbery. Also trying to say anyone who doesnt want > to learn morse is basically a "scumbag" shows Bigotry beyond contempt. Why I said no such thing ! you have some correcting to do. Article: 94944 of rec.radio.amateur.homebrew From: class-a-pkearn-zuuzpk@multi-band-cb-is-here---its-as-easy-as-they-say.br.eircom.ie.net (zarPK) Subject: Re: FAQ, just what is Ham Radio? Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 16:14:24 GMT Message-ID: <43776657.82388286@news.iol.ie> References: <1131719903.005850.10610@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1131731647.609112.91470@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <4375f03b.76992518@news.iol.ie> <1131816097.135014.66360@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <1131830838.965951.205690@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> "an_old_friend" wrote: > > Walter Raleigh wrote: > > "an_old_friend" wrote in message > > news:1131816097.135014.66360@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com... > > > > Don't worry, it's just another example of the Doobalin illiterati returning > > to the fold after a far too brief absence... > > sorry but some where in there info stopped being tranfered? who > returning? if you would be so kind ha ha ha.. yes wallyrally... start speaking with intelligence... (not mention a spellchecker + decent keyboard)