| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#122
October 6th 04, 02:40 AM
|
|||
|
|||
PAMNO (N2EY) wrote in message ...
In article , Dave Heil writes: Len Over 21 wrote: In article , (N2EY) writes: (Avery Fineman)(so desperate to get past spam filters that he changes screen names)wrote in message ... In article , PAMNO (N2EY) writes: So...was all this "phase noise" invisible way back in the 1990 time? It didn't exist? That you didn't read the published material does not mean that the material did not exist. The synthesizer phase noise issue was debated well before 1990. It is referred to in QST product reviews of ~20 years ago. Thus the tube radio. No synthesizer. What a wunderful way around it. Hi, hi! It only came up when a frequency synthesizer was incorporated? :-) Synthesizers were in wide use prior to 1990. Extreme wide use. The phase noise issue became important as synthesizer circuits became common in transceivers. The phase noise issue became an issue with the first synthesizer circuit. I'll invite to read up on the subject. Ditto. I've provided several urls. Ho ho! There are numerous other sources of information on the subject. Why not avail yourself of some of them? Compare the transmitted noise spectra of an SG2020, Elecraft K2, and K1. Guess where that noise comes from? Synthesizer circuits? R70s were made 1982-84 (approximately), so the design is at least 23 years old (1981). You frequenctly denigrate others as "behind the times", yet the R70 is the newest/most modern piece of HF radio equipment you mention owning. Just another example of "do as Len says, not as Len does". That little Icom R-70 still works fine, as advertised. While I doubt that the receiver functions as advertised, I have no trouble believing that it works as designed. Ya missed the point. Ooops! Other designs are criticized because of age - but not the R-70. Guess why. Schindler? I've got one. You don't. :-) Don't want one. If somebody gave me one, I'd sell it. And do what with the money? I'm sure it is quite a nice piece of equipment for the casual SWL. I'm happy for you. Happiness abounds in RRAP! The only thing I "recycled" was some paper to get one in working order. :-) I recall you mentioning that. "Cash" wasn't it? Use of a credit card would have muddied the waters. I paid cash for all the parts in the Type 7.... What? No TV transformer yoke? "Phase noise" wasn't a big buzzword then. It has a three-loop PLL in it plus a microcontroller. Sensitivity is still good and comparable with any contemporary HF receiver. "Phase noise" wasn't a big buzz word in the Icom engineering and sales bunch. Elsewhere, the use of the term was already common. Like amongst hams. Like with the first synthesized circuit radios??? And of course, those very first synthisized circuit radios were ham radios! Hi, hi! I've yet to get close to the concept of sitting around a shack making as many contacts as possible in a given time as any "sport." It's called "competition". Nope, it's called contesting. Best of Luck. Skill and endurance are certainly big factors in winning any amateur radio contest. Somebody's half-way awake. Missed the boat ont he sport concept. Neither is that activity "pioneering the ariwaves" nor any sort of "training for emergencies" to reasonable-thinking human beans. Did you ask any? No claims for contests as pioneering the "ariwaves" have been made. Any on-air activity which requires speedy, accurate operation is good training for emergency situations. Contest operation also points up the weak points in any radio station. The contest and DX folks have pushed the need for better rigs for decades. Where money is no object. I thought you guys were focused on third-worlders who had to self-manufacture CW only circuits? Wherethere is no money. Which is it? Like chess or checkers or board games, radio contesting is a GAME. So are all sports. Like the Olympic GAMES... Messing with Steve is a game. Emergency comms is no game. MARS is NOT Amateur Radio. There are some similarities. A good strategy, playing within the rules Rules RULES??? Like copying the W1AW message the day before? Hello Kelly??? Hi, hi! These guys obey no rules. They are the elite! Rules are for the other hams. and some luck are involved. No board games that I'm aware of require putting up big antennas at height, putting together a radio station or planning sleep breaks. Why must you confine your "game" to board games??? Are road rally's played on a board? Think car racing. Bicycle racing (Lance