"Phil Kane" wrote in message . net...
On 1 Oct 2004 20:05:47 -0700, William wrote:

Not limited to weather, however, the context -was- weather. I'll
allow you to slide on this one if you can produce licensure or
credentials in "metrology."

Any high school graduate who paid attention during the science
classes knows that -40F = -40C without having to calculate it.

Then perhaps any ole "radio clerk" might actually know a thing or two
about radio. Theoretically speaking, of course.

Folks have flunked out of first-year engineering and science classes
for less than that.

I don't doubt that. No one ever flunked out of weather school for
that simple equation.

What do they flunk out of law school for?

Dave Heil wrote in message ...

It seems to bother our Leonard that your equipment doesn't look like
stereo equipment.


Does he engage in diversity reception?

In article , Dave Heil
writes:

N2EY wrote:

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:

snip of Len's lecture on IC's

What was his point, anyway? That 74192s aren't in current production?

His "point" was to impress us with how much he knew about the devices.

Then he failed. I already knew all that he presented and more about that
counter family. In fact I knew it 30 years ago.

Whether he actually knew much or just presented material glommed from
the web is irrelevant. He needed to impress us. Nobody can know more
than Leonard H. Anderson. Certainly not mere radio amateurs.

Perhaps that's *really* the issue for him. Explains his behavior here, and his
hatred of Morse Code.

by jove, Dave, I think you've got it...

73 de Jim, N2EY

William wrote:

Dave Heil wrote in message ...

It seems to bother our Leonard that your equipment doesn't look like
stereo equipment.


Does he engage in diversity reception?

He who? Leonard? Naw, he hasn't gone through diversity training.

Dave K8MN

On 2 Oct 2004 07:00:32 -0700, William wrote:

Folks have flunked out of first-year engineering and science classes
for less than that.

I don't doubt that. No one ever flunked out of weather school for
that simple equation.

What do they flunk out of law school for?

Being a**holes and not giving proper respect to those of us who
have graduated from law school.

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

In article ,
(Brian Kelly) writes:

(N2EY) wrote in message
...
In article ,

(Brian Kelly) writes:

I'll bet I know where the S3 came from . . .

W3ABT, now N3KZ

. . . I couldn't have missed . . !

It even has convenient connections to all the oscillators coming out the back.


My method was quick/n/dirty but it worked. No busted traces either.

Sounds OK for small one-off boards but there are some downsides to
that method. The biggest I see is that you can't get multiple boards
out of a single layout, you have to do the "artwork" for each board
which is the intensive labor part of DIY PCBs.

Agreed! But since it was a one-off, no problem.

The stripline SWR
bridge I built worked quite well and as a result I got several
requests for copies of the board and I was able to churn 'em out
pretty quickly by simply reusing the "negative". Which I also was able
to keep on file for possible use again.

Yup.

An advantage of using the commercially-supplied to-scale transfer
patterns for chips and transistors was high accuracy and density
without having to draft and cut them manually. Which is a *lotta* work
if you did a big board like the K3JH keyer which used a couple dozen
chips. Solder-patching the traces was a 5-10 minute per board
no-brainer, I did it to all traces as "insurance". In the end both
approaches have their applications.

old crap. I have a yen now to build a couple more widgets using
homebrewed PCBs but so far I have not been able to find the board
stock or chemicals in hobby quantities.

I have the board stock. Ferric chloride is a different matter...

Bare double-sided board stock is readily available but sensitized
board stock ain't and neither are the chemicals. No doubt it's just a
matter of Googling around to locate the stuff. Maybe the technology
has improved to the point where DIY "board burning" is now a piece of
cake.

Two tricks I've read about but not tried yet:

Get a pen plotter (remember them?) and set it up with your favorite CADD system
to draw the resist onto the boardstock directly. Of course it's a dedicated
piece of hardware....

There are also various techniques where you print a positive (?) onto a
transfer sheet which is then ironed onto the boardstock (literally) and peeled
off. Then etch.

Then the slickest trick of all:

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.

I fed the aformentioned dumpster a *shoebox* full of those old 7400
series chips . . .

They were da bomb in their time but today it would be easier to do it other
ways.

Right.

Here's how I'd do it today:

Still need a timebase, input amp/gates/sequencer and counters. But the counters
could be simple 2N, not decade counters.

The counter outputs would be managed by a PIC that would also do the job of
latching, storage, and up/down add/subtract functions. Also a lot of control
functions.

Or just do a mechanical dial...

Why would I do that when shaft encoders and freq counters are a
helluva lot smarter way to go??

They're only "smarter" if you have all the goodies to go with 'em. Like the
whole synthesizer and the controller and the programming. For a one-off project
that gets to be a bit much.

This is one of the trends that makes homebrewing unattractive.

In the ancient times, you mounted the parts on a wooden base, then wired it up.
Build a rig in an evening.

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.

Then came PC boards. Do the metal layout, the metal work, the PC board layout,
fabricate the PC boards, stuff the PC boards, mount the rest of the parts.
Build a rig in some weeks of evenings.

Then came PICS and other programmable devices. Do the metal layout, the metal
work, the PC board layout, fabricate the PC boards, stuff the PC boards, mount
the rest of the parts. Then do the software development, debug, program. Build
a rig in many weeks of evenings.

Given typical basement resources, I'll have my mechanical dial built and
calibrated before the other guy has his PC boards done.

That leaves Sweetums and his half-vast "experience" out. Long-haul
military HF comms are channelized and if a station is weak they just
twist the Variac clockwise. 40kW with rhombics just to push RTTY from
Tokyo to the west coast . . SPARE me . . !

Just a different environment. Army of Occupation takes over JA in 1945, one
of
the first orders of business is good comms back to DC and Arlington. Pick
out a
good site, put up the poles, haul up the diamonds, fire away. All on the
taxpayer's nickel. Well spent money but has little to do with the reality
of self-funded avocational radio.

Right on the money. As if Sweetums ever sank dime one of his own wad
one into any "station he operated".

Sure he did. He had a cb set, for one.

Fact is that he wouldn't have done
any of it if us taxpayers hadn't paid him to do it . . . Hell, we even
paid him to trudge thru the University of Monmouth Vo-Tech Division.

So what? That's what it was there for.

Where the disconnect occurs is in situations like this:

Len says there was no use of Morse Code at ADA. Or anywhere in US Army
"point-to-point" radio comms back in 1952 or whenever. All done by RTTY...or
RATT, as they called it then. All of which is almost certainly true.

Where the disconnect occurs is that Len seems to think that the Army's non-use
of Morse then and there means that hams should not use or have a test for Morse
here and now. The connection is never explained.

