Re: [Repeater-Builder] Mystery Signal
On Dec 15, 2006, at 8:02 PM, Don Kupferschmidt wrote: Hey Nate: Most outstanding was Nate Duehr's (WY0X) successful extraction of Packet data from deep in the modulation. He, using computer filtration and blanking techniques, removed the DTMF zeros and brought the packet data up by what must have been at least 30 db.. He then put this on his server for any and all to try to decode. Nice work here. Many thanks to you. If I ever have a problem with my system, I'm come running to you. Don, KD9PT Just way too many hours of listening to packet direct from the speaker of a radio back in the fun days of Packet, Don... while trying to get my horribly-built and soldered baycom style modem (baycom didn't exist yet at that point, just a schematic and a dream was all any of us had for a cheap way on to packet radio... and a pile of parts, a bad soldering iron, and a really dumb guy running it... me). I think I'd recognize a packet burst from Amateur packet in my sleep -- after a year or more of having the monitor speaker on, on that original packet station. That was one of my first projects home-brewing anything. I learned a LOT about humility when I had to take it to another ham's house and he tore apart my rat's nest, laughed at all my cold solder joints, put the thing under a real light on a real workbench (it was assembled on a TV tray in a dark room -- who here remembers TV trays?! heh...) and a magnifier, and proceeded to re-solder every joint that had taken me an hour or two in about 10 minutes. Learned what good solder joints look like that night too! And how important it is to block out at least three hours for visiting ANY other person's shack... because we weren't there just to fix the modem. We were there to get the Grand Tour, and have some coffee... and talk... and, holy cow... what time is it again?! Man... I gotta get up in the morning! THANKS for the help!!! Everyone has to start somewhere... I let a lot of the magic smoke out of things in that first ham shack. Also learned how to neutralize the tubes of an old HW-101 OVER THE AIR from two different hams one night... another lesson learned... telephones sometimes really ARE better than radios! Heh... but the magic smoke stayed in everything that night, and the little old HW-101 once again put out power and was much happier with its brand new 6146B's! Other lessons learned from that packet station... even transistor switches fail sometimes... and yes, if you live on a high hill, a 1W packet station with a Icom 2AT HT as the transmitter WILL tick off everyone for 25 or more miles if your silly little modem you built locks up in TX and you're out to dinner and working overnights... on a Saturday... and they WILL DF your house... and they'll find the neighbor with the tower first, and freak him out at 10:30 PM at night... and then they'll find your phone number and talk to your family members who will gladly walk into the shack and unplug *everything* at their urgent request since they know you're at work and can't be reached! (HUGE GRIN...) But thanks for the kind words. MANY people here on RB have helped me understand and/or learn new things I needed to know about the RF side of the systems I [try to] maintain. We all help where we can. -- Nate Duehr - WY0X [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[Repeater-Builder] Re: FCC officially issues RO dropping code requirement
I hate to see this happen!!! Yes I do have my code and I had to work at it. Yes I do have a problem with my hearing, not sure what they call it, but my ears are ringing all the time. Code was very had for me, but I got it. I found an Elmer who taught me, AC7Z. He told me I have a real good Fist. I did not like the code, but I wanted the General class so I learned the code. I hope FCC will bring it back at least for the Extra class. There needs to be a certain class that we all look up to, a class that is had to get. Why? Today any HAM can buy a radio off the shelf. If it needs repaired, who works on it? Very few HAMs today (including myself) work on their radios, they take it to a shop for repairs. We need to learn how to repair it ourselves. You do not need high tech, top of the line test equipment. Ok, I will get off my pedestal, sorry. I just hate to see this come about. Some times change is good, some times change is bad. Time will tell on this change. Rod KC7VQR
Re: [Repeater-Builder] FYI: FCC officially issues RO dropping code requirement today