Armstrong wasn't riding a three-speed with baloon tires) Allow Bill Sohl to speak of road rally's. If you dare. It is FAR from an ATHLETIC sport. Not if done correctly. Let's see....I run as exercise and also a sport. Done two marathons and more half-marathons, ten-milers, 10Ks and 5 milers than I can recall. Mike Coslo is a hockey player. What sports do others participate in? ot as spectators! Lying? Robeson leads. You *do* sound just like him, Len. Lots of words and lots of put-downs and lots of theory. But in terms of actual radios built on your own time, with your own resources, from your own design....nada. Zip. Zilch. Zero. Nothing. Not that anyone here knows about in all your years and petabytes of posting. If I had extra copies, I could, with a year or so off to do it, digitize those things and put them on a website that allowed at least 100 MB user space. That includes corporate documents (public) along with photographs. The challenge is for *homebrew* radio projects. Not stuff done for work. Yet most of the HEROES of amateur radio were doing their heroic work as PROFESSIONALS!!! Explain. Explain again! Not worth it, since the typical PCTA extra "commentary" (to use a word very loosely) would be totally derogatory. You mean you fear reaping what you sow? "We" only fear reaping what Steve sows. Spooky dood. Low-class ideas. My little text and photo memorabilia on the ADA assignment takes 6 MB in PDF. Did you design and build ADA on your own time, with your own resources? Did you build the VE system on your own time, with your own resources? YOU have REJECTED simple things like a digitized license repro in the past. I didn't ask for it. I had already said I'd take your word that you had one. But you sent me*several* unsolicited emails with unknown attachments of large size. (Ever hear of compressing a file before sending?). How was I to know what they were? I found out later that one attachement was a picture that contained male nudity. Not my cup of tea, so to speak. Must have been right up Steve's foci! You would be expected to reject anything I present...as "credentials" or whatever real proof there is...and there is a lot of it. It's real simple, Len: Pick an HF radio project that you did in your home workshop as a "hobby" activity. Not something for work, or something you did as part of a group, but something you dreamed up and built yourself, just for the fun of it. Not some accessory, either - a complete receiver, transmitter or transceiver. Put a picture and a short description on your AOL homepage, just like I did. We don't need megabytes or a long diatribe. Just a .jpg and a short description. My project is out there for all to see. Where's yours? Or are you too afraid of what others will say? Was Fesseden's projects for amateur radio? Marconi? -- Rank, title and status? Tsk. I lost interest in DXing in "radio sports" and the wallpaper collection of QSLs after working at station ADA long ago. To each his own. Why do you denigrate what others find as fun? What is wrong with live and let live? A federal REGULATION requiring morse code testing in order to get an AMATEUR license to operate on HF is NOT "live and let live." Yes, it is. It is not. No other AMERICAN radio service requires such. Sure it is, Leonard. You have the same opportunity to take and pass such an exam as I did. The REGULATION doesn't single you out. I don't know why the term "AMATEUR license" bothers you. That's what the exam is for--an "AMATEUR license" to operate an AMATEUR radio station on HF. Be that as it may, you didn't bother to answer the question about you denigrating what some radio amateurs do for fun. Why would it bother you that someone participates in a contest? I mean, it isn't as if you are actually involved in amateur radio. Exactly. Would you mind saying that just one more time for the record? And guess what: If the code test goes away, contesting in amateur radio will continue. Yes. Even with Morse Code. But what is wrong with amateur radio gaining another RTTY or SSB contester??? Some contesters are actually *for* doing away with the code test on the grounds that it will allegedly get more hams on HF, thereby raising their scores by having more folks to work and making some sections/countries/zones less rare. 73 de Jim, N2EY And all PCTA's are actually against doing away with the code test on the ground that it will diminish their status as "REAL Hams." 73 de bb |
|
#123
October 6th 04, 03:57 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ...