Sponge. Bleh!

all at once raise the apparent noise floor of their *modern*
transceivers, in part due to phase-noisy oscillators in the
contest-haters equipment.

"If ya can't take the heat go up the band!"

Point is, they *could* coexist with better equipment.

There is no way that any guy/gal even with the world's quietist rcvr
and offscale BDRs and IMD3s is gonna "coexist" and ragchew with
anybody on 7.020 at sundown and beyond during the two big CW DX
contests, just isn't possible in any even remotely practical scenario.
Try it the last weekend of November. Move up the band or go to 30M.
'Way up the band . . .

How far up does the contest go? How about 7.070?

btw - the way I'd solve the problem would be to email you for the
solution.

. . . boink . . POINT!

"Wouldn't it be easier for *me* if *you* did it?"
. . . .

Like I said - don't reinvent the wheel....

You do your things, I add my things and we get the job done.

Exactly!

But
Sweetums can do it ALL . . . of course his history proves otherwise.

Actually, we have no idea what he can do on his own. He doesn't mention any
projects he does in his home shop. Nor does he have a web page showing them.

My highschool friend could do all kinds of projects - in theory.

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.....

73 de Jim, N2EY

"Phil Kane" wrote in message . net...
On 2 Oct 2004 07:00:32 -0700, William wrote:

Folks have flunked out of first-year engineering and science classes
for less than that.

I don't doubt that. No one ever flunked out of weather school for
that simple equation.

What do they flunk out of law school for?

Being a**holes and not giving proper respect to those of us who
have graduated from law school.

WAAAAAHOOOO!

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." :-)

Tsk.

Fact is that he wouldn't have done
any of it if us taxpayers hadn't paid him to do it . . . Hell, we even
paid him to trudge thru the University of Monmouth Vo-Tech Division.

What do you mean "we paid," Kellie?

Were you a "taxpayer" in 1952? How much did you actually pay ME?
:-)

Well, isn't that so terrible...a citizen volunteers for military duty and
serves honorably, then some arrogant elitist comes along and
calls all such for "drudges." His noble, elite, royal self was TOO
GOOD for any such menial task such as defending this country.

God forbid any HARM that might come to blessed royalty such as
his noble self from actually SERVING his country!

It was at the Fort Monmouth, NJ, Signal School, not a "university."
As a member of the United States Army.

Feel free to continue looking down your noble, royal nose at
veterans who volunteered. No problem. You won't change, not
even if you get all the peasants to eat cake instead of hard-to-get
bread. Madame la Guillotine will have the cure.

Meanwhile, go ahead, continue to damn the peasantry. Isn't it
awful that the "peasantry" have freedom of speech? Tsk.


Sponge. Bleh!

Ooooooo...the ELITE speak against the "drudges!"


You do your things, I add my things and we get the job done. But
Sweetums can do it ALL . . . of course his history proves otherwise.

Tsk. "My history" disproves Kellie's ASSumptions.

But...he is of the nobility, the elite, and doesn't recognize "drudges"
who worked for a salary. :-)


Lemmee know when you get yer home installation of Microstation to spit
out the plane and torsional moments of inertia of a tower section.

...and don't forget to inform everyone that MECHANICAL elements
of antennas are MUCH MORE important than any menial
electrical "drudge" characteristics.

Why don't you two sweetums move this to private e-mail? Or are
you bound and determined to turn this public-access newsgroup
into a cozy little private chat room suitable only for PCTA extras?

In article ,
(Brian Kelly) writes:

(Len Over 21) wrote in message
...
In article ,

(Brian Kelly) writes:

. . . some of those "works of art" before I dumstered all that
old crap. I have a yen now to build a couple more widgets using
homebrewed PCBs but so far I have not been able to find the board
stock or chemicals in hobby quantities.

Go to FAR Circuits for a huge collection of PCBs available for
all those magazine article projects. Ready-made wiring. FAR
is run by a ham.

I'm aware of FAR and the boards they offer, nice stuff, quite
affordable and they can save a lot of drudgery. But I'd still like to
burn a few of my own from scratch just for the helluvait.

Don't keep old "crap." Save that to toss at NCTAs in
newsgroups.

snore

The 74192 and other TTL family chips were hot stuff 30 years ago when
I was doing that project. You can still get pin-compatible parts
today.

I fed the aformentioned dumpster a *shoebox* full of those old 7400
series chips . . .

Tsk. Well, if you don't know how to use them, toss 'em.

Nah. Just about everything radio in that heap which was more than
twenty years old landed in the dumpster on general principles.

Riiiight...Millen dials, J.W.Miller coil forms, Hammarlund
variables, WW2 surplus items, tubes...all "over twenty years
old!" :-)

You are PCTA extra royalty. Save the TUBES, recycle 'em into
world-beating contest-quality radios to win all those accolades!

I already gave 'em to Miccolis, ALL of 'em. 'Cept for the NOS Eimac
3-500Z. I'll prolly make a lamp out of it.

Do you have sufficient knowledge of electricity to wire it up?

Don't you have to be QUALIFIED to meet the electrical code?

That leaves Sweetums and his half-vast "experience" out. Long-haul
military HF comms are channelized and if a station is weak they just
twist the Variac clockwise. 40kW with rhombics just to push RTTY from
Tokyo to the west coast . . SPARE me . . !

You "know" all about military communications?

Absolutely not. Nor do I give a rat's patooie about military comms
gear.

Riiiight...but you KNOW all about what the U.S. military DOES,
don't you? [you've demonstrated that in here before...]

Of course you do.
You were of the royalty that was never IN.

Right again.

That military service was for "drudge" citizens, not for the nobility
whose bodies were far too precious to waste defending their
country... tsk, tsk.

You've never worn an AN/PRC-104 HF manpack raddio, have you?

Have you?

Yes, as a civilian!

on the SGC 2020...

I hate to bust yer bubble again Sweetums but they're all over the ham
bands used mostly by the "pack radio" crowd. Nice rugged little
minimalist's xcvr but somewhat lacking in rcvr basic performance.

Awwww...not up to Kellie's mighty standards? Tsk.

Are you in the tRoll opinion against the "shack on the belt crowd?"

"Minimalist?" It does SSB very well. It includes a lot of self-
check features as standard.

Maybe you want a "top of the line contester" transceiver that not
only has all the super selectivity and sensitivity to leap tall pileups
but also keeps the logs and prints out QSLs? All on battery power?
:-)


That's why Phil Smith came up with the Smith Chart back before
WW2. :-)

Not for designing antennas...for easing the work required by
Bell Telephone on long-distance transmission lines. Work that
required slide-rules and mechanical desk calculators (sometimes)
due to pocket calculators not being invented yet. :-)

I'm not new to slide rules and Fridens Sweetie, I had one of each on
my board back when I was designing catapults.