It is now just a matter of time. The problems with hams not understanding what they are doing will increase. Interference will increase. Commercial interests will petition the FCC for the frequencies. The hams will not be able to defend their desire to keep the frequencies. Now the ham frequencies will be sold to the highest bidder. The handwriting is on the wall. Less that 10% of the newly licensed hams can draw a simple block diagram of the radio that they use. Just my opinion, based on my observations. 73 Glenn WB4UIV At 11:25 PM 12/15/06, you wrote: Is it a little early for April Fools jokes? Will 10 meters become the next CB band? I will wait and see what happens here... 73 Mike - N7ZEF Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] FYI: FCC officially issues RO dropping code requirement today Oh well, the end of an era. Boo-Hiss. Bob M. == --- Joe Montierth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-269012A1.pdf Techs get tech+ privs, code test gone for general and extra. Joe __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com Yahoo! Groups Links Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [Repeater-Builder] FYI: FCC officially issues RO dropping code requirement today
I know CW, and proved it by passing a 20 WPM code test over 10 years ago and by passing a 13 wpm code test nearly 20 years ago. I will vouch for LJ also knowing code. -- Original Message -- Received: Sat, 16 Dec 2006 01:13:21 AM CST From: mch [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] FYI: FCC officially issues RO dropping code requirement today But how many of those folks actually KNEW CW, and how many were using a program? Joe M. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Anyone who thinks CW is dead never listened to HF in the last couple months to the ARRL CW SS contest, the CQWW DX CW Contest, or to the recent 5A7A DXpedition to Libya. Somebody(s) are working lots of CW (the CW bands were FULL, day and night!) You had to see it to believe it - it was most encouraging to see. LJ
Re: [Repeater-Builder] FYI: FCC officially issues RO dropping code requirement today
Huh? I know plenty of Long Time hams who know the code and were licensed back when the test was at the FCC field office who still can't draw a block diagram of a radio. I know plenty of Extra class operators who cannot program a simple HT. They can pound it out at 20 wpm, but forget trying to enable a PL on the HT for the local repeater. Morse code and technical competency (or even common sense as shown by some of the responses in this thread) do NOT go hand in hand. The FCC just lifted an outdated road block for some people who do not posses the ability to learn a new language (just like not everyone has the ability to be a musician) but may be VERY technically component and deserving of the Amateur Service highest license class. Good for them (IMHO). How does dropping the code lead to more interference and the FCC auctioning off the bands? Let's move on- Our repeaters can still send a CW id, enjoy Please flame back directly, save the bandwidth for repeater building issues. And yes- I do know the Code. Tom W9SRV - Original Message From: Glenn Little WB4UIV [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, December 16, 2006 12:50:22 PM Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] FYI: FCC officially issues RO dropping code requirement today It is now just a matter of time. The problems with hams not understanding what they are doing will increase. Interference will increase. Commercial interests will petition the FCC for the frequencies. The hams will not be able to defend their desire to keep the frequencies. Now the ham frequencies will be sold to the highest bidder. The handwriting is on the wall. Less that 10% of the newly licensed hams can draw a simple block diagram of the radio that they use. Just my opinion, based on my observations. 73 Glenn WB4UIV At 11:25 PM 12/15/06, you wrote: Is it a little early for April Fools jokes? Will 10 meters become the next CB band? I will wait and see what happens here... 73 Mike - N7ZEF Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] FYI: FCC officially issues RO dropping code requirement today Oh well, the end of an era. Boo-Hiss. Bob M. == --- Joe Montierth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-269012A1.pdf Techs get tech+ privs, code test gone for general and extra. Joe __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com Yahoo! Groups Links Yahoo! Groups Links Yahoo! Groups Links __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: [Repeater-Builder] FYI: FCC officially issues RO dropping code requirement today
One time 35-40? years ago, I was applying for an electronic technician position in Pasadena California. One of the pre-employment test questions was to draw a block diagram of a receiver. As my hobby time back then was amateur radio and I had been studying the Motorola T44A6A 450-470 Mc (not MHz back then) receiver. So, I drew the block diagram of the T44A6A receiver - triple conversion, walking first and second IF's, 455 Kc third IF and AFC circuit. Yes, I did get the job. Neil - WA6KLA - Original Message - From: Glenn Little WB4UIV [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Saturday, December 16, 2006 10:50 am Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] FYI: FCC officially issues RO dropping code requirement today It is now just a matter of time. The problems with hams not understanding what they are doing will increase. Interference will increase. Commercial interests will petition the FCC for the frequencies. The hams will not be able to defend their desire to keep the frequencies. Now the ham frequencies will be sold to the highest bidder. The handwriting is on the wall. Less that 10% of the newly licensed hams can draw a simple block diagram of the radio that they use. Just my opinion, based on my observations. 73 Glenn WB4UIV