Subject: US Licensing Restructuring ??? When ??? From: (William) Date: 10/5/2004 5:04 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: (Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ... Subject: US Licensing Restructuring ??? When ??? From: Dave Heil Date: 10/4/2004 12:26 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: Len Over 21 wrote: Keep talking snarly at all those non-ham people who have actually had an entire career in radio-electronics involved in the contstantly- changing state of the electronics and radio arts...and succeeded. "Talking snarly"? I didn't note any snarly at all. You may well have succeeded in the career goals you set for yourself. Dandy. That really has nothing to do with amateur radio. Lennie's "success" in "professional radio" was getting by on the works of others and not gettting sued for it. Sounds like libel. Only if it's not true. Are you certain it's true? I have word that his "performance" was less than expected on at least one assignment. State the assignment. State who's word. Whatever's left of your reputation is at stake. Oh, nevermind. You're a habitual liar. More a successful con-man than "professional in radio" I am gald you agree. Wherever did you get that idea? I hold my agreement in abayence. Exactly what are you gualled about? |
|
#124
October 6th 04, 04:19 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
(Brian Kelly) wrote in message . com...
PAMNO (N2EY) wrote in message ... In article , Dave Heil writes: Kellie and Jimmie want "my scores from the last Field Day" as one loaded "challenge." :-) Not all amateurs participate in "Field Day" and no non-amateur-licensee can possibly operate legally. An example of a NON-challenge, already-known answer disguised as a sort-of (sort off, really) "civil discourse" question. No non-amateur-licensee can possibly operate legally on Field Day? I'd think you'd get one right once in a great while, Leonard. That response would be wrong. No, he's right, Dave. FCC specifically defines the term "operate an amateur radio station". It means to be the control oeprator, responsible for rules compliance. By definition, only a licensed ham can do that. Others "participate in amateur radio". Len cannot legally operate an amateur radio station, according to FCC. Nor can Michael Powell, for that matter. That's your interpetation of the rules and I consider it far too literal James. Literal interpretation not permissible. I.E., morse code exams at 5 wpm vice anything else (Farnsworth) at 12-15wpm. I.E., monetary compensation for making a transmission (repeater owners). Oh, well. So much for literalisms. By any normal standards the individual punching the buttons, doing the tuning and doing the communicating or in any combination is defined as the operator. Such as the "attendant" at a military communications switch? The Op at Brandywine wouldn't have time for your illigitimate complaints. Everywhere, not just in ham radio. Everywhere? Even at military switches? Oh, my! In the case of ham radio Part 97 requires that a licensed ham has to be onsite, watching and listening if the operator does not have a ham license. It gets mightly lonely at those mountaintop repeater sites. But all that is besides the point. THAT I agree with! Amateur regulations are besides the point? Be sure to send that sentiment to Riley, and sign it, "Extra." What matters most in amateur radio - or any field of endeavor, really - is what is actually done, not what's theoretically possible. That's the point of the story about my highschool friend who had lots of great ideas (and lots of criticism) but no station of his own. The computer folks have a word for it: Vaporware. Firmware? Software controlled radios? Is an Icom R-70 evil vaporware? A beat-up Budbox is wholesome hardware? I think your prejudice is showing. Who do you have more respect for, Dave: The person with a modest amateur station who is actually on the air making QSOs or The person who talks endlessly about "state of the art", "better modes and modulations", "the future of amateur radio", "progress", etc., etc., yet who isn't on the ham bands at all? Windbags. That's all quite easy to say if that person has amateur operating priveleges. Plenty of Windbags in amatuer radio. One is attributed with high status if they have passed a Morse Code exam. Woo Hoo! The person without operating priveleges may yet own the best ideas and concepts wrt HF radio. You choose to deny him or her the opportunity advance amateur radio. Too bad for all of us because of your inexcusable prejudice. Meanwhile, you bootlegged as a kid. But its all "good." You're an Extra now. |
|
#125
October 6th 04, 04:35 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
William wrote:
PAMNO (N2EY) wrote in message ... In article , Dave Heil writes: Len Over 21 wrote: In article , PAMNO (N2EY) writes: In article , Dave Heil writes: Len Over 21 wrote: In article , (N2EY) writes: (Brian Kelly) wrote in message .com... PAMNO (N2EY) wrote in message ... In article , (Brian Kelly) writes: (Len Over 21) wrote in message ... In article , (Brian Kelly) writes: All that's needed is for him to obtain a valid amateur radio license, and an amateur radio station. Why are you so focussed on all MUST have a ham license to discuss anything in here? Where did I say that? Jim, that is a pervasive theme in RRAP, the "requirement" of having an amateur radio license to discuss things -radio- related. One of your continuing problems is that of telling the difference between what you think has been written and what has actually been written. Firstly, this isn't a "radio-related" newsgroup. It is an "amateur radio-related" newsgroup. Len discusses and discusses. Mostly, his windbag routine consists of insulting radio amateurs and the ARRL. Sometimes he includes personal historical data having nothing to do with amateur radio. Very little of what he posts has a thing to do with any current or past amateur radio policy matter. If you missed it, then you must must be necrotic. If you support it, then you do so by your silence, as you do so many other topics on RRAP. Schindler. I note your silence on gay marriage. By your silence, you must support it. You've been awfully silent on the matter of Scott Pederson. It could be said that you must support him. So you're either for it or agin it. Support Kelly, Heil, and Robeson? ....or he couldn't care less. Time to get off of the fence. I'd strongly suggest that you do so--especially if you're sitting on top of one of the posts. Dave K8MN |
|
#126
October 6th 04, 02:51 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Subject: US Licensing Restructuring ??? When ???