Riiiiight...lots of catapults used in ham radio of your yesterday,
huh? :-)


Tsk. You should use Roy Lewallen's EZNEC. Roy is a long-time
ham. EZNEC is advertised in QST.

Sweetums if you will kindly point out just where in EZNEC Roy provides
the ability to work thru antenna stress and deflection issues.

Ask Roy. I thought that YOU, as the super-duper mechanical man
would ALREADY KNOW what is needed! :-)

USN Postgraduate School folks came up with the Numerical
Electromagnetic Code (NEC) which is all free to anyone (no
copyright).

I'm not new to NEC either Sweetums, I have NEC2 two mouse clicks away
from here along with it's Nec Win Plus interface.

Riiiiiight...You are so schmardt in methods of moments theory...

Too bad the USN types at the "captain's table"
didn't mention that to you...

. . . in 1963??

Tsk. Didn't the USN use radio then?

Oh, yes, they used only morse code! Morse code gets through
when anything else does...

What DID you talk about? How "rough" the "war" was? Did YOU
have some "hostile actions" and collect a shoebox full of medals?

Oh, I AM sorry. I'm acting like a "drudge." I'm not supposed to
DO such things, being an NCTA and all. This newsgroup is
RESERVED for the PCTA extras, the elitists who meet to beat.

In article ,
(William) writes:

"Phil Kane" wrote in message
.net...
On 1 Oct 2004 20:05:47 -0700, William wrote:

Not limited to weather, however, the context -was- weather. I'll
allow you to slide on this one if you can produce licensure or
credentials in "metrology."

Any high school graduate who paid attention during the science
classes knows that -40F = -40C without having to calculate it.

Then perhaps any ole "radio clerk" might actually know a thing or two
about radio. Theoretically speaking, of course.

Folks have flunked out of first-year engineering and science classes
for less than that.

I don't doubt that. No one ever flunked out of weather school for
that simple equation.

What do they flunk out of law school for?

I'm guessing that it was for the wrong legal briefs they wore? :-)

In article ,
(William) writes:

(Len Over 21) wrote in message
...
In article ,
(William) writes:

(Len Over 21) wrote in message
...
In article , "Dee D. Flint"
writes:

"William" wrote in message
. com...
"Dee D. Flint" wrote in message
...
"N2EY" wrote in message
...
In article , Dave Heil

writes:

Now, Leonard -40F and -40C occur at roughly the same point.
Have
your
ever participated in amateur radio emergency communications
outdoors
when the temp was -40?

I've been outdoors working when the temperature was -30 F.


-40C and -40F are not roughly the same point, they are EXACTLY the
same
point.

(Celsius * 9/5) + 32 = Fahrenheit
(-40C * 9/5) + 32 = -40F

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Unless any of you can produce licensure or credentials in meteorology
or atmospheric science, I'm going to have to consider your comments
suspect.

;^)

bb

Actually that would have to be metrology (the science of measurement)
since
temperature is not limited to weather.

Wow! A true thing by a morseperson! :-)

Hey, back off! :)

Ooops. My excuse is finding an honest morseperson not trying
(too much) to destroy an NCTA... :-)

I cede to your point.

I've been testing electronics IN a -55 C environment. Involved in
metrology. Was cold. I didn't stay in the walk-in chamber for
any longer than necessary. :-)

CW telemetry always gets through.

It MUST...whether there's electric power available or not! :-)

Wasn't degreed or credentialed in metrology at the time. Nobody
else involved in that testing was degreed or credentialed in
metrology. NIST doesn't demand that, either!.

Sunnuvagun!

But, but, but... Len. I -need- her to be licensured or credentialed
in metrology whether there's such a thing or not.

I -must- have it.

I DEMAND IT!!!

If SHE doesn't produce licensure in metrology within 24 hours,
Dee will forever be known as a LIAR and a Bag Lady and a Horse Thief!

Because I say so!

;^)

Hmmm...trying out nursie's fantasyworld thinking?

Warning: Do not try that at home!

Oooh. Ow. I've got a headache this morning. Terrible, terrible
dreams. I should have known they're would be a backlash to acting so
crazy.

Heh, we could have said "told ya so!" but that would be cruel.

It must have been like Darth Vader experienced...except ol Darth
didn't survive.

Sorry, to Dee. I ventured where no sane person should go.

[we'll all wait for the inevitable "you don't have the credentials!" :-) ]

But...to be super-legal on ham HF one MUST be tested for
morsemanship.

Only in the land of the free and the home of the brave.

Yes, so I'm told by all the PCTA extras...if they bother
mentioning it at all... :-)

Ham radios won't work without that credential?

Nope - they refuse.

Physics is altogether different.

Haven't you learned that by now? You've been told often enough.

If you don't get that by now I'm going to have to start Dialing...

Careful, careful, trying to think like nursie may be hazardous to
your health!

Oooh. Ow. My head.

Take two tablets of acetyl salicylic acid and call a real MD in
the morning.



Strange brew. The things you learn in a ham newsgroup.

Yes, it is...once in a while a true factoid comes into public view,
about 1 percent of the time in between all the PCTA extras trying
to destroy all NCTA whichever way they can... :-)



Yep. Dee was correct. :)

Hey, what's that box-van with 911 painted on the side doing in my
driveway?

Hi, hi!

It's the PCTA Police van! Oh, oh, big trouble! :-)

Hi hi and a Ho ho.

Len Over 21 wrote:

Why don't you two sweetums move this to private e-mail? Or are
you bound and determined to turn this public-access newsgroup
into a cozy little private chat room suitable only for PCTA extras?

What was it when you and "William" were doing your Charlie Chan routine?


Dave K8MN

(Len Over 21) wrote in message ...
In article ,
(Brian Kelly) writes:


Nah. Just about everything radio in that heap which was more than
twenty years old landed in the dumpster on general principles.

Riiiight...Millen dials, J.W.Miller coil forms, Hammarlund
variables, WW2 surplus items, tubes...all "over twenty years
old!" :-)

Right on Sweetums, I did exactly that. Except for a bunch of elderly
variable caps which are always nice to have around when cobbling
together matching circuits.

You are PCTA extra royalty. Save the TUBES, recycle 'em into
world-beating contest-quality radios to win all those accolades!

I already gave 'em to Miccolis, ALL of 'em. 'Cept for the NOS Eimac
3-500Z. I'll prolly make a lamp out of it.