[Repeater-Builder] For Sale: Link Comm RLC Club Deluxe and DVR 1
Hello to the group. I have a Link Comm RLC Club Deluxe with factory rack mount enclosure and the matching Link Comm DVR 1 also in the rack mount enclosure. Both in proper working order. Asking $700 obo for the pair. Please e-mail with any questions. 73 to all.John
Re: [Repeater-Builder] FYI: FCC officially issues RO dropping code requirement today
That's interesting, Neil. About 15 years ago I applied at one of the local MSS organizations (Day Wireless - then Clackamas Comm) and was given their test. It was a 3 page test with things like: How is a FET like a diode how is it like a vacuum tube? Draw a block diagram of a remote base. They told me I aced the test but the job was given to an internal person who transferred in from Spokane. Today we have amateur extras who can't figure out how to make PL/CTCSS/QC/CG work on their HT to access a repeater. -- Original Message -- Received: Sat, 16 Dec 2006 01:35:54 PM CST From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: repeater-builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] FYI: FCC officially issues RO dropping code requirement today One time 35-40? years ago, I was applying for an electronic technician position in Pasadena California. One of the pre-employment test questions was to draw a block diagram of a receiver. As my hobby time back then was amateur radio and I had been studying the Motorola T44A6A 450-470 Mc (not MHz back then) receiver. So, I drew the block diagram of the T44A6A receiver - triple conversion, walking first and second IF's, 455 Kc third IF and AFC circuit. Yes, I did get the job. Neil - WA6KLA - Original Message - From: Glenn Little WB4UIV [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Saturday, December 16, 2006 10:50 am Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] FYI: FCC officially issues RO dropping code requirement today It is now just a matter of time. The problems with hams not understanding what they are doing will increase. Interference will increase. Commercial interests will petition the FCC for the frequencies. The hams will not be able to defend their desire to keep the frequencies. Now the ham frequencies will be sold to the highest bidder. The handwriting is on the wall. Less that 10% of the newly licensed hams can draw a simple block diagram of the radio that they use. Just my opinion, based on my observations. 73 Glenn WB4UIV
Re: [Repeater-Builder] FYI: FCC officially issues RO dropping code requirement today
I know when I passed the 13 wpm in 1961 (remember the old tape code players with a 800 Hz tone the FCC Offices used, this one in Houston, Texas) at the age of 17, I was on cloud nine. I was in a room of much older people trying the test. When I heard them send the 20 wpm test, I thought at that time it would take a miracle to pass that. I have to admit, I only used CW because I had to (had a Eico 720 running xtal controlled only)in the early day. Yes, on 15 and 40 meters which was quite a challenge. When I got out of college a number of years later, I finally had the funds to buy a ssb rig (Heathkit HW-100). I tried CW a few other times and then peaked at 20 wpm to pass the Extra and have not had a CW contact since then. I stupidly sold my Vibroplex Bug a number of years ago not knowing it was worth well more than what I paid for it in 1960. I knew that it was a matter of time before the CW requirement would go that away, but it still is re to use if it is warranted to make a QSO. Roger W5RD ex-AJ5L, K5JAJ, KN5JAJ Licensed in spring 1961 - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: repeater-builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, December 16, 2006 1:21 PM Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] FYI: FCC officially issues RO dropping code requirement today One time 35-40? years ago, I was applying for an electronic technician position in Pasadena California. One of the pre-employment test questions was to draw a block diagram of a receiver. As my hobby time back then was amateur radio and I had been studying the Motorola T44A6A 450-470 Mc (not MHz back then) receiver. So, I drew the block diagram of the T44A6A receiver - triple conversion, walking first and second IF's, 455 Kc third IF and AFC circuit. Yes, I did get the job. Neil - WA6KLA - Original Message - From: Glenn Little WB4UIV [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Saturday, December 16, 2006 10:50 am Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] FYI: FCC officially issues RO dropping code requirement today It is now just a matter of time. The problems with hams not understanding what they are doing will increase. Interference will increase. Commercial interests will petition the FCC for the frequencies. The hams will not be able to defend their desire to keep the frequencies. Now the ham frequencies will be sold to the highest bidder. The handwriting is on the wall. Less that 10% of the newly licensed hams can draw a simple block diagram of the radio that they use. Just my opinion, based on my observations. 73 Glenn WB4UIV