From: (William) Date: 10/5/2004 9:57 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: (Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ... Subject: US Licensing Restructuring ??? When ??? From: (William) Date: 10/5/2004 5:04 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: (Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ... Subject: US Licensing Restructuring ??? When ??? From: Dave Heil Date: 10/4/2004 12:26 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: Len Over 21 wrote: Keep talking snarly at all those non-ham people who have actually had an entire career in radio-electronics involved in the contstantly- changing state of the electronics and radio arts...and succeeded. "Talking snarly"? I didn't note any snarly at all. You may well have succeeded in the career goals you set for yourself. Dandy. That really has nothing to do with amateur radio. Lennie's "success" in "professional radio" was getting by on the works of others and not gettting sued for it. Sounds like libel. Only if it's not true. Are you certain it's true? I am more certain of the honesty and reliability of the person from who I obtained this information than I am of Lennie or you. I have word that his "performance" was less than expected on at least one assignment. State the assignment. State who's word. When Lennie was in Warminster, PA...And the "who" is my secret. Whatever's left of your reputation is at stake. What's left of MY reputation will still be standing long after you have been laid to rest, Brain. Oh, nevermind. You're a habitual liar. I am sure you wished it was true. We'll discuss it at next Dayton...See you there, Brain! More a successful con-man than "professional in radio" I am gald you agree. Wherever did you get that idea? Why, through your SILENCE, Brain! You requoted the statement and didn't comment on it. By your own "Rules of Engagement", failure to comment on something means you condone it by virtue of that silence. You've expressed those very sentiments in another thread within the last 12 hours. Again, you provide us with yet another example of not being able to keep your OWN stories straight, Brain. I hold my agreement in abayence. Exactly what are you gualled about? I think you meant "gaulled". We could start with your complete lack of character, your DOCUMENTED pattern of lying and deceit, and we can wrap it up with your complete failure to validate even ONE example of your self-proclaimed "superior operator" status. And that's just what we know of you from THIS forum. I shudder to think what any deeper investigation might reveal. Steve, K4YZ |
|
#127
October 6th 04, 04:55 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
My spam filtering blocked this until Dave's reply....
