"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 7 Jan 2005 10:57:27 -0500, (Twistedhed)
wrote:

From: (Dave Hall) wrote:
The "DX" has nothing to do with the amount of splatter and the
distortion a signal may have. The only effect that "DX" may have is
heterodyning of co-channel signals. In any case, when my observations
were made, the "DX" was not running heavy enough that a clean sample
of any particular transmission could not be made.

Ummm, no Dave. DX has everything to do with DX splatter.


I find it absoutely astounding this is lost upon you

That's not surprising considering you once tried to tell me (and the
group) that a 4 watt skip station 1000 miles away could potentially
walk on top of a 4 watt station a half mile away, totally disregarding
the effects of R.F. path loss.

of your recent comments self-professing an incredible amount of adept
and technical radio knowledge. Coupled with your claim concerning roger
beeps and echo on cb being illegal (they're not) merely because you were
unable to locate a rule specifically permitting their use, and it merits

There are specific rules which specifically prohibit devices used for
"entertainment" and "amusement" purposes. There is also a specific
rule which outlines permitted tone signals. A Roger Beep is not listed
under permissible tone signals. Following simple logic, since there is
no valid rule which permits a particular device, then the device
defaults to one of "amusement or entertainment" status and is
prohibited.

So therefore it can be assumed that a roger beep and (even more
definite) an echo box could be considered "entertainment" or
"amusement" devices and, as such, are specifically prohibited.

You can make the point that the FCC doesn't care enough to make a case
about these things, and I would probably agree with you. But the fact
remains that they are prohibited by the rules.

We've gone over this before Dave, your wrong.

same flaw.

Dave
"Sandbagger"

On Sat, 08 Jan 2005 05:19:54 GMT, "Landshark"
wrote in :


"Dave Hall" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 7 Jan 2005 10:57:27 -0500, (Twistedhed)
wrote:

From: (Dave Hall) wrote:
The "DX" has nothing to do with the amount of splatter and the
distortion a signal may have. The only effect that "DX" may have is
heterodyning of co-channel signals. In any case, when my observations
were made, the "DX" was not running heavy enough that a clean sample
of any particular transmission could not be made.

Ummm, no Dave. DX has everything to do with DX splatter.


He's right, Dave. You can receive more than one skip signal from the
same transmission, and their phasing can cause intermodulation
distortion in any RF stage of your receiver. All that's required is
enough non-linearity in just one stage and the signals will modulate
each other. The result is what appears to be splatter but is really a
fault of the receiver. Happens all the time with cheap shortwave
radios. And DX doesn't have to be up to get a good signal -- I have
heard many clear DX signals from seemingly dead bands.

On Fri, 07 Jan 2005 21:36:36 -0800, Frank Gilliland
wrote:

On Sat, 08 Jan 2005 05:19:54 GMT, "Landshark"
wrote in :


"Dave Hall" wrote in message
. ..
On Fri, 7 Jan 2005 10:57:27 -0500, (Twistedhed)
wrote:

From: (Dave Hall) wrote:
The "DX" has nothing to do with the amount of splatter and the
distortion a signal may have. The only effect that "DX" may have is
heterodyning of co-channel signals. In any case, when my observations
were made, the "DX" was not running heavy enough that a clean sample
of any particular transmission could not be made.

Ummm, no Dave. DX has everything to do with DX splatter.


He's right, Dave. You can receive more than one skip signal from the
same transmission, and their phasing can cause intermodulation
distortion in any RF stage of your receiver.

No dice Frank. The effect you have described is commonly referred to
as "multipath". The differences in phase angles of the received
signals can cause either an addition to or a subtraction from the
fundamental signal. But it does not cause it to splatter. A special
form of this is called "selective fading" which can cause different
parts of the signal to fade differently, which can distort the audio.
But this is not "splatter, and will not make the signal "bleed" more.
Heck the HF ham bands are almost always utilizing skywave propagation.
If what you say were true, then the ham bands would be virtually
unusable due to all the signals splattering across the band. With the
exception of a few bad apples running some illegal equipment, this is
normally not a problem.

All that's required is
enough non-linearity in just one stage and the signals will modulate
each other.

I have never seen this happen in any of the quality receivers I've
owned over the years.

Unless the signal is in motion (doppler effect) the frequency will
remain the same even if the phase shifts. Since all the multipath
signal frequencies are the same, there will be no mixing products
generated.

If that were the case, then any group of signals, local or skip, would
do the same thing. That's not something that you'd want in a good
receiver. But you can't pin the faults of a bad receiver design on
atmospheric phenomenon.