Do you have sufficient knowledge of electricity to wire it up?

Yup.

Don't you have to be QUALIFIED to meet the electrical code?

Of course, the NEC is only a couple mouse clicks away from here.

That leaves Sweetums and his half-vast "experience" out. Long-haul
military HF comms are channelized and if a station is weak they just
twist the Variac clockwise. 40kW with rhombics just to push RTTY from
Tokyo to the west coast . . SPARE me . . !

You "know" all about military communications?

Absolutely not. Nor do I give a rat's patooie about military comms
gear.

Riiiight...but you KNOW all about what the U.S. military DOES,
don't you? [you've demonstrated that in here before...]

Cite the posts.

Of course you do.
You were of the royalty that was never IN.

Right again.

That military service was for "drudge" citizens, not for the nobility
whose bodies were far too precious to waste defending their
country... tsk, tsk.

| Yawn |

You've never worn an AN/PRC-104 HF manpack raddio, have you?

Have you?

Yes, as a civilian!

Aha; I thought so, you're a member of the Smoggy Bottom Militia eh?

on the SGC 2020...

I hate to bust yer bubble again Sweetums but they're all over the ham
bands used mostly by the "pack radio" crowd. Nice rugged little
minimalist's xcvr but somewhat lacking in rcvr basic performance.

Awwww...not up to Kellie's mighty standards? Tsk.

You bet. Crummy rcvr. Dig up the test lab reports on it. Like this
one.

http://www.arrl.org/members-only/prodrev/pdf/pr9810.pdf


Are you in the tRoll opinion against the "shack on the belt crowd?"

Nope.

"Minimalist?" It does SSB very well. It includes a lot of self-
check features as standard.

I can check my own radios Sweetums, but you better stick with SGC.

Maybe you want a "top of the line contester" transceiver that not
only has all the super selectivity and sensitivity to leap tall pileups
but also keeps the logs and prints out QSLs?

Right on again Sweetums, you're finally starting to get it.

All on battery power?
:-)

Whatta a great battery-powered rig: Draws over a half amp while simply
listening to a dummy load.


required slide-rules and mechanical desk calculators (sometimes)
due to pocket calculators not being invented yet. :-)

I'm not new to slide rules and Fridens Sweetie, I had one of each on
my board back when I was designing catapults.

Riiiiight...lots of catapults used in ham radio of your yesterday,
huh? :-)

Well no, fact is Sweetums that I have a very current tech ham radio
catapult, Miccolis and I used it to launch some Field Day antennas
just a few months ago. He has one of a different design which also
works well.


Tsk. You should use Roy Lewallen's EZNEC. Roy is a long-time
ham. EZNEC is advertised in QST.

Sweetums if you will kindly point out just where in EZNEC Roy provides
the ability to work thru antenna stress and deflection issues.

Ask Roy. I thought that YOU, as the super-duper mechanical man
would ALREADY KNOW what is needed! :-)

I sure as hell do know what's needed and I also know it's not in EZNEC
Sweetums, not even close. But you obviously don't know so you made an
ass of yourself in public once again because you didn't spend enough
time surfing around the Web to get up to speed on EZNEC before you
spouted off about it.

How many times . . ?


USN Postgraduate School folks came up with the Numerical
Electromagnetic Code (NEC) which is all free to anyone (no
copyright).

I'm not new to NEC either Sweetums, I have NEC2 two mouse clicks away
from here along with it's Nec Win Plus interface.

Riiiiiight...You are so schmardt in methods of moments theory...

Eat your heart out.

Too bad the USN types at the "captain's table"
didn't mention that to you...

. . . in 1963??

Tsk. Didn't the USN use radio then?

Oh stop it you silly old fart, of course they used radio. Knock off
your bush-league bait 'n switch games Sweetie, they don't work, the
topic was the electromagnetics code, not "USN radio" Sweetie. Now once
more was the NEC available in 1963 or not?

Oh, yes, they used only morse code! Morse code gets through
when anything else does...

What DID you talk about? How "rough" the "war" was? Did YOU
have some "hostile actions" and collect a shoebox full of medals?

Oh, I AM sorry. I'm acting like a "drudge." I'm not supposed to
DO such things, being an NCTA and all. This newsgroup is
RESERVED for the PCTA extras, the elitists who meet to beat.

|| The usual broken record, snores galore ||

Subject: US Licensing Restructuring ??? When ???
From: Dave Heil
Date: 10/3/2004 7:53 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

Len Over 21 wrote:

Why don't you two sweetums move this to private e-mail? Or are
you bound and determined to turn this public-access newsgroup
into a cozy little private chat room suitable only for PCTA extras?

What was it when you and "William" were doing your Charlie Chan routine?

You didn't REALLY expect the Prince of Pottymouth to live by his own
standards, now did ya, Dave...?!?! =)

Brain and Lennie keep trying to insinuate that others invoke some kind of
double standard, but all you have to do is wait a couple of hours, and one or
the other will post yet another bit of trollish tripe that clearly implicates
themselves in the very same conduct.

Putzii Supreme.

73

Steve, K4YZ

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!

Fact is that he wouldn't have done
any of it if us taxpayers hadn't paid him to do it . . . Hell, we even
paid him to trudge thru the University of Monmouth Vo-Tech Division.

What do you mean "we paid," Kellie?

Were you a "taxpayer" in 1952? How much did you actually pay ME?
:-)

Well, isn't that so terrible...a citizen volunteers for military duty
and
serves honorably, then some arrogant elitist comes along and
calls all such for "drudges." His noble, elite, royal self was TOO
GOOD for any such menial task such as defending this country.

God forbid any HARM that might come to blessed royalty such as
his noble self from actually SERVING his country!

It was at the Fort Monmouth, NJ, Signal School, not a "university."
As a member of the United States Army.

Feel free to continue looking down your noble, royal nose at
veterans who volunteered. No problem. You won't change, not
even if you get all the peasants to eat cake instead of hard-to-get
bread. Madame la Guillotine will have the cure.

Getting yourself a bit wrapped up in that "patriotic bunting" that you
seem to express disdain in others, aren't you, Lennie?

As long as YOU are the one being wrapped, I guess it's OK, huh...???

Meanwhile, go ahead, continue to damn the peasantry. Isn't it
awful that the "peasantry" have freedom of speech? Tsk.


Sponge. Bleh!

Ooooooo...the ELITE speak against the "drudges!"

Nah, none of it has anything to do with anybody's military service or
lack thereof Sweetums. I simply needed to find out how hard I had to
yank yer chain in this topic area before you came unglued again. I
expected to have to put up with another round or two but nope, here it
is. You usta be a helluva lot quicker Sweetums. Getting OLD is a pain
the ass isn't it?

