Article: 228489 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "LenAnderson@ieee.org" Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Date: 19 Aug 2006 12:20:30 -0700 Message-ID: <1156015230.748436.86760@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> References: <2D6Dg.7768$FN2.1842@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com> hot-ham-and-cheese@hotmail.com wrote: > LenAnderson@ieee.org wrote: > > > Had you wanted to be "civil" about it, you could have simply > > acknowledged your mistake, stopped trying to build a Mt. Everest > > out of a teaspoon of sand, and gone on with life. You did not. > > You have MANUFACTURED a dispute, insulted your challengers, and > > implied a number of things, all without any referencible data. > > Very Robesonesque. Hello Brian, This "dispute manufacturing" technique probably predates Robeson by centuries... :-) Anyway, it is an old, old technique of computer-modem comms and was seen on ARPANET back before the first BBSs existed. It's a way of bluff by the "manufacturer" to get around actually replying to some challenge made by others. That's usually accompanied by the manufacturer's veiled or outright personal insults levelled against the challenger. Robeson uses the latter more than the former. LenAnderson@ieee.org Article: 228490 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2006 15:23:32 -0400 From: jawod Subject: Sommer versus SteppIR Message-ID: <8e917$44e765ad$453d9423$8718@FUSE.NET> Ron was kind enough to stick with Sommer until the web page came back up. Now that I have viewed both their page and the one for SteppIR, I have a question. The Sommer has an interesting phase line approach like a log period array and the spacing of the elements is also a critical design feature. The SteppIR has fixed elements that vary in their length per each band. The SteppIR is elegant in its simplicity, the Sommer elegant in its complexity. How important is element spacing for ANY design? Does the SteppIR suffer at all because of fixed element spacing? Totally impractical, I know, but would the ideal beam design vary element length AND spacing? John AB8O Article: 228491 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "wa0kbz" References: Subject: Re: It's amazing what people will say to try to justify dumbing down Amateur Radio. Message-ID: Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2006 21:07:15 -0500 Glen Don't know if I 100% agree with your code speeds but I do thing the NO Code should be for 1 year and none renewable. I had to take my license in front of the FCC and not so VE who may or may not help you out to get a license. As I am a big VHFer I don't know how these NO Code guys are going to understand beacons. They are all code and most at 10 ~ 20 wpm. I guess the next thing will be, they will want all beacons either digital or voice. YUK! Not up in the GHZ range yet but maybe some day. 73, Bill, WA0KBZ "Slow Code" wrote in message news:Q0sFg.5556$Sn3.866@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net... > Glen Overby wrote in > news:oa8cr3-v5v2.ln1@monolith.nodomain: > >> slow code flamed: >>>Anyone going to visit the FCC website please leave them these ideas in >>>their comment box, Thanks. >> >> Leave them yourself. Enter your comments with dots and dashes. >> >>>3-Code elements should be 13 wpm for General, and 20 wpm for Extra. >> >> Thats too whimpy. Morse code = Ham Radio, right? >> >> Make it 20wpm for general, 30wpm for Extra. >> >> Require extras to answer 100% on ALL questions of ALL element question >> pools in on ONE sitting with no multiple choice. You're not "extra" if >> you can't do that. >> >> Stop granting type acceptance to any radio that can transmit or receive >> on the extra portion of the band (just like the rule for the cell phone >> frequencies). Extras should be building radios, not buying them. >> >>>4-Make the no-code license one year non-renewable. >> >> Eliminate the no code license, wait ten years for the hobby to die, then >> give 2.3ghz to WiFI, 5.7 to WiMAX and auction the rest off to the >> highest bidder. >> >> Looking forwards to working you on the 10ghz-and-up contest this >> weekend, Glen > > > Sheeesh. > > Article: 228492 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "LenAnderson@ieee.org" Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? - Mark, Just ignore them. Date: 19 Aug 2006 12:29:30 -0700 Message-ID: <1156015770.026900.177290@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> References: <1155265525.310166.4760@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> Slow Code wrote: > "LenAnderson@ieee.org" wrote in > news:1155853578.502660.314550@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com: > > > From: Al Klein on Wed, Aug 16 2006 6:15 pm > > > >>On 15 Aug 2006 23:21:32 -0700, "LenAnder...@ieee.org" > >> wrote: > >>>From: Al Klein on Tues, Aug 15 2006 5:35 am > >>>Groups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna, rec.radio.amateur.policy, > >>>rec.radio.scanner, rec.radio.swap > >>>> wrote: > >>>>>From: Al Klein on Sun, Aug 13 2006 9:15 pm > >>>>>>On 12 Aug 2006 18:58:18 -0700, "an old friend" > >>>>>>wrote: > >>>>>>>hot-ham-and-che...@hotmail.com wrote: > >>>>>>>> How did capacitors escape getting color coded? > >>>>>>>ssshhhhh bb don't ask such questions please > >> > >>>>>>Since a) you don't know the answer and b) they didn't. > >> > >>>>> Klein, you said you were an OF. Any olde-fahrt ought to KNOW that > >>>>> silver-mica capacitors were color-dot-coded for about a quarter > >>>>> century. [look in the 1976 ARRL Handbook] Those flat cases > >>>>> were eventually displaced by dipped silver-mica. > >> > >>>>> Paper tubular capacitors in molded plastic tubular casings were > >>>>> marked with color bands and were on the market for at least > >>>>> 15 years, maybe 20...until aced out by ceramic disc capacitors > >>>>> for general bypassing and coupling applications (by both tube > >>>>> and transistor architecture electronics). > >> > >>>>> ANYONE with hands-on experience in electronics between 1950 > >>>>> and about 1970 would KNOW that. [okay, folks, looks like > >>>>> there's another imposter here...at least this one isn't > >>>>> trying to pass hisself off as some marine NCO...:-) > >> > >>>>Try reading what I wrote. > >> > >>> Tsk, Klein, you don't write enough to read. > >> > >>I'm not the one who misread "capacitors didn't *ESCAPE* getting color > >>coded" for "capacitors didn't *GET* color coded" - YOU DID! > > > > Nice attempt at misdirection, but a very old technique. :-) > > > > That sort of misdirection is puerile (meaning childish). > > If you have some bona fides on English grammar and some > > false idea that ALL must be literal with NO departure from > > such literalness, please state them. Otherwise go into > > auto-fornication mode since we ain't buyin that, homie. :-) > > > > Let's reprise. First you state that capacitors were never > > color coded. You got called on that and corrected by more > > than myself. Secondly, you've never admitted being wrong or > > corrected. Third, you try to (badly) convince others that > > those who corrected your statement are "wrong" or "at fault." > > > > Amazing. You make mistakes and then try to convince all that > > those mistakes never happened or that it is "wrong" to try to > > correct your mistakes! :-) > > > > Here's some more to chew on: > > > > RFCs (Radio Frequency Chokes, inductors) in axial-lead plastic > > tubular packages are STILL marked with color-code bands. There's > > a MIL SPEC on that as all "long-time design engineers" should > > know; such parts are even used in commercial market electronics. > > It's really irrelevant HOW capacitors are marked as long anyone > > using them can know their value and working voltage and > > tolerance and apply them properly. > > > > There are 7 (seven) amateur radio licensees in the USA that could > > answer to "Al Klein." Are you one of those? > > > > I can say without hesitation that I am NOT a licensed amateur. > > I am a licensed commercial-professional in radio and have been > > so for 50 years, beginning in military 24/7 big-time HF > > communications 53 1/2 years ago. I have all sorts of valid > > documentation on that and some in here have seen some of that. > > Do you have ANYTHING in the way of ID? On the Internet? > > > > Or, are you going to scribble meaningless misdirections in here, > > attempting to portray some personal "outrage" for being > > corrected? Especially about a well-known electronic component > > identification method which you don't seem to know yet others > > can verify? > > > > I'll just put you down as an IMPOSTER poster, one of those > > wanna-bees who might never have been anything but really, > > really wants to be someone. That's up to you. I don't care. > > I've seen your kind on the Internet, on the Bulletin Board > > Systems since 1984. None have anything worthwhile to > > contribute but all wanting to be a SOMEBODY on screens. > > > > LenAnderson@ieee.org > > Mark, Just ignore them. Hey, "Slow," you might want to check your message headers a bit more carefully. I am not Mark. Neither am I a "mark" for con games. :-) > They only tease you because of the stupid things you say when you > follow up. Just ignore them and they'll give up. Oh, my, another one with "stupid." Tsk, tsk, tsk. :-) > Stop giving them reasons to tease you. It only makes you look > more stupid. Yup, a fledgling "dispute manufacturer" busy practicing... > Take a break from the radio groups for a while, Maybe work on your > moon bounce some more. "Slow," I've been involved in radio for 53 years. Most of that time as a professional. As a part of that, I once "worked" a station ON the moon. No bounce needed. Quarter million mile DX. Can you top that as an amateur? :-) LenAnderson@ieee.org Article: 228493 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Richard Clark Subject: Re: Sommer versus SteppIR Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2006 12:46:27 -0700 Message-ID: References: <8e917$44e765ad$453d9423$8718@FUSE.NET> On Sat, 19 Aug 2006 15:23:32 -0400, jawod wrote: >Totally impractical, I know, but would the ideal beam design vary >element length AND spacing? Hi John, Yes, just like adjusting the length (element spacing) of a telescope provides for focus and hence the best resolution for a given magnification. Fixed designs, of course, have these considerations nailed down ahead of time. Variable designs such as StepIR at some point have to be recognized as being generalized rather than optimized. That is, the spacing between elements has to be selected to suit the many possible bands and lengths of the elements. This spacing cannot serve all combinations optimally. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC Article: 228494 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Walter Maxwell Subject: Re: VHF/UHF antenna on a motorcycle Message-ID: References: <44e66e04_1@news.iprimus.com.au> Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2006 16:48:24 -0400 On Sat, 19 Aug 2006 11:18:53 +0930, "Robert J Mitchell" wrote: >As a long time m/c rider I suggest ride to live and stuff >radio....concentration being the key word mate !! As long as things are going along swimmingly, m/c = motorcycle. Add radio to motorcycle, then m/c = murdercycle. Walt, W2DU Article: 228495 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "an old friend" Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Date: 19 Aug 2006 14:18:35 -0700 Message-ID: <1156022315.584445.177400@74g2000cwt.googlegroups.com> References: <1155265525.310166.4760@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> LenAnderson@ieee.org wrote: > Slow Code wrote: > > "LenAnderson@ieee.org" wrote in > > news:1155853578.502660.314550@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com: > > > LenAnderson@ieee.org > > > > Mark, Just ignore them. > > Hey, "Slow," you might want to check your message headers > a bit more carefully. I am not Mark. Neither am I a "mark" > for con games. :-) it seems that Slowcode think I am some secret maniolator (or is just realy stupid about programing jammer bots > > > They only tease you because of the stupid things you say when you > > follow up. Just ignore them and they'll give up. > > Oh, my, another one with "stupid." Tsk, tsk, tsk. :-) > > > Stop giving them reasons to tease you. It only makes you look > > more stupid. > > Yup, a fledgling "dispute manufacturer" busy practicing... > > > Take a break from the radio groups for a while, Maybe work on your > > moon bounce some more. > > "Slow," I've been involved in radio for 53 years. Most of that time > as a professional. As a part of that, I once "worked" a station > ON the moon. No bounce needed. Quarter million mile DX. > Can you top that as an amateur? :-) I csn about match that Lenn not quite but close > > LenAnderson@ieee.org Article: 228496 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2006 17:25:25 -0400 From: Dave Subject: Re: Sommer versus SteppIR References: <8e917$44e765ad$453d9423$8718@FUSE.NET> Message-ID: jawod wrote: SNIPPED > > Totally impractical, I know, but would the ideal beam design vary > element length AND spacing? > > John > AB8O Answer = YES! Article: 228497 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Owen Duffy Subject: Re: 9 m Monopole Analysis Message-ID: References: <12ecgid65q8rl39@corp.supernews.com> Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2006 22:44:04 GMT On Sat, 19 Aug 2006 00:52:40 GMT, "Frank's" wrote: ... >Hope you managed to follow my rambling description. To say the >least it requires a lot of tedious data manipulation with Excel. >If you are interested I can e-mail my spread sheets, NEC input >and output files, etc. Frank, You might want to consider a scripting environment to build, run, and summarise NEC runs. Windows lacks a good scripting language for this type of application. Fortunately there are others available, and at no charge. Two that I have used are PERL and Python. I prefer PERL mainly for historical reasons and the huge base of packages to extend the PERL base, though Python is probably a better designed language, and less likely to change radically (as PERL looks likely to do with V6). Importantly, both natively support complex number type. For instance, you can write in PERL: #calculate Zo and gamma my $a=$R+i*2*PI*$this->{f}*$L; my $b=$G+i*2*PI*$this->{f}*$C; $this->{zo}=($a/$b)**0.5; $this->{gamma}=($a*$b)**0.5; PERL is excellent for reading megabytes of NEC output and extracting key figures for summarisation. An example, I recently wanted to explore the relationship between predicted beamwidth (in E and H planes separately) and gain for DL6WU long boom Yagis. I built and ran literally hundreds of models with pattern reporting at 0.1deg intervals, producing over 50MB of output. Models were automatically generated from a PERL port of the DL6WU design algorithms, and NEC runs of the generated models were automated. Half power point was found by linear interpolation between 0.1deg points around the half power points. If I did that by hand, I would be working for months, whereas a half hour of scripting produced a solution that was more accurate and reusable. Is there a place for Excel? Certainly, I usually create tab delimited summary files with PERL scripts and drop them on Excel to the final ad-hoc analysis and presentation. DPLOT is also a pretty neat tool for graphical analysis and presentation. For example, the regression analysis of the data from the study above http://www.vk1od.net/dl6wu/new_pa2.gif was calculated and displayed using DPLOT. Worth the investment in learning PERL (or the like)! http://www.perl.org/ (You need the Activestate PERL for Windows.) http://www.python.org/ http://www.dlot.com/ Owen -- Article: 228498 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Allodoxaphobia Subject: Re: 9 m Monopole Analysis Date: 20 Aug 2006 00:52:41 GMT Message-ID: References: <12ecgid65q8rl39@corp.supernews.com> On Sat, 19 Aug 2006 22:44:04 GMT, Owen Duffy wrote: > On Sat, 19 Aug 2006 00:52:40 GMT, "Frank's" > wrote: > ... >>Hope you managed to follow my rambling description. To say the >>least it requires a lot of tedious data manipulation with Excel. >>If you are interested I can e-mail my spread sheets, NEC input >>and output files, etc. > > You might want to consider a scripting environment to build, run, and > summarise NEC runs. > > Windows lacks a good scripting language for this type of application. > Fortunately there are others available, and at no charge. Two that I > have used are PERL and Python. And, there's REXX (several -- recommend Regina for one) which has _great_ string handling capabilities. Jonesy -- Marvin L Jones | jonz | W3DHJ | linux 38.24N 104.55W | @ config.com | Jonesy | OS/2 *** Killfiling google posts: Article: 228499 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Owen Duffy Subject: Re: 9 m Monopole Analysis Message-ID: References: <12ecgid65q8rl39@corp.supernews.com> Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 02:06:37 GMT On 20 Aug 2006 00:52:41 GMT, Allodoxaphobia wrote: >And, there's REXX (several -- recommend Regina for one) which has >_great_ string handling capabilities. I haven't followed the fortunes of REXX since I taught some "Safe REXX" courses in the ealy '90s. I do recall that in the 80s, IBM wanted to hand it over to the ANSI to be made a standard. That should have nobbled its progress sufficiently to be overtaken by developments originating from the Unix world. But yes, I see that enthusiasts have kept it alive. Does it have (PC)REs, might be an option for people who don't want to embrace REs. Owen -- Article: 228500 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "LenAnderson@ieee.org" Subject: Re: VHF/UHF antenna on a motorcycle Date: 19 Aug 2006 20:07:25 -0700 Message-ID: <1156043245.547218.141830@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> References: From: Tom on Fri, Aug 18 2006 3:02 am >I would like to install a VHF-UHF antenna on my motorcycle . It's a Suzuki >GSX750 . I did some tests with a Diamond NR-770H and it works well . The >only problem is that the antenna is to big for such a bike . >Afterwards i did a test with a Diamond NR-77 . The antenna is about 43 cm >and that's about the size i would like to use . >The problem i have with this antenna is the swr , it's to high . > >Anyone an idea how i can solve this problem ? Try contacting your local PD radio repair place. Motorcycle police have been using VHF-UHF radios on their motors for over 40 years. Successfully. They must be doing something right, yes? :-) Quod erat demonstrandum. LenAnderson@ieee.org Article: 228501 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "LenAnderson@ieee.org" Subject: Re: license renewal Date: 19 Aug 2006 20:29:54 -0700 Message-ID: <1156044594.166730.207150@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com> References: From: Slow Code on Fri, Aug 18 2006 4:26 pm >"LenAnder...@ieee.org" wrote in >> From: Pin-medic on Fri, Aug 18 2006 10:30 am >>>I agree Bob, and maybe we'd have better operators as a result. >>>Considering the waning interest in our dying hobby though, all that >>>would probably do is eliminate even more operators from the ranks, >>>leading the FCC to reduce our bands even more by selling them to the >>>highest bidder. > >> 1. The FCC has NOT "reduced 'your' bands," nor is it somehow >> threatening to "sell them" to anyone. Had you bothered to >> look at this process of AUCTIONING certain COMMERCIAL bands >> and the Congressional laws establishing it, you would have >> seen that it does NOT apply to radio amateurs. Hey, "Slow," no comment on that? >> 2. Since WARC-79 'you' have gotten MORE BANDS and that has >> increased up to a few years ago when 'you' got the five >> 60m channels. 1979 was TWENTY-SEVEN YEARS AGO. >> 3. There doesn't seem to be any "waning interest" in USA >> amateur radio considering the overall licensee numbers. >> The newcomer licensees are - just managing - to keep the >> licensee numbers in numeric bouyancy, almost keeping pace >> with those letting their licenses lapse. See www.hamdata. >> com FCC data page. Still no comment, "Slow?" :-) >1: No more automatic renewals. Individuals must retest and > pass all elements required for their license class. Wow...you will be REALLY popular with VEs...FCC too... >2: The passing score for written exams needs to be raised to 85%. Wayyyy too low. 100%! Nothing less... >3: Code elements should be 13 wpm for General, and 20 wpm for Extra. Wayyyy too low. 30 WPM for General, 80 WPM for Extra! >4: Make the no-code license one year non-renewable. Make it two weeks. It's fairly obvious you've just alienated half of your "brotherhood"! [better armor your lead-in...] >Let's take back ham radio. Why? Was it kidnapped? Lost along with Apollo 11 data? BRING BACK SPARK! The very first RF transmitter in amateur radio! Preserve the past! Honor "sparky" tradition! Hey, "Slow," here's a better idea: Let's get you to a cryogenic chamber and FREEZE you and your longing for times of your youth. You want everything FROZEN, don't you? Cool? Cool... Pax. LenAnderson@ieee.org Article: 228502 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "LenAnderson@ieee.org" Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Date: 19 Aug 2006 20:41:30 -0700 Message-ID: <1156045290.227782.28180@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> References: <1155265525.310166.4760@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> From: an old friend on Sat, Aug 19 2006 2:18 pm >LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote: >> Slow Code wrote: >> > "LenAnder...@ieee.org" wrote in >> > news:1155853578.502660.314550@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com: >> > > LenAnder...@ieee.org > >> > Mark, Just ignore them. > >> Hey, "Slow," you might want to check your message headers >> a bit more carefully. I am not Mark. Neither am I a "mark" >> for con games. :-) > >it seems that Slowcode think I am some secret maniolator (or is just >realy stupid about programing jammer bots He seems CONFUSED. Maybe that's a result of hearing all that beeping morse code? :-) He sent his "reply" to me TWICE... tsk,tsk :-) >> "Slow," I've been involved in radio for 53 years. Most of that time >> as a professional. As a part of that, I once "worked" a station >> ON the moon. No bounce needed. Quarter million mile DX. >> Can you top that as an amateur? :-) > >I csn about match that Lenn not quite but close Noooooo. I worked a STATION on the moon, namely one of the ALSEP (Apollo Lunar Surface Experiment Package). Sent a command to the SWS (Solar Wind Spectrometer) part, got the response back on earth. Two-way. The ALSEPs are now silent, nobody can work them. :-) LenAnderson@ieee.org Article: 228503 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Alan Subject: Re: VHF/UHF antenna on a motorcycle Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 11:54:22 +0800 Message-ID: <45nfe29sgf57sd2g4gts1am5ov4cl7dutl@4ax.com> References: <1156043245.547218.141830@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> On 19 Aug 2006 20:07:25 -0700, "LenAnderson@ieee.org" wrote: >From: Tom on Fri, Aug 18 2006 3:02 am > >>I would like to install a VHF-UHF antenna on my motorcycle . It's a Suzuki >>GSX750 . I did some tests with a Diamond NR-770H and it works well . The >>only problem is that the antenna is to big for such a bike . >>Afterwards i did a test with a Diamond NR-77 . The antenna is about 43 cm >>and that's about the size i would like to use . >>The problem i have with this antenna is the swr , it's to high . >> >>Anyone an idea how i can solve this problem ? Talk to your local two way radio supplier/service company about a "ground independant" antenna. Alan -- Sell your surplus electronic components at http://ozcomponents.com Search or browse for that IC, capacitor, crystal or other component you need. Article: 228504 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Frank's" References: Subject: Re: 9 m Monopole Analysis Message-ID: Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 06:18:08 GMT Reg, The frequency is still 8.07 MHz. I was also puzzled by the radiation resistance, but I arrived at the value differently than in previous models. Anyway, I think I have discovered the error. In computing the surface wave at 200 m I assumed the loss would be insignificant. This does not appear to be true. For example; at a 26 degree elevation angle normalization of the E-field to one meter produces essentially the same result from either: 200 meters, or 400 meters. At zero degree elevation angle, where the surface wave dominates; normalization from 200 m or 400 m produces significantly different results -- as shown below: Elevation Distance E- field Angle (m) normalized (deg.) to 1 meter (V) 26 200 83.0 26 400 83.3 0 200 67.5 0 400 45.5 I had this at the back of my mind when making the calculations. To be honest it is pretty much a no brainer, since it is well known that the surface wave diminishes rapidly at the higher frequencies. All your comments are noted. For the moment I would like to perform an integration of the Poynting Vector in the near field. Hopefully it will provide a more realistic radiation resistance. Now to figure out how to do this in Excel. Frank "Reg Edwards" wrote in message news:S6SdndRQ4pbP0nvZRVnysQ@bt.com... > Frank, > > You don't mention frequency. I assume it is still 8.07 MHz. > > There's something seriously wrong! > > The only change you have made (or I think you have changed) is to > increase the number of radials from 36 to 99. > > Yet, for a length of 10 metres, the resistance of the radials ground > connection has INCREASED from a few ohms (for 36 radials) to 20.7 ohms > (for 99 radials). > > This is impossible! It should either decrease to an even lower value > or at least remain the same. > > Although I am not particularly interested in radiation resistance, > there is also something seriously wrong with Rrad. Rrad for a > 1/4-wave vertical ought to be in the region of 34 ohms - not as low > as 13 ohms. > > I think you use Rrad to calculate radials input resistance in which I > AM very interested. > > I think you subtract the antenna input impedance, from the total > impedance of antenna + radials, to obtain the radials input > resistance. > > Rrad + conductor resistance is the feedpoint resistance of the > antenna. You make it about 34 - 13 = 21 ohms too low. > > If you subtract 21 ohms from YOUR radials input resistance values, > then the EXPECTED very low input resistance values for 99 radials are > obtained. But, of course, the radials input resistance should never > become negative. > > If you are unable to find where the error arises then use my value of > Antenna Feedpoint Resistance = 33.8 ohms (which I have just > calculated.) > > Could you please investigate your results and apply corrections? If > you are unable to determine the resonant input resistance of the > 9-metre vertical antenna ( jX = 0) then use my value of 33.8 ohms > which, as likely as not, will not be exactly correct. > > ...................................................................... > ................................ > > Then change antenna height to exactly 3 metres and change frequency to > about 25 MHz. The exact frequency being that at which the antenna is > 1/4-wave resonant with the feedpoint reactance being zero. Repeat > measurements for 99 radials. > > Such measurements will be far more accurate than if they were made in > the field. > > I have some nice graphs of input impedance, R + jX, versus radial > length for work you have already done. They tell me quite a lot. > ---- > Reg. > > ======================================= >> Reg: >> >> Here is the results of my analysis of a 99 radial monople: >> Height 9 m, radial length from 0.5 to 10m, all conductors >> #14 AWG copper, ground Er = 16, resistivity 150 ohm - m. >> Radials 25 mm below ground. Antenna efficiency includes >> the surface wave. >> >> Radial Radial Radiation Ant >> Length Z Resistance Efficiency >> (m) (ohms) (ohms) (%) >> >> 0.5 63.0 - j 33.6 13.2 17.6 >> 1.0 47.7 - j 18.2 13.2 21.7 >> 1.5 41.8 - j 13.7 13.2 24.1 >> 2.0 38.3 - j 12.5 13.2 25.7 >> 2.5 35.7 - j 11.2 13.2 27.1 >> 3.0 33.4 - j 10.8 13.2 28.3 >> 3.5 31.6 - j 10.5 13.1 29.4 >> 4.0 29.8 - j 10.1 13.1 30.6 >> 4.5 28.2 - j 9.5 13.1 31.7 >> 5.0 26.8 - j 8.9 13.1 32.8 >> 5.5 25.7 - j 8.2 13.1 33.8 >> 6.0 24.7 - j 8.0 13.2 34.7 >> 6.5 23.9 - j 6.9 13.2 35.6 >> 7.0 23.2 - j 6.2 13.3 36.4 >> 7.5 22.6 - j 5.5 13.4 37.7 >> 8.0 22.1 - j 4.8 13.5 38.0 >> 8.5 21.6 - j 4.2 13.7 38.8 >> 9.0 21.2 - j 3.5 13.8 39.5 >> 9.5 20.9 - j 2.9 14.0 40.2 >> 10.0 20.7 - j 2.2 14.2 40.9 >> >> Note that the radiation resistance is computed >> from the total radiated power (including surface >> wave) divided by the RMS base current squared. >> >> The radial input impedance is derived from >> the difference between the antenna input >> impedance and the radiation resistance. A >> fraction of an ohm can be attributed to the >> copper losses in the monopole. Also >> some of the imaginary part of the radial impedance >> must be due, in part, to the input impedance >> of the vertical section. >> >> With 0.5 m radials the surface wave accounts for >> 2% of the total radiated power. With 10 m radials >> the surface wave accounts for 5% of the TRP. >> >> >> Frank >> CM Reg's 99 radial Vertical >> >> CM (WG) >> >> CE >> >> GW 2 1 0 0 0 0 0.0968 -0.025 0.00082 >> >> GW 35 4 0 0.0968 -0.025 0.026 0.5 -0.025 0.00082 >> >> GW 70 4 0 0.0968 -0.025 0 0.5 -0.025 0.00082 >> >> GW 105 4 0 0.0968 -0.025 -0.026 0.5 -0.025 0.00082 >> >> GR 1 33 >> >> GE -1 2 >> >> GN 2 0 0 0 16 0.0067 >> >> FR 0 1 0 0 8.07 0.01 >> >> LD 5 0 0 0 5.8001E7 >> >> WG >> >> EN >> >> >> >> CM Reg's 99 radial >> >> CM (GF) >> >> CE >> >> GF >> >> GW 1 90 0 0 9 0 0 0 0.00082 >> >> GE -1 >> >> EX 0 1 90 00 83.83328192 0 >> >> LD 5 0 0 0 5.8001E7 >> >> RP 1 101 1 0000 200 0 -2 1 200 >> >> RP 0 91 1 1000 0 0 1 1 >> >> RP 0 19 73 1002 -90 0 5.00000 5.00000 >> >> NE 1 1 46 1 200 45 90 1.0 1.0 1 >> >> NH 1 1 1 1 200 89 90 1.0 1.0 1 >> >> EN >> >> > > Article: 228505 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Brenda Ann" Subject: Re: What is wrong with Hawaii, Alaska, and Canada Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 21:41:48 +0900 Message-ID: References: <5DYFg.9998$xp2.7906@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net> -- Say no to institutionalized interference. Just say NO to HD/IBOC! "Brian" wrote in message news:5DYFg.9998$xp2.7906@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net... >I ship to anyone that wants to pay for it. I do avoid APO/FPO shipping, >and > not because of scams but because of very very poor delivery chances on > anything not a 1 ounce letter. > > I sent several boxes of supplies to friends serving in Iraq with the US > Marine Corps...most of the boxes languished in a warehouse in Germany for > about 4 weeks before being hauled to Iraq...then it was another 2 or 3 > weeks > befire they actually got the stuff. Needless to say, never ship a puppy > or > kitten to a war zone. I have one realative that was in Iraq for a year > (the > last time). I mailed him a Christmas package at the end of October. He > got > home in February and still hadn't received it. > Yes, shipping to OIF/OEF is very very slow. This is because nobody wants to go in there. Regular fuel shipments can take 2 weeks to cross the country. Shipping to APO/AE (Europe), APO/AA (Americas) and APO/AP (Pacific region) is fairly steady, at least going by Priority. Parcel Post or Media Mail go by SAM (Space Available Mail) and can take months to get ANYWHERE within the military postal system. This is because EVERY other class of mail gets priority over SAM, and some of those parcels don't leave the mil hub for weeks (stateside). Article: 228506 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Message-ID: <44E85D74.4050504@atnet.net> From: Bob W7AVK Subject: Re: What is wrong with Hawaii, Alaska, and Canada References: <5DYFg.9998$xp2.7906@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net> Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 06:02:44 -0700 What I've done sending goodies to our troops is to use the flat rate Priority Boxes available free at the post office. All you can stuff into it for the 2 pounds rate or $8.10. Mose have been delivered within a couple weeks. If interested might check out http://www.anysolder.com 73 Bob W7AVK Article: 228507 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Green Egghead Subject: Re: Vertical radiation from horizontal dipole? Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 14:34:56 -0000 Message-ID: <12egsogtbki2m13@corp.supernews.com> References: <1155949003.609701.39890@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <12ed290mv4kekea@corp.supernews.com> Roy Lewallen wrote: > > I don't have any link handy, but it's easy to explain. > > Ground isn't necessary. Consider a horizontal dipole in free space. > Position yourself directly in line with the antenna, some distance away, > so all you see of the antenna is a dot. Now, move directly upward or > downward. The antenna now looks like a vertical line(*). The radiation > from the antenna at the point where you are is purely vertically > polarized, for the same reason it's purely horizontally polarized when > you're directly broadside to the antenna. > > The only directions in which the dipole will radiate a purely > horizontally polarized signal are in the horizontal plane of the > antenna, or exactly at right angles (broadside) to the antenna. In the > vertical plane containing the antenna, it's purely vertically polarized. > In all other directions, it's a combination of the two. (In other words, > the polarization angle of the total field is neither vertical nor > horizontal.) > > Here's an illustration you can do with the demo version of EZNEC. Open > the Dipole1.ez example file, which is a dipole in free space. In the > main window, click the Desc Options line. In the Desc Options dialog > box, select the Plot and Fields tabs if not already active, and select > "Vert, Horiz" (not "Vert, Horiz, Total") in the Fields To Plot frame. > Then click Ok to close the box. (Note: The "Vert, Horiz" option, without > the "Total", isn't available in EZNEC v. 3.0, including EZNEC-ARRL.) > > The example file is set up to plot the pattern in the horizontal plane > of the antenna. If you click FF Plot, you'll see only a horizontally > polarized field. That's because the field is purely horizontally > polarized in the horizontal plane of the antenna, as I mentioned > earlier. The ends of the antenna are up and down on the plot, and > broadside is to the left and right. > > Now in the main window, change the elevation angle to 45 degrees. Do > this by clicking on the Elevation Angle line, entering 45 in the dialog > box, then clicking Ok. This moves the observer above the horizontal > plane of the antenna. The observation point (assumed very far from the > antenna) follows a circle which is equidistant from the antenna and the > horizontal plane containing the antenna. That is, it maintains a > constant distance and an angle of 45 degrees above horizontal from the > antenna. Click FF Plot to see the result. Now you can see that when > you're directly broadside to the antenna (left and right on the plot), > the field is purely horizontally polarized -- the vertical polarization > component is zero. But directly in line with the ends of the antenna, > the polarization is purely vertical. The top and bottom directions of > the plot correspond to the position you were in when you saw the antenna > as a vertical line. > > Vertically and horizontally polarized components reflect differently > from the ground. So in directions where both are present, one can be > reinforced while the other is attenuated, resulting in a different mix > after reflection. (But reflection won't change a horizontally polarized > component to vertically polarized or vice-versa.) For example, a > vertically polarized field reinforces when reflecting from a perfect > ground at a low angle, while a horizontally polarized signal cancels. > This ends up enhancing the vertically polarized component at low angles > when both are present. (Remember, though, this is perfect ground -- real > ground, except salt water, behaves quite differently.) > > Finally, let me emphasize that there's really only one E field from the > antenna, with one polarization angle. Separating it into vertically and > horizontally polarized components is simply a convenience used for > calculations and as an aid in understanding, much like separating two > currents into common and differential (even and odd) mode components. > The principle of superposition allows us to conceptually split the field > into components, analyze each separately, then recombine the results, > getting the same answer we'd get if we had done the analysis on the > total field. Are there multipath solutions using circular polarization between double side band supressed carrier components? > > (*) More precisely, the projection of the antenna on a vertical plane > passing through your position is a vertical line. Visually, you can't > tell if the antenna is a short vertical wire or a longer horizontal one > you're seeing end-on. The nature of the radiation in your direction is > also the same for the two situations. > > Roy Lewallen, W7EL > > lu6etj wrote: > > Dear friends: > > > > Could you give me me a link to some reference material (in the net) > > about vertical polarized radiation of horizontal dipoles near ground? > > (not feed line radiation).. > > Thank yoy very much in advance. > > > > Miguel Ghezzi (LU 6ETJ) > > Article: 228508 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "G8JNF" Subject: Half size trapped G5RV Date: 20 Aug 2006 08:49:47 -0700 Message-ID: <1156088987.868859.14160@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> Hi I have been given an EL-40XC 80m Add-on Inductors Kit for Adding 80m to 1/2 size G5RV, but no instructions as to how to trim/tune the G5RV after fitting. Anyone else fitted these and could possibly email me a copy of the instructions? Regards Duncan g8jnf@duncanberry.com Article: 228509 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: hot-ham-and-cheese@hotmail.com Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Date: 20 Aug 2006 09:59:08 -0700 Message-ID: <1156093148.686146.230750@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> References: <2D6Dg.7768$FN2.1842@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com> LenAnderson@ieee.org wrote: > hot-ham-and-cheese@hotmail.com wrote: > > LenAnderson@ieee.org wrote: > > > > > Had you wanted to be "civil" about it, you could have simply > > > acknowledged your mistake, stopped trying to build a Mt. Everest > > > out of a teaspoon of sand, and gone on with life. You did not. > > > You have MANUFACTURED a dispute, insulted your challengers, and > > > implied a number of things, all without any referencible data. > > > > Very Robesonesque. > > Hello Brian, > > This "dispute manufacturing" technique probably predates Robeson > by centuries... :-) > > Anyway, it is an old, old technique of computer-modem comms and > was seen on ARPANET back before the first BBSs existed. > > It's a way of bluff by the "manufacturer" to get around actually > replying to some challenge made by others. That's usually > accompanied by the manufacturer's veiled or outright personal > insults levelled against the challenger. Robeson uses the latter > more than the former. > > LenAnderson@ieee.org His, "Sorry Hans, MARS >>>IS<<< Amateur Radio." would make a good, quick, clean case study for some grad student of psychology. It has all of the elements of that pathology and google serves it up in seconds. Article: 228510 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "LenAnderson@ieee.org" Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Date: 20 Aug 2006 10:34:16 -0700 Message-ID: <1156095256.617771.181000@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> References: <2D6Dg.7768$FN2.1842@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com> hot-ham-and-cheese@hotmail.com wrote: > LenAnderson@ieee.org wrote: > > hot-ham-and-cheese@hotmail.com wrote: > > > LenAnderson@ieee.org wrote: > > > > > > > Had you wanted to be "civil" about it, you could have simply > > > > acknowledged your mistake, stopped trying to build a Mt. Everest > > > > out of a teaspoon of sand, and gone on with life. You did not. > > > > You have MANUFACTURED a dispute, insulted your challengers, and > > > > implied a number of things, all without any referencible data. > > > > > > Very Robesonesque. > > > > Hello Brian, > > > > This "dispute manufacturing" technique probably predates Robeson > > by centuries... :-) > > > > Anyway, it is an old, old technique of computer-modem comms and > > was seen on ARPANET back before the first BBSs existed. > > > > It's a way of bluff by the "manufacturer" to get around actually > > replying to some challenge made by others. That's usually > > accompanied by the manufacturer's veiled or outright personal > > insults levelled against the challenger. Robeson uses the latter > > more than the former. > > > > LenAnderson@ieee.org > > His, "Sorry Hans, MARS >>>IS<<< Amateur Radio." would make a good, > quick, clean case study for some grad student of psychology. It has > all of the elements of that pathology and google serves it up in > seconds. Quite true, Brian. Those of us who were here 1 to 2 years ago had an eyefull of his continuous - but faulty - efforts to "tell" us all about His fantasy of things. :-) Mainly it was his abject refusal to back down when faced with definitive directives by the government (DoD) in regard to the Military Affiliate Radio System. Weeks went by without his admitting that the Directive existed. His final communication on the subject would NOT openly admit to error but was laced with more personal insults on his challengers. Sad. LenAnderson@ieee.org Article: 228511 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Ruben Navarro Huedo" Subject: Vertica multiband antenna HF Message-ID: <5_2Gg.13649$MA3.12746@news.ono.com> Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 21:46:02 +0200 Hello friends: My name is Ruben (EB5ESX) and i am from Spain. I have to replace my vertical antenna becouse i am having a lot of mecanical problems with it. It is an artesanal antenna made in Spain. I live in a building and i can't install radial systems, becouse i have to install elevated in a mast. I need an antenna like Cushcraft R8, Gap Titan, Diamond CP-6 or something like that with integrated radial systems. Money is not the most important for me..... i am looking for a durable and efficient vertical antenna. What antenna do you like? Do you have some experience? My antenna at this moment is an standard loaded 1/4 wave vertical with a lot of losses and very noisy. Please... any help? Thank's a lot. Article: 228512 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Spokesman" References: Subject: Re: What is wrong with Hawaii, Alaska, and Canada Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 15:52:05 -0400 Message-ID: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0031_01C6C470.96048E20 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable "Paul Hinman" wrote in message = news:aLfEg.400583$Mn5.137675@pd7tw3no... I frequently see postings in the ham radio related newsgroups for = items currently being offered on E-Bay. All to often I that items will be shipped only to the lower 48 states, = leaving hams in Hawaii, Alaska, and Canada out of the picture. What is = the problem. In Canada we are well served by FEDEX and the United = States Postal Service. Amateur radio equipment crosses the border with = out any problem. I realize that Hawaii and Alaska may be a bit far from = the "lower 48" but the same delivery services are available even though = surface transportation may be a little bit slow. In the US you also = have UPS, the folks in Brown which we Canadians prefer not to use = because the often make the border crossing more difficult than it needs = to be and we don't like getting stuck with brokerage fees. So why the discrimination, if the buyer knows that delivery may take a = little longer and is prepared to accept the fact then it becomes a non = problem. If the seller is intimidated by the prospect of complicated = paperwork, he needn't be. Please leave it up to the buyer to decide = whether he wants to bib or not. I can not speak for shipments to Europe, Africa, India, China, or the = South Pacific but for fellow Americans, or friendly northern neighbours, = I think that people should be prepared to deal with us. Thanx for letting get this off my chest and I realize that I have = cross posted this to four different newsgroups but I wanted to get to a = broad audience. Paul --=20 Paul S. Hinman - VE6LDS long West 113 deg 27 min 20 sec lat North 53 deg 27 min 3 sec Maidenhead Locator DO33gk=20 ------=_NextPart_000_0031_01C6C470.96048E20 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
 
"Paul Hinman" <paul.hinman@shaw.ca> wrote = in message=20 news:aLfEg.400583$Mn5.1376= 75@pd7tw3no...
I frequently see postings in = the ham radio=20 related newsgroups for items currently being offered on = E-Bay.

All to=20 often I that items will be shipped only to the lower 48 states, = leaving hams=20 in Hawaii, Alaska, and Canada out of the picture.  What is the=20 problem.  In Canada we are well served by FEDEX and the United = States=20 Postal Service.  Amateur radio equipment crosses the border with = out any=20 problem.  I realize that Hawaii and Alaska may be a bit far from=20 the  "lower 48" but the same delivery services are available even = though=20 surface transportation may be a little bit slow.  In the US you = also have=20 UPS, the folks in Brown which we Canadians prefer not to use because = the often=20 make the border crossing more difficult than it needs to be and we = don't like=20 getting stuck with brokerage fees.

So why the discrimination, = if the=20 buyer knows that delivery may take a little longer and is prepared to = accept=20 the fact then it becomes a non problem.  If the seller is = intimidated by=20 the prospect of complicated paperwork, he needn't be.  Please = leave it up=20 to the buyer to decide whether he wants to bib or not.

I can = not speak=20 for shipments to Europe, Africa, India, China, or the South Pacific = but for=20 fellow Americans, or friendly northern neighbours, I think that people = should=20 be prepared to deal with us.

Thanx for letting get this off my = chest=20 and I realize that I have cross posted this to four different = newsgroups but I=20 wanted to get to a broad audience.