This is almost as hokey as saying that a certain antenna will make you
sound "louder".

Propagation, like antennas, are passive. It only radiates or
re-radiates a signal. It does not modify it . If a signal is clean,
then the propagation will propagate it as such.

The result is what appears to be splatter but is really a
fault of the receiver. Happens all the time with cheap shortwave
radios.

Ah! But why do you assume that I have a "cheap shortwave radio"?

What happens when you put a low noise GasFET preamp behind a bandpass
filter and then into a spectrum analyzer? Surely you know what
splatter looks like on a spectral display?

And DX doesn't have to be up to get a good signal -- I have
heard many clear DX signals from seemingly dead bands.

A clear, and stable DX condition will not distort a radio signal.

A station which is backswinging wildly, with fuzzy distorted audio,
and splattering 3 channels in each direction, is running illegally,
regardless of the fact that the FCC hasn't yet cited them for it.

Dave
"Sandbagger"

On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 10:50:05 -0500, Dave Hall
wrote in :

On Fri, 07 Jan 2005 21:36:36 -0800, Frank Gilliland
wrote:

On Sat, 08 Jan 2005 05:19:54 GMT, "Landshark"
wrote in :


"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 7 Jan 2005 10:57:27 -0500, (Twistedhed)
wrote:

From: (Dave Hall) wrote:
The "DX" has nothing to do with the amount of splatter and the
distortion a signal may have. The only effect that "DX" may have is
heterodyning of co-channel signals. In any case, when my observations
were made, the "DX" was not running heavy enough that a clean sample
of any particular transmission could not be made.

Ummm, no Dave. DX has everything to do with DX splatter.


He's right, Dave. You can receive more than one skip signal from the
same transmission, and their phasing can cause intermodulation
distortion in any RF stage of your receiver.

No dice Frank. The effect you have described is commonly referred to
as "multipath".


a.k.a, "fading".


The differences in phase angles of the received
signals can cause either an addition to or a subtraction from the
fundamental signal. But it does not cause it to splatter.


No it doesn't, and that's not what I said. I said that a non-linear
stage in the receiver can turn that fading into what appears to be
splatter. If you want an example I have a couple cheap shortwave
radios that do exactly that; you pay for shipping and you can examine
them all you want.

On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 09:33:27 -0800, Frank Gilliland
wrote:


He's right, Dave. You can receive more than one skip signal from the
same transmission, and their phasing can cause intermodulation
distortion in any RF stage of your receiver.

No dice Frank. The effect you have described is commonly referred to
as "multipath".


a.k.a, "fading".


The differences in phase angles of the received
signals can cause either an addition to or a subtraction from the
fundamental signal. But it does not cause it to splatter.


No it doesn't, and that's not what I said. I said that a non-linear
stage in the receiver can turn that fading into what appears to be
splatter. If you want an example I have a couple cheap shortwave
radios that do exactly that; you pay for shipping and you can examine
them all you want.


You may very well have an example of what you've described. But that
doesn't mean that I do, or that I am incapable of distinguishing
between receiver quirks and actual on-air splatter caused by an
illegal transmitter. In many cases, I've used different radios (I have
enough of them) as well as test equipment to make my determination.

Do you really want to argue the point just because you're smarting
with me right now? You, of all people, know what an illegal operator
sounds like.

Dave
"Sandbagger"

On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 11:21:28 -0500, Dave Hall
wrote in :

On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 09:33:27 -0800, Frank Gilliland
wrote:


He's right, Dave. You can receive more than one skip signal from the
same transmission, and their phasing can cause intermodulation
distortion in any RF stage of your receiver.

No dice Frank. The effect you have described is commonly referred to
as "multipath".


a.k.a, "fading".


The differences in phase angles of the received
signals can cause either an addition to or a subtraction from the
fundamental signal. But it does not cause it to splatter.


No it doesn't, and that's not what I said. I said that a non-linear
stage in the receiver can turn that fading into what appears to be
splatter. If you want an example I have a couple cheap shortwave
radios that do exactly that; you pay for shipping and you can examine
them all you want.


You may very well have an example of what you've described. But that
doesn't mean that I do, or that I am incapable of distinguishing
between receiver quirks and actual on-air splatter caused by an
illegal transmitter. In many cases, I've used different radios (I have
enough of them) as well as test equipment to make my determination.

Do you really want to argue the point just because you're smarting
with me right now? You, of all people, know what an illegal operator
sounds like.