It doesn't have to be, Brian...A great many of my patients are folks well
into thier 80's, and they are active, happy and fulfilled people.

Of course that's there Lennie loses touch...He won't DO anything to get
himself out of his rut, and then blames everyone else EXCEPT himself for his
lack of fulfillment.

You do your things, I add my things and we get the job done. But
Sweetums can do it ALL . . . of course his history proves otherwise.

Tsk. "My history" disproves Kellie's ASSumptions.

Wanna take it back to the conditions under which you departed NAS
Johnsville?

Din think so.

I have noticed that Lennie hasn't been so bold as to repost his whole CV
here again since I was able to approach folks who were actaully AT one of them
and do a bit of investigating of my own.

Of course I think Lennie LIKES getting his tail under the rockers...He so
often posts stuff that is so easily disproven with readily available facts that
one wonders what he could have been thinking other than to induce a
self-humiliating scenario.

But...he is of the nobility, the elite, and doesn't recognize "drudges"
who worked for a salary. :-)


Lemmee know when you get yer home installation of Microstation to spit
out the plane and torsional moments of inertia of a tower section.

...and don't forget to inform everyone that MECHANICAL elements
of antennas are MUCH MORE important than any menial
electrical "drudge" characteristics.

| snore |

Why don't you two sweetums move this to private e-mail? Or are
you bound and determined to turn this public-access newsgroup
into a cozy little private chat room suitable only for PCTA extras?

What's a' matter Sweetie, you can't stand it when the adults around
here talk over yer head? One of your peers, my seven-year-old #2
grandson has the same problem.

Lennie loves sending stuff via private e mail. Of course he doesn't send
what he promises...but he does love doing it!

73

Steve, K4YZ

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 ,

(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 only came up when a frequency
synthesizer was incorporated? :-)

Synthesizers were in wide use prior to 1990. The phase noise issue
became important as synthesizer circuits became common in transceivers.
I'll invite to read up on the subject. I've provided several urls.
There are numerous other sources of information on the subject. Why not
avail yourself of some of them?

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.

I've got one. You don't. :-)

I'm sure it is quite a nice piece of equipment for the casual SWL. I'm
happy for you.

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.

"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.


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."

Skill and endurance are certainly big factors in winning any amateur
radio contest.

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.

Like chess or checkers or board games, radio contesting is
a GAME.

There are some similarities. A good strategy, playing within the rules
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.

It is FAR from an ATHLETIC sport.

Not if done correctly.

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. Not worth it, since the typical PCTA
extra "commentary" (to use a word very loosely) would be
totally derogatory. My little text and photo memorabilia on the
ADA assignment takes 6 MB in PDF.

I thought you had no need of rank, title or status.

YOU have REJECTED simple things like a digitized license
repro in the past. You would be expected to reject anything I
present...as "credentials" or whatever real proof there is...and
there is a lot of it.

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."

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.

Dave K8MN

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:
Where was all that talk about "phase noise" over a decade ago?

Hint: Cellular telephony had not the impact on electronics design
a decade and a half ago. "Phase noise" wasn't talked about much
back then. Some MUST have their buzzwords to sound "grown-up"
in hum raddio... :-)

Hint: It must appear that way to a fellow who spent his time reading
only about cellular telephony. The term "phase noise" was commonly
discussed "back then" as regards synthesized HF transceivers. Many of
we grownups where discussing it two decades back.

There were contests a decade ago and farther back. Those that
don't have much to communicate can always have "contests" to
prove they are "somebody" through point scores. :-)

That you see no value in competitive endeavers doesn't really effect
those of us who do. How are you effected by amateur radio contests?

Especially good point scores through the efforts of "reducing
phase noise." :-)

I guess it is the little smiley which really makes you sound like a
person uninformed on the issue. How is it possible for you to have been
a PROFESSIONAL in radio, a PROFESSIONAL in the design of synthesizer
circuits and to have been unaware of the problem of phase noise with
such circuits?


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?

You've discussed. You just have no experience in amateur radio, no
stake in amateur radio and no credibility in amateur radio. You needn't
have an amateur radio license at all. Does that clear things up for you?


More tsk. My choice of residence location is NOT primarily
motivated by any slavering desire to erect a radio station of
any kind.

Great. It looks like you've got your wish. My Cincinnati home was
somewhat motivated by a desire for a good radio location. My present
home was selected in large part by a desire for a great radio location
with few neighbors. In addition, I have dark skies, a view to die for
and quiet which city and suburban dwellers don't even notice they don't
have.

Residences are HOMES, a place of living.

Residences mean many things to many owners. My living here includes
amateur radio, guitars, computers, astronomy, reading, writing,
photography, videography. I have neighbors who do none of those things.
Their residences are for what they enjoy doing in their manner of
living.

I've lived ON a huge radio station long ago, one much bigger than
is possible in any residential area. Not my idea of living for the
rest of my life...but important back then. If you want to live ON
or IN a radio station, feel free to apply for a broadcasting license
and make sure the local ordinances allow living on business
premises.

I currently live in the midst of a goodly sized radio station. I didn't
need to apply for a broadcasting license. I have no business on the
site and it wouldn't matter anyway. This county has very few
restrictions or zoning laws.

For a small part of my life the radio station complex was built
ON an old airfield. Not even the old Press Wireless station
in Palos Verdes, CA, (the one bought by a ham) was that large.

....but one man, Don Wallace W6AM bought that 25 acre Press Wireless
site, complete with rhombics and the large building which formerly
housed the station. He used it primarily for DXing and contests.


End result is "can't fix it because the
parts cannot be had". It is probably easier to restore a 40 year old R-390A
or 75S3 than a 20 year old R-70, if certain parts are needed.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA!!!!

Riiiiight. Try to find a replacement for an R-390 power transformer...
or anything inside that PTO...even in 1980... :-)

There are, in fact, numerous sources for such parts.



Last vacuum tube receiver I DESIGNED and built was in 1964-1965.

HF. Wasn't for listening to on-off keyed radiotelegraphy! [horrors!]

Terrible thing! NOT A LICENSED AMATEUR DESIGNING AND
BUILDING AN HF RADIO! Call out the radio police!

No license was or is required to build a receiver. In fact, no license
was or is required to build an amateur radio transmitter. You'll need
one if you want to hook it to an antenna and transmit though.

It didn't use any "recycled parts."

A pity that you had nothing useable on hand.