Paul
--=20
Paul S. Hinman - VE6LDS
long West 113 deg 27 min 20 sec
lat  North 53 deg 27 min 3 sec
Maidenhead Locator DO33gk=20
------=_NextPart_000_0031_01C6C470.96048E20-- Article: 228513 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Stefan Wolfe" References: Subject: Re: training ?? Message-ID: Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 19:58:29 GMT "ml" wrote in message news:m-8D0DE8.08105319082006@news.verizon.net... > Hi > > Does anyone know of any web or pc based Extra class training? > > NOT* NOT* talking about license prep that just gives you test questions > > Referring to somthing that actually teaches you the material you need to > know for Extra Class > > Just drilling me on the question pool prior to material review is just a > exercise in memory w/o understanding /learning > > I've got good books on it from arrl but thought pc/web based mught be > fun and can't find any Here is what I did: I did purchase the ARRL Extra Class manual just to get a synopsis of the questions asked and one author's overly simplified explanations of the subject matter. I do have a BSEE degree from UW Madison but I must admit that, contrary to the assertions of many in this group, in my case at least it was not a "trivial" test nor do I believe it would be easy to memorize each question and answer in the 500 question pool. The PE EIT test is much harder because they equations for the same material are trickier. For this test, you must know what a smith chart is. For the EIT (FE) and PE, you "should" know what it is because a smith chart will permit you to more readily arrive at the answer. If you understand what a smith chart is, how it was derived and have used it for just a few example questions/answers as Google research will teach, such knowledge is good for all of these exams. Search engines will give you papers, articles and all sorts of discussions on the materials covering each section in the test and you will now be able to improve your knowledge (review in my case) or learn (for someone with a degree). I think this is far better than paying money to some radio club instructor of questionable technical background who only promises to help you pass one test. Also, when using Google, you may discover that similar or the exact same questions are covered in other countries' tests (New Zealand, Great Britain, Canada to name a few) and some even appear in the commercial license exams. You will find that more than a few of the correct "answers" to the questions on the exam are technically controversial. When you get to that level of understanding you will be well under way to a perfect score. You may also have an inclination to write to the US VEC QPC to inform them of some of their wrong or ambiguous answers but once you discover that the test is based on a worldwide set of accepted questions, you will see that there is no point in this and you will just give the answer they want for the test but know the correct answer for yourself. So my answer is, use a search engine like Google...properly used, it is the best instruction tool available. 73 Article: 228514 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "noreaster" Subject: KLM HF antennas Date: 20 Aug 2006 13:18:01 -0700 Message-ID: <1156105081.876672.74340@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> KLM antennas: brand new, still in unopened boxes. "Killer Tribander" KT36XA 6-element yagi - and 40M2L 2-element 40m yagi. See www.eham.net to buy. Article: 228515 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: hot-ham-and-cheese@hotmail.com Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Date: 20 Aug 2006 13:55:55 -0700 Message-ID: <1156107355.126445.201060@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> References: <2D6Dg.7768$FN2.1842@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com> LenAnderson@ieee.org wrote: > hot-ham-and-cheese@hotmail.com wrote: > > LenAnderson@ieee.org wrote: > > > hot-ham-and-cheese@hotmail.com wrote: > > > > LenAnderson@ieee.org wrote: > > > > > > > > > Had you wanted to be "civil" about it, you could have simply > > > > > acknowledged your mistake, stopped trying to build a Mt. Everest > > > > > out of a teaspoon of sand, and gone on with life. You did not. > > > > > You have MANUFACTURED a dispute, insulted your challengers, and > > > > > implied a number of things, all without any referencible data. > > > > > > > > Very Robesonesque. > > > > > > Hello Brian, > > > > > > This "dispute manufacturing" technique probably predates Robeson > > > by centuries... :-) > > > > > > Anyway, it is an old, old technique of computer-modem comms and > > > was seen on ARPANET back before the first BBSs existed. > > > > > > It's a way of bluff by the "manufacturer" to get around actually > > > replying to some challenge made by others. That's usually > > > accompanied by the manufacturer's veiled or outright personal > > > insults levelled against the challenger. Robeson uses the latter > > > more than the former. > > > > > > LenAnderson@ieee.org > > > > His, "Sorry Hans, MARS >>>IS<<< Amateur Radio." would make a good, > > quick, clean case study for some grad student of psychology. It has > > all of the elements of that pathology and google serves it up in > > seconds. > > Quite true, Brian. Those of us who were here 1 to 2 years ago > had an eyefull of his continuous - but faulty - efforts to "tell" us > all about His fantasy of things. :-) Little Billy Beeper had him pegged - he's nuts. > Mainly it was his abject refusal to back down when faced with > definitive directives by the government (DoD) in regard to the > Military Affiliate Radio System. Such complete ignorance of MARS, yet somehow, he claims that he was the Assistant NCOIC of a NMC MARS Station on Okinawa. Simply unbeleivable. > Weeks went by without his > admitting that the Directive existed. His final communication > on the subject would NOT openly admit to error but was laced > with more personal insults on his challengers. Sad. > > LenAnderson@ieee.org Accusations and insults. Whichever grad student locks on to him first is one lucky SOB. All the work is done. Article: 228516 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Roy Lewallen Subject: Re: Vertical radiation from horizontal dipole? Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 14:07:05 -0700 Message-ID: <12ehjnus1o10d89@corp.supernews.com> References: <1155949003.609701.39890@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <12ed290mv4kekea@corp.supernews.com> <12egsogtbki2m13@corp.supernews.com> Green Egghead wrote: > . . . > Are there multipath solutions using circular polarization > between double side band supressed carrier components? Sorry, I don't understand the question. What do you mean by solutions between components? Solutions to what? Or is the question about polarization between components? If so, what does that mean? The original question and my answer involved only linearly polarized fields, not circular or elliptical. Roy Lewallen, W7EL Article: 228517 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: hot-ham-and-cheese@hotmail.com Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Date: 20 Aug 2006 14:57:29 -0700 Message-ID: <1156111049.458067.33380@74g2000cwt.googlegroups.com> References: <1153584132.692529.177920@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> LenAnderson@ieee.org wrote: > From: hot-ham-and-che...@hotmail.com on Thurs, Aug 10 2006 8:48 pm > Groups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna, rec.radio.amateur.policy, > rec.radio.scanner, rec.radio.swap > > > >Al Klein wrote: > >> On 9 Aug 2006 19:14:54 -0700, hot-ham-and-che...@hotmail.com wrote: > > > >> >You couldn't be more wrong. If there were practical exams for SSB, FM, > >> >AM, FSTV, SSTV, RTTY (which is pretty darned old), packet, PSK, etc, > >> >then it would be CRYSTAL clear that a Morse Code exam is valid. > > > >> >However, there are no such practical exams for the other modes. So > >> >there need be no exam for Morse Code, either. > > > >> That's my point - there's no test any longer. For anything more than > >> the ability to memorize answers. > > > >Lots of memorization was required in your day. It's only a bad thing > >in 1992 to present. I think I get your drift... > > Selective amnesia. "No one had to memorize anything" prior 1992. > Not in grade school, not in college, not in industry, not in > real life. Strange perception... Selective amnesia... With the advent of the No-Code Technician license, memorization became a bad, bad thing. > >Ummm? There's no Morse Code test anymore? > > The International Morse Code test for United States amateur > radio license classes General and Extra have NEVER GONE AWAY. > > That is especially true in the perception of the ARRL which > still manages to insert the "necessities" for morsemanship > in nearly everything it publishes. It's been six decades > since Hiram Percy became ultimate DX but they still keep on > with their demand that all [US] amateurs be proficient in > that old mode. Most issues of QST have a minimum of at least one walk down memory lane, usually with a key or keyer in one hand. > > The Conditional was whatever class was being tested for, but not at an > > FCC office. It had nothing to do with the class, only with the > > location. > > >> What current exam? Memorizing answers and writing them down isn't a > >> test. > > > >So what is it that you fear? > > Klein fears CHANGE and, perhaps, feelings of obsolescence. I think everyone has some of that to one degree or another. It's unhealthy to allow that fear to paralyze you. > Someone who has been a regular worker in electronics (radio is a > subset of electronics) ought to damn well know and recognize > that the state of the art in electronics has been CONSTANTLY > changing. It's sometimes a chore to keep up, whether it be > 1950 or 2000 or any time in-between. There will be new challenges before us tomorrow, but we won't know about them. We will still be arguing if a morse code exam is necessary. > >> > You'd probably be weeded out pretty quickly. > > > >> I doubt it - if I couldn't pass an Extra theory exam - a real one, not > >> the nonsense that passes for one these days - I'd lose my job in a > >> second. > > > >Mmmm. I see. You are a careerist in the electronics industry and it > >pisses you off that hobbyists have equal "status" as you in amatuer > >radio. I've run across a lot of that in the past 20 years... > > I've run across a lot of that my entire life. :-) > > I think Klein wants recognition as a "professional amateur" or > "amateur professional." I'm not sure which... He's a professional whiner. > >> What if you addressed what I said when you answer me? Your dishonest > >> tactics are transparent. > > > >You're the one that forgot the circuit, not me. Get pissed at your own > >self. > > When in doubt of an effective reply, these Fundamentalist > Morseodists > must resort to some form of denigration. Sigh, they never learn... My dishonest, transparent tactics... Odd, saying what you mean and meaning what you say have become dishonest. > >> Quit putting words in my mouth. I wasn't complaining to anyone, and > >> we weren't discussing remembering 50 year old tests. > > > >Correct. "WE" weren't discussing it. YOU were. YOU were discussing > >how you can't draw what you can't remember. > > This is an indicator that Klein isn't used to computer-modem > communications. He isn't looking beyond his own screen and > understanding that others are separated from it in time and space. > "He" was obviously talking about "old days" of "His." He is not > considering that others do not share his viewpoints. I regret to inform Mr Klein that I do not agree with him. > Considering the Type of Oscillator and "names," he has put > Names as somehow "essential" to the circuit. NO SUCH THING. > An oscillator is simply an amplifier of just-barely-past-unity > gain with positive feedback. The Names were tacked on by > academics long, long ago as IDENTIFICATION of the general form > of amplification-with-positive-feedback. I'm surprised that Klein allows any feedback in his oscillator circuits. > One can build a Colpitts oscillator, make it work, and continue > calling it a Hartley. Won't make a bit of difference to the > circuit...electrons don't give a damn about human labels. They > work by THEIR laws, not humans' with their imperative labels. > > By the way, on a quick bit of checking, I've got text references > to about 11 different oscillator forms, not just two (with his > unknown third type)...and I'm not counting free-running multi- > vibrators which are also very much an "oscillator." Talk of any kind of vibrator might draw inuendo from robesin. > >> Maybe we should have one - show the ability to put a clean PSK signal > >> on the air. Show the ability to interpret a waterfall display. Show > >> the ability to tell the difference between various digital modes. The > >> bands would be pretty QRM-free. > > > >YES!!! > > [ no... ] Huh? Lets let the FCC tell us that it is impractical to have everyone take mode exams. Or lets let the council of VECs tul us the same thing. > >If you are ever going to save your beloved Morse Code test, this is the > >only way you're going to do it. > > The only way to "save his beloved morse code test" is to have the > ARRL exercise some BETTER brainwashing than it has been doing for > decades. The League is still trying to use its old persuasion > and, so far, hasn't been able to get memberships from the 3/4 of > all licensed US radio amateurs who are NOT ARRL members... If the league pushes the morse testing issue too hard, it will become obvious to the 25% that are members. > >I think it is you who don't know where you're going with this > >discussion. It's gone beyond your having grief over your favorite mode > >to actually having to think about the future of the service. > >Conggrats. Another couple of years of RRAP tutoring and you just might > >become a rational being. > > I disagree, Brian. Klein is a MORSEMAN. They don't change. > They are rooted in old days long gone, brainwashed early into > thinking that morsemanship is "essential" to "best" radio > communication. It isn't...easily proved by ALL the OTHER > radio services giving up on morse code as a mode (if they > had it once) or never requiring it since a radio service began. Actuarial tables abound to deal with that kind of thinking. > >> >Who said that? We absolutely NEED relevant exams. That is my whole > >> >argument! > > > >> So you're in favor of exams that test knowledge of theory? "Draw the > >> schematic of ..."? "Explain why long path 2400 bps is impossible on > >> 14 MHz"? That kind of relevance? > > > >Sure. But you have to ask yourself one question. Can the average VE > >administer such an exam? If not, can your average GS-7 FCC employee > >administer such an exam? If you set up an exam that only an engineer > >can administer, then your government isn't going to accept it. So be > >realistic in your zeal. > > Klein hasn't considered the simple fact that, by law, the VEs > do NOT have to be trained test-adminsters. They are simply > VOLINTEERS who have the requisite license class and GIVE OF > THEIR OWN TIME to adminster tests. VEs are accountable only > to the FCC in that volunteer testing. VEs' only "penalty" > in mis-administering an amateur test is a reduction in license > class or forteiture of their amateur license. > > Klein and his "tests aren't like they were in 'my' time" > bitchers and moaners HAD their chance to keep privatization > in testing from happening long ago. Legal means to stop it > by NPRM Commentary didn't make their case. Privatization > happened for BOTH amateur and commercial licenses. Now > their whine is long past its time and has turned to vinegar. Yep. Testing must become more "legitimate" for hobbyists than for professionals. > >> Or the "pick the answer with the resistor like we showed you in the > >> example" kind of relevance? > > > >The exam can be anything your VEC wants it to be. We learned this when > >the ARRL went from administering a Morse Code Exam at 5WPM to > >administering a Farnsworth Exam at 13-15WPM. > > True enough, Brian, but expect ten kinds of flak from the > other morsepersons in here on that... :-) Quack, Quack! Water off a duck's back. > The VEC can LEGALLY generate a Question Pool with ONE HUNDRED > times the minimum required number of questions. With electronic > transmittal over the Internet the Question Pool can be updated > within 24 hours to ALL VE groups. But everytime the NCVEC solicits for questions and participants for the QP revisions, guys like Klein are silent; absent. > Say the FCC requires a minimum of 50 questions on a written > test element. If the VEC QPC generates the Question-Answer > pool with FIVE THOUSAND QUESTIONS (and answers), it should be > obvious that mere "memorization" sufficient to pass that > written test element is out of the question. Anyone who CAN > memorize that prodigious amount is already gifted as an eidetic > and those are extremely rare among humans. Klein will claim that all are eidetic, and the new QP is unfair. > What all that concentration on the "written tests" is about is > just a DIVERSION to keep from replying on the singular morse > code test continuation. The morsemen just haven't been able > to come up with sufficently-valid reasons to keep the morse > test (other than the emotional ones) so they smoke-screen by > bringing up the writtens. Old tactic of theirs. Old and tired. > >> How do you draw a schematic > > > >Memorization. > > Correct. > > >> and explain the functions of parts by > >> memorizing answers? > > > >Memorization. > > Correct again. > > >> You can't explain phase shift by memorizing "10k" > >> or "coil". > > > >You can't memorize the def of phase shift? > > > >C'mon, aren't you supposed to be in the industry? > > We don't know WHERE, Brian, or for WHOM. :-) Sounds like Jim. > >> >> >I used radios in the military. I never used a CW key in the military. > >> >> >I never jammed another operator, although Brandywine asked me to reduce > >> >> >power once. > > > >> >> But you had to learn how to use the radios. > > > >> >I did? > > > >> They just gave you a radio and said "use it"? > > > >On/Off and PTT. What else is there??? > > [ ahem..."volume" and "squelch" to name two... :-) ] > > >Oh, yeh, a magnetic compass and a chart where the satellite is. > > Darn you "kids!" Weren't any of those newfangled gizmos > like "satellites" when I was in the Army. :-) 1957. The Russians. Sputnik. CW beacon signal on 20M. And I wasn't born yet. But the technilogy was worthwhile and moved forward - without morse code. > The AN/PRC-8 backpack VHF transceivers (one of which I wore > in PIP Training) also had VFO frequency control along with a > built-in "crystal calibrator." Nothing like the "channel > selection" of a later synthesized AN/PRC-25 (also FM on VHF). > > Interesting engineering feat with that VFO control over a > military temperature and vibration environment. Copied from > the old SCR-300 "walkie-talkie" of WW2, devised by Motorola > (also FM on VHF). But, I digress, that was Practical Theory > as applied by professional engineering, used by professional > military people...didn't have the majesty of AMATEURISM and > all its nobility (and class distinctions). Now we've got FM repeater satellites getting kicked out by the dozens. > >> >> Hams today don't - they > >> >> memorize a few answers, buy equipment and get on the air - with no > >> >> understanding of what they're doing, and no desire to learn. > > > >> >Then it hasn't changed much since you were first licensed. > > > >> When I was licensed you had to show an understanding of theory, by > >> answering questions that were more than just multiple choice from a > >> published answer pool. > > > >Yes, you had to memorize paragraphs instead of multiple choices. Big > >deal. > > Good grief, all that crying and wailing over Test Privatization! > Maybe we should take up a collection to send him some Kleenex? Robesin will interpret that as some kind of sexual inuendo. > Seems to me that COLLEGE-level course tests that I took had a > LOT of memorization. Maybe we should all slam the academic > world for doing the same "memorization?" Hey, why not, all > those who failed college level courses can get a Wailing Wall! Bill Gates at the wailing wall? > My state drivers' license testing is done from multiple-choice > and that requires MUCH memorization of the applicable laws. > While the CA DMV does not publish the EXACT answers, the have > lots and lots of examples, not only well-publicized but available > free in little booklets at each DMV office. Maybe Klein wants > me to take an ME degree course in automotive engineering just > to drive our Malibu MAXX? :-) I sure hope he doesn't answer that question. > >> >> You may, but I can see from many of the comments that have been posted > >> >> here that a lot of people don't. They don't want to learn, they want > >> >> to get on the air. Period. > > > >> >W3RV didn't wait to get a ham license before operating! He just wanted > >> >to get on the air. Period. > > > >> Point? > > > >All you wonderful OF's taking trips down memory lane forget that some > >of your brother hams were bootleggers. > > > >It's only the unwashed No-code Techs that operate illegally. Hi!!! > >What a stinking load. > > Brian, if you check out the "official" history of the ARRL > you will find out that they BEGAN in trying to circumvent > the commercial telegram system with a relaying of messages > past the commercial boundaries and FEES. If that were > reported today, the journalists would call it "hacking." Oh, oh. > >> > If you must retain a Morse Code Exam, then you must > >> >also administer practical exams for SSB, FM, AM, FSTV, SSTV, RTTY > >> >(which is pretty darned old), packet, PSK, etc. > > > >> I have no problem with that. > > > >Then go for it. > > > >It is the ONLY legitimate recourse you have for retaining the Morse > >Code exam. > > > >Best of luck. > > I hope he tries it. I'm anxious to find out how much hostility > he will engender from his fellow amateurs who are VEs...how they > have to spend many more hours (of their own time) in testing > each license applicant (separately). Ought to go over like a > concrete balloon... Forced learning of Morse Code... > >> Trained as an EE. Spent years designing RF circuitry, then went into > >> digital design. "Is", not yet "was" - I'm still alive. > > > >Are you drawing a pension from it? "Was." > > > >Are you drawing a paycheck from it? "Is." > > > >And it's so typical for Old Timers to forget that not everyone in the > >ARS are CAREERIST PROFESSIONALS. Bitching and Moaning about how > >everyone else doesn't know as much as them. > > Klein has yet to define his own label, whether it is "professional > amateur" or "amateur professional." He seems undecided. > > I'm one of the (chronological) Olde Fahrts in this group but I > pray to God that I won't ever get as bad as some of them with > their retro attitudes and fixations with modes of their long- > ago youth, the ultra importance of CLASS and RANK. Geez. > > You'd think that some of them regard amateur radio like the > USMC! ["the few, the ultra proud (of morsemanship)"] I'm just a beginner. Passed my Novice Exam in November 1986. > >> Let's have a test that > >> shows whether the testee knows anything. > > > >Remember that you are handsomely compensated for your professional > >knowledge. Amateur Radio is a non-compensated hobby. > > Some of these Olde Fahrts seem to think their amateurism is on > some kind of "higher plane" than ordinary, plebian, work. > They be BETTER than the pros and keep reinforcing each other > with that pipe-dream. After all, the ARRL keeps reminding > them of their greatness, their "service to their country" > (by having their hobby). To hear them talk the nation would > immediately fall apart without these federally-licensed > hobbyists! Don't know if you've heard yet, but the ARRL and robesin announced that MARS and TSA have an agreement for armageddon communications. > We'll have to get Mr. Webster to work coming up with a better > definition of the hobby. Is it "professional amateurism" or > "amateur professionalism?" I opt for the latter but others > may differ. > > Beep, beep... > > LenAnderson@ieee.org Didit. Article: 228518 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Jim - NN7K Subject: Re: Vertical radiation from horizontal dipole? References: <1155949003.609701.39890@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <12ed290mv4kekea@corp.supernews.com> <12egsogtbki2m13@corp.supernews.com> Message-ID: <5%4Gg.11362$9T3.4779@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net> Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 22:03:45 GMT Think what he may mean is: if you use a Circular polarization , it will receive both horizontal, and vertical polarization signals, equally well tho at a decrease of 3 dB in signal , vs. horizontal to horizontal, or vertical to vertical polarization. A good way to observe this optically, for LINEAR polarizations, would be to find an old pair of sunglasses, useing polarized lenses. break them in two, and then look throuh BOTH lens's . As you rotate one, keeping the other stationary, note the loss of light thru them. At 90 degrees, it should be almost black! but at 45, degrees, the degree of darkness (this is for the stationary lens) will be about the same if the rotated lense is moved either + or - 45 degrees (the equivalent of circular polarization in an optic field. Don't know if this explaination helps, but migh give it a try-- Jim NN7K Green Egghead wrote: > Roy Lewallen wrote: >> I don't have any link handy, but it's easy to explain. >> >> Ground isn't necessary. Consider a horizontal dipole in free space. >> Position yourself directly in line with the antenna, some distance away, >> so all you see of the antenna is a dot. Now, move directly upward or >> downward. The antenna now looks like a vertical line(*). The radiation >> from the antenna at the point where you are is purely vertically >> polarized, for the same reason it's purely horizontally polarized when >> you're directly broadside to the antenna. >> >> The only directions in which the dipole will radiate a purely >> horizontally polarized signal are in the horizontal plane of the >> antenna, or exactly at right angles (broadside) to the antenna. In the >> vertical plane containing the antenna, it's purely vertically polarized. >> In all other directions, it's a combination of the two. (In other words, >> the polarization angle of the total field is neither vertical nor >> horizontal.) >> >> Here's an illustration you can do with the demo version of EZNEC. Open >> the Dipole1.ez example file, which is a dipole in free space. In the >> main window, click the Desc Options line. In the Desc Options dialog >> box, select the Plot and Fields tabs if not already active, and select >> "Vert, Horiz" (not "Vert, Horiz, Total") in the Fields To Plot frame. >> Then click Ok to close the box. (Note: The "Vert, Horiz" option, without >> the "Total", isn't available in EZNEC v. 3.0, including EZNEC-ARRL.) >> >> The example file is set up to plot the pattern in the horizontal plane >> of the antenna. If you click FF Plot, you'll see only a horizontally >> polarized field. That's because the field is purely horizontally >> polarized in the horizontal plane of the antenna, as I mentioned >> earlier. The ends of the antenna are up and down on the plot, and >> broadside is to the left and right. >> >> Now in the main window, change the elevation angle to 45 degrees. Do >> this by clicking on the Elevation Angle line, entering 45 in the dialog >> box, then clicking Ok. This moves the observer above the horizontal >> plane of the antenna. The observation point (assumed very far from the >> antenna) follows a circle which is equidistant from the antenna and the >> horizontal plane containing the antenna. That is, it maintains a >> constant distance and an angle of 45 degrees above horizontal from the >> antenna. Click FF Plot to see the result. Now you can see that when >> you're directly broadside to the antenna (left and right on the plot), >> the field is purely horizontally polarized -- the vertical polarization >> component is zero. But directly in line with the ends of the antenna, >> the polarization is purely vertical. The top and bottom directions of >> the plot correspond to the position you were in when you saw the antenna >> as a vertical line. >> >> Vertically and horizontally polarized components reflect differently >> from the ground. So in directions where both are present, one can be >> reinforced while the other is attenuated, resulting in a different mix >> after reflection. (But reflection won't change a horizontally polarized >> component to vertically polarized or vice-versa.) For example, a >> vertically polarized field reinforces when reflecting from a perfect >> ground at a low angle, while a horizontally polarized signal cancels. >> This ends up enhancing the vertically polarized component at low angles >> when both are present. (Remember, though, this is perfect ground -- real >> ground, except salt water, behaves quite differently.) >> >> Finally, let me emphasize that there's really only one E field from the >> antenna, with one polarization angle. Separating it into vertically and >> horizontally polarized components is simply a convenience used for >> calculations and as an aid in understanding, much like separating two >> currents into common and differential (even and odd) mode components. >> The principle of superposition allows us to conceptually split the field >> into components, analyze each separately, then recombine the results, >> getting the same answer we'd get if we had done the analysis on the >> total field. > > Are there multipath solutions using circular polarization > between double side band supressed carrier components? > >> (*) More precisely, the projection of the antenna on a vertical plane >> passing through your position is a vertical line. Visually, you can't >> tell if the antenna is a short vertical wire or a longer horizontal one >> you're seeing end-on. The nature of the radiation in your direction is >> also the same for the two situations. >> >> Roy Lewallen, W7EL >> >> lu6etj wrote: >>> Dear friends: >>> >>> Could you give me me a link to some reference material (in the net) >>> about vertical polarized radiation of horizontal dipoles near ground? >>> (not feed line radiation).. >>> Thank yoy very much in advance. >>> >>> Miguel Ghezzi (LU 6ETJ) >>> > > Article: 228519 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "N3" Subject: Two Meter FM Antenna Question Date: 20 Aug 2006 15:26:38 -0700 Message-ID: <1156112798.027258.152330@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> Which one of the the two is more efficient as a radiator & why? 1/2 wave vertical fed in the center with coax or one vertical 1/4 wave with four 1/4 wave radials also fed in the center with coax? Article: 228520 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Jimmie D" References: <30954.oidi09.d0904.ddoi0@qkd.org> <1152929851.865986.4740@35g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <_AVug.9493$PE1.1406@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net> <1153275616.225575.252170@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com> <44BDA4F3.7000706@fuse.net> <12brelk76dlj901@corp.supernews.com> Subject: Re: Morris Code -plus- Continuous Wave (CW) Radio Transmission -and- Semaphore Signals ? Do They Defining Amateur Radio ? Message-ID: Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 19:27:53 -0400 > > Yes. That's understandable. Hams these days don't want to act like hams, > they like to be appliance operators. So kids don't see that CW is > important and fun. All they see is hams gabbing on a microphone like any > CB'er can do. > > SC Actually a lot of tghe boy scouts know morse code, they still arent intersted in ham radio. Article: 228521 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Roy Lewallen Subject: Re: Vertical radiation from horizontal dipole? Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 16:46:44 -0700 Message-ID: <12eht36jlo0v7eb@corp.supernews.com> References: <1155949003.609701.39890@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <12ed290mv4kekea@corp.supernews.com> <12egsogtbki2m13@corp.supernews.com> <5%4Gg.11362$9T3.4779@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net> Jim - NN7K wrote: > Think what he may mean is: if you use a Circular polarization , it will > receive both horizontal, > and vertical polarization signals, equally well > tho at a decrease of 3 dB in signal , vs. horizontal > to horizontal, or vertical to vertical > polarization. A good way to observe this > optically, for LINEAR polarizations, would > be to find an old pair of sunglasses, useing > polarized lenses. break them in two, and then look > throuh BOTH lens's . As you rotate one, keeping > the other stationary, note the loss of light thru > them. At 90 degrees, it should be almost black! > but at 45, degrees, the degree of darkness (this > is for the stationary lens) will be about the same > if the rotated lense is moved either + or - 45 > degrees (the equivalent of circular polarization > in an optic field. Don't know if this explaination > helps, but migh give it a try-- Jim NN7K Unfortunately, it's not demonstrating circular polarization at all. Circular polarization isn't the equivalent of 45 degree tilted linear polarization. The polarization of a circularly polarized wave (RF, light, or any other electromagnetic wave) rotates, one revolution per cycle. So over each period, the polarization rotates from vertical, through intermediate angles to horizontal, back to vertical but oriented the other direction, to reverse-oriented horizontal, back to vertical again. A 1 MHz field does this a million times per second. If you view circularly polarized light through polarized sunglasses, the intensity will be the same regardless of how you rotate the glasses. If you pass circularly polarized light through one polarized lens, the light is linearly polarized on the other side. So rotating the second lens behind it illustrates only cross polarization of linearly polarized waves. If you have a purely linearly polarized field, say, horizontal, and rotate a dipole in a vertical plane in that field (with the plane oriented so the field is broadside to the dipole), the signal received by the dipole will be maximum when the dipole is horizontal, zero when it's vertical ("cross polarization"), and intermediate values in between. This is the equivalent of the polarized sunglass experiment. But if the impinging field is circularly polarized, the received signal will be the same for any of the dipole orientations. This is because the field is always aligned with the dipole for two instants every cycle (when the antenna response will be maximum), cross-polarized for two instants every cycle (when the antenna response is zero), and at some intermediate relative polarization for the rest of the cycle (when the antenna response will be greater than zero but less than the maximum). And the proportion of each is the same regardless of which position the dipole is rotated to. The 3 dB attenuation relative to a linearly polarized, optimally oriented field is due to the fact that the circularly polarized wave is cross-polarized to various degrees during the cycle and is optimally polarized only for those two instants each cycle. A dual situation exists with a circularly polarized antenna and linearly polarized field: a linearly polarized wave of any orientation is received equally with a right or left handed circularly polarized antenna. Any plane wave can be divided into either vertical and horizontal (or any two orthogonal) linear components, or into right and left handed circular components. Any linearly polarized wave has equal magnitude right and left handed circular components. Any circularly polarized wave has equal magnitude horizontal and vertical linear components. Hence the antenna responses discussed above. Like a circularly polarized wave, a 45 degree linearly polarized wave also has equal magnitude horizontal and vertical components. But this doesn't make it the same as a circularly polarized wave. The horizontal and vertical components of a 45 degree linearly polarized wave are in time phase or 180 degrees out of phase; those of a circularly polarized wave are 90 degrees relative to each other. This essential difference causes the orientation of the linearly polarized field to stay fixed but the orientation of the circularly polarized field to rotate. Put two crossed dipoles close to each other and feed them in phase or 180 degrees out of phase, and you'll get a 45 degree linearly polarized field broadside to the antenna. Feed them in quadrature (90 degree relative phasing) and you'll get a circularly polarized field broadside to the antenna. Linear and circular polarization are limiting special cases of the more general elliptical polarization. The polarization of an elliptically polarized field rotates each cycle, but the amplitude can also vary during the cycle. The ratio of the minimum amplitude to the maximum (or vice-versa, depending on the reference) is called the axial ratio. Circular polarization is the special case of elliptical polarization having an axial ratio of one. Linear polarization is the special case where the axial ratio is zero (or infinite, depending on the definition used for axial ratio). A general elliptically polarized wave can have different horizontal and vertical linear polarization components, and different right and left hand circular polarization components. Roy Lewallen, W7EL Article: 228522 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Subject: Re: Two Meter FM Antenna Question From: Ed References: <1156112798.027258.152330@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> Message-ID: Date: 20 Aug 2006 23:54:28 GMT "N3" wrote in news:1156112798.027258.152330 @m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com: > Which one of the the two is more efficient as a radiator & why? > > 1/2 wave vertical fed in the center with coax or one vertical 1/4 wave > with four 1/4 wave radials also fed in the center with coax? > > The vertical dipole has more horizontal gain than the groundplane. I believe its about 1dB improvement. Ed K7AAT Article: 228523 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Ed Light" Subject: Solder to Aluminum? Message-ID: Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 16:55:58 -0700 Hi, Antenna Guys. My FM antenna had the wire attachment posts ripped out by the wind. I'm wondering if I can solder to the aluminum? Then I'd epoxy over it. I'd just try it, but I'm afraid it might pop in my face or something. -- Ed Light Smiley :-/ MS Smiley :-\ Send spam to the FTC at spam@uce.gov Thanks, robots. Bring the Troops Home: http://bringthemhomenow.org Article: 228524 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Jimmie D" References: <30954.oidi09.d0904.ddoi0@qkd.org> Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Message-ID: Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 19:58:15 -0400 "Dirk" wrote in message news:30954.oidi09.d0904.ddoi0@qkd.org... > Ham's care more about operating appliances than knowing how to save a > lives. > > :-( > Hams could save more lives by supporting a blood drive than than standing by waiting for that emergency to use morse code. I hear about hams supporting public service, my daughter DID 75 hrs of public service last year as a ten year old Girl Scout. I learned CW even got up to 20 wpm but I dont think it should be any more of a requirement than any other mode of operation. There is a lot of hams who may not be able to save anyones lives but they could save their own by turning off the radio for an hour and taking a walk Article: 228525 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Wayne" References: <5_2Gg.13649$MA3.12746@news.ono.com> Subject: Re: Vertica multiband antenna HF Message-ID: <0M6Gg.2309$0J6.464@trnddc02> Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 00:04:12 GMT Ruben-- Do you have room for a horizontal antenna? I have used a broadband antenna similar to the B&W multiband folded dipole. It is convenient in an urban environment, because a tuner is not required. With a single center support, it fits the top of a typical building. However, it is not as efficient as a full sized antenna, because there is an integral matching resistor that consumes some power. --Wayne "Ruben Navarro Huedo" wrote in message news:5_2Gg.13649$MA3.12746@news.ono.com... > Hello friends: > My name is Ruben (EB5ESX) and i am from Spain. > I have to replace my vertical antenna becouse i am having a lot of > mecanical problems with it. > It is an artesanal antenna made in Spain. > I live in a building and i can't install radial systems, becouse i have to > install elevated in a mast. > I need an antenna like Cushcraft R8, Gap Titan, Diamond CP-6 or something > like that with integrated radial systems. > Money is not the most important for me..... i am looking for a durable and > efficient vertical antenna. > What antenna do you like? > Do you have some experience? > > My antenna at this moment is an standard loaded 1/4 wave vertical with a > lot of losses and very noisy. > > Please... any help? > > Thank's a lot. > > > > Article: 228526 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Mark@kb9rqz.com Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 20:08:34 -0400 Message-ID: <84uhe21f29eecisk1i143m5nnllomsmmel@4ax.com> References: <1153664765.447946.4510@s13g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1154574315.819259.204140@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <6gr3d21444qdt5m6mr1e1jpavltvso929p@4ax.com> <1155176094.212232.56330@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> <1155268104.444785.177310@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1155324703.131909.279070@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1156111049.458067.33380@74g2000cwt.googlegroups.com> On 20 Aug 2006 14:57:29 -0700, hot-ham-and-cheese@hotmail.com wrote: > >LenAnderson@ieee.org wrote: >> The VEC can LEGALLY generate a Question Pool with ONE HUNDRED >> times the minimum required number of questions. With electronic >> transmittal over the Internet the Question Pool can be updated >> within 24 hours to ALL VE groups. > >But everytime the NCVEC solicits for questions and participants for the >QP revisions, guys like Klein are silent; absent. tell me have you ever sent any input to the NVEC? get any reply? http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/ -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Article: 228527 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Tam/WB2TT" References: Subject: Re: Solder to Aluminum? Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 20:15:48 -0400 Message-ID: "Ed Light" wrote in message news:hE6Gg.17746$RD.221@fed1read08... > Hi, Antenna Guys. > > My FM antenna had the wire attachment posts ripped out by the wind. I'm > wondering if I can solder to the aluminum? Then I'd epoxy over it. I'd > just try it, but I'm afraid it might pop in my face or something. > > -- > Ed Light > > Smiley :-/ > MS Smiley :-\ > > Send spam to the FTC at > spam@uce.gov > Thanks, robots. > > Bring the Troops Home: > http://bringthemhomenow.org > > > Why not just replace the posts with 4-40 or 6-32 stainless steel bolts and nuts. Drill new holes in the aluminum if needed. Tam/WB2TT Article: 228528 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Frank's" References: <12ecgid65q8rl39@corp.supernews.com> Subject: Re: 9 m Monopole Analysis Message-ID: Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 00:24:52 GMT > You might want to consider a scripting environment to build, run, and > summarise NEC runs. > > Windows lacks a good scripting language for this type of application. > Fortunately there are others available, and at no charge. Two that I > have used are PERL and Python. > > I prefer PERL mainly for historical reasons and the huge base of > packages to extend the PERL base, though Python is probably a better > designed language, and less likely to change radically (as PERL looks > likely to do with V6). Importantly, both natively support complex > number type. For instance, you can write in PERL: > > #calculate Zo and gamma > my $a=$R+i*2*PI*$this->{f}*$L; > my $b=$G+i*2*PI*$this->{f}*$C; > $this->{zo}=($a/$b)**0.5; > $this->{gamma}=($a*$b)**0.5; > > PERL is excellent for reading megabytes of NEC output and extracting > key figures for summarisation. > > An example, I recently wanted to explore the relationship between > predicted beamwidth (in E and H planes separately) and gain for DL6WU > long boom Yagis. I built and ran literally hundreds of models with > pattern reporting at 0.1deg intervals, producing over 50MB of output. > Models were automatically generated from a PERL port of the DL6WU > design algorithms, and NEC runs of the generated models were > automated. Half power point was found by linear interpolation between > 0.1deg points around the half power points. If I did that by hand, I > would be working for months, whereas a half hour of scripting produced > a solution that was more accurate and reusable. > > Is there a place for Excel? Certainly, I usually create tab delimited > summary files with PERL scripts and drop them on Excel to the final > ad-hoc analysis and presentation. DPLOT is also a pretty neat tool for > graphical analysis and presentation. For example, the regression > analysis of the data from the study above > http://www.vk1od.net/dl6wu/new_pa2.gif was calculated and displayed > using DPLOT. > > Worth the investment in learning PERL (or the like)! > > http://www.perl.org/ (You need the Activestate PERL for Windows.) > > http://www.python.org/ > > http://www.dlot.com/ > > > Owen Thanks for the info Owen, also the comments from Jonsey. The scripting languages look very interesting. From your sample code above it does look very logical and easy to use; not to mention that it can handle complex numbers. Regards, Frank Article: 228529 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Mark@kb9rqz.com Subject: Re: Choices, Choices, Choices... CW or CB? Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 20:28:33 -0400 Message-ID: References: On Mon, 24 Jul 2006 23:42:13 GMT, Slow Code wrote: > >That's what you have to decide. > >SC false choice it never was a single choice teither or only fools like you think so http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/ -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Article: 228530 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Mark@kb9rqz.com Subject: Re: CW to be used in Beruit as only means of communication by Coast Guard Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 20:32:02 -0400 Message-ID: References: On Mon, 31 Jul 2006 02:21:12 GMT, "Steve Stone" wrote: >The Coast Guard reported today that they will only use CW in Beruit. >All other emissions will be ignored. > still no suport of this fraud http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/ -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Article: 228531 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Message-ID: <4cbnr3-gol.ln1@mail.specsol.com> From: jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com Subject: Re: Solder to Aluminum? References: Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 00:35:01 GMT Ed Light wrote: > Hi, Antenna Guys. > My FM antenna had the wire attachment posts ripped out by the wind. I'm > wondering if I can solder to the aluminum? Then I'd epoxy over it. I'd just > try it, but I'm afraid it might pop in my face or something. Ordinary solder, no, but there are solders specifically made for aluminum. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. Article: 228532 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Marco Licetti" Subject: FS: HP/AGILENT 436A POWERMETER - RF/Microwave, LIKE-NEW, CALIBRATED, [DIGITAL display] Message-ID: Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 02:35:13 GMT HP/AGILENT 436A POWER METER - RF/Microwave [DIGITAL display] CALIBRATED, PERFECT CONDITION, warranty, may include sensor cable on request Do NOT reply on Newsgroup, if email: remove "death2spammers" strings in my address (repeated twice). Price $199/$229, shipping from Amplitech, Inc., New York, USA Posted on Ebay, item# 330020367897. Goto www.ebay.com and enter "330020367897" (without quotation marks) into search window (or item#, etc.); BUY NOW OPTION is AVAILABLE, i.e. NO need to wait for Auction end ($199) - set to $229. Description is there (on Ebay), copied down here for your convenience, BUT to see PICTURES/etc do check that Ebay listing. Best done via Ebay - SAFE for you/me (my feedback is 100% positive there & 10+ years on Newsgroups), but if you're not into Ebay and unless a bid already placed, I can take it off and sell outside Ebay. Description copied here (see pictures on Ebay): Concise description as you can GET DETAILED DESCRIPTION/SPECS/MANUAL at AGILENT website (www.agilent.com->search->enter 436A, power). People who buy Test Equipment are professionals/engineers - know already the specific model specs or can quickly locate. HP/Agilent 436A is one of the most widely used/legacy RF/microwave powermeters, thus often supported in modern ATE software and even modern Agilent meters almost always offer 436A emulation mode (I personally never had a chance to automate it), HPIB/GPIB is included (back connector) and tested with ATE software OK, the address selection switch is inside. 1. CALIBRATED - VALID THRU JULY 2007 2. CONDITION is LIKE NEW. PULLED FROM WORKING ENVIRONMENT at AMPLITECH, Inc. (www.amplitechinc.com), one of the best-known RF/Microwave companies - a spin off of Miteq, Inc. Used as recent as yesterday for military amplifiers testing, assure you precisely calibrated/ready to be plugged into your environment 3. Sensor not included at this price, in fact I am using it with a new meter that didn't come with its own sensor, but I CAN add a near-new sensor cable at a very small fee, just email me. 4. As mentioned above, docs/specs/manuals are at Agilent website, it's a simple meter comparing to dual-head/modern meters. Reason to sell We're fortunate now to afford a company-wide upgrade program, e.g. for this powermeter we're now using a dual-head $5000 unit, so this original unit is up for sale. Will post an older/analog HP435 + waveguide sensor (thermistor type?) for $95 only - lookup my Ebay userID for "all items for sale by this member" - should find that meter soon (again, pulled from working environment, but long ago, could be nice as secondary/backup meter). Article: 228533 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "J. Mc Laughlin" Subject: Re: Confidence limits for noise measurement Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 23:09:39 -0400 Message-ID: <12ei8v98c15qs69@corp.supernews.com> References: <2l03b2hffoicfkfmuvg1asin6fm55rvspp@4ax.com> Dear Owen and Richard: I have arrived at this set very late and the hour is late. However, many, many years ago I was involved with the radio astronomy task of measuring (always two major numbers involved) the flux from a strong source. A reasonably predictable antenna gain was effected by using a very long horn antenna with a rectangular (it might have been square) cross section. The antenna was placed in a gully so that the source would pass through the beam once a sidereal day. The scheme used to construct the antenna was innovative and non-trivial. A classic, comparison measurement was effected. Are not all measurements comparisons? A dummy load was kept in ice water protected by a condom. A switching scheme was used to switch between the dummy and the antenna with an offset. I called it the HILLRAMS receiver. (High Isolation Low Loss Radio Astronomy Microwave Switched Receiver) Since the bandwidth was the same for both sources, once a day we measured how much stronger the source was than the noise produced by a zero centigrade source. All analog/ At Ohio State I did something similar with, probably for the first time, actual digitizing that went to a computer (punched paper tape!). As I recall, I did worry about sample rate, but it was much faster than any changes being observed because a heavy LPF was used. (With the slow computers in use, I needed not to overdesign the rate too much.) It seems to me that if you have any reasonably fast filter fall-off, 11 kHz is plenty fast enough. But then, I am not too sure that I understand your concern and I am starting to ramble (though I am stone sober). 73 Mac N8TT -- J. Mc Laughlin; Michigan U.S.A. Home: JCM@Power-Net.Net Article: 228534 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "LenAnderson@ieee.org" Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Date: 20 Aug 2006 20:19:20 -0700 Message-ID: <1156130360.024398.156900@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> References: <2D6Dg.7768$FN2.1842@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com> From: hot-ham-and-che...@hotmail.com on Sun, Aug 20 2006 1:55 pm >LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote: >> hot-ham-and-che...@hotmail.com wrote: >> > LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote: >> > > hot-ham-and-che...@hotmail.com wrote: >> > > > LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote: >> > His, "Sorry Hans, MARS >>>IS<<< Amateur Radio." would make a good, >> > quick, clean case study for some grad student of psychology. It has >> > all of the elements of that pathology and google serves it up in >> > seconds. > >> Quite true, Brian. Those of us who were here 1 to 2 years ago >> had an eyefull of his continuous - but faulty - efforts to "tell" us >> all about His fantasy of things. :-) > >Little Billy Beeper had him pegged - he's nuts. True enough. :-( >> Mainly it was his abject refusal to back down when faced with >> definitive directives by the government (DoD) in regard to the >> Military Affiliate Radio System. > >Such complete ignorance of MARS, yet somehow, he claims that he was the >Assistant NCOIC of a NMC MARS Station on Okinawa. Simply unbeleivable. It gets worse. Go to the QRZ bio page for K4YZ and use his link to his AOL Home Page. There he claims not only an Assistant "CHOP" (presumably CHief OPerator) but as THE CHOP of another MARS station! He'd never mentioned being at that 2nd MARS station in here. >> Weeks went by without his >> admitting that the Directive existed. His final communication >> on the subject would NOT openly admit to error but was laced >> with more personal insults on his challengers. Sad. > >Accusations and insults. Whichever grad student locks on to him first >is one lucky SOB. All the work is done. Yeah, but look at the MASSIVE outpouring of his claims, insults, and generally vague, undetailed personal history of his. Whoever takes it on will probably need a dozen file cabinets to store all the printouts! :-) [a fine example of today's Extra class amateur licensee...] LenAnderson@ieee.org Article: 228535 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "AC7PN" Subject: Re: Sommer versus SteppIR Date: 20 Aug 2006 20:42:50 -0700 Message-ID: <1156131770.320326.41130@74g2000cwt.googlegroups.com> References: <8e917$44e765ad$453d9423$8718@FUSE.NET> As a general rule for a yagi antenna (assuming a fixed number of elements) the longer the boom length the greater the gain. Forced by economic matters yagis are more often squeezed into a smaller boom size than is optimum for best performance. Hence I don't think it is a any problem for the designers of the Step IR to optimize the performance of a ten meter antenna using the element spacing and boom length of a 20 meter antenna. Article: 228536 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Message-ID: <44E92B6C.5070605@fuse.net> Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 23:41:32 -0400 From: jawod Subject: Re: training ?? References: > > So my answer is, use a search engine like Google...properly used, it is the > best instruction tool available. > > 73 > > I am not EE trained and the ARRL Extra license manual worked very well for me. A google search may work but, typically, you can get far afield >from what you want or need to pass the actual test. My recommendation is to use ARRL material: it reviews the pertinent material to allow you to pass the test AND it teaches you the theory behind the questions. Not a deep treatise, mind you, but a good general understanding. My two cents. John AB8O Article: 228537 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Message-ID: <44E92C73.8030509@fuse.net> Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 23:45:55 -0400 From: jawod Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person References: <2D6Dg.7768$FN2.1842@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com> <1155433505.131116.226510@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> <1155434298.409922.126140@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> <1155606175.469557.27070@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1qf3e2tu8t5lrd82arlr6eitfb6l3poo1b@4ax.com> <1155709292.489367.259930@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1155853578.502660.314550@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1155931359.841721.300500@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1155948964.809708.129860@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com> <1156015230.748436.86760@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <1156093148.686146.230750@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1156095256.617771.181000@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> <1156107355.126445.201060@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> <1156130360.024398.156900@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> > > [a fine example of today's Extra class amateur licensee...] > > LenAnderson@ieee.org > You want to slam all Extras because of one lid? Perhaps that same psych grad student has some prime real estate closer to (your) home? Article: 228538 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Message-ID: <44E92CE5.10502@fuse.net> Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 23:47:49 -0400 From: jawod Subject: Re: Sommer versus SteppIR References: <8e917$44e765ad$453d9423$8718@FUSE.NET> <1156131770.320326.41130@74g2000cwt.googlegroups.com> AC7PN wrote: > As a general rule for a yagi antenna (assuming a fixed number of > elements) the longer the boom length the greater the gain. Forced by > economic matters yagis are more often squeezed into a smaller boom size > than is optimum for best performance. Hence I don't think it is a any > problem for the designers of the Step IR to optimize the performance of > a ten meter antenna using the element spacing and boom length of a 20 > meter antenna. > Any votes SteppIR versus Sommer? Article: 228539 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Marco Licetti" References: Subject: Re: HP/AGILENT 436A POWERMETER - RF/Microwave, LIKE-NEW, CALIBRATED, [DIGITAL display] Message-ID: Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 04:05:11 GMT PRICE CHANGED to $149 (auction) - 169 ("buynow") Article: 228540 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Owen Duffy Subject: Re: Confidence limits for noise measurement Message-ID: References: <2l03b2hffoicfkfmuvg1asin6fm55rvspp@4ax.com> <12ei8v98c15qs69@corp.supernews.com> Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 05:16:33 GMT On Sun, 20 Aug 2006 23:09:39 -0400, "J. Mc Laughlin" wrote: >Dear Owen and Richard: ... > At Ohio State I did something similar with, probably for the first time, >actual digitizing that went to a computer (punched paper tape!). As I >recall, I did worry about sample rate, but it was much faster than any >changes being observed because a heavy LPF was used. (With the slow >computers in use, I needed not to overdesign the rate too much.) It seems >to me that if you have any reasonably fast filter fall-off, 11 kHz is plenty >fast enough. But then, I am not too sure that I understand your concern and >I am starting to ramble (though I am stone sober). Mac, I collected my thinking on the subject in an article at http://www.vk1od.net/fsm/FsmNoiseConfidenceLimits.htm . Owen -- Article: 228541 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "an old friend" Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Date: 20 Aug 2006 23:04:11 -0700 Message-ID: <1156140251.371223.239890@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> References: <1155434298.409922.126140@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> jawod wrote: > > > > [a fine example of today's Extra class amateur licensee...] > > > > LenAnderson@ieee.org > > > You want to slam all Extras because of one lid? Perhaps that same psych > grad student has some prime real estate closer to (your) home? well there Is Robeson and Wismen Heil is better than them but.. How many example does one need? right now the sample rate isn't very good of Extras that are not members of NCI given your non disclosed call status you certainly don't count Article: 228542 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "an old friend" Subject: Re: Morris Code -plus- Continuous Wave (CW) Radio Transmission -and- Semaphore Signals ? Do They Defining Amateur Radio ? Date: 20 Aug 2006 23:17:17 -0700 Message-ID: <1156141037.487249.100550@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com> References: <30954.oidi09.d0904.ddoi0@qkd.org> Slow Code wrote: > "Jimmie D" wrote in > news:hwqAg.40256$Nt.22359@bignews8.bellsouth.net: > > Yes. That's understandable. Hams these days don't want to act like hams, > they like to be appliance operators. So kids don't see that CW is > important and fun. that is becuase it isn't important and fun for some it is neither but it is not important in the modern world period Article: 228543 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Wolfgang K. Mygett Subject: Re: Vertica multiband antenna HF Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 08:25:12 +0200 Message-ID: <84kie2tuootkqh9kveeo8numnbignaiuto@4ax.com> References: <5_2Gg.13649$MA3.12746@news.ono.com> On Sun, 20 Aug 2006 21:46:02 +0200, "Ruben Navarro Huedo" wrote: >I need an antenna like Cushcraft R8, Gap Titan, Diamond CP-6 or something >like that with integrated radial systems. My Hy-Gain AV-640 does a very good job. But dont forget - none of these antennas can be mounted without guy ropes. I use 3mm 'starter-rope' that is sold in hardware stores. They label it as UV resistant and having 180kg max. This rope was made as a starting rope for lawnmower. The radials a steel elements. around 1 m, hanging down very deep. 73 Wolfgang OE1MWW Article: 228544 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Subject: Re: Vertica multiband antenna HF From: "Ruben Navarro Huedo" References: <5_2Gg.13649$MA3.12746@news.ono.com> <84kie2tuootkqh9kveeo8numnbignaiuto@4ax.com> Message-ID: Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 11:58:37 +0200 A lot of thank's for your answer. Hy gain is a good antenna. Why did you choose it and not Cushcraft or other antenna? Seems that Hy Gain has less looses? Is this ok? Thank's a lot En Mon, 21 Aug 2006 08:25:12 +0200, Wolfgang K. Mygett escribió: > On Sun, 20 Aug 2006 21:46:02 +0200, "Ruben Navarro Huedo" > wrote: > > >> I need an antenna like Cushcraft R8, Gap Titan, Diamond CP-6 or >> something >> like that with integrated radial systems. > > My Hy-Gain AV-640 does a very good job. But dont forget - none of > these antennas can be mounted without guy ropes. I use 3mm > 'starter-rope' that is sold in hardware stores. They label it as UV > resistant and having 180kg max. This rope was made as a starting rope > for lawnmower. > > The radials a steel elements. around 1 m, hanging down very deep. > > 73 > Wolfgang > OE1MWW -- Usando el revolucionario cliente de correo de Opera: http://www.opera.com/mail/ Article: 228545 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Denny" Subject: Re: Solder to Aluminum? Date: 21 Aug 2006 04:17:59 -0700 Message-ID: <1156159079.736670.113270@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> References: http://www.aluminumrepair.com/ denny Article: 228546 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Denny" Subject: Re: Sommer versus SteppIR Date: 21 Aug 2006 04:26:38 -0700 Message-ID: <1156159598.509222.178800@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> References: <8e917$44e765ad$453d9423$8718@FUSE.NET> In my mind it is a no contest situation... The SteppIR is very well thought of by the owners... Another check point is what the serious contestors are running... I know of no one using Sommer, but I'm starting to see them install the SteppIR... denny Article: 228547 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "H. Adam Stevens, NQ5H" Subject: Re: Sommer versus SteppIR Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 07:29:51 -0500 Message-ID: <12ej9q0cr2op60c@corp.supernews.com> References: <8e917$44e765ad$453d9423$8718@FUSE.NET> <1156131770.320326.41130@74g2000cwt.googlegroups.com> <44E92CE5.10502@fuse.net> <1156159598.509222.178800@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> "Denny" wrote in message news:1156159598.509222.178800@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com... > In my mind it is a no contest situation... The SteppIR is very well > thought of by the owners... > > Another check point is what the serious contestors are running... I > know of no one using Sommer, but I'm starting to see them install the > SteppIR... > > denny > My 4-el SteppIR has been up nearly two years. I love it. 73 H. NQ5H Article: 228548 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Not Cocksucker Lloyd" Subject: Re: Poor Markie! Date: 21 Aug 2006 06:42:56 -0700 Message-ID: <1156167776.418585.26880@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> References: <44e0d125$0$11665$88260bb3@free.teranews.com> jawod wrote: > Not Cocksucker Lloyd wrote: > > an old friendless cocksucking child molester wrote: > > > >>cease > > > > > > Cry, you illiterate cunt, cry! > > > Nobody reads your ridiculous posts You just did, obviously, dumbassed pizza boy. Article: 228549 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: kb9rqz_child_molester@yahoo.com Subject: Re: Poor Markie! Date: 21 Aug 2006 06:45:41 -0700 Message-ID: <1156167941.257256.314290@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> References: <1155732492.347529.228590@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> MarkMoron@kb9rqz.com wrote: > On Fri, 18 Aug 2006 08:56:55 -0400, jawod wrote: > > >Not Cocksucker Lloyd wrote: > >> an old friendless cocksucking child molester wrote: > >> > >>>cease > >> > >> > >> Cry, you illiterate cunt, cry! > >> > >Nobody reads your ridiculous posts > be fiar I certainly do so do you Markie admits to being a bitch! > it is good for laughs mosts day laughing a rueshaking of the head In English, you illiterate lying fraud. Article: 228550 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "an old friend" Subject: cease and desist Date: 21 Aug 2006 06:47:35 -0700 Message-ID: <1156168055.849450.60970@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com> References: <44e0d125$0$11665$88260bb3@free.teranews.com> Not Cocksucker Lloyd wrote: > cease and desist Article: 228551 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: FS: HP/AGILENT 436A POWERMETER - RF/Microwave, LIKE-NEW, CALIBRATED, References: Message-ID: Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 14:15:15 GMT Marco Licetti wrote: > Price $199/$229, shipping from Amplitech, Inc., New York, USA Your email address contains "DEATH2SPAMMERS" and then you spam this newsgroup thus violating the newsgroup guidelines? There is a group chartered for postings like yours. It is rec.radio.swap -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 228552 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Allodoxaphobia Subject: Re: Solder to Aluminum? Date: 21 Aug 2006 16:19:52 GMT Message-ID: References: On Sun, 20 Aug 2006 20:15:48 -0400, Tam/WB2TT wrote: > "Ed Light" wrote: >> >> My FM antenna had the wire attachment posts ripped out by the wind. >> I'm wondering if I can solder to the aluminum? Then I'd epoxy over >> it. I'd just try it, but I'm afraid it might pop in my face or >> something. > Why not just replace the posts with 4-40 or 6-32 stainless steel bolts > and nuts. Drill new holes in the aluminum if needed. Or, use a pop-rivet tool to attach whatever fastner(s) suit you. Or, use small, SS, worm-screw pipe clamps to attach the wire(s) directly. HTH Jonesy -- Marvin L Jones | jonz | W3DHJ | linux 38.24N 104.55W | @ config.com | Jonesy | OS/2 *** Killfiling google posts: Article: 228553 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Green Egghead Subject: Re: Vertical radiation from horizontal dipole? Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 16:21:29 -0000 Message-ID: <12ejnc9stjcot66@corp.supernews.com> References: <1155949003.609701.39890@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <12ed290mv4kekea@corp.supernews.com> <12egsogtbki2m13@corp.supernews.com> <12ehjnus1o10d89@corp.supernews.com> Roy Lewallen wrote: > > Green Egghead wrote: > > . . . > > > Are there multipath solutions using circular polarization > > between double side band supressed carrier components? > > Sorry, I don't understand the question. What do you mean by solutions > between components? Solutions to what? Or is the question about > polarization between components? If so, what does that mean? > > The original question and my answer involved only linearly polarized > fields, not circular or elliptical. > > Roy Lewallen, W7EL By "solution" I mean to the problem of recovering as much of the transmitted signal strength as possible. More specifically under typical receiving conditions where polarization of that transmitted signal is affected by reflections, atmospheric conditions or some other cause (what would be other causes?). I am still confused by the relationship between the absolute and relative terms, between the spatially and temporally changing components, and between the analytical versus physical descriptions of polarization. Your very helpful follow-up to NN7K both refines and complicates my understanding. You wrote there about phasing linearly polarized orthogonal transmission antennas: > This essential difference causes the orientation of the linearly polarized > field to stay fixed but the orientation of the circularly polarized field > to rotate. Put two crossed dipoles close to each other and feed them > in phase or 180 degrees out of phase, and you'll get a 45 degree linearly polarized > field broadside to the antenna. Feed them in quadrature (90 degree > relative phasing) and you'll get a circularly polarized field broadside > to the antenna. Please correct me where I am wrong here. >From what you wrote: One antenna is transmitting a "horizontally" polarized (electric) field with a time varying electric amplitude A(t): B_h = A(t)*cos(0) = A(t) B_v = A(t)*sin(0) = 0 where "horizontal" is represented by an angle of zero degrees in the transmitter's coordinates, and B_h and B_v are it's respective horizontal and vertical e-field strengths. Similarly the other transmitting antenna is vertically polarized: C_h = A(t)*cos(90) = 0 C_v = A(t)*sin(90) = A(t) again where "vertical" is represented by an angle of 90 degrees in the transmitter's coordinates. Superposing these two fields yields a 45 degree linear field polarization (45 degrees relative to the transmitter's coordinates) As far as the transmitter is concerned this polarization will be the same for every point in free space. This is ignoring the observer's relative perspective on the transmitter. To get a circularly polarized field (again, relative to the transmitter's coordinates irrespective of any receiver) feeding the two linearly polarized antennas in quadrature would be equivalent to: B_h = A(t)*cos(0) = A(t) B_v = A(t)*sin(0) = 0 and C_h = A(t+90)*cos(90) = 0 C_v = A(t+90)*sin(90) = A(t+90) Where A(t+90) represents the signal A(t) shifted 90 degrees relative to the carrier frequency. Signal A(t) is not equal to A(t+90) at the every point in free space and so they will interfere. This would create a spatially and temporally changing carrier amplitude? Circular polarization is not due to the superposition of two orthogonal linearly polarized fields at a receiving dipole where one of the field's linear polarization is rotated 90 degrees with respect to the other. As you pointed out, that's just a 45 degree linear polarization and it does not change from one point in free space to the next. So I don't understand how two same frequency carriers where one is 90 out of phase with the other creates a circularly polarized wave since their resultant is not in the polarization plane but along the direction of the field's propagation. Wouldn't the phase between the electric and magnetic fields have to be different (other than 90 degrees) to create a circularly polarized wave? If so can circular polarization be described as changing more or less than once per cycle? Any single linearly polarized field can be parametrized into two circularly polarized fields (represented as the superposition of two circularly polarized fields). Therefore, any receiver with a horizontal dipole, can be described as receiving two circularly polarized waves. But this would be an analytical description of the receiver, rather than a physical description of the field that was actually sent. What amount of radio signal attenuation is typically attributed to polarization mismatches? Thanks for your help, I realize that polarization can be complicated to describe in full detail. I do not know much about how it is delt with in terms of radio reception. KC2PRE Article: 228554 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Allodoxaphobia Subject: Re: Two Meter FM Antenna Question Date: 21 Aug 2006 16:24:31 GMT Message-ID: References: <1156112798.027258.152330@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> On 20 Aug 2006 23:54:28 GMT, Ed wrote: > "N3" wrote: > >> Which one of the the two is more efficient as a radiator & why? >> >> 1/2 wave vertical fed in the center with coax or one vertical 1/4 wave >> with four 1/4 wave radials also fed in the center with coax? > The vertical dipole has more horizontal gain than the groundplane. > I believe its about 1dB improvement. Actually, *neither* one has any "gain". :-) Jonesy -- Marvin L Jones | jonz | W3DHJ | linux 38.24N 104.55W | @ config.com | Jonesy | OS/2 *** Killfiling google posts: Article: 228555 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Subject: Re: Two Meter FM Antenna Question From: Ed References: <1156112798.027258.152330@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> Message-ID: Date: 21 Aug 2006 17:50:21 GMT >> The vertical dipole has more horizontal gain than the groundplane. >> I believe its about 1dB improvement. > Actually, *neither* one has any "gain". :-) > Its all a matter of reference. I was thinking in terms of dBi.... a vertical has 3dBi gain, a ground plane, 2 dBi. Ed K7AAT Article: 228556 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Richard Clark Subject: Re: Two Meter FM Antenna Question Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 10:58:46 -0700 Message-ID: <8usje21pgkpi0sc1dc67jpiio2r54vte0h@4ax.com> References: <1156112798.027258.152330@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> On 21 Aug 2006 17:50:21 GMT, Ed wrote: > Its all a matter of reference. I was thinking in terms of dBi.... a >vertical has 3dBi gain, a ground plane, 2 dBi. Hi Ed, The missing "reference" is that the vertical is planted into earth (because both antennas are vertical, this missing "reference" should be very explicitly stated). However, in the context of 2M FM, an antenna planted into the ground, unless that ground happens to be the peak of a mountain, is rather a very poor option for 1dB "gain." 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC Article: 228557 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Subject: Re: Two Meter FM Antenna Question From: Ed References: <1156112798.027258.152330@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> <8usje21pgkpi0sc1dc67jpiio2r54vte0h@4ax.com> Message-ID: Date: 21 Aug 2006 18:35:41 GMT > > The missing "reference" is that the vertical is planted into earth > (because both antennas are vertical, this missing "reference" should > be very explicitly stated). However, in the context of 2M FM, an > antenna planted into the ground, unless that ground happens to be the > peak of a mountain, is rather a very poor option for 1dB "gain." > I've lost you here, on the "planted into earth" part. The original poster was asking about 2M vertical vs. groundplane antenna. I would assume for 2M that either antenna would be up in the air..... ??? Ed K7AAT Article: 228558 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Pete" Subject: Re: Sommer versus SteppIR Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 20:51:25 +0200 Message-ID: References: <8e917$44e765ad$453d9423$8718@FUSE.NET> <1156131770.320326.41130@74g2000cwt.googlegroups.com> <44E92CE5.10502@fuse.net> My next antenna is a 3 element SteppIR with the 6m option and 40/30m dipole option. I currently have a Hy-Gain Explorer 14 with 40m kit. I vote SteppIR. -- Pete . . ZS5ACT ------ Reply Separator ------ "jawod" wrote in message news:44E92CE5.10502@fuse.net... > AC7PN wrote: >> As a general rule for a yagi antenna (assuming a fixed number of >> elements) the longer the boom length the greater the gain. Forced by >> economic matters yagis are more often squeezed into a smaller boom size >> than is optimum for best performance. Hence I don't think it is a any >> problem for the designers of the Step IR to optimize the performance of >> a ten meter antenna using the element spacing and boom length of a 20 >> meter antenna. >> > Any votes SteppIR versus Sommer? Article: 228559 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: markie_morgan_rapesboys@yahoo.com Subject: STFU, Morgan Date: 21 Aug 2006 12:00:49 -0700 Message-ID: <1156186849.689873.44950@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> References: <44e0d125$0$11665$88260bb3@free.teranews.com> an old friendless kiddie diddler wrote: > ce Dance, my little monkey boy, dance! Article: 228560 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Richard Clark Subject: Re: Two Meter FM Antenna Question Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 12:13:10 -0700 Message-ID: References: <1156112798.027258.152330@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> <8usje21pgkpi0sc1dc67jpiio2r54vte0h@4ax.com> On 21 Aug 2006 18:35:41 GMT, Ed wrote: > I've lost you here, on the "planted into earth" part. The original >poster was asking about 2M vertical vs. groundplane antenna. I would >assume for 2M that either antenna would be up in the air..... ??? Hi Ed, In that case, the gains are identical. A vertical "planted into the earth" exhibits a higher gain (given many other considerations) than an elevated vertical - be that elevated vertical be a dipole or a ground plane design (which is simply another dipole, albeit rather more elaborate). 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC Article: 228561 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "LenAnderson@ieee.org" Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Date: 21 Aug 2006 12:25:57 -0700 Message-ID: <1156188357.153274.166100@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> References: <1155434298.409922.126140@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> From: jawod on Sun, Aug 20 2006 8:45 pm >> [a fine example of today's Extra class amateur licensee...] > >> LenAnder...@ieee.org > >You want to slam all Extras because of one lid? Tsk, tsk, tsk, anony-mousie "Jawod," that LID is doing the "slamming," not I. :-) Why are YOU so upset, "Jawod?" You don't exist. You are a mere figment of your own imagination. The FCC doesn't license figments... >Perhaps that same psych >grad student has some prime real estate closer to (your) home? Which home? The one in California or the one in Washington (state)? :-) As far as the southern home is concerned, its address has been printed with every article I had published in HAM RADIO magazine. It's still the same address. No problem on "knowing psych" people. Graduates...of USC, (University of California) of UI (University of Illinois), of University of Wisconsin at Madison. "Students?" Not greatly acquainted with any, only their instructors. My wife has two Masters Degrees, one of which required a thorough education in mental health...and she was licensed in two states for private practice. "Jawod," what you just attempted to do was INTIMIDATE through suggestion. Old, old BLUFF. Didn't work, of course, but you just had to try the bully game, didn't you? :-) That bluff-intimidation ploy has been used for years and years on BBSs and Internet...almost always by those too cowardly to reveal their true identity. [few of us would be "scared" if we found out how you REALLY are...] Try not to be such a blatant bullshitter in the future, OK? Beep, beep and bye-eeee... LenAnderson@ieee.org Article: 228562 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "LenAnderson@ieee.org" Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Date: 21 Aug 2006 12:29:22 -0700 Message-ID: <1156188562.839806.186090@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> References: <1153584132.692529.177920@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> From: hot-ham-and-che...@hotmail.com on Sun, Aug 20 2006 2:57 pm >LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote: >> From: hot-ham-and-che...@hotmail.com on Thurs, Aug 10 2006 8:48 pm >> >Al Klein wrote: >> >> On 9 Aug 2006 19:14:54 -0700, hot-ham-and-che...@hotmail.com wrote: >> >> That's my point - there's no test any longer. For anything more than >> >> the ability to memorize answers. > >> >Lots of memorization was required in your day. It's only a bad thing >> >in 1992 to present. I think I get your drift... > >> Selective amnesia. "No one had to memorize anything" prior 1992. >> Not in grade school, not in college, not in industry, not in >> real life. Strange perception... > >Selective amnesia... > >With the advent of the No-Code Technician license, memorization became >a bad, bad thing. Tsk. Brian, there's another individual for study by that psych student. >> >Ummm? There's no Morse Code test anymore? > >> The International Morse Code test for United States amateur >> radio license classes General and Extra have NEVER GONE AWAY. > >> That is especially true in the perception of the ARRL which >> still manages to insert the "necessities" for morsemanship >> in nearly everything it publishes. It's been six decades >> since Hiram Percy became ultimate DX but they still keep on >> with their demand that all [US] amateurs be proficient in >> that old mode. > >Most issues of QST have a minimum of at least one walk down memory >lane, usually with a key or keyer in one hand. ARRL views itself as "representative" of the ARS. Unfortunately, the 'ARS' stands for Amateur Radiotelegraphy Society. >> >> What current exam? Memorizing answers and writing them down isn't a >> >> test. > >> >So what is it that you fear? > >> Klein fears CHANGE and, perhaps, feelings of obsolescence. > >I think everyone has some of that to one degree or another. It's >unhealthy to allow that fear to paralyze you. Yes and no. When it comes to Status-Rank-Privilege the fear of LOSS of those seems to take on a life of its own. They are SOMEBODIES at present, complete with federally-authorized permission and certificates (suitable for framing) to "prove" that. Take away the status, the rank, and perhaps privileges and they are (in their own perception) "lesser beings." That seems to work with the normal prime survival rule in humans. >> Someone who has been a regular worker in electronics (radio is a >> subset of electronics) ought to damn well know and recognize >> that the state of the art in electronics has been CONSTANTLY >> changing. It's sometimes a chore to keep up, whether it be >> 1950 or 2000 or any time in-between. > >There will be new challenges before us tomorrow, but we won't know >about them. We will still be arguing if a morse code exam is >necessary. True. "Today is the tomorrow you worried about yesterday." :-) >> >Mmmm. I see. You are a careerist in the electronics industry and it >> >pisses you off that hobbyists have equal "status" as you in amatuer >> >radio. I've run across a lot of that in the past 20 years... > >> I've run across a lot of that my entire life. :-) > >> I think Klein wants recognition as a "professional amateur" or >> "amateur professional." I'm not sure which... > >He's a professional whiner. :-) >> >> What if you addressed what I said when you answer me? Your dishonest >> >> tactics are transparent. > >> >You're the one that forgot the circuit, not me. Get pissed at your own >> >self. > >> When in doubt of an effective reply, these Fundamentalist Morseodists >> must resort to some form of denigration. Sigh, they never learn... > >My dishonest, transparent tactics... > >Odd, saying what you mean and meaning what you say have become >dishonest. Klein is just a teeny bit more civil than Major Dud. Robeson just shouts "LIAR! LIAR!" :-) >> >> Quit putting words in my mouth. I wasn't complaining to anyone, and >> >> we weren't discussing remembering 50 year old tests. > >> >Correct. "WE" weren't discussing it. YOU were. YOU were discussing >> >how you can't draw what you can't remember. > >> This is an indicator that Klein isn't used to computer-modem >> communications. He isn't looking beyond his own screen and >> understanding that others are separated from it in time and space. >> "He" was obviously talking about "old days" of "His." He is not >> considering that others do not share his viewpoints. > >I regret to inform Mr Klein that I do not agree with him. I also don't agree with him. Maybe he's gotten the message? >> Considering the Type of Oscillator and "names," he has put >> Names as somehow "essential" to the circuit. NO SUCH THING. >> An oscillator is simply an amplifier of just-barely-past-unity >> gain with positive feedback. The Names were tacked on by >> academics long, long ago as IDENTIFICATION of the general form >> of amplification-with-positive-feedback. > >I'm surprised that Klein allows any feedback in his oscillator >circuits. Positive feedback (pro-code type) allowed. Negative feedback is "dishonest." :-) >> >> Maybe we should have one - show the ability to put a clean PSK signal >> >> on the air. Show the ability to interpret a waterfall display. Show >> >> the ability to tell the difference between various digital modes. The >> >> bands would be pretty QRM-free. > >> >YES!!! > >> [ no... ] > >Huh? Lets let the FCC tell us that it is impractical to have everyone >take mode exams. Or lets let the council of VECs tul us the same >thing. Klein, armed only with an air of self-importance and inflated claims of experience, is shooting from the lip. IF and only IF such a "practical test" were imposed, the time of testing EACH license applicant would increase dramatically. VEs would have to spend at least a day's worth of time on each applicant. I think VEs would object to such enforced labor in a Volunteer task. As with other proponents of a "practical test," Klein hasn't explained WHO will maintain the equipment necessary for such "practical tests" nor make up the much-more-complicated test tasks and grading. Who will pay for the equipment that would cover "everything" as to modes and operations? The FCC? The VECs? Who will pay the VEs for their (essentially) "jobs"? Klein assigns an importance and ability of AMATEUR activities in radio far higher than professional ones. This is wrong, but it serves his and other pro-coders self-image of being "better" because they passed tests lobbied-for by those of the same mindset. >If the league pushes the morse testing issue too hard, it will become >obvious to the 25% that are members. I don't think so. The Amateur Radiotelegraphy Society is very firmly SET in their ideas of keeping the "heritage" and "tradition" of being a living museum of archaic radio. Those firm believers and worshippers at the Church of St. Hiram are disciples and they haven't had their last supper yet. >> >I think it is you who don't know where you're going with this >> >discussion. It's gone beyond your having grief over your favorite mode >> >to actually having to think about the future of the service. >> >Conggrats. Another couple of years of RRAP tutoring and you just might >> >become a rational being. > >> I disagree, Brian. Klein is a MORSEMAN. They don't change. >> They are rooted in old days long gone, brainwashed early into >> thinking that morsemanship is "essential" to "best" radio >> communication. It isn't...easily proved by ALL the OTHER >> radio services giving up on morse code as a mode (if they >> had it once) or never requiring it since a radio service began. > >Actuarial tables abound to deal with that kind of thinking. That's a draconian sort of realism...but, unfortunately true. Believers can be extremely stubborn. "The only way you'll stop morse code is to pry my code key from my cold, dead fingers" isn't an idle threat. Morsemen as SOMEBODIES and they will hold that banner high even as they crumble. >Yep. Testing must become more "legitimate" for hobbyists than for >professionals. Self-inflation of importance, meaningless in reality. >> >The exam can be anything your VEC wants it to be. We learned this when >> >the ARRL went from administering a Morse Code Exam at 5WPM to >> >administering a Farnsworth Exam at 13-15WPM. > >> True enough, Brian, but expect ten kinds of flak from the >> other morsepersons in here on that... :-) > >Quack, Quack! Water off a duck's back. :-) >> The VEC can LEGALLY generate a Question Pool with ONE HUNDRED >> times the minimum required number of questions. With electronic >> transmittal over the Internet the Question Pool can be updated >> within 24 hours to ALL VE groups. > >But everytime the NCVEC solicits for questions and participants for the >QP revisions, guys like Klein are silent; absent. That shows they are only whining, not thinking. In order to preserve their self-image of importance they have to continue whining on how they are so self-important. If they REALLY CARED about their sacred amateurism they would get busy and work at preserving things. Perhaps mumifying instead of preservation... >> What all that concentration on the "written tests" is about is >> just a DIVERSION to keep from replying on the singular morse >> code test continuation. The morsemen just haven't been able >> to come up with sufficently-valid reasons to keep the morse >> test (other than the emotional ones) so they smoke-screen by >> bringing up the writtens. Old tactic of theirs. > >Old and tired. It is, but they are self-important because of a singular skill test that makes them "better" than others..."better" in ways not even remotely connected to that singular skill test. >> Seems to me that COLLEGE-level course tests that I took had a >> LOT of memorization. Maybe we should all slam the academic >> world for doing the same "memorization?" Hey, why not, all >> those who failed college level courses can get a Wailing Wall! > >Bill Gates at the wailing wall? Nah...Bill G. QUIT Harvard "to pursue other interests." :-) He could probably BUY Harvard now...and have lots more left in his petty-cash box. :-) Oh, yeah, and Bill Gates is PRO-CODE! Only problem for hams is that the "code" isn't morse but programming code... :-) >> Brian, if you check out the "official" history of the ARRL >> you will find out that they BEGAN in trying to circumvent >> the commercial telegram system with a relaying of messages >> past the commercial boundaries and FEES. If that were >> reported today, the journalists would call it "hacking." > >Oh, oh. It is TRUE according to the ARRL's own history. But, they've written it (cleverly) so that it LOOKS like some kind of noble thing that "wasn't cheating anyone." :-) >> Some of these Olde Fahrts seem to think their amateurism is on >> some kind of "higher plane" than ordinary, plebian, work. >> They be BETTER than the pros and keep reinforcing each other >> with that pipe-dream. After all, the ARRL keeps reminding >> them of their greatness, their "service to their country" >> (by having their hobby). To hear them talk the nation would >> immediately fall apart without these federally-licensed >> hobbyists! > >Don't know if you've heard yet, but the ARRL and robesin announced that >MARS and TSA have an agreement for armageddon communications. Heh heh, I wouldn't doubt it... :-) [via "giant meteor bounce?" ... off the earth, that is? :-) ] I thought Robesin had put on his (invisible) USMC uniform and was busy pounding brass with the USCG offshore from Beirut to evacuate US civilians? :-) LenAnderson@ieee.org Article: 228563 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Green Egghead Subject: Re: Vertical radiation from horizontal dipole? Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 19:48:02 -0000 Message-ID: <12ek3fi5u42qk8f@corp.supernews.com> References: <1155949003.609701.39890@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <12ed290mv4kekea@corp.supernews.com> <12egsogtbki2m13@corp.supernews.com> <5%4Gg.11362$9T3.4779@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net> Jim - NN7K wrote: > > Think what he may mean is: if you use a Circular > polarization , it will receive both horizontal, > and vertical polarization signals, equally well > tho at a decrease of 3 dB in signal , vs. horizontal > to horizontal, or vertical to vertical > polarization. A good way to observe this > optically, for LINEAR polarizations, would > be to find an old pair of sunglasses, useing > polarized lenses. break them in two, and then look > throuh BOTH lens's . As you rotate one, keeping > the other stationary, note the loss of light thru > them. At 90 degrees, it should be almost black! > but at 45, degrees, the degree of darkness (this > is for the stationary lens) will be about the same > if the rotated lense is moved either + or - 45 > degrees (the equivalent of circular polarization > in an optic field. Don't know if this explaination > helps, but migh give it a try-- Jim NN7K I was thinking about something I read a while back in Paul Nahin's book "Science of Radio" about synchronized transmitters and receivers, and about something in Richard Feynman's QED. Roy Lewallen said several things that for a moment made me wonder whether quantum entanglement could be demonstrated in radio waves as it can be for light. I'll have to re-read Nahin's book. Karo brand corn syrup has an interesting property. It will rotate the linear polarization of light passing through it by different amounts depending on the frequency. This can easily be seen by placing a small jar of Karo syrup between to linear polarizers and rotating them. Different angles between the linear polarizers will result in a different color being seen in the Karo jar. Note the color seen also depends on the thickness of the jar, so if you use a round jar you will see several different colors but they will still change when you rotate the polarizers. I was wondering if a radio receiver could be frequency tuned based on polarization in such a manner. > Green Egghead wrote: > > Roy Lewallen wrote: > >> I don't have any link handy, but it's easy to explain. > >> > >> Ground isn't necessary. Consider a horizontal dipole in free space. > >> Position yourself directly in line with the antenna, some distance away, > >> so all you see of the antenna is a dot. Now, move directly upward or > >> downward. The antenna now looks like a vertical line(*). The radiation > >> from the antenna at the point where you are is purely vertically > >> polarized, for the same reason it's purely horizontally polarized when > >> you're directly broadside to the antenna. > >> > >> The only directions in which the dipole will radiate a purely > >> horizontally polarized signal are in the horizontal plane of the > >> antenna, or exactly at right angles (broadside) to the antenna. In the > >> vertical plane containing the antenna, it's purely vertically polarized. > >> In all other directions, it's a combination of the two. (In other words, > >> the polarization angle of the total field is neither vertical nor > >> horizontal.) > >> > >> Here's an illustration you can do with the demo version of EZNEC. Open > >> the Dipole1.ez example file, which is a dipole in free space. In the > >> main window, click the Desc Options line. In the Desc Options dialog > >> box, select the Plot and Fields tabs if not already active, and select > >> "Vert, Horiz" (not "Vert, Horiz, Total") in the Fields To Plot frame. > >> Then click Ok to close the box. (Note: The "Vert, Horiz" option, without > >> the "Total", isn't available in EZNEC v. 3.0, including EZNEC-ARRL.) > >> > >> The example file is set up to plot the pattern in the horizontal plane > >> of the antenna. If you click FF Plot, you'll see only a horizontally > >> polarized field. That's because the field is purely horizontally > >> polarized in the horizontal plane of the antenna, as I mentioned > >> earlier. The ends of the antenna are up and down on the plot, and > >> broadside is to the left and right. > >> > >> Now in the main window, change the elevation angle to 45 degrees. Do > >> this by clicking on the Elevation Angle line, entering 45 in the dialog > >> box, then clicking Ok. This moves the observer above the horizontal > >> plane of the antenna. The observation point (assumed very far from the > >> antenna) follows a circle which is equidistant from the antenna and the > >> horizontal plane containing the antenna. That is, it maintains a > >> constant distance and an angle of 45 degrees above horizontal from the > >> antenna. Click FF Plot to see the result. Now you can see that when > >> you're directly broadside to the antenna (left and right on the plot), > >> the field is purely horizontally polarized -- the vertical polarization > >> component is zero. But directly in line with the ends of the antenna, > >> the polarization is purely vertical. The top and bottom directions of > >> the plot correspond to the position you were in when you saw the antenna > >> as a vertical line. > >> > >> Vertically and horizontally polarized components reflect differently > >> from the ground. So in directions where both are present, one can be > >> reinforced while the other is attenuated, resulting in a different mix > >> after reflection. (But reflection won't change a horizontally polarized > >> component to vertically polarized or vice-versa.) For example, a > >> vertically polarized field reinforces when reflecting from a perfect > >> ground at a low angle, while a horizontally polarized signal cancels. > >> This ends up enhancing the vertically polarized component at low angles > >> when both are present. (Remember, though, this is perfect ground -- real > >> ground, except salt water, behaves quite differently.) > >> > >> Finally, let me emphasize that there's really only one E field from the > >> antenna, with one polarization angle. Separating it into vertically and > >> horizontally polarized components is simply a convenience used for > >> calculations and as an aid in understanding, much like separating two > >> currents into common and differential (even and odd) mode components. > >> The principle of superposition allows us to conceptually split the field > >> into components, analyze each separately, then recombine the results, > >> getting the same answer we'd get if we had done the analysis on the > >> total field. > > > > Are there multipath solutions using circular polarization > > between double side band supressed carrier components? > > > >> (*) More precisely, the projection of the antenna on a vertical plane > >> passing through your position is a vertical line. Visually, you can't > >> tell if the antenna is a short vertical wire or a longer horizontal one > >> you're seeing end-on. The nature of the radiation in your direction is > >> also the same for the two situations. > >> > >> Roy Lewallen, W7EL > >> > >> lu6etj wrote: > >>> Dear friends: > >>> > >>> Could you give me me a link to some reference material (in the net) > >>> about vertical polarized radiation of horizontal dipoles near ground? > >>> (not feed line radiation).. > >>> Thank yoy very much in advance. > >>> > >>> Miguel Ghezzi (LU 6ETJ) > >>> > > > > Article: 228564 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Ed Light" References: Subject: Re: Solder to Aluminum? Message-ID: <9foGg.17786$RD.3564@fed1read08> Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 12:57:57 -0700 Thanks, folks. -- Ed Light Smiley :-/ MS Smiley :-\ Send spam to the FTC at spam@uce.gov Thanks, robots. Bring the Troops Home: http://bringthemhomenow.org Article: 228565 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Message-ID: <44EA17D3.10400@fuse.net> Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 16:30:11 -0400 From: jawod Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person References: <1155434298.409922.126140@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> <1155606175.469557.27070@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1qf3e2tu8t5lrd82arlr6eitfb6l3poo1b@4ax.com> <1155709292.489367.259930@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1155853578.502660.314550@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1155931359.841721.300500@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1155948964.809708.129860@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com> <1156015230.748436.86760@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <1156093148.686146.230750@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1156095256.617771.181000@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> <1156107355.126445.201060@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> <1156130360.024398.156900@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <44E92C73.8030509@fuse.net> <1156188357.153274.166100@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> LenAnderson@ieee.org wrote: > From: jawod on Sun, Aug 20 2006 8:45 pm > > > >>> [a fine example of today's Extra class amateur licensee...] >> >>> LenAnder...@ieee.org >> >>You want to slam all Extras because of one lid? > > > Tsk, tsk, tsk, anony-mousie "Jawod," that LID is doing the > "slamming," not I. :-) > > Why are YOU so upset, "Jawod?" You don't exist. You are > a mere figment of your own imagination. The FCC doesn't > license figments... > > >>Perhaps that same psych >>grad student has some prime real estate closer to (your) home? > > > Which home? The one in California or the one in Washington > (state)? :-) > > As far as the southern home is concerned, its address has > been printed with every article I had published in HAM > RADIO magazine. It's still the same address. > > No problem on "knowing psych" people. Graduates...of USC, > (University of California) of UI (University of Illinois), > of University of Wisconsin at Madison. "Students?" Not > greatly acquainted with any, only their instructors. My > wife has two Masters Degrees, one of which required a > thorough education in mental health...and she was licensed > in two states for private practice. > > "Jawod," what you just attempted to do was INTIMIDATE > through suggestion. Old, old BLUFF. Didn't work, of > course, but you just had to try the bully game, didn't > you? :-) > > That bluff-intimidation ploy has been used for years and > years on BBSs and Internet...almost always by those too > cowardly to reveal their true identity. [few of us would > be "scared" if we found out how you REALLY are...] Try > not to be such a blatant bullshitter in the future, OK? > > Beep, beep and bye-eeee... > > LenAnderson@ieee.org > So many people need to pump themselves up here. Truly amazing. I have no interest in your wife's degrees, your home(s), your friends or anything else. Nor was any "bluff" intended. My post was in response to the quote above. If that wasn't you, my apologies. It was a simple statement. Whew. Sometimes accessing this group is like stepping in dogshit. Article: 228566 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 16:37:09 -0400 From: jawod Subject: Sommer design Message-ID: <940d3$44ea19ef$453d9423$32391@FUSE.NET> The Sommer design is stated as having "phasing line similar to log periodic array". Am I correct in thinking that it is not a true LPA because of different element sizing and spacing than an LPA? If so, what is the advantage of the "LPA-like" phasing line in this case? John AB8O Article: 228567 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "K4YZ" Subject: If Lennie Anderson Went One Day Without Disparging The Amateur Radio Service, Would Andy Rooney's Eyebrows Fall Out? Subtitled: The Feeble Five Backslap Each Other Date: 21 Aug 2006 13:42:13 -0700 Message-ID: <1156192933.731602.229720@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> References: <1153584132.692529.177920@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> LenCan'tPassThe SameTestGradeSchoolersDoAnderson@ieee.org wrote: > From: snot-scam-and-sleaze@hotmail.com on Sun, Aug 20 2006 2:57 pm > >Most issues of QST have a minimum of at least one walk down memory > >lane, usually with a key or keyer in one hand. > > ARRL views itself as "representative" of the ARS. Unfortunately, > the 'ARS' stands for Amateur Radiotelegraphy Society. At the Anderscum residence, perhaps. For the nearly 700,000 of us with licenses, it's the Amateur Radio Service. Note: Leonard H. Anderson is not an FCC licensee in that service. > >I think everyone has some of that to one degree or another. It's > >unhealthy to allow that fear to paralyze you. > > Yes and no. When it comes to Status-Rank-Privilege the fear > of LOSS of those seems to take on a life of its own. You would know, Lennie... It's YOU that perceives that loss...For by taking the same test mere mortals do, you "surrender" your "I Was An Electronics Engineer" brags. Snip of usual Anti-Amateur Radio rhetoric. > >Odd, saying what you mean and meaning what you say have become > >dishonest. > > Klein is just a teeny bit more civil than Major Dud. Robeson > just shouts "LIAR! LIAR!" Who's "Major Dud"..?!?! And I don't have to shout it, Lennie... You make it quite apparent. > >I regret to inform Mr Klein that I do not agree with him. > > I also don't agree with him. Maybe he's gotten the message? Maybe he doesn't see the need to try and "debate" those who only want to throw sand...?!?! > >If the league pushes the morse testing issue too hard, it will become > >obvious to the 25% that are members. > > I don't think so. The Amateur Radiotelegraphy Society is very > firmly SET in their ideas of keeping the "heritage" and > "tradition" of being a living museum of archaic radio. Those > firm believers and worshippers at the Church of St. Hiram are > disciples and they haven't had their last supper yet. Thankfully OUR "last supper" will come long, LONG after yours, Lennie... > >Actuarial tables abound to deal with that kind of thinking. > > That's a draconian sort of realism...but, unfortunately true. And as I was saying...Let's hope YOUR tables are into small numbers. MORE SNIPPAGE > >Don't know if you've heard yet, but the ARRL and robesin announced that > >MARS and TSA have an agreement for armageddon communications. > > Heh heh, I wouldn't doubt it... "Armageddon"...?!?! No one announced "armageddon" in any release that I am aware of. Why did you? Yet more evidence of why it's better to have Lennie "Can't Pass An Exam" Anderson on the outside looking in. Steve, K4YZ Article: 228568 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Roy Lewallen Subject: Re: Vertical radiation from horizontal dipole? Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 13:45:03 -0700 Message-ID: <12ek6qhsrtdr5b@corp.supernews.com> References: <1155949003.609701.39890@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <12ed290mv4kekea@corp.supernews.com> <12egsogtbki2m13@corp.supernews.com> <12ehjnus1o10d89@corp.supernews.com> <12ejnc9stjcot66@corp.supernews.com> Green Egghead wrote: > Roy Lewallen wrote: >> Green Egghead wrote: >>> . . . >>> Are there multipath solutions using circular polarization >>> between double side band supressed carrier components? >> Sorry, I don't understand the question. What do you mean by solutions >> between components? Solutions to what? Or is the question about >> polarization between components? If so, what does that mean? >> >> The original question and my answer involved only linearly polarized >> fields, not circular or elliptical. >> >> Roy Lewallen, W7EL > > By "solution" I mean to the problem of recovering as much > of the transmitted signal strength as possible. > More specifically under typical receiving conditions > where polarization of that transmitted signal > is affected by reflections, atmospheric conditions or > some other cause (what would be other causes?). At HF considerable fading, including selective frequency fading, is caused by polarization shift. But it's not easy to create a receiving antenna that's circularly polarized when a ground reflection is involved (because ground reflection characteristics are functions of both reflection angle and polarization), and even more difficult to do it in more than one direction. If you can build the antenna, it should reduce polarization shift fading. You still have the problem of fading due to multipath interference. >. . . > > Please correct me where I am wrong here. > From what you wrote: > > One antenna is transmitting a "horizontally" polarized > (electric) field with a time varying electric amplitude A(t): > > B_h = A(t)*cos(0) = A(t) > B_v = A(t)*sin(0) = 0 > > where "horizontal" is represented by an angle of zero degrees > in the transmitter's coordinates, and B_h and B_v are it's > respective horizontal and vertical e-field strengths. > > Similarly the other transmitting antenna is vertically polarized: > > C_h = A(t)*cos(90) = 0 > C_v = A(t)*sin(90) = A(t) > > again where "vertical" is represented by an angle of 90 degrees > in the transmitter's coordinates. Ok so far. > > Superposing these two fields yields a 45 degree linear field > polarization (45 degrees relative to the transmitter's coordinates) > As far as the transmitter is concerned this polarization will > be the same for every point in free space. This is ignoring the > observer's relative perspective on the transmitter. > > > To get a circularly polarized field (again, relative to the > transmitter's coordinates irrespective of any receiver) > feeding the two linearly polarized antennas in quadrature > would be equivalent to: > > B_h = A(t)*cos(0) = A(t) > B_v = A(t)*sin(0) = 0 > and > C_h = A(t+90)*cos(90) = 0 > C_v = A(t+90)*sin(90) = A(t+90) > > Where A(t+90) represents the signal A(t) shifted > 90 degrees relative to the carrier frequency. > > Signal A(t) is not equal to A(t+90) at the every point in > free space and so they will interfere. This would create > a spatially and temporally changing carrier amplitude? Yes, that's correct. > Circular polarization is not due to the superposition of > two orthogonal linearly polarized fields at a receiving dipole > where one of the field's linear polarization is rotated > 90 degrees with respect to the other. As you pointed out, > that's just a 45 degree linear polarization and it does > not change from one point in free space to the next. That's right. > So I don't understand how two same frequency carriers > where one is 90 out of phase with the other creates a > circularly polarized wave since their resultant is not > in the polarization plane but along the direction of > the field's propagation. Here's your error. In free space in the far field, there is no tilt in the E field in the direction of propagation; the field is what we call a plane wave. At any instant, the E field is oriented normal to the direction of travel. If you look at a circularly polarized wave at a fixed location, you'll see it rotate in the plane normal to the direction of propagation. If you freeze the wave in time, you'll see that the field orientation is a rotating vector, again rotating in a plane normal to the direction of propagation. Think of the path of an airplane propeller as the plane flies. > > Wouldn't the phase between the electric and magnetic > fields have to be different (other than 90 degrees) > to create a circularly polarized wave? No. Traditionally, polarization refers only to the orientation of the electric field. Once the phase of the E field is known, both the magnitude and phase of the H field can be found. The ratio between the two is called the impedance of the medium, and is dictated solely by the nature of the medium through which it travels. In free space, the ratio of E to H is a purely real number (about 377 ohms), so E and H are always in phase. You can't alter that except in the field close to an antenna (the near field). > If so can > circular polarization be described as changing more > or less than once per cycle? No. The field rotates exactly one revolution per cycle, never any more or less. > Any single linearly polarized field can be parametrized > into two circularly polarized fields (represented > as the superposition of two circularly polarized fields). > Therefore, any receiver with a horizontal dipole, > can be described as receiving two circularly polarized waves. > But this would be an analytical description of the receiver, > rather than a physical description of the field that was > actually sent. The splitting of a single field into two orthogonal components such as horizontal and vertical linear or left and right circular is a way of describing the field itself. It's useful for such purposes as determining what the response of a particular kind of antenna would be. > What amount of radio signal attenuation is typically > attributed to polarization mismatches? I commonly see fades of 20 - 30 dB on 40 meters which I can reverse by switching between horizontal and vertical antennas -- that is, at the bottom of the fade I can switch to the other antenna and restore the signal. So it's mainly due to polarization shift. On line of sight paths, I believe the attenuation can be quite severe. I don't know what proportion of the frequency selective fading you hear on distant AM signals is due to polarization shift and how much to multipath interference. >. . . There should be some good explanations (and undoubtedly also some bad ones) on the web, and the topic is covered to some extent in most electromagnetics texts. Roy Lewallen, W7EL Article: 228569 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Mark@kb9rqz.com Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 16:46:56 -0400 Message-ID: References: <1155931359.841721.300500@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1155948964.809708.129860@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com> <1156015230.748436.86760@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <1156093148.686146.230750@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1156095256.617771.181000@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> <1156107355.126445.201060@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> <1156130360.024398.156900@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <44E92C73.8030509@fuse.net> <1156188357.153274.166100@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> On 21 Aug 2006 12:25:57 -0700, "LenAnderson@ieee.org" wrote: >From: jawod on Sun, Aug 20 2006 8:45 pm > > >>> [a fine example of today's Extra class amateur licensee...] >> >>> LenAnder...@ieee.org >> >>You want to slam all Extras because of one lid? > > Tsk, tsk, tsk, anony-mousie "Jawod," that LID is doing the > "slamming," not I. :-) > > Why are YOU so upset, "Jawod?" You don't exist. You are > a mere figment of your own imagination. The FCC doesn't > license figments... oh he exists he is just afraid to come out and dmit his name it ight be robeson after all > >>Perhaps that same psych >>grad student has some prime real estate closer to (your) home? > > Which home? The one in California or the one in Washington > (state)? :-) > > As far as the southern home is concerned, its address has > been printed with every article I had published in HAM > RADIO magazine. It's still the same address. > > No problem on "knowing psych" people. Graduates...of USC, > (University of California) of UI (University of Illinois), > of University of Wisconsin at Madison. "Students?" Not > greatly acquainted with any, only their instructors. My > wife has two Masters Degrees, one of which required a > thorough education in mental health...and she was licensed > in two states for private practice. > > "Jawod," what you just attempted to do was INTIMIDATE > through suggestion. Old, old BLUFF. Didn't work, of > course, but you just had to try the bully game, didn't > you? :-) > > That bluff-intimidation ploy has been used for years and > years on BBSs and Internet...almost always by those too > cowardly to reveal their true identity. [few of us would > be "scared" if we found out how you REALLY are...] Try > not to be such a blatant bullshitter in the future, OK? > > Beep, beep and bye-eeee... > > LenAnderson@ieee.org http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/ -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Article: 228570 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Roy Lewallen Subject: Re: Vertical radiation from horizontal dipole? Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 13:49:45 -0700 Message-ID: <12ek73b5fneji02@corp.supernews.com> References: <1155949003.609701.39890@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <12ed290mv4kekea@corp.supernews.com> <12egsogtbki2m13@corp.supernews.com> <5%4Gg.11362$9T3.4779@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net> <12ek3fi5u42qk8f@corp.supernews.com> Green Egghead wrote: > . . . > Karo brand corn syrup has an interesting property. > It will rotate the linear polarization of light passing through it > by different amounts depending on the frequency. > This can easily be seen by placing a small jar of > Karo syrup between to linear polarizers and rotating > them. Different angles between the linear polarizers > will result in a different color being seen in the Karo jar. . . Dextrose (for right) and levulose (for left) -- aka glucose and fructose, the components of sucrose, ordinary table sugar -- are named for the direction in which they rotate the polarization of light. Roy Lewallen, W7EL Article: 228571 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Mark@kb9rqz.com Subject: Re: Poor Markie! Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 16:52:41 -0400 Message-ID: <887ke2turqa8vu0kicfomqf513lbkhj9ld@4ax.com> References: <1155732649.689048.244200@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1155755878.737265.55800@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> <1155819580.435966.161810@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1155868528.387517.185650@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com> <1155904856.192887.112830@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <44E5B917.6050406@fuse.net> <1156167941.257256.314290@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> On 21 Aug 2006 06:45:41 -0700, kb9rqz_child_molester@yahoo.com wrote: cease and desist http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/ -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Article: 228572 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: davis@space.mit.edu (John E. Davis) Subject: Re: Two Meter FM Antenna Question References: <1156112798.027258.152330@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> Message-ID: Date: 21 Aug 2006 20:56:10 GMT On 21 Aug 2006 17:50:21 GMT, Ed > Its all a matter of reference. I was thinking in terms of dBi.... a >vertical has 3dBi gain, a ground plane, 2 dBi. Here is a ground plane with a free-space gain greater than 2.9 dBi and an SWR less than 1.2 at its design frequency (as given by NEC2): CM Groundplane antenna for MURS (151.8 Mhz) CE GW 1 19 0 0 0 0 0 0.444243 0.000813863 GW 2 21 0 0 0 0 0.163546 -0.4506 0.000813863 GW 3 21 0 0 0 0 -0.163546 -0.4506 0.000813863 GW 4 21 0 0 0 -0.163546 0 -0.4506 0.000813863 GW 5 21 0 0 0 0.163546 0 -0.4506 0.000813863 GE 0 FR 0 31 0 0 145 0.33 EX 0 1 1 0 1 RP 0 31 73 1001 0, 0, 3, 5, 10000, 0 EN It uses 14 AWG wire and consists of a 17-1/2 inch vertical, and 4 18-7/8 inch radials symmetrically placed at about 20 degrees with respect to the vertical axis: | | | A A = 17-1/2 in | B = 18-7/8 in | T = 2*19.95 degrees / \ C = 12-7/8 in / T \ B / \ (only 2 radials shown) / \ <-- C --> --John Article: 228573 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "an old friend" Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Date: 21 Aug 2006 14:01:33 -0700 Message-ID: <1156194093.467279.51150@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> References: <1155606175.469557.27070@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> jawod wrote: > LenAnderson@ieee.org wrote: > > From: jawod on Sun, Aug 20 2006 8:45 pm > So many people need to pump themselves up here. Truly amazing. indeed why do you do it? Article: 228574 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "an old friend" Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Date: 21 Aug 2006 14:11:15 -0700 Message-ID: <1156194675.522795.165860@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> References: <1153584132.692529.177920@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> LenAnderson@ieee.org wrote: > From: hot-ham-and-che...@hotmail.com on Sun, Aug 20 2006 2:57 pm > > >> Selective amnesia. "No one had to memorize anything" prior 1992. > >> Not in grade school, not in college, not in industry, not in > >> real life. Strange perception... > > > >Selective amnesia... > > > >With the advent of the No-Code Technician license, memorization became > >a bad, bad thing. > > Tsk. Brian, there's another individual for study by that psych > student. are we even sure of that? he might be robeson after all or dave or a few others under another nick Article: 228575 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 17:41:58 -0400 From: Dave Subject: Re: Sommer design References: <940d3$44ea19ef$453d9423$32391@FUSE.NET> Message-ID: I Googled SommerAntennas so I could get a look at what you are writing about and got a 'Could not be found' message for . In either case a LP design has many solutions for a given frequency range for number of elements, spacing, etc. A true LPDA will operate anywhere within it's minimum and maximum frequency range. That is: a 13.5 to 33 MHz design will operate ANYWHERE within that range and meet published specifications for Gain, VSWR, efficiency, without the need for ANY on tower tuning, etc. [An LP does NOT have the 20, 17, 15, 12 and 10 meter bands!!! It has FULL coverage ANYWHERE within it's published minimum and maximum frequencies.] A LP design is a driven array NOT a parasitic [YAGI} design. It's major advantage is the very broad bandwidth it covers without tuning, traps, or stubs. It provides slightly less 'gain' than a 3 element triband Yagi. A Long John single band YAGI will have 3 to 6 dB additional gain above a LP, but the YAGI is band limited. - - - jawod wrote: > The Sommer design is stated as having "phasing line similar to log > periodic array". Am I correct in thinking that it is not a true LPA > because of different element sizing and spacing than an LPA? > > If so, what is the advantage of the "LPA-like" phasing line in this case? > > John > AB8O Article: 228576 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Subject: Re: Two Meter FM Antenna Question From: Ed References: <1156112798.027258.152330@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> <8usje21pgkpi0sc1dc67jpiio2r54vte0h@4ax.com> Message-ID: Date: 21 Aug 2006 22:07:40 GMT > In that case, the gains are identical. A vertical "planted into the > earth" exhibits a higher gain (given many other considerations) than > an elevated vertical - be that elevated vertical be a dipole or a > ground plane design (which is simply another dipole, albeit rather > more elaborate). > I don't have much experience with earth verticals.... mostly HF I would say, and that's another animal altoghther than the question the original poster raised here on VHF antennas. The vast majority of my experience with groundplanes and verticals is at VHF and above. Every reference and factory specification for standard grounplane and vertical dipole antennas I've seen indicates the standard vertical dipole has a horizontal gain of 3 dBi, and the groundplane 2.1 dBi. I don't know where some others are finding the non-industry standard figures I have seen cited here. Ed K7AAT Article: 228577 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Richard Clark Subject: Re: Sommer design Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 15:10:46 -0700 Message-ID: References: <940d3$44ea19ef$453d9423$32391@FUSE.NET> On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 16:37:09 -0400, jawod wrote: >If so, what is the advantage of the "LPA-like" phasing line in this case? Hi John, Yes, it is an interesting coupling mechanism. It is something of a delta match going from element to element with a phase reversal (to boost the number of degrees that would otherwise force a greater distance into the boom). 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC Article: 228578 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "an old friend" Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Date: 21 Aug 2006 15:16:47 -0700 Message-ID: <1156198607.916738.121580@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> References: <1153584132.692529.177920@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> LenAnderson@ieee.org wrote: > From: hot-ham-and-che...@hotmail.com on Sun, Aug 20 2006 2:57 pm > >If the league pushes the morse testing issue too hard, it will become > >obvious to the 25% that are members. > > I don't think so. The Amateur Radiotelegraphy Society is very > firmly SET in their ideas of keeping the "heritage" and > "tradition" of being a living museum of archaic radio. Those > firm believers and worshippers at the Church of St. Hiram are > disciples and they haven't had their last supper yet. > I have no objection to them trying to prservs thier mode the ARS is big enough even for unproductive thing > >Don't know if you've heard yet, but the ARRL and robesin announced that > >MARS and TSA have an agreement for armageddon communications. > > Heh heh, I wouldn't doubt it... :-) > > [via "giant meteor bounce?" ... off the earth, that is? :-) ] > > I thought Robesin had put on his (invisible) USMC uniform and > was busy pounding brass with the USCG offshore from Beirut to > evacuate US civilians? :-) now that remark I must take you to task for the last thing we want to sugest that robeson might wear is something invisible now that image IS a sexauly distrubing one > > LenAnderson@ieee.org Article: 228579 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Not Lloyd" Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 19:17:02 -0500 Message-ID: <8a4cp.d0b.17.1@news.alt.net> References: <1155606175.469557.27070@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1qf3e2tu8t5lrd82arlr6eitfb6l3poo1b@4ax.com> <1155709292.489367.259930@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1155853578.502660.314550@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1155931359.841721.300500@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1155948964.809708.129860@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com> <1156015230.748436.86760@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <1156093148.686146.230750@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1156095256.617771.181000@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> <1156107355.126445.201060@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> <1156130360.024398.156900@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <44E92C73.8030509@fuse.net> <1156188357.153274.166100@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <44EA17D3.10400@fuse.net> <1156194093.467279.51150@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> "an old friend" wrote in message news:1156194093.467279.51150@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com... jawod wrote: > LenAnderson@ieee.org wrote: > > From: jawod on Sun, Aug 20 2006 8:45 pm > So many people need to pump themselves up here. Truly amazing. indeed why do you do it? > Mostly, it's just Lennie. He "pumps himself up" in hopes that it will bolster his credibility with the group. Article: 228580 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Mark@kb9rqz.com Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 19:17:08 -0400 Message-ID: References: <1156093148.686146.230750@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1156095256.617771.181000@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> <1156107355.126445.201060@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> <1156130360.024398.156900@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <44E92C73.8030509@fuse.net> <1156188357.153274.166100@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <44EA17D3.10400@fuse.net> <1156194093.467279.51150@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <8a4cp.d0b.17.1@news.alt.net> On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 19:17:02 -0500, "Not Lloyd" wrote: > >"an old friend" wrote in message >news:1156194093.467279.51150@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com... > >jawod wrote: >> LenAnderson@ieee.org wrote: >> > From: jawod on Sun, Aug 20 2006 8:45 pm > >> So many people need to pump themselves up here. Truly amazing. >indeed why do you do it? >> >Mostly, it's just Lennie. He "pumps himself up" in hopes that it will >bolster his credibility with the group. how? he just states his biol whe chalneged > http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/ -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Article: 228584 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Richard Clark Subject: Re: Two Meter FM Antenna Question Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 16:36:17 -0700 Message-ID: <8hfke2droqlvu50odf5ltrnununpt7l2sv@4ax.com> References: <1156112798.027258.152330@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> <8usje21pgkpi0sc1dc67jpiio2r54vte0h@4ax.com> On 21 Aug 2006 22:07:40 GMT, Ed wrote: >Every reference and factory specification for >standard grounplane and vertical dipole antennas I've seen indicates the >standard vertical dipole has a horizontal gain of 3 dBi, and the >groundplane 2.1 dBi. Hi Ed, Those are pretty curious references then. Why would they dwell on the HORIZONTAL gains of VERTICAL antennas? There must be something left unsaid in what you are trying to express because cross polarization would drive down sensitivities by 20 to 30 dB. For another matter, those values you quote bear very little resemblence to typical 2M FM operation, unless it is from the Space Shuttle. Height above ground variations in gain easily washes over any differences you might perceive. I can see a variation of 2dB in just raising a groundplane from 40" off the turf to 120". 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC Article: 228585 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Ron Walters Subject: Re: Sommer design References: <940d3$44ea19ef$453d9423$32391@FUSE.NET> Message-ID: <4BrGg.6886$Tg1.4852@tornado.tampabay.rr.com> Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 23:46:08 GMT Dave wrote: > I Googled SommerAntennas so I could get a look at what you are writing > about and got a 'Could not be found' message for > . > > In either case a LP design has many solutions for a given frequency > range for number of elements, spacing, etc. A true LPDA will operate > anywhere within it's minimum and maximum frequency range. That is: a > 13.5 to 33 MHz design will operate ANYWHERE within that range and meet > published specifications for Gain, VSWR, efficiency, without the need > for ANY on tower tuning, etc. [An LP does NOT have the 20, 17, 15, 12 > and 10 meter bands!!! It has FULL coverage ANYWHERE within it's > published minimum and maximum frequencies.] > > A LP design is a driven array NOT a parasitic [YAGI} design. It's major > advantage is the very broad bandwidth it covers without tuning, traps, > or stubs. It provides slightly less 'gain' than a 3 element triband > Yagi. A Long John single band YAGI will have 3 to 6 dB additional gain > above a LP, but the YAGI is band limited. > > - - - > > > > jawod wrote: > >> The Sommer design is stated as having "phasing line similar to log >> periodic array". Am I correct in thinking that it is not a true LPA >> because of different element sizing and spacing than an LPA? >> >> If so, what is the advantage of the "LPA-like" phasing line in this case? >> >> John >> AB8O > > Dave,John Just tried the WEB site and I had to hit the try again button to get the response, I spoke with Alf the Owner last Friday and advised him of the site trouble, he said that the server was giving them fits. The Sommer factory located in Geneva FL was going at fill steam to meet the Govt (Military demands) from around the world. Several Govt have standardized on the Sommer antenna. Its not that Ham Radio has taken a back seat but you go where the money is! Alf invited me to come to the factory, see the antennas up in the air and see what they have to offer. Alf claims that his XP504 LP has the same gain as a 4-element Yagi on the ham bands. He has the review facts >from a French Government study. The only problem I can see with this antenna is the weight (73#'s) compared to a lower weight of 43#'s form SteppIR and from other antennas. I was hoping to get access to the QTH.net archives but they have disappeared. Was looking to read what others had to say. Anyone know how to get archives or where they are? The SteppIR caught my attention a few years back and I was considering one of those antennas as a replacement for my current TA-33 trap style tribander which has performed very well but lacks the WARC bands plus the six meter band if I want. For 30 and 40 meters there is a kit for the Sommer but from what I have read your better off with a dipole for the added costs. Several articles I have read seem to backup what Alf had to say plus reports from on the air comparisons. From what I hear it is built like a tank with quality products. Give the site another try and keep hitting the refresh button and it will finally respond. After my visit which I hope happens this coming Saturday I give you and the rest a report. Ron - W4LDE Article: 228586 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Mark@kb9rqz.com Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 19:47:45 -0400 Message-ID: References: <1156015230.748436.86760@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <1156093148.686146.230750@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1156095256.617771.181000@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> <1156107355.126445.201060@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> <1156130360.024398.156900@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <44E92C73.8030509@fuse.net> <1156188357.153274.166100@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <44EA17D3.10400@fuse.net> On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 23:45:13 GMT, Slow Code wrote: >jawod wrote in news:44EA17D3.10400@fuse.net: > >> So many people need to pump themselves up here. Truly amazing. >> >> I have no interest in your wife's degrees, your home(s), your friends or >> anything else. Nor was any "bluff" intended. >> >> My post was in response to the quote above. If that wasn't you, my >> apologies. It was a simple statement. >> >> Whew. Sometimes accessing this group is like stepping in dogshit. > > > >Usenet radio groups were a lot nicer before ham radio got dumbed down. Now >the ham radio groups have a CB feel to them. > obviously not since ham radio has never been dumbed down >SC http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/ -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Article: 228587 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Mark@kb9rqz.com Subject: Re: Morris Code -plus- Continuous Wave (CW) Radio Transmission -and- Semaphore Signals ? Do They Defining Amateur Radio ? Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 19:49:27 -0400 Message-ID: References: <_AVug.9493$PE1.1406@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net> <1153275616.225575.252170@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com> <44BDA4F3.7000706@fuse.net> <12brelk76dlj901@corp.supernews.com> On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 23:45:30 GMT, Slow Code wrote: >"Jimmie D" wrote in >news:Ld6Gg.30663$bo6.7667@bignews7.bellsouth.net: > >> >>> >>> Yes. That's understandable. Hams these days don't want to act like >>> hams, they like to be appliance operators. So kids don't see that CW >>> is important and fun. All they see is hams gabbing on a microphone >>> like any CB'er can do. >>> >>> SC >> >> Actually a lot of tghe boy scouts know morse code, they still arent >> intersted in ham radio. >> > > > >Some old time ham in the area needs to step in and show the scouts how ham >radio and CW can save lives and help communities in emergencies. how can they do that with nobody but ham using CW it can't save anybody on a reiliable mann > >Nickle Generals & Extra's have a hard time promoting amateur radio. All >they want to do is promote dumbing it down more. it has never been dumbed down indeed the tests (while alwys needing even more improvement) have gotten away from testing on the realy stupid shit like wether an occilator is a Hartley or Colpitts >SC http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/ -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Article: 228588 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Mark@kb9rqz.com Subject: why not deal with the eal issue Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 19:50:46 -0400 Message-ID: <6lhke2tnmq1pnsq258lj5gmo9k7vmoqlha@4ax.com> References: <1H5Gg.10923$xp2.2506@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net> <1156129587.649254.66300@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 23:44:48 GMT, Slow Code wrote: >"EchoBlip" wrote in >news:AvjGg.9708$%j7.4910@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net: > >>> Because Ham radio is dying. >> >> E V E R Y T H I N G D I E S >> >> >> > > > >Why do we want to let in people that don't want to be hams? red herring why are we exclding people able to be ham nd that want to for no reason at all > >SC http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/ -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Article: 228589 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Mark@kb9rqz.com Subject: Re: PING: Slow Code Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 19:55:33 -0400 Message-ID: References: <1156186858.857772.22110@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 23:46:48 GMT, Slow Code wrote: >new_cw_ham@saintly.com wrote in >news:1156186858.857772.22110@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com: > >> Wanted to thank you for your posts about the code. >> >> Because of you I just upgraded (Saturday) from technician to general. I >> breezed the 5 wpm and am up to around 15wpm according to the W1AW >> pratice broadcasts. I never would have bothered to learn CW if it >> wasn't for you. >> >> I know I only "need" 5 wpm but I am not going to upgrade to extra until >> I can cpy 25 wpm SOLID! >> >> This is in honor of my electronic elmer, Slow Code. >> >> Thanks...... > >ROFLMAO! > >.... And you've made me think of possibly joining CAP. > > >Testimonials like yours will bring a smile to every Real hams face. :-) > >Just learn the code to 22 wpm. That would be a nice edge if you still had >to take a 20 wpm CW test. But if you can only get your speed up to 16 or >17 words per minute, upgrade anyway. We need good people like you on the >ham bands and on usenet. LOL why do we ned more people that make snips and don't even have the guts to sign their names? > > >73 > >SC http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/ -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Article: 228590 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Mark@kb9rqz.com Subject: Re: Poor Markie! - Markie, Just ignore them. Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 19:57:03 -0400 Message-ID: <82ike2pei4r1ja1lonke9cun717mcq0mea@4ax.com> References: <1155755878.737265.55800@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> <1155819580.435966.161810@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1155868528.387517.185650@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com> <1155904856.192887.112830@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <44E5B917.6050406@fuse.net> <1156167941.257256.314290@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 23:46:53 GMT, Slow Code wrote: >kb9rqz_child_molester@yahoo.com wrote in >news:1156167941.257256.314290@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com: > >> MarkMoron@kb9rqz.com wrote: >>> On Fri, 18 Aug 2006 08:56:55 -0400, jawod wrote: >>> >>> >Not Cocksucker Lloyd wrote: >>> >> an old friendless cocksucking child molester wrote: >>> >> >>> >>>cease >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> Cry, you illiterate cunt, cry! >>> >> >>> >Nobody reads your ridiculous posts >>> be fiar I certainly do so do you >> >> Markie admits to being a bitch! >> >>> it is good for laughs mosts day laughing a rueshaking of the head >> >> In English, you illiterate lying fraud. >> > > >Markie, Just ignore them. why? http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/ -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Article: 228591 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Mark@kb9rqz.com Subject: Re: STFU, Morgan - Markie, Just ignore them. Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 19:59:08 -0400 Message-ID: <56ike295bug0hr4h2tgj35jvkj0e666hl1@4ax.com> References: <1155819580.435966.161810@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1155868528.387517.185650@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com> <1155904856.192887.112830@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <44E5B917.6050406@fuse.net> <1156167776.418585.26880@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1156168055.849450.60970@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com> <1156186849.689873.44950@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 23:47:54 GMT, Slow Code wrote: >markie_morgan_rapesboys@yahoo.com wrote in >news:1156186849.689873.44950@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com: > >> >> an old friendless kiddie diddler wrote: >>> ce >> >> Dance, my little monkey boy, dance! >> >> > >Markie, Just ignore them. > why? http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/ -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Article: 228592 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "mikeFNB" References: <1H5Gg.10923$xp2.2506@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net> <1156129587.649254.66300@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <6lhke2tnmq1pnsq258lj5gmo9k7vmoqlha@4ax.com> Subject: Re: why not deal with the eal issue Message-ID: Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 23:55:27 GMT all sounds a bit fishy to me eal issue red herring mike wrote in message news:6lhke2tnmq1pnsq258lj5gmo9k7vmoqlha@4ax.com... > On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 23:44:48 GMT, Slow Code wrote: > >>"EchoBlip" wrote in >>news:AvjGg.9708$%j7.4910@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net: >> >>>> Because Ham radio is dying. >>> >>> E V E R Y T H I N G D I E S >>> > >>> >>> >> >> >> >>Why do we want to let in people that don't want to be hams? > red herring > > why are we exclding people able to be ham nd that want to for no > reason at all >> >>SC > http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/ > > -- > Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com > Article: 228593 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Subject: Re: Two Meter FM Antenna Question From: Ed References: <1156112798.027258.152330@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> <8usje21pgkpi0sc1dc67jpiio2r54vte0h@4ax.com> <8hfke2droqlvu50odf5ltrnununpt7l2sv@4ax.com> Message-ID: Date: 22 Aug 2006 00:21:47 GMT >>Every reference and factory specification for >>standard grounplane and vertical dipole antennas I've seen indicates the >>standard vertical dipole has a horizontal gain of 3 dBi, and the >>groundplane 2.1 dBi. > Those are pretty curious references then. Why would they dwell on the > HORIZONTAL gains of VERTICAL antennas? There must be something left > unsaid in what you are trying to express because cross polarization > would drive down sensitivities by 20 to 30 dB. > > For another matter, those values you quote bear very little > resemblence to typical 2M FM operation, unless it is from the Space > Shuttle. Height above ground variations in gain easily washes over > any differences you might perceive. I can see a variation of 2dB in > just raising a groundplane from 40" off the turf to 120". Richard, You and I seem to be talking different languages !! :^) My reference to horizontal gain is gain measured in the horizontal plane...... that is, measurements are taken broadside to the vertical antenna elements, in this case, both the vertical dipole and a groundplane. Gain measurements taken in any other plane in any other plane than horizontal tend to be rather useless since most VHF mobile communications takes place horizontally..... even distant repeaters tend to be close to the horizon. Cross polarization is not an issue in VHF operations since all commercial and amateur FM operations I'm familiar with use vertical polarization. As far as height variations having effect on gain.... you are talking about path gain, or system gain. I am speaking specifically of antenna gain, which I believed to be the question of the original poster. And as I have already pointed out, most factory specifications for vertical dipoles and groundplane antennas are as I already listed. Ed K7AAT Article: 228594 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "lu6etj" Subject: Re: Vertical radiation from horizontal dipole? Date: 21 Aug 2006 17:55:25 -0700 Message-ID: <1156208125.913100.306680@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> References: <1155949003.609701.39890@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> Dear Roy: Stupendous explanation, I also think, as Denny, that should be included in the antenna book to highlight this aspect, because a lot of friends tends to believe that the horizontal dipole only emits with horizontal polarization... In fact, my question arose when comparing the relative difference between the vertical field and the horizontal one in the free space and on the proximities of the real ground (or with the perfect ground also) and to notice a bigger intensity of the vertical field near to the ground (relative to the horizontal one), taking reference with the same relationship in the free space. My hypothesis was that this would be due to an asymmetric distribution of the displacement currents taken place by the presence of the graund that would cancel part of the vertical field in low angles. I was looking for the correct explanation of such an asymmetry. Now I think that your explanation, based on difference in the reflection coefficient, seems to be more appropriate. It put my accent in "the low height", because I was in a friend's shack that uses EZNEC 3 (I am more familiarized with MMANA which I use because it is free and not because I prefers it to yours, that is very good) and I am got confused with automatic way of locating the outer ring, suggesting me a great intensity of vertical field (reason why the results they were too optimistic). It was my fault because the text on the results gives the outer ring value (but one so many times doesn't read the tiny letters...). When, at your suggestion, download EZNEC 4 Demo, I realized (when opening Desc Options) that the 0 dB corresponded to an external ring of approximately -10 dB or less, (maybe it would be good a "warning" to avoid troubles at peoples as fool as me ;>) ) Those first results took me to think that the vertical field could have more relevance on comunnications at short distance by terrestrial waves (very low angles) on the lowest bands... Anyway, maybe the most interesting thing that has arisen of this question is to remember us that the horizontal dipole =A1doesn't sends only polarized horizontally waves..! Thank very you for your quick answer and my congratulations for your great program. =20 Miguel Ghezzi (LU 6ETJ) --------------------------------------- Article: 228595 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Douche Bag" Subject: Re: PING: Slow Code Date: 21 Aug 2006 17:58:38 -0700 Message-ID: <1156208318.777429.173610@74g2000cwt.googlegroups.com> References: <1156186858.857772.22110@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> You both suck each other off. Jerks! Mark@kb9rqz.com wrote: > On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 23:46:48 GMT, Slow Code wrote: > > >new_cw_ham@saintly.com wrote in > >news:1156186858.857772.22110@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com: > > > >> Wanted to thank you for your posts about the code. > >> > >> Because of you I just upgraded (Saturday) from technician to general. I > >> breezed the 5 wpm and am up to around 15wpm according to the W1AW > >> pratice broadcasts. I never would have bothered to learn CW if it > >> wasn't for you. > >> > >> I know I only "need" 5 wpm but I am not going to upgrade to extra until > >> I can cpy 25 wpm SOLID! > >> > >> This is in honor of my electronic elmer, Slow Code. > >> > >> Thanks...... > > > >ROFLMAO! > > > >.... And you've made me think of possibly joining CAP. > > > > > >Testimonials like yours will bring a smile to every Real hams face. :-) > > > >Just learn the code to 22 wpm. That would be a nice edge if you still had > >to take a 20 wpm CW test. But if you can only get your speed up to 16 or > >17 words per minute, upgrade anyway. We need good people like you on the > >ham bands and on usenet. LOL > > why do we ned more people that make snips and don't even have the guts > to sign their names? > > > > > >73 > > > >SC > http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/ > > -- > Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Article: 228596 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Mark@kb9rqz.com Subject: Re: PING: Slow Code Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 20:59:46 -0400 Message-ID: References: <1156186858.857772.22110@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> <1156208318.777429.173610@74g2000cwt.googlegroups.com> On 21 Aug 2006 17:58:38 -0700, "Douche Bag" wrote: >You both suck each other off. Jerks! >Mark@kb9rqz.com wrote: >> On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 23:46:48 GMT, Slow Code wrote: talking about yuorself abthat way http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/ -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Article: 228597 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Douche Bag" Subject: Re: why not deal with the eal issue Date: 21 Aug 2006 18:01:26 -0700 Message-ID: <1156208486.108865.15650@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> References: <1H5Gg.10923$xp2.2506@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net> IT'S DEAD. Get a life. You learned code for nothing. Where's my iPod? ikeFNB wrote: > all sounds a bit fishy to me > eal issue > red herring > > mike > > wrote in message > news:6lhke2tnmq1pnsq258lj5gmo9k7vmoqlha@4ax.com... > > On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 23:44:48 GMT, Slow Code wrote: > > > >>"EchoBlip" wrote in > >>news:AvjGg.9708$%j7.4910@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net: > >> > >>>> Because Ham radio is dying. > >>> > >>> E V E R Y T H I N G D I E S > >>> > > > >>> > >>> > >> > >> > >> > >>Why do we want to let in people that don't want to be hams? > > red herring > > > > why are we exclding people able to be ham nd that want to for no > > reason at all > >> > >>SC > > http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/ > > > > -- > > Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com > > Article: 228598 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "an old friend" Subject: Re: why not deal with the eal issue Date: 21 Aug 2006 18:04:43 -0700 Message-ID: <1156208683.769075.32480@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> References: <1H5Gg.10923$xp2.2506@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net> Douche Bag wrote: > IT'S DEAD. Get a life. You learned code for nothing. Where's my iPod? wel you got that part aprt Code being dead but the ARS is still alive dispite the efforts of Sloaw code Robeson and others to kill it Article: 228599 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "LenAnderson@ieee.org" Subject: Re: Morris Code -plus- Continuous Wave (CW) Radio Transmission -and- Semaphore Signals ? Do They Defining Amateur Radio ? Date: 21 Aug 2006 18:05:19 -0700 Message-ID: <1156208719.641279.66550@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> References: <30954.oidi09.d0904.ddoi0@qkd.org> From: Slow Code on Mon, Aug 21 2006 4:45 pm >"Jimmie D" wrote in >news:Ld6Gg.30663$bo6.7667@bignews7.bellsouth.net: > >>> Yes. That's understandable. Hams these days don't want to act like >>> hams, they like to be appliance operators. So kids don't see that CW >>> is important and fun. All they see is hams gabbing on a microphone >>> like any CB'er can do. > >>> SC > >> Actually a lot of tghe boy scouts know morse code, they still arent >> intersted in ham radio. > >Some old time ham in the area needs to step in and show the scouts how ham >radio and CW can save lives and help communities in emergencies. When are you leaving the group to go do that, "Slow?" Oh, and while you're at it, why don't you inform the group the date when amateur radio morse code saved ANYONE's life? Betcha can't do it... On 7 July 2006 the FCC released its Independent Panel report on the worst natural disaster to hit the USA, Hurricane Katrina. You can find it in the Federal Register of that date. In there you can find an objective report on how much radio amateurs helped their communities. BTW, Comments on that Report are due on or before 21 August 2006...today. Have you sent in your Comment, "Slow?" No? >Nickle Generals & Extra's have a hard time promoting amateur radio. All >they want to do is promote dumbing it down more. Tsk, if anyone was doing "dumbing it down more," they'd have to outdo your own retrograde, freeze-it-in-YOUR-youth ham radio, "Slow." Feel proud. You are practically a one-ham show on dumbing down the service... >It's no wonder the scouts aren't interested. Tsk, you should have recited your own tale of saving the Titanic...when you were asleep on the US California... LenAnderson@ieee.org Article: 228600 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "LenAnderson@ieee.org" Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Date: 21 Aug 2006 18:10:13 -0700 Message-ID: <1156209013.791687.216010@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> References: <1155606175.469557.27070@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> From: Slow Code on Mon, Aug 21 2006 4:45 pm >jawod wrote in news:44EA17D3.10400@fuse.net: > >> So many people need to pump themselves up here. Truly amazing. > >> I have no interest in your wife's degrees, your home(s), your friends or >> anything else. Nor was any "bluff" intended. Tsk, tsk, "Jawod" did indeed intimidate through bluff. Poor baby got stomped on and now he cries "foul." Boo-hoo. >> Whew. Sometimes accessing this group is like stepping in dogshit. > >Usenet radio groups were a lot nicer before ham radio got dumbed down. "Slow," multiple-choice questions were in place in FCC exams LONNNNGGGG ago. [many morsemen bitch that those started the "dumbing-down"] Privatization of license testing happened BEFORE the Internet went public and creation of amateur radio newsgroups in what many still call "USENET." With privatization of testing came the open question pools. "Slow," you are very confused on your dates and what happened. >Now the ham radio groups have a CB feel to them. Awwww...you can't find enough for a group to sit around and bullshit to one another on how "good" and "magical" is CW? Must do your self-image a really, really bad whuppin! Now, you run right out and Save A Life for Hiram Percy, ya hear? Show them what you can do! Then you can sit around campfires and molest the ears of young boy scouts... Beep, beep... LenAnderson@ieee.org Article: 228601 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "LenAnderson@ieee.org" Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Date: 21 Aug 2006 18:10:17 -0700 Message-ID: <1156209017.352408.62810@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> References: <1155606175.469557.27070@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> From: Slow Code on Mon, Aug 21 2006 4:45 pm >jawod wrote in news:44EA17D3.10400@fuse.net: > >> So many people need to pump themselves up here. Truly amazing. > >> I have no interest in your wife's degrees, your home(s), your friends or >> anything else. Nor was any "bluff" intended. Tsk, tsk, "Jawod" did indeed intimidate through bluff. Poor baby got stomped on and now he cries "foul." Boo-hoo. >> Whew. Sometimes accessing this group is like stepping in dogshit. > >Usenet radio groups were a lot nicer before ham radio got dumbed down. "Slow," multiple-choice questions were in place in FCC exams LONNNNGGGG ago. [many morsemen bitch that those started the "dumbing-down"] Privatization of license testing happened BEFORE the Internet went public and creation of amateur radio newsgroups in what many still call "USENET." With privatization of testing came the open question pools. "Slow," you are very confused on your dates and what happened. >Now the ham radio groups have a CB feel to them. Awwww...you can't find enough for a group to sit around and bullshit to one another on how "good" and "magical" is CW? Must do your self-image a really, really bad whuppin! Now, you run right out and Save A Life for Hiram Percy, ya hear? Show them what you can do! Then you can sit around campfires and molest the ears of young boy scouts... Beep, beep... LenAnderson@ieee.org Article: 228602 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "LenAnderson@ieee.org" Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Date: 21 Aug 2006 18:19:04 -0700 Message-ID: <1156209544.379600.140580@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> References: <1153584132.692529.177920@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> From: an old friend on Mon, Aug 21 2006 3:16 pm >LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote: >> From: hot-ham-and-che...@hotmail.com on Sun, Aug 20 2006 2:57 pm >> >If the league pushes the morse testing issue too hard, it will become >> >obvious to the 25% that are members. > >> I don't think so. The Amateur Radiotelegraphy Society is very >> firmly SET in their ideas of keeping the "heritage" and >> "tradition" of being a living museum of archaic radio. Those >> firm believers and worshippers at the Church of St. Hiram are >> disciples and they haven't had their last supper yet. > >I have no objection to them trying to prservs thier mode the ARS is big >enough even for unproductive thing It's "minority rule" when ARRL lobbies for preservation of morse code test for any amateur radio license class. The ARRL membership is slightly less than a quarter of all US amateur radio licensees. >> >Don't know if you've heard yet, but the ARRL and robesin announced that >> >MARS and TSA have an agreement for armageddon communications. > >> Heh heh, I wouldn't doubt it... :-) > >> [via "giant meteor bounce?" ... off the earth, that is? :-) ] > >> I thought Robesin had put on his (invisible) USMC uniform and >> was busy pounding brass with the USCG offshore from Beirut to >> evacuate US civilians? :-) > >now that remark I must take you to task for > >the last thing we want to sugest that robeson might wear is something >invisible now that image IS a sexauly distrubing one Ahem...my reference was the old fairy tale, "The Emperor's New Clothes." :-) That's the one where a full-of-himself ruler ordered some new clothes and the tailor buttered him up (while not sewing any new clothes) so much that the Emperor bought into this pandering to his ego and appeared in public with his "new clothes" (he was naked). Needless to say, the public laughed and laughed at this ridiculous spectacle. :-) Robeson has been all full of himself in here about his alleged "USMC service" yet he has presented zero-point-zero evidence from anyone else (or any legitimate agency) that he ever served on active USMC duty for any of his claimed "18 years." Even though he NOW thinks of himself AS the amateur radio service personified (anything against him is somehow against ALL radio amateurs), he is still parodying the "Emperor." LenAnderson@ieee.org Article: 228603 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Mark@kb9rqz.com Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 21:30:43 -0400 Message-ID: References: <6gr3d21444qdt5m6mr1e1jpavltvso929p@4ax.com> <1155176094.212232.56330@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> <1155268104.444785.177310@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1155324703.131909.279070@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1156111049.458067.33380@74g2000cwt.googlegroups.com> <1156188562.839806.186090@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1156198607.916738.121580@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1156209544.379600.140580@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> On 21 Aug 2006 18:19:04 -0700, "LenAnderson@ieee.org" wrote: >From: an old friend on Mon, Aug 21 2006 3:16 pm > > >>LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote: >>> From: hot-ham-and-che...@hotmail.com on Sun, Aug 20 2006 2:57 pm >>> >If the league pushes the morse testing issue too hard, it will become >>> >obvious to the 25% that are members. >> >>> I don't think so. The Amateur Radiotelegraphy Society is very >>> firmly SET in their ideas of keeping the "heritage" and >>> "tradition" of being a living museum of archaic radio. Those >>> firm believers and worshippers at the Church of St. Hiram are >>> disciples and they haven't had their last supper yet. >> >>I have no objection to them trying to prservs thier mode the ARS is big >>enough even for unproductive thing > > It's "minority rule" when ARRL lobbies for preservation of > morse code test for any amateur radio license class. The > ARRL membership is slightly less than a quarter of all US > amateur radio licensees. > >>> >Don't know if you've heard yet, but the ARRL and robesin announced that >>> >MARS and TSA have an agreement for armageddon communications. >> >>> Heh heh, I wouldn't doubt it... :-) >> >>> [via "giant meteor bounce?" ... off the earth, that is? :-) ] >> >>> I thought Robesin had put on his (invisible) USMC uniform and >>> was busy pounding brass with the USCG offshore from Beirut to >>> evacuate US civilians? :-) >> >>now that remark I must take you to task for >> >>the last thing we want to sugest that robeson might wear is something >>invisible now that image IS a sexauly distrubing one > > Ahem...my reference was the old fairy tale, "The Emperor's New > Clothes." :-) i thougt as much OTOH the image of robeson nude is still well > That's the one where a full-of-himself ruler ordered some new > clothes and the tailor buttered him up (while not sewing any > new clothes) so much that the Emperor bought into this pandering > to his ego and appeared in public with his "new clothes" (he was > naked). Needless to say, the public laughed and laughed at this > ridiculous spectacle. :-) indeed i laugh at him myself ruefully with the added though that this is thebest the procoder can muster > > Robeson has been all full of himself in here about his alleged > "USMC service" yet he has presented zero-point-zero evidence > from anyone else (or any legitimate agency) that he ever > served on active USMC duty for any of his claimed "18 years." > > Even though he NOW thinks of himself AS the amateur radio > service personified (anything against him is somehow against > ALL radio amateurs), he is still parodying the "Emperor." > > LenAnderson@ieee.org http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/ -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Article: 228604 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Roy Lewallen Subject: Re: Two Meter FM Antenna Question Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 18:31:54 -0700 Message-ID: <12eknkcib18cad1@corp.supernews.com> References: <1156112798.027258.152330@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> You should always run an average gain test when you have an unusually high or low field strength. Using EZNEC, the average gain shows as 1.227, or 0.89 dB, and this same average gain should be reported by NEC-2. That means that the actual gain is 0.89 dB less than what NEC-2 is reporting, or just about 2.0 dBi. If you don't understand what this test is, consult the NEC-2 manual. EZNEC users will find it indexed in the EZNEC manual. I suggest you also do an average gain check on your 3 dBi vertical. Roy Lewallen, W7EL John E. Davis wrote: > On 21 Aug 2006 17:50:21 GMT, Ed >> Its all a matter of reference. I was thinking in terms of dBi.... a >> vertical has 3dBi gain, a ground plane, 2 dBi. > > Here is a ground plane with a free-space gain greater than 2.9 dBi and > an SWR less than 1.2 at its design frequency (as given by NEC2): > > CM Groundplane antenna for MURS (151.8 Mhz) > CE > GW 1 19 0 0 0 0 0 0.444243 0.000813863 > GW 2 21 0 0 0 0 0.163546 -0.4506 0.000813863 > GW 3 21 0 0 0 0 -0.163546 -0.4506 0.000813863 > GW 4 21 0 0 0 -0.163546 0 -0.4506 0.000813863 > GW 5 21 0 0 0 0.163546 0 -0.4506 0.000813863 > GE 0 > FR 0 31 0 0 145 0.33 > EX 0 1 1 0 1 > RP 0 31 73 1001 0, 0, 3, 5, 10000, 0 > EN > > > It uses 14 AWG wire and consists of a 17-1/2 inch vertical, and 4 > 18-7/8 inch radials symmetrically placed at about 20 degrees with > respect to the vertical axis: > > | > | > | A A = 17-1/2 in > | B = 18-7/8 in > | T = 2*19.95 degrees > / \ C = 12-7/8 in > / T \ B > / \ (only 2 radials shown) > / \ > <-- C --> > > --John Article: 228605 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Bob Miller Subject: Re: Two Meter FM Antenna Question Message-ID: References: <8usje21pgkpi0sc1dc67jpiio2r54vte0h@4ax.com> <8hfke2droqlvu50odf5ltrnununpt7l2sv@4ax.com> Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 01:41:11 GMT On 22 Aug 2006 00:21:47 GMT, Ed wrote: > > And as I have already pointed out, most factory specifications >for vertical dipoles and groundplane antennas are as I already listed. > > Ed K7AAT Maybe I'm missing something, who manufactures vertical vhf dipoles? bob k5qwg > Article: 228606 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Bakb0ne" Subject: Re: why not deal with the eal issue Date: 21 Aug 2006 19:19:19 -0700 Message-ID: <1156213159.387173.176230@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> References: <1H5Gg.10923$xp2.2506@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net> an old friend wrote: > Douche Bag wrote: > > IT'S DEAD. Get a life. You learned code for nothing. Where's my iPod? > wel you got that part aprt Code being dead but the ARS is still alive > dispite the efforts of Sloaw code Robeson and others to kill it Isnt that the main point tho.... they have no power to do anything... They are just sad ppl with nothing better to do. Next they will be saying that you should have to pay a monthly fee to use the airwaves... Maybe have a subscription fee, that would stop most of the scum (yeh right) Article: 228607 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Subject: Re: Two Meter FM Antenna Question From: Ed References: <8usje21pgkpi0sc1dc67jpiio2r54vte0h@4ax.com> <8hfke2droqlvu50odf5ltrnununpt7l2sv@4ax.com> Message-ID: Date: 22 Aug 2006 02:53:14 GMT > > Maybe I'm missing something, who manufactures vertical vhf dipoles? > > bob > k5qwg >> > Cushcraft used to sell one, amongst others. Most commercial dipoles now are folded design, and designed for side mount on a tower or mast, so gain figures tend to include the effects of the mast... although they can be mounted on top of a tower or mast, too. Other than the certain physical advantages inherent in folded dipole design, the performance remains about the same as a standard halfwave dipole. A quick check showed Andrew and Celwave (RFS Celwave) with current products along these lines. Couldn't find a decent site for Cushcraft, and didn't spend time looking for other vendors. http://www.andrew.com/products/antennas/bsa/DB220-B.aspx http://shop.talleycom.com/store/product.jsp? pdtl=_root&pdtl_pn=TELANT150D Ed Article: 228608 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "an old friend" Subject: Re: why not deal with the real issue Date: 21 Aug 2006 19:56:49 -0700 Message-ID: <1156215409.916008.322300@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> References: <1H5Gg.10923$xp2.2506@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net> Bakb0ne wrote: > an old friend wrote: > > Douche Bag wrote: > > > IT'S DEAD. Get a life. You learned code for nothing. Where's my iPod? > > wel you got that part aprt Code being dead but the ARS is still alive > > dispite the efforts of Sloaw code Robeson and others to kill it > > Isnt that the main point tho.... they have no power to do anything... > > They are just sad ppl with nothing better to do. Next they will be > saying that > you should have to pay a monthly fee to use the airwaves... > > Maybe have a subscription fee, that would stop most of the scum (yeh > right) well a GMRS like license would surely do better asa filter than the code test look at the code tested ham we have on the air now Article: 228609 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "David G. Nagel" Subject: Re: Two Meter FM Antenna Question Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 22:10:23 -0500 Message-ID: <12ektd13decg7d5@corp.supernews.com> References: <8usje21pgkpi0sc1dc67jpiio2r54vte0h@4ax.com> <8hfke2droqlvu50odf5ltrnununpt7l2sv@4ax.com> Bob Miller wrote: > On 22 Aug 2006 00:21:47 GMT, Ed > wrote: > > > >> And as I have already pointed out, most factory specifications >>for vertical dipoles and groundplane antennas are as I already listed. >> >> Ed K7AAT > > > Maybe I'm missing something, who manufactures vertical vhf dipoles? > > bob > k5qwg > I don't know about vertical dipoles for ham radio but many manufacturers make them for marine applications. The vhf marine band antennas for fiberglass boats are center fed vertical dipoles. Dave WD9BDZ Article: 228610 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Sundip Sindar" Subject: test2 Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2006 22:47:42 -0700 Message-ID: <1156215863.839161@newsreg.cos.agilent.com> Article: 228611 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Bakb0ne" Subject: Re: why not deal with the real issue Date: 21 Aug 2006 20:22:15 -0700 Message-ID: <1156216935.451293.177760@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> References: <1H5Gg.10923$xp2.2506@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net> an old friend wrote: > Bakb0ne wrote: > > an old friend wrote: > > > Douche Bag wrote: > > > > IT'S DEAD. Get a life. You learned code for nothing. Where's my iPo= d? > > > wel you got that part aprt Code being dead but the ARS is still alive > > > dispite the efforts of Sloaw code Robeson and others to kill it > > > > Isnt that the main point tho.... they have no power to do anything... > > > > They are just sad ppl with nothing better to do. Next they will be > > saying that > > you should have to pay a monthly fee to use the airwaves... > > > > Maybe have a subscription fee, that would stop most of the scum (yeh > > right) > well a GMRS like license would surely do better asa filter than the > code test look at the code tested ham we have on the air now What part of the GMRS license would be a better filter? The 5 year duration between renewals, the $75/=A340 charge or just the general way of applying for it? Im not saying i disagree, just wondering what you meant.. Article: 228612 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "an old friend" Subject: Re: why not deal with the real issue Date: 21 Aug 2006 20:26:57 -0700 Message-ID: <1156217217.076077.295020@74g2000cwt.googlegroups.com> References: <1H5Gg.10923$xp2.2506@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net> Bakb0ne wrote: > an old friend wrote: > > Bakb0ne wrote: > > > an old friend wrote: > > > > Douche Bag wrote: > > > > > IT'S DEAD. Get a life. You learned code for nothing. Where's my i= Pod? > > > > wel you got that part aprt Code being dead but the ARS is still ali= ve > > > > dispite the efforts of Sloaw code Robeson and others to kill it > > > > > > Isnt that the main point tho.... they have no power to do anything... > > > > > > They are just sad ppl with nothing better to do. Next they will be > > > saying that > > > you should have to pay a monthly fee to use the airwaves... > > > > > > Maybe have a subscription fee, that would stop most of the scum (yeh > > > right) > > well a GMRS like license would surely do better asa filter than the > > code test look at the code tested ham we have on the air now > > What part of the GMRS license would be a better filter? > > The 5 year duration between renewals, the $75/=A340 charge or just the > general way of applying for it? > > Im not saying i disagree, just wondering what you meant.. having to pay to use the ARS freqs might be more of a deterant to those with bad attiudes than a code test not to say it would be a good filter but fee for license with the license fee used for enforcement here in the state the license is free (the tests cost something) and the FCC is always complaining it laks any funding to go after ham violators I suspect you are a brit and so this might escape you I should have been clearer nice to see someone serious paying attention here I had assume the flamers and trolls had driven them off Article: 228613 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Message-ID: <44EA7A0E.2070101@fuse.net> Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 23:29:18 -0400 From: jawod Subject: Re: Sommer design References: <940d3$44ea19ef$453d9423$32391@FUSE.NET> <4BrGg.6886$Tg1.4852@tornado.tampabay.rr.com> Ron Walters wrote: > Dave wrote: > >> I Googled SommerAntennas so I could get a look at what you are writing >> about and got a 'Could not be found' message for >> . >> >> In either case a LP design has many solutions for a given frequency >> range for number of elements, spacing, etc. A true LPDA will operate >> anywhere within it's minimum and maximum frequency range. That is: a >> 13.5 to 33 MHz design will operate ANYWHERE within that range and meet >> published specifications for Gain, VSWR, efficiency, without the need >> for ANY on tower tuning, etc. [An LP does NOT have the 20, 17, 15, 12 >> and 10 meter bands!!! It has FULL coverage ANYWHERE within it's >> published minimum and maximum frequencies.] >> >> A LP design is a driven array NOT a parasitic [YAGI} design. It's >> major advantage is the very broad bandwidth it covers without tuning, >> traps, or stubs. It provides slightly less 'gain' than a 3 element >> triband Yagi. A Long John single band YAGI will have 3 to 6 dB >> additional gain above a LP, but the YAGI is band limited. >> > > Dave,John > > Just tried the WEB site and I had to hit the try again button to get the > response, I spoke with Alf the Owner last Friday and advised him of the > site trouble, he said that the server was giving them fits. The Sommer > factory located in Geneva FL was going at fill steam to meet the Govt > (Military demands) from around the world. Several Govt have > standardized on the Sommer antenna. Its not that Ham Radio has taken a > back seat but you go where the money is! > > Alf invited me to come to the factory, see the antennas up in the air > and see what they have to offer. Alf claims that his XP504 LP has the > same gain as a 4-element Yagi on the ham bands. He has the review facts > from a French Government study. The only problem I can see with this > antenna is the weight (73#'s) compared to a lower weight of 43#'s form > SteppIR and from other antennas. I was hoping to get access to the > QTH.net archives but they have disappeared. Was looking to read what > others had to say. Anyone know how to get archives or where they are? > > The SteppIR caught my attention a few years back and I was considering > one of those antennas as a replacement for my current TA-33 trap style > tribander which has performed very well but lacks the WARC bands plus > the six meter band if I want. For 30 and 40 meters there is a kit for > the Sommer but from what I have read your better off with a dipole for > the added costs. Several articles I have read seem to backup what Alf > had to say plus reports from on the air comparisons. From what I hear > it is built like a tank with quality products. > > Give the site another try and keep hitting the refresh button and it > will finally respond. After my visit which I hope happens this coming > Saturday I give you and the rest a report. > > Ron - W4LDE Thanks, Ron. Yes, the website is up and down. If you can get on it, it's a fairly informative site. I didn't realize there was such a weight diff. I'm actually dreaming of my first tower several years away. Who knows, by then, a large nerfball sphere may digitally reproduce any propagation you wish...or at least that's one of my other dreams. Is Alf referring to the XP504 as a log periodic dipole array? I have no intention of being a stickler...just curious. In the ARRL antenna book, there are several formulas to follow in order to design an LPDA and the XP504 doesn't look like it would conform. There is also a hybrid LP-Yagi, using a director parasitic element, listed there. In my mind, the weight difference alone leans heavily (horrible pun) toward the SteppIR. Man, the Sommer is almost TWICE as heavy. John AB8O PS, Is this Alf fuzzy and short? I may know him. Article: 228615 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Al Schapira Subject: Testing a thermocouple-type RF Ammeter Message-ID: Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 04:07:49 GMT Is is valid to test a thermocouple-type RF Ammeter using low frequency (say 60 Hz) current? I did so and got quite reasonable results. Hey, current is current, right? I have three different thermocouple-type RF Ammeters, with FS ranges of 1.5, 2.0 and 3.0 RF Amps that I wanted to test. The 2 Amp meter has an external thermocouple (16 mV DC for 2.0 RF Amps) and the other two have internal thermocouples. I hooked them all up in series, and also in series with a Fluke digital AC Ammeter, fed them from 6.3 VAC through a suitable dropping resistor. All readings agreed within a few percent at various currents. Can I now assume that these meters will also function correctly at RF (i.e. 3 - 30 MHz)? Thanks. -Al, W2ADS Article: 228616 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Sal M. Onella" References: <8usje21pgkpi0sc1dc67jpiio2r54vte0h@4ax.com> <8hfke2droqlvu50odf5ltrnununpt7l2sv@4ax.com> Subject: Re: Two Meter FM Antenna Question Message-ID: <_DvGg.14232$lv.9429@fed1read12> Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 21:22:17 -0700 "Bob Miller" wrote in message news:s1oke2d6os46jjmeana75prsdi7ie93e9c@4ax.com... < snip > > > Maybe I'm missing something, who manufactures vertical vhf dipoles? > > bob > k5qwg > > US Navy has two, at least, NT-66095 for the VHF aircraft band and a shortened version, NT-66095MOD, for the 160 MHz Marine band. Also, do a Google search on "dipole sleeve" and "dipole cage" to see a few others. Military also uses some biconical dipoles for receive only. They look like two funnels, connected together at the skinny end and are all mounted vertically for omni coverage, IIRC. Would it be cheating to call the J-pole a vertical dipole? It is a free-space half-wave radiator, albeit end-fed. Article: 228617 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "David G. Nagel" Subject: Re: Two Meter FM Antenna Question Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 00:20:07 -0500 Message-ID: <12el508njaerd60@corp.supernews.com> References: <8usje21pgkpi0sc1dc67jpiio2r54vte0h@4ax.com> <8hfke2droqlvu50odf5ltrnununpt7l2sv@4ax.com> <_DvGg.14232$lv.9429@fed1read12> Sal M. Onella wrote: > "Bob Miller" wrote in message > news:s1oke2d6os46jjmeana75prsdi7ie93e9c@4ax.com... > > < snip > > >>Maybe I'm missing something, who manufactures vertical vhf dipoles? >> >>bob >>k5qwg >> > > US Navy has two, at least, NT-66095 for the VHF aircraft band and a > shortened version, NT-66095MOD, for the 160 MHz Marine band. Also, do a > Google search on "dipole sleeve" and "dipole cage" to see a few others. > Military also uses some biconical dipoles for receive only. They look like > two funnels, connected together at the skinny end and are all mounted > vertically for omni coverage, IIRC. > > Would it be cheating to call the J-pole a vertical dipole? It is a > free-space half-wave radiator, albeit end-fed. > > > Actually it looks like a OCF dipole antenna to me. Dave WD9BDZ Article: 228618 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Owen Duffy Subject: Re: Testing a thermocouple-type RF Ammeter Message-ID: References: Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 09:50:56 GMT On Tue, 22 Aug 2006 04:07:49 GMT, Al Schapira wrote: >Is is valid to test a thermocouple-type RF Ammeter using low >frequency (say 60 Hz) current? I did so and got quite >reasonable results. Hey, current is current, right? It is somewhat easier to measure the RMS value of DC current than mains AC current. It may be worth considering a DC calibration. > >I have three different thermocouple-type RF Ammeters, with >FS ranges of 1.5, 2.0 and 3.0 RF Amps that I wanted to test. >The 2 Amp meter has an external thermocouple (16 mV DC for 2.0 RF Amps) >and the other two have internal thermocouples. > >I hooked them all up in series, and also in series with a >Fluke digital AC Ammeter, fed them from 6.3 VAC through a suitable >dropping resistor. All readings agreed within a few percent at various >currents. > >Can I now assume that these meters will also function correctly at RF >(i.e. 3 - 30 MHz)? > >Thanks. > > -Al, W2ADS -- Article: 228619 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "PA3HGT" Subject: Re: Vertica multiband antenna HF Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 12:39:26 +0200 Message-ID: <4l056oFdb7ffU1@individual.net> References: <5_2Gg.13649$MA3.12746@news.ono.com> <84kie2tuootkqh9kveeo8numnbignaiuto@4ax.com> Cushcraft has spare-part problems in mij experience and Hygain not for starters. I had a Cushcraft R6000 and now a Hygain AV620 who has the same designer. The pro for the AV620 is that the antenna has no traps only stubs. IMHO the AV620 performs better then the R6000. Wolfgangs advise to guy the antenne is treu because the antenna is catching wind.That's also for the R6000. IMHO the mount-material from Cuscraft is better then Hygain and the time to contruct a R6000 is a lot shorter then a AV620. -- Met vriendelijke groeten, Hans Pluijgers callsign : PA3HGT http://www.pa3hgt.nl > A lot of thank's for your answer. > Hy gain is a good antenna. > Why did you choose it and not Cushcraft or other antenna? > Seems that Hy Gain has less looses? Is this ok? > > Thank's a lot > > En Mon, 21 Aug 2006 08:25:12 +0200, Wolfgang K. Mygett escribió: >> On Sun, 20 Aug 2006 21:46:02 +0200, "Ruben Navarro Huedo" >> wrote: >> >> >>> I need an antenna like Cushcraft R8, Gap Titan, Diamond >>> CP-6 or something >>> like that with integrated radial systems. >> >> My Hy-Gain AV-640 does a very good job. But dont forget >> - none of these antennas can be mounted without guy >> ropes. I use 3mm 'starter-rope' that is sold in hardware >> stores. They label it as UV resistant and having 180kg >> max. This rope was made as a starting rope for lawnmower. >> >> The radials a steel elements. around 1 m, hanging down >> very deep. >> 73 >> Wolfgang >> OE1MWW > > > > -- > Usando el revolucionario cliente de correo de Opera: > http://www.opera.com/mail/ Article: 228620 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Not Cocksucker Lloyd" Subject: Re: PING: Slow Code Date: 22 Aug 2006 03:49:15 -0700 Message-ID: <1156243755.176467.116970@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> References: <1156186858.857772.22110@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> Markqueer@kb9rqz.com wrote: > On 21 Aug 2006 17:58:38 -0700, "Douche Bag" > wrote: > > >You both suck each other off. Jerks! > >Mark@kb9rqz.com wrote: > >> On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 23:46:48 GMT, Slow Code wrote: > talking about yuorself abthat way Drunk again, Marqueer? Article: 228621 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Not Cocksucker Lloyd" Subject: Re: STFU, Morgan - Markie, Just drink gasoline Date: 22 Aug 2006 04:00:01 -0700 Message-ID: <1156244401.890375.104080@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> References: MarkMoron@kb9rqz.com wrote: > On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 23:47:54 GMT, Slow Code wrote: > > >markie_morgan_rapesboys@yahoo.com wrote in > >news:1156186849.689873.44950@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com: > > > >> > >> an old friendless kiddie diddler wrote: > >>> ce > >> > >> Dance, my little monkey boy, dance! > >> > >> > > > >Markie, Just ignore them. > > > why? Dance, bitch, dance! Article: 228622 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Green Egghead Subject: Re: Vertical radiation from horizontal dipole? Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 14:00:01 -0000 Message-ID: <12em3f1tjaqrpc4@corp.supernews.com> References: <1155949003.609701.39890@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <12ed290mv4kekea@corp.supernews.com> <12egsogtbki2m13@corp.supernews.com> <12ehjnus1o10d89@corp.supernews.com> <12ejnc9stjcot66@corp.supernews.com> <12ek6qhsrtdr5b@corp.supernews.com> Roy Lewallen wrote: > At HF considerable fading, including selective frequency fading, is > caused by polarization shift. But it's not easy to create a receiving > antenna that's circularly polarized when a ground reflection is involved > (because ground reflection characteristics are functions of both > reflection angle and polarization), and even more difficult to do it in > more than one direction. If you can build the antenna, it should reduce > polarization shift fading. You still have the problem of fading due to > multipath interference. > > > To get a circularly polarized field (again, relative to the > > transmitter's coordinates irrespective of any receiver) > > feeding the two linearly polarized antennas in quadrature > > would be equivalent to: > > > > B_h = A(t)*cos(0) = A(t) > > B_v = A(t)*sin(0) = 0 > > and > > C_h = A(t+90)*cos(90) = 0 > > C_v = A(t+90)*sin(90) = A(t+90) > > > > Where A(t+90) represents the signal A(t) shifted > > 90 degrees relative to the carrier frequency. > > > > Signal A(t) is not equal to A(t+90) at the every point in > > free space and so they will interfere. This would create > > a spatially and temporally changing carrier amplitude? > > Yes, that's correct. > > > So I don't understand how two same frequency carriers > > where one is 90 out of phase with the other creates a > > circularly polarized wave since their resultant is not > > in the polarization plane but along the direction of > > the field's propagation. > > Here's your error. In free space in the far field, there is no tilt in > the E field in the direction of propagation; the field is what we call a > plane wave. At any instant, the E field is oriented normal to the > direction of travel. If you look at a circularly polarized wave at a > fixed location, you'll see it rotate in the plane normal to the > direction of propagation. If you freeze the wave in time, you'll see > that the field orientation is a rotating vector, again rotating in a > plane normal to the direction of propagation. Think of the path of an > airplane propeller as the plane flies. I don't yet see how the B_h and C_v signals, A(t) and A(t+90), (which appear serially on the feed line as a superposition) get physically split into their respective h and v dipoles (I can see that if they are, circular polarization results). Besides the 90 carrier phase shift and the 90 angular shift of the crossed dipoles, I figure there has to be one more part that splits the orthogonal signal components in the feed line into their respective dipoles (it would be a waste of energy to send the B_h component through the vertical dipole). Is this why circularly polarized antennas like this one seem to have a vertical and horizontal radiator combined? http://www.ccbroadcasters.com/images/antenn3.jpg That's what had me thinking that circular polarization had something to do with the E and H field phase difference since it looks like a horiz loop integrally combined with a vert dipole. > > > What amount of radio signal attenuation is typically > > attributed to polarization mismatches? > > I commonly see fades of 20 - 30 dB on 40 meters which I can reverse by > switching between horizontal and vertical antennas -- that is, at the > bottom of the fade I can switch to the other antenna and restore the > signal. So it's mainly due to polarization shift. On line of sight > paths, I believe the attenuation can be quite severe. I don't know what > proportion of the frequency selective fading you hear on distant AM > signals is due to polarization shift and how much to multipath interference. > > >. . . > > There should be some good explanations (and undoubtedly also some bad > ones) on the web, and the topic is covered to some extent in most > electromagnetics texts. Thanks for your experienced help getting through these rough parts for me. I'll keep studying. Article: 228623 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "an old friend" Subject: cease and desist Date: 22 Aug 2006 08:05:35 -0700 Message-ID: <1156259135.750875.198930@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> References: Not Cocksucker Lloyd wrote: > !cease and desist Article: 228624 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Mismatched Zo Connectors Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 16:52:31 +0100 Message-ID: At risk of being called a Troll, and having little else to do at present, I copy from another newsgroup the following text. "Reg Edwards" wrote - "The effect of an impedance mis-match at a coaxial connector of ordinary dimensions is practically zero at frequencies up to UHF. Regardless of its other dimensions, the primary requirement of a mismatched connector is that its length should be appreciably less than 1/4-wavelength at the highest working frequency. People are unnecessarily worried at VHF and below. Mix up 50 and 75-ohm connectors, and indeed connectors of unknown Zo, and carry on regardless. For an analysis of performance, download in a few seconds and run immediately program CONNECT from website below." Program CONNECT will calculate the effect on performance of inserting any relatively short length of line, of Zo different from system Zo, into the system. It's less than the inexperienced might imagine from reading frightening magazine and handbook articles about impedance and conjugate mis-matches. If you have a short length of coax lying around, of unknown Zo, just use it! ---- ........................................................... Regards from Reg, G4FGQ For Free Radio Design Software go to http://www.btinternet.com/~g4fgq.regp ........................................................... Article: 228625 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" References: <30954.oidi09.d0904.ddoi0@qkd.org> <1152929851.865986.4740@35g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <_AVug.9493$PE1.1406@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net> <1153275616.225575.252170@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com> <44BDA4F3.7000706@fuse.net> <12brelk76dlj901@corp.supernews.com> Subject: Re: Morris Code -plus- Continuous Wave (CW) Radio Transmission -and- Semaphore Signals ? Do They Defining Amateur Radio ? Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 17:24:49 +0100 Message-ID: > Some old time ham in the area needs to step in and show the scouts how ham > radio and CW can save lives and help communities in emergencies. > ===================================== In these days of mobile telephones, etc., morse code just gets in the way of emergencies. But there's nothing to prevent people who appreciate and love the language of Morse, the way it sings, its universality, its beauty, >from continuing to use it way into the future. It is the beauty of Morse, in plain English, never mind the abbreviations, which boy scouts and others who show an interest should be taught to appreciate. ---- Reg, G4FGQ Article: 228626 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: davis@space.mit.edu (John E. Davis) Subject: Re: Two Meter FM Antenna Question References: <1156112798.027258.152330@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> <12eknkcib18cad1@corp.supernews.com> Message-ID: Date: 22 Aug 2006 17:15:57 GMT On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 18:31:54 -0700, Roy Lewallen wrote: >You should always run an average gain test when you have an unusually >high or low field strength. Using EZNEC, the average gain shows as >1.227, or 0.89 dB, and this same average gain should be reported by >NEC-2. That means that the actual gain is 0.89 dB less than what NEC-2 >is reporting, or just about 2.0 dBi. If you don't understand what this >test is, consult the NEC-2 manual. EZNEC users will find it indexed in >the EZNEC manual. You are correct--- an antenna cannot radiate more energy than was input into it. Increasing the number of segments did not help the accuracy of the model either. It appears that the angles are too acute (40 degrees) for NEC-2 to model accurately. Changing the geometry to avoid the smaller angles also produced an antenna with a gain of 2 dBi as you suggested. Perhaps you can advise me regarding the numerical stability of the following omni-directional, which NEC indicates has a gain of 4 and a VSWR<1.2 when fed with a 50ohm feedline at 151.75 Mhz. The geometry consists of a 54.5 inch vertical with 4 35.625 inch radials that are bent upward by about 11 degrees. The vertical is made from 14 AWG wire, while the radials are 1/8 inch brazing rod. CM High Gain Omni for MURS CE GW 1 29 0 0 0 0 0 1.38375 0.000813863 GW 2 3 0 0 0 0.0508 0 0 0.0015875 GW 3 19 0.0508 0 0 0.938496 0 0.172104 0.0015875 GW 4 3 0 0 0 3.1105e-18 0.0508 0 0.0015875 GW 5 19 3.1105e-18 0.0508 0 5.74644e-17 0.938496 0.172104 0.0015875 GW 6 3 0 0 0 -0.0508 6.221e-18 0 0.0015875 GW 7 19 -0.0508 6.221e-18 0 -0.938496 1.14929e-16 0.172104 0.0015875 GW 8 3 0 0 0 -9.3315e-18 -0.0508 0 0.0015875 GW 9 19 -9.3315e-18 -0.0508 0 -1.72393e-16 -0.938496 0.172104 0.0015875 GE 0 FR 0 41 0 0 145 0.25 EX 0 1 1 0 1 RP 0 61 73 1001 0 0 3 5 10000, 0 GN -1 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 EN With segment sizes of 0.05 and 0.025 lambda, the average power gain is very close to 1. Changing the segment size to 0.0125, drops the average power gain to 0.93, which indicates numerical instability. Should I believe this model? Thanks again, --John Article: 228627 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: Morris Code -plus- Continuous Wave (CW) Radio Transmission -and- References: <30954.oidi09.d0904.ddoi0@qkd.org> <1152929851.865986.4740@35g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <_AVug.9493$PE1.1406@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net> <1153275616.225575.252170@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com> <44BDA4F3.7000706@fuse.net> <12brelk76dlj901@corp.supernews.com> Message-ID: Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 17:23:35 GMT Reg Edwards wrote: > But there's nothing to prevent people who appreciate and love the > language of Morse, the way it sings, its universality, its beauty, > from continuing to use it way into the future. The same is true of sailing ships, hot-air balloons, and horses. Do what turns you on and leave the @#$%&$ federal government out of it. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 228628 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: Mismatched Zo Connectors References: Message-ID: Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 17:28:01 GMT Reg Edwards wrote: > Regardless of its other dimensions, the primary requirement of a > mismatched connector is that its length should be appreciably less > than 1/4-wavelength at the highest working frequency. Yes, at HF the reflections from one impedance discontinuity and the reflections from a complimentary impedance discontinuity 3 inches away almost entirely cancel each other. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 228629 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Bill Turner" Subject: Re: Morris Code -plus- Continuous Wave (CW) Radio Transmission -and-Semaphore Signals ? Do They Defining Amateur Radio ? References: <30954.oidi09.d0904.ddoi0@qkd.org> <1152929851.865986.4740@35g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <_AVug.9493$PE1.1406@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net> <1153275616.225575.252170@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com> <44BDA4F3.7000706@fuse.net> <12brelk76dlj901@corp.supernews.com> Message-ID: <44eb0e03$1_4@newsfeed.slurp.net> Date: 22 Aug 2006 09:00:35 -0500 Cecil Moore wrote: > The same is true of sailing ships, hot-air balloons, > and horses. Do what turns you on and leave the > @#$%&$ federal government out of it. -----------------REPLY BELOW----------------- Cecil has it exactly right. Bill, W6WRT -- Article: 228630 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Denny" Subject: Re: Mismatched Zo Connectors Date: 22 Aug 2006 10:37:46 -0700 Message-ID: <1156268266.047506.311280@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> References: Some of us are so cheeky as to use CATV, RG-6, Rg-8, R8-11, etc., with no regard as to the supposed 'surge impedence'.. What is the load impedence of a 50 ohm antenna at any frequency removed >from its resonance point anyway? If the antenna is 30 ohms or 80 ohms, with some reactance, does the SWR meter notice the inexpensive run of supposed 70 ohm coax that you cadged from the cable tv company? Once in a while I get an antenna that is fed with bits and pieces of this and that, which swears differently back at the shack than it did at the antenna feed point... Inserting another 5 or 10 feet of coax jumper usually cures it... denny / k8do - antenna monger from way back... Another fine myth you've gotten us into, Ollie! Article: 228631 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Denny" Subject: Re: Testing a thermocouple-type RF Ammeter Date: 22 Aug 2006 10:38:50 -0700 Message-ID: <1156268330.442702.111250@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> References: Yup, it's a good bet, Al... denny / k8do Article: 228632 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Denny" Subject: Re: Sommer design Date: 22 Aug 2006 10:41:31 -0700 Message-ID: <1156268491.181944.273850@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> References: <940d3$44ea19ef$453d9423$32391@FUSE.NET> Man, the Sommer is almost TWICE as heavy. > And the Sommer has lebenty zillion clamped, screwed, and riveted, RF connections which will not take kindly to oxidation, salt air, etc... denny Article: 228633 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "RST Engineering" References: <1156112798.027258.152330@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: Two Meter FM Antenna Question Message-ID: Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 11:12:43 -0700 Let's not confuse "efficiency" with "gain". Efficiency asks, "Of the power that is incident at the feed point of the antenna, how much of that power is radiated into free space and how much is wasted as reflected or consumed in losses (matching or the elements themselves)?" Gain asks, "For a receiver far distant (in terms of wavelengths) from the antenna, which antenna produces a higher signal strength?" In the latter, which is what I presume you meant, we have to have a reference of some sort ... we have a fictitious impossible antenna called "isotropic", which says that all power is radiated from a point source that is infinitely small and infinitely efficient ... that is, all the power incident on the point is radiated equally in all spherical directions ... a radiating molecular seed at the center of an orange the size of Yankee stadium. If you measure a perfect dipole with respect to this isotropic source, you find a "gain" perpendicular to the dipole elements of 2.14 dB. Where did this "gain" come from, since power can not be created by a passive antenna? If you look at the radiation pattern of a dipole, this apparent increase in power was caused by a deep hole in the pattern off the ends of the dipole. THe dipole, in essence, squeezed the top and the bottom to let the sides bulge out. Think of a donut dropped over the elements and sitting at the feed point of the dipole. For the ground plane, think of that same donut cut in half through the fat part of the donut. Now since our "power" is really the volume of the donut, if you cut it in half, you are going to have to start out with a fatter donut if you are going to wind up with the same volume. Now drop that fat donut over the radiating element and let it come to rest on the center of the ground plane. The dipole radiated its energy so that half of it was "up" and half of it was "down". If "down" into the ground isn't what you wanted, then the ground plane, which radiates all of its energy "up" at some angle to the horizon, has more gain. By a clever bending of the ground plane wires down at some angle to the horizon, you can move that donut pattern down to where it is nearly horizontal. Thus, for a person at some far distance, a properly constructed ground plane will appear to have a stronger signal relative to a dipole. Jim "N3" wrote in message news:1156112798.027258.152330@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com... > Which one of the the two is more efficient as a radiator & why? > > 1/2 wave vertical fed in the center with coax or one vertical 1/4 wave > with four 1/4 wave radials also fed in the center with coax? > Article: 228634 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: kevin.pavin@gmail.com Subject: Transmit but not Receive Date: 22 Aug 2006 11:39:54 -0700 Message-ID: <1156271994.209347.58810@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> Hi, First off let me state that I'm a newbie in RF hardware so my apologies if this is a dumb question. For an experiment I'm conducting I want to be able to transmit two data streams from two WiFi(b) routers at the same time. I realize that they have carrier sense avoidance so that if they are right next to each other they will not transmit at the same time. Is there a piece of hardware (filter, diode? or something?) that i can put between the output of the routers and their respective antennas such that this device will pass the transmit signal to the antenna but not pass any radiation received from the antenna to the routers? The idea then would be that the carrier sense would not come into play as no power would be received from the antennas. Any ideas or suggestions would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, Kev Article: 228635 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Helmut Wabnig <...._.--_.-_-..._-._.._--.@.-_---_-._*_.-_-> Subject: Re: Transmit but not Receive Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 20:48:15 +0200 Message-ID: References: <1156271994.209347.58810@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> On 22 Aug 2006 11:39:54 -0700, kevin.pavin@gmail.com wrote: >Hi, > >First off let me state that I'm a newbie in RF hardware so my apologies >if this is a dumb question. For an experiment I'm conducting I want to >be able to transmit two data streams from two WiFi(b) routers at the >same time. I realize that they have carrier sense avoidance so that if >they are right next to each other they will not transmit at the same >time. Is there a piece of hardware (filter, diode? or something?) that >i can put between the output of the routers and their respective >antennas such that this device will pass the transmit signal to the >antenna but not pass any radiation received from the antenna to the >routers? The idea then would be that the carrier sense would not come >into play as no power would be received from the antennas. Any ideas >or suggestions would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, > >Kev A circulator would do the trick. http://www.ditom.com/microwave-circulator.htm https://ewhdbks.mugu.navy.mil/circulat.htm Rather expensive, sometimes to be found on Ebay. w. Article: 228636 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" References: Subject: Re: Mismatched Zo Connectors Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 20:00:19 +0100 Message-ID: <2eSdnYZzr7pWyXbZRVnytA@bt.com> > Reg Edwards wrote: > > Regardless of its other dimensions, the primary requirement of a > > mismatched connector is that its length should be appreciably less > > than 1/4-wavelength at the highest working frequency. ====================================== > Yes, at HF the reflections from one impedance discontinuity > and the reflections from a complimentary impedance discontinuity > 3 inches away almost entirely cancel each other. > -- > 73, Cecil ======================================== Reflections are functions of TIME, not frequency. Oliver Heaviside had the right idea long before the invention of the SWR meter. ----- Reg, G4FGQ. Article: 228637 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" References: <1156112798.027258.152330@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: Two Meter FM Antenna Question Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 20:10:19 +0100 Message-ID: "N3" wrote in message news:1156112798.027258.152330@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com... > Which one of the the two is more efficient as a radiator & why? > > 1/2 wave vertical fed in the center with coax or one vertical 1/4 wave > with four 1/4 wave radials also fed in the center with coax? > ========================================== They are both equally efficient. There's no reason why they should be otherwise. Hint : Try not to confuse efficiency with gain. Article: 228638 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: kevin.pavin@gmail.com Subject: Re: Transmit but not Receive Date: 22 Aug 2006 12:30:29 -0700 Message-ID: <1156275029.791800.75670@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> References: <1156271994.209347.58810@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> Helmut Wabnig wrote: > On 22 Aug 2006 11:39:54 -0700, kevin.pavin@gmail.com wrote: > > >Hi, > > > >First off let me state that I'm a newbie in RF hardware so my apologies > >if this is a dumb question. For an experiment I'm conducting I want to > >be able to transmit two data streams from two WiFi(b) routers at the > >same time. I realize that they have carrier sense avoidance so that if > >they are right next to each other they will not transmit at the same > >time. Is there a piece of hardware (filter, diode? or something?) that > >i can put between the output of the routers and their respective > >antennas such that this device will pass the transmit signal to the > >antenna but not pass any radiation received from the antenna to the > >routers? The idea then would be that the carrier sense would not come > >into play as no power would be received from the antennas. Any ideas > >or suggestions would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, > > > >Kev > A circulator would do the trick. > > http://www.ditom.com/microwave-circulator.htm > > https://ewhdbks.mugu.navy.mil/circulat.htm > > Rather expensive, sometimes to be found on Ebay. > > w. Thanks for the suggestion, a circulator/isolator is what i need. If anyone has any suggestions on a bargain vendor I'd appreciate it. Also as a follow up does anyone have a sense as to what the default carrier sense power threshold is on WiFi routers in dBm? I've seen a few isolators so far that range from 20dB to 40dB isolation, my router puts out 20dBm so it would be good to know if one isolator will do the trick. Thanks again. Kev Article: 228639 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Woody" References: <30954.oidi09.d0904.ddoi0@qkd.org> <12bactjanpufjfc@corp.supernews.com> Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Message-ID: <0_IGg.27169$uV.15986@trnddc08> Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 19:33:16 GMT It was a CQD actually.... but the point is, the ham immediately alerted the Frankfurt, Olympic, Carpathia, et al and told them to go save lives! Being simple Marconists however; they all said 'no' so the ham grabbed his portable radio trunk, strapped a J-38 to his leg, jumped into his skiff and madly paddled 46 hours straight out to the stricken ship, all the while tapping out rescue coordination efforts with his elbow, and.... wait... I forget, where does it go from there? rb "David G. Nagel" wrote in message news:12bactjanpufjfc@corp.supernews.com... > Cecil Moore wrote: > >> Dirk wrote: >> >>> Ham's care more about operating appliances than knowing how to save a >>> lives. >> >> >> How many times in the entire history of amateur radio >> has a ham used CW to actually save a life? One would >> think there would be a book full of examples by now. > > A ham operator intercepted the SOS from the RMS Titanic. Article: 228640 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Bruce in Alaska Subject: Re: Testing a thermocouple-type RF Ammeter References: Message-ID: Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 19:34:33 GMT In article , Al Schapira wrote: > Is is valid to test a thermocouple-type RF Ammeter using low > frequency (say 60 Hz) current? I did so and got quite > reasonable results. Hey, current is current, right? > > I have three different thermocouple-type RF Ammeters, with > FS ranges of 1.5, 2.0 and 3.0 RF Amps that I wanted to test. > The 2 Amp meter has an external thermocouple (16 mV DC for 2.0 RF Amps) > and the other two have internal thermocouples. > > I hooked them all up in series, and also in series with a > Fluke digital AC Ammeter, fed them from 6.3 VAC through a suitable > dropping resistor. All readings agreed within a few percent at various > currents. > > Can I now assume that these meters will also function correctly at RF > (i.e. 3 - 30 MHz)? > > Thanks. > > -Al, W2ADS Usually done with a calirated DC supply, but Thermal is Thermal and mostly those meters aren't any better than 2% anyway..... Bruce in alaska AL7AQ -- add a <2> before @ Article: 228641 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: You Subject: Re: Transmit but not Receive References: <1156271994.209347.58810@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> Message-ID: Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 19:38:32 GMT In article , Helmut Wabnig <...._.--_.-_-..._-._.._--.@.-_---_-._*_.-_-> wrote: > On 22 Aug 2006 11:39:54 -0700, kevin.pavin@gmail.com wrote: > > >Hi, > > > >First off let me state that I'm a newbie in RF hardware so my apologies > >if this is a dumb question. For an experiment I'm conducting I want to > >be able to transmit two data streams from two WiFi(b) routers at the > >same time. I realize that they have carrier sense avoidance so that if > >they are right next to each other they will not transmit at the same > >time. Is there a piece of hardware (filter, diode? or something?) that > >i can put between the output of the routers and their respective > >antennas such that this device will pass the transmit signal to the > >antenna but not pass any radiation received from the antenna to the > >routers? The idea then would be that the carrier sense would not come > >into play as no power would be received from the antennas. Any ideas > >or suggestions would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, > > > >Kev > A circulator would do the trick. > > http://www.ditom.com/microwave-circulator.htm > > https://ewhdbks.mugu.navy.mil/circulat.htm > > Rather expensive, sometimes to be found on Ebay. > > w. Why would there be a significant problem in the first place.... these aren't CW devices, they are Packetized Spread Spectrum and two devices next to each other, even on the same channel, would not run into each other, due to different spreading code roots anyway..... Hmmmmm, non problem, from where I sit..... Article: 228642 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Woody" References: <30954.oidi09.d0904.ddoi0@qkd.org> <12bactjanpufjfc@corp.supernews.com> <1152726413.592316.117800@s13g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <12bag3q7hc7u723@corp.supernews.com> Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Message-ID: Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 19:42:37 GMT uhhhh..... good point. Not sure what your point applies to... but OK, we all agree that radio is a useful invention. What were we talking about again? rb "David G. Nagel" wrote in message news:12bag3q7hc7u723@corp.supernews.com... > an old friend wrote: >> David G. Nagel wrote: >> >>>Cecil Moore wrote: >>> >>> >>>>Dirk wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>>Ham's care more about operating appliances than knowing how to save a >>>>>lives. >>>> >>>> >>>>How many times in the entire history of amateur radio >>>>has a ham used CW to actually save a life? One would >>>>think there would be a book full of examples by now. >>> >>>A ham operator intercepted the SOS from the RMS Titanic. >> >> how many life were saved thereby the Carpathia wheard the call and >> arrived to save some folks what role did the ARS playing in saving even >> one life that sorry day? >> > > We aren't talking about failure to receive a CW SOS. Those ships that > responded did so after receiving word of the sinking by radio. They saved > many lives from the lifeboats which would otherwise have been lost to the > cold. > > Dave N Article: 228643 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" References: <30954.oidi09.d0904.ddoi0@qkd.org> <1152929851.865986.4740@35g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <_AVug.9493$PE1.1406@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net> <1153275616.225575.252170@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com> <44BDA4F3.7000706@fuse.net> <12brelk76dlj901@corp.supernews.com> Subject: Re: Morris Code -plus- Continuous Wave (CW) Radio Transmission -and- Semaphore Signals ? Do They Defining Amateur Radio ? Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 20:44:29 +0100 Message-ID: <6-idnTM_Adq1wnbZRVnyuA@bt.com> "Cecil Moore" wrote in message news:r4HGg.3174$q63.1567@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com... > Reg Edwards wrote: > > But there's nothing to prevent people who appreciate and love the > > language of Morse, the way it sings, its universality, its beauty, > > from continuing to use it way into the future. > > The same is true of sailing ships, hot-air balloons, > and horses. Do what turns you on and leave the > @#$%&$ federal government out of it. > -- > 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp ======================================== I like watching gleaming reciprocating stationary steam engines with 8 feet diameter flywheels. They turn me on too. The government doesn't interfere. But there's not many about these days. ;o( Turbines leave me cold! ---- Reg. Article: 228644 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Woody" References: <30954.oidi09.d0904.ddoi0@qkd.org> <12bactjanpufjfc@corp.supernews.com> Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Message-ID: Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 19:50:35 GMT The Titanic knew their coordinates.... didn't slow the influx of H20.... The responding ships had radios too... didn't turn their props any faster.... Answer to the question.... there was no system then. CW can punch through if there is a human on the other end, where GPS/packet says 'no signal'.... GPS is faster, where CW takes longer.... so one is obsolete, the other inferior. rb "Cecil Moore" wrote in message news:alctg.129932$dW3.39849@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com... > Dave wrote: >> David G. Nagel wrote: >>> A ham operator intercepted the SOS from the RMS Titanic. >> >> Yep!! It happened once! > > If CW had not existed at the time, how would things have > turned out differently? If the present GPS-based system > had existed at the time, how would things have turned out? > Which system is presently inferior and virtually obsolete? > -- > 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 228645 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Woody" References: <30954.oidi09.d0904.ddoi0@qkd.org> <12bactjanpufjfc@corp.supernews.com> Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Message-ID: Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 19:56:37 GMT Good Lord, are you saying that a 1 jigawatt transmitter and an Infinity times Pi speed ham operator couldn't telepathically float a swamped ship, and thwart hypothermia of people in the water??? How crass. Can you tell I'm off today and quite bored? LOL rb "Dave" wrote in message news:GM6dnaSGH_QW9ijZnZ2dnUVZ_oSdnZ2d@comcast.com... > Cecil Moore wrote: > >> Dave wrote: >> >>> David G. Nagel wrote: >>> >>>> A ham operator intercepted the SOS from the RMS Titanic. >>> >>> >>> Yep!! It happened once! >> >> >> If CW had not existed at the time, how would things have >> turned out differently? If the present GPS-based system >> had existed at the time, how would things have turned out? >> Which system is presently inferior and virtually obsolete? > > C'mon Cecil, you've been licensed as long as I have. I Know you Know CW. > Does that mean we're virtually obsolete? > > RE Titanic: > > The same result would have happened. The ship hit an iceberg in poor > visibility. I don't think icebergs carry GPS transponders these days. > > Now, the Titanic's GPS; does it have transponder capability? The older GPS > units do not. Anyway, after the crew slipped by the iceberg that ripped it > open, the radio op gets on the air and reports "SOS" or equivalent. The > nearest ships respond. Under conditions similar to 1914{?} the Titanic > still sinks. Many people still die. But, now we know to 20 feet exactly > where the ship was when it sank. > > GPS won't make a difference. Neither will CW today. > > I still enjoy CW. > Article: 228646 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: dplatt@radagast.org (Dave Platt) Subject: Re: Transmit but not Receive Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 20:00:21 -0000 Message-ID: <12emoil7eputaab@corp.supernews.com> References: <1156271994.209347.58810@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> <1156275029.791800.75670@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> In article <1156275029.791800.75670@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>, wrote: >> A circulator would do the trick. >> >> http://www.ditom.com/microwave-circulator.htm >> >> https://ewhdbks.mugu.navy.mil/circulat.htm >> >> Rather expensive, sometimes to be found on Ebay. >> >> w. > >Thanks for the suggestion, a circulator/isolator is what i need. If >anyone has any suggestions on a bargain vendor I'd appreciate it. Ummm... realize that a circulator/isolator hooked between the antenna, and the antenna jack of a typical 802.11b router, is going to dump essentially _all_ of the incoming power from the antenna into its dummy load. This will include any power generated by the other AP's transmitter and reflected back from the antenna. It'll also include any power picked up by the antenna. In short, the AP's receiver will "go deaf". It won't be overwhelmed by transmitted signal from the other radio, but neither will it "hear" the signals it's supposed to respond to. That's fine if all you're doing is broadcasting/multicasting packets, and don't need to accept packets or acknowledgements in return. It won't work, however, with a typical 802.11b AP-and-client system, in which the client device has to transmit to the AP in order to associate with it. I really don't know if an 802.11 AP is going to try to broadcast or multicast packets if it "thinks" that there aren't any client devices associated with it. -- Dave Platt AE6EO Hosting the Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads! Article: 228647 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Woody" References: <30954.oidi09.d0904.ddoi0@qkd.org> <12bactjanpufjfc@corp.supernews.com> Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Message-ID: <%nJGg.27240$uV.18850@trnddc08> Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 20:00:59 GMT Hey, if an alien force ever invades our planet and demands that we pass a 40wpm code test or they will annihilate the planet, then yes, it would! Never say never. rb ps: Yeah, all is see on these groups is stupidity... might as well enjoy it. :-) no offense to the OP's here.... just making a generalized statement about this whole thread and others like it. "Cecil Moore" wrote in message news:RYitg.48117$VE1.6593@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com... > Dave wrote: >> C'mon Cecil, you've been licensed as long as I have. I Know you Know CW. >> Does that mean we're virtually obsolete? > > My favorite mode is CW and it's a fun mode but it is never > going to save the world. > -- > 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 228648 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Woody" References: <30954.oidi09.d0904.ddoi0@qkd.org> <12bactjanpufjfc@corp.supernews.com> Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Message-ID: Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 20:02:50 GMT ....and ammo, for control of rabid cw ops who finally figure out there's no one listening and come to steal said food and water.... rb "Cecil Moore" wrote in message news:VgAtg.48291$VE1.42374@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com... > Slow Code wrote: >> With an attitude like that it probably won't. Better keep a microphone >> handy. > > Actually, what I keep handy is food and water. > -- > 73, Cecil, http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 228649 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Woody" References: <30954.oidi09.d0904.ddoi0@qkd.org> <12bactjanpufjfc@corp.supernews.com> <7ifcb2pnsk4dfm7sqgq0fk5o2blct6i9r7@4ax.com> <641db29d5dd2dsn4ofkgdc7dr02nq7ugr1@4ax.com> <44b69682$0$3634$ecde5a14@news.coretel.net> <7Ywtg.3750$2v.1828@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net> <44b6bd4e$0$3643$ecde5a14@news.coretel.net> Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Message-ID: Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 20:17:10 GMT Wow.... so you could almost say the reason there was such a disaster [notwithstanding the time period and simple circumstance] is that all these radio operators [and companies] were acting like a bunch of egotistical morons, each thinking their way to be better, and that most vessels communications, wireless ops and policies were almost.............. amateur........... in nature? LOL... rb "Geoffrey S. Mendelson" wrote in message news:slrnebdhlt.flp.gsm@cable.mendelson.com... > clfe wrote: >> "Cecil Moore" wrote in message >> news:7Ywtg.3750$2v.1828@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net... >>> It was before the Titanic hit the iceberg that the Titanic >>> CW operator told the Californian CW operator to get off the >>> air. He considered his normal Titanic CW message traffic to >>> have priority over any CW traffic that the Californian might >>> need to pass. Turns out the Californian's CW operator was >>> the only person in the world who could have saved the life >>> of the Titanic's CW operator. >>> -- >>> 73, Cecil, http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp >> >> In that case then - I stand corrected, I was unaware of that. > > It's totaly untrue. The Californian's radio operator ignored the > Titanic's distress signals because the Titanic was a Marconi ship and > the Californian was a Telefunken ship. The operators were not allowed to > communicate with the competing company's operators under any > circumstances under penalty of being put off the ship at first landing, > with no hope of getting home or being hired by the other company. > > I recently blogged about it: > > http://geoffstechno.livejournal.com/2006/06/22/ > > Geoff. > > -- > Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel gsm@mendelson.com N3OWJ/4X1GM > IL Voice: (07)-7424-1667 IL Fax: 972-2-648-1443 U.S. Voice: > 1-215-821-1838 > Visit my 'blog at http://geoffstechno.livejournal.com/ Article: 228650 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Woody" References: <30954.oidi09.d0904.ddoi0@qkd.org> <1152725095.545555.121150@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Message-ID: Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 20:21:44 GMT And I say I agree with the problem that mentioned for the cw being needed and life saving station for the pc with no code. It'll never work and if it does it will only be working a pc and if that is not the person then it is not the same so you can say it didn't work anyway because it wasn't a person that needed it. So there. rb "Bill Turner" wrote in message news:j6kab2hpqfaob6qrm1s32ra118p8gh3h3p@4ax.com... > ORIGINAL MESSAGE: > > On 12 Jul 2006 10:24:55 -0700, "an old freind" > wrote: > >>if i was at my home station is no they would not die >> >>and I am as no code as they come I down right hate the mode and yet y >>pc and station is quite able to work cw as needed to save a life if it >>was needed > > ------------ REPLY SEPARATOR ------------ > > He apparently hates English too. > > Bill, W6WRT Article: 228651 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Woody" References: <30954.oidi09.d0904.ddoi0@qkd.org> Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Message-ID: <%RJGg.27319$uV.13889@trnddc08> Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 20:32:59 GMT Well there ya have it folks.... 50wpm saves lives. So how does it work? Turn up the speaker really loud and place it [face down] on the person's chest, while an op in South America tapped out universally accepted words that would mimic an atrioventricular rhythm? Wrong theatre? OK... Maybe if a person is trapped on a sinking ship in the Indian Ocean you, in Siberia, could tap out a message to someone in Madagascar [who happened to be awake at an odd hour] and that person also owned a large SAR chopper, they could jump in it, saving the time of relaying to anyone else, and go pluck them from certain death? OH, or better yet... if your neighbor is also a ham.... and your wife fell over with an AMI, you could call your neighbor, give him a freq, then the two of you get set up and running, then you can send a 50wpm message asking your neighbor to call an ambulance? BTW, if the phones are down, you ask him to get in his car and drive down to the local EMS agency, and bring them to you. Life saved! I'm impressed. rb "Dave Oldridge" wrote in message news:Xns97FEBF9E9E651doldridgsprintca@64.59.135.159... > dj@qkd.net (Dirk) wrote in news:30954.oidi09.d0904.ddoi0@qkd.org: > >> Ham's care more about operating appliances than knowing how to save a >> lives. > > The person would not die on my watch, as long as I could get a signal out > and someone on the other end could copy it. I'd probably have to practice > a bit to get back up over 50wpm, but I can do 25 or 30 all day long. > > > -- > Dave Oldridge+ > ICQ 1800667 Article: 228652 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Woody" References: <30954.oidi09.d0904.ddoi0@qkd.org> <1152929851.865986.4740@35g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <44b94f14$0$3631$ecde5a14@news.coretel.net> Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Message-ID: <1WJGg.27331$uV.23399@trnddc08> Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 20:37:17 GMT Not true.... commercial stations ID with CW all the time. It's great for zero-priority use. rb "Alun L. Palmer" wrote in message news:Xns980282642E234elektrosmdonet@217.22.228.20... > "clfe" wrote in > news:44b94f14$0$3631$ecde5a14@news.coretel.net: > >> "Alun L. Palmer" wrote in message >> news:Xns9801992EDFA46elektrosmdonet@217.22.228.20... >>> hot-ham-and-cheese@hotmail.com wrote in >>> news:1152929851.865986.4740@35g2000cwc.googlegroups.com: >>> >>> If you asked the same question to someone who had only passed 5 wpm >>> and then, like me, never used it, then I suspect the victim wouldn't >>> make it. But then in most countries there is NO morse code testing any >>> more, so there are plenty of hams now who've never learnt atall. For >>> decades there have been no code VHF hams in most countries anyway. >>> >> >> To "some" extent, I "may" have to disagree. I held a class once for "No >> Code Tech" and one of the guys - a man in his 70s asked if he could go >> for the code test even though I wasn't teaching code. He said he had >> learned it years ago in the service - but may be rusty. Let me tell you >> - when he was done testing, he had PERFECT copy. Was he practicing all >> along? We'll never know - nor did I ask. He has since passed on. Some >> people DO have a good memory and retain quite well. Others - lose >> things almost immediately if not used. Some of us, it takes a while to >> lose it and we usually do. >> >> Lou >> >> >> > > It is possible that someone could learn at 5wpm, not use it for years, and > still be able to use it, but I wouldn't want to bet my life on it. > > More to the point is I can't magine a scenario in which CW would be the > only mode available, and that hams are about the only remaining users of > CW. Article: 228653 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Woody" References: <30954.oidi09.d0904.ddoi0@qkd.org> <1152929851.865986.4740@35g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Message-ID: <9ZJGg.27339$uV.13173@trnddc08> Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 20:40:37 GMT LOL...... amen, brother... Don't continue to show intelligence, though.... it disturbs the natives.... rb "Fred McKenzie" wrote in message news:fmmck-1607061316520001@ac9bfd05.ipt.aol.com... > In article , "Alun L. > Palmer" wrote: > >> Assuming some weird contrived scenario where I had the equipment to send >> CW >> but not phone, it would depend what frequencies it worked on. > > I think this is the nature of the premise on which the original post was > based. > > Compare it to a similar situation, where a film camera user is debating a > digital camera user: > > "If you came upon a drowning man, and you had to choose whether to save > him or photograph his demise, what kind of film would you use?" Article: 228654 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Message-ID: <44EB6CEC.A2578DAA@shaw.ca> From: Irv Finkleman Subject: Re: Vertica multiband antenna HF References: <5_2Gg.13649$MA3.12746@news.ono.com> <84kie2tuootkqh9kveeo8numnbignaiuto@4ax.com> Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 20:45:23 GMT Ruben Navarro Huedo wrote: > > > > > > >> I need an antenna like Cushcraft R8, Gap Titan, Diamond CP-6 or > >> something > >> like that with integrated radial systems. I have a Cushcraft R7 which I picked up used a few years ago. It has withstood four harsh Calgary winters, heavy hail, and some pretty high winds without any degredation in performance. It is not guyed and provides 40 meter operation as well. I've used other verticals, and beams as well, but in over 40 years of hamming it's the best antenna I've had so far. Irv VE6BP -- -------------------------------------- Visit my HomePage at http://members.shaw.ca/finkirv/index.html Visit my Baby Sofia website at http://members.shaw.ca/finkirv4/index.htm Visit my OLDTIMERS website at http://members.shaw.ca/finkirv5/index.htm -------------------- Irv Finkleman, Grampa/Ex-Navy/Old Fart/Ham Radio VE6BP Calgary, Alberta, Canada Article: 228655 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Woody" References: <30954.oidi09.d0904.ddoi0@qkd.org> <1152929851.865986.4740@35g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <_AVug.9493$PE1.1406@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net> <1153181770.231461.15160@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Message-ID: <15KGg.27360$uV.26734@trnddc08> Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 20:49:01 GMT Ha... yeah, only a ham radio operator would use a non-digital camera..... and then it would have to be a daguerreotype. rb "Brian Denley" wrote in message news:L4-dneMy-efFpCHZnZ2dnUVZ_vOdnZ2d@comcast.com... > an old friend wrote: >> Slow Code wrote: >>> fmmck@aol.com (Fred McKenzie) wrote in >>> news:fmmck-1607061316520001@ac9bfd05.ipt.aol.com: >>> >>>> In article , "Alun L. >>>> Palmer" wrote: >> >>>> "If you came upon a drowning man, and you had to choose whether to >>>> save him or photograph his demise, what kind of film would you use?" >>> >>> >>> Getting rid of CW is like choosing the kind of film. >>> >>> Ham radio is drowning and the anti-code hams want us to think >>> tossing it bricks will make it float better. Dumbing things down is >>> never an improvement. >> nobody is talking about dummbing anything down >> >> you are >> indeed you advocate dummbing down radio and giving hf only to the >> unintelgent >> >>> >>> SC > > Knowing CW is NO indication of any level of intelligence, technical or > otherwise! > > BTW film is seeing it's last days too. Ask Kodak! > > -- > Brian Denley > http://home.comcast.net/~b.denley/index.html > Article: 228656 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Woody" References: <30954.oidi09.d0904.ddoi0@qkd.org> <1152929851.865986.4740@35g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <_AVug.9493$PE1.1406@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net> <1153275616.225575.252170@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com> <44BDA4F3.7000706@fuse.net> <12brelk76dlj901@corp.supernews.com> Subject: Re: Morris Code -plus- Continuous Wave (CW) Radio Transmission -and- Semaphore Signals ? Do They Defining Amateur Radio ? Message-ID: Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 20:55:47 GMT Why would they be? 10th graders aren't interested in listening to a bunch of 60yr old men act like 8th graders. :-) rb "Jimmie D" wrote in message news:Ld6Gg.30663$bo6.7667@bignews7.bellsouth.net... > >> >> Yes. That's understandable. Hams these days don't want to act like >> hams, >> they like to be appliance operators. So kids don't see that CW is >> important and fun. All they see is hams gabbing on a microphone like any >> CB'er can do. >> >> SC > > Actually a lot of tghe boy scouts know morse code, they still arent > intersted in ham radio. > Article: 228657 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Woody" References: <_AVug.9493$PE1.1406@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net> <1153275616.225575.252170@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com> <6gKvg.174657$F_3.5191@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net> Subject: Re: Morse Code -plus- Continuous Wave (CW) Radio Transmission -and- Semaphore Signals ? Do They Defining Amateur Radio ? Message-ID: Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 21:01:30 GMT LOL "Telamon" wrote in message news:telamon_spamshield-6107E6.12161920072006@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com... > In article , > Cecil Moore wrote: > >> Al Klein wrote: >> > You can hear the change in noise as a carrier goes on and off. It's >> > extremely difficult to copy high speed CW like that if the signal is >> > strong, but a weak signal or slower CW is just as easy to copy as >> > noise as it is to copy as a pure tone. T1 doesn't mean uncopyable, it >> > just means ragged tone. >> >> So now amateurs and SWL's should be Morse code proficient >> not only using tones but using the swishing sound made when >> a BFO is not present? > > The swishing sound is coming from aliens. Try making the same sounds > back to them. You might get a more intelligent conversation going than > the one in this cross posted thread. > > -- > Telamon > Ventura, California Article: 228658 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Woody" References: <30954.oidi09.d0904.ddoi0@qkd.org> <1152929759.022387.231510@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1152931208.617498.208970@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1153564701.965658.219410@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> <1153584132.692529.177920@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <0ro4c2d13dq9i23ab98uiiql3spgmhfi22@4ax.com> Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Message-ID: Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 21:05:54 GMT .... yup, and to complete the circle we should also learn both the older and newer versions of it, because you never know when some poor 90yr old ex-radio op is gonna fire up his spark-gap and send out a distress call using non-international code..... It's all about being prepared, ppl.... rb "Tom" wrote in message news:N-Kdndf6GIDM41_ZnZ2dnUVZ_sGdnZ2d@insightbb.com... > > "Cecil Moore" wrote in message > news:OQtwg.177124$F_3.62543@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net... >> Al Klein wrote: >>> How honest is it to memorize answers to a test? >> >> How honest is it to memorize Morse code? Or should >> Morse code be derived from first principles? >> -- >> 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp > > Lets face it folks to be a well rounded Ham one should learn CW. You > never know when it will come in handy. I am not that good at it, maybe a > step or less above a Novice, but I like to fool around with it. One ought > to think about learning it in do time even though it is not required. > My 2 cents worth. > > > Article: 228659 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Woody" References: <1152931208.617498.208970@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1153564701.965658.219410@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> <1153584132.692529.177920@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <0ro4c2d13dq9i23ab98uiiql3spgmhfi22@4ax.com> <1153597502.509378.294260@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> <1153664765.447946.4510@s13g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1154574315.819259.204140@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <6gr3d21444qdt5m6mr1e1jpavltvso929p@4ax.com> Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Message-ID: Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 21:24:28 GMT Yep, and a single point mentioning that if it were anything other than a simple hobby, your arguments would matter. But since it isn't... rb "Al Klein" wrote in message news:6gr3d21444qdt5m6mr1e1jpavltvso929p@4ax.com... > On 2 Aug 2006 20:05:21 -0700, hot-ham-and-cheese@hotmail.com wrote: > >>Al Klein wrote: >>> On 23 Jul 2006 07:26:05 -0700, hot-ham-and-cheese@hotmail.com wrote: > >>> >> >how balanced is to to place CW over all over ham knowledge? > >>> >> No one is, any more than by requiring people to know the law one is >>> >> putting the law "over all ham knowledge". > >>> >CW is pass/fail. To fail CW denies all HF privs (except for Alaska). > >>> Theory is also pass/fail. To fail to get the required number of >>> correct answers denies all privs - HF, VHF, UHF ... > >>There is no pass/fail practical for SSB, FM, AM, FSTV, SSTV, RTTY, FAX, >>Packet, PSK, etc, etc, etc. > > There's no test at all, so those claiming that the reason they want a > test for CW dropped because it's not "modern" have no argument - they > want no test for FSTV, SSTV, RTTY (which is also pretty old hat), > packet, PSK, etc. They want no test at all, unless they can memorize > a few answers to "pass" it. > >>> >> >How progressive is it? > >>> >> How progressive is it to not require people to know ... oh, yeah, >>> >> that's progressive, since the new thing is to hand out licenses >>> >> because people have some kind of "right" to get on the air. > >>> >Then why is it with the prospect of losing the CW Exam, that you'se >>> >guys want to "beef up" the written exams? > >>> We don't. > >>That is not true. > > Sure it is. "Beefing up" the written exam is a counter to "drop CW > because it's old fashioned". If you want modern you want the testing > to be turned from CW to modern modes. Those who want CW dropped just > want what they can't memorize dropped so they can get a ticket without > really being tested on anything. Actually knowing anything is so old > fashioned, isn't it? > >>> We want to get back the level it used to be before it was >>> dumbed down to the point that you could almost pass it if you never >>> heard of the FCC, ham radio or electronics. > >>You're referring to the Conditional license, right? > > No, I'm not addressing *where* the test is held at all - I'm > addressing *whether* there's any real test, which there isn't, except > for CW right now. Spitting out something you memorized is only a test > of memory. > >>> Just by guessing at the >>> answers. It used to require that you draw (was it 3?) schematics. > >>You tell me? Was it 2 or was it 3? > > I don't remember after almost 50 years - but I could still draw them > today, and it's not a test of remembering what's on the test, it's a > test of knowing what's in a radio. > >>> From scratch. Let's see how many people could do that today. A >>> Colpitts oscillator, a Hartley oscillator and some other circuit that >>> I've forgotten at the moment. > >>You should self-modify your license and cease amateur operation until >>you remember. > > Why? Testing isn't about memory, it's about knowledge. > >>The amateur is self-policing, and you no longer meet your own standard. > > Sure I do. The test wasn't to remember what circuits to draw, it was > to draw them. And I can draw them any time. > >>> They're still as relevant today as they were 50 years ago. > >>Other things are relevant today that weren't even known 50 years ago. > > So let's have them on the test. > > Oops, that's right - no more relevant testing, isn't that what people > are asking for? Just give me the answers so I can memorize them and > pick them out on the test. > >>> >> >how loyal is it to denny the nation the benifits of allowing more >>> >> >operators > >>> >> What "benefits" does the country get from more people using radios >>> >> who >>> >> don't know the first thing about them? (Whatever "denny" means.) > >>> >It's always been that way. You could even buy Heathkits already >>> >assembled. > >>> But you had to actually *know* a little theory to use one legally. > >>No you didn't. > > Yes, you did - you had to pass a test to show that you did. All you > have to do now is memorize a few answers. > >>I used radios in the military. I never used a CW key in the military. >>I never jammed another operator, although Brandywine asked me to reduce >>power once. > > But you had to learn how to use the radios. Hams today don't - they > memorize a few answers, buy equipment and get on the air - with no > understanding of what they're doing, and no desire to learn. > >>> That's exactly what he's talking about. Give someone a radio and a >>> "license" to use it and he'll "acquire the skill to be ready for >>> service to country and community". That's what Mark said, right up >>> above. How does one acquire skill by playing radio? > >>We self-train. > > You may, but I can see from many of the comments that have been posted > here that a lot of people don't. They don't want to learn, they want > to get on the air. Period. > >> It is a continuous process of improvements. You >>mistakenly believe that at the conclusion of The Exam, the "operator" >>is 100%. > > And you mistakenly believe that most hams today want to learn how to > operate properly. Listen to 75 some evenings. > >>> But that's what Mark and his ilk want - we'll have "skilled operators" >>> if we allow people to buy radios and put them on the air with no skill >>> or knowledge. By osmosis? Or by magic? > >>I've listened to emergency responders on a scanner before. They don't >>use Morse Code, they don't use CW. They use FM/Voice. Somehow they >>are effective at it, not having taken a Morse Code test. How can this >>be? > > They were trained. > >>> So you'd get a license not knowing CW, build a radio (you couldn't buy >>> one then) and ... what? Sit and look at it. Some things are just too >>> obvious to need mentioning. > >>Please diagram that radio from "Scratch." > > Any time. Filter or phasing? BFO receive or quadrature detection? > I've designed them, built them and used them, and still could. > >>> Evidently not, or I'd be the only one in the world advocating that a >>> test should actually test for something. There are actually millions >>> of us who don't think lack of instant gratification is the worst thing >>> in the world. > >>Dial 911 and tell the operator that you don't need instant >>gratification, take your time. > > Very bad example of an attempt at sarcasm and a misunderstanding of > "gratification". > >>> What next? DXCC awards for those who *want* to work 100 countries? > >>You seem to be confused. DXCC is an award offered by the ARRL, not the >>FCC. It has nothing to do with licensing. > > But an award for wanting has to do with "I want it so it's my right to > have it", which is what I'm talking about. No one has any "right" to > get on the air. Article: 228660 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Al Schapira Subject: Re: Testing a thermocouple-type RF Ammeter References: Message-ID: Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 21:26:07 GMT Thanks to all who responded. -Al Article: 228661 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Woody" References: <1152931208.617498.208970@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1153564701.965658.219410@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> <1153584132.692529.177920@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <0ro4c2d13dq9i23ab98uiiql3spgmhfi22@4ax.com> <1153597502.509378.294260@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> <1153664765.447946.4510@s13g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1154574315.819259.204140@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <6gr3d21444qdt5m6mr1e1jpavltvso929p@4ax.com> <1154614371.351691.272240@s13g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Message-ID: Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 21:31:18 GMT Won't work.... memorizing is learning. You know where you live because you memorized it. You know what a diode is because you read it somewhere. Reading a book or taking a class on radio would require you retain [memorize] what you are told or read. The information on radio should be kept secret, and the real test would be this: Here's a radio. Take it with you. Come back in 30 days and explain how it works. Then you get your owner's license, and can buy a radio. Next test is to listen on-air to the CW [as there is no reason to use phone, if you already speak a language.] and figure out the code without any text or charts. Then you get your operator's license. When you can do that, then you can act like you've accomplished something. rb "Cecil Moore" wrote in message news:LInAg.689$%j7.344@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net... > K4YZ wrote: >> Cecil Moore wrote: >>> Then why isn't knowledge of Morse code and the CW mode >>> sufficient? Why must someone be forced to memorize >>> the individual characters? >> >> Probably, Cecil, since it would then make it difficult to pass the >> test. > > You missed the point. The Morse code skill exam requires > memorizing the characters. Memorizing is being condemned > as an evil act. Since memorizing is evil, the Morse code > skill exam should be the first thing to be eliminated. > -- > 73, Cecil, http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 228662 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Woody" References: <6gr3d21444qdt5m6mr1e1jpavltvso929p@4ax.com> <1154614371.351691.272240@s13g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <44d20fd9$0$2919$ecde5a14@news.coretel.net> <44d216cb$0$2920$ecde5a14@news.coretel.net> <6ic7d2diqkk5go86t8bo86ik3c43t3laco@4ax.com> <44d3b80f$0$2919$ecde5a14@news.coretel.net> <1154726291.953345.94290@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <77p7d218eepp3gi87gqgr4rvmqs5nobkif@4ax.com> <1154741161.913572.107030@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Message-ID: Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 21:38:41 GMT This reply has absolutely no significance or meaning. It was just a good place to add a reply. Helps even out the sawtooth shape of the posts as I scroll down them. rb "an old friend" wrote in message news:1154741161.913572.107030@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com... > > Bill Turner wrote: >> ORIGINAL MESSAGE: >> >> On 4 Aug 2006 14:18:12 -0700, "an old freind" >> wrote: >> >> >i don't it was pretty for me one day work on one of these bike races >> >the served organizers heard the reapteer CW id asked what it read I >> >said hame were no longer required to be to read them and I could not, >> >time change ignorance fixed >> >> ------------ REPLY SEPARATOR ------------ >> >> Text like the above is what comes out when I try to copy CW. > can you still read it when you do it >> >> Bill, W6WRT >> 20 WPM Extra, but just barely > Article: 228663 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "LenAnderson@ieee.org" Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Date: 22 Aug 2006 15:10:17 -0700 Message-ID: <1156284617.050388.132430@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> References: <30954.oidi09.d0904.ddoi0@qkd.org> From: Woody on Tues, Aug 22 2006 12:50 pm >The Titanic knew their coordinates.... didn't slow the influx of H20.... >The responding ships had radios too... didn't turn their props any >faster.... The year was 1912...NINETY-FOUR YEARS AGO. >Answer to the question.... there was no system then. The predecessor organization for SOLAS had not yet made 500 KHz the international distress and safety frequency. "SOLAS" is an acronym for Safety Of Life At Sea. >CW can punch through if there is a human on the other end, where GPS/packet >says 'no signal'.... >GPS is faster, where CW takes longer.... >so one is obsolete, the other inferior. The International Maritime Community settled the 'morse issue.' They DROPPED it in favor of GMDSS (Global Marine Distress and Safety System), a semi-automated system which can be operated by anyone of the bridge crew on a ship (it needs little instruction on use). GMDSS messages are automatically routed to ground stations (note plural) via satellite relay. Those ground stations can coordinate rescue missions. A shipboard GMDS station doesn't HAVE to have a GPS receiver to feed it position data but all those which have one have no complaint about this alleged "loss of signal." Position data can be entered manually to a GMDS station. The bridge crew will have a running record of the ship's position in either event. The United States Coast Guard has DROPPED continuous monitoring of the 500 KHz distress frequency some years ago. Several other countries have done so. A following question is WHO will you believe on the efficacy of communications? The entire international maritime community or a bunch of myth-happy amateur morsemen? In a sentient, intelligent mind, ANY form of communications is good for use in matters involving life and death. The FCC thinks (rightly) so and says as much in Part 1 of Title 47 C.F.R. [Part 97 is not the entirety of regulations on amateur radio in the USA] -------------------- In a preceding message set: >"Cecil Moore" wrote in message >> Dave wrote: >>> David G. Nagel wrote: > >>>> A ham operator intercepted the SOS from the RMS Titanic. > >>> Yep!! It happened once! It happened NINETY-FOUR YEARS AGO. >> If CW had not existed at the time, how would things have >> turned out differently? If the present GPS-based system >> had existed at the time, how would things have turned out? I have to fault Cecil's erudite and intelligent mindset on that...although his motor looks good in his picture. :-) One CANNOT base any intelligent argument about ALTERNATE universes of different times and places. It hasn't happened in our present time-space continuum. In 1912 "radio" was in its infancy, having been first shown and demonstrated as a communications medium just 16 years prior. There were extremely few ships which had vacuum tubes as active devices to aid those first "radios." The tube was only 6 years old, the triode invented in 1906. To argue about "GPS" (which is not an integral part of GMDSS but can be) versus morse code is ludicrous. GPS relies on a time-frequency standard within each of the 24 GPS satellites which is comparable to the best time- frequency source at NIST. [the quartz crystal oscillator wasn't yet invented in 1912] Each satellite needs solid-state circuitry to make it function within a relatively small package. [the best "solid-state" device of 1912 was a galena crystal detector with its famous "cat's whisker"] The whole GPSS needed rocketry advanced enough to put all the satellites into orbit. [rocketry wasn't perfected for that purpose until after WW2] Those rockets needed launch guidance aided by radar systems. [radar, or rather a primitive system of it, wasn't tried until 1932 in a harbor area of France] However, "morse code" was used in the landline Morse-Vail Telegraph System working before the American Civil War and simple enough to turn a spark transmitter on and off as on the Titanic. >> Which system is presently inferior and virtually obsolete? On-off keyed CW. Except in the mindset of the ARRL. The IARU knows better. LenAnderson@ieee.org Article: 228664 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "LenAnderson@ieee.org" Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Date: 22 Aug 2006 15:19:49 -0700 Message-ID: <1156285189.249991.19140@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> References: <1153584132.692529.177920@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> From: M...@kb9rqz.com on Mon, Aug 21 2006 6:30 pm > wrote: >>From: an old friend on Mon, Aug 21 2006 3:16 pm >>>LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote: >>>> From: hot-ham-and-che...@hotmail.com on Sun, Aug 20 2006 2:57 pm > >>>> >If the league pushes the morse testing issue too hard, it will become >>>> >obvious to the 25% that are members. > >>>> I don't think so. The Amateur Radiotelegraphy Society is very >>>> firmly SET in their ideas of keeping the "heritage" and >>>> "tradition" of being a living museum of archaic radio. Those >>>> firm believers and worshippers at the Church of St. Hiram are >>>> disciples and they haven't had their last supper yet. > >>>I have no objection to them trying to prservs thier mode the ARS is big >>>enough even for unproductive thing > >> It's "minority rule" when ARRL lobbies for preservation of >> morse code test for any amateur radio license class. The >> ARRL membership is slightly less than a quarter of all US >> amateur radio licensees. > >>>> >Don't know if you've heard yet, but the ARRL and robesin announced that >>>> >MARS and TSA have an agreement for armageddon communications. > >>>> Heh heh, I wouldn't doubt it... :-) > >>>> [via "giant meteor bounce?" ... off the earth, that is? :-) ] > >>>> I thought Robesin had put on his (invisible) USMC uniform and >>>> was busy pounding brass with the USCG offshore from Beirut to >>>> evacuate US civilians? :-) > >>>now that remark I must take you to task for > >>>the last thing we want to sugest that robeson might wear is something >>>invisible now that image IS a sexauly distrubing one > >> Ahem...my reference was the old fairy tale, "The Emperor's New >> Clothes." :-) > >i thougt as much OTOH the image of robeson nude is still well To me it is UNwell... :-) >> That's the one where a full-of-himself ruler ordered some new >> clothes and the tailor buttered him up (while not sewing any >> new clothes) so much that the Emperor bought into this pandering >> to his ego and appeared in public with his "new clothes" (he was >> naked). Needless to say, the public laughed and laughed at this >> ridiculous spectacle. :-) > >indeed i laugh at him myself ruefully > >with the added though that this is thebest the procoder can muster Robesin is merely a product of the "incentive" licensing system where all those who hunger for being a "somebody" can get a Title - Rank - Privilege through a singular skill. I didn't make that system, neither did you, neither did anyone in these four forums. The FCC took a big chunk out of it (license classes and morsemanship skill) with the Restructuring of 2000 and that pissed off the Title-Rank- Status seekers. Devout morsemen are angry and venting steam because their self-esteem has fallen. >> Robeson has been all full of himself in here about his alleged >> "USMC service" yet he has presented zero-point-zero evidence >> from anyone else (or any legitimate agency) that he ever >> served on active USMC duty for any of his claimed "18 years." Simply amazing. EIGHTEEN years alleged on active duty and he can't supply a single photo or document to support his claim? In November of this year I can truthfully say I've been in the southern California aerospace business 50 years. I have all sorts of documentation and photos on that which I may fully digitize some day (some are already digitized). Some time ago I posted my resume in here...which only made Robesin ballistic then since he has NO comparable experience in industry and cannot prove any radio experience other than amateur and alleged "chief operator" status at some small MARS station long ago. [that was before his less-than-a-half-year as a purchasing agent at a small set top box maker] In another recent post, Robesin keeps referring to a "CV." That's an acronym for the Latin 'curriculum vitae,' a list of life experiences (education, work experience). In the electronics industry, indeed in MOST industries, those applying for jobs don't present a curriculum vitae, just a RESUME of education-work experience. Some academics may use "CV" but Personnel departments still look over resumes. Just one more little gaffe on Robesin's part, trying to LOOK experienced when he is NOT. >> Even though he NOW thinks of himself AS the amateur radio >> service personified (anything against him is somehow against >> ALL radio amateurs), he is still parodying the "Emperor." Another sign of his megalomania, purporting to "represent all" and, by extension, anyone against Him is "against all radio amateurs." Robesin desperately needs SOMETHING to hold up his self-esteem and he uses amateur radio for that selfish purpose. It is like his infamous snot-on-the- moustache CAP flight suit picture, big on rank, title, and with implications of status. CAP is NOT about amateur radio but Robesin keeps on harping about it as if it "proved" something about his amateur radio abilities. He does the same with his "ER nurse qualifications" but those have absolutely nothing to do with radio, amateur or professional. But, challenge Robesin or call him in error and one will be inundated with personal insults. Robeson MUST be right and he MUST rule. Civil comportment be damned with Robeson in newsgroups. Those newsgroups were (in his mind) created to showcase Him? LenAnderson@ieee.org Article: 228665 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "K4YZ" Subject: If Lennie Anderson Had To Tell The Truth Once, Would Bill Clinton Swear Off Big Mac's and White House Interns? With "Engineers" Like Lennie, It's No Wonder Everything Says "Made In Someplace Other Than The United States" Date: 22 Aug 2006 15:31:09 -0700 Message-ID: <1156285869.664544.112970@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> References: <1153584132.692529.177920@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> LenAnderson@ieee.org tried the same old tired rhetoric: Huge snip of same stuff Lennie's trashed the NG with for years..... > But, challenge Robesin or call him in error and one will be > inundated with personal insults. Robeson MUST be right and > he MUST rule. Civil comportment be damned with Robeson in > newsgroups. Those newsgroups were (in his mind) created to > showcase Him? No, Lennie...All YOU had to do was start in with the Nazi terms, elitist, etc etc etc. Google archives refer. I'd say you had a pretty good insight to yourself.... Hmmmmmm...Lessee...... > But, challenge (Anderson) or call him in error and one will be > inundated with personal insults. (Anderson) MUST be right and > he MUST rule. Civil comportment be damned with (Anderson) in > newsgroups. Those newsgroups were (in his mind) created to > showcase Him? Yep. Perfect fit. Steve, K4YZ Article: 228666 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "an old freind" Subject: Re: If Lennie Anderson Had To Tell The Truth Once, Would Bill Clinton Swear Off Big Mac's and White House Interns? With "Engineers" Like Lennie, It's No Wonder Everything Says "Made In Someplace Other Than The United States" Date: 22 Aug 2006 15:38:25 -0700 Message-ID: <1156286305.735833.70980@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> References: <1153597502.509378.294260@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> K4YZ wrote: > LenAnderson@ieee.org tried the same old tired rhetoric: >> > But, challenge (Anderson) or call him in error and one will be > > inundated with personal insults. (Anderson) MUST be right and > > he MUST rule. Civil comportment be damned with (Anderson) in > > newsgroups. Those newsgroups were (in his mind) created to > > showcase Him? > > Yep. agreeing for once get help but titles like that are Robeson stock in trade my content in his posts just ranting on and on about epople instead of Issues Article: 228667 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Owen Duffy Subject: Re: Mismatched Zo Connectors Message-ID: References: Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 22:53:40 GMT On Tue, 22 Aug 2006 17:28:01 GMT, Cecil Moore wrote: >and the reflections from a complimentary impedance discontinuity What is a "complimentary impedance discontinuity", or even a "complementary impedance discontinuity" if you meant that? Owen -- Article: 228668 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" References: <1156268266.047506.311280@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: Mismatched Zo Connectors Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 23:46:59 +0100 Message-ID: <_s6dnZHmMfd1FHbZnZ2dnUVZ8tOdnZ2d@bt.com> "Denny" wrote > If the antenna is 30 ohms or 80 ohms, with some reactance, does the SWR > meter notice the inexpensive run of supposed 70 ohm coax that you > cadged from the cable tv company? ===================================== Of course it doesn't. But at least it does try. The meter thinks it indicates SWR on the transmission line, whereas it actually indicates SWR on a long, imaginary, non-existent, 50-ohm line between tuner and transmitter. What sort of mess would Laurel & Hardy have found themselves in when trying to disentangle forward from reflected power? =================================== Article: 228669 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Tom Donaly" Subject: Re: Mismatched Zo Connectors References: Message-ID: Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 23:07:18 GMT Cecil Moore wrote: > Reg Edwards wrote: > >> Regardless of its other dimensions, the primary requirement of a >> mismatched connector is that its length should be appreciably less >> than 1/4-wavelength at the highest working frequency. > > > Yes, at HF the reflections from one impedance discontinuity > and the reflections from a complimentary impedance discontinuity > 3 inches away almost entirely cancel each other. What's a "complimentary impedance discontinuity," Cecil? 73, Tom Donaly, KA6RUH Article: 228670 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Woody" References: <30954.oidi09.d0904.ddoi0@qkd.org> <12bactjanpufjfc@corp.supernews.com> <1156284617.050388.132430@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Message-ID: <1iMGg.27902$uV.24149@trnddc08> Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 23:19:25 GMT Um.... you know, just saying "I agree" would have been a lot simpler and saved you 2 pages of typing.... LOL. rb wrote in message news:1156284617.050388.132430@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com... > From: Woody on Tues, Aug 22 2006 12:50 pm > > >>The Titanic knew their coordinates.... didn't slow the influx of H20.... >>The responding ships had radios too... didn't turn their props any >>faster.... > > The year was 1912...NINETY-FOUR YEARS AGO. > >>Answer to the question.... there was no system then. > > The predecessor organization for SOLAS had not yet made 500 KHz > the international distress and safety frequency. "SOLAS" is an > acronym for Safety Of Life At Sea. > >>CW can punch through if there is a human on the other end, where >>GPS/packet >>says 'no signal'.... >>GPS is faster, where CW takes longer.... >>so one is obsolete, the other inferior. > > The International Maritime Community settled the 'morse issue.' > They DROPPED it in favor of GMDSS (Global Marine Distress and > Safety System), a semi-automated system which can be operated > by anyone of the bridge crew on a ship (it needs little > instruction on use). GMDSS messages are automatically routed > to ground stations (note plural) via satellite relay. Those > ground stations can coordinate rescue missions. > > A shipboard GMDS station doesn't HAVE to have a GPS receiver > to feed it position data but all those which have one have > no complaint about this alleged "loss of signal." Position > data can be entered manually to a GMDS station. The bridge > crew will have a running record of the ship's position in > either event. > > The United States Coast Guard has DROPPED continuous > monitoring of the 500 KHz distress frequency some years > ago. Several other countries have done so. > > A following question is WHO will you believe on the efficacy > of communications? The entire international maritime > community or a bunch of myth-happy amateur morsemen? > > In a sentient, intelligent mind, ANY form of communications > is good for use in matters involving life and death. The > FCC thinks (rightly) so and says as much in Part 1 of Title > 47 C.F.R. [Part 97 is not the entirety of regulations on > amateur radio in the USA] > > -------------------- > > In a preceding message set: > >>"Cecil Moore" wrote in message >>> Dave wrote: >>>> David G. Nagel wrote: >> >>>>> A ham operator intercepted the SOS from the RMS Titanic. >> >>>> Yep!! It happened once! > > It happened NINETY-FOUR YEARS AGO. > >>> If CW had not existed at the time, how would things have >>> turned out differently? If the present GPS-based system >>> had existed at the time, how would things have turned out? > > I have to fault Cecil's erudite and intelligent mindset > on that...although his motor looks good in his picture. :-) > > One CANNOT base any intelligent argument about ALTERNATE > universes of different times and places. It hasn't > happened in our present time-space continuum. > > In 1912 "radio" was in its infancy, having been first shown > and demonstrated as a communications medium just 16 years > prior. There were extremely few ships which had vacuum > tubes as active devices to aid those first "radios." The > tube was only 6 years old, the triode invented in 1906. > > To argue about "GPS" (which is not an integral part of > GMDSS but can be) versus morse code is ludicrous. GPS > relies on a time-frequency standard within each of the > 24 GPS satellites which is comparable to the best time- > frequency source at NIST. [the quartz crystal > oscillator wasn't yet invented in 1912] Each satellite > needs solid-state circuitry to make it function within > a relatively small package. [the best "solid-state" > device of 1912 was a galena crystal detector with its > famous "cat's whisker"] The whole GPSS needed rocketry > advanced enough to put all the satellites into orbit. > [rocketry wasn't perfected for that purpose until after > WW2] Those rockets needed launch guidance aided by > radar systems. [radar, or rather a primitive system of > it, wasn't tried until 1932 in a harbor area of France] > > However, "morse code" was used in the landline Morse-Vail > Telegraph System working before the American Civil War > and simple enough to turn a spark transmitter on and off > as on the Titanic. > >>> Which system is presently inferior and virtually obsolete? > > On-off keyed CW. > > Except in the mindset of the ARRL. The IARU knows better. > > LenAnderson@ieee.org > Article: 228671 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: kevin.pavin@gmail.com Subject: Re: Transmit but not Receive Date: 22 Aug 2006 16:28:09 -0700 Message-ID: <1156289289.803852.98710@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> References: <1156271994.209347.58810@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> You wrote: > In article , > Helmut Wabnig <...._.--_.-_-..._-._.._--.@.-_---_-._*_.