In article , Dave Heil writes: William wrote: PAMNO (N2EY) wrote in message ... In article , Dave Heil writes: Len Over 21 wrote: In article , PAMNO (N2EY) writes: In article , Dave Heil writes: Len Over 21 wrote: In article , (N2EY) writes: (Brian Kelly) wrote in message .com... PAMNO (N2EY) wrote in message ... In article , (Brian Kelly) writes: (Len Over 21) wrote in message ... In article , (Brian Kelly) writes: All that's needed is for him to obtain a valid amateur radio license, and an amateur radio station. Why are you so focussed on all MUST have a ham license to discuss anything in here? Where did I say that? Jim, that is a pervasive theme in RRAP, the "requirement" of having an amateur radio license to discuss things -radio- related. Where, when and how did *I* say that "all MUST have a ham license to discuss anything in here?" If it seems to some to be a "pervasive theme", that's due to the fact that Len writes it over and over.... As I've said many times before, *anyone* with internet/usenet access can post here. Credibility is a different issue - it has to be earned. One of your continuing problems is that of telling the difference between what you think has been written and what has actually been written. "William" does seem to have that problem. Firstly, this isn't a "radio-related" newsgroup. It is an "amateur radio-related" newsgroup. True. Len discusses and discusses. Very true! Mostly, his windbag routine consists of insulting radio amateurs and the ARRL. One caveat: That behavior is reserved for those who disagree with him, or point out errors in his statements. There's a one-paragraph profile of Len's behavior floating around... Sometimes he includes personal historical data having nothing to do with amateur radio. Very little of what he posts has a thing to do with any current or past amateur radio policy matter. True and true again. If you missed it, then you must must be necrotic. Where, when and how did *I* say that "all MUST have a ham license to discuss anything in here?" If it seems to some to be a "pervasive theme", that's due to the fact that Len writes it over and over.... As I've said many times before, *anyone* with internet/usenet access can post here. Credibility is a different issue - it has to be earned. If you support it, then you do so by your silence, as you do so many other topics on RRAP. Not true! Faulty logic. Schindler. What significance does that name have to amateur radio policy? Do you seek to flatter me by comparing me to one of the most heroic figures in human history? I note your silence on gay marriage. By your silence, you must support it. You've been awfully silent on the matter of Scott Pederson. It could be said that you must support him. So you're either for it or agin it. It's not a binary issue. Support Kelly, Heil, and Robeson? On some things, yes. On others, no. Independent thought on my part. ...or he couldn't care less. Time to get off of the fence. Is that an order? Or a demand? I'd strongly suggest that you do so--especially if you're sitting on top of one of the posts. By his own logic, "William" must support Len's behavior here. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
|
#128
October 6th 04, 06:06 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
(William) wrote in message . com...
(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ... Subject: US Licensing Restructuring ??? When ??? From: (Brian Kelly) Date: 10/4/2004 2:29 AM Central Standard Time Message-id: (Len Over 21) wrote in message ... In article , (Mechanical Man) writes: Right on the money. As if Sweetums ever sank dime one of his own wad one into any "station he operated". WRONG. INCORRECT. ERROR! PLMRS VHF two-way, base and mobiles, as part of a partnership... which required a helluva lot more than a "dime." :-) Oh gawd, OK, I surrender, so you sank some coin into the world of blue dot & green dot radios. Didja get their WTAS (Worked Taxicabs in all States) award? What's the URL for this "partnership"? Yeah...ya gotta admire a guy who can "build" a radio system just by throwning more money at it...Really impresses the bee-jeebers out of me! They are called Contesters and DXers. Correct that to "CW contesters and DXers". May the Lord bless the total amateurs of RRAP. |
|
#129
October 6th 04, 06:32 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
PAMNO (N2EY) wrote in message ...
In article , (Brian Kelly) writes: There are prototype board shops that will make boards for you. You feed 'em the artwork and they make the boards in an almost totally-automated process. Prices are low enough that if you make a few copies it gets really attractive - particularly since the price includes things like coating and component locations. And you don't have to deal with the chemicals or board stock. They advertise all over the electronics trade publications and on the Web. "It just ain't the same as real hombrewing." . . Yeah, I know, but depending on yer timeframe, space, tools and tolerance for smells and such it may be cheaper/easier/quicker to farm it out. Time and tools I have, the space is a question though. I was raised in a machine shop, worked in refineries, chemical plants, textile mills and had a darkroom. Odors are no biggie. Agreed