Dave K8MN

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , PAMNO
(N2EY) writes:

In article , Dave Heil
writes:
Tsk, tsk. I CAN "legally" operate lots of OTHER radio service
radios...and radio amateur licensees can NOT do so... :-)

Izzat supposed to impress us? What's keeping you from it? Have a ball.

Mikey ("Mr. BPL") Powell and papa Colin both operated radios when
they were in the U.S. Army. Not amateur radios. Professional
soldier radios. [they are both former Army officers]

Sunnuvagun!

That should thrill the gang at alt.I.used.to.be.a.sojer

Who do you have more respect for, Dave:

Any PCTA who worships at the Church of St. Hiram.

That'd be wrong.

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?

Tsk. Keep the faith, Jimmie, make that Living Museum of Archaic
Radiotelegraphy continue...hold everyone back in the tube era
with all those "recycled" parts.

Couldn't you come up with a real response to Jim's query to me?

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. You've certainly failed to act on
your several decades of declared interest in amateur radio. You've not
even *attempted* to obtain the most basic of licenses, much less that
"Extra right out of the box". Do you see this statement of facts as
"talking snarly"?

Work that key and collect those points and QSLs, remake tube
bases into plug-in coil forms, memorize all those schematics to
be the Ninth Wonder of the Radio world to anyone visiting your
shack. Force everyone to learn telegraphy to play in your ham
sandbox on HF.

He can do that or anything else permitted by an amateur radio license.
You simply aren't involved.

Dave K8MN

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. More a successful con-man than
"professional in radio"

73

Steve, K4YZ

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 ,

(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.

It only came up when a frequency
synthesizer was incorporated? :-)

Synthesizers were in wide use prior to 1990. The phase noise issue
became important as synthesizer circuits became common in transceivers.
I'll invite to read up on the subject. I've provided several urls.
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?

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.

Other designs are criticized because of age - but not the R-70. Guess why.

I've got one. You don't. :-)

Don't want one. If somebody gave me one, I'd sell it.

I'm sure it is quite a nice piece of equipment for the casual SWL. I'm
happy for you.

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....

"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.

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".

Skill and endurance are certainly big factors in winning any amateur
radio contest.

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.

Like chess or checkers or board games, radio contesting is
a GAME.

So are all sports. Like the Olympic GAMES...

There are some similarities. A good strategy, playing within the rules
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.

Think car racing. Bicycle racing (Lance Armstrong wasn't riding a three-speed
with baloon tires)

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? Not as spectators!

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.

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?

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?

I thought you had no need of rank, title or status.

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.

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?

--

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.

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.

And guess what: If the code test goes away, contesting in amateur radio will
continue. 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

In article ,
(Brian Kelly) writes:

(N2EY) wrote in message
...
In article ,

(Brian Kelly) writes:


I've owned three CAD plotters. Two were early-mid '90s pen plotters
and both were abominations I never want to have to deal with again. My
current plotter is an HP D-size Windoze color inkjet machine which is
very nice. All of 'em are/were sheet and/or roll fed and can't be used
to draw on flat surfaces. You're talking about using a flatbed pen
plotter. I guess there are some of those still out there but I don't
want anything to do with 'em for any purpose much less just to crank
out a few PCBs.

R R R

There are also various techniques where you print a positive (?) onto a
transfer sheet which is then ironed onto the boardstock (literally) and
peeled off. Then etch.

THAT sounds like the way to go. This is good. Inkjet or laser printer?

I forget. Google rec.radio.amateur.homebrew for "DIY PC boards" "inkjet" and
such words. All sorts info the past few years.

Then the slickest trick of all:

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.

Or just do a mechanical dial...

Why would I do that when shaft encoders and freq counters are a
helluva lot smarter way to go??

They're only "smarter" if you have all the goodies to go with 'em. Like the
whole synthesizer and the controller and the programming. For a one-off
project that gets to be a bit much.

Not my problem, those are your problems, I don't reinvent wheels, I do
the knob, you do the rest.

This is one of the trends that makes homebrewing unattractive.

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.

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

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

Then came PC boards. Do the metal layout, the metal work, the PC board
layout,
fabricate the PC boards, stuff the PC boards, mount the rest of the parts.
Build a rig in some weeks of evenings.

Then came PICS and other programmable devices. Do the metal layout, the
metal
work, the PC board layout, fabricate the PC boards, stuff the PC boards,
mount
the rest of the parts. Then do the software development, debug, program.
Build a rig in many weeks of evenings.

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.

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.

Right on the money. As if Sweetums ever sank dime one of his own wad
one into any "station he operated".

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?

Fact is that he wouldn't have done
any of it if us taxpayers hadn't paid him to do it . . . Hell, we even
paid him to trudge thru the University of Monmouth Vo-Tech Division.

So what? That's what it was there for.

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.

Junior year was a trip - 5 engineering courses and working 35-39 hours/week. No
car, either. Thank you SEPTA....

Where the disconnect occurs is in situations like this:

Len says there was no use of Morse Code at ADA. Or anywhere in US Army
"point-to-point" radio comms back in 1952 or whenever. All done by
RTTY...or
RATT, as they called it then. All of which is almost certainly true.

Where the disconnect occurs is that Len seems to think that the Army's
non-use
of Morse then and there means that hams should not use or have a test for
Morse
here and now. The connection is never explained.

Nobody can "explain" irrelevance compounded by irrationality. Or
explain him for that matter.

There is no way that any guy/gal even with the world's quietist rcvr
and offscale BDRs and IMD3s is gonna "coexist" and ragchew with
anybody on 7.020 at sundown and beyond during the two big CW DX
contests, just isn't possible in any even remotely practical scenario.
Try it the last weekend of November. Move up the band or go to 30M.
'Way up the band . . .

How far up does the contest go? How about 7.070?

Bunch of variables are involved in this sticky wicket. But in general
at high noon a QRP ragchew on 7.020 should be no sweat. But when the
east coast big guns swing their monster yagis at EU to open the band
in the afternoon you better be above 7.050 and the "MUF" goes higher
from there as the clock ticks. MUF in this case being the *minimum*
usable freq for non-contesters.

R R R

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....

I didn't say I could solve the problem, just that I could get the results!

I'll buy the RB without a bet.

73 de Jim, N2EY

Dave Heil wrote in message ...
Len Over 21 wrote:

Why don't you two sweetums move this to private e-mail? Or are
you bound and determined to turn this public-access newsgroup
into a cozy little private chat room suitable only for PCTA extras?

What was it when you and "William" were doing your Charlie Chan routine?


Dave K8MN

I'm tired of trying to set the record straight, but here I go again.

I was playing Hop Sing, the cook on Bonanza. I think Len was playing
Fuji, the POW on Seven Hostile Actions, err, I mean McHale's Navy.
But you'll have to confirm that with Len.