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Rule on tampering with a FCC licensed transmiter
I wish that rule was still in existance. A member of the local repeater coordination council took actions which resulted in a repeater getting unplugged by the site manager. There was NO report of interference. After intervention by myself and others, the repeater was turned back on a few days later by the site manager. The person initiating this had no reason for taking his actions, other than to throw his weight around which has happened several times. -- Original Message -- Received: Sat, 09 Dec 2006 10:01:18 AM CST From: Jeff Kincaid [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Rule on tampering with a FCC licensed transmiter From WWII onward it was a federal crime to tamper with a licensed radio station of any kind. It was a matter of national security. But, about 10 or 15 years ago someone noticed that the rule hadn't been used in decades and it was dropped. The only remaining recourse is under local property laws; vandalism, willful destruction, trespassing, etc. Jeff --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, mch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: They most certainly do license transmitters. It's only in the Ham type services the operators are licensed and can put transmitters anywhere (almost). That's why the commercial licenses have coordinates and frequencies on them. As for the rule, I know it exists, but I don't know exactly where offhand. I think it's going to be in the 'lower CFR parts', not in the rules specific to any one service. On the other hand, all the tower signs I've ever seen don't reference any specific rule - they just talk about the site being under the jurisdiction of the federal government. Nobody I know of quotes a specific law. Joe M. Gary wrote: Not sure what you mean John. The FCC does not license transmitters however they do license operators of transmitters and they approve transmitters depending upon they application in the U.S. All the rules and regs can be viewed at the FCC's website. Go to the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau and click on the link to 'Rules and Regulations'. Gary JOHN MACKEY wrote: Can anyone qoute me the rule abotu tampering with a federally licensed transmitter?
Re: [Repeater-Builder] FYI: FCC officially issues RO dropping code requirement today
Hey Ken, I didn't know you are 'that' old. Back then you may have been a teenager ... Neil - Original Message - From: Ken Arck [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Saturday, December 16, 2006 12:08 pm Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] FYI: FCC officially issues RO dropping code requirement today Interestingly, I applied for the same job and was asked to draw a block diagram of Neil. I didn't get the job Ken At 11:21 AM 12/16/2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: One time 35-40? years ago, I was applying for an electronic technician position in Pasadena California. One of the pre-employment test questions was to draw a block diagram of a receiver. As my hobby time back then was amateur radio and I had been studying the Motorola T44A6A 450-470 Mc (not MHz back then) receiver. So, I drew the block diagram of the T44A6A receiver - triple conversion, walking first and second IF's, 455 Kc third IF and AFC circuit. Yes, I did get the job. Neil - WA6KLA - Original Message - From: Glenn Little WB4UIV mailto:glennmaillist%40bellsouth.net[EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Saturday, December 16, 2006 10:50 am Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] FYI: FCC officially issues RO dropping code requirement today It is now just a matter of time. The problems with hams not understanding what they are doing will increase. Interference will increase. Commercial interests will petition the FCC for the frequencies. The hams will not be able to defend their desire to keep the frequencies. Now the ham frequencies will be sold to the highest bidder. The handwriting is on the wall. Less that 10% of the newly licensed hams can draw a simple block diagram of the radio that they use. Just my opinion, based on my observations. 73 Glenn WB4UIV --- --- President and CTO - Arcom Communications Makers of the world famous RC210 Repeater Controller and accessories. http://www.ah6le.net/arcom/index.html Authorized Dealers for Kenwood and Telewave and we offer complete repeater packages! AH6LE/R - IRLP Node 3000 http://www.irlp.net
Re: [Repeater-Builder] FYI: FCC officially issues RO dropping code requireme...