-_-> wrote: > > > On 22 Aug 2006 11:39:54 -0700, kevin.pavin@gmail.com wrote: > > > > >Hi, > > > > > >First off let me state that I'm a newbie in RF hardware so my apologies > > >if this is a dumb question. For an experiment I'm conducting I want to > > >be able to transmit two data streams from two WiFi(b) routers at the > > >same time. I realize that they have carrier sense avoidance so that if > > >they are right next to each other they will not transmit at the same > > >time. Is there a piece of hardware (filter, diode? or something?) that > > >i can put between the output of the routers and their respective > > >antennas such that this device will pass the transmit signal to the > > >antenna but not pass any radiation received from the antenna to the > > >routers? The idea then would be that the carrier sense would not come > > >into play as no power would be received from the antennas. Any ideas > > >or suggestions would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, > > > > > >Kev > > A circulator would do the trick. > > > > http://www.ditom.com/microwave-circulator.htm > > > > https://ewhdbks.mugu.navy.mil/circulat.htm > > > > Rather expensive, sometimes to be found on Ebay. > > > > w. > > Why would there be a significant problem in the first place.... > these aren't CW devices, they are Packetized Spread Spectrum > and two devices next to each other, even on the same channel, would > not run into each other, due to different spreading code roots > anyway..... Hmmmmm, non problem, from where I sit..... I'm running 802.11b @ 2.4Ghz. As I understand it at 11Mbps (which I'm using) the signal is "spread" using the CCK code, and each packet/user uses the same spreading function. So a transmission only goes forward if the channel is "empty", i.e. the received power at the transmitter is below some carrier sense threshold (dBm)...... Article: 228672 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "David 01" References: <30954.oidi09.d0904.ddoi0@qkd.org> <12bactjanpufjfc@corp.supernews.com> <1152726413.592316.117800@s13g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <12bag3q7hc7u723@corp.supernews.com> Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 19:29:55 -0400 Message-ID: <58860$44eb9361$471f2e62$7403@ALLTEL.NET> "Woody" wrote in message news:N6JGg.27193$uV.6302@trnddc08... > uhhhh..... good point. Not sure what your point applies to... but OK, we all > agree that radio is a useful invention. > What were we talking about again? > > rb > > > "David G. Nagel" wrote in message > news:12bag3q7hc7u723@corp.supernews.com... > > an old friend wrote: > >> David G. Nagel wrote: > >> > >>>Cecil Moore wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>>>Dirk wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>Ham's care more about operating appliances than knowing how to save a > >>>>>lives. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>How many times in the entire history of amateur radio > >>>>has a ham used CW to actually save a life? One would > >>>>think there would be a book full of examples by now. > >>> > >>>A ham operator intercepted the SOS from the RMS Titanic. > >> > >> how many life were saved thereby the Carpathia wheard the call and > >> arrived to save some folks what role did the ARS playing in saving even > >> one life that sorry day? > >> > > > > We aren't talking about failure to receive a CW SOS. Those ships that > > responded did so after receiving word of the sinking by radio. They saved > > many lives from the lifeboats which would otherwise have been lost to the > > cold. > > > > Dave N > > > Article: 228673 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: kevin.pavin@gmail.com Subject: Re: Transmit but not Receive Date: 22 Aug 2006 16:32:38 -0700 Message-ID: <1156289558.142926.6620@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> References: <1156271994.209347.58810@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> Dave Platt wrote: > In article <1156275029.791800.75670@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>, > wrote: > > >> A circulator would do the trick. > >> > >> http://www.ditom.com/microwave-circulator.htm > >> > >> https://ewhdbks.mugu.navy.mil/circulat.htm > >> > >> Rather expensive, sometimes to be found on Ebay. > >> > >> w. > > > >Thanks for the suggestion, a circulator/isolator is what i need. If > >anyone has any suggestions on a bargain vendor I'd appreciate it. > > Ummm... realize that a circulator/isolator hooked between the antenna, > and the antenna jack of a typical 802.11b router, is going to dump > essentially _all_ of the incoming power from the antenna into its > dummy load. > > This will include any power generated by the other AP's transmitter > and reflected back from the antenna. > > It'll also include any power picked up by the antenna. > > In short, the AP's receiver will "go deaf". It won't be overwhelmed > by transmitted signal from the other radio, but neither will it "hear" > the signals it's supposed to respond to. > > That's fine if all you're doing is broadcasting/multicasting packets, > and don't need to accept packets or acknowledgements in return. It > won't work, however, with a typical 802.11b AP-and-client system, in > which the client device has to transmit to the AP in order to > associate with it. > > I really don't know if an 802.11 AP is going to try to broadcast or > multicast packets if it "thinks" that there aren't any client devices > associated with it. > > -- > Dave Platt AE6EO > Hosting the Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior > I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will > boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads! Yah let me clarify that, I have a hacked up router for running experiments, all I'm using it for is to transmit broadcast packets, so no receive information is necessary for my app....I just want to get rid of carrier sense so that I can have more than one co-located tx running at once...and as i see it the easiest way is a hardware fix..... Article: 228674 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" References: Subject: Re: Mismatched Zo Connectors Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 00:37:32 +0100 Message-ID: "Owen Duffy" wrote in message news:a72ne2tm0v18rbc50tlgjkqu6fso4apsgg@4ax.com... > On Tue, 22 Aug 2006 17:28:01 GMT, Cecil Moore > wrote: > > > >and the reflections from a complimentary impedance discontinuity > > What is a "complimentary impedance discontinuity", or even a > "complementary impedance discontinuity" if you meant that? ======================================= Owen, For the benifit of innocent bystanders, he means the same magnitude discontinuity with the opposite sign. But you knew that of course, didn't you? On the other hand, I'm not sure *I* have described it correctly. It can best be described in terms of the reflection coefficient. There are two reflections, of opposite signs, which do not occur at exactly the same instant in TIME. Whatever it is, Cecil is (im)perfectly correct. ---- Reg. Article: 228675 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Richard Clark Subject: Re: Transmit but not Receive Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 16:43:12 -0700 Message-ID: <595ne2dc6mar8htggeo8els47ogk4c5q9h@4ax.com> References: <1156271994.209347.58810@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> <1156289289.803852.98710@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> On 22 Aug 2006 16:28:09 -0700, kevin.pavin@gmail.com wrote: >> Why would there be a significant problem in the first place.... >> these aren't CW devices, they are Packetized Spread Spectrum >> and two devices next to each other, even on the same channel, would >> not run into each other, due to different spreading code roots >> anyway..... Hmmmmm, non problem, from where I sit..... > >I'm running 802.11b @ 2.4Ghz. As I understand it at 11Mbps (which I'm >using) the signal is "spread" using the CCK code, and each packet/user >uses the same spreading function. So a transmission only goes forward >if the channel is "empty", i.e. the received power at the transmitter >is below some carrier sense threshold (dBm)...... Hi All, Spread Spectrum is merely the 0 level of the protocol stack and has nothing to do with "going forward." That is a software issue at a much higher level that deals with packet collisions. The hardware may augment collision detection through carrier sense (which would only occur if both share the same code). In fact, thresholds may be well below the noise floor (dBm) and still work with notably lower throughput, but this is an even more remote issue, except you may be fighting poor isolation from even the best of isolators. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC Article: 228676 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "L." References: <1155331373.380661.27660@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <3O6Dg.7773$FN2.4946@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com> <44dded8c$0$6593$ecde5a14@news.coretel.net> <44de150a$0$6591$ecde5a14@news.coretel.net> <1155405497.799120.156630@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> <9epDg.7812$kO3.4544@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com> <44de358f$0$6597$ecde5a14@news.coretel.net> <4QtDg.6510$1f6.2095@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net> <44de6f6e$0$6604$ecde5a14@news.coretel.net> <44dec558$0$6587$ecde5a14@news.coretel.net> <7j8t6.7pu.19.1@news.alt.net> <44DFA6A6.2020708@fuse.net> <0VNDg.5150$%j7.4201@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net> Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 19:54:15 -0400 Message-ID: <44eb9963$0$15489$ecde5a14@news.coretel.net> "Cecil Moore" wrote in message news:0VNDg.5150$%j7.4201@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net... > jawod wrote: >> If MENSA membership is important to you, fine. Most of us find it a bit >> pretentious and downright silly. > > Ditto for the Morse code testing requirement. > That was the whole point. > -- > 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp As the little munchin said in the Wizard of Oz - opening up the window to Dorothy's insistent knocking - and she finally got her point across - "well now - that's a horse of a different color - why didn't you say so!" L. Article: 228677 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" References: <2eSdnYZzr7pWyXbZRVnytA@bt.com> Subject: Re: Mismatched Zo Connectors Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 00:54:51 +0100 Message-ID: "Reg Edwards" wrote > Reflections are functions of TIME, not frequency. > > Oliver Heaviside had the right idea long before the invention of the > SWR meter. ==================================== For "reflections" also read "Echos". ----- Reg, G4FGQ. ==================================== Article: 228678 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: hot-ham-and-cheese@hotmail.com Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Date: 22 Aug 2006 17:16:07 -0700 Message-ID: <1156292167.553349.223020@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> References: <1153584132.692529.177920@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> LenAnderson@ieee.org wrote: > From: an old friend on Mon, Aug 21 2006 3:16 pm > > > >LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote: > >> From: hot-ham-and-che...@hotmail.com on Sun, Aug 20 2006 2:57 pm > >> >If the league pushes the morse testing issue too hard, it will become > >> >obvious to the 25% that are members. > > > >> I don't think so. The Amateur Radiotelegraphy Society is very > >> firmly SET in their ideas of keeping the "heritage" and > >> "tradition" of being a living museum of archaic radio. Those > >> firm believers and worshippers at the Church of St. Hiram are > >> disciples and they haven't had their last supper yet. > > > >I have no objection to them trying to prservs thier mode the ARS is big > >enough even for unproductive thing > > It's "minority rule" when ARRL lobbies for preservation of > morse code test for any amateur radio license class. The > ARRL membership is slightly less than a quarter of all US > amateur radio licensees. The ARRL is trying to soften their image - the latest QST shows a person using a, gulp, microphone on the FRONT cover! Just inside is yet another article on building a code key - from a door hinge. > >> >Don't know if you've heard yet, but the ARRL and robesin announced that > >> >MARS and TSA have an agreement for armageddon communications. > > > >> Heh heh, I wouldn't doubt it... :-) > > > >> [via "giant meteor bounce?" ... off the earth, that is? :-) ] > > > >> I thought Robesin had put on his (invisible) USMC uniform and > >> was busy pounding brass with the USCG offshore from Beirut to > >> evacuate US civilians? :-) > > > >now that remark I must take you to task for > > > >the last thing we want to sugest that robeson might wear is something > >invisible now that image IS a sexauly distrubing one > > Ahem...my reference was the old fairy tale, "The Emperor's New > Clothes." :-) > > That's the one where a full-of-himself ruler ordered some new > clothes and the tailor buttered him up (while not sewing any > new clothes) so much that the Emperor bought into this pandering > to his ego and appeared in public with his "new clothes" (he was > naked). Needless to say, the public laughed and laughed at this > ridiculous spectacle. :-) > > Robeson has been all full of himself in here about his alleged > "USMC service" yet he has presented zero-point-zero evidence > from anyone else (or any legitimate agency) that he ever > served on active USMC duty for any of his claimed "18 years." > > Even though he NOW thinks of himself AS the amateur radio > service personified (anything against him is somehow against > ALL radio amateurs), he is still parodying the "Emperor." > > LenAnderson@ieee.org This just in from The ARRL Letter, Vol. 25, No. 33, August 18, 2006 "ARRL First Vice President Kay Craigie, N3KN, represented the League at the Global Amateur Radio Emergency Communications Conference 2006." "Craigie stressed that Amateur Radio needs to avoid "being dazzled by our own press clippings into thinking that we are the big dog in emergency telecommunications."" She refers to robesin-like attitudes within the ARS. didit! Article: 228679 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: hot-ham-and-cheese@hotmail.com Subject: Re: If you had to use CW... would robesin still be an idiot? Date: 22 Aug 2006 17:31:31 -0700 Message-ID: <1156293091.154625.295310@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> References: <1153584132.692529.177920@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> K4YZ wrote: > LenCan'tPassThe SameTestGradeSchoolersDoAnderson@ieee.org wrote: > > From: snot-scam-and-sleaze@hotmail.com on Sun, Aug 20 2006 2:57 pm Geee? Robesin is still forging attributes... Some things just never change. > > >Don't know if you've heard yet, but the ARRL and robesin announced that > > >MARS and TSA have an agreement for armageddon communications. > > > > Heh heh, I wouldn't doubt it... > > "Armageddon"...?!?! > > No one announced "armageddon" in any release that I am aware of. > > Why did you? > > Yet more evidence of why it's better to have Lennie "Can't Pass An > Exam" Anderson on the outside looking in. > > Steve, K4YZ The ARRL Letter, Vol. 25, No. 33, August 18, 2006 ARRL First Vice President Kay Craigie, N3KN, represented the League at the Global Amateur Radio Emergency Communications Conference 2006: "Craigie stressed that Amateur Radio needs to avoid "being dazzled by our own press clippings into thinking that we are the big dog in emergency telecommunications."" Article: 228680 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Richard Clark Subject: Re: Mismatched Zo Connectors Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 17:40:02 -0700 Message-ID: References: <2eSdnYZzr7pWyXbZRVnytA@bt.com> On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 00:54:51 +0100, "Reg Edwards" wrote: > >"Reg Edwards" wrote > >> Reflections are functions of TIME, not frequency. >> >> Oliver Heaviside had the right idea long before the invention of the >> SWR meter. >==================================== > >For "reflections" also read "Echos". Hi Reggie, You are in fact wrong in all accounts. Reflections are functions of distance - as are echoes. This is a phase issue. Time and frequency are always inseparable as Kelvin would instruct you in first principles before another hunk of chalk was winged off your noggin. You may choose to render phase into time, but shift the frequency and the phase shifts, not the distance. Mismatched Zo connectors do not shrink or enlarge with frequency - the effects may, but physical components rarely follow such perturbations.... until an arc-over that is the classic failure mechanism for such mismatches (obviously, and deliberately ignored in this thread). 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC Article: 228681 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" References: <2eSdnYZzr7pWyXbZRVnytA@bt.com> Subject: Re: Mismatched Zo Connectors Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 01:51:29 +0100 Message-ID: > "Reg Edwards" wrote > > > Reflections are functions of TIME, not frequency. > > > > Oliver Heaviside had the right idea long before the invention of the SWR meter. ==================================== > > For "reflections" also read "Echos". ==================================== The reason there are so many misunderstandings about SWR is that SWR meters are based on impedance and frequency. Not a simple concept. Whereas reflections (echos) (which according to Cecil are what it's all about) are functions of time and distance. With which we are very familiar. Unfortunately, there does not appear to be a simple measuring instrument which could replace the SWR meter. Any ideas? But we would still need an instrument, a TLI, which indicates whether or not the transmitter is correctly loaded with 50 ohms. So perhaps things are best kept as they are. Just rename the SWR meter! ----- Reg, G4FGQ. ==================================== Article: 228682 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? From: Dave Oldridge References: <30954.oidi09.d0904.ddoi0@qkd.org> <%RJGg.27319$uV.13889@trnddc08> Message-ID: Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 01:10:08 GMT "Woody" wrote in news:%RJGg.27319$uV.13889@trnddc08: > Well there ya have it folks.... 50wpm saves lives. So how does it > work? Turn up the speaker really loud and place it [face down] on the > person's chest, while > an op in South America tapped out universally accepted words that > would mimic an atrioventricular rhythm? Did someone drop you on your head at birth? The reason 50wpm can save lives is probably a bit complex for you to get both your functioning neurons around, but believe me, having done CW for a living for some decades I do know that it can save lives. And if you're faster than the average bear at it, you can tell someone on the scene things they need to know all that much faster. > > Wrong theatre? OK... > > Maybe if a person is trapped on a sinking ship in the Indian Ocean > you, in Siberia, could tap out a message to someone in Madagascar [who > happened to be awake at an odd hour] and that person also owned a > large SAR chopper, they could jump in it, saving the time of relaying > to anyone else, and go pluck them from certain death? > > OH, or better yet... if your neighbor is also a ham.... and your wife > fell over with an AMI, you could call your neighbor, give him a freq, > then the two of you > get set up and running, then you can send a 50wpm message asking your > neighbor to call an ambulance? BTW, if the phones are down, you ask > him to get in his > car and drive down to the local EMS agency, and bring them to you. > Life saved! > I'm impressed. > rb So apparently YOUR answer to this question is that you couldn't send your name if your own life depended on it. Believe me, I get it. I don't think CW ought to be mandatory and it isn't where I live. I do think people who intend to use it should learn how to use it properly, though. For CW to be effective, both operators must be competent. IF they are, they can often transcend barriers of language that only digital modes can get over. In my own case, the fact that I could read CW and read written Spanish a bit once enabled me to render aid to a burning fishing boat. (There were other more routine examples of where the language barrier was crossed by CW--many messages I copied were not in English at all, but were readable by their end recipients). -- Dave Oldridge+ ICQ 1800667 Article: 228683 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" References: <2eSdnYZzr7pWyXbZRVnytA@bt.com> Subject: Re: Mismatched Zo Connectors Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 02:10:41 +0100 Message-ID: Ric, Yet again, like a Catherine Wheel, you are flying off in convoluted tangents. ----- Punchinello Article: 228684 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Owen Duffy Subject: Antenna wire Message-ID: <5udne2hbro4lsmhg5d7kv0c5nb4bbglof3@4ax.com> Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 02:18:21 GMT In searching the 'net for wire suitable for wire antennas, I came across a single core 2.7mm diameter 40% aluminium clad high tensile steel wire. I am trying to get some further detail on its Guaranteed Breaking Strength, but my guess is that the steel core is probably somewhere about 1000 MPa UTS, and will give an overall GBS around 4kN. The coating thickness looks like high conductivity aluminium, with a thickness of 300 microns, which is 5 skin depths at 1.8MHz, so conductivity should be good. Apart from the challenge of making reliable connections to aluminium, are there other "issues" that come to mind in using such wire for antennas? Owen -- Article: 228685 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: hot-ham-and-cheese@hotmail.com Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Date: 22 Aug 2006 19:14:21 -0700 Message-ID: <1156299261.351592.9880@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> References: <1153584132.692529.177920@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> LenAnderson@ieee.org wrote: > From: M...@kb9rqz.com on Mon, Aug 21 2006 6:30 pm > > > wrote: > >>From: an old friend on Mon, Aug 21 2006 3:16 pm > >>>LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote: > >>>> From: hot-ham-and-che...@hotmail.com on Sun, Aug 20 2006 2:57 pm > > > >>>> >If the league pushes the morse testing issue too hard, it will become > >>>> >obvious to the 25% that are members. > > > >>>> I don't think so. The Amateur Radiotelegraphy Society is very > >>>> firmly SET in their ideas of keeping the "heritage" and > >>>> "tradition" of being a living museum of archaic radio. Those > >>>> firm believers and worshippers at the Church of St. Hiram are > >>>> disciples and they haven't had their last supper yet. > > > >>>I have no objection to them trying to prservs thier mode the ARS is big > >>>enough even for unproductive thing > > > >> It's "minority rule" when ARRL lobbies for preservation of > >> morse code test for any amateur radio license class. The > >> ARRL membership is slightly less than a quarter of all US > >> amateur radio licensees. > > > >>>> >Don't know if you've heard yet, but the ARRL and robesin announced that > >>>> >MARS and TSA have an agreement for armageddon communications. > > > >>>> Heh heh, I wouldn't doubt it... :-) > > > >>>> [via "giant meteor bounce?" ... off the earth, that is? :-) ] > > > >>>> I thought Robesin had put on his (invisible) USMC uniform and > >>>> was busy pounding brass with the USCG offshore from Beirut to > >>>> evacuate US civilians? :-) > > > >>>now that remark I must take you to task for > > > >>>the last thing we want to sugest that robeson might wear is something > >>>invisible now that image IS a sexauly distrubing one > > > >> Ahem...my reference was the old fairy tale, "The Emperor's New > >> Clothes." :-) > > > >i thougt as much OTOH the image of robeson nude is still well > > To me it is UNwell... :-) > > >> That's the one where a full-of-himself ruler ordered some new > >> clothes and the tailor buttered him up (while not sewing any > >> new clothes) so much that the Emperor bought into this pandering > >> to his ego and appeared in public with his "new clothes" (he was > >> naked). Needless to say, the public laughed and laughed at this > >> ridiculous spectacle. :-) > > > >indeed i laugh at him myself ruefully > > > >with the added though that this is thebest the procoder can muster > > Robesin is merely a product of the "incentive" licensing > system where all those who hunger for being a "somebody" > can get a Title - Rank - Privilege through a singular skill. If it doesn't have rank or a uniform, Robesin isn't interested. > I didn't make that system, neither did you, neither did > anyone in these four forums. The FCC took a big chunk out > of it (license classes and morsemanship skill) with the > Restructuring of 2000 and that pissed off the Title-Rank- > Status seekers. Devout morsemen are angry and venting steam > because their self-esteem has fallen. Only in their minds. They are the very same good or bad hams that they were with all the layers of hamdom. > >> Robeson has been all full of himself in here about his alleged > >> "USMC service" yet he has presented zero-point-zero evidence > >> from anyone else (or any legitimate agency) that he ever > >> served on active USMC duty for any of his claimed "18 years." > > Simply amazing. EIGHTEEN years alleged on active duty and > he can't supply a single photo or document to support his > claim? In November of this year I can truthfully say I've > been in the southern California aerospace business 50 years. > I have all sorts of documentation and photos on that which > I may fully digitize some day (some are already digitized). > Some time ago I posted my resume in here...which only made > Robesin ballistic then since he has NO comparable > experience in industry and cannot prove any radio experience > other than amateur and alleged "chief operator" status at > some small MARS station long ago. [that was before his > less-than-a-half-year as a purchasing agent at a small > set top box maker] Yet as "chief operator" or ANCOIC of NMC MARS on Okinawa, he remains woefully ignorant of MARS. I just don't get it. > In another recent post, Robesin keeps referring to a "CV." > That's an acronym for the Latin 'curriculum vitae,' a list > of life experiences (education, work experience). Maybe he meant "constant velocity" as in "CV joints" because he's always "spun up" about one thing or another. In the > electronics industry, indeed in MOST industries, those > applying for jobs don't present a curriculum vitae, just a > RESUME of education-work experience. Some academics may > use "CV" but Personnel departments still look over resumes. > Just one more little gaffe on Robesin's part, trying to > LOOK experienced when he is NOT. Robesin an academic? Not in this lifetime. It's just his inappropriate use of what to him are important sounding words and acronyms. > >> Even though he NOW thinks of himself AS the amateur radio > >> service personified (anything against him is somehow against > >> ALL radio amateurs), he is still parodying the "Emperor." > > Another sign of his megalomania, purporting to "represent > all" and, by extension, anyone against Him is "against all > radio amateurs." Robesin desperately needs SOMETHING to > hold up his self-esteem and he uses amateur radio for that > selfish purpose. It is like his infamous snot-on-the- > moustache CAP flight suit picture, big on rank, title, and > with implications of status. CAP is NOT about amateur > radio but Robesin keeps on harping about it as if it > "proved" something about his amateur radio abilities. He > does the same with his "ER nurse qualifications" but those > have absolutely nothing to do with radio, amateur or > professional. > > But, challenge Robesin or call him in error and one will be > inundated with personal insults. Robeson MUST be right and > he MUST rule. Civil comportment be damned with Robeson in > newsgroups. Those newsgroups were (in his mind) created to > showcase Him? > > LenAnderson@ieee.org The rec.radio newsgroups have showcased Robesin. He HAS earned his reputation. He's worked very hard for it. From dingiswayo324_at_yahoo.com Wed Aug 23 20:17:36 EDT 2006 Article: 228686 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 21:20:52 -0500 From: "scrook" Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna References: <1156112798.027258.152330@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> <8usje21pgkpi0sc1dc67jpiio2r54vte0h@4ax.com> <8hfke2droqlvu50odf5ltrnununpt7l2sv@4ax.com> Subject: Re: Two Meter FM Antenna Question Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 22:20:52 -0400 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2962 Message-ID: Lines: 62 NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.128.218.117 X-Trace: sv3-7v77gVNdKTiuS7uHD1eZr/VHdrE+Je3tK2z69bqsJkxMejpTP2DDcEnNfrFjtwqKTkxmtMArV/d2ESk!ZFrOZ9OcdHg0tTZxWhOrIAcgBM9Q7aWX4zbo9Hxabl69xvkGXLSlw56UEKdGaoowKYPzqTvnM2XK!nJWBpVw5SCPm X-Complaints-To: abuse@comcast.net X-DMCA-Complaints-To: dmca@comcast.net X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly X-Postfilter: 1.3.32 Path: news.unc.edu!elk.ncren.net!newsfeed.news.ucla.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!postnews.google.com!news3.google.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local02.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.comcast.com!news.comcast.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: news0.isis.unc.edu rec.radio.amateur.antenna:228686 I was always under the impression the 2.15 dBi and 3 dBi applied to antennas in free space, the GP being on one side of an infinite plane at the fed end. Indeed in real would cases in the vicinity of earth or other large (relative to the antenna) objects the differances (particularly in FM service) become negligable. Note too: dBi is relative to a (theoretical) isotropic radiator (which is a mathamaticily logical standard of comparison), vs. dBd which is relative to an ideal center fed 1/2 wave dipole in free space. "Ed" wrote in message news:Xns9826B0E638935spectrumhogstarbandn@198.186.192.196... > >>>Every reference and factory specification for >>>standard grounplane and vertical dipole antennas I've seen indicates > the >>>standard vertical dipole has a horizontal gain of 3 dBi, and the >>>groundplane 2.1 dBi. > > > >> Those are pretty curious references then. Why would they dwell on the >> HORIZONTAL gains of VERTICAL antennas? There must be something left >> unsaid in what you are trying to express because cross polarization >> would drive down sensitivities by 20 to 30 dB. >> >> For another matter, those values you quote bear very little >> resemblence to typical 2M FM operation, unless it is from the Space >> Shuttle. Height above ground variations in gain easily washes over >> any differences you might perceive. I can see a variation of 2dB in >> just raising a groundplane from 40" off the turf to 120". > > > Richard, > > You and I seem to be talking different languages !! :^) > > My reference to horizontal gain is gain measured in the horizontal > plane...... that is, measurements are taken broadside to the vertical > antenna elements, in this case, both the vertical dipole and a > groundplane. > > Gain measurements taken in any other plane in any other plane than > horizontal tend to be rather useless since most VHF mobile communications > takes place horizontally..... even distant repeaters tend to be close to > the horizon. > > Cross polarization is not an issue in VHF operations since all > commercial and amateur FM operations I'm familiar with use vertical > polarization. > > As far as height variations having effect on gain.... you are > talking about path gain, or system gain. I am speaking specifically of > antenna gain, which I believed to be the question of the original poster. > > And as I have already pointed out, most factory specifications > for vertical dipoles and groundplane antennas are as I already listed. > > Ed K7AAT > > Article: 228687 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Bakb0ne" Subject: Re: why not deal with the real issue Date: 22 Aug 2006 19:34:12 -0700 Message-ID: <1156300452.123618.251900@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> References: <1H5Gg.10923$xp2.2506@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net> an old friend wrote: > Bakb0ne wrote: > > an old friend wrote: > > > Bakb0ne wrote: > > > > an old friend wrote: > > > > > Douche Bag wrote: > > > > > > IT'S DEAD. Get a life. You learned code for nothing. Where's my= iPod? > > > > > wel you got that part aprt Code being dead but the ARS is still a= live > > > > > dispite the efforts of Sloaw code Robeson and others to kill it > > > > > > > > Isnt that the main point tho.... they have no power to do anything.= .=2E > > > > > > > > They are just sad ppl with nothing better to do. Next they will be > > > > saying that > > > > you should have to pay a monthly fee to use the airwaves... > > > > > > > > Maybe have a subscription fee, that would stop most of the scum (yeh > > > > right) > > > well a GMRS like license would surely do better asa filter than the > > > code test look at the code tested ham we have on the air now > > > > What part of the GMRS license would be a better filter? > > > > The 5 year duration between renewals, the $75/=A340 charge or just the > > general way of applying for it? > > > > Im not saying i disagree, just wondering what you meant.. > having to pay to use the ARS freqs might be more of a deterant to those > with bad attiudes than a code test > > not to say it would be a good filter but fee for license with the > license fee used for enforcement here in the state the license is free > (the tests cost something) and the FCC is always complaining it laks > any funding to go after ham violators I suspect you are a brit and so > this might escape you I should have been clearer > > nice to see someone serious paying attention here I had assume the > flamers and trolls had driven them off Yep, im british. I can see your point about the FCC complaints, lack of funding is the usual reason for them not to bother to go after ham violators. If they charged users then they would be able to use that money to go after the retards who clog todays airwaves... And the flamers/trolls havent driven us all off, we just go into hiding until we see something of interest, and just ignore the rest... Article: 228688 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "an Old friend" Subject: Re: why not deal with the real issue Date: 22 Aug 2006 19:40:06 -0700 Message-ID: <1156300806.685581.89530@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com> References: <1H5Gg.10923$xp2.2506@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net> Bakb0ne wrote: > an old friend wrote: > > Bakb0ne wrote: > > > an old friend wrote: > > > > Bakb0ne wrote: > > > > > an old friend wrote: > > > > > > Douche Bag wrote: > > > > > > > IT'S DEAD. Get a life. You learned code for nothing. Where's = my iPod? > > > > > > wel you got that part aprt Code being dead but the ARS is still= alive > > > > > > dispite the efforts of Sloaw code Robeson and others to kill it > > > > > > > > > > Isnt that the main point tho.... they have no power to do anythin= g=2E.. > > > > > > > > > > They are just sad ppl with nothing better to do. Next they will be > > > > > saying that > > > > > you should have to pay a monthly fee to use the airwaves... > > > > > > > > > > Maybe have a subscription fee, that would stop most of the scum (= yeh > > > > > right) > > > > well a GMRS like license would surely do better asa filter than the > > > > code test look at the code tested ham we have on the air now > > > > > > What part of the GMRS license would be a better filter? > > > > > > The 5 year duration between renewals, the $75/=A340 charge or just the > > > general way of applying for it? > > > > > > Im not saying i disagree, just wondering what you meant.. > > having to pay to use the ARS freqs might be more of a deterant to those > > with bad attiudes than a code test > > > > not to say it would be a good filter but fee for license with the > > license fee used for enforcement here in the state the license is free > > (the tests cost something) and the FCC is always complaining it laks > > any funding to go after ham violators I suspect you are a brit and so > > this might escape you I should have been clearer > > > > nice to see someone serious paying attention here I had assume the > > flamers and trolls had driven them off > > Yep, im british. > > I can see your point about the FCC complaints, lack of funding is the > usual reason for them not to bother to go after ham violators. If they > charged users then they would be able to use that money to go after the > retards who clog todays airwaves... > > And the flamers/trolls havent driven us all off, we just go into hiding > until we see something of interest, and just ignore the rest... indeed but you can't discuss any changes as I suspect you have ntoiced and for that matter I have never seen why we have to have all of us geting our license by the same path indeed I have always liked an idea with some folks talking a rule and safety test (and being confined to built equipment) and pay a fee while others would takerigourous test and no fees Article: 228689 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Bakb0ne" Subject: Re: why not deal with the real issue Date: 22 Aug 2006 19:46:56 -0700 Message-ID: <1156301216.132471.315560@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> References: <1H5Gg.10923$xp2.2506@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net> an Old friend wrote: > Bakb0ne wrote: > > an old friend wrote: > > > Bakb0ne wrote: > > > > an old friend wrote: > > > > > Bakb0ne wrote: > > > > > > an old friend wrote: > > > > > > > Douche Bag wrote: > > > > > > > > IT'S DEAD. Get a life. You learned code for nothing. Where'= s my iPod? > > > > > > > wel you got that part aprt Code being dead but the ARS is sti= ll alive > > > > > > > dispite the efforts of Sloaw code Robeson and others to kill = it > > > > > > > > > > > > Isnt that the main point tho.... they have no power to do anyth= ing... > > > > > > > > > > > > They are just sad ppl with nothing better to do. Next they will= be > > > > > > saying that > > > > > > you should have to pay a monthly fee to use the airwaves... > > > > > > > > > > > > Maybe have a subscription fee, that would stop most of the scum= (yeh > > > > > > right) > > > > > well a GMRS like license would surely do better asa filter than t= he > > > > > code test look at the code tested ham we have on the air now > > > > > > > > What part of the GMRS license would be a better filter? > > > > > > > > The 5 year duration between renewals, the $75/=A340 charge or just = the > > > > general way of applying for it? > > > > > > > > Im not saying i disagree, just wondering what you meant.. > > > having to pay to use the ARS freqs might be more of a deterant to tho= se > > > with bad attiudes than a code test > > > > > > not to say it would be a good filter but fee for license with the > > > license fee used for enforcement here in the state the license is free > > > (the tests cost something) and the FCC is always complaining it laks > > > any funding to go after ham violators I suspect you are a brit and so > > > this might escape you I should have been clearer > > > > > > nice to see someone serious paying attention here I had assume the > > > flamers and trolls had driven them off > > > > Yep, im british. > > > > I can see your point about the FCC complaints, lack of funding is the > > usual reason for them not to bother to go after ham violators. If they > > charged users then they would be able to use that money to go after the > > retards who clog todays airwaves... > > > > And the flamers/trolls havent driven us all off, we just go into hiding > > until we see something of interest, and just ignore the rest... > indeed but you can't discuss any changes as I suspect you have ntoiced > > and for that matter I have never seen why we have to have all of us > geting our license by the same path > > indeed I have always liked an idea with some folks talking a rule and > safety test (and being confined to built equipment) and pay a fee while > others would takerigourous test and no fees So basically ur saying that you should be able to either 1=2E Pay for your license and Take a beginner test (to prove your competent) or 2=2E Take a Intermediate Test and get free license after passing If this is what you mean, then i can see your logic and i would fully support a system like this... Only problem is that just like Slow Code and the other trolls who try to change the Ham world, we wouldnt be able to do anything either, its down to the corporations, not us little people... Article: 228690 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Richard Clark Subject: Re: Mismatched Zo Connectors Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 19:54:08 -0700 Message-ID: <20gne2tjvobcgnvgebsdj59c99fvt1j5jg@4ax.com> References: <2eSdnYZzr7pWyXbZRVnytA@bt.com> On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 02:10:41 +0100, "Reg Edwards" wrote: >Ric, >Yet again, like a Catherine Wheel, you are flying off in convoluted >tangents. How else to follow your logic? As you can see, facile diversions are easily managed in kind. ;-) If you cannot reconcile distance to reflection, what use is it being preserved in unzipped code? I await your next turn on the highway to avoid this road-kill. To cut the thread short, I recall one of your bedtime fairy tales of how you fought a radar fire aboard an airplane. Cut it anyway you want, but the fire undoubtedly arose from a mismatch. This appears to have marked a trauma in your youth to avoid the discussion of mismatch consequences. Please, in the future, begin your posts with "Once upon a time..." instead of >At risk of being called a Troll, You must agree, this particular bait was self-fulfilling; and as always, I am most pleased to serve your bidding. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC Article: 228691 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: Mismatched Zo Connectors References: Message-ID: Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 02:56:50 GMT Owen Duffy wrote: > Cecil Moore wrote: >> and the reflections from a complimentary impedance discontinuity > > What is a "complimentary impedance discontinuity", or even a > "complementary impedance discontinuity" if you meant that? Sorry about the misspelling. I was trying to us the word "complement" in the sense of "A numerical derived from a given numeral by a specified subtraction rule. Often used to represent the negative of the number represented by the given numeral." Definition from "The IEEE Dictionary". For instance, the reflection coefficient at the second impedance discontinuity can be considered to be the complement of the reflection coefficient at the first impedance discontinuity. --------Z01---x---Z02---y---Z01----------- The physical reflection coefficient at point 'x' would be (Z02-Z01)/(Z01+Z02). The physical reflection coefficient at point 'y' would be (Z01-Z02)/(Z01+Z02). Mathematically, those two reflection coefficients can be considered to be complements of each other. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 228692 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: Mismatched Zo Connectors References: Message-ID: Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 02:58:52 GMT Tom Donaly wrote: > What's a "complimentary impedance discontinuity," Cecil? Sorry my spellchecker didn't catch that. It should have been "complementary", a mathematical term. Please see my reply to Owen. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 228693 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Richard Clark Subject: Re: Antenna wire Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 20:04:24 -0700 Message-ID: References: <5udne2hbro4lsmhg5d7kv0c5nb4bbglof3@4ax.com> On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 02:18:21 GMT, Owen Duffy wrote: >Apart from the challenge of making reliable connections to aluminium, >are there other "issues" that come to mind in using such wire for >antennas? Hi Owen, I've used ordinary house wiring for long-wires and they have survived 100# limb falls that ripped out my matching box from its post. The survival was with the wire, not the box. [warning to Reggie, the prose that follows contains literary allusions] What price tensile strength? The worst thing you can do is pull a wire tight in an attempt to totally eliminate sag. The inverse sine angle of its depression magnifies the stress by huge amounts. A slight sag will never yield a tensile failure in the most pedestrian of wire. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC Article: 228694 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: ricknj10@hotmail.com (Rick) Subject: Re: Sommer versus SteppIR Message-ID: <44ebc755.60522765@news.optonline.net> References: <8e917$44e765ad$453d9423$8718@FUSE.NET> <1156131770.320326.41130@74g2000cwt.googlegroups.com> <44E92CE5.10502@fuse.net> Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 03:30:01 GMT On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 20:51:25 +0200, "Pete" wrote: >My next antenna is a 3 element SteppIR with the 6m option and 40/30m dipole >option. I currently have a Hy-Gain Explorer 14 with 40m kit. > >I vote SteppIR. >-- >Pete . . >ZS5ACT I have had a three element SteppIR up for three years now. It replaced a pair of Hy Gain monobanders (4 element 20 and 5 element 15). Biggest difference I noticed was that my mast doesn't bend anymore !! And my rotor has about 1/3 the work to do because the torque is so much less. And I have one feedline and no antenna switches, and only one lightning arrestor. And I now get 10 meters, and 17 meters. Wow what a great band 17 meters is. Yes, I DO notice the pattern is not as sharp as the big monobanders, no question about it. Probably a db or so less gain. On 6 meters (I DO NOT have the extra fixed length element for 6 meters) I also have a 5 element M Squared, mounted about 6 feet above the SteppIR. It absolutely blows away the SteppIR. So if you are serious about 6, and don't want another yagi on the tower, give serious consideration to the advice of Mike at SteppIR and get his 4th element. I guess you said that, you are getting the 6 meter element. But I miss that shiny aluminum up there. Sometimes the early morning sun would reflect off all those Hy Gain elements...... Man, that was a beautiful sight. But 30 and 40 meters with the SteppIR? Seems like the only advantages are the ones I mentioned above about the single feedline and simplicity. I can't really see all that much advantage to being able to rotate those single element radiators on those bands. I experimented with learning EZNEC last week and I didn't see hardly any directivity at all in my 40 meter inverted vee. Rick K2XT Article: 228695 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Owen Duffy Subject: Re: Antenna wire Message-ID: References: <5udne2hbro4lsmhg5d7kv0c5nb4bbglof3@4ax.com> Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 03:35:44 GMT On Tue, 22 Aug 2006 20:04:24 -0700, Richard Clark wrote: >On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 02:18:21 GMT, Owen Duffy wrote: > >>Apart from the challenge of making reliable connections to aluminium, >>are there other "issues" that come to mind in using such wire for >>antennas? > >Hi Owen, > >I've used ordinary house wiring for long-wires and they have survived >100# limb falls that ripped out my matching box from its post. The >survival was with the wire, not the box. I think "ordinary house wire" may be aluminium, a by product of 110V utilisation I guess. House wiring here is still principally copper. > >[warning to Reggie, the prose that follows contains literary >allusions] > What price tensile strength? > >The worst thing you can do is pull a wire tight in an attempt to >totally eliminate sag. The inverse sine angle of its depression >magnifies the stress by huge amounts. A slight sag will never yield a >tensile failure in the most pedestrian of wire. Subject to more reliable information on the wire's GBS, my initial calcs are that a span of 40m (half of a half wave dipole on 160m) would need 3.3% sag (~1.4m) to survive wind at 60m/s with a safety factor of 3.5. Yes, of course, the mountings must also survive the wind, and this analysis assumes not deflection of the mounting points and no stretch of the wire. The only thing that compares on strength and conductivity is Copperweld, but it is not easily obtained here... I suspect the cost of freight might double or triple the price of a 100lb pack of 30% #12 wire. I did look at heavy galvanised wires, but it seems the move has been to Zinc/Aluminium alloy with an overall synthetic coating, and since it erodes much slower, the coatings are only 10 to 20 microns... not thick enough for good conductivity. My usual supplier looks like he can't do 3mm HDC economically any more, hence the search. Owen -- Article: 228696 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Jim Higgins Subject: Re: Choices, Choices, Choices... CW or CB? Message-ID: <1pine2t7om4ohr94q9npmbooqks8rsfiu0@4ax.com> References: Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 03:31:49 GMT On Sun, 20 Aug 2006 20:28:33 -0400, Mark@kb9rqz.com wrote: >On Mon, 24 Jul 2006 23:42:13 GMT, Slow Code wrote: > >> >>That's what you have to decide. >> >>SC >false choice it never was a single choice teither or > >only fools like you think so >http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/ Sweet Geezus! That's not only the worst spelling I've ever seen, but also the most inconsistent. And you wear it like a badge of honor! If you don't give a damn how you write I certainly don't give a damn about reading it. Article: 228697 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: ricknj10@hotmail.com (Rick) Subject: Re: Two Meter FM Antenna Question Message-ID: <44ebcc97.61868625@news.optonline.net> References: <8usje21pgkpi0sc1dc67jpiio2r54vte0h@4ax.com> <8hfke2droqlvu50odf5ltrnununpt7l2sv@4ax.com> Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 03:41:41 GMT > >Maybe I'm missing something, who manufactures vertical vhf dipoles? We're hams. We make our own antennas, don't we? Two pieces of wire, and some insulators. I had a vertical dipole for 2 meters once, a section of an old tv antenna. One element (by definition) mounted on an insulator on a boom. I attached the boom with two hose clamps onto my tower and mouunted the single element out from the tower 3-4 feet. Attached a piece of coax to the elements. Zero cost, used it for 15 years like that. Worked great. Wait a minute. On second thought how would I know that? Ok let me rephrase that. "It worked." It's 2 meters, for crying out loud - anything works. If you need gain you get a beam. Rick K2XT Article: 228698 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Subject: Re: Antenna wire From: Ed References: <5udne2hbro4lsmhg5d7kv0c5nb4bbglof3@4ax.com> Message-ID: Date: 23 Aug 2006 04:24:29 GMT > > Apart from the challenge of making reliable connections to aluminium, > are there other "issues" that come to mind in using such wire for > antennas? > > Owen > -- I've seen comments suggesting that steele core wire is not a good idea if you live in any kind of humid climate..... the cover clad develops pin- holes over time which allows moisture to start the rust process of the inner steel core. Breakage soon follows..... The comments I received were regarding copper clad, though. I don't know if aluminum would have the same potential problem or not. Ed K7AAT Article: 228699 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "LenAnderson@ieee.org" Subject: Re: If you had to use CW... would robesin still be an idiot? Date: 22 Aug 2006 21:47:04 -0700 Message-ID: <1156308424.852891.4550@74g2000cwt.googlegroups.com> References: <1153584132.692529.177920@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> >LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote: >> From: an old friend on Mon, Aug 21 2006 3:16 pm >> >LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote: >> >> From: hot-ham-and-che...@hotmail.com on Sun, Aug 20 2006 2:57 pm >> It's "minority rule" when ARRL lobbies for preservation of >> morse code test for any amateur radio license class. The >> ARRL membership is slightly less than a quarter of all US >> amateur radio licensees. > >The ARRL is trying to soften their image - the latest QST shows a >person using a, gulp, microphone on the FRONT cover! Good grief! The sky is falling! The sky is falling! >Just inside is yet another article on building a code key - from a door >hinge. Oh, goody...HIGH TECH construction article. Would they follow that with another article on the door itself? Like, I mean, making the door a jar? :-) >> Ahem...my reference was the old fairy tale, "The Emperor's New >> Clothes." :-) > >> That's the one where a full-of-himself ruler ordered some new >> clothes and the tailor buttered him up (while not sewing any >> new clothes) so much that the Emperor bought into this pandering >> to his ego and appeared in public with his "new clothes" (he was >> naked). Needless to say, the public laughed and laughed at this >> ridiculous spectacle. :-) > >> Robeson has been all full of himself in here about his alleged >> "USMC service" yet he has presented zero-point-zero evidence >> from anyone else (or any legitimate agency) that he ever >> served on active USMC duty for any of his claimed "18 years." > >> Even though he NOW thinks of himself AS the amateur radio >> service personified (anything against him is somehow against >> ALL radio amateurs), he is still parodying the "Emperor." >This just in from The ARRL Letter, Vol. 25, No. 33, August 18, 2006 > >"ARRL First Vice President Kay Craigie, N3KN, represented the League at the >Global Amateur Radio Emergency Communications Conference 2006." > >"Craigie stressed that Amateur Radio needs to avoid "being dazzled by our >own press clippings into thinking that we are the big dog in emergency >telecommunications."" > >She refers to robesin-like attitudes within the ARS. Oh. My. God. ! ! ! Tsk, just because NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, FOX, ESPN, and PBS haven't covered the tremendously fantastic wonderfullest huge contribution to saving lives and property via ham radio? Gosh, there are all sorts of clippings from obscure weekly and biweekly newspapers dutifully cut-and-pasted into messages here from Robesin & Co. Maybe I'll have to write the Department of Defense and say that "Major" Robesin said that radio amateurs run MARS! They should fortwith cease and desist publishing DoD Directives on thinking that they started it and keep running it! Maybe I missed the "news" on the Home and Garden Channel...I don't watch that much... Right and all the other radio services are switching to morse code for all emergency communications a la ham radio...the sky has truly fallen! >didit! Dahdah comrade. :-) LenAnderson@ieee.org Article: 228700 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Mark@kb9rqz.com Subject: Re: Morris Code -plus- Continuous Wave (CW) Radio Transmission -and- Semaphore Signals ? Do They Defining Amateur Radio ? Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 12:33:35 -0400 Message-ID: References: <_AVug.9493$PE1.1406@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net> <1153275616.225575.252170@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com> <44BDA4F3.7000706@fuse.net> <12brelk76dlj901@corp.supernews.com> On Tue, 22 Aug 2006 17:24:49 +0100, "Reg Edwards" wrote: >> Some old time ham in the area needs to step in and show the scouts >how ham >> radio and CW can save lives and help communities in emergencies. >> >===================================== > >In these days of mobile telephones, etc., morse code just gets in the >way of emergencies. indeed > >But there's nothing to prevent people who appreciate and love the >language of Morse, the way it sings, its universality, its beauty, >from continuing to use it way into the future. indeed and I who profess a definate distan for the mode defend their right to use it > >It is the beauty of Morse, in plain English, never mind the >abbreviations, which boy scouts and others who show an interest should >be taught to appreciate. >---- >Reg, G4FGQ > http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/ -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Article: 228701 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Mark@kb9rqz.com Subject: Re: PING: Slow Code Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 13:37:25 -0400 Message-ID: References: <1156186858.857772.22110@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 23:46:48 GMT, Slow Code wrote: >new_cw_ham@saintly.com wrote in >news:1156186858.857772.22110@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com: > >> Wanted to thank you for your posts about the code. >> >> Because of you I just upgraded (Saturday) from technician to general. I >> breezed the 5 wpm and am up to around 15wpm according to the W1AW >> pratice broadcasts. I never would have bothered to learn CW if it >> wasn't for you. >> >> I know I only "need" 5 wpm but I am not going to upgrade to extra until >> I can cpy 25 wpm SOLID! >> >> This is in honor of my electronic elmer, Slow Code. >> >> Thanks...... > >ROFLMAO! > >.... And you've made me think of possibly joining CAP. > > >Testimonials like yours will bring a smile to every Real hams face. :-) > >Just learn the code to 22 wpm. That would be a nice edge if you still had >to take a 20 wpm CW test. But if you can only get your speed up to 16 or >17 words per minute, upgrade anyway. We need good people like you on the >ham bands and on usenet. LOL > > >73 > >SC why do you want to kil the ARS? http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/ -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Article: 228702 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Mark@kb9rqz.com Subject: Re: Poor Markie! - Markie, Just ignore them. Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 13:37:35 -0400 Message-ID: References: <1155755878.737265.55800@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> <1155819580.435966.161810@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1155868528.387517.185650@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com> <1155904856.192887.112830@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <44E5B917.6050406@fuse.net> <1156167941.257256.314290@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 23:46:53 GMT, Slow Code wrote: >kb9rqz_child_molester@yahoo.com wrote in >news:1156167941.257256.314290@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com: > >> MarkMoron@kb9rqz.com wrote: >>> On Fri, 18 Aug 2006 08:56:55 -0400, jawod wrote: >>> >>> >Not Cocksucker Lloyd wrote: >>> >> an old friendless cocksucking child molester wrote: >>> >> >>> >>>cease >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> Cry, you illiterate cunt, cry! >>> >> >>> >Nobody reads your ridiculous posts >>> be fiar I certainly do so do you >> >> Markie admits to being a bitch! >> >>> it is good for laughs mosts day laughing a rueshaking of the head >> >> In English, you illiterate lying fraud. >> > > >Markie, Just ignore them. > >They only tease you because of the stupid things you say when you >follow up. Just ignore them and they'll give up. > >Stop giving them reasons to tease you. It only makes you look >more stupid. > >Take a break from the radio groups for a while, Maybe work on your >moon bounce some more or clean up your yard. > >SC why do you want to kil the ARS? http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/ -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Article: 228703 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Mark@kb9rqz.com Subject: Re: Morris Code -plus- Continuous Wave (CW) Radio Transmission -and-Semaphore Signals ? Do They Defining Amateur Radio ? Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 13:41:57 -0400 Message-ID: <0dgme2dvrliscnuou3l0pp23eonsu8g1ld@4ax.com> References: <44BDA4F3.7000706@fuse.net> <12brelk76dlj901@corp.supernews.com> <44eb0e03$1_4@newsfeed.slurp.net> On 22 Aug 2006 09:00:35 -0500, "Bill Turner" wrote: >Cecil Moore wrote: > >> The same is true of sailing ships, hot-air balloons, >> and horses. Do what turns you on and leave the >> @#$%&$ federal government out of it. > >-----------------REPLY BELOW----------------- > >Cecil has it exactly right. hopefully the FCC will soon follow and agree On that front one of the posters from qrz claims that he has contacted the FCC at FCCHam@fcc.gov and recieved the repsonse that the R&O is due out soon > >Bill, W6WRT http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/ -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Article: 228704 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Mark@kb9rqz.com Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 16:38:41 -0400 Message-ID: References: <30954.oidi09.d0904.ddoi0@qkd.org> <%RJGg.27319$uV.13889@trnddc08> On Tue, 22 Aug 2006 20:32:59 GMT, "Woody" wrote: >Well there ya have it folks.... 50wpm saves lives. So how does it work? >Turn up the speaker really loud and place it [face down] on the person's >chest, while >an op in South America tapped out universally accepted words that would >mimic an atrioventricular rhythm? you know that might work althought the same result could be achieved by having a laptop and speacker do the same thiing http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/ -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Article: 228705 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Mark@kb9rqz.com Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 17:05:06 -0400 Message-ID: <7bsme211fs48snmemim65rf2mtqh0taaaf@4ax.com> References: <30954.oidi09.d0904.ddoi0@qkd.org> <1152929851.865986.4740@35g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <44b94f14$0$3631$ecde5a14@news.coretel.net> On Sun, 16 Jul 2006 13:59:32 -0400, Al Klein wrote: >On 16 Jul 2006 18:51:21 +0200, "Alun L. Palmer" >wrote: > >>More to the point is I can't magine a scenario in which CW would be the >>only mode available > >A transmitter with no mic, no computer - just a transmit switch. Or >not even a transmit switch, but you can get to one of the battery >wires. Far fetched, but it could happen. > >>and that hams are about the only remaining users of CW. > >Boy Scouts? The military no longer uses CW - what used to be passed >by brass pounders is now passed digitally. Merchant Marine? Same >thing. Aero commo? Same thing, except for voice. I doubt any group >or service actually uses it these days. and yet we still test for it and try to claim we are advancing radio by doing it http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/ -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Article: 228706 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Mark@kb9rqz.com Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 17:22:45 -0400 Message-ID: <0dtme213mn1h0ss123du9uf8f657n1v6ia@4ax.com> References: <1152929851.865986.4740@35g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <_AVug.9493$PE1.1406@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net> <1153181770.231461.15160@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> <15KGg.27360$uV.26734@trnddc08> On Tue, 22 Aug 2006 20:49:01 GMT, "Woody" wrote: >Ha... yeah, only a ham radio operator would use a non-digital camera..... >and then it would have to be a daguerreotype. >rb LOL > > >"Brian Denley" wrote in message >news:L4-dneMy-efFpCHZnZ2dnUVZ_vOdnZ2d@comcast.com... >> an old friend wrote: >>> Slow Code wrote: >>>> fmmck@aol.com (Fred McKenzie) wrote in >>>> news:fmmck-1607061316520001@ac9bfd05.ipt.aol.com: >>>> >>>>> In article , "Alun L. >>>>> Palmer" wrote: >>> >>>>> "If you came upon a drowning man, and you had to choose whether to >>>>> save him or photograph his demise, what kind of film would you use?" >>>> >>>> >>>> Getting rid of CW is like choosing the kind of film. >>>> >>>> Ham radio is drowning and the anti-code hams want us to think >>>> tossing it bricks will make it float better. Dumbing things down is >>>> never an improvement. >>> nobody is talking about dummbing anything down >>> >>> you are >>> indeed you advocate dummbing down radio and giving hf only to the >>> unintelgent >>> >>>> >>>> SC >> >> Knowing CW is NO indication of any level of intelligence, technical or >> otherwise! >> >> BTW film is seeing it's last days too. Ask Kodak! >> >> -- >> Brian Denley >> http://home.comcast.net/~b.denley/index.html >> > http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/ -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Article: 228707 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "LenAnderson@ieee.org" Subject: Re: If Lennie Anderson Had To Tell The Truth Once, Would Bill Clinton Swear Off Big Mac's and White House Interns? With "Engineers" Like Lennie, It's No Wonder Everything Says "Made In Someplace Other Than The United States" Date: 22 Aug 2006 21:59:31 -0700 Message-ID: <1156309170.987438.161010@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> References: <1153597502.509378.294260@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> From: an old freind on Tues, Aug 22 2006 4:16 pm >K4YZ wrote: >> an old freind wrote: >> > K4YZ wrote: >> > > LenAnder...@ieee.org tried the same old tired rhetoric: > >> > > > But, challenge Robeson or call him in error and one will be >> > > > inundated with personal insults. Robeson MUST be right and >> > > > he MUST rule. Civil comportment be damned with Robeson in >> > > > newsgroups. Those newsgroups were (in his mind) created to >> > > > showcase Him? > >> > > Yep. > >> > agreeing for once get help > >> Get help for what? > >well a pro needs to way but Id say meglomanina paranoia, pathological >lying for starts Give up on Robesin, Mark. He MUST remain "right" and He "must" rule. He isn't interested in civility. Once an "enemy" of his, always an enemy in his mind. Sick way to be but he is that way, repeatedly. He just proved it in the message you replied to. He is setting the example for all hams. Not going to help the amateur ranks in getting more hams but that is not, apparently, his point. Robesin needs to come out on TOP in his own mind, be chieftan, be the warlord. He also wants rec.radio.amateur. policy all his own to do with as he sees fit. [probably to have his daily fits in...] Ech... > but titles like that are Robeson stock in trade my content in his posts > just ranting on and on about epople instead of Issues Absolutely true, Mark. He tries to belittle his "enemies" so that He looks good. Problem is, it is working in reverse and he is only belittling himself. LenAnderson@ieee.org Article: 228708 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Mark@kb9rqz.com Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 18:29:22 -0400 Message-ID: <121ne2pq8rntcmb90l7lrj30qmk3voaioq@4ax.com> References: <6gr3d21444qdt5m6mr1e1jpavltvso929p@4ax.com> <1155176094.212232.56330@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> <1155268104.444785.177310@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1155324703.131909.279070@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1156111049.458067.33380@74g2000cwt.googlegroups.com> <1156188562.839806.186090@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1156198607.916738.121580@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1156285189.249991.19140@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> On 22 Aug 2006 15:19:49 -0700, "LenAnderson@ieee.org" wrote: >From: M...@kb9rqz.com on Mon, Aug 21 2006 6:30 pm > >> wrote: >>>From: an old friend on Mon, Aug 21 2006 3:16 pm >>>>LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote: >>>>> From: hot-ham-and-che...@hotmail.com on Sun, Aug 20 2006 2:57 pm >> >>>>> >If the league pushes the morse testing issue too hard, it will become >>>>> >obvious to the 25% that are members. >> >>>>> I don't think so. The Amateur Radiotelegraphy Society is very >>>>> firmly SET in their ideas of keeping the "heritage" and >>>>> "tradition" of being a living museum of archaic radio. Those >>>>> firm believers and worshippers at the Church of St. Hiram are >>>>> disciples and they haven't had their last supper yet. >> >>>>I have no objection to them trying to prservs thier mode the ARS is big >>>>enough even for unproductive thing >> >>> It's "minority rule" when ARRL lobbies for preservation of >>> morse code test for any amateur radio license class. The >>> ARRL membership is slightly less than a quarter of all US >>> amateur radio licensees. >> >>>>> >Don't know if you've heard yet, but the ARRL and robesin announced that >>>>> >MARS and TSA have an agreement for armageddon communications. >> >>>>> Heh heh, I wouldn't doubt it... :-) >> >>>>> [via "giant meteor bounce?" ... off the earth, that is? :-) ] >> >>>>> I thought Robesin had put on his (invisible) USMC uniform and >>>>> was busy pounding brass with the USCG offshore from Beirut to >>>>> evacuate US civilians? :-) >> >>>>now that remark I must take you to task for >> >>>>the last thing we want to sugest that robeson might wear is something >>>>invisible now that image IS a sexauly distrubing one >> >>> Ahem...my reference was the old fairy tale, "The Emperor's New >>> Clothes." :-) >> >>i thougt as much OTOH the image of robeson nude is still well > > To me it is UNwell... :-) thinking much about him makes me feel unwell myself one of the reason I refuse to spend any time proofing a response to him > >>> That's the one where a full-of-himself ruler ordered some new >>> clothes and the tailor buttered him up (while not sewing any >>> new clothes) so much that the Emperor bought into this pandering >>> to his ego and appeared in public with his "new clothes" (he was >>> naked). Needless to say, the public laughed and laughed at this >>> ridiculous spectacle. :-) >> >>indeed i laugh at him myself ruefully >> >>with the added though that this is thebest the procoder can muster > > Robesin is merely a product of the "incentive" licensing > system where all those who hunger for being a "somebody" > can get a Title - Rank - Privilege through a singular skill. > > I didn't make that system, neither did you, neither did > anyone in these four forums. The FCC took a big chunk out > of it (license classes and morsemanship skill) with the > Restructuring of 2000 and that pissed off the Title-Rank- > Status seekers. Devout morsemen are angry and venting steam > because their self-esteem has fallen. > BTW several Ham over on QRZ have posted that they have received word derect from the FCC that the R&O is due out soon that should drive some of them over the edge >>> Robeson has been all full of himself in here about his alleged >>> "USMC service" yet he has presented zero-point-zero evidence >>> from anyone else (or any legitimate agency) that he ever >>> served on active USMC duty for any of his claimed "18 years." > > Simply amazing. EIGHTEEN years alleged on active duty and > he can't supply a single photo or document to support his > claim? In November of this year I can truthfully say I've > been in the southern California aerospace business 50 years. > I have all sorts of documentation and photos on that which > I may fully digitize some day (some are already digitized). > Some time ago I posted my resume in here...which only made > Robesin ballistic then since he has NO comparable > experience in industry and cannot prove any radio experience > other than amateur and alleged "chief operator" status at > some small MARS station long ago. [that was before his > less-than-a-half-year as a purchasing agent at a small > set top box maker] > > In another recent post, Robesin keeps referring to a "CV." > That's an acronym for the Latin 'curriculum vitae,' a list > of life experiences (education, work experience). In the > electronics industry, indeed in MOST industries, those > applying for jobs don't present a curriculum vitae, just a > RESUME of education-work experience. Some academics may > use "CV" but Personnel departments still look over resumes. > Just one more little gaffe on Robesin's part, trying to > LOOK experienced when he is NOT. > not tryiong to look more experenced but more cultured I think >>> Even though he NOW thinks of himself AS the amateur radio >>> service personified (anything against him is somehow against >>> ALL radio amateurs), he is still parodying the "Emperor." > > Another sign of his megalomania, purporting to "represent > all" and, by extension, anyone against Him is "against all > radio amateurs." Robesin desperately needs SOMETHING to > hold up his self-esteem and he uses amateur radio for that > selfish purpose. It is like his infamous snot-on-the- > moustache CAP flight suit picture, big on rank, title, and > with implications of status. CAP is NOT about amateur > radio but Robesin keeps on harping about it as if it > "proved" something about his amateur radio abilities. He > does the same with his "ER nurse qualifications" but those > have absolutely nothing to do with radio, amateur or > professional. > > But, challenge Robesin or call him in error and one will be > inundated with personal insults. Robeson MUST be right and > he MUST rule. Civil comportment be damned with Robeson in > newsgroups. Those newsgroups were (in his mind) created to > showcase Him? > > LenAnderson@ieee.org http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/ -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Article: 228709 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Mark@kb9rqz.com Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 18:31:13 -0400 Message-ID: References: <30954.oidi09.d0904.ddoi0@qkd.org> <12bactjanpufjfc@corp.supernews.com> <1156284617.050388.132430@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> On 22 Aug 2006 15:10:17 -0700, "LenAnderson@ieee.org" wrote: >From: Woody on Tues, Aug 22 2006 12:50 pm > > >>The Titanic knew their coordinates.... didn't slow the influx of H20.... >>The responding ships had radios too... didn't turn their props any >>faster.... > > The year was 1912...NINETY-FOUR YEARS AGO. > >>Answer to the question.... there was no system then. > > The predecessor organization for SOLAS had not yet made 500 KHz > the international distress and safety frequency. "SOLAS" is an > acronym for Safety Of Life At Sea. > >>CW can punch through if there is a human on the other end, where GPS/packet >>says 'no signal'.... >>GPS is faster, where CW takes longer.... >>so one is obsolete, the other inferior. > > The International Maritime Community settled the 'morse issue.' > They DROPPED it in favor of GMDSS (Global Marine Distress and > Safety System), a semi-automated system which can be operated > by anyone of the bridge crew on a ship (it needs little > instruction on use). GMDSS messages are automatically routed > to ground stations (note plural) via satellite relay. Those > ground stations can coordinate rescue missions. > > A shipboard GMDS station doesn't HAVE to have a GPS receiver > to feed it position data but all those which have one have > no complaint about this alleged "loss of signal." Position > data can be entered manually to a GMDS station. The bridge > crew will have a running record of the ship's position in > either event. Inded if the distress a small private like mine for example my GPS stil tells me where I last was > > The United States Coast Guard has DROPPED continuous > monitoring of the 500 KHz distress frequency some years > ago. Several other countries have done so. > > A following question is WHO will you believe on the efficacy > of communications? The entire international maritime > community or a bunch of myth-happy amateur morsemen? > > In a sentient, intelligent mind, ANY form of communications > is good for use in matters involving life and death. The > FCC thinks (rightly) so and says as much in Part 1 of Title > 47 C.F.R. [Part 97 is not the entirety of regulations on > amateur radio in the USA] > > -------------------- > > In a preceding message set: > >>"Cecil Moore" wrote in message >>> Dave wrote: >>>> David G. Nagel wrote: >> >>>>> A ham operator intercepted the SOS from the RMS Titanic. >> >>>> Yep!! It happened once! > > It happened NINETY-FOUR YEARS AGO. > >>> If CW had not existed at the time, how would things have >>> turned out differently? If the present GPS-based system >>> had existed at the time, how would things have turned out? > > I have to fault Cecil's erudite and intelligent mindset > on that...although his motor looks good in his picture. :-) > > One CANNOT base any intelligent argument about ALTERNATE > universes of different times and places. It hasn't > happened in our present time-space continuum. > > In 1912 "radio" was in its infancy, having been first shown > and demonstrated as a communications medium just 16 years > prior. There were extremely few ships which had vacuum > tubes as active devices to aid those first "radios." The > tube was only 6 years old, the triode invented in 1906. > > To argue about "GPS" (which is not an integral part of > GMDSS but can be) versus morse code is ludicrous. GPS > relies on a time-frequency standard within each of the > 24 GPS satellites which is comparable to the best time- > frequency source at NIST. [the quartz crystal > oscillator wasn't yet invented in 1912] Each satellite > needs solid-state circuitry to make it function within > a relatively small package. [the best "solid-state" > device of 1912 was a galena crystal detector with its > famous "cat's whisker"] The whole GPSS needed rocketry > advanced enough to put all the satellites into orbit. > [rocketry wasn't perfected for that purpose until after > WW2] Those rockets needed launch guidance aided by > radar systems. [radar, or rather a primitive system of > it, wasn't tried until 1932 in a harbor area of France] > > However, "morse code" was used in the landline Morse-Vail > Telegraph System working before the American Civil War > and simple enough to turn a spark transmitter on and off > as on the Titanic. > >>> Which system is presently inferior and virtually obsolete? > > On-off keyed CW. > > Except in the mindset of the ARRL. The IARU knows better. > > LenAnderson@ieee.org http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/ -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Article: 228710 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Mark@kb9rqz.com Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 19:22:07 -0400 Message-ID: References: <30954.oidi09.d0904.ddoi0@qkd.org> <12bactjanpufjfc@corp.supernews.com> <1156284617.050388.132430@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> <1iMGg.27902$uV.24149@trnddc08> On Tue, 22 Aug 2006 23:19:25 GMT, "Woody" wrote: >Um.... you know, just saying "I agree" would have been a lot simpler and >saved you 2 pages of typing.... LOL. >rb len likes to carry on as is his right http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/ -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Article: 228711 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Mark@kb9rqz.com Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 20:36:51 -0400 Message-ID: References: <1155268104.444785.177310@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1155324703.131909.279070@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1156111049.458067.33380@74g2000cwt.googlegroups.com> <1156188562.839806.186090@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1156198607.916738.121580@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1156209544.379600.140580@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <1156292167.553349.223020@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> On 22 Aug 2006 17:16:07 -0700, hot-ham-and-cheese@hotmail.com wrote: > >LenAnderson@ieee.org wrote: >> From: an old friend on Mon, Aug 21 2006 3:16 pm >> >> >> >LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote: >> >> From: hot-ham-and-che...@hotmail.com on Sun, Aug 20 2006 2:57 pm >> >> >If the league pushes the morse testing issue too hard, it will become >> >> >obvious to the 25% that are members. >> > >> >> I don't think so. The Amateur Radiotelegraphy Society is very >> >> firmly SET in their ideas of keeping the "heritage" and >> >> "tradition" of being a living museum of archaic radio. Those >> >> firm believers and worshippers at the Church of St. Hiram are >> >> disciples and they haven't had their last supper yet. >> > >> >I have no objection to them trying to prservs thier mode the ARS is big >> >enough even for unproductive thing >> >> It's "minority rule" when ARRL lobbies for preservation of >> morse code test for any amateur radio license class. The >> ARRL membership is slightly less than a quarter of all US >> amateur radio licensees. > >The ARRL is trying to soften their image - the latest QST shows a >person using a, gulp, microphone on the FRONT cover! > >Just inside is yet another article on building a code key - from a door >hinge. > >> >> >Don't know if you've heard yet, but the ARRL and robesin announced that >> >> >MARS and TSA have an agreement for armageddon communications. >> > >> >> Heh heh, I wouldn't doubt it... :-) >> > >> >> [via "giant meteor bounce?" ... off the earth, that is? :-) ] >> > >> >> I thought Robesin had put on his (invisible) USMC uniform and >> >> was busy pounding brass with the USCG offshore from Beirut to >> >> evacuate US civilians? :-) >> > >> >now that remark I must take you to task for >> > >> >the last thing we want to sugest that robeson might wear is something >> >invisible now that image IS a sexauly distrubing one >> >> Ahem...my reference was the old fairy tale, "The Emperor's New >> Clothes." :-) >> >> That's the one where a full-of-himself ruler ordered some new >> clothes and the tailor buttered him up (while not sewing any >> new clothes) so much that the Emperor bought into this pandering >> to his ego and appeared in public with his "new clothes" (he was >> naked). Needless to say, the public laughed and laughed at this >> ridiculous spectacle. :-) >> >> Robeson has been all full of himself in here about his alleged >> "USMC service" yet he has presented zero-point-zero evidence >> from anyone else (or any legitimate agency) that he ever >> served on active USMC duty for any of his claimed "18 years." >> >> Even though he NOW thinks of himself AS the amateur radio >> service personified (anything against him is somehow against >> ALL radio amateurs), he is still parodying the "Emperor." >> >> LenAnderson@ieee.org > >This just in from The ARRL Letter, Vol. 25, No. 33, August 18, 2006 > >"ARRL First Vice President Kay Craigie, N3KN, represented the League at >the >Global Amateur Radio Emergency Communications Conference 2006." > >"Craigie stressed that Amateur Radio needs to avoid "being dazzled by >our >own press clippings into thinking that we are the big dog in emergency >telecommunications."" > >She refers to robesin-like attitudes within the ARS. indeed she might almost hav mentioned him by name > >didit! http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/ -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Article: 228712 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Mark@kb9rqz.com Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 21:17:51 -0400 Message-ID: References: <30954.oidi09.d0904.ddoi0@qkd.org> <%RJGg.27319$uV.13889@trnddc08> On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 01:10:08 GMT, Dave Oldridge wrote: >"Woody" wrote in >news:%RJGg.27319$uV.13889@trnddc08: > >> Well there ya have it folks.... 50wpm saves lives. So how does it >> work? Turn up the speaker really loud and place it [face down] on the >> person's chest, while >> an op in South America tapped out universally accepted words that >> would mimic an atrioventricular rhythm? > >Did someone drop you on your head at birth? wy wouldyou ask that did someone drop you on yours? >The reason 50wpm can save >lives is probably a bit complex for you to get both your functioning >neurons around, but believe me, having done CW for a living for some >decades I do know that it can save lives. a date when was the last Ham Morse saved a life at any speed >> car and drive down to the local EMS agency, and bring them to you. >> Life saved! >> I'm impressed. >> rb > >So apparently YOUR answer to this question is that you couldn't send your >name if your own life depended on it. I can send anything I like the proof of that is before you I have a pc > >Believe me, I get it. I don't think CW ought to be mandatory and it >isn't where I live. good for you > I do think people who intend to use it should learn >how to use it properly, though. For CW to be effective, both operators >must be competent. IF they are, they can often transcend barriers of >language that only digital modes can get over. In my own case, the fact >that I could read CW and read written Spanish a bit once enabled me to >render aid to a burning fishing boat. (There were other more routine >examples of where the language barrier was crossed by CW--many messages I >copied were not in English at all, but were readable by their end >recipients). ok you have a date for that I'll accept it as a life saved by CW if you do http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/ -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Article: 228713 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Mark@kb9rqz.com Subject: Re: why not deal with the real issue Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 23:44:42 -0400 Message-ID: References: <1156208683.769075.32480@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1156213159.387173.176230@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1156215409.916008.322300@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <1156216935.451293.177760@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1156217217.076077.295020@74g2000cwt.googlegroups.com> <1156300452.123618.251900@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1156300806.685581.89530@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com> <1156301216.132471.315560@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> On 22 Aug 2006 19:46:56 -0700, "Bakb0ne" wrote: > >an Old friend wrote: >> Bakb0ne wrote: >> > an old friend wrote: >> > > Bakb0ne wrote: >> > > > an old friend wrote: >> > > > > Bakb0ne wrote: >> indeed I have always liked an idea with some folks talking a rule and >> safety test (and being confined to built equipment) and pay a fee while >> others would takerigourous test and no fees > >So basically ur saying that you should be able to either > >1. Pay for your license and Take a beginner test (to prove your >competent) >or >2. Take a Intermediate Test and get free license after passing > >If this is what you mean, then i can see your logic and i would fully >support a system like this... basicaly yes > >Only problem is that just like Slow Code and the other trolls who try >to change the Ham world, we wouldnt be able to do anything either, its >down to the corporations, not us little people... well maybe I am naive but if Ham could get it together to support something different that was not hard to run (from the FCC's point of view) I suspect we would get it http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/ -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Article: 228714 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Paul Hinman Subject: Re: Sommer versus SteppIR References: <8e917$44e765ad$453d9423$8718@FUSE.NET> <1156131770.320326.41130@74g2000cwt.googlegroups.com> <44E92CE5.10502@fuse.net> <44ebc755.60522765@news.optonline.net> Message-ID: Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 05:15:10 GMT This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------010306060204050700010304 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Rick wrote: >On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 20:51:25 +0200, "Pete" > wrote: > > > >>My next antenna is a 3 element SteppIR with the 6m option and 40/30m dipole >>option. I currently have a Hy-Gain Explorer 14 with 40m kit. >> >>I vote SteppIR. >>-- >>Pete . . >>ZS5ACT >> >> > > >I have had a three element SteppIR up for three years now. >It replaced a pair of Hy Gain monobanders (4 element 20 and 5 element >15). >Biggest difference I noticed was that my mast doesn't bend anymore !! >And my rotor has about 1/3 the work to do because the torque is so >much less. >And I have one feedline and no antenna switches, and only one >lightning arrestor. >And I now get 10 meters, and 17 meters. Wow what a great band 17 >meters is. >Yes, I DO notice the pattern is not as sharp as the big monobanders, >no question about it. Probably a db or so less gain. > >On 6 meters (I DO NOT have the extra fixed length element for 6 >meters) I also have a 5 element M Squared, mounted about 6 feet above >the SteppIR. It absolutely blows away the SteppIR. So if you are >serious about 6, and don't want another yagi on the tower, give >serious consideration to the advice of Mike at SteppIR and get his 4th >element. I guess you said that, you are getting the 6 meter element. > >But I miss that shiny aluminum up there. Sometimes the early morning >sun would reflect off all those Hy Gain elements...... Man, that was >a beautiful sight. > >But 30 and 40 meters with the SteppIR? Seems like the only advantages >are the ones I mentioned above about the single feedline and >simplicity. I can't really see all that much advantage to being able >to rotate those single element radiators on those bands. I >experimented with learning EZNEC last week and I didn't see hardly any >directivity at all in my 40 meter inverted vee. > >Rick K2XT > > You could also get a second mortgage on the house and get the Steppir Monstir and rotate 4 elements on 40M. It might mean a tower and rotor upgrade but one can always dream. Paul -- Paul S. Hinman - VE6LDS long West 113 deg 27 min 20 sec lat North 53 deg 27 min 3 sec Maidenhead Locator DO33gk --------------010306060204050700010304 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Rick wrote:
On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 20:51:25 +0200, "Pete"
<zs5actRemovethis@mweb.co.za> wrote:

  
My next antenna is a 3 element SteppIR with the 6m option and 40/30m dipole 
option. I currently have a Hy-Gain Explorer 14 with 40m kit.

I vote SteppIR.
-- 
Pete . .
ZS5ACT
    


I have had a three element SteppIR up for three years now.
It replaced a pair of Hy Gain monobanders (4 element 20 and 5 element
15).
Biggest difference I noticed was that my mast doesn't bend anymore !!
And my rotor has about 1/3 the work to do because the torque is so
much less.
And I have one feedline and no antenna switches, and only one
lightning arrestor.
And I now get 10 meters, and 17 meters.  Wow what a great band 17
meters is.
Yes, I DO notice the pattern is not as sharp as the big monobanders,
no question about it.  Probably a db or so less gain.

On 6 meters (I DO NOT have the extra fixed length element for 6
meters) I also have a 5 element M Squared, mounted about 6 feet above
the SteppIR.  It absolutely blows away the SteppIR.  So if you are
serious about 6, and don't want another yagi on the tower, give
serious consideration to the advice of Mike at SteppIR and get his 4th
element.  I guess you said that, you are getting the 6 meter element.

But I miss that shiny aluminum up there.  Sometimes the early morning
sun would reflect off all those Hy Gain elements...... Man,  that was
a beautiful sight.  

But 30 and 40 meters with the SteppIR?  Seems like the only advantages
are the ones I mentioned above about the single feedline and
simplicity.  I can't really see all that much advantage to being able
to rotate those single element radiators on those bands.  I
experimented with learning EZNEC last week and I didn't see hardly any
directivity at all in my 40 meter inverted vee.

Rick  K2XT
You could also get a second mortgage on the house and get the Steppir Monstir and rotate 4 elements on 40M.  It might mean a tower and rotor upgrade but one can always dream.