In article ,
(Brian Kelly) writes:

(Len Over 21) wrote in message
...
In article ,

(Brian Kelly) writes:

on the SGC 2020...

I hate to bust yer bubble again Sweetums but they're all over the ham
bands used mostly by the "pack radio" crowd. Nice rugged little
minimalist's xcvr but somewhat lacking in rcvr basic performance.

Awwww...not up to Kellie's mighty standards? Tsk.

You bet. Crummy rcvr. Dig up the test lab reports on it. Like this
one.

http://www.arrl.org/members-only/prodrev/pdf/pr9810.pdf

Some observations on the SG 2020....

- It's a nice little rugged 20W box. Continuous HF coverage, which may be a big
plus for those who want to do freeband or cb :-).

- It's lacking in receiver performance in a number of ways. Some of the
deficiencies are made up for by *audio* DSP, at extra cost. But it's
direct-conversion, so things like aftermarket filters don't exist.
Unwanted-sideband suppression is not up to superhet standards.

- BDR and 3rd order 2 tone IMD are way below the competition, and are *noise
limited* due to the synthesizer.

- It's not a bargain. Costs more than many ham xcvrs that perform better. The
basic unit is not too expensive but the add-ons are.

- Almost no internal accessories. (ATU, battery, filters). No noise-blanker
that I could find on the website.

- Heavy, by comparison to the competition

In almost every performance spcification, there are better performing rigs for
the same or less money. About the only place the SG 2020 really shines is that
it's in a rugged case, and puts out up to 20 W.

Are you in the tRoll opinion against the "shack on the belt crowd?"

Nope.

"Minimalist?" It does SSB very well. It includes a lot of self-
check features as standard.

I can check my own radios Sweetums, but you better stick with SGC.

It's not alone in the self-check function. How much test equipment is needed to
do a complete alignment?

Maybe you want a "top of the line contester" transceiver that not
only has all the super selectivity and sensitivity to leap tall pileups
but also keeps the logs and prints out QSLs?

Right on again Sweetums, you're finally starting to get it.

Take a spin over to the Elecraft website and see the mobile computer a ham put
together in the EC2 enclosure. ITX motherboard, tiny LCD display. Big computer
performance. Whole thing runs on 12V.

All on battery power?
:-)

Whatta a great battery-powered rig: Draws over a half amp while simply
listening to a dummy load.

That's more than double the competition's requirement. Some smaller
ultraportables draw about a tenth of that on receive!

Plus SG2020 has no provision for internal battery. There's an external pack so
you can run it on D cells.

Bring a lot of D cells.

You don't wanna think about what it draws while transmitting.

Perhaps some folks' idea of fun is hauling all those batteries around. Good
exercise ;-)

But you missed the big question: Does Len own an SG 2020? How about
accessories?

Or does he do like my old highschool friend - "borrow" others' setups, rather
than have his own?

Well no, fact is Sweetums that I have a very current tech ham radio
catapult, Miccolis and I used it to launch some Field Day antennas
just a few months ago. He has one of a different design which also
works well.

You have the deluxe model, I have the minimalist. Seen service at several
locations.

IIRC, mine has been used on at least 3 Field Days and also to put up permanent
antennas at ham QTHs. Yours is even better-traveled.

73 de Jim, N2EY

In article , Dave Heil
writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:
In article ,

(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?

Anyone can discuss here. I have seen no postings where somebody has told Len to
"shut up", even though he has told others to "shut the hell up".

Credibility is another issue.

You've discussed. You just have no experience in amateur radio, no
stake in amateur radio and no credibility in amateur radio. You needn't
have an amateur radio license at all. Does that clear things up for you?

I don't think Len understands.

More tsk. My choice of residence location is NOT primarily
motivated by any slavering desire to erect a radio station of
any kind.

Great. It looks like you've got your wish.

To each his own. But from descriptions and mapquest, it appears that Len's
choice was a particularly poor one for HF radio operations.

My Cincinnati home was
somewhat motivated by a desire for a good radio location. My present
home was selected in large part by a desire for a great radio location
with few neighbors. In addition, I have dark skies, a view to die for
and quiet which city and suburban dwellers don't even notice they don't
have.

Some of us notice.

Residences are HOMES, a place of living.

Avocations are part of living. Amateur radio is part of my life, and part of
the definition of "home" to me. Others may differ, of course.

Residences mean many things to many owners. My living here includes
amateur radio, guitars, computers, astronomy, reading, writing,
photography, videography. I have neighbors who do none of those things.
Their residences are for what they enjoy doing in their manner of
living.

What a concept!

I've lived ON a huge radio station long ago, one much bigger than
is possible in any residential area.

But it wasn't Len's radio station. He didn't own it, build it, or pay for it.
He and over 700 others ran it. Was their *job*.

Not my idea of living for the
rest of my life...but important back then.

Yes, it was.

Amateur radio stations are important, too.

If you want to live ON
or IN a radio station, feel free to apply for a broadcasting license
and make sure the local ordinances allow living on business
premises.

It sounds like what Len is saying is that we hams should not be allowed to have
our stations in our homes. He has made similar remarks before. I think if it
were up to Len, most of us hams would be forced off the air by a variety of
forces.

How does Len feel about anti-antenna ordinances?

I currently live in the midst of a goodly sized radio station. I didn't
need to apply for a broadcasting license. I have no business on the
site and it wouldn't matter anyway. This county has very few
restrictions or zoning laws.

I've lived "on" a radio station since 1967.

For a small part of my life the radio station complex was built
ON an old airfield. Not even the old Press Wireless station
in Palos Verdes, CA, (the one bought by a ham) was that large.

But did Len *own* it, or was he simply a resident?

I used to live on, and own, part of the Erie Canal, too.

...but one man, Don Wallace W6AM bought that 25 acre Press Wireless
site, complete with rhombics and the large building which formerly
housed the station. He used it primarily for DXing and contests.

Yup. Do you know where KH6IJ used to live?

End result is "can't fix it because the
parts cannot be had". It is probably easier to restore a 40 year old
R-390A
or 75S3 than a 20 year old R-70, if certain parts are needed.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA!!!!

It's true.

Riiiiight.

Yes, it is.

Try to find a replacement for an R-390 power transformer...

Easy. Get one from a hangar queen. Lots of them out there. Not inexpensive but
anyone who deals with '390s knows that.

or anything inside that PTO...even in 1980... :-)

Wrong again, Len.

The modular construction of the R-390A permits a lot of repair to be done by
module-swapping. PTOs for those receivers are not hard to find, and most
versions can be rebuilt and recalibrated in the typical basement workshop with
a few tools and parts.