and trying to use SMT devices to homebrew compact complex equipment really drives a stake in it. There are those who can do SMT, of course. But the stuff requires yet another level of tooling and skills. Kills it for me. In the ancient times, you mounted the parts on a wooden base, then wired it up. Build a rig in an evening. ME built a rig on a wooden base? You jest. Never in this world . . ! Aluminum or steel or forget it. I've done it... Point is, it was quick, inexpensive, easy and forgiving of errors And when it's done it looks just like what it is, a POS. Then came metal chassis and panels. Do the metal layout, the metal work, mount the parts, wire it up. Build a rig in a bunch of evenings. SOP. Yup but a lot more work than a piece o' wood I'm willing. Given typical basement resources, I'll have my mechanical dial built and calibrated before the other guy has his PC boards done. Probably but it depends on whether yer talking Collins quality or rubber-band quality mechanicals. I figured that one out about 35 years ago: WW2 surplus had lots of good parts. Among the very best are the integral dial/reduction drives/capacitors found in ARC-5 rx and tx units, and the LM/BC-221 freqmeters. All you need are adapters for the shaft and a new dial. Swords into plowshares. I never bothered with Millen and National drives for serious stuff. Then you missed the boat. As you know I'm more than just a tad familiar with those old surplus drives. They were designed *seven decades* ago for use in high altitude high vibration combat environments. Usually on fixed freqs. None of which has anything to do with ham gear particularly today's ham gear. They're miserably slow tuning *kluges* by any realistic measure. I could build a complete DC rcvr in the space one of those clunkers sucks up and it would have a nice smooth tuning mechanism. Which is why you got the last of those I had. I am not going to be the Last Dinosaur, that's your yob. The Type 7 uses a cap from a hangar-queen BC-221. 100:1 nobacklash drive, thermally compensated, extremely rugged cast frame, etc. Better than almost anything in typical ham gear. Cost maybe $5 for the whole chassis, which has lots other good parts. To get more dial spread, I made a dial drum from a piece of 6" plexiglass tubing. Recycled, of course. Dial light/reflector assembly is inside the drum and shines through the plexiglass. You view the lighted dial through a window in the front panel. To calibrate, I wound a piece of paper on the drum and marked it with the aid of my working BC-221. Then the raw paper was redrawn via CADD, the result inkjet printed on a scrap of Mylar drawing stock, and the whole thing put on the dial drum. Works and I can read it in any light, with or without glasses. Steam locomotives and gas lamps still work too. I'm waiting for you to announce that you're driving back and forth to the job in a 1937 Model 72 Terraplane. Sure he did. He had a cb set, for one. Seems like he also had some green dot / yellow dot sorts of reddios in addition to the CB rig. 100% Rat Shack and Moxon plug & play. Whatta "homebrewer" . . . You see what some folks pulled with those licenseless HTs down in Orange County, FL? Nope. Yeah, I guess we had to have somebody "over there" reading the repeater meters and locked in mortal combat with all those kamikaze geishas in the joints in Tokyo. While I worked my way thru E school back here on the home front. On my own dime. Been there, done that - halfway, anyhow. One big reason I went to Penn was the nice Benjamin Franklin scholarship they gave me. Covered more than half of the cost per year. Also NDSL loans and a near-full-time job year 'round. I took a different path and not only paid the full tab as I went along via the job, I also had a nice wad in the bank and two years worth of engineering experience at the end of my trek. No summers off though. Junior year was a trip - 5 engineering courses and working 35-39 hours/week. That's ugly. No car, either. Thank you SEPTA.... PRR MU-54s: 14 minutes flat from Aldan to 30th St. I run a LISP rountine in Autocad to come up with the cross-sectional properties Nice! But I prefer Microstation... Lemmee know when you get yer home installation of Microstation to spit out the plane and torsional moments of inertia of a tower section. I can get that result in about 120 seconds..... Here we go, I'm gonna hold yer feet to the fire on this one Micollis. I'm gonna show up at your place with a .dxf of a random cross-section on a CD and you find **all** of it's cross-sectional properties within 120 seconds or you pop for my Newtown Square Ale House wet roast beef sammich. All I do is email the problem to you and wait for the results. Then Microstation does a format conversion.... You SLIME! I didn't say I could solve the problem, just that I could get the results! I'll buy the RB without a bet. .. . . you got that right . . ! 73 de Jim, N2EY w3rv |
|
#130
October 7th 04, 12:26 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| US Licensing Restructuring ??? When ??? | Policy | |||
| US Licensing Restructuring ??? When ??? | Policy | |||
| US Licensing Restructuring ??? When ??? | Policy | |||
| New ARRL Proposal | Policy | |||
| My restructuring proposal | Policy | |||
Linear Mode