Paul

-- 
Paul S. Hinman - VE6LDS
long West 113 deg 27 min 20 sec
lat  North 53 deg 27 min 3 sec
Maidenhead Locator DO33gk
--------------010306060204050700010304-- Article: 228715 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Roy Lewallen Subject: Re: Two Meter FM Antenna Question Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 22:59:32 -0700 Message-ID: <12enrm6nunsr414@corp.supernews.com> References: <1156112798.027258.152330@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> <12eknkcib18cad1@corp.supernews.com> John E. Davis wrote: > . . . > Perhaps you can advise me regarding the numerical stability of the > following omni-directional, which NEC indicates has a gain of 4 and a > VSWR<1.2 when fed with a 50ohm feedline at 151.75 Mhz. > > The geometry consists of a 54.5 inch vertical with 4 35.625 inch > radials that are bent upward by about 11 degrees. The vertical is > made from 14 AWG wire, while the radials are 1/8 inch brazing rod. > . . . > > With segment sizes of 0.05 and 0.025 lambda, the average power gain is > very close to 1. Changing the segment size to 0.0125, drops the > average power gain to 0.93, which indicates numerical instability. > > Should I believe this model? Actually, that's pretty good. It's not uncommon to see quite good models hit around a half dB from perfect, i.e., average gain around +/- 12% >from unity. Within that range, and even when the average gain is substantially worse, you can correct both the input resistance and gain with the average gain figure to arrive at an accurate result. (Refer to the NEC-2 or EZNEC manual for more information.) Poor average gain doesn't usually indicate instability, but rather problems with the way the assumed currents from the source overlap onto adjacent segments -- it's an excitation problem. Particularly problematic are wires of differing diameters, different segment lengths, and with bends in the immediate vicinity of the source. Your model has all three, so the average gain you're seeing is really good for that model. Roy Lewallen, W7EL Article: 228716 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Jeff Liebermann Subject: Re: Transmit but not Receive Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 22:45:36 -0700 Message-ID: References: <1156271994.209347.58810@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> kevin.pavin@gmail.com hath wroth: >For an experiment I'm conducting I want to >be able to transmit two data streams from two WiFi(b) routers at the >same time. Through the same antenna or seperate antennas? If one antenna, use a Wilkinson combiner to isolate the xmitters so there's no intermod. >I realize that they have carrier sense avoidance so that if >they are right next to each other they will not transmit at the same >time. Sorta. 802.11 is CSMA/CA or collision avoidance, not collision detection. It will do it's best to prevent simultaneous transmissions, but it still can happen. The receiver will listen for data, but will only wait until the end of the random contention time period. Allegedly, it will wait 3 contention periods before transmitting. Unfortunately, I've found that it will transmit anyway after these 3 periods. This is to prevent broadband noise from creating the ultimate denial of service attack and shut down all wireless transmissions by transmitting continuous noise. http://www.zytrax.com/tech/wireless/802_mac.htm >Is there a piece of hardware (filter, diode? or something?) that >i can put between the output of the routers and their respective >antennas such that this device will pass the transmit signal to the >antenna but not pass any radiation received from the antenna to the >routers? Others have suggested a circulator or isolator. That will work. So will a hybrid ring. >The idea then would be that the carrier sense would not come >into play as no power would be received from the antennas. It might be easier to simply disable the receiver section of your unspecified wireless device. Many Wi-Fi router use seperate RF power amplifiers in the TX path. That means there's an exposed T/R swich somewhere on the board. Find it, chop the RX input line, ground or terminate the RF input pin, and you're done. If you can identify the radio chip, you should be able to easily find the RX pin. -- Jeff Liebermann jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 Article: 228717 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Richard Clark Subject: Re: Antenna wire Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 00:17:25 -0700 Message-ID: <0ftne2l1aedai6emg6on8natfplbno4cmc@4ax.com> References: <5udne2hbro4lsmhg5d7kv0c5nb4bbglof3@4ax.com> On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 03:35:44 GMT, Owen Duffy wrote: >I think "ordinary house wire" may be aluminium, a by product of 110V >utilisation I guess. House wiring here is still principally copper. Hi Owen, Aluminium/um house wiring here was but a brief, failed experiment some 30-40 years ago. >Subject to more reliable information on the wire's GBS, my initial >calcs are that a span of 40m (half of a half wave dipole on 160m) >would need 3.3% sag (~1.4m) to survive wind at 60m/s With a Category Four Hurricane roaring outside, I would think you would be worried about more than wire. >with a safety >factor of 3.5. Yes, of course, the mountings must also survive the >wind, and this analysis assumes not deflection of the mounting points >and no stretch of the wire. My wire tables offer that 40M of #12 wire would weigh 2.6 pounds in bare copper. The breaking load would push beyond 100 times that at 337 pounds (40% copper clad is slightly more than twice that). For a sag of 1.4 meters in 20 meters would be an angle of depression of 4°. If I take the inverse of the sin( 4°) it would multiply the weight by 14.3 for a tension of 37 pounds. The wire by itself would hardly constitute any jeopardy, but there is still a choke and transmission line's weight to be added (and I probably missed this by a factor of two in simply winging the math). Let it sag 3 meters and the multiplier drops to less than 7. >The only thing that compares on strength and conductivity is >Copperweld, but it is not easily obtained here... I suspect the cost >of freight might double or triple the price of a 100lb pack of 30% #12 >wire. > >I did look at heavy galvanised wires, but it seems the move has been >to Zinc/Aluminium alloy with an overall synthetic coating, and since >it erodes much slower, the coatings are only 10 to 20 microns... not >thick enough for good conductivity. At something like 4 dB additional loss, this may matter. Additional sag would seem to be a very efficient return on investment in comparison to the additional 1.6 meters proximity to earth (that wouldn't nearly add 4 dB loss, would it?). >My usual supplier looks like he can't do 3mm HDC economically any >more, hence the search. Try using a rope runner. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC Article: 228718 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Owen Duffy Subject: Re: Antenna wire Message-ID: References: <5udne2hbro4lsmhg5d7kv0c5nb4bbglof3@4ax.com> <0ftne2l1aedai6emg6on8natfplbno4cmc@4ax.com> Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 08:29:37 GMT On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 00:17:25 -0700, Richard Clark wrote: >On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 03:35:44 GMT, Owen Duffy wrote: > >>I think "ordinary house wire" may be aluminium, a by product of 110V >>utilisation I guess. House wiring here is still principally copper. > >Hi Owen, > >Aluminium/um house wiring here was but a brief, failed experiment some >30-40 years ago. Hi Richard, Thankfully, it didn't come here. I just Googled for "aluminium house wiring fires" and got 1,080,000 hits, whereas for "copper house wiring fires" I got 736,000 hits. I guess there may have been an issue. > >>Subject to more reliable information on the wire's GBS, my initial >>calcs are that a span of 40m (half of a half wave dipole on 160m) >>would need 3.3% sag (~1.4m) to survive wind at 60m/s > >With a Category Four Hurricane roaring outside, I would think you >would be worried about more than wire. > >>with a safety >>factor of 3.5. Yes, of course, the mountings must also survive the >>wind, and this analysis assumes not deflection of the mounting points >>and no stretch of the wire. > >My wire tables offer that 40M of #12 wire would weigh 2.6 pounds in >bare copper. The breaking load would push beyond 100 times that at >337 pounds (40% copper clad is slightly more than twice that). > >For a sag of 1.4 meters in 20 meters would be an angle of depression >of 4°. If I take the inverse of the sin( 4°) it would multiply the >weight by 14.3 for a tension of 37 pounds. The wire by itself would Using that approximation, shouldn't you have taken the weight of a half span? Then, isn't that weight evenly distributed over the half span, so you should halve it again?) A parabolic approximation is better than the triangular approximate, and it would suggest tension is W*S^2/sag/8 or 0.28*40^2/1.2/8 N or 46.7N (~10.5lbf) which is a small fraction of the GBS of 1350N for HDC, so yes, the wire is easily able to support itself. Wind forces are much greater, and wind at 60m/s (highest design speed for non-cyclonic localities under building standards here) loads the wire to 386N (which is GBS/SF). The lowest design speed under our standards is 41m/s, that results in about half the tension. >hardly constitute any jeopardy, but there is still a choke and >transmission line's weight to be added (and I probably missed this by >a factor of two in simply winging the math). I was considering a span with no concentrated loads (it is a quarter wave, half of a half wave dipole). Yes to missing a factor or two. It is too late to be grinding numbers on your side of the world! > >Let it sag 3 meters and the multiplier drops to less than 7. > >>The only thing that compares on strength and conductivity is >>Copperweld, but it is not easily obtained here... I suspect the cost >>of freight might double or triple the price of a 100lb pack of 30% #12 >>wire. >> >>I did look at heavy galvanised wires, but it seems the move has been >>to Zinc/Aluminium alloy with an overall synthetic coating, and since >>it erodes much slower, the coatings are only 10 to 20 microns... not >>thick enough for good conductivity. > >At something like 4 dB additional loss, this may matter. Additional >sag would seem to be a very efficient return on investment in >comparison to the additional 1.6 meters proximity to earth (that >wouldn't nearly add 4 dB loss, would it?). > >>My usual supplier looks like he can't do 3mm HDC economically any >>more, hence the search. > >Try using a rope runner. Do you mean a rope as a carrier for the conductor... runs into some other issues like differential stretch, and huge wind resistance. The structure may stay in the sky, but the wire might be fractured anyway. Owen -- Article: 228719 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 08:10:30 -0400 From: Dave Subject: Re: Antenna wire References: <5udne2hbro4lsmhg5d7kv0c5nb4bbglof3@4ax.com> Message-ID: COPPER-WELD There are no issues of "reliable connections". NOTE: Copper-weld is copper cladded steel wire. It's been used for years as a very reliable antenna with long spans. Catenary stresses are carried by the steel wire component. /s/ DD Owen Duffy wrote: > In searching the 'net for wire suitable for wire antennas, I came > across a single core 2.7mm diameter 40% aluminium clad high tensile > steel wire. > > I am trying to get some further detail on its Guaranteed Breaking > Strength, but my guess is that the steel core is probably somewhere > about 1000 MPa UTS, and will give an overall GBS around 4kN. > > The coating thickness looks like high conductivity aluminium, with a > thickness of 300 microns, which is 5 skin depths at 1.8MHz, so > conductivity should be good. > > Apart from the challenge of making reliable connections to aluminium, > are there other "issues" that come to mind in using such wire for > antennas? > > Owen > -- Article: 228720 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Not Cocksucker Lloyd" Subject: Re: Poor Markie! - Markie, Just ignore them. Date: 23 Aug 2006 05:30:23 -0700 Message-ID: <1156336223.563647.100240@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> References: <1155755878.737265.55800@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> MarkMoron@kb9rqz.com wrote: > On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 23:46:53 GMT, Slow Code wrote: > > >kb9rqz_child_molester@yahoo.com wrote in > >news:1156167941.257256.314290@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com: > > > >> MarkMoron@kb9rqz.com wrote: > >>> On Fri, 18 Aug 2006 08:56:55 -0400, jawod wrote: > >>> > >>> >Not Cocksucker Lloyd wrote: > >>> >> an old friendless cocksucking child molester wrote: > >>> >> > >>> >>>cease > >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >> Cry, you illiterate cunt, cry! > >>> >> > >>> >Nobody reads your ridiculous posts > >>> be fiar I certainly do so do you > >> > >> Markie admits to being a bitch! > >> > >>> it is good for laughs mosts day laughing a rueshaking of the head > >> > >> In English, you illiterate lying fraud. > >> > > > > > >Markie, Just ignore them. > > > >They only tease you because of the stupid things you say when you > >follow up. Just ignore them and they'll give up. > > > >Stop giving them reasons to tease you. It only makes you look > >more stupid. > > > >Take a break from the radio groups for a while, Maybe work on your > >moon bounce some more or clean up your yard. > > > >SC > why do you want to kil the ARS? Why do you want to "kill" the English language? Article: 228721 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Not Cocksucker Lloyd" Subject: Re: PING: Slow Code Date: 23 Aug 2006 05:31:31 -0700 Message-ID: <1156336291.761443.49450@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com> References: <1156186858.857772.22110@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> MarkMoron@kb9rqz.com wrote: > On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 23:46:48 GMT, Slow Code wrote: > > >new_cw_ham@saintly.com wrote in > >news:1156186858.857772.22110@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com: > > > >> Wanted to thank you for your posts about the code. > >> > >> Because of you I just upgraded (Saturday) from technician to general. I > >> breezed the 5 wpm and am up to around 15wpm according to the W1AW > >> pratice broadcasts. I never would have bothered to learn CW if it > >> wasn't for you. > >> > >> I know I only "need" 5 wpm but I am not going to upgrade to extra until > >> I can cpy 25 wpm SOLID! > >> > >> This is in honor of my electronic elmer, Slow Code. > >> > >> Thanks...... > > > >ROFLMAO! > > > >.... And you've made me think of possibly joining CAP. > > > > > >Testimonials like yours will bring a smile to every Real hams face. :-) > > > >Just learn the code to 22 wpm. That would be a nice edge if you still had > >to take a 20 wpm CW test. But if you can only get your speed up to 16 or > >17 words per minute, upgrade anyway. We need good people like you on the > >ham bands and on usenet. LOL > > > > > >73 > > > >SC > why do you want to kil the ARS? Why do you "kill" the English language ? Article: 228722 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: Mismatched Zo Connectors References: <2eSdnYZzr7pWyXbZRVnytA@bt.com> Message-ID: Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 12:38:15 GMT Reg Edwards wrote: > Reflections are functions of TIME, not frequency. Remember that in the (2*pi*frequency*time) term used to describe reflections, frequency is just as important as time. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 228723 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Steve Stone" References: <30954.oidi09.d0904.ddoi0@qkd.org> <1152929851.865986.4740@35g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <_AVug.9493$PE1.1406@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net> <1153275616.225575.252170@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com> <44BDA4F3.7000706@fuse.net> <12brelk76dlj901@corp.supernews.com> Subject: Re: Morris Code -plus- Continuous Wave (CW) Radio Transmission -and- Semaphore Signals ? Do They Defining Amateur Radio ? Message-ID: <5KYGg.8192$oa1.5530@news02.roc.ny> Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 13:28:33 GMT > But there's nothing to prevent people who appreciate and love the > language of Morse, the way it sings, its universality, its beauty, > from continuing to use it way into the future. > > It is the beauty of Morse, in plain English, never mind the > abbreviations, which boy scouts and others who show an interest should > be taught to appreciate. > ---- > Reg, G4FGQ I completely agree with you N2UBP Article: 228724 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Bob Miller Subject: Re: Two Meter FM Antenna Question Message-ID: <4smoe2pflk3t1lf4eg6mvlrncu9o576bp0@4ax.com> References: <8usje21pgkpi0sc1dc67jpiio2r54vte0h@4ax.com> <8hfke2droqlvu50odf5ltrnununpt7l2sv@4ax.com> <44ebcc97.61868625@news.optonline.net> Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 13:46:12 GMT On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 03:41:41 GMT, ricknj10@hotmail.com (Rick) wrote: > >> >>Maybe I'm missing something, who manufactures vertical vhf dipoles? > > >We're hams. We make our own antennas, don't we? >Two pieces of wire, and some insulators. I agree, a 2 meter dipole would take minutes to make. I was just curious about manufacturer's published gain figures since I can't recall ever seeing a manufactured 2 meter center-fed dipole -- apparantely there are a few out there. bob k5qwg > >I had a vertical dipole for 2 meters once, a section of an old tv >antenna. One element (by definition) mounted on an insulator on a >boom. I attached the boom with two hose clamps onto my tower and >mouunted the single element out from the tower 3-4 feet. Attached a >piece of coax to the elements. Zero cost, used it for 15 years like >that. > >Worked great. Wait a minute. On second thought how would I know >that? Ok let me rephrase that. "It worked." It's 2 meters, for >crying out loud - anything works. If you need gain you get a beam. > >Rick K2XT Article: 228725 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "lepongebob" Subject: fan of cinema ? Date: 23 Aug 2006 07:41:52 -0700 Message-ID: <1156344112.075417.272000@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com> Hye! I have lauched a new cinema website: [url]http://www.cineclic.net/tgroo[/url] the best reviews you have ever seen. Give me your opinion See ya ! Sponge Bob Article: 228726 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "an Old friend" Subject: Re: Poor Markie! - Markie, Just ignore them. Date: 23 Aug 2006 08:18:16 -0700 Message-ID: <1156346296.495989.316750@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> References: <1155755878.737265.55800@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> Not Cocksucker Lloyd wrote: > MarkMoron@kb9rqz.com wrote: > > On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 23:46:53 GMT, Slow Code wrote: > > > > why do you want to kil the ARS? > > Why do you want to "kill" the English language? based on you own adknowledgement that I am an expert on lying I say you are lying Article: 228727 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "an old friend" Subject: Re: PING: Slow Code Date: 23 Aug 2006 08:38:27 -0700 Message-ID: <1156347507.188495.166660@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> References: <1156186858.857772.22110@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> Not Cocksucker Lloyd wrote: > MarkMoron@kb9rqz.com wrote: > > why do you want to kil the ARS? > > Why do you "kill" the English language ? by the authority YOU gave me I can state the expert opiion you just lied Article: 228728 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "kb9rqz@hotmail.com" Subject: Re: Choices, Choices, Choices... CW or CB? Date: 23 Aug 2006 09:04:23 -0700 Message-ID: <1156349063.066092.165050@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com> References: Jim Higgins wrote: > On Sun, 20 Aug 2006 20:28:33 -0400, Mark@kb9rqz.com wrote: > > >On Mon, 24 Jul 2006 23:42:13 GMT, Slow Code wrote: > > > >> > >>That's what you have to decide. > >> > >>SC > >false choice it never was a single choice teither or > > > >only fools like you think so > >http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/ > > > Sweet Geezus! That's not only the worst spelling I've ever seen, but > also the most inconsistent. And you wear it like a badge of honor! If > you don't give a damn how you write I certainly don't give a damn > about reading it. one I Do far worse from timte to time two fi you don't want to read it DON"T by all means Article: 228729 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Green Egghead Subject: Re: Vertical radiation from horizontal dipole? Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 16:44:28 -0000 Message-ID: <12ep1fco58ja62e@corp.supernews.com> References: <1155949003.609701.39890@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <12ed290mv4kekea@corp.supernews.com> <12egsogtbki2m13@corp.supernews.com> <5%4Gg.11362$9T3.4779@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net> <12ek3fi5u42qk8f@corp.supernews.com> <12ek73b5fneji02@corp.supernews.com> Roy Lewallen wrote: > > Green Egghead wrote: > > . . . > > Karo brand corn syrup has an interesting property. > > It will rotate the linear polarization of light passing through it > > by different amounts depending on the frequency. > > This can easily be seen by placing a small jar of > > Karo syrup between to linear polarizers and rotating > > them. Different angles between the linear polarizers > > will result in a different color being seen in the Karo jar. . . > > Dextrose (for right) and levulose (for left) -- aka glucose and > fructose, the components of sucrose, ordinary table sugar -- are named > for the direction in which they rotate the polarization of light. > > Roy Lewallen, W7EL To make things worse, there's a d-fructose and l-fructose. D-tagatose is the all-natural un-sugar: http://www.jhu.edu/~jhumag/1102web/sweet.html I think I've seen it on store shelves. I'll check it out if it's not too expensive. A few years ago someone discovered an efficient way to grow crystals of a specific handedness >from solution. So I'm surprised L-tagatose hasn't totally replaced saccharin and phenylketoneurics. Perhaps because some diseases ()like phenylketoneuria) are associated with certain chiral forms? Astrobioligists have suggested using chiral tests to determine the presense of life on other planets since, as far as they know, all life on earth has a preference for (or immunity against?) one handedness over the other. This suggested to them that perhaps once life developed on a planet it would quickly bias all life on that planet towards one of the two forms. More on topic, should we be testing for circular polarization radiation exposure levels on field strength meters? It is interesting that Faraday rotation of linear polarization can be described in terms of circular birefringence. I can't tell if that's an analytical more than a physical description. I see though the Faraday Effect is used in astronomy with oscillating pulsars but otherwise making a radio tuner in this manner would seem to present a problem of scales. I'm confused about this since I've seen it said the higher frequencies of light are rotated more by Karo syrup, while another website says the higher radio frequencies are rotated less by the ionosphere due to the Faraday Effect than are the lower frequencies. If I had to guess, I would think there would be only a certain band of radio frequencies where polarization rotation would make a practical radio tuner. Spintronics? Article: 228730 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: davis@space.mit.edu (John E. Davis) Subject: Re: Two Meter FM Antenna Question References: <1156112798.027258.152330@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> <12eknkcib18cad1@corp.supernews.com> <12enrm6nunsr414@corp.supernews.com> Message-ID: Date: 23 Aug 2006 17:34:16 GMT On Tue, 22 Aug 2006 22:59:32 -0700, Roy Lewallen wrote: >> Should I believe this model? > >Actually, that's pretty good. It's not uncommon to see quite good models The only other thing that worries me is the placement of the feedline. I plan run it at right angles to the vertical as much as possible. After I built my 5-element yagi for MURS, I found that the SWR was affected by the placement of the feedline. As such, I would like to simulate its presence with NEC-2. Any hints about how to do this? Thanks, --John Article: 228731 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Dan Richardson Subject: Re: Two Meter FM Antenna Question Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 10:42:32 -0700 Message-ID: References: <1156112798.027258.152330@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> <12eknkcib18cad1@corp.supernews.com> <12enrm6nunsr414@corp.supernews.com> On 23 Aug 2006 17:34:16 GMT, davis@space.mit.edu (John E. Davis) wrote: >The only other thing that worries me is the placement of the feedline. >I plan run it at right angles to the vertical as much as possible. >After I built my 5-element yagi for MURS, I found that the SWR was >affected by the placement of the feedline. As such, I would like to >simulate its presence with NEC-2. Any hints about how to do this? > >Thanks, >--John John, Its all called out in EZNEC's help file. Look under "About Transmission Lines" Danny, K6MHE Article: 228732 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: davis@space.mit.edu (John E. Davis) Subject: Re: Two Meter FM Antenna Question References: <1156112798.027258.152330@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> <12eknkcib18cad1@corp.supernews.com> <12enrm6nunsr414@corp.supernews.com> Message-ID: Date: 23 Aug 2006 18:10:12 GMT On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 10:42:32 -0700, Dan Richardson wrote: >Its all called out in EZNEC's help file. Look under "About >Transmission Lines" Does EZNEC support linux? I do not have windows installed on my machines--- only Debian linux. I will double check the NEC-2 docs. I also have the ARRL antenna book but I do not recall a discussion of it there, but I will recheck that too. Thanks, --John Article: 228733 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Richard Clark Subject: Re: Antenna wire Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 11:17:37 -0700 Message-ID: References: <5udne2hbro4lsmhg5d7kv0c5nb4bbglof3@4ax.com> <0ftne2l1aedai6emg6on8natfplbno4cmc@4ax.com> On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 08:29:37 GMT, Owen Duffy wrote: >Thankfully, it didn't come here. I just Googled for "aluminium house >wiring fires" and got 1,080,000 hits, whereas for "copper house wiring >fires" I got 736,000 hits. I guess there may have been an issue. Hi Owen, To say the least. The problem with aluminium/um house wiring was identified as "cold flow" where over time the mechanical joint would fail, increase resistance and electrical failure followed. Given the correspondence here on connecting aluminium/um, it appears that problem has been solved by professionals, but it would also seem to offer dim prospects in the housing industry. >Using that approximation, shouldn't you have taken the weight of a >half span? Then, isn't that weight evenly distributed over the half >span, so you should halve it again?) No, upon further investigation, my numbers appear to be ball-park without an order of two correction (other corrections may be necessary). >A parabolic approximation is better than the triangular approximate, More properly a "catenary" for sags which is a curve of constant tension; and for our antenna use, this is a classic application. The difference is slight in this regard as both involve hyperbolic transcendentals, but the point of constant tension is more to be noted. When we add the kicker of center feed weight, the curve is obviously pulled out (which suggests linear analysis). >From my 1912 copy of "Standard Handbook for Electrical Engineers" comes coverage of stringing power lines and calculating sag for a given tension. Tables and calculations are not remarkably different >from my first approximation. This volume states "the working stress should not be over one fourth this [ultimate breaking strength]." >>Try using a rope runner. > >Do you mean a rope as a carrier for the conductor... runs into some >other issues like differential stretch, and huge wind resistance. True. >The >structure may stay in the sky, but the wire might be fractured anyway. How do you come by the conclusion that the wire is destroyed, but the rope remains? 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC Article: 228734 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "an old friend" Subject: Re: If Lennie Anderson Had To Tell The Truth Once, Would Bill Clinton Swear Off Big Mac's and White House Interns? With "Engineers" Like Lennie, It's No Wonder Everything Says "Made In Someplace Other Than The United States" Date: 23 Aug 2006 11:18:51 -0700 Message-ID: <1156357131.548824.161310@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> References: <1153664765.447946.4510@s13g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> LenAnderson@ieee.org wrote: > From: an old freind on Tues, Aug 22 2006 4:16 pm > > > >K4YZ wrote: > >> an old freind wrote: > >> > K4YZ wrote: > >> > > LenAnder...@ieee.org tried the same old tired rhetoric: > > > >> > > > But, challenge Robeson or call him in error and one will be > >> > > > inundated with personal insults. Robeson MUST be right and > >> > > > he MUST rule. Civil comportment be damned with Robeson in > >> > > > newsgroups. Those newsgroups were (in his mind) created to > >> > > > showcase Him? > > > >> > > Yep. > > > >> > agreeing for once get help > > > >> Get help for what? > > > >well a pro needs to way but Id say meglomanina paranoia, pathological > >lying for starts > > Give up on Robesin, Mark. He MUST remain "right" and He > "must" rule. He isn't interested in civility. Once an > "enemy" of his, always an enemy in his mind. Sick way to > be but he is that way, repeatedly. He just proved it in > the message you replied to. I use him for punching bag hopeing he might give it up did you catch the bit where he claims that he is acting as MY firend I am gald I was not drinking something , i might have choked to death > > He is setting the example for all hams. Not going to help > the amateur ranks in getting more hams but that is not, > apparently, his point. Robesin needs to come out on TOP in > his own mind, be chieftan, be the warlord. he is great as bad example. I use robeson posts as warning to people all the time I have specail set book marked to us as warning fo r where their behavoir might lead > > He also wants rec.radio.amateur. policy all his own to do with > as he sees fit. [probably to have his daily fits in...] in a few day weeks or months I will quit this feild signing off here as KB9RQZ/AE > > Ech... > > > but titles like that are Robeson stock in trade my content in his posts > > just ranting on and on about epople instead of Issues > > Absolutely true, Mark. He tries to belittle his "enemies" so that > He looks good. Problem is, it is working in reverse and he is only > belittling himself. indeed > > LenAnderson@ieee.org Article: 228735 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Subject: Re: Antenna wire From: Bert Hyman References: <5udne2hbro4lsmhg5d7kv0c5nb4bbglof3@4ax.com> <0ftne2l1aedai6emg6on8natfplbno4cmc@4ax.com> Message-ID: Date: 23 Aug 2006 18:22:10 GMT owen@no.where (Owen Duffy) wrote in news:cm2oe29to2auuf1p8elnbb3a2uh6ik5foa@4ax.com: > Thankfully, it didn't come here. I just Googled for "aluminium > house wiring fires" and got 1,080,000 hits, ... Of course, that might have been 1,080,000 references to the same article in Weekly World News. -- Bert Hyman | St. Paul, MN | bert@iphouse.com Article: 228736 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Richard Clark Subject: Re: Vertical radiation from horizontal dipole? Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 11:24:34 -0700 Message-ID: References: <1155949003.609701.39890@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <12ed290mv4kekea@corp.supernews.com> <12egsogtbki2m13@corp.supernews.com> <5%4Gg.11362$9T3.4779@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net> <12ek3fi5u42qk8f@corp.supernews.com> <12ek73b5fneji02@corp.supernews.com> <12ep1fco58ja62e@corp.supernews.com> On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 16:44:28 -0000, Green Egghead wrote: >If I had to guess, I would think there would be only a certain >band of radio frequencies where polarization rotation would >make a practical radio tuner. Spintronics? Perhaps if your dial is marked in THz. Article: 228737 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: kennnick@gmail.com Subject: Working in strong 60Hz magnetic fields Date: 23 Aug 2006 11:32:31 -0700 Message-ID: <1156357951.687505.203010@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> I'm a long-time reader of this NG and so realize that there is a lot of knowledge of EM principles on tap here. I'm pondering a non-ham issue from my workplace (a power plant) and could use a little education or peer checking of my ideas. In the industry, there is occasionally a need to construct scaffolding below the main generator, up to the area where the main leads exit. Typically there are three leads (busses, phases) energized at 22kV phase to phase and carrying around 28,000 amperes. These busses are contained within individual aluminum ducts, creating sort of huge coaxial cables (three of them). The busses run through the turbine building and out to the transformer yard. The ducts are cross connected with welded plates at the ends and maybe at one or two intermediate locations to allow induced currents to circulate. Here's the issue. Occasionally while erecting or removing such a scaffold with the unit at full power, there will be reports of arcing at the ends of scaffold poles (aluminum tube, I think) and of scaffold members becoming hot. There are lots of anecdotal stories of such events, and also of measuring from several to maybe 100 amperes in scaffold members, ground cables, structures and permanent piping in the vicinity. Now, question or questions. Sifting through various stories and recommendations, I see recommendations to assure that the scaffold is well grounded. I'm not sure why this would help, assuming the currents (and arcing) are the result of magnetic induction. One recommendation is to ground only at one point, which makes sense to me. I also see a lot of cautions about "static charge". It seems to me that any static charge would be the result of an electric field. And given that the busses (and generator) are enclosed in grounded metallic housings, this should not be a possibility. Is this correct? One person recommended non-metallic scaffolding, which I like. But another wanted to assure that persons on that scaffold were grounded, which I'm not too sure about. I don't think it would be harmful in most cases, but I'd be concerned if the person and his ground happened to complete a current loop. Does that make sense? Again, I assume the grounding is for static charge concerns, which I don't see as valid. It seems to me that structures built in the vicinity of strong 60Hz magnetic fields should either 1) avoid creating loops, including open loops that could have high voltage across the open ends, or 2) make sure the loops are intact and can carry the resulting induced currents. Of course, #2 still makes disassembly while at power a problem. Thanks for any opinions. I now return you to SWR, E-H, CM and G5RV. 73--Nick, WA5BDU Article: 228738 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Woody" References: <30954.oidi09.d0904.ddoi0@qkd.org> <12bactjanpufjfc@corp.supernews.com> <1156284617.050388.132430@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> <1iMGg.27902$uV.24149@trnddc08> Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Message-ID: Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 19:24:19 GMT I agree. rb wrote in message news:sb4ne25616rmuc5dq64ns9j1q67h4pq9em@4ax.com... > On Tue, 22 Aug 2006 23:19:25 GMT, "Woody" wrote: > >>Um.... you know, just saying "I agree" would have been a lot simpler and >>saved you 2 pages of typing.... LOL. >>rb > len likes to carry on > > as is his right > http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/ > > -- > Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com > Article: 228739 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Roy Lewallen Subject: Re: Two Meter FM Antenna Question Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 12:30:39 -0700 Message-ID: <12epb72auprr927@corp.supernews.com> References: <1156112798.027258.152330@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> <12eknkcib18cad1@corp.supernews.com> <12enrm6nunsr414@corp.supernews.com> John E. Davis wrote: > > Does EZNEC support linux? I do not have windows installed on my > machines--- only Debian linux. I will double check the NEC-2 > docs. I also have the ARRL antenna book but I do not recall a > discussion of it there, but I will recheck that too. Sorry, there is no EZNEC version for Linux. The last report I got was that the available Linux Windows emulator isn't able to open the EZNEC manual, and it has other problems with EZNEC also. Roy Lewallen, W7EL Article: 228740 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Roy Lewallen Subject: Re: Two Meter FM Antenna Question Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 12:38:25 -0700 Message-ID: <12epbll75ukpd90@corp.supernews.com> References: <1156112798.027258.152330@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> <12eknkcib18cad1@corp.supernews.com> <12enrm6nunsr414@corp.supernews.com> John E. Davis wrote: > On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 10:42:32 -0700, Dan Richardson > wrote: >> Its all called out in EZNEC's help file. Look under "About >> Transmission Lines" > > Does EZNEC support linux? I do not have windows installed on my > machines--- only Debian linux. I will double check the NEC-2 > docs. I also have the ARRL antenna book but I do not recall a > discussion of it there, but I will recheck that too. A printable form of the EZNEC manual can be downloaded from http://eznec.com/ez40manual.html. It's in both .rtf (rich text) and .doc MS Word) formats, though, so you'll have to be able to read one or the other of those. Having no Windows system must be quite a handicap. It certainly limits the amount of software available to use. Roy Lewallen, W7EL Article: 228741 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? From: Dave Oldridge References: <30954.oidi09.d0904.ddoi0@qkd.org> <%RJGg.27319$uV.13889@trnddc08> <1o2Hg.19713$Te.3938@trnddc07> Message-ID: Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 20:27:51 GMT "Woody" wrote in news:1o2Hg.19713$Te.3938@trnddc07: > > "Dave Oldridge" wrote in message > news:Xns9827B8D1F9112doldridgsprintca@64.59.135.159... >> "Woody" wrote in >> news:%RJGg.27319$uV.13889@trnddc08: >> >> Did someone drop you on your head at birth? The reason 50wpm can >> save lives is probably a bit complex for you to get both your >> functioning neurons around, but believe me, having done CW for a >> living for some decades I do know that it can save lives. And if >> you're faster than the average bear at it, you can tell someone on >> the scene things they need to know all that much faster. >>> > > Possibly, because try as I might, I can't really remember much about > that day.... I had pyloric stenosis, if that counts? > >> So apparently YOUR answer to this question is that you couldn't send >> your name if your own life depended on it. > > Now that's true... I'd require a CW setup of some kind in order to > send my name; or anything else for that matter. > Or as previously pointed out, hack up a headphone jack and tippy tap > the wires together. Either way, I don't see my life depending on it at > any time, so I'll just let my CW skills continue to rust. > However; your argument does make me wonder how non-hams even have a > chance at life in this world... ?? > >> >> Believe me, I get it. I don't think CW ought to be mandatory and it >> isn't where I live. I do think people who intend to use it should >> learn how to use it properly, though. For CW to be effective, both >> operators must be competent. IF they are, they can often transcend >> barriers of language that only digital modes can get over. In my own >> case, the fact that I could read CW and read written Spanish a bit >> once enabled me to render aid to a burning fishing boat. (There were >> other more routine examples of where the language barrier was crossed >> by CW--many messages I copied were not in English at all, but were >> readable by their end recipients). > > OK.... so by your own words, CW still didn't save a life... CW mixed > with bad Spanish passed a message. So now we'll have to add a Spanish > test. Thanks a lot. My point is, my bad Spanish might not have recognized the word "fuego" if it was spoken fast among a lot of other words. But on CW it came across loud and clear. > As for the language thing.... I can copy voice language and hand it > off to another native just as easy and they'll figure it out too. > No CW necessary. Except you'll be a lot slower because you'll need phonetic spellings for everything. Believe me, I know. I've done this. For a living for many years. > BTW, I noticed you conveniently left out the specific year in which > said burning boat was offshore with an obsolete CW outfit, and how > your CW expertise put out a fire.... but I'm guessing we're talking > many a year ago, so again, a moot point. Not that long ago, really. Early 1990's if I remember. > Actually, > The boat thing in general is really killing me... If these numb-nuts > are offshore and not on the correct USCG freqs and/or unaware of how > to properly tune their radios in an emergency, then it isn't CW saving > lives, it's the grace of God that somebody happened to be on their > freq at that time. But again, what boats are out there with a CW > rig???? That's crazy, bubba. :-) rb This was on 500khz (and 484). CW was the mode of operation on those frequencies until well into the 90's. Cheap SSB radios were plentiful. So were some SITOR lashups. But what finally killed it was INMARSAT. So now, instead of getting nailed by solar flares on HF, you get nailed by them on INMARSAT and have to wait 6 to 9 months for a new launch. Meanwhile you're limping along on SSB using a phonetic alphabet to send traffic at a SLOWER rate. -- Dave Oldridge+ ICQ 1800667 Article: 228742 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Al Klein Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Message-ID: References: <30954.oidi09.d0904.ddoi0@qkd.org> <%RJGg.27319$uV.13889@trnddc08> <1o2Hg.19713$Te.3938@trnddc07> Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 18:02:50 -0400 On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 19:54:37 GMT, "Woody" wrote: >"Dave Oldridge" wrote in message >news:Xns9827B8D1F9112doldridgsprintca@64.59.135.159... >> For CW to be effective, both operators >> must be competent. IF they are, they can often transcend barriers of >> language that only digital modes can get over. In my own case, the fact >> that I could read CW and read written Spanish a bit once enabled me to >> render aid to a burning fishing boat. (There were other more routine >> examples of where the language barrier was crossed by CW--many messages I >> copied were not in English at all, but were readable by their end >> recipients). >OK.... so by your own words, CW still didn't save a life... CW mixed with >bad Spanish passed a message. So now we'll have to add a Spanish test. >Thanks a lot. I think you missed the point. Even if you didn't know "ola" from "adios", you can copy Spanish in CW and hand it to the recipient, who can read it. Try that with a mic. >As for the language thing.... I can copy voice language and hand it off to >another native just as easy and they'll figure it out too. >No CW necessary. Really? You can write a spoken language you don't understand well enough to be read by someone who understands it? Maybe. Maybe not. In CW, you can. Article: 228743 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: davis@space.mit.edu (John E. Davis) Subject: Re: Two Meter FM Antenna Question References: <1156112798.027258.152330@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> <12eknkcib18cad1@corp.supernews.com> <12enrm6nunsr414@corp.supernews.com> <12epbll75ukpd90@corp.supernews.com> Message-ID: Date: 23 Aug 2006 22:13:03 GMT On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 12:38:25 -0700, Roy Lewallen wrote: >Having no Windows system must be quite a handicap. It certainly limits >the amount of software available to use. It depends upon what you want to do. I have not found it to be too big of a limitation for what I do, and I have been using linux since 1992. I have also been an active supporter of open software for many years (see ) and I have managed to code around what I perceive as gaps. For the antenna modeling, I use a slang script () to search the parameter space for a specified antenna geometry by minimizing a statistic. The slang script runs nec and then runs a hacked version of xnecview to get the gain and SWR as a function of frequency, and from that information computes the statistic. --John Article: 228744 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Dee Flint" References: <30954.oidi09.d0904.ddoi0@qkd.org> <%RJGg.27319$uV.13889@trnddc08> Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 18:14:20 -0400 Message-ID: "Dave Oldridge" wrote in message news:Xns9828881EDA0doldridgsprintca@64.59.135.159... [snip] > > Now, today, we have such things a PSK31 to do much of the grunt work. > That will work as well as CW in most cases, I find. > Don't forget thought that solar flares and especially the aurora they create induce a phase shift in signals and that wipes out PSK31. Dee, N8UZE Article: 228745 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "an old freind" Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Date: 23 Aug 2006 15:23:07 -0700 Message-ID: <1156371787.106622.88700@74g2000cwt.googlegroups.com> References: <30954.oidi09.d0904.ddoi0@qkd.org> Al Klein wrote: > On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 19:54:37 GMT, "Woody" wrote: > > >"Dave Oldridge" wrote in message > >news:Xns9827B8D1F9112doldridgsprintca@64.59.135.159... > >> For CW to be effective, both operators > >> must be competent. IF they are, they can often transcend barriers of > >> language that only digital modes can get over. In my own case, the fact > >> that I could read CW and read written Spanish a bit once enabled me to > >> render aid to a burning fishing boat. (There were other more routine > >> examples of where the language barrier was crossed by CW--many messages I > >> copied were not in English at all, but were readable by their end > >> recipients). > > >OK.... so by your own words, CW still didn't save a life... CW mixed with > >bad Spanish passed a message. So now we'll have to add a Spanish test. > >Thanks a lot. > > I think you missed the point. Even if you didn't know "ola" from > "adios", you can copy Spanish in CW and hand it to the recipient, who > can read it. Try that with a mic. I do that firaly well as long as it is a a langauge fro gruop I know I can take down serbian in crylllic even though I don't what they are saying it is simply a skill For that matter I hear and resend Morse as long as I don't try to decipher it > > >As for the language thing.... I can copy voice language and hand it off to > >another native just as easy and they'll figure it out too. > >No CW necessary. > > Really? You can write a spoken language you don't understand well > enough to be read by someone who understands it? Maybe. Maybe not. > In CW, you can. YOU can and you then claim that you have that skill it is valid your values in the ARS refuse to accept that notion different strokes for different folks If instead of CW testng we had a choice a various tests to take that would stand muster the current value Morse well outside of it value withut even realy testing its abilty to do a QSO were the test based sending and receiveing where the receiveing could send bak pse senf all after ... and before what then take a test to show that he was able to comincate the test would have more vailiity but it doesn't the CW tests do noy even show that the testee can use CW over the air Article: 228746 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Mark@kb9rqz.com Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 18:26:36 -0400 Message-ID: <2rkpe2pidhmd1ra6chkcrql0hj9h0l91db@4ax.com> References: <30954.oidi09.d0904.ddoi0@qkd.org> <%RJGg.27319$uV.13889@trnddc08> On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 20:22:53 GMT, Dave Oldridge wrote: >Mark@kb9rqz.com wrote in >news:erane2hdiu7srugt48dht5ut01r71ru6g7@4ax.com: > >> On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 01:10:08 GMT, Dave Oldridge >> wrote: >> >>>"Woody" wrote in >>>news:%RJGg.27319$uV.13889@trnddc08: >>> >>>> Well there ya have it folks.... 50wpm saves lives. So how does it >>>> work? Turn up the speaker really loud and place it [face down] on >>>> the person's chest, while >>>> an op in South America tapped out universally accepted words that >>>> would mimic an atrioventricular rhythm? >>> >>>Did someone drop you on your head at birth? >> wy wouldyou ask that did someone drop you on yours? > >No, but when I'm confronted with TOTAL stupidity, it's a possible >explanotion for it. where did you encounter total stpupidity? I missed it I saw someone being sarcastic and reasonabley cleaver about it > >>>The reason 50wpm can save >>>lives is probably a bit complex for you to get both your functioning >>>neurons around, but believe me, having done CW for a living for some >>>decades I do know that it can save lives. >> a date when was the last Ham Morse saved a life at any speed >> >>>> car and drive down to the local EMS agency, and bring them to you. >>>> Life saved! >>>> I'm impressed. >>>> rb >>> >>>So apparently YOUR answer to this question is that you couldn't send >>>your name if your own life depended on it. > >> I can send anything I like the proof of that is before you I have a pc >>> >>>Believe me, I get it. I don't think CW ought to be mandatory and it >>>isn't where I live. >> good for you >>> I do think people who intend to use it should learn >>>how to use it properly, though. For CW to be effective, both >>>operators must be competent. IF they are, they can often transcend >>>barriers of language that only digital modes can get over. In my own >>>case, the fact that I could read CW and read written Spanish a bit >>>once enabled me to render aid to a burning fishing boat. (There were >>>other more routine examples of where the language barrier was crossed >>>by CW--many messages I copied were not in English at all, but were >>>readable by their end recipients). >> ok you have a date for that I'll accept it as a life saved by CW if >> you do >> http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/ > >Not an exact date, though it's probably in the archives of the Canadian >Coast Guard, my employer at the time. Hey, I worked at Halifax Coast >Guard radio from 1977 until 1995, 18 years at the one station. We >handled a number of SOS calls on CW and were able to save lives some of >the time (not always. alas). But with trained operators on both ends of >the signal path, CW was pretty much always an easier go than SSB. And >SITOR was pretty much a joke. Half the ships couldn't get it going. > >INMARSAT is what put CW out of business in the marine industry. And a >nasty solar flare or two could put INMARSAT out of business. You pays >your money and you takes your chances. I'm not sure that a ship equipped >with a complex satellite radio with a lot of moving parts and a >technician is all that much better off than a ship was when they were >equipped with an MF-HF CW and SSB radio station and a radio operator who >was also a trained technician. All is well until something breaks and >the nearest part is 500 miles away over water. > > >CW was still in use for a some ship-to-shore work when I retired in 1995. > >When I went to the high arctic in 1964 it was our main means of >communication with the south. We eventually converted that to RTTY and >SSB, but neither was really as effective as the CW that preceded. > >Now, today, we have such things a PSK31 to do much of the grunt work. >That will work as well as CW in most cases, I find. http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/ -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Article: 228747 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Dave" References: <1156357951.687505.203010@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: Working in strong 60Hz magnetic fields Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 22:49:19 -0000 Message-ID: I think you are on the right track. the problem in locations like that is not 'static' charge, but induced current. induced current requires a loop. typical scaffolding with metal frames that typically look like big square loops would make great pickups for those fields. some people may be confusing the arcs caused by breaking a loop with static charge, which it definitely isn't. I kind of like the non-metallic scaffolding idea, that would be a great way to avoid most of the problems. The one thing to definitely avoid is to ground the personnel... consider this, two grounded people on an insulated platform touch, thus completing a loop that consists of them and their ground wires... could be a shocking experience. they would also end up in the middle of a loop any time they touched another piece of metal that happened to have a path to ground. with the cables at least partially shielded by the conduits I'm not sure if the fields would be high enough to cause heating of things like bracelets and neck chains... but it might be something to test out and see if prohibiting that type of stuff would be in order. it should be fairly easy to test when you have access to a setup near the generator by using a clamp on ammeter on the legs of the scaffolding... preferably somewhere that it forms a loop rather than on a dead ended pipe. wrote in message news:1156357951.687505.203010@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com... > I'm a long-time reader of this NG and so realize that there is a lot > of knowledge of EM principles on tap here. I'm pondering a non-ham > issue from my workplace (a power plant) and could use a little > education or peer checking of my ideas. > > In the industry, there is occasionally a need to construct scaffolding > below the main generator, up to the area where the main leads exit. > Typically there are three leads (busses, phases) energized at 22kV > phase to phase and carrying around 28,000 amperes. These busses are > contained within individual aluminum ducts, creating sort of huge > coaxial cables (three of them). The busses run through the turbine > building and out to the transformer yard. The ducts are cross > connected with welded plates at the ends and maybe at one or two > intermediate locations to allow induced currents to circulate. > > Here's the issue. Occasionally while erecting or removing such a > scaffold with the unit at full power, there will be reports of arcing > at the ends of scaffold poles (aluminum tube, I think) and of scaffold > members becoming hot. There are lots of anecdotal stories of such > events, and also of measuring from several to maybe 100 amperes in > scaffold members, ground cables, structures and permanent piping in the > vicinity. > > Now, question or questions. Sifting through various stories and > recommendations, I see recommendations to assure that the scaffold is > well grounded. I'm not sure why this would help, assuming the > currents (and arcing) are the result of magnetic induction. One > recommendation is to ground only at one point, which makes sense to me. > > > I also see a lot of cautions about "static charge". It seems to me > that any static charge would be the result of an electric field. And > given that the busses (and generator) are enclosed in grounded metallic > housings, this should not be a possibility. Is this correct? > > One person recommended non-metallic scaffolding, which I like. But > another wanted to assure that persons on that scaffold were grounded, > which I'm not too sure about. I don't think it would be harmful in > most cases, but I'd be concerned if the person and his ground > happened to complete a current loop. Does that make sense? Again, I > assume the grounding is for static charge concerns, which I don't see > as valid. > > It seems to me that structures built in the vicinity of strong 60Hz > magnetic fields should either 1) avoid creating loops, including open > loops that could have high voltage across the open ends, or 2) make > sure the loops are intact and can carry the resulting induced currents. > Of course, #2 still makes disassembly while at power a problem. > > Thanks for any opinions. I now return you to SWR, E-H, CM and G5RV. > > 73--Nick, WA5BDU > Article: 228748 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Mark@kb9rqz.com Subject: Re: Poor Markie! - Markie, Just ignore them. Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 19:29:24 -0400 Message-ID: <36ppe2p3v7ak0mp4e8um72gi5n06a3un5j@4ax.com> References: <1155819580.435966.161810@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1155868528.387517.185650@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com> <1155904856.192887.112830@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <44E5B917.6050406@fuse.net> <1156167941.257256.314290@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 23:26:07 GMT, Slow Code wrote: >Mark@kb9rqz.com wrote in news:q6gme2durm28nfpqopn5u6fv7tu8h1ql30@4ax.com: > >> On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 23:46:53 GMT, Slow Code wrote: >> >>>SC >> why do you want to kil the ARS? > > >Why do you want ham radio to be like CB? > I don't and it isn't >SC http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/ -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Article: 228749 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "an old freind" Subject: Re: PING: Slow Code Date: 23 Aug 2006 16:38:54 -0700 Message-ID: <1156376334.120034.171090@74g2000cwt.googlegroups.com> References: <1156186858.857772.22110@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> Slow Code wrote: > Mark@kb9rqz.com wrote in news:g6gme25j5trdejh97p5a33kmltaaocdhek@4ax.com: > > > On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 23:46:48 GMT, Slow Code wrote: > > > >>SC > > why do you want to kil the ARS? > > > Why do you want ham radio to be like CB? I don't why do you want Ham radio dead > > SC Article: 228750 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "John, N9JG" Subject: Can't find enameled copperweld antenna wire Message-ID: Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 00:15:50 GMT The last time I installed a wire antenna for 80 meters was in the mid 70s. At that time the wire of choice was #14 (or perhaps #12) solid enameled copperweld (now called copper clad) wire. Yes, the wire was kinky, fussy to install, but it had high mechanical strength, excellent electrical properties, and it lasted for many years. I have moved to eastern Tennessee, and because of circumstances, I want to revert back to a wire antenna, at least for the time being. Much to my surprise I can not seem to locate a source of solid enameled copper clad wire. Is there any reason why this wire is no longer available? I will be suspending the wire between the chimney and the trunk of a tall tree and plan to put a galvanized screen-door spring in series with the support at one end. The span will be about 120 feet. The WireMan offers several types of wire, such as "Fabricated 14 AWG solid copper clad steel (30%). The best choice for long-lived, high performance antennas in any environment. Breaking strength 550 lbs.", but this wire is not enameled. (13ó/ft) Another choice from the WireMan is "'Silky' 12 AWG, 19 strand, tinned, 40% copper-clad steel. Smooth as silk, tight lay, engineered antenna wire as close to solid performance as possible, but flexible and easy to use. Our heaviest - overkill for most work. Break strength 474 lbs." This wire is stranded and tinned. (22ó/ft) Finally, the WireMan offers "Toughcoat 'Silky' 13 AWG, 19 strand 40% copper-clad steel (OD 0.0795") with tough, high density, low-gloss polyethylene (Nominal OD, 0.120" including 0.020" jacket. Designed for through-the-trees, sea coast, acid rain or other inclement atmospheric conditions. Our most rugged, longest-lived, stranded antenna wire for any purpose. Jacket has minimal effect on performance - less than that of a year's accumulation of oxidation product on bare wire, with less noise." (21ó/ft) Any advice, recommendations, or links to wire sources will be greatly appreciated. John, N9JG Article: 228751 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Mark@kb9rqz.com Subject: Re: PING: Slow Code Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 20:34:27 -0400 Message-ID: <60tpe211tj35hec0vrjs7umiejmqenjuof@4ax.com> References: <1156186858.857772.22110@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 23:26:05 GMT, Slow Code wrote: >Mark@kb9rqz.com wrote in news:g6gme25j5trdejh97p5a33kmltaaocdhek@4ax.com: > >> On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 23:46:48 GMT, Slow Code wrote: >> >>>new_cw_ham@saintly.com wrote in >>>news:1156186858.857772.22110@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com: >>> >>>> Wanted to thank you for your posts about the code. >>>> >>>> Because of you I just upgraded (Saturday) from technician to general. >>>> I breezed the 5 wpm and am up to around 15wpm according to the W1AW >>>> pratice broadcasts. I never would have bothered to learn CW if it >>>> wasn't for you. >>>> >>>> I know I only "need" 5 wpm but I am not going to upgrade to extra >>>> until I can cpy 25 wpm SOLID! >>>> >>>> This is in honor of my electronic elmer, Slow Code. >>>> >>>> Thanks...... >>> >>>ROFLMAO! >>> >>>.... And you've made me think of possibly joining CAP. >>> >>> >>>Testimonials like yours will bring a smile to every Real hams face. :-) >>> >>>Just learn the code to 22 wpm. That would be a nice edge if you still >>>had to take a 20 wpm CW test. But if you can only get your speed up to >>>16 or 17 words per minute, upgrade anyway. We need good people like you >>>on the ham bands and on usenet. LOL >>> >>> >>>73 >>> >>>SC >> why do you want to kil the ARS? > > >Why do you want ham radio to be like CB? i don't why do you want it dead? > >SC http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/ -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Article: 228752 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "LenAnderson@ieee.org" Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Date: 23 Aug 2006 18:18:42 -0700 Message-ID: <1156382321.909740.191980@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> References: <1153597502.509378.294260@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> From: hot-ham-and-che...@hotmail.com on Tues, Aug 22 2006 7:14 pm >LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote: >> From: M...@kb9rqz.com on Mon, Aug 21 2006 6:30 pm >> > wrote: >> >>From: an old friend on Mon, Aug 21 2006 3:16 pm >> >>>LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote: >> >>>> From: hot-ham-and-che...@hotmail.com on Sun, Aug 20 2006 2:57 pm >> Robesin is merely a product of the "incentive" licensing >> system where all those who hunger for being a "somebody" >> can get a Title - Rank - Privilege through a singular skill. > >If it doesn't have rank or a uniform, Robesin isn't interested. That certainly seems the case. The "uniform" is his emperor's new clothes... >> I didn't make that system, neither did you, neither did >> anyone in these four forums. The FCC took a big chunk out >> of it (license classes and morsemanship skill) with the >> Restructuring of 2000 and that pissed off the Title-Rank- >> Status seekers. Devout morsemen are angry and venting steam >> because their self-esteem has fallen. > >Only in their minds. They are the very same good or bad hams that they >were with all the layers of hamdom. All of those "layers" hams are examples to the general public, good or bad or indifferent. So? "Self-esteem" is a nice-nice word for EGO tied in with self- perception. Trying to represent themselves as "expert" radio persons in this new millennium is a rather stupid idea of those devout morsepersons when they want to force the FCC to keep the code test. Those who LIKE morse code should, and can, go on using it. That is in no sense any validity for making it an amateur radio test requirement for a license. >> Simply amazing. EIGHTEEN years alleged on active duty and >> he can't supply a single photo or document to support his >> claim? In November of this year I can truthfully say I've >> been in the southern California aerospace business 50 years. >> I have all sorts of documentation and photos on that which >> I may fully digitize some day (some are already digitized). >> Some time ago I posted my resume in here...which only made >> Robesin ballistic then since he has NO comparable >> experience in industry and cannot prove any radio experience >> other than amateur and alleged "chief operator" status at >> some small MARS station long ago. [that was before his >> less-than-a-half-year as a purchasing agent at a small >> set top box maker] > >Yet as "chief operator" or ANCOIC of NMC MARS on Okinawa, he remains >woefully ignorant of MARS. I just don't get it. It's easy to "get." He wasn't what he says he was. He hasn't supplied a single bit of evidence to prove his claims. >> In another recent post, Robesin keeps referring to a "CV." >> That's an acronym for the Latin 'curriculum vitae,' a list >> of life experiences (education, work experience). > >Maybe he meant "constant velocity" as in "CV joints" because he's >always "spun up" about one thing or another. He tries to "spin" his claims to be the truth. Still no evidence presented. Robesin used the wrong word/acronym for a RESUME' presented as part of an interview for a job. >Robesin an academic? Not in this lifetime. > >It's just his inappropriate use of what to him are important sounding >words and acronyms. Some of those he makes up as he goes along. >The rec.radio newsgroups have showcased Robesin. He HAS earned his >reputation. He's worked very hard for it. He's hardly worked in radio. LenAnderson@ieee.org Article: 228753 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Bill Turner" Subject: Re: PING: Slow Code References: <1156186858.857772.22110@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> <1156376334.120034.171090@74g2000cwt.googlegroups.com> Message-ID: <44ecd18e_2@newsfeed.slurp.net> Date: 23 Aug 2006 17:07:10 -0500 an old freind wrote: > > > why do you want to kil the ARS? > > > > Why do you want ham radio to be like CB? > > why do you want Ham radio dead -----------------REPLY FOLLOWS----------------- Why do you ask these questions on an antenna newsgroup? Bill, W6WRT -- Article: 228754 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Roy Lewallen Subject: Re: Can't find enameled copperweld antenna wire Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 18:45:13 -0700 Message-ID: <12eq15dn03hlg61@corp.supernews.com> References: Bare copper or Copperweld has served me well everywhere I've lived. The only time I've had a problem with it was at the coast, about a block >from the ocean where the air nearly always contained a fog of salt water droplets. There, a copper wire turned into blue powder in less than a year. I suppose you could have similar problems if you're downwind from a coal-fired plant or something. So if you have a very severe atmosphere, get the coated Wireman stuff. Otherwise, bare Copperweld will do as well. Roy Lewallen, W7EL Article: 228755 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "kb9rqz@hotmail.com" Subject: Re: PING: Slow Code Date: 23 Aug 2006 18:50:46 -0700 Message-ID: <1156384246.774658.71930@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> References: <1156186858.857772.22110@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> Bill Turner wrote: > an old freind wrote: > > > > > why do you want to kil the ARS? > > > > > > Why do you want ham radio to be like CB? > > > > why do you want Ham radio dead > > -----------------REPLY FOLLOWS----------------- > > Why do you ask these questions on an antenna newsgroup? I ask becuase I have given up on parring back the thread of the troll's and if I answer i answer in all the NG not to break the threads > > Bill, W6WRT > > > -- Article: 228756 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Bob Miller Subject: Re: Can't find enameled copperweld antenna wire Message-ID: References: Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 02:29:33 GMT On Thu, 24 Aug 2006 00:15:50 GMT, "John, N9JG" wrote: >The last time I installed a wire antenna for 80 meters was in the mid 70s. >At that time the wire of choice was #14 (or perhaps #12) solid enameled >copperweld (now called copper clad) wire. Yes, the wire was kinky, fussy to >install, but it had high mechanical strength, excellent electrical >properties, and it lasted for many years. > >Any advice, recommendations, or links to wire sources will be greatly >appreciated. > >John, N9JG > > I use the Wireman's Silky 16 AWG for an 80 meter dipole. Tree limbs have fallen on it, but it still hasn't broken (I think the screen door springs at each end help). Any of his heavier stuff should hold up fine. bob k5qwg Article: 228757 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person References: <30954.oidi09.d0904.ddoi0@qkd.org> <%RJGg.27319$uV.13889@trnddc08> <1o2Hg.19713$Te.3938@trnddc07> Message-ID: Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 02:32:01 GMT Al Klein wrote: > Really? You can write a spoken language you don't understand well > enough to be read by someone who understands it? Maybe. Maybe not. > In CW, you can. Spanish words are easy to write even if one doesn't understand them. In general, unlike English, there is usually only one possible way to pronounce and to spell a Spanish word. You hear "a-di-os". You write a-d-i-o-s. You don't need to know what it means. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 228758 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: hot-ham-and-cheese@hotmail.com Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Date: 23 Aug 2006 19:46:56 -0700 Message-ID: <1156387616.130756.18380@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> References: <1153597502.509378.294260@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> LenAnderson@ieee.org wrote: > From: hot-ham-and-che...@hotmail.com on Tues, Aug 22 2006 7:14 pm > > > >LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote: > >> From: M...@kb9rqz.com on Mon, Aug 21 2006 6:30 pm > >> > wrote: > >> >>From: an old friend on Mon, Aug 21 2006 3:16 pm > >> >>>LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote: > >> >>>> From: hot-ham-and-che...@hotmail.com on Sun, Aug 20 2006 2:57 pm > > > >> Robesin is merely a product of the "incentive" licensing > >> system where all those who hunger for being a "somebody" > >> can get a Title - Rank - Privilege through a singular skill. > > > >If it doesn't have rank or a uniform, Robesin isn't interested. > > That certainly seems the case. The "uniform" is his > emperor's new clothes... Lessee. He's got a Marine uniform (he says). A Tennessee State Guard uniform (whatever that is), an ill-fitting Air Force CAP flight suit uniform, and a male nurses uniform. And he has lots of military medals that he never earned (according to him). You know, whenever I saw folks in the CAP uniform at any Air Force Base, including Maxwell, they work the 4b or Class A. Never ever saw a CAP in a flight suit before robesin's well advertised home page. > >> I didn't make that system, neither did you, neither did > >> anyone in these four forums. The FCC took a big chunk out > >> of it (license classes and morsemanship skill) with the > >> Restructuring of 2000 and that pissed off the Title-Rank- > >> Status seekers. Devout morsemen are angry and venting steam > >> because their self-esteem has fallen. > > > >Only in their minds. They are the very same good or bad hams that they > >were with all the layers of hamdom. > > All of those "layers" hams are examples to the general public, > good or bad or indifferent. So? > > "Self-esteem" is a nice-nice word for EGO tied in with self- > perception. Trying to represent themselves as "expert" radio > persons in this new millennium is a rather stupid idea of those > devout morsepersons when they want to force the FCC to keep the > code test. Some do. Some don't. robesin does. > Those who LIKE morse code should, and can, go on using it. Roger. > That > is in no sense any validity for making it an amateur radio test > requirement for a license. No valid reason to maintain it as a barrier to the ARS. > >> Simply amazing. EIGHTEEN years alleged on active duty and > >> he can't supply a single photo or document to support his > >> claim? In November of this year I can truthfully say I've > >> been in the southern California aerospace business 50 years. > >> I have all sorts of documentation and photos on that which > >> I may fully digitize some day (some are already digitized). > >> Some time ago I posted my resume in here...which only made > >> Robesin ballistic then since he has NO comparable > >> experience in industry and cannot prove any radio experience > >> other than amateur and alleged "chief operator" status at > >> some small MARS station long ago. [that was before his > >> less-than-a-half-year as a purchasing agent at a small > >> set top box maker] > > > >Yet as "chief operator" or ANCOIC of NMC MARS on Okinawa, he remains > >woefully ignorant of MARS. I just don't get it. > > It's easy to "get." He wasn't what he says he was. He hasn't > supplied a single bit of evidence to prove his claims. Now it all makes sense. > >> In another recent post, Robesin keeps referring to a "CV." > >> That's an acronym for the Latin 'curriculum vitae,' a list > >> of life experiences (education, work experience). > > > >Maybe he meant "constant velocity" as in "CV joints" because he's > >always "spun up" about one thing or another. > > He tries to "spin" his claims to be the truth. Still no > evidence presented. > > Robesin used the wrong word/acronym for a RESUME' presented > as part of an interview for a job. Thought he had a "killer" job as a male nurse? > >Robesin an academic? Not in this lifetime. > > > >It's just his inappropriate use of what to him are important sounding > >words and acronyms. > > Some of those he makes up as he goes along. Probably how his career in the Marines was invented. > >The rec.radio newsgroups have showcased Robesin. He HAS earned his > >reputation. He's worked very hard for it. > > He's hardly worked in radio. Oh, I don't know. After a hard day behind the microphone, he's got that 1,000 yard stare. Article: 228759 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: hot-ham-and-cheese@hotmail.com Subject: Re: If you had to use CW... would robesin still be an idiot? Date: 23 Aug 2006 20:10:14 -0700 Message-ID: <1156389014.340987.320780@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com> References: <1153597502.509378.294260@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> LenAnderson@ieee.org wrote: > >LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote: > >> From: an old friend on Mon, Aug 21 2006 3:16 pm > >> >LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote: > >> >> From: hot-ham-and-che...@hotmail.com on Sun, Aug 20 2006 2:57 pm > > > >> It's "minority rule" when ARRL lobbies for preservation of > >> morse code test for any amateur radio license class. The > >> ARRL membership is slightly less than a quarter of all US > >> amateur radio licensees. > > > >The ARRL is trying to soften their image - the latest QST shows a > >person using a, gulp, microphone on the FRONT cover! > > Good grief! The sky is falling! The sky is falling! It may be for some. > >Just inside is yet another article on building a code key - from a door > >hinge. > > Oh, goody...HIGH TECH construction article. They didn't mention wether you should use oil or conductive grease on the hinge. > Would they follow that with another article on the door itself? > Like, I mean, making the door a jar? :-) Wow! We almost leaped from a door hinge to a jar head. > >> Ahem...my reference was the old fairy tale, "The Emperor's New > >> Clothes." :-) > > > >> That's the one where a full-of-himself ruler ordered some new > >> clothes and the tailor buttered him up (while not sewing any > >> new clothes) so much that the Emperor bought into this pandering > >> to his ego and appeared in public with his "new clothes" (he was > >> naked). Needless to say, the public laughed and laughed at this > >> ridiculous spectacle. :-) > > > >> Robeson has been all full of himself in here about his alleged > >> "USMC service" yet he has presented zero-point-zero evidence > >> from anyone else (or any legitimate agency) that he ever > >> served on active USMC duty for any of his claimed "18 years." > > > >> Even though he NOW thinks of himself AS the amateur radio > >> service personified (anything against him is somehow against > >> ALL radio amateurs), he is still parodying the "Emperor." > > >This just in from The ARRL Letter, Vol. 25, No. 33, August 18, 2006 > > > >"ARRL First Vice President Kay Craigie, N3KN, represented the League at the > >Global Amateur Radio Emergency Communications Conference 2006." > > > >"Craigie stressed that Amateur Radio needs to avoid "being dazzled by our > >own press clippings into thinking that we are the big dog in emergency > >telecommunications."" > > > >She refers to robesin-like attitudes within the ARS. > > Oh. My. God. ! ! ! > > Tsk, just because NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, FOX, ESPN, and PBS haven't > covered the tremendously fantastic wonderfullest huge contribution > to saving lives and property via ham radio? Gosh, there are all > sorts of clippings from obscure weekly and biweekly newspapers > dutifully cut-and-pasted into messages here from Robesin & Co. And probably at least as credible as the rest of the news they carry. > Maybe I'll have to write the Department of Defense and say that > "Major" Robesin said that radio amateurs run MARS! He did. > They should > fortwith cease and desist publishing DoD Directives on thinking > that they started it and keep running it! They live in a fantasy world. > Maybe I missed the "news" on the Home and Garden Channel...I don't > watch that much... > > Right and all the other radio services are switching to morse > code for all emergency communications a la ham radio The American Public would sue them for slow service and wrongful deaths. > ...the sky > has truly fallen! The other shoe would drop. > >didit! > > Dahdah comrade. :-) > > LenAnderson@ieee.org bb Article: 228760 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Owen Duffy Subject: Re: Antenna wire Message-ID: References: <5udne2hbro4lsmhg5d7kv0c5nb4bbglof3@4ax.com> <0ftne2l1aedai6emg6on8natfplbno4cmc@4ax.com> Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 10:05:37 GMT On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 11:17:37 -0700, Richard Clark wrote: >>A parabolic approximation is better than the triangular approximate, > >More properly a "catenary" for sags which is a curve of constant >tension; and for our antenna use, this is a classic application. The >difference is slight in this regard as both involve hyperbolic >transcendentals, but the point of constant tension is more to be >noted. When we add the kicker of center feed weight, the curve is >obviously pulled out (which suggests linear analysis). I think the case of a concentrated load such as a balun and feedline, along with a distributed load is also exactly solved by a catenary, just the ends are at unequal heights. The three dimensional nature of the problem when horizontal wind forces are considered as well as vertical weight forces makes solutions messy. > >From my 1912 copy of "Standard Handbook for Electrical Engineers" >comes coverage of stringing power lines and calculating sag for a >given tension. Tables and calculations are not remarkably different >from my first approximation. This volume states "the working stress >should not be over one fourth this [ultimate breaking strength]." Now that it is so easy to calculate the catenary, it is the way to go.. but on shallow catenarys of equal height, the solution is not much different to a parabolic one. There is still a computational advantage to the parobolic approximation. Standards here (aka "codes" in your country) stipulate the safety factor to be used, and it is 3.5 for standing rigging, 5 for running rigging. That does apply to guy wires, and seems appropriate to antenna wires that may not also be guy wires. I note that the ARRL takes a different approach. The ARRL Antenna Handbook 18th edition has some information on sagging wire antenna spans on pages 20-2ff. Similar information may be in other editions. There is no explicit discussion of wind loading, and the design guides (tables, nomographs, text) lead the reader to a design based on weight loading alone and with a Safety Factor of 10 or 5 depending on the chosen tension. I guess that approach supports the maxim that "if your antenna didn't blow down last season, it wasn't gib enough", or am I mythtaken! > >>>Try using a rope runner. >> >>Do you mean a rope as a carrier for the conductor... runs into some >>other issues like differential stretch, and huge wind resistance. > >True. > >>The >>structure may stay in the sky, but the wire might be fractured anyway. > >How do you come by the conclusion that the wire is destroyed, but the >rope remains? If the rope stretches more easily than the metal conductor, it may (depending on how it is supported) increase the tension in the metal conductor and break it. Owen -- Article: 228761 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: wood@itd.nrl.navy.mil (J. B. Wood) Subject: Re: Mismatched Zo Connectors Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 07:53:46 -0400 Message-ID: References: <2eSdnYZzr7pWyXbZRVnytA@bt.com> In article <2eSdnYZzr7pWyXbZRVnytA@bt.com>, "Reg Edwards" wrote: > Reflections are functions of TIME, not frequency. > > Oliver Heaviside had the right idea long before the invention of the > SWR meter. > ----- > Reg, G4FGQ. Hello, and the present or absence of reflections in the steady-state (no transients as one would see when the system is first energized) is by comparison of an impedance (Zx) at a measurement point to some reference impedance (Zo). This reference impedance can be associated with the characteristic impedance of a transmission line or some other system characteristic. If Zx and/or Zo varies with frequency (has a reactive component) then the RMS amplitude of the voltage/current reflections also varies with frequency. We use this property to match Zx to Zo at some frequency by minimizing the measured reflected voltage (or current or power). In the steady-state there is one voltage/current (as seen by an RF voltmeter or ammeter) placed at the measurement point. We need a directional coupler (part of a Bird model 43) or impedance bridge (referenced to Zo) inserted at the measurment point in order to partition the sampled voltage/current into incident (forward) and reflected waves. I'm not sure exactly what Reg meant. Sincerely, and 73s from N4GGO, John Wood (Code 5550) e-mail: wood@itd.nrl.navy.mil Naval Research Laboratory 4555 Overlook Avenue, SW Washington, DC 20375-5337 Article: 228762 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: =?utf-8?b?TEE0UlQgSm9uIEvDpXJlIA==?= Subject: Re: Two Meter FM Antenna Question Date: 24 Aug 2006 14:09:38 +0200 Message-ID: <1mirkiwd19.fsf@persaunet.uninett.no> References: <1156112798.027258.152330@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> <12eknkcib18cad1@corp.supernews.com> <12enrm6nunsr414@corp.supernews.com> <12epb72auprr927@corp.supernews.com> Roy Lewallen writes: > John E. Davis wrote: > Sorry, there is no EZNEC version for Linux. The last report I got was > that the available Linux Windows emulator isn't able to open the EZNEC > manual, and it has other problems with EZNEC also. > > Roy Lewallen, W7EL The versions in Ubuntu Edgy and Debian Etch both hang at the splash screen. I asked on the Wine mailing list, but nothing helpful turned up. I can run it under VMWare - slow on my machine -, or I can use the kids' Windows game computer. But the gap between their bedtime and mine is closing. The Wine people are interested in fixing bugs, but they need info from app developers. Roy, would you be interested in working with them, if I can get a Wine developer interested? What toolkit do you use? Regards LA4RT Jon Trondheim, Norway Article: 228763 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Slow Code" Subject: Re: What is going on with this newsgroup? Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 08:14:38 -0400 Message-ID: References: <27ae5$44ebc0fd$a66659c0$7088@ALLTEL.NET> <1156303510.883796.301500@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com> <1156334703.569610.4940@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1156347030.009789.61350@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1156374225.132023.89420@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com> Markie, Just ignore them. They only tease you because of the stupid things you say when you follow up. Just ignore them and they'll give up. Stop giving them reasons to tease you. It only makes you look more stupid. "an old freind" wrote in message news:1156374225.132023.89420@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com... > > FreeSpeechStore wrote: >> On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 08:30:30 -0700, LibelWatcher wrote: >> >> > The Executives at Shaw Communications The Vancouver Police, The Media, >> > and >> > the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) Coquitlam Detachment need to >> > hear >> > from all those abused by this Internet Vermin! Below is just how you >> > do >> > it! >> >> Keep on k00king out over me in other people's froggeries, Dick, it helps >> your campaign for the Allisat! > what is going one is that you have been hooked into a lame flame war to > go with your other lame flame wars > Article: 228764 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Slow Code" Subject: Re: get help Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 08:18:05 -0400 Message-ID: References: <1156091960.013011.129240@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <564he2l29m5pd1ssle2osui1vnuqjl19nq@4ax.com> <200820061806454759%erfc@netcabal.com> <200820062125058782%erfc@netcabal.com> <9rgne25bpc94ljgo3hd6v7ckg25356radr@4ax.com> <1156305190.799654.105250@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com> <1156338836.376274.150290@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1156374292.055102.320270@74g2000cwt.googlegroups.com> Markie, Just ignore them. They only tease you because of the stupid things you say when you follow up. Just ignore them and they'll give up. Stop giving them reasons to tease you. It only makes you look more stupid. "an old freind" wrote in message news:1156374292.055102.320270@74g2000cwt.googlegroups.com... > > Demon Lord of Confusion wrote: >> On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 06:13:56 -0700, Wabbit attempted to >> confuse the issue further by squeaking: >> > FreeSpeechStore wrote: >> >> On Tue, 22 Aug 2006 20:53:10 -0700, an Old friend wrote: > >> >> for the foreseeable future. >> > >> > Fuck off, Crapout. >> >> You only _think_ you know who I am, Wabbit. > grow up > Article: 228765 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Slow Code" Subject: Re: get help Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 08:24:31 -0400 Message-ID: References: <1156091960.013011.129240@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <564he2l29m5pd1ssle2osui1vnuqjl19nq@4ax.com> <200820061806454759%erfc@netcabal.com> <200820062125058782%erfc@netcabal.com> <9rgne25bpc94ljgo3hd6v7ckg25356radr@4ax.com> <1156305190.799654.105250@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com> <1156338836.376274.150290@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1156374324.623122.193680@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> Markie, Just ignore them. They only tease you because of the stupid things you say when you follow up. Just ignore them and they'll give up. Stop giving them reasons to tease you. It only makes you look more stupid. "an old freind" wrote in message news:1156374324.623122.193680@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com... > > Demon Lord of Confusion wrote: >> On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 06:13:56 -0700, Wabbit attempted to >> confuse the issue further by squeaking: >> > FreeSpeechStore wrote: >> >> On Tue, 22 Aug 2006 20:53:10 -0700, an Old friend wrote: > >> >> for the foreseeable future. >> > >> > Fuck off, Crapout. >> >> You only _think_ you know who I am, Wabbit. > grow up > Article: 228766 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Not Cocksucker Lloyd" Subject: Re: PING: Slow Code Date: 24 Aug 2006 05:28:26 -0700 Message-ID: <1156422506.804963.308820@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> References: <1156186858.857772.22110@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> an old friendless cocksucker wrote: > Not Cocksucker Lloyd wrote: > > MarkMoron@kb9rqz.com wrote: > > > why do you want to kil the ARS? > > > > Why do you "kill" the English language ? > by the authority YOU gave me I can state the expert opiion you just lied By your own example, you proved me right, imbecile. And that's the general "opinion" on you. Article: 228767 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Not Cocksucker Lloyd" Subject: Re: PING: Slow Code Date: 24 Aug 2006 05:29:48 -0700 Message-ID: <1156422588.144428.116840@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> References: <1156186858.857772.22110@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> kb9rqzchildmolester@hotmail.com wrote: > Bill Turner wrote: > > an old freind wrote: > > > > > > > why do you want to kil the ARS? > > > > > > > > Why do you want ham radio to be like CB? > > > > > > why do you want Ham radio dead > > > > -----------------REPLY FOLLOWS----------------- > > > > Why do you ask these questions on an antenna newsgroup? > I ask becuase I have given up on parring back the thread of the troll's Markie likes to spam. > and if I answer i answer in all the NG not to break the threads As I said, Markie likes to spam. Article: 228768 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Slow Code" Subject: Re: been accepted into the army.. but im having 2nd thoughts cos im gay Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 18:16:01 +0545 Message-ID: References: <1156334703.569610.4940@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1156347030.009789.61350@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1156374225.132023.89420@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com> Slow Code , the psychiatrist's patient, hawked: > i find it really hard to have great sex. i cant move properley and get > a good rhythem, i barley get anything unless he does something aswel, > is there an easier way of sittin on him? its so hard, hes let me > practise on him but its still not so good. can anyone help me? Shuld I > ask hiom to be the passive guy for a change? Article: 228769 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Slow Code" Subject: Re: get help Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 18:18:39 +0545 Message-ID: References: <1156338836.376274.150290@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1156374292.055102.320270@74g2000cwt.googlegroups.com> Slow Code , the sewer cleaner and riverbank scavenger, fussed: > FUCKING SLUTTY BITCH BLACK JOKE Markie, Just ignore them. HORNY CLIT > BITCH JISM SLUT BLOWJOB TWAT POO CUM FACTORY PIMP PUSSY > FUCKING COMMERCIAL BEAVER FLOPPY TITS BUM They only tease you because > of FUCKING BONE BOX the stupid things you say when FUCKING ANAL-BORER > NIGGER LADY you follow up. Just ignore FUCKING FUCK ME them and > they'll give up. FUCKER PORK SWORD BASTARD PISS ARSE TWAT PRICK PUSSY > FLAPS FAGGOT DONKEY DICK MARMITE DRILLER > FUCKING HARLOT Stop giving them reasons to tease FUCKING LOVE CUSHIONS > PIMP you. It only makes you FUCKING GOAT FUCKER NYMPHOMANIAC look > more stupid. BASTARD JISM SUCK BASTARD CUNNILINGUS HERPES KNOB BULL > SHIT > FUCKING FUCKFACE BUM BANDIT "an old freind" > wrote FUCKING KNICKERS in message > news:1156374292.055102.320270@74g2000cwt.googlegroups.com... PENIS > FELCH VIRGIN I'D DO YOU CUNT-STABBER JISM DOGGY SWING BOTH WAYS Article: 228770 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Slow Code" Subject: Re: I really need someone to talk to Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 18:20:11 +0545 Message-ID: <4vpe51$l6l$b@shrivelled-golden-globes.net> References: <1156338836.376274.150290@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1156374324.623122.193680@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> Slow Code , the customs officer who supervises over the off-loading of contraband goods on the coast, brown-nosed: > Is this real, or some strange and twisted dream? Article: 228771 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Not Cocksucker Lloyd" Subject: Re: Poor Markie! - Markie, Just kill yourself. Date: 24 Aug 2006 05:38:56 -0700 Message-ID: <1156423136.443138.16580@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com> References: <1155755878.737265.55800@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> an Old fraud wrote: > Not Cocksucker Lloyd wrote: > > MarkMoron@kb9rqz.com wrote: > > > On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 23:46:53 GMT, Slow Code wrote: > > > > > > > why do you want to kil the ARS? > > > > Why do you want to "kill" the English language? > based on you own adknowledgement that I am an expert on lying I say you > are lying You proved me correct again in your "acknowledgement." Article: 228772 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Al Klein Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Message-ID: <4g7re29ghimo4ochmlh7v6mhv3qq1gsmej@4ax.com> References: <30954.oidi09.d0904.ddoi0@qkd.org> <%RJGg.27319$uV.13889@trnddc08> <1o2Hg.19713$Te.3938@trnddc07> Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 08:47:12 -0400 On Thu, 24 Aug 2006 02:32:01 GMT, Cecil Moore wrote: >Al Klein wrote: >> Really? You can write a spoken language you don't understand well >> enough to be read by someone who understands it? Maybe. Maybe not. >> In CW, you can. >Spanish words are easy to write even if one doesn't >understand them. Ever try taking dictation at 100wpm spoken speed in a foreign language? I have. Even in one I understand, it's difficult. In one I don't understand it's impossible. Maybe you're better than I am. > In general, unlike English, there >is usually only one possible way to pronounce and to >spell a Spanish word. You hear "a-di-os". You write >a-d-i-o-s. You don't need to know what it means. When it's spoken very quickly and in a panic, it's more like "adhyose". Understandable, if weird looking, to a Spaniard. Try some other languages, though - those you've never heard spoken before. See how well you do. Then see how well you do in CW ... oh, you already know that, don't you? -.-. is the same, whether it's hard, soft or unpronounced. Whether you put a cedilla on it or not, a Spaniard will understand it. So will a Turk, even though it sounds more like - -.-. But would you write "Con" for something that sounds like Tchonn? Article: 228773 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: peewee_lloyd_davies@yahoo.com Subject: Re: If Lennie Anderson Had To Tell The Truth Once, Would Bill Clinton Swear Off Big Mac's and White House Interns? With "Engineers" Like Lennie, It's No Wonder Everything Says "Made In Someplace Other Than The United States" Date: 24 Aug 2006 06:24:56 -0700 Message-ID: <1156425896.895590.63550@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> References: <1153664765.447946.4510@s13g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> LenAnderson@ieee.org wrote: > From: an old freind on Tues, Aug 22 2006 4:16 pm > > > >K4YZ wrote: > >> an old freind wrote: > >> > K4YZ wrote: > >> > > LenAnder...