There are, in fact, numerous sources for such parts.

Yep. Also lots of information and even "professional quality" instruction
videos on how to restore them. In fact, the internet has made them *more*
available. Check out

http://www.r390A.com

for one such source, and links to many others.

btw, the R390A was produced by a number of manufacturers from 1954 to at least
1984. Although many were destroyed (because the govt.either didn't know or
didn't care about what they were worth), many survive as either working
receivers or parts sources.

Last vacuum tube receiver I DESIGNED and built was in 1964-1965.

Did you do that at work or as a "hobby" project?

HF. Wasn't for listening to on-off keyed radiotelegraphy! [horrors!]

Description? Pictures? Performance?

Terrible thing! NOT A LICENSED AMATEUR DESIGNING AND
BUILDING AN HF RADIO! Call out the radio police!

And how many HF receivers have you designed and built as a "hobby" in the
intervening ~40 years?

No license was or is required to build a receiver. In fact, no license
was or is required to build an amateur radio transmitter. You'll need
one if you want to hook it to an antenna and transmit though.

You also need one in order to sell a transmitter.

It didn't use any "recycled parts."

A pity that you had nothing useable on hand.

When I asked Len for help in designing an HF station, all he could offer was to
point me to the Digi-Key catalog. That explained a lot, actually, because it
told me that Len doesn't really know how to do home design and construction of
radios. Nor how to be creative in the use of available components rather than
just what's in the catalogs.

That's not a put-down, just a fact. While Len talks a lot of theory, and what
he did as a "professional" way back when, home construction of HF receivers,
transmitters and transceivers just isn't his thing. Look at his articles in
'ham radio' - none of them are radio construction articles.

73 de Jim, N2EY

Subject: US Licensing Restructuring ??? When ???
From: PAMNO (N2EY)
Date: 10/5/2004 6:28 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

In article , Dave Heil
writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:
In article ,

Why are you so focussed on all MUST have a ham license to
discuss anything in here?

Where did I say that?

Lennie's typo notwithstanding, you didn't.

Just one of Lennie's SOP's (Situationally Obnoxious Posting). Keeps
reciting the same unfounded, baseless rant over and over again.

What Lennie HAS been told is that perhaps if he got an Amateur Radio
license and PARTICIPATED in Amateur Radio, he would actually understand it and
be able to discuss it from an INFORMED position.

Anyone can discuss here. I have seen no postings where somebody has told Len
to
"shut up", even though he has told others to "shut the hell up".

It's that "anger" thing he keeps accusing me and others of. "Shut the
hell up" is a very angry, antagonistic way of trying to brow-beat another.

Credibility is another issue.

Again...perhasp if he could actually discuss matters from an informed,
experienced positon...As it stands, he has zero-point-zero minutes of practical
Amateur Radio experience.

You've discussed. You just have no experience in amateur radio, no
stake in amateur radio and no credibility in amateur radio. You needn't
have an amateur radio license at all. Does that clear things up for you?

I don't think Len understands.

How can he?

He and Brain have thier respective heads up each others backsides so far
that neither can see a thing, and what they can hear is muffled and distorted.

More tsk. My choice of residence location is NOT primarily
motivated by any slavering desire to erect a radio station of
any kind.

Great. It looks like you've got your wish.

Ahhhhhh! But he CAN report to us on the VHF navaids from LAX! Oh joy!

Of course any of us with more than a month or two's experience in Amateur
Radio can attest to the fact that respectable signals can be radiated from and
received by antennas that no one can see.

Having once resided in SoCal antenna controlled neighborhoods myself I can
attest to the fact that a wire around the eaves and fed by a decent roller
tuner and worked against a good ground can work pretty well.

To each his own. But from descriptions and mapquest, it appears that Len's
choice was a particularly poor one for HF radio operations.

My Cincinnati home was
somewhat motivated by a desire for a good radio location. My present
home was selected in large part by a desire for a great radio location
with few neighbors. In addition, I have dark skies, a view to die for
and quiet which city and suburban dwellers don't even notice they don't
have.

Some of us notice.

Last vacuum tube receiver I DESIGNED and built was in 1964-1965.

Did you do that at work or as a "hobby" project?

I'm still waiting for Lennie to regale us with what RF devices our lives
can't do without that he allegedly had a hand in creating.

HF. Wasn't for listening to on-off keyed radiotelegraphy! [horrors!]

Description? Pictures? Performance?

None.

Just like his Padawamn Learner's T5 logs.

Terrible thing! NOT A LICENSED AMATEUR DESIGNING AND
BUILDING AN HF RADIO! Call out the radio police!

And how many HF receivers have you designed and built as a "hobby" in the
intervening ~40 years?

None. Last time he dared to venture a discussion on any kind of direct
participation in radio as a hobby, he had a(n) (alleged) ricebox lineup
including an ICOM R-70.

When I asked Len for help in designing an HF station, all he could offer was
to
point me to the Digi-Key catalog. That explained a lot, actually, because it
told me that Len doesn't really know how to do home design and construction
of
radios. Nor how to be creative in the use of available components rather than
just what's in the catalogs.

That's not a put-down, just a fact. While Len talks a lot of theory, and what
he did as a "professional" way back when, home construction of HF receivers,
transmitters and transceivers just isn't his thing. Look at his articles in
'ham radio' - none of them are radio construction articles.

Lennie's "contribution" to radio was getting coffee for and staying out of
the way of the REAL radio professionals as they did REAL engineering and design
work.

73

Steve, K4YZ

PAMNO (N2EY) wrote in message ...
In article ,
(Brian Kelly) writes:

(Len Over 21) wrote in message
...
In article ,

(Brian Kelly) writes:

on the SGC 2020...

I hate to bust yer bubble again Sweetums but they're all over the ham
bands used mostly by the "pack radio" crowd. Nice rugged little
minimalist's xcvr but somewhat lacking in rcvr basic performance.

Awwww...not up to Kellie's mighty standards? Tsk.

You bet. Crummy rcvr. Dig up the test lab reports on it. Like this
one.

http://www.arrl.org/members-only/prodrev/pdf/pr9810.pdf

Some observations on the SG 2020....

- It's a nice little rugged 20W box. Continuous HF coverage, which may be a big
plus for those who want to do freeband or cb :-).

Such negativism. Besides, they're not interested in 20W radios.

Consider wx intercept, rtty wx, and hf fax.

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. I have word that his "performance" was less than
expected on at least one assignment.

More a successful con-man than
"professional in radio"

I am gald you agree.

Steve, K4YZ