One time 35 years ago, I applied for a job at an MSS and I'm still there, man am I old! It's only temporary though, I'm only here until I decide on a career. Glenn W8AK
RE: [Repeater-Builder] FYI: FCC officially issues RO dropping code requirement today
Paper tape machines! Man, that's what I first learned my Morse Code with. Wasn't that McCoy ? I remember his name popping up a lot back then. ( Dinosaurs still roamed the earth back then). Well, I'm glad I learned it, its been nothing but a source of joy to me. Since I first got my novice call sign, WN8HJX, I only have one microphone! The rest, keys and an old bug. I think I'll try and share this joy with others in my area by putting on Morse Code lessons again. Rich K8JX Why grab possessions like thieves, or divide them like socialists, when you can ignore them like wise men? Natalie Clifford Barney /\___/\ ^ ^ )_o_(I love Samoyed Rescue- Save a Sammy !! U Visit http://www.foreverhomesamoyed.org http://www.foreverhomesamoyed.org for a nice hobby, http://www.w8usa.org
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: 6M duplexer wanted in UK
Dave, Having looked at the GB3FH website,this duplexer looks to be self compensating. Any expansion due to heating of the heliax inner should be compensated by expansion of the linking feeder inner,pushing the tuning bar upwards. I have doubts as to the small effect on tuning that 0.2mm expansion on a 1.3m stub would have (0-40 degC) I also have doubts that an inner constrained and corrugated in foam would self expand in the first place. I think this design could be ideal given some RD time and a little patience..I have my eyes on a 25m piece of 1 5/8 at the moment in the Oxford area.. I just need to persuade the owners that I am not a scrap metal capitalist and need the stuff for a genuine non-profit purpose.. will keep you posted Ian G8PWE Walsall UK - Original Message - From: dave_g7uzn To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2006 3:37 PM Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: 6M duplexer wanted in UK Are you saying that a duplexer built from heliax can cope with a 0.5MHz plit at any temperature?I somehow doubt it (no invar!) Cheers Dave UZN --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Matt Beasant [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Steve, The 'FH duplexer was built by a very good friend, who doesn't want to build another one!!! But yes, it was built from LDF7-50 1 -5/8 Heliax. Matt - Original Message - From: Steve To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, December 06, 2006 5:14 PM Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] 6M duplexer wanted in UK Hi Matt What size heliax did you use, I seem to remember that it was built for you, wasn't it. I tried myself with small dia stuff and it was not very good, went slightly off tune and of course rx desense. As I have said, itmay just have been the cable I used. 73 Steve - Original Message - From: Matt Beasant To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, December 06, 2006 4:06 PM Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] 6M duplexer wanted in UK My heliax duplexer has been in service now for over 2 years at GB3FH without fault or need to re-adjust. I check it every time I visit site and it never moves! Over 85dB rejection on one side and 90 odd dB on the other, works fine for me. You can see pictures of it at www.gb3fh.org.uk Regards, Matt, G4RKY --- Steve [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi don't get me wrong, Iam not condeming heliax duplexers totaly, but you have to take into account reliability once on site. I did make one but had to scrap it as it was so unreliable causing de sense etc, and every time I had to look at it I had to make arragements to access the site, which could take upto 2 weeks, must point out the one I made used small dia heliax, maybe larger dia would be OK but as I can't get any, I don't know Anyway had my say so end of thread from me Steve - Original Message - From: Barry C' To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, December 06, 2006 11:25 AM Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] 6M duplexer wanted in UK Being a fan to the exclusion of saving several hundred quid is rather silly when the duplexers work well and are generally quite efficient . From: Steve [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] 6M duplexer wanted in UK Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2006 11:07:54 - Hi think you will find that Dave, like me, isn't a huge fan of Heliax duplexers, see my posts about actualy getting hold of ldf 750 73 Steve - Original Message - From: Mr John Lloyd To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; repeater-builder@yahoogroups.com ; John Lloyd Sent: Wednesday, December 06, 2006 6:56 AM Subject: [Repeater-Builder] 6M duplexer wanted in UK Dave, You can build your own 6 Mtr duplexer. Find some 1-5/8 heliax and put one together. Look at http://www.wa7x.com/ki7dx_rpt.html Thanks, John, K7JL Utah VHF Society http://utahvhfs.org/snowlink.html 1a. 6M duplexer wanted in UK Posted by: dave_g7uzn [EMAIL PROTECTED] dave_g7uzn Date: Tue Dec 5, 2006 3:20 am ((PST)) Hi All, Is anyone with a set of cavity filters suitable for 50/51MHz brave enough to sell them to me and get them shipped to the UK for a 6M repeater project? ALL expences will of course be covered. If you can help please email me direct at [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Need a quick answer? Get one in minutes
Re: [Repeater-Builder] FYI: FCC officially issues RO dropping code requirement today
At 12:11 PM 12/16/2006, you wrote: Hey Ken, I didn't know you are 'that' old. Back then you may have been a teenager ... ---Don't forget I was first licensed in 1967 at the ripe old age of 13 - back then you could both a Novice and Tech license simultaneously (which I did). And I was involved with repeaters since 1969, when I helped with the first 34/94 machine in Upper Darby, PA. (thanks to Gene K3DSM). But I still ain't as old as you! snicker Ken -- President and CTO - Arcom Communications Makers of the world famous RC210 Repeater Controller and accessories. http://www.ah6le.net/arcom/index.html Authorized Dealers for Kenwood and Telewave and we offer complete repeater packages! AH6LE/R - IRLP Node 3000 http://www.irlp.net
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Rule on tampering with a FCC licensed transmiter
Yes, we wish that rule was still in existance too. As a result of this situation, we had a meeting at our office since this same person may have access to some of our radio sites, as well, and may try to do some of the same snooping and plug-pulling to shut down ham Repeaters. From now on, we plan to make sure that everyone signs in and out of the site access log whenever they visit the site, and we will regularly check it against the alarm company's alarm code disable entries. We've also contacted other local site owners and government agencies to alert them to this problem. We have decided to change out the cabinet locks to some that are not the standard Motorola/GE, etc. kinds of locks that are usually found on 2-Way radio cabinets. We have certainly learned by this unfortunate situation at your radio site which is not but about a 5 minute drive from ours! LJ -Original Message- From: JOHN MACKEY [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Dec 16, 2006 12:17 PM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Rule on tampering with a FCC licensed transmiter I wish that rule was still in existance. A member of the local repeater coordination council took actions which resulted in a repeater getting unplugged by the site manager. There was NO report of interference. After intervention by myself and others, the repeater was turned back on a few days later by the site manager. The person initiating this had no reason for taking his actions, other than to throw his weight around which has happened several times. -- Original Message -- Received: Sat, 09 Dec 2006 10:01:18 AM CST From: Jeff Kincaid [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Rule on tampering with a FCC licensed transmiter From WWII onward it was a federal crime to tamper with a licensed radio station of any kind. It was a matter of national security. But, about 10 or 15 years ago someone noticed that the rule hadn't been used in decades and it was dropped. The only remaining recourse is under local property laws; vandalism, willful destruction, trespassing, etc. Jeff --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, mch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: They most certainly do license transmitters. It's only in the Ham type services the operators are licensed and can put transmitters anywhere (almost). That's why the commercial licenses have coordinates and frequencies on them. As for the rule, I know it exists, but I don't know exactly where offhand. I think it's going to be in the 'lower CFR parts', not in the rules specific to any one service. On the other hand, all the tower signs I've ever seen don't reference any specific rule - they just talk about the site being under the jurisdiction of the federal government. Nobody I know of quotes a specific law. Joe M. Gary wrote: Not sure what you mean John. The FCC does not license transmitters however they do license operators of transmitters and they approve transmitters depending upon they application in the U.S. All the rules and regs can be viewed at the FCC's website. Go to the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau and click on the link to 'Rules and Regulations'. Gary JOHN MACKEY wrote: Can anyone qoute me the rule abotu tampering with a federally licensed transmitter?
Re: [Repeater-Builder] FYI: FCC officially issues RO dropping code requirement today
Nah, I don't agree with that opinion. It is true that when the FCC implemented incentive licensing many years ago, a lot of hams were upset. They needed to increase their knowledge base (through upgrading), to obtain more privileges in the ham radio spectrum. Before that was done, the hams were complacent to sit on their licenses, use the frequencies assigned to them, and not learn any additional electronic knowledge unless they wanted to. I happen to know of a ham, now in his 70's, who is still very upset of this happening to him. On the other side of the coin, the FCC, in their infinite wisdom, decided that the so called technical pool needed revamping. Their vision, so to speak, was to make average Joe ham a deal. Obtain more knowledge, get more privileges. If you look at the people in the technical field of electronics and RF, you will find that there are many hams out there because of that ruling. I'm not saying that ham radio produces more electronic engineers and technicians; what I mean by that is someone who is interested in ham radio or electronics might want to pursue a formal education in the electronics industry. It goes hand in hand. I would truly doubt if the FCC would abolish what little is left of the ham radio spectrum to business interests. It just doesn't make any sense. Why fool around with the ham community when the technical pool keeps happening? Agreed, ham radio is a small community. But when you consider and factor in what it does in the big picture of communications and RF, I highly doubt that the government would take away the amateur service. Besides, the ARRL would have a field day if this would ever happen. Just my $0.02 . . .. . Don, KD9PT - Original Message - From: Glenn Little WB4UIV [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, December 16, 2006 12:50 PM Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] FYI: FCC officially issues RO dropping code requirement today It is now just a matter of time. The problems with hams not understanding what they are doing will increase. Interference will increase. Commercial interests will petition the FCC for the frequencies. The hams will not be able to defend their desire to keep the frequencies. Now the ham frequencies will be sold to the highest bidder. The handwriting is on the wall. Less that 10% of the newly licensed hams can draw a simple block diagram of the radio that they use. Just my opinion, based on my observations. 73 Glenn WB4UIV At 11:25 PM 12/15/06, you wrote: Is it a little early for April Fools jokes? Will 10 meters become the next CB band? I will wait and see what happens here... 73 Mike - N7ZEF Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] FYI: FCC officially issues RO dropping code requirement today Oh well, the end of an era. Boo-Hiss. Bob M. == --- Joe Montierth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-269012A1.pdf Techs get tech+ privs, code test gone for general and extra. Joe __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com Yahoo! Groups Links Yahoo! Groups Links Yahoo! Groups Links !DSPAM:1016,4584407e21785414056337!
Re: [Repeater-Builder] FYI: FCC officially issues RO dropping code requirement
It is now just a matter of time. The problems with hams not understanding what they are doing will increase. Interference will increase. Commercial interests will petition the FCC for the frequencies. The hams will not be able to defend their desire to keep the frequencies. Now the ham frequencies will be sold to the highest bidder. The handwriting is on the wall. Less that 10% of the newly licensed hams can draw a simple block diagram of the radio that they use. Just my opinion, based on my observations. 73 Glenn WB4UIV I don't think you have made real consideration of the truth at this point , you appear ill informed and insular because other countries have dropped code each time with great success and no theft of bandwidth , or somehow is your governing body more evil than ours ? perhaps there is a secrete plot ? I suggest you relax and accept it , in the long run it means more Amatuers and incidently it doesn't mean a decline in skills as you should acknowledge that arguement has been happinging for time in memorium . The only disadvantage is a huge impediment has been removed and now once a member of the fraternity people will learn code for the pleasure and not because it's a must . B _ Advertisement: Mobiles, computers, handsets, iPODs and more! http://a.ninemsn.com.au/b.aspx?URL=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Etradingpost%2Ecom%2Eau%2Fsearch%2Fcat%5FPhones%5Fns%5FTrue%5Foff%5F0%5Fsect%5FAutomotive%5Fsort%5FotRZSQ1BJDZfdRZSQSearchDisplayPriorityIndAVSCotRZSQ1BJDZfdRZSQFirstPublished%5Fsqt%5F2%5Fsrch%5Fmobile%2Bphones%5Fsrchtype%5Fint%5Fstate%5F9%5Fstpg%5F1%5Fsubs%5FUsed%2BCars%5F%3Freferrer%3Dplacement13_t=759568604_r=Email_Tagline1_m=EXT
Re: [Repeater-Builder] FYI: FCC officially issues RO dropping code requirement
The only thing that this possibly has in common with repeaters is that now more people will have access to repeaters on 10M, and that is all FM phone, anyway. Please, can we take the flamefests to some other forum and get back to discussing repeater building? Jeff At 07:51 PM 12/16/2006, you wrote: It is now just a matter of time. The problems with hams not understanding what they are doing will increase. Interference will increase. Commercial interests will petition the FCC for the frequencies. The hams will not be able to defend their desire to keep the frequencies. Now the ham frequencies will be sold to the highest bidder. The handwriting is on the wall. Less that 10% of the newly licensed hams can draw a simple block diagram of the radio that they use. Just my opinion, based on my observations. 73 Glenn WB4UIV I don't think you have made real consideration of the truth at this point , you appear ill informed and insular because other countries have dropped code each time with great success and no theft of bandwidth , or somehow is your governing body more evil than ours ? perhaps there is a secrete plot ? I suggest you relax and accept it , in the long run it means more Amatuers and incidently it doesn't mean a decline in skills as you should acknowledge that arguement has been happinging for time in memorium . The only disadvantage is a huge impediment has been removed and now once a member of the fraternity people will learn code for the pleasure and not because it's a must . B __ Advertisement: Mobiles, computers, handsets, iPODs and more! http://a.ninemsn.com.au/b.aspx?URL=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Etradingpost%2Ecom%2Eau%2Fsearch%2Fcat%5FPhones%5Fns%5FTrue%5Foff%5F0%5Fsect%5FAutomotive%5Fsort%5FotRZSQ1BJDZfdRZSQSearchDisplayPriorityIndAVSCotRZSQ1BJDZfdRZSQFirstPublished%5Fsqt%5F2%5Fsrch%5Fmobile%2Bphones%5Fsrchtype%5Fint%5Fstate%5F9%5Fstpg%5F1%5Fsubs%5FUsed%2BCars%5F%3Freferrer%3Dplacement13_t=759568604_r=Email_Tagline1_m=EXThttp://a.ninemsn.com.au/b.aspx?URL=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Etradingpost%2Ecom%2Eau%2Fsearch%2Fcat%5FPhones%5Fns%5FTrue%5Foff%5F0%5Fsect%5FAutomotive%5Fsort%5FotRZSQ1BJDZfdRZSQSearchDisplayPriorityIndAVSCotRZSQ1BJDZfdRZSQFirstPublished%5Fsqt%5F2%5Fsrch%5Fmobile%2Bphones%5Fsrchtype%5Fint%5Fstate%5F9%5Fstpg%5F1%5Fsubs%5FUsed%2BCars%5F%3Freferrer%3Dplacement13_t=759568604_r=Email_Tagline1_m=EXT
RE: [Repeater-Builder] OT: FYI: FCC officially issues RO dropping code requirement today
FWIW - I used NuMorse, a program written by a Brit to learn my code. Worked remarkably well for me, and I'd tried several times previously to learn it. IN fact, I passed my code exam - missed only one character during the entire exam. (Of course it was one of the characters in the sending station's call. ARRRGH!!) If you count the questions, I got a 90%, but I also copied 1 min of perfect code, so. whatever. I passed! And did it with the help of NuMorse. 73 de Mark - N9WYS _ From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com On Behalf Of Dave Schmidt I'm going to be near AES Milwaukee tomarrow... so I'll stop in and get da books. I already have code tapes and code software I've been trying to learn code for a while, I just have a brick for a brain for learning it and on top of that, something always comes up to distract me from daily practice - I can never get a set schedual for free time a few weeks to learn it... something always comes up to change everything and screw me up. The dropping of the code requirement shouldn't be the end of the code for the people who were trying to learn. I say - keep going. Its a challenge almost like learning a new language. I'll still continue to try and ONE OF THESE DAYS ... I'll make my first cw contact. I just gotta get a few QSLs on my wall for CW comms to add to the FM DX, SSB and even AM work I've done. Dave / N9NLU
[Repeater-Builder] Re: FYI: FCC officially issues RO dropping code requirement today
I took that (almost)very same test there at Clackamas Comm. about twenty nine years ago. And passed it too! --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, JOHN MACKEY [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That's interesting, Neil. About 15 years ago I applied at one of the local MSS organizations (Day Wireless - then Clackamas Comm) and was given their test. It was a 3 page test with things like: How is a FET like a diode how is it like a vacuum tube? Draw a block diagram of a remote base.
[Repeater-Builder] repeater for sale 2 meter VHF
I need to clean house here for Christmas What I have for sale is a BridgeCom VHF repeater. At this time it is programmed for 146.7/100 and is set for about 3 to 5 watts. This is a 40 watt repeater. I have the program software for it and it will come with it. Cable is a standard 9 pin male/female computer cable. Was order for a customer and he never got it, so I programmed it to my ham repeater to test it. Well the end of the year is here and it need to go. Dealer cost was about $930. with shipping and software. Will sell it for $700.00 with normal USPS 2 to 4 day shipping and the software (in the 48 states only) Thanks for your time John 1-888-708-0709
Re: [Repeater-Builder] FYI: FCC officially issues RO dropping code requirement
Code should have been abandoned 30 years ago. It's not a filter. It kept as many good potential hams out as it kept bad ones out. And no one can deny that there are plenty of bad hams that learned code. Get over it and move on. I learned it to pass the test and never used it ever again. Chuck WB2EDV - Original Message - From: Barry C' [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, December 16, 2006 7:51 PM Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] FYI: FCC officially issues RO dropping code requirement It is now just a matter of time. The problems with hams not understanding what they are doing will increase. Interference will increase. Commercial interests will petition the FCC for the frequencies. The hams will not be able to defend their desire to keep the frequencies. Now the ham frequencies will be sold to the highest bidder. The handwriting is on the wall. Less that 10% of the newly licensed hams can draw a simple block diagram of the radio that they use. Just my opinion, based on my observations. 73 Glenn WB4UIV