@ieee.org tried the same old tired rhetoric: > > > >> > > > But, challenge Robeson or call him in error and one will be > >> > > > inundated with personal insults. Robeson MUST be right and > >> > > > he MUST rule. Civil comportment be damned with Robeson in > >> > > > newsgroups. Those newsgroups were (in his mind) created to > >> > > > showcase Him? > > > >> > > Yep. > > > >> > agreeing for once get help > > > >> Get help for what? > > > >well a pro needs to way but Id say meglomanina paranoia, pathological > >lying for starts > > Give up on Robesin, Mark. He MUST remain "right" and He > "must" rule. He isn't interested in civility. Once an > "enemy" of his, always an enemy in his mind. Sick way to > be but he is that way, repeatedly. He just proved it in > the message you replied to. > > He is setting the example for all hams. Not going to help > the amateur ranks in getting more hams but that is not, > apparently, his point. Robesin needs to come out on TOP in > his own mind, be chieftan, be the warlord. > > He also wants rec.radio.amateur. policy all his own to do with > as he sees fit. [probably to have his daily fits in...] > > Ech... > > > but titles like that are Robeson stock in trade my content in his posts > > just ranting on and on about epople instead of Issues > > Absolutely true, Mark. He tries to belittle his "enemies" so that > He looks good. Problem is, it is working in reverse and he is only > belittling himself. Says the blowhard who can't even pass the No Code Technician Amateur exam. Some "electronics expert" you are. Article: 228774 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: peewee_lloyd_davies@yahoo.com Subject: Re: If Lennie Anderson Had To Tell The Truth Once, Would Bill Clinton Swear Off Big Mac's and White House Interns? With "Engineers" Like Lennie, It's No Wonder Everything Says "Made In Someplace Other Than The United States" Date: 24 Aug 2006 06:26:58 -0700 Message-ID: <1156426018.245182.308720@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com> References: <1153664765.447946.4510@s13g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> an old fraud wrote: > > I use him for punching bag hopeing he might give it up Markie, you are everybody's punching bag. > did you catch the bit where he claims that he is acting as MY firend I > am gald I was not drinking something , i might have choked to death We can only hope you would choke to death...... > in a few day weeks or months I will quit this feild signing off here as > KB9RQZ/AE That will never happen, you are too stupid to pass the theory tests. Article: 228775 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Mark@kb9rqz.com Subject: Re: PING: Slow Code Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 10:04:17 -0400 Message-ID: References: <1156186858.857772.22110@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> <1156336291.761443.49450@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com> <1156347507.188495.166660@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1156422506.804963.308820@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> On 24 Aug 2006 05:28:26 -0700, "Not Cocksucker Lloyd" wrote: > >an old friendless cocksucker wrote: >> Not Cocksucker Lloyd wrote: >> > MarkMoron@kb9rqz.com wrote: >> > > why do you want to kil the ARS? >> > >> > Why do you "kill" the English language ? >> by the authority YOU gave me I can state the expert opiion you just lied > >By your own example, you proved me right, imbecile. And that's the >general "opinion" on you. you are Lying expert opinion adknowledged by yourself cease desist and growup http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/ -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Article: 228776 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Mark@kb9rqz.com Subject: Re: If Lennie Anderson Had To Tell The Truth Once, Would Bill Clinton Swear Off Big Mac's and White House Interns? With "Engineers" Like Lennie, It's No Wonder Everything Says "Made In Someplace Other Than The United States" Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 10:11:01 -0400 Message-ID: References: <1156188562.839806.186090@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1156198607.916738.121580@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1156285189.249991.19140@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1156285869.664544.112970@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> <1156286305.735833.70980@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <1156309170.987438.161010@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> <1156357131.548824.161310@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1156426018.245182.308720@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com> On 24 Aug 2006 06:26:58 -0700, peewee_lloyd_davies@yahoo.com wrote: > >an old fraud wrote: >> >> I use him for punching bag hopeing he might give it up > >Markie, you are everybody's punching bag. nope > >> did you catch the bit where he claims that he is acting as MY firend I >> am gald I was not drinking something , i might have choked to death > >We can only hope you would choke to death...... and such a statement from MY Friend > >> in a few day weeks or months I will quit this feild signing off here as >> KB9RQZ/AE > >That will never happen, you are too stupid to pass the theory tests. already done I may have to take them again if the FCC dleys much longer after steve you keep complaining they are too easy http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/ -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Article: 228777 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Mark@kb9rqz.com Subject: Re: If Lennie Anderson Had To Tell The Truth Once, Would Bill Clinton Swear Off Big Mac's and White House Interns? With "Engineers" Like Lennie, It's No Wonder Everything Says "Made In Someplace Other Than The United States" Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 10:11:30 -0400 Message-ID: <0scre25a5jp7olsibcl4qgctecjamcb2dq@4ax.com> References: <1156111049.458067.33380@74g2000cwt.googlegroups.com> <1156188562.839806.186090@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1156198607.916738.121580@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1156285189.249991.19140@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1156285869.664544.112970@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> <1156286305.735833.70980@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <1156309170.987438.161010@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> <1156425896.895590.63550@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> On 24 Aug 2006 06:24:56 -0700, peewee_lloyd_davies@yahoo.com wrote: > >LenAnderson@ieee.org wrote: >> From: an old freind on Tues, Aug 22 2006 4:16 pm >> >> >> >K4YZ wrote: >> >> an old freind wrote: >> >> > K4YZ wrote: >> >> > > LenAnder...@ieee.org tried the same old tired rhetoric: >> > >> >> > > > But, challenge Robeson or call him in error and one will be >> >> > > > inundated with personal insults. Robeson MUST be right and >> >> > > > he MUST rule. Civil comportment be damned with Robeson in >> >> > > > newsgroups. Those newsgroups were (in his mind) created to >> >> > > > showcase Him? >> > >> >> > > Yep. >> > >> >> > agreeing for once get help >> > >> >> Get help for what? >> > >> >well a pro needs to way but Id say meglomanina paranoia, pathological >> >lying for starts >> >> Give up on Robesin, Mark. He MUST remain "right" and He >> "must" rule. He isn't interested in civility. Once an >> "enemy" of his, always an enemy in his mind. Sick way to >> be but he is that way, repeatedly. He just proved it in >> the message you replied to. >> >> He is setting the example for all hams. Not going to help >> the amateur ranks in getting more hams but that is not, >> apparently, his point. Robesin needs to come out on TOP in >> his own mind, be chieftan, be the warlord. >> >> He also wants rec.radio.amateur. policy all his own to do with >> as he sees fit. [probably to have his daily fits in...] >> >> Ech... >> >> > but titles like that are Robeson stock in trade my content in his posts >> > just ranting on and on about epople instead of Issues >> >> Absolutely true, Mark. He tries to belittle his "enemies" so that >> He looks good. Problem is, it is working in reverse and he is only >> belittling himself. > >Says the blowhard who can't even pass the No Code Technician Amateur >exam. Some "electronics expert" you are. learn english hasn't does not mean can't http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/ -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Article: 228778 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Mark@kb9rqz.com Subject: Re: Poor Markie! - Markie, Just kill yourself. Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 10:31:41 -0400 Message-ID: References: <1155904856.192887.112830@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <44E5B917.6050406@fuse.net> <1156167941.257256.314290@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <1156336223.563647.100240@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> <1156346296.495989.316750@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1156423136.443138.16580@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com> On 24 Aug 2006 05:38:56 -0700, "Not Cocksucker Lloyd" wrote: > >an Old fraud wrote: >> Not Cocksucker Lloyd wrote: >> > MarkMoron@kb9rqz.com wrote: >> > > On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 23:46:53 GMT, Slow Code wrote: >> > > >> >> > > why do you want to kil the ARS? >> > >> > Why do you want to "kill" the English language? >> based on you own adknowledgement that I am an expert on lying I say you >> are lying > >You proved me correct again in your "acknowledgement." the subject is your lying you claim I am a expert on lying so I say you are lying http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/ -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Article: 228779 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: Mismatched Zo Connectors References: <2eSdnYZzr7pWyXbZRVnytA@bt.com> Message-ID: Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 14:45:38 GMT J. B. Wood wrote: > In the steady-state there is one voltage/current (as seen by an RF > voltmeter or ammeter) placed at the measurement point. We need a > directional coupler (part of a Bird model 43) or impedance bridge > (referenced to Zo) inserted at the measurment point in order to partition > the sampled voltage/current into incident (forward) and reflected waves. Hi John, one important fact that some people would like to forget is that the reflected wave can indeed be partitioned >from the forward wave. Some people on this newsgroup argue that the forward wave and reflected wave are inseparable and that reflected waves contain no rearward traveling energy. However a circulator plus load resistor located at the source will prevent reflected wave energy from being incident upon the source and will heat up that load resistor in the process proving that reflected waves are real and do contain energy. My favorite illustration of such is a one-second lossless transmission line with reflections. The number of watts in the forward wave plus the number of watts in the reflected wave equals the number of joules stored in the line during steady-state. For instance, if Pfor = 200w and Pref = 100w, then 300 joules of RF energy exist in the one-second long lossless line during steady-state. -- 73, Cecil, http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 228780 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person References: <30954.oidi09.d0904.ddoi0@qkd.org> <%RJGg.27319$uV.13889@trnddc08> <1o2Hg.19713$Te.3938@trnddc07> <4g7re29ghimo4ochmlh7v6mhv3qq1gsmej@4ax.com> Message-ID: Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 14:52:28 GMT Al Klein wrote: > Ever try taking dictation at 100wpm spoken speed in a foreign > language? I have. Even in one I understand, it's difficult. In one > I don't understand it's impossible. Maybe you're better than I am. I can certainly write down Spanish spoken at my CW speed of 13 wpm which is the whole point. If one speaks faster, I may not be able to copy it. If one sends CW to me faster than 13 wpm, for sure I cannot copy it even in English. -- 73, Cecil, http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 228781 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Richard Clark Subject: Re: Antenna wire Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 09:12:53 -0700 Message-ID: References: <5udne2hbro4lsmhg5d7kv0c5nb4bbglof3@4ax.com> <0ftne2l1aedai6emg6on8natfplbno4cmc@4ax.com> On Thu, 24 Aug 2006 10:05:37 GMT, Owen Duffy wrote: >There is no explicit discussion of wind loading, and the design guides >(tables, nomographs, text) lead the reader to a design based on >weight loading alone and with a Safety Factor of 10 or 5 depending on >the chosen tension. Hi Owen, Consult: http://www.iaei.org/subscriber/magazine/02_c/other_code.htm 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC Article: 228782 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: wood@itd.nrl.navy.mil (J. B. Wood) Subject: Re: Mismatched Zo Connectors Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 12:22:29 -0400 Message-ID: References: <2eSdnYZzr7pWyXbZRVnytA@bt.com> In article , Cecil Moore wrote: > Hi John, one important fact that some people would like to > forget is that the reflected wave can indeed be partitioned > from the forward wave. Hello, and it would be more correct to say that the forward and reflected waves are components of a standing wave. > However a circulator plus load resistor located at the source > will prevent reflected wave energy from being incident upon > the source and will heat up that load resistor in the process > proving that reflected waves are real and do contain energy. Hmm. Don't quite get that. Say an RF voltage source is located at port A of an ideal 3-port circulator designed for a system (characteristic) impedance of Zo. A load of ZL terminates port B and a load of Zo is attached to port C. Now, incident energy from the source at A is transferred by circulator action to the load at port B. If ZL is not equal to Zo then reflected energy from port B is transferred to port C where it is dissipated in the port C termination. None of the reflected energy originating from port B ever returns to port A in this ideal case (circulator has infinite isolation). Sincerely, John Wood (Code 5550) e-mail: wood@itd.nrl.navy.mil Naval Research Laboratory 4555 Overlook Avenue, SW Washington, DC 20375-5337 Article: 228783 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 07:14:37 -1000 From: Rick Frazier Subject: Re: Can't find enameled copperweld antenna wire References: Message-ID: John, N9JG wrote: > The last time I installed a wire antenna for 80 meters was in the mid 70s. > At that time the wire of choice was #14 (or perhaps #12) solid enameled > copperweld (now called copper clad) wire. Yes, the wire was kinky, fussy to > install, but it had high mechanical strength, excellent electrical > properties, and it lasted for many years. > > > Any advice, recommendations, or links to wire sources will be greatly > appreciated. > > John, N9JG > Home Depot, Lowes, or any other local Borg... I've been using ordinary, stranded 12 guage THHN house wiring. It's insulated (yes, you do need to adjust length a bit for the insulation), comes in a variety of colors (I prefer black or blue) and is strong enough for most any antenna you'll likely put up. With fixed corner posts, I ran a 800 foot loop through and over trees without any problems, and have run at least one 160M half wave without any issues. Note that I'm not in a heavy icing area, as my temperatures rarely get even close to freezing where I live now (Hawaii), but many others have also used stranded household wire to good effect. If your antenna isn't in the clear, the insulation helps. Given a tree on one end, I've used a pulley at the top with a rope connected to the antenna end, with a bucket of sand on the other end. The bucket moves up and down as the tree moves, and the last time I used this approach (in Washington state) the rope lasted 5 or 6 years before I needed to replace it. Good Luck, --Rick AH7H Article: 228784 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: kennnick@gmail.com Subject: Re: Working in strong 60Hz magnetic fields Date: 24 Aug 2006 10:24:57 -0700 Message-ID: <1156440297.623767.319410@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> References: <1156357951.687505.203010@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> The conduits (bus ducts) don't get hot mainly because they have greater total cross sectional area than the bus itself. They're about a half inch thick aluminum and maybe three feet in diameter. All joints are continuously welded. Some documents I've found suggest 95% shielding efficiency, supposedly less than 100% due not to skin effect, but to resistivity. Regarding the other responder's comments on jewelry and so on, here's my anecdote. Not so long ago I climbed up near the main generator output bushings to view a cooling air damper through a window in the housing. This is sort of unusual with the plant at power and it made me a bit nervous. I stayed about five minutes, but after I climbed down I discovered that my (analog) watch had gained an hour! Now I can't find that watch. My theory is that it's off in the future just an hour out, but I can't catch up to it. 73--Nick, WA5BDU (... this being the internet, I guess I'd better state that I was only kidding about the location of my watch.) Howard Eisenhauer wrote: > > I'm no expert on this but it sounds to me like the magnetic fields > around the busses are inducing eddy currents in the scaffolding as > opposed to actual current flowing around the square sections in a > loop. The conduits surrounding the busses will be "thin" skin-depth > wise at 60 Hz so a large amount of field gets through. I'm actually > kinda curious as to why the conduits themselves arn't getting really > hot :?. > > I'd suggest posting on sci.electronics.design, I'll bet somebody there > knows about this... > > H. Article: 228785 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "an old friend" Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Date: 24 Aug 2006 10:32:16 -0700 Message-ID: <1156440736.207259.220220@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> References: <30954.oidi09.d0904.ddoi0@qkd.org> Cecil Moore wrote: > Al Klein wrote: > > Ever try taking dictation at 100wpm spoken speed in a foreign > > language? I have. Even in one I understand, it's difficult. In one > > I don't understand it's impossible. Maybe you're better than I am. > > I can certainly write down Spanish spoken at my CW > speed of 13 wpm which is the whole point. If one speaks > faster, I may not be able to copy it. If one sends CW > to me faster than 13 wpm, for sure I cannot copy it even > in English. interesting how Al Keeps changing the condictions franticaly trying to make a point > -- > 73, Cecil, http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 228786 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Jim Kelley Subject: Re: Mismatched Zo Connectors Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 10:36:16 -0700 Message-ID: References: <2eSdnYZzr7pWyXbZRVnytA@bt.com> Cecil Moore wrote: > Hi John, one important fact that some people would like to > forget is that the reflected wave can indeed be partitioned > from the forward wave. Some people on this newsgroup argue > that the forward wave and reflected wave are inseparable and > that reflected waves contain no rearward traveling energy. > > However a circulator plus load resistor located at the source > will prevent reflected wave energy from being incident upon > the source and will heat up that load resistor in the process > proving that reflected waves are real and do contain energy. Hi Cecil How much energy is "in the reflected wave" without a circulator load resistor? 73, ac6xg Article: 228787 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Richard Clark Subject: Re: Working in strong 60Hz magnetic fields Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 11:01:48 -0700 Message-ID: References: <1156357951.687505.203010@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> <1156440297.623767.319410@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> On 24 Aug 2006 10:24:57 -0700, kennnick@gmail.com wrote: >Not so long ago I climbed up near the main generator >output bushings to view a cooling air damper through a window in the >housing. This is sort of unusual with the plant at power and it made >me a bit nervous. I stayed about five minutes, but after I climbed >down I discovered that my (analog) watch had gained an hour! A 60Hz Fields Exposure Dosimeter Article: 228788 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "John, N9JG" References: Subject: Re: Can't find enameled copperweld antenna wire Message-ID: <1SlHg.215$5i7.2@newsreading01.news.tds.net> Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 18:03:41 GMT I thank everyone for their comments and suggestions. I will probably go with #14 copper clad steel. Article: 228789 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "n3ox.dan@gmail.com" Subject: Re: Can't find enameled copperweld antenna wire Date: 24 Aug 2006 11:12:46 -0700 Message-ID: <1156443166.256082.270560@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> References: It's worth pointing out that copperweld, in addition to being superior to house wiring, is CHEAPER than solid copper at the moment. Dan Article: 228790 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Bruce in Alaska Subject: Re: Can't find enameled copperweld antenna wire References: Message-ID: Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 18:24:18 GMT In article , "John, N9JG" wrote: > > Any advice, recommendations, or links to wire sources will be greatly > appreciated. > > John, N9JG > Out here on the Left Coast, when one wants "The Best" in antenna wire, one goes to a Marine Hardware supplier and orders PhospherBronze Antenna Wire. This is used on most Vessels as LF/MF/HF Antenna Wire. It lasts, basically forever, withstands whipping, doesn't stretch, and is corrosion resistant in almost any weather or sea condition. It comes in various sizes from #12 (7/12) on up to Ought (O) depending on your antenna current and rigging. Standard NecoPress and Splitbolt Hardware in PhosherBronze is available to facilitate rigging. I think if you look on just about ANY Military Vessel, if it has wire antennas they will be spec'd as PhospherBronze. It isn't cheap, but it is "The Best"..... Bruce in alaska Al7AQ -- add a <2> before @ Article: 228791 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: Mismatched Zo Connectors References: <2eSdnYZzr7pWyXbZRVnytA@bt.com> Message-ID: Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 18:31:12 GMT Jim Kelley wrote: > How much energy is "in the reflected wave" without a circulator load > resistor? There's the same amount of energy in the reflected wave either way, with or without a circulator load resistor. The reflected wave is incapable of looking ahead and using its free will to decide how much energy to contain depending upon its future fate. But that is what some people would have us believe. Does your question imply: A reflected wave that is going to be dissipated in a circulator resistor sometime in the future contains energy but a reflected wave that is going to be dissipated after the power is turned off does not contain energy? In a one second long lossless transmission line, watts equal joules. A forward wave of 200 watts contains 200 joules of energy. A reflected wave of 100 watts contains 100 joules of energy. Under such conditions, the source has supplied exactly 300 joules more than has been delivered to the load, no more and no less. Conservation of energy strikes again. -- 73, Cecil, http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 228792 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Jim Kelley Subject: Re: Mismatched Zo Connectors Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 11:54:36 -0700 Message-ID: References: <2eSdnYZzr7pWyXbZRVnytA@bt.com> Cecil Moore wrote: > The reflected wave is incapable of looking ahead and > using its free will to decide how much energy to contain > depending upon its future fate. But that is what some > people would have us believe. Those are the bad people, evidently. > Does your question imply: A reflected wave that is > going to be dissipated in a circulator resistor sometime > in the future contains energy but a reflected wave that > is going to be dissipated after the power is turned off > does not contain energy? The question implies that there are issues regarding the flow of energy which you continue to misunderstand. Your answer confirms this. > In a one second long lossless transmission line, watts > equal joules. A forward wave of 200 watts contains 200 > joules of energy. A reflected wave of 100 watts contains > 100 joules of energy. Under such conditions, the source > has supplied exactly 300 joules more than has been > delivered to the load, no more and no less. Is your claim that the above describes the system with, or without, the circulator load? 73, ac6xg Article: 228793 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "John, N9JG" References: Subject: Re: Can't find enameled copperweld antenna wire Message-ID: Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 19:42:26 GMT Well, in that environment corrosion resistance certainly has to be quite high on the requirements list. "Bruce in Alaska" wrote in message news:bruceg-EB5C51.10242824082006@netnews.worldnet.att.net... > In article , > "John, N9JG" wrote: > >> >> Any advice, recommendations, or links to wire sources will be greatly >> appreciated. >> >> John, N9JG >> > > Out here on the Left Coast, when one wants "The Best" in antenna wire, > one goes to a Marine Hardware supplier and orders PhospherBronze > Antenna Wire. This is used on most Vessels as LF/MF/HF Antenna Wire. > It lasts, basically forever, withstands whipping, doesn't stretch, > and is corrosion resistant in almost any weather or sea condition. > It comes in various sizes from #12 (7/12) on up to Ought (O) depending > on your antenna current and rigging. Standard NecoPress and Splitbolt > Hardware in PhosherBronze is available to facilitate rigging. I think > if you look on just about ANY Military Vessel, if it has wire antennas > they will be spec'd as PhospherBronze. It isn't cheap, but it is > "The Best"..... > > Bruce in alaska Al7AQ > -- > add a <2> before @ Article: 228794 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Roy Lewallen Subject: Re: Two Meter FM Antenna Question Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 12:56:07 -0700 Message-ID: <12es12qsthsb388@corp.supernews.com> References: <1156112798.027258.152330@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> <12eknkcib18cad1@corp.supernews.com> <12enrm6nunsr414@corp.supernews.com> <12epb72auprr927@corp.supernews.com> <1mirkiwd19.fsf@persaunet.uninett.no> LA4RT Jon Kåre Hellan wrote: > Roy Lewallen writes: > >> John E. Davis wrote: >> Sorry, there is no EZNEC version for Linux. The last report I got was >> that the available Linux Windows emulator isn't able to open the EZNEC >> manual, and it has other problems with EZNEC also. >> >> Roy Lewallen, W7EL > > The versions in Ubuntu Edgy and Debian Etch both hang at the splash > screen. I asked on the Wine mailing list, but nothing helpful turned > up. I can run it under VMWare - slow on my machine -, or I can use the > kids' Windows game computer. But the gap between their bedtime and > mine is closing. > > The Wine people are interested in fixing bugs, but they need info from > app developers. Roy, would you be interested in working with them, if > I can get a Wine developer interested? > > What toolkit do you use? The person who reported the problems posted them on the appropriate newsgroup but as far as I know got no response. The primary problem is that the manual can't be viewed under wine, and the last thing I want is to have the program functional but the manual not functional. Only when that problem is fixed will I address any others. The manual is created with RoboHelp v. 7, and although getting pretty old now, it's always worked on all Windows systems as well as under Mac emulators. The manual is EZW4.hlp with EZW4.cnt, which are installed with the EZNEC demo program and freely available for analysis by anyone who's interested. This isn't the appropriate newsgroup for this discussion, so we should take this discussion off-line for any followup. Roy Lewallen, W7EL Article: 228795 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: Mismatched Zo Connectors References: <2eSdnYZzr7pWyXbZRVnytA@bt.com> Message-ID: Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 20:03:23 GMT Jim Kelley wrote: > The question implies that there are issues regarding the flow of energy > which you continue to misunderstand. Your answer confirms this. So please enlighten me. How does a wave know whether to carry energy or not depending upon its future fate? It is my understanding that the power in an EM wave is ExH no matter what its future fate. Does a laser beam reflected from an ideal mirror carry any less energy than the forward beam just because it has been reflected? If so, how does that not violate the conservation of energy principle? > > In a one second long lossless transmission line, watts > > equal joules. A forward wave of 200 watts contains 200 > > joules of energy. A reflected wave of 100 watts contains > > 100 joules of energy. Under such conditions, the source > > has supplied exactly 300 joules more than has been > > delivered to the load, no more and no less. > > Is your claim that the above describes the system with, or without, the > circulator load? Yes, in both cases the voltage reflection coefficient at the load is 0.707 making the power reflection coefficient = 0.5, i.e. half the power incident upon the load is reflected. The system with the circulator load at the signal generator has the signal generator supplying 200 watts and the circulator load resistor dissipating 100 watts. 'SGCR' stands for a signal generator equipped with a circulator and circulator load resistor equal to the Z0 of the feedline. There's 300 joules of energy in the feedline during steady-state. 100 watts is dissipated in the load. 200W SGCR-----one second long feedline-------load Pfor=200W--> <--Pref=100W The system without the circulator and load consists of a 100 watt source feeding an ideal autotuner tied to the transmission line. In this case all reflected energy is re-reflected by the Z0-matched autotuner. 'SGAT' stands for a signal generator equipped with an ideal autotuner. There's 300 joules of energy in the feedline during steady-state. 100 watts is dissipated in the load. 100W SGAT-----one second long feedline-------load Pfor=200W--> <--Pref=100W -- 73, Cecil, http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 228796 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "H. Adam Stevens, NQ5H" Subject: Re: Sommer versus SteppIR Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 15:28:58 -0500 Message-ID: <12es30960kl9435@corp.supernews.com> References: <8e917$44e765ad$453d9423$8718@FUSE.NET> <1156131770.320326.41130@74g2000cwt.googlegroups.com> <44E92CE5.10502@fuse.net> <44ebc755.60522765@news.optonline.net> "Rick" wrote in message news:44ebc755.60522765@news.optonline.net... > On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 20:51:25 +0200, "Pete" > wrote: > >>My next antenna is a 3 element SteppIR with the 6m option and 40/30m >>dipole >>option. I currently have a Hy-Gain Explorer 14 with 40m kit. >> >>I vote SteppIR. >>-- >>Pete . . >>ZS5ACT > > > I have had a three element SteppIR up for three years now. > It replaced a pair of Hy Gain monobanders (4 element 20 and 5 element > 15). > Biggest difference I noticed was that my mast doesn't bend anymore !! > And my rotor has about 1/3 the work to do because the torque is so > much less. > And I have one feedline and no antenna switches, and only one > lightning arrestor. > And I now get 10 meters, and 17 meters. Wow what a great band 17 > meters is. > Yes, I DO notice the pattern is not as sharp as the big monobanders, > no question about it. Probably a db or so less gain. > > On 6 meters (I DO NOT have the extra fixed length element for 6 > meters) I also have a 5 element M Squared, mounted about 6 feet above > the SteppIR. It absolutely blows away the SteppIR. So if you are > serious about 6, and don't want another yagi on the tower, give > serious consideration to the advice of Mike at SteppIR and get his 4th > element. I guess you said that, you are getting the 6 meter element. > > But I miss that shiny aluminum up there. Sometimes the early morning > sun would reflect off all those Hy Gain elements...... Man, that was > a beautiful sight. > > But 30 and 40 meters with the SteppIR? Seems like the only advantages > are the ones I mentioned above about the single feedline and > simplicity. I can't really see all that much advantage to being able > to rotate those single element radiators on those bands. I > experimented with learning EZNEC last week and I didn't see hardly any > directivity at all in my 40 meter inverted vee. > > Rick K2XT Since reading Rick's post I should add that I have the two extra elements for six and have had great success. I cannot compare it to another antenna, but I just got a 6M QSL from New Hampshire and I'm in Texas. 73 H., NQ5H Article: 228798 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Al Klein Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Message-ID: References: <30954.oidi09.d0904.ddoi0@qkd.org> <%RJGg.27319$uV.13889@trnddc08> <1o2Hg.19713$Te.3938@trnddc07> <4g7re29ghimo4ochmlh7v6mhv3qq1gsmej@4ax.com> Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 16:32:50 -0400 On Thu, 24 Aug 2006 14:52:28 GMT, Cecil Moore wrote: >Al Klein wrote: >> Ever try taking dictation at 100wpm spoken speed in a foreign >> language? I have. Even in one I understand, it's difficult. In one >> I don't understand it's impossible. Maybe you're better than I am. >I can certainly write down Spanish spoken at my CW >speed of 13 wpm Really? You listen to people speaking at 13 wpm? What are they on? It sounds like good stuff. Article: 228799 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "LenAnderson@ieee.org" Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Date: 24 Aug 2006 14:34:44 -0700 Message-ID: <1156455284.028084.184240@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> References: <1153664765.447946.4510@s13g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> From: hot-ham-and-che...@hotmail.com on Wed, Aug 23 2006 7:46 pm >LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote: >> From: hot-ham-and-che...@hotmail.com on Tues, Aug 22 2006 7:14 pm >> >LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote: >> >> From: M...@kb9rqz.com on Mon, Aug 21 2006 6:30 pm >> >> > wrote: >> >> >>From: an old friend on Mon, Aug 21 2006 3:16 pm >> >> >>>LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote: >> >> >>>> From: hot-ham-and-che...@hotmail.com on Sun, Aug 20 2006 2:57 pm > >> >> Robesin is merely a product of the "incentive" licensing >> >> system where all those who hunger for being a "somebody" >> >> can get a Title - Rank - Privilege through a singular skill. > >> >If it doesn't have rank or a uniform, Robesin isn't interested. > >> That certainly seems the case. The "uniform" is his >> emperor's new clothes... > >Lessee. He's got a Marine uniform (he says). A Tennessee State Guard >uniform (whatever that is), an ill-fitting Air Force CAP flight suit >uniform, and a male nurses uniform. And he has lots of military medals >that he never earned (according to him). > >You know, whenever I saw folks in the CAP uniform at any Air Force >Base, including Maxwell, they work the 4b or Class A. Never ever saw a >CAP in a flight suit before robesin's well advertised home page. In all my visits to USAF bases I've never seen any CAP personnel there, let alone some in a poopy suit. I've seen several civilians on USAF bases, employed by the USAF, wearing flight suits and clearly identified as to being civilian. >> >> I didn't make that system, neither did you, neither did >> >> anyone in these four forums. The FCC took a big chunk out >> >> of it (license classes and morsemanship skill) with the >> >> Restructuring of 2000 and that pissed off the Title-Rank- >> >> Status seekers. Devout morsemen are angry and venting steam >> >> because their self-esteem has fallen. > >> >Only in their minds. They are the very same good or bad hams that they >> >were with all the layers of hamdom. > >> All of those "layers" hams are examples to the general public, >> good or bad or indifferent. So? > >> "Self-esteem" is a nice-nice word for EGO tied in with self- >> perception. Trying to represent themselves as "expert" radio >> persons in this new millennium is a rather stupid idea of those >> devout morsepersons when they want to force the FCC to keep the >> code test. > >Some do. Some don't. robesin does. He's a bad example for the morsemen. >> Those who LIKE morse code should, and can, go on using it. > >Roger. Roger that. >> That >> is in no sense any validity for making it an amateur radio test >> requirement for a license. > >No valid reason to maintain it as a barrier to the ARS. Oh, oh...in the PC (Political Correctness) of morsedom, the code test cannot possibly ever be a "barrier." ALL "good hams" should WORK for their AMATEUR licenses! Those that won't are worse than river-bottom slime...:-) Trying to speak logically, the FCC grants amateur licenses in the USA and even they proposed (via an NPRM) to eliminate the amateur radio morse code test for a license. FCC is on record of a couple decades ago that this singular manual skill test does not tell them if a license applicant is worthy of a federal license. >> >> Simply amazing. EIGHTEEN years alleged on active duty and >> >> he can't supply a single photo or document to support his >> >> claim? In November of this year I can truthfully say I've >> >> been in the southern California aerospace business 50 years. >> >> I have all sorts of documentation and photos on that which >> >> I may fully digitize some day (some are already digitized). >> >> Some time ago I posted my resume in here...which only made >> >> Robesin ballistic then since he has NO comparable >> >> experience in industry and cannot prove any radio experience >> >> other than amateur and alleged "chief operator" status at >> >> some small MARS station long ago. [that was before his >> >> less-than-a-half-year as a purchasing agent at a small >> >> set top box maker] > >> >Yet as "chief operator" or ANCOIC of NMC MARS on Okinawa, he remains >> >woefully ignorant of MARS. I just don't get it. > >> It's easy to "get." He wasn't what he says he was. He hasn't >> supplied a single bit of evidence to prove his claims. > >Now it all makes sense. It was all one great big super-brag. >> Robesin used the wrong word/acronym for a RESUME' presented >> as part of an interview for a job. > >Thought he had a "killer" job as a male nurse? God forbid! >> >Robesin an academic? Not in this lifetime. > >> >It's just his inappropriate use of what to him are important sounding >> >words and acronyms. > >> Some of those he makes up as he goes along. > >Probably how his career in the Marines was invented. Well, he might have been in the reserves? >> >The rec.radio newsgroups have showcased Robesin. He HAS earned his >> >reputation. He's worked very hard for it. > >> He's hardly worked in radio. > >Oh, I don't know. After a hard day behind the microphone, he's got >that 1,000 yard stare. That's also a symptom of anoxia...lack of oxygen used up in his bragging of what he did that never was... :-) Tsk, all that work he does in trying to bluff us. All he had to do was present SOME sort of document proof or even a personal snapshot taken while in that "hostile-action-filled" 18 year "career" in the USMC. He hasn't done so after many years. If he can't present a single item of 18 years of his life, it is hard for the rest of us to believe anything he said. LenAnderson@ieee.org Article: 228800 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "LenAnderson@ieee.org" Subject: Re: If you had to use CW... would robesin still be an idiot? Date: 24 Aug 2006 14:41:22 -0700 Message-ID: <1156455681.932440.283910@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> References: <1153597502.509378.294260@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> From: hot-ham-and-che...@hotmail.com on Wed, Aug 23 2006 8:10 pm >LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote: >> >LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote: >> >> From: an old friend on Mon, Aug 21 2006 3:16 pm >> >> >LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote: >> >> >> From: hot-ham-and-che...@hotmail.com on Sun, Aug 20 2006 2:57 pm > >> >> It's "minority rule" when ARRL lobbies for preservation of >> >> morse code test for any amateur radio license class. The >> >> ARRL membership is slightly less than a quarter of all US >> >> amateur radio licensees. > >> >The ARRL is trying to soften their image - the latest QST shows a >> >person using a, gulp, microphone on the FRONT cover! > >> Good grief! The sky is falling! The sky is falling! > >It may be for some. I pity the Al-Code-Ah and their absurd zealousness of the old. >> >Just inside is yet another article on building a code key - from a door >> >hinge. > >> Oh, goody...HIGH TECH construction article. > >They didn't mention wether you should use oil or conductive grease on >the hinge. They should use "RF Grease" - same stuff to lower VSWR on feedlines... >> Would they follow that with another article on the door itself? >> Like, I mean, making the door a jar? :-) > >Wow! We almost leaped from a door hinge to a jar head. Oh, my! :-) Now comes the "outrage" from a wanna-be jar head. I was thinking more of the image of Jar-Jar Binks having come to earth in Newington and invading the editors offices of QST. [see the 4th "Star Wars" film to find out who Jar-Jar Binks is and morsemen should quit viewing "Independence Day" for the umpteenth time... :-) ] >> >This just in from The ARRL Letter, Vol. 25, No. 33, August 18, 2006 > >> >"ARRL First Vice President Kay Craigie, N3KN, represented the League at the >> >Global Amateur Radio Emergency Communications Conference 2006." > >> >"Craigie stressed that Amateur Radio needs to avoid "being dazzled by our >> >own press clippings into thinking that we are the big dog in emergency >> >telecommunications."" > >> >She refers to robesin-like attitudes within the ARS. > >> Oh. My. God. ! ! ! > >> Tsk, just because NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, FOX, ESPN, and PBS haven't >> covered the tremendously fantastic wonderfullest huge contribution >> to saving lives and property via ham radio? Gosh, there are all >> sorts of clippings from obscure weekly and biweekly newspapers >> dutifully cut-and-pasted into messages here from Robesin & Co. > >And probably at least as credible as the rest of the news they carry. Weeklies and bi-weeklies serve their communities okay. It's when their reporters get overly ambitious and start copying copy from other sources when they get into trouble. >> Maybe I'll have to write the Department of Defense and say that >> "Major" Robesin said that radio amateurs run MARS! > >He did. We KNOW Major Dud said that in here over and over and over and over and over and over again, but did he really write DoD? BWAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! >> Right and all the other radio services are switching to morse >> code for all emergency communications a la ham radio > >The American Public would sue them for slow service and wrongful >deaths. Well, the reporting of those civil court cases would be NEW COPY for the papers! Wanna bet that the ARRL would try to spin that off as "good for the ARS?" :-) >> ...the sky has truly fallen! > >The other shoe would drop. The end is near... doo-dah, doo-dah... LenAnderson@ieee.org Article: 228801 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Jim Kelley Subject: Re: Mismatched Zo Connectors Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 14:22:24 -0700 Message-ID: References: <2eSdnYZzr7pWyXbZRVnytA@bt.com> Cecil Moore wrote: > How does a wave know whether to > carry energy or not depending upon its future fate? > Does a laser beam reflected from an ideal mirror carry any > less energy than the forward beam just because it has been > reflected? What can be said other than; these questions appear to have been posed by someone who is struggling to understand some pretty simple concepts. >> > In a one second long lossless transmission line, watts >> > equal joules. A forward wave of 200 watts contains 200 >> > joules of energy. A reflected wave of 100 watts contains >> > 100 joules of energy. Under such conditions, the source >> > has supplied exactly 300 joules more than has been >> > delivered to the load, no more and no less. >> >> Is your claim that the above describes the system with, or without, >> the circulator load? > > > Yes, in both cases the voltage reflection coefficient > at the load is 0.707 making the power reflection > coefficient = 0.5, i.e. half the power incident upon > the load is reflected. But, is the latter really more than a mathematical convenience? (You may recall that 'power' isn't something which actually moves in physical systems. And being a scalar, it can be tricky to do a proper vector analysis.) How energy moves is dependent upon factors throughout the entire system - not just at the load. > The system with the circulator load at the signal > generator has the signal generator supplying 200 > watts and the circulator load resistor dissipating 100 > watts. 'SGCR' stands for a signal generator equipped with > a circulator and circulator load resistor equal to the > Z0 of the feedline. There's 300 joules of energy in the > feedline during steady-state. 100 watts is dissipated > in the load. > > 200W SGCR-----one second long feedline-------load > Pfor=200W--> <--Pref=100W > > The system without the circulator and load consists of > a 100 watt source feeding an ideal autotuner tied to > the transmission line. In this case all reflected energy > is re-reflected by the Z0-matched autotuner. 'SGAT' stands > for a signal generator equipped with an ideal autotuner. > There's 300 joules of energy in the feedline during > steady-state. 100 watts is dissipated in the load. > > 100W SGAT-----one second long feedline-------load > Pfor=200W--> <--Pref=100W Very inventive. The question was posed without a load on the circulator, not without a circulator. You still haven't answered that question. Perhaps you wouldn't mind just considering one system at a time. No sense changing the variables just to make the solution come out the way we want. Don't they teach you that you're not supposed to change horses in the middle of a stream out there in Texas? ;-) So, since we've obviously been talking about the steady state, what's with all the weird questions about 'how the wave knows' what's going to happen in the future? 73, ac6xg Article: 228802 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person References: <30954.oidi09.d0904.ddoi0@qkd.org> <%RJGg.27319$uV.13889@trnddc08> <1o2Hg.19713$Te.3938@trnddc07> <4g7re29ghimo4ochmlh7v6mhv3qq1gsmej@4ax.com> Message-ID: Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 22:06:47 GMT Al Klein wrote: > Cecil Moore wrote: >> I can certainly write down Spanish spoken at my CW >> speed of 13 wpm > > Really? You listen to people speaking at 13 wpm? What are they on? > It sounds like good stuff. Your objection was that I cannot write Spanish at 100 wpm. I admit that but I know how to say "despacio" until they slow down so I can write it down. Since I can copy CW at 13 wpm, that seems to be a reasonable comparison. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 228803 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "RLW" Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 18:34:16 -0500 Message-ID: <8hv0f.csu.19.1@news.alt.net> References: <1153664765.447946.4510@s13g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1154574315.819259.204140@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <6gr3d21444qdt5m6mr1e1jpavltvso929p@4ax.com> <1155176094.212232.56330@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> <1155268104.444785.177310@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1155324703.131909.279070@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1156111049.458067.33380@74g2000cwt.googlegroups.com> <1156188562.839806.186090@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1156198607.916738.121580@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1156285189.249991.19140@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1156299261.351592.9880@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> <1156382321.909740.191980@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <1156387616.130756.18380@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1156455284.028084.184240@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> wrote in message news:1156455284.028084.184240@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... From: hot-ham-and-che...@hotmail.com on Wed, Aug 23 2006 7:46 pm >LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote: >> From: hot-ham-and-che...@hotmail.com on Tues, Aug 22 2006 7:14 pm >> >LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote: >> >> From: M...@kb9rqz.com on Mon, Aug 21 2006 6:30 pm >> >> > wrote: >> >> >>From: an old friend on Mon, Aug 21 2006 3:16 pm >> >> >>>LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote: >> >> >>>> From: hot-ham-and-che...@hotmail.com on Sun, Aug 20 2006 2:57 pm > >> >> Robesin is merely a product of the "incentive" licensing >> >> system where all those who hunger for being a "somebody" >> >> can get a Title - Rank - Privilege through a singular skill. > >> >If it doesn't have rank or a uniform, Robesin isn't interested. > >> That certainly seems the case. The "uniform" is his >> emperor's new clothes... > >Lessee. He's got a Marine uniform (he says). A Tennessee State Guard >uniform (whatever that is), an ill-fitting Air Force CAP flight suit >uniform, and a male nurses uniform. And he has lots of military medals >that he never earned (according to him). > >You know, whenever I saw folks in the CAP uniform at any Air Force >Base, including Maxwell, they work the 4b or Class A. Never ever saw a >CAP in a flight suit before robesin's well advertised home page. In all my visits to USAF bases I've never seen any CAP personnel there, let alone some in a poopy suit. I've seen several civilians on USAF bases, employed by the USAF, wearing flight suits and clearly identified as to being civilian. >> >> I didn't make that system, neither did you, neither did >> >> anyone in these four forums. The FCC took a big chunk out >> >> of it (license classes and morsemanship skill) with the >> >> Restructuring of 2000 and that pissed off the Title-Rank- >> >> Status seekers. Devout morsemen are angry and venting steam >> >> because their self-esteem has fallen. > >> >Only in their minds. They are the very same good or bad hams that they >> >were with all the layers of hamdom. > >> All of those "layers" hams are examples to the general public, >> good or bad or indifferent. So? > >> "Self-esteem" is a nice-nice word for EGO tied in with self- >> perception. Trying to represent themselves as "expert" radio >> persons in this new millennium is a rather stupid idea of those >> devout morsepersons when they want to force the FCC to keep the >> code test. > >Some do. Some don't. robesin does. He's a bad example for the morsemen. >> Those who LIKE morse code should, and can, go on using it. > >Roger. Roger that. >> That >> is in no sense any validity for making it an amateur radio test >> requirement for a license. > >No valid reason to maintain it as a barrier to the ARS. Oh, oh...in the PC (Political Correctness) of morsedom, the code test cannot possibly ever be a "barrier." ALL "good hams" should WORK for their AMATEUR licenses! Those that won't are worse than river-bottom slime...:-) Trying to speak logically, the FCC grants amateur licenses in the USA and even they proposed (via an NPRM) to eliminate the amateur radio morse code test for a license. FCC is on record of a couple decades ago that this singular manual skill test does not tell them if a license applicant is worthy of a federal license. >> >> Simply amazing. EIGHTEEN years alleged on active duty and >> >> he can't supply a single photo or document to support his >> >> claim? In November of this year I can truthfully say I've >> >> been in the southern California aerospace business 50 years. >> >> I have all sorts of documentation and photos on that which >> >> I may fully digitize some day (some are already digitized). >> >> Some time ago I posted my resume in here...which only made >> >> Robesin ballistic then since he has NO comparable >> >> experience in industry and cannot prove any radio experience >> >> other than amateur and alleged "chief operator" status at >> >> some small MARS station long ago. [that was before his >> >> less-than-a-half-year as a purchasing agent at a small >> >> set top box maker] > >> >Yet as "chief operator" or ANCOIC of NMC MARS on Okinawa, he remains >> >woefully ignorant of MARS. I just don't get it. > >> It's easy to "get." He wasn't what he says he was. He hasn't >> supplied a single bit of evidence to prove his claims. > >Now it all makes sense. It was all one great big super-brag. >> Robesin used the wrong word/acronym for a RESUME' presented >> as part of an interview for a job. > >Thought he had a "killer" job as a male nurse? God forbid! >> >Robesin an academic? Not in this lifetime. > >> >It's just his inappropriate use of what to him are important sounding >> >words and acronyms. > >> Some of those he makes up as he goes along. > >Probably how his career in the Marines was invented. Well, he might have been in the reserves? >> >The rec.radio newsgroups have showcased Robesin. He HAS earned his >> >reputation. He's worked very hard for it. > >> He's hardly worked in radio. > >Oh, I don't know. After a hard day behind the microphone, he's got >that 1,000 yard stare. That's also a symptom of anoxia...lack of oxygen used up in his bragging of what he did that never was... :-) Tsk, all that work he does in trying to bluff us. All he had to do was present SOME sort of document proof or even a personal snapshot taken while in that "hostile-action-filled" 18 year "career" in the USMC. He hasn't done so after many years. If he can't present a single item of 18 years of his life, it is hard for the rest of us to believe anything he said. LenAnderson@ieee.org Well, doggone it, Lennie. Next thing ya know he'll be posting over the callsign of another Amateur. Nope...ya just cain't believe guys like that, can you Len? Article: 228804 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: Mismatched Zo Connectors References: <2eSdnYZzr7pWyXbZRVnytA@bt.com> Message-ID: Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 22:35:18 GMT Jim Kelley wrote: > Cecil Moore wrote: > What can be said other than; these questions appear to have been posed > by someone who is struggling to understand some pretty simple concepts. Actually, I am struggling to understand your concepts which you appear somewhat incapable of putting into words, hence the total absence of anything technical in your posting. Is energy-passing-a-point "power" as defined by the IEEE Dictionary? Does an EM wave possesses ExH amount of power as the technical references assert? > So, since we've obviously been talking about the steady state, what's > with all the weird questions about 'how the wave knows' what's going to > happen in the future? Steady-state had a beginning and it will have an end. It cannot be analyzed without knowing what happened in the beginning and what will happen in the end. Steady-state is the rug under which you and others try to sweep the laws of physics including the conservation of energy principle. I'm doing what I can to call your bluff. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 228805 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Richard Clark Subject: Re: Mismatched Zo Connectors Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 15:43:42 -0700 Message-ID: References: <2eSdnYZzr7pWyXbZRVnytA@bt.com> On Thu, 24 Aug 2006 14:22:24 -0700, Jim Kelley wrote: >Cecil Moore wrote: > >> How does a wave know whether to >> carry energy or not depending upon its future fate? Hi Jim, I don't know how you can pass up all these tarnished jewels. Energy at the speed of light has no time dimension (Lorenz law) and as such there is no futurity. No future, no fate - presumptions aside (or galore, depending upon the source). > >> Does a laser beam reflected from an ideal mirror carry any >> less energy than the forward beam just because it has been >> reflected? Of course it does. Jim, your question was: >How much energy is "in the reflected wave" without a circulator load >resistor? and we find, after having gone down the primrose path: >> Yes, in both cases the voltage reflection coefficient >> at the load is 0.707 making the power reflection >> coefficient = 0.5, i.e. half the power incident upon >> the load is reflected. The common finding of an unterminated circulator load would offer reflections from that port passing back to the apparent source, the original mismatched load. Hence, that load sees more than 0.707 (whatever) - now from two "sources." There is one way to prevent this, but Cecil doesn't have enough experience at the linear bench to come up with that solution. Certainly I can anticipate his fog of vectors and SWR mechanics with 1 second transmission lines blossoming in the swamp - but a real bench tech could whip out the solution and make it work with less effort and certainly not have to cobble up a phonebook thick stack of Xeroxed proofs. >Very inventive. The question was posed without a load on the >circulator, not without a circulator. You were expecting something else? ;-) 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC Article: 228806 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Message-ID: Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 23:51:06 +0100 From: Ian White GM3SEK Subject: Re: Can't find enameled copperweld antenna wire References: Bruce in Alaska wrote: > >Out here on the Left Coast, when one wants "The Best" in antenna wire, >one goes to a Marine Hardware supplier and orders PhospherBronze >Antenna Wire. This is used on most Vessels as LF/MF/HF Antenna Wire. >It lasts, basically forever, withstands whipping, doesn't stretch, and >is corrosion resistant in almost any weather or sea condition. It comes >in various sizes from #12 (7/12) on up to Ought (O) depending on your >antenna current and rigging. Standard NecoPress and Splitbolt Hardware >in PhosherBronze is available to facilitate rigging. I think if you >look on just about ANY Military Vessel, if it has wire antennas they >will be spec'd as PhospherBronze. It isn't cheap, but it is "The Best"..... > >Bruce in alaska Al7AQ Stranded phosphor bronze is also the normal antenna wire for North Sea fishing trawlers, which regularly experience strong gales and heavy icing in Arctic waters. A G3 who lives on the Right Coast of the UK has 80m and 40m inverted-Vs made from 3/8in fozzy bronze, and those antennas are also his tower guys. -- 73 from Ian GM3SEK 'In Practice' columnist for RadCom (RSGB) http://www.ifwtech.co.uk/g3sek Article: 228807 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: kevin.pavin@gmail.com Subject: antenna switch Date: 24 Aug 2006 16:54:12 -0700 Message-ID: <1156463652.569279.320370@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> Hi, This is a variant on a question I asked a couple days ago. Again I'm not the most hardware knowledgable so apologies in advance. I have two WiFi (802.11b here) routers that I'm using to conduct some experiments. They will be co-located (~half wavelength spacing) and sending broadcast packets in a continuous loop over the duration of the experiment. I originally wanted to disable carrier sense on the routers so that they could transmit packets simultaneously. Given the difficulty I've had trying to achieve this as an alternative I would like to use some sort of timed switching device. Essentially I would like this device to on each clock cycle short one of the routers to its respective antenna and open circuit the other router from its antenna and ground its output, and then on the next cycle do the opposite. I'd like a clock period of about 2 msec. The idea then would be that the routers would not block one another from transmitting. One might ask why not just let them both transmit without this switching device, in theory the carrier sense should allow equal channel use, but I've observed that its not as evenly distrubuted over time intervals as I would like for my experiments. Thanks for any suggestions on this device, Kev Article: 228808 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: Mismatched Zo Connectors References: <2eSdnYZzr7pWyXbZRVnytA@bt.com> Message-ID: Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 23:56:15 GMT Richard Clark wrote: > There is one way to prevent this, but Cecil doesn't have enough > experience at the linear bench to come up with that solution. Probably true but I am not looking to solve that non-problem. The question to be answered is: Is the power in an EM wave equal to ExH as the textbooks say, or is it zero until dissipated? Jim obviously has his own personal definition of "power" that disagrees with The IEEE Dictionary. That is what he is basing his entire argument on - simple semantics using special definitions of words. That's why my argument involves one second long transmission lines in which power in watts = energy in joules. That's an argument that is very difficult to sweep under the rug. The number of joules in a transmission line *ALWAYS* equals the number of joules not lost to radiation, I^2R, and dielectric and not yet delivered to the load. And it is *ALWAYS* equivalent to the sum of the forward and reflected powers in that particular length of transmission line. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 228809 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Dave" References: Subject: Re: Can't find enameled copperweld antenna wire Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2006 00:02:11 -0000 Message-ID: <-IKdnVIGAO2So3PZnZ2dnUVZ_tOdnZ2d@crocker.com> try http://www.cliffordvt.com/imsa.html the imsa spec 28-3 copper clad steel with hdpe insulation is really tough stuff. the insulation makes it a bit easier to handle than bare or enameled. "John, N9JG" wrote in message news:Wc6Hg.199$5i7.174@newsreading01.news.tds.net... > The last time I installed a wire antenna for 80 meters was in the mid 70s. > At that time the wire of choice was #14 (or perhaps #12) solid enameled > copperweld (now called copper clad) wire. Yes, the wire was kinky, fussy > to install, but it had high mechanical strength, excellent electrical > properties, and it lasted for many years. > > I have moved to eastern Tennessee, and because of circumstances, I want to > revert back to a wire antenna, at least for the time being. Much to my > surprise I can not seem to locate a source of solid enameled copper clad > wire. Is there any reason why this wire is no longer available? > > I will be suspending the wire between the chimney and the trunk of a tall > tree and plan to put a galvanized screen-door spring in series with the > support at one end. The span will be about 120 feet. > > The WireMan offers several types of wire, such as "Fabricated 14 AWG solid > copper clad steel (30%). The best choice for long-lived, high performance > antennas in any environment. Breaking strength 550 lbs.", but this wire is > not enameled. (13ó/ft) > > Another choice from the WireMan is "'Silky' 12 AWG, 19 strand, tinned, 40% > copper-clad steel. Smooth as silk, tight lay, engineered antenna wire as > close to solid performance as possible, but flexible and easy to use. Our > heaviest - overkill for most work. Break strength 474 lbs." This wire is > stranded and tinned. (22ó/ft) > > Finally, the WireMan offers "Toughcoat 'Silky' 13 AWG, 19 strand 40% > copper-clad steel (OD 0.0795") with tough, high density, low-gloss > polyethylene (Nominal OD, 0.120" including 0.020" jacket. Designed for > through-the-trees, sea coast, acid rain or other inclement atmospheric > conditions. Our most rugged, longest-lived, stranded antenna wire for any > purpose. Jacket has minimal effect on performance - less than that of a > year's accumulation of oxidation product on bare wire, with less noise." > (21ó/ft) > > Any advice, recommendations, or links to wire sources will be greatly > appreciated. > > John, N9JG > > > Article: 228810 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Al Klein Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Message-ID: References: <%RJGg.27319$uV.13889@trnddc08> <1o2Hg.19713$Te.3938@trnddc07> <4g7re29ghimo4ochmlh7v6mhv3qq1gsmej@4ax.com> Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 21:14:19 -0400 On Thu, 24 Aug 2006 22:06:47 GMT, Cecil Moore wrote: >Al Klein wrote: >> Cecil Moore wrote: >>> I can certainly write down Spanish spoken at my CW >>> speed of 13 wpm >> >> Really? You listen to people speaking at 13 wpm? What are they on? >> It sounds like good stuff. > >Your objection was that I cannot write Spanish at 100 wpm. >I admit that but I know how to say "despacio" until they >slow down so I can write it down. As I said in another post, try that in Turkish. Or Latvian. Or any other language you don't know a single word of. But in CW, it doesn't matter - you write the letters as they come, whether you know what they mean or not. In the Navy, we had to read what we had copied to know what it said - the CW came in your ear and went out your fingers, you didn't pay attention to it. English? Who knew, until you read it? Article: 228811 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "an old friend" Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Date: 24 Aug 2006 18:15:52 -0700 Message-ID: <1156468552.726523.209080@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> References: Al Klein wrote: > On Thu, 24 Aug 2006 22:06:47 GMT, Cecil Moore > wrote: > > >Al Klein wrote: > >> Cecil Moore wrote: > >>> I can certainly write down Spanish spoken at my CW > >>> speed of 13 wpm > >> > >> Really? You listen to people speaking at 13 wpm? What are they on? > >> It sounds like good stuff. > > > >Your objection was that I cannot write Spanish at 100 wpm. > >I admit that but I know how to say "despacio" until they > >slow down so I can write it down. > > As I said in another post, try that in Turkish. Or Latvian. Or any > other language you don't know a single word of. > > But in CW, it doesn't matter - you write the letters as they come, > whether you know what they mean or not. In the Navy, we had to read > what we had copied to know what it said - the CW came in your ear and > went out your fingers, you didn't pay attention to it. English? Who > knew, until you read it? if you get a message in turkish in most of the USA you still have a useless message since where are yo going to find some that read the lang Article: 228812 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: hot-ham-and-cheese@hotmail.com Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Date: 24 Aug 2006 18:30:20 -0700 Message-ID: <1156469420.301419.134990@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> References: <1153664765.447946.4510@s13g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> LenAnderson@ieee.org wrote: > From: hot-ham-and-che...@hotmail.com on Wed, Aug 23 2006 7:46 pm > > > >LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote: > >> From: hot-ham-and-che...@hotmail.com on Tues, Aug 22 2006 7:14 pm > >> >LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote: > >> >> From: M...@kb9rqz.com on Mon, Aug 21 2006 6:30 pm > >> >> > wrote: > >> >> >>From: an old friend on Mon, Aug 21 2006 3:16 pm > >> >> >>>LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote: > >> >> >>>> From: hot-ham-and-che...@hotmail.com on Sun, Aug 20 2006 2:57 pm > > > >> >> Robesin is merely a product of the "incentive" licensing > >> >> system where all those who hunger for being a "somebody" > >> >> can get a Title - Rank - Privilege through a singular skill. > > > >> >If it doesn't have rank or a uniform, Robesin isn't interested. > > > >> That certainly seems the case. The "uniform" is his > >> emperor's new clothes... > > > >Lessee. He's got a Marine uniform (he says). A Tennessee State Guard > >uniform (whatever that is), an ill-fitting Air Force CAP flight suit > >uniform, and a male nurses uniform. And he has lots of military medals > >that he never earned (according to him). > > > >You know, whenever I saw folks in the CAP uniform at any Air Force > >Base, including Maxwell, they work the 4b or Class A. Never ever saw a > >CAP in a flight suit before robesin's well advertised home page. > > In all my visits to USAF bases I've never seen any CAP > personnel there, let alone some in a poopy suit. I've seen > several civilians on USAF bases, employed by the USAF, wearing > flight suits and clearly identified as to being civilian. I knew a SSgt that was also a Major. When he had on his Major Uniform, he strutted around escorting the JrCAPs to the chow hall to show them how it's really done. > >> >> I didn't make that system, neither did you, neither did > >> >> anyone in these four forums. The FCC took a big chunk out > >> >> of it (license classes and morsemanship skill) with the > >> >> Restructuring of 2000 and that pissed off the Title-Rank- > >> >> Status seekers. Devout morsemen are angry and venting steam > >> >> because their self-esteem has fallen. > > > >> >Only in their minds. They are the very same good or bad hams that they > >> >were with all the layers of hamdom. > > > >> All of those "layers" hams are examples to the general public, > >> good or bad or indifferent. So? > > > >> "Self-esteem" is a nice-nice word for EGO tied in with self- > >> perception. Trying to represent themselves as "expert" radio > >> persons in this new millennium is a rather stupid idea of those > >> devout morsepersons when they want to force the FCC to keep the > >> code test. > > > >Some do. Some don't. robesin does. > > He's a bad example for the morsemen. But he's very visible, with or without that new suit of clothes. Either way, it's bad for the morsemen. > >> Those who LIKE morse code should, and can, go on using it. > > > >Roger. > > Roger that. > > > >> That > >> is in no sense any validity for making it an amateur radio test > >> requirement for a license. > > > >No valid reason to maintain it as a barrier to the ARS. > > Oh, oh...in the PC (Political Correctness) of morsedom, > the code test cannot possibly ever be a "barrier." > > ALL "good hams" should WORK for their AMATEUR licenses! > > Those that won't are worse than river-bottom slime...:-) Like kepone at the bottom of the James. > Trying to speak logically, the FCC grants amateur licenses > in the USA and even they proposed (via an NPRM) to eliminate > the amateur radio morse code test for a license. FCC is on > record of a couple decades ago that this singular manual > skill test does not tell them if a license applicant is > worthy of a federal license. So what's the hold up? > >> >> Simply amazing. EIGHTEEN years alleged on active duty and > >> >> he can't supply a single photo or document to support his > >> >> claim? In November of this year I can truthfully say I've > >> >> been in the southern California aerospace business 50 years. > >> >> I have all sorts of documentation and photos on that which > >> >> I may fully digitize some day (some are already digitized). > >> >> Some time ago I posted my resume in here...which only made > >> >> Robesin ballistic then since he has NO comparable > >> >> experience in industry and cannot prove any radio experience > >> >> other than amateur and alleged "chief operator" status at > >> >> some small MARS station long ago. [that was before his > >> >> less-than-a-half-year as a purchasing agent at a small > >> >> set top box maker] > > > >> >Yet as "chief operator" or ANCOIC of NMC MARS on Okinawa, he remains > >> >woefully ignorant of MARS. I just don't get it. > > > >> It's easy to "get." He wasn't what he says he was. He hasn't > >> supplied a single bit of evidence to prove his claims. > > > >Now it all makes sense. > > It was all one great big super-brag. He never thought that a mere Army or Air Force NCO would know anything about MARS. Very, very unfortunate for him. > >> Robesin used the wrong word/acronym for a RESUME' presented > >> as part of an interview for a job. > > > >Thought he had a "killer" job as a male nurse? > > God forbid! Yes. > >> >Robesin an academic? Not in this lifetime. > > > >> >It's just his inappropriate use of what to him are important sounding > >> >words and acronyms. > > > >> Some of those he makes up as he goes along. > > > >Probably how his career in the Marines was invented. > > Well, he might have been in the reserves? Was that you or Frank that nailed that one? > >> >The rec.radio newsgroups have showcased Robesin. He HAS earned his > >> >reputation. He's worked very hard for it. > > > >> He's hardly worked in radio. > > > >Oh, I don't know. After a hard day behind the microphone, he's got > >that 1,000 yard stare. > > That's also a symptom of anoxia...lack of oxygen used up in > his bragging of what he did that never was... :-) There is supposed to be a form of self-afflicted asphyxia but to talk of it wouldn't be polite. > Tsk, all that work he does in trying to bluff us. All he had to > do was present SOME sort of document proof or even a personal > snapshot taken while in that "hostile-action-filled" 18 year > "career" in the USMC. He hasn't done so after many years. Seven hostile actions, I'm told. I can't imagine being short-sheeted 7 times by members of my flight. > If he can't present a single item of 18 years of his life, it > is hard for the rest of us to believe anything he said. > > LenAnderson@ieee.org Yep. Article: 228813 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "an old friend" Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Date: 24 Aug 2006 18:37:24 -0700 Message-ID: <1156469844.402083.323040@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> References: <1154574315.819259.204140@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> hot-ham-and-cheese@hotmail.com wrote: > LenAnderson@ieee.org wrote: > > From: hot-ham-and-che...@hotmail.com on Wed, Aug 23 2006 7:46 pm > > Trying to speak logically, the FCC grants amateur licenses > > in the USA and even they proposed (via an NPRM) to eliminate > > the amateur radio morse code test for a license. FCC is on > > record of a couple decades ago that this singular manual > > skill test does not tell them if a license applicant is > > worthy of a federal license. > > So what's the hold up? >most likely the fact that some at the FCC wouldlike to plase the ARRL as long as it costs them nothing ut the cpsts are starting to build since NVEC realy needs to know soon what the general license involves so they can write the new pool Article: 228814 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: hot-ham-and-cheese@hotmail.com Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Date: 24 Aug 2006 18:39:55 -0700 Message-ID: <1156469995.033080.20480@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> References: <1153664765.447946.4510@s13g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> RLW wrote: > wrote in message > news:1156455284.028084.184240@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > From: hot-ham-and-che...@hotmail.com on Wed, Aug 23 2006 7:46 pm > > > >LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote: > >> From: hot-ham-and-che...@hotmail.com on Tues, Aug 22 2006 7:14 pm > >> >LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote: > >> >> From: M...@kb9rqz.com on Mon, Aug 21 2006 6:30 pm > >> >> > wrote: > >> >> >>From: an old friend on Mon, Aug 21 2006 3:16 pm > >> >> >>>LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote: > >> >> >>>> From: hot-ham-and-che...@hotmail.com on Sun, Aug 20 2006 2:57 pm > > > >> >> Robesin is merely a product of the "incentive" licensing > >> >> system where all those who hunger for being a "somebody" > >> >> can get a Title - Rank - Privilege through a singular skill. > > > >> >If it doesn't have rank or a uniform, Robesin isn't interested. > > > >> That certainly seems the case. The "uniform" is his > >> emperor's new clothes... > > > >Lessee. He's got a Marine uniform (he says). A Tennessee State Guard > >uniform (whatever that is), an ill-fitting Air Force CAP flight suit > >uniform, and a male nurses uniform. And he has lots of military medals > >that he never earned (according to him). > > > >You know, whenever I saw folks in the CAP uniform at any Air Force > >Base, including Maxwell, they work the 4b or Class A. Never ever saw a > >CAP in a flight suit before robesin's well advertised home page. > > In all my visits to USAF bases I've never seen any CAP > personnel there, let alone some in a poopy suit. I've seen > several civilians on USAF bases, employed by the USAF, wearing > flight suits and clearly identified as to being civilian. Saturdays. They bring the kids in for a tour and a meal at the chow hall. > >Oh, I don't know. After a hard day behind the microphone, he's got > >that 1,000 yard stare. > > That's also a symptom of anoxia...lack of oxygen used up in > his bragging of what he did that never was... :-) > > Tsk, all that work he does in trying to bluff us. All he had to > do was present SOME sort of document proof or even a personal > snapshot taken while in that "hostile-action-filled" 18 year > "career" in the USMC. He hasn't done so after many years. > > If he can't present a single item of 18 years of his life, it > is hard for the rest of us to believe anything he said. > > LenAnderson@ieee.org > > Well, doggone it, Lennie. Next thing ya know he'll be posting over the > callsign of another Amateur. > > Nope...ya just cain't believe guys like that, can you Len? I don't believe his bs. Article: 228815 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Gene Fuller Subject: Re: Mismatched Zo Connectors References: <2eSdnYZzr7pWyXbZRVnytA@bt.com> Message-ID: Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2006 01:40:38 GMT Cecil Moore wrote: [snip] > > Steady-state had a beginning and it will have an end. It > cannot be analyzed without knowing what happened in the > beginning and what will happen in the end. Steady-state > is the rug under which you and others try to sweep the > laws of physics including the conservation of energy > principle. I'm doing what I can to call your bluff. Cecil, Countless mathematicians and scientists would disagree with your characterization of steady state. Perhaps even a few engineers as well. 8-) This sort of stuff is thoroughly covered in differential equations courses and in any physics or engineering course that look at electrical or mechanical response to impulses and other stimuli. Surely they dealt with such matters at TAMU. If you refuse to accept standard technical conventions, then there is little hope of getting others to agree with you. 73, Gene W4SZ Article: 228816 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Jim Kelley Subject: Re: Mismatched Zo Connectors Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 18:22:52 -0700 Message-ID: References: <2eSdnYZzr7pWyXbZRVnytA@bt.com> Cecil Moore wrote: > Is energy-passing-a-point "power" as defined by the IEEE > Dictionary? Does an EM wave possesses ExH amount of power > as the technical references assert? Nothing the IEEE says counters the fact that the mathematical product of two physical quantities does not and can not physically propagate through a transmission line. It can also not reflect, refract, diffract, superpose, or interfere constructively or destructively. Waves propagate and energy moves. Power is simply the rate at which energy is transferred or changes form. It is the rate at which 'electric smoke' is liberated from one's aerial so to speak. > Steady-state had a beginning and it will have an end. It > cannot be analyzed without knowing what happened in the > beginning and what will happen in the end. But there's no dispute about what happens in the beginning or at the end. It's entirely about what you claim is happening in the steady state. > Steady-state > is the rug under which you and others try to sweep the > laws of physics including the conservation of energy > principle. The steady-state condition isn't something which contradicts nature - it IS nature. Clearly, the only one needing to sweep the laws of physics under the rug around here is you, Cecil. 73, ac6xg Article: 228817 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person References: <%RJGg.27319$uV.13889@trnddc08> <1o2Hg.19713$Te.3938@trnddc07> <4g7re29ghimo4ochmlh7v6mhv3qq1gsmej@4ax.com> Message-ID: <20tHg.17273$gY6.5766@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com> Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2006 02:12:14 GMT Al Klein wrote: > As I said in another post, try that in Turkish. Or Latvian. Or any > other language you don't know a single word of. Sorry, you first challenged me to do that in Spanish. I have proved beyond any doubt that I can do that. Your need to suddenly change languages on me speaks volumes. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 228818 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: Mismatched Zo Connectors References: <2eSdnYZzr7pWyXbZRVnytA@bt.com> Message-ID: Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2006 02:36:12 GMT Jim Kelley wrote: > Nothing the IEEE says counters the fact that the mathematical product of > two physical quantities does not and can not physically propagate > through a transmission line. Once again you make a statement with which no one has disagreed. Has anybody in the world said otherwise? I certainly have not, so your statement appears to be just another one of your straw men. Energy flowing past a point is defined as *power* at that fixed point even if it is reflected energy! The fact that you are forced to misrepresent what I have said speaks volumes. > But there's no dispute about what happens in the beginning or at the > end. It's entirely about what you claim is happening in the steady state. Exactly what is my claim about what is happening in the steady- state? In case you misunderstood, here it is again. What I have said is happening during steady-state is that the source has supplied exactly the amount of energy contained in the measured forward wave and the measured reflected wave. That energy has been delivered to the system by the source but has not yet reached the load. Occam's razor says that exact amount of energy is most likely contained in the forward and reflected waves, not magically somewhere else, e.g. sloshing around between standing wave nodes as W7EL asserts. I say the ExH watts exist in the forward wave and the reflected wave just as the textbooks assert. You seem to be saying that it isn't there. If it isn't there, where did it go? Conservation of energy strikes again. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 228819 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: Mismatched Zo Connectors References: <2eSdnYZzr7pWyXbZRVnytA@bt.com> Message-ID: <_qtHg.17293$gY6.8636@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com> Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2006 02:40:58 GMT Gene Fuller wrote: > If you refuse to accept standard technical conventions, then there is > little hope of getting others to agree with you. Gene, have you stopped beating your wife? Your usual ad hominem attack completely devoid of any technical content is duly noted. In a one second long lossless transmission line where the forward power is 200W and the reflected power is 100W, it can be proved that the source has supplied 300 joules that have not been accepted by the load. If those joules are not contained in the forward and reflected waves, where are they? -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 228820 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Jim Higgins Subject: Re: Working in strong 60Hz magnetic fields Message-ID: References: <1156357951.687505.203010@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2006 02:56:32 GMT On 23 Aug 2006 11:32:31 -0700, kennnick@gmail.com wrote: >I'm a long-time reader of this NG and so realize that there is a lot >of knowledge of EM principles on tap here. I'm pondering a non-ham >issue from my workplace (a power plant) and could use a little >education or peer checking of my ideas. I think it's good that you're pondering, but I think any consideration of changes in the established work methods should be avoided unless they are discussed with and approved by personnel charged with workplace safety. The power industry wasn't born yesterday and if people aren't dying or being injured using current practices I think it ill advised to make changes on your own based on your own conjecture and most especially based on conjecture from others without experience in the same environment. Working around large lead acid batteries for 30 years - and I'm talking stuff that will easily deliver 10,000 DC amperes to a short, I've seen people who thought they knew better than the those who established procedures for them to follow very severely injured. Not the same thing at all as 28,000 AC amperes, but if you have to ask first then you shouldn't be making changes. Just my opinion. No offense intended. Article: 228821 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Jim Higgins Subject: Re: Can't find enameled copperweld antenna wire Message-ID: References: Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2006 02:31:35 GMT On Thu, 24 Aug 2006 00:15:50 GMT, "John, N9JG" wrote: >The last time I installed a wire antenna for 80 meters was in the mid 70s. >At that time the wire of choice was #14 (or perhaps #12) solid enameled >copperweld (now called copper clad) wire. Yes, the wire was kinky, fussy to >install, but it had high mechanical strength, excellent electrical >properties, and it lasted for many years. > >I have moved to eastern Tennessee, and because of circumstances, I want to >revert back to a wire antenna, at least for the time being. Much to my >surprise I can not seem to locate a source of solid enameled copper clad >wire. Is there any reason why this wire is no longer available? Copper clad is easy to find. ENAMELED copper clad is something I've not seen or even heard of until now, after 30 years of hamming. If it really does exist I wouldn't waste my time trying to locate it. >I will be suspending the wire between the chimney and the trunk of a tall >tree and plan to put a galvanized screen-door spring in series with the >support at one end. The span will be about 120 feet. > >The WireMan offers several types of wire, such as "Fabricated 14 AWG solid >copper clad steel (30%). The best choice for long-lived, high performance >antennas in any environment. Breaking strength 550 lbs.", but this wire is >not enameled. (13ó/ft) > >Another choice from the WireMan is "'Silky' 12 AWG, 19 strand, tinned, 40% >copper-clad steel. Smooth as silk, tight lay, engineered antenna wire as >close to solid performance as possible, but flexible and easy to use. Our >heaviest - overkill for most work. Break strength 474 lbs." This wire is >stranded and tinned. (22ó/ft) > >Finally, the WireMan offers "Toughcoat 'Silky' 13 AWG, 19 strand 40% >copper-clad steel (OD 0.0795") with tough, high density, low-gloss >polyethylene (Nominal OD, 0.120" including 0.020" jacket. Designed for >through-the-trees, sea coast, acid rain or other inclement atmospheric >conditions. Our most rugged, longest-lived, stranded antenna wire for any >purpose. Jacket has minimal effect on performance - less than that of a >year's accumulation of oxidation product on bare wire, with less noise." >(21ó/ft) Any idea what the effect of a year's worth of oxidation product really is? I bet the Wireman has no idea either. >Any advice, recommendations, or links to wire sources will be greatly >appreciated. Use the uninsulated solid copper weld. Pay a little attention and take a litle care when unrolling and handling - I believe ARRL handbook or Antenna Book has hints - and kinks won't be an issue. Article: 228822 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: Mismatched Zo Connectors References: <2eSdnYZzr7pWyXbZRVnytA@bt.com> Message-ID: Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2006 03:00:58 GMT Gene Fuller wrote: > If you refuse to accept standard technical conventions, then there is > little hope of getting others to agree with you. I am advocating the wave reflection model as explained in: Johnson's, "Transmission Lines and Networks", 1st Edition Ramo/Whinnery's, "Fields and Waves in Modern Radio", 2nd Edition Hecht's, "Optics", 4th Edition Maxwell's, "Reflections" and "Reflections II" "The ARRL Antenna Book", 15th Edition I am also advocating the conservation of energy principle. I hope that one doesn't need references. Exactly what is it about the wave reflection model and the conservation of energy principle with which you disagree? -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 228823 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "LenAnderson@ieee.org" Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Date: 24 Aug 2006 20:56:36 -0700 Message-ID: <1156478196.340076.306810@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> References: <1154574315.819259.204140@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> rom: hot-ham-and-che...@hotmail.com on Thurs, Aug 24 2006 6:39 pm > wrote in message > news:1156455284.028084.184240@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... >> From: hot-ham-and-che...@hotmail.com on Wed, Aug 23 2006 7:46 pm >> >LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote: >> >> From: hot-ham-and-che...@hotmail.com on Tues, Aug 22 2006 7:14 pm >> >> >LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote: >> >> >> From: M...@kb9rqz.com on Mon, Aug 21 2006 6:30 pm >> >> >> > wrote: >> >> >> >>From: an old friend on Mon, Aug 21 2006 3:16 pm >> >> >> >>>LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote: >> >> >> >>>> From: hot-ham-and-che...@hotmail.com on Sun, Aug 20 2006 2:57 pm >> In all my visits to USAF bases I've never seen any CAP >> personnel there, let alone some in a poopy suit. I've seen >> several civilians on USAF bases, employed by the USAF, wearing >> flight suits and clearly identified as to being civilian. > >Saturdays. They bring the kids in for a tour and a meal at the chow >hall. OK, that explains it. :-) If I was on-site for some company business, I wouldn't be there on weekends. :-) >> >Oh, I don't know. After a hard day behind the microphone, he's got >> >that 1,000 yard stare. > >> That's also a symptom of anoxia...lack of oxygen used up in >> his bragging of what he did that never was... :-) > >> Tsk, all that work he does in trying to bluff us. All he had to >> do was present SOME sort of document proof or even a personal >> snapshot taken while in that "hostile-action-filled" 18 year >> "career" in the USMC. He hasn't done so after many years. > >> If he can't present a single item of 18 years of his life, it >> is hard for the rest of us to believe anything he said. > >I don't believe his bs. Any rational, sane person can't believe his claims. Hopefully, that is most of us reading some of the garbage going on in here now. I found it uproarious that Robeson tried to cover up his NOT naming a single military radio that was operational during his alleged 18-year "USMC career," claiming "all the information is classified!" :-) Absolute bullshit. The names, ID, functions have all been in public view...the 'Public' being the makers or those wanting to get in on an RFQ (Request for Quote) being advertised by the DoD. Even though I never operated (as a civilian) anything more than an old ARC-27 or PRC-119 SINCGARS, all the military radios operational between the times of those two are easily recognizeable to me (well, the VRCs have lots of differences between families but the same case and general form). The operating manuals are NOT classified, just in limited distribution. LOGSA the Logistics Supply Agency is busy making CDs of all the printed manuals for darn near ALL military equipment; it's a piece of cake to pop one of those CDs in an ever-present military PC and read them. LOGSA has a website and even civilians can download some of the older equipment's manuals. LOGSA has some internal priority on what can be downloaded (depending on the cookie generated by a non-military PC). That was a tip I got from rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors and rec.radio.amateur.homebrew. The nomenclatures and quick- look facts are on a couple websites in a long, long, long list. Even BAMA has some manuals for free download plus big link lists for other sites that have them. Robesin DID list some (questionable) nomenclatures for MARS equipment once but NOTHING else. That kind of info can be had from other hams' personal websites. MARS doesn't normally talk about regular military tactical radio gear. MARS doesn't normally use such. :-) LenAnderson@ieee.org Article: 228824 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" References: <2eSdnYZzr7pWyXbZRVnytA@bt.com> Subject: Re: Mismatched Zo Connectors Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2006 06:25:09 +0100 Message-ID: <4a6dnao4y86hF3PZnZ2dnUVZ8qadnZ2d@bt.com> John, I would like to reply to your question (if that's what it is) but I am unable to understand what you are saying. So I leave it to Cecil and Co. to add further to the complications and confusion. It's really all very simple. ---- Reg. Article: 228825 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: wood@itd.nrl.navy.mil (J. B. Wood) Subject: Re: Mismatched Zo Connectors Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2006 07:49:46 -0400 Message-ID: References: <2eSdnYZzr7pWyXbZRVnytA@bt.com> <4a6dnao4y86hF3PZnZ2dnUVZ8qadnZ2d@bt.com> In article <4a6dnao4y86hF3PZnZ2dnUVZ8qadnZ2d@bt.com>, "Reg Edwards" wrote: > John, > > I would like to reply to your question (if that's what it is) but I am > unable to understand what you are saying. > > So I leave it to Cecil and Co. to add further to the complications and > confusion. > > It's really all very simple. > ---- > Reg. Hello, Reg. What I didn't understand was your statement "Reflections are functions of TIME, not frequency." That statement immediately invited conflict with the info contained in my electromagnetics and transmission line theory texts lining my office bookshelf. I attempted to provide some clarification and hopefully not insult anyone's intelligence. Sincerely, John Wood (Code 5550) e-mail: wood@itd.nrl.navy.mil Naval Research Laboratory 4555 Overlook Avenue, SW Washington, DC 20375-5337 Article: 228826 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: peewee_lloyd_davies@yahoo.com Subject: Re: Poor Markie! - Markie, Just kill yourself. Date: 25 Aug 2006 05:02:43 -0700 Message-ID: <1156507363.140996.70620@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> References: <1155904856.192887.112830@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> MarkMron@kb9rqz.com wrote: > On 24 Aug 2006 05:38:56 -0700, "Not Cocksucker Lloyd" > wrote: > > > > >an Old fraud wrote: > >> Not Cocksucker Lloyd wrote: > >> > MarkMoron@kb9rqz.com wrote: > >> > > On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 23:46:53 GMT, Slow Code wrote: > >> > > > >> > >> > > why do you want to kil the ARS? > >> > > >> > Why do you want to "kill" the English language? > >> based on you own adknowledgement that I am an expert on lying I say you > >> are lying > > > >You proved me correct again in your "acknowledgement." > the subject is your lying The subject is and was the fact you have substandard English skills. > > you claim I am a expert on lying so I say you are lying I am lying? But if everything I say is a lie then I am telling the truth........... Article: 228827 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: kb9rqz_child_molester@yahoo.com Subject: Re: PING: Slow Code Date: 25 Aug 2006 05:22:46 -0700 Message-ID: <1156508566.946201.190240@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> References: <1156186858.857772.22110@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> MarkMoron@kb9rqz.com wrote: > On 24 Aug 2006 05:28:26 -0700, "Not Cocksucker Lloyd" > wrote: > > > > >an old friendless cocksucker wrote: > >> Not Cocksucker Lloyd wrote: > >> > MarkMoron@kb9rqz.com wrote: > >> > > why do you want to kil the ARS? > >> > > >> > Why do you "kill" the English language ? > >> by the authority YOU gave me I can state the expert opiion you just lied > > > >By your own example, you proved me right, imbecile. And that's the > >general "opinion" on you. > you are Lying expert opinion adknowledged by yourself You continue to prove you lack English skills. Article: 228828 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Al Klein Subject: Re: If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Message-ID: References: <1o2Hg.19713$Te.3938@trnddc07> <4g7re29ghimo4ochmlh7v6mhv3qq1gsmej@4ax.com> <20tHg.17273$gY6.5766@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com> Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2006 08:48:07 -0400 On Fri, 25 Aug 2006 02:12:14 GMT, Cecil Moore wrote: >Al Klein wrote: >> As I said in another post, try that in Turkish. Or Latvian. Or any >> other language you don't know a single word of. >Sorry, you first challenged me to do that in Spanish. David's choice was Spanish. My choice was a language one couldn't understand. Pay attention. >I have proved beyond any doubt that I can do that. >Your need to suddenly change languages on me speaks >volumes. About your lack of content, yes. Article: 228829 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "n3ox.dan@gmail.com" Subject: Re: Mismatched Zo Connectors Date: 25 Aug 2006 06:31:28 -0700 Message-ID: <1156512688.306777.324280@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> References: Cecil, I think you are conflating models with nature, and trying to champion one correct model over another correct model! It's confusing to onlookers and boring. There is NO inconsistency between saying "there's only one electromagnetic field in a transmission line" and "a circulator seperates the forward wave from the reflected wave" if you've suitably defined what all those terms mean and you do the correct math. The electromagnetic field as a function of space and time in the coaxial transmission line is a three-dimensional time dependent field. There's a description wherein one single vector valued function E(r,phi,z, t) describes the electric field and another describes the magnetic field, and of course, you can get one from the other, so in some sense, all you need to describe what's going on is E(r,phi,z,t). Now, in the coaxial TEM mode the radial and azimuthal dependence of the fields becomes trivial, and you're just left with some function E'(z,t) to describe the electric field, and one B'(z,t) for the magnetic field (once again, you can of course, get one from the other) It turns out that mathematically you can represent this function as a superposition of other functions, forward and reverse traveling waves. It's just a DIFFERENT WAY OF WRITING IT DOWN. A circulator *doesn't know math*. Its operation may have a simple description in the language of forward and reverse waves, but it does what it does no matter what model you use to describe it. If you get different answers using a forward and reflected wave description than some other description, then one or both of your descriptions are wrong. The conversion of one mathematical description of the electromagnetic field into a series of statements in English and the argument based on those words never gets you anywhere on this topic. Why not pick up a copy of Jackson's Electrodynamics and write down what you're trying to say mathematically. If you're right, everyone will have to be convinced. 73, Dan Article: 228830 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: mcalhoun@ksu.edu Subject: Re: Solder to Aluminum? Date: 25 Aug 2006 08:23:51 -0500 Message-ID: References: <4cbnr3-gol.ln1@mail.specsol.com> >>My FM antenna had the wire attachment posts ripped out by the wind. >>I'm wondering if I can solder to the aluminum? Then I'd epoxy over it. >>I'd just try it, but I'm afraid it might pop in my face or something. >Ordinary solder, no, but there are solders specifically made for aluminum. I suspect safety guru's would say one should always wear (safety) glasses when soldering! It takes practice, but if you'll "puddle" some silver polish on a spot you want to solder, rub it a bit to clean the oxide off the aluminum, and then solder right through the puddle with a hot iron (the stuff will bubble and sizzle, so do wear