Well gee Dave, I'm just suggesting there's another possibility for the
splatter instead of illegal behavior. You know, kinda like your
suggestions that there were other reasons for voting irregularities in
Ohio. How can you be so 'open minded' on one topic yet be so quick to
condemn on another?






----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

Dave Hall wrote:
You, of all people, know what an illegal operator
sounds like.

Auuuuuuuddddiiiooo..auuuuuuudddddiiioooo.

click click g

"Steveo" wrote in message
...
Dave Hall wrote:
You, of all people, know what an illegal operator
sounds like.

Auuuuuuuddddiiiooo..auuuuuuudddddiiioooo.

click click g

Careful, click click is considered amusement and
you microphone would then be illegal :P

Landshark

--
My bad..the camera is mightier than the blowhard(s)..in most respects.

On Sat, 08 Jan 2005 05:19:54 GMT, "Landshark"
wrote:


"Dave Hall" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 7 Jan 2005 10:57:27 -0500, (Twistedhed)
wrote:

From: (Dave Hall) wrote:
The "DX" has nothing to do with the amount of splatter and the
distortion a signal may have. The only effect that "DX" may have is
heterodyning of co-channel signals. In any case, when my observations
were made, the "DX" was not running heavy enough that a clean sample
of any particular transmission could not be made.

Ummm, no Dave. DX has everything to do with DX splatter.

No, it doesn't. Dx is simply an enhancement of the atmosphere which
allows a signal to propagate farther then normal line of sight. It
does not add "splatter" to an otherwise clean signal.


So therefore it can be assumed that a roger beep and (even more
definite) an echo box could be considered "entertainment" or
"amusement" devices and, as such, are specifically prohibited.

You can make the point that the FCC doesn't care enough to make a case
about these things, and I would probably agree with you. But the fact
remains that they are prohibited by the rules.

We've gone over this before Dave, your wrong.


I have referenced two part 95 rules which address both the issue of
permissible non-voice transmissions and also prohibited transmissions
which include devices which are used for entertainment and amusement.

Conversely there are no rules which specifically allow either a roger
beep (and other noise makers) or echo boxes. Since neither are defined
under permissible non-voice transmissions, it can reasonably be
concluded that these devices would be considered amusement or
entertainment devices, and as such prohibited.

You tell me I'm wrong, then please prove it by providing the rules
which allow these devices.

Dave
"Sandbagger"

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 08 Jan 2005 05:19:54 GMT, "Landshark"
wrote:


"Dave Hall" wrote in message
. ..
On Fri, 7 Jan 2005 10:57:27 -0500, (Twistedhed)
wrote:

From: (Dave Hall) wrote:
The "DX" has nothing to do with the amount of splatter and the
distortion a signal may have. The only effect that "DX" may have is
heterodyning of co-channel signals. In any case, when my observations
were made, the "DX" was not running heavy enough that a clean sample
of any particular transmission could not be made.

Ummm, no Dave. DX has everything to do with DX splatter.

No, it doesn't. Dx is simply an enhancement of the atmosphere which
allows a signal to propagate farther then normal line of sight. It
does not add "splatter" to an otherwise clean signal.

Ah, that explains everything. So when a normal channel
has maybe 5 to 10 operators, add another 100 because of
skip conditions, of course there will be some running
clipped & mod radio's, you don't think that enhances
the splatter?



So therefore it can be assumed that a roger beep and (even more
definite) an echo box could be considered "entertainment" or
"amusement" devices and, as such, are specifically prohibited.

You can make the point that the FCC doesn't care enough to make a case
about these things, and I would probably agree with you. But the fact
remains that they are prohibited by the rules.

We've gone over this before Dave, your wrong.


I have referenced two part 95 rules which address both the issue of
permissible non-voice transmissions and also prohibited transmissions
which include devices which are used for entertainment and amusement.

Conversely there are no rules which specifically allow either a roger
beep (and other noise makers) or echo boxes. Since neither are defined
under permissible non-voice transmissions, it can reasonably be
concluded that these devices would be considered amusement or
entertainment devices, and as such prohibited.

You tell me I'm wrong, then please prove it by providing the rules
which allow these devices.

If I showed you CB radio's being sold BRAND NEW
with roger beeps, will that do?


Dave
"Sandbagger"

Landshark


--
Is it so frightening to have me at your shoulder?
Thunder and lightning couldn't be bolder.
I'll write on your tombstone, ``I thank you for dinner.''
This game that we animals play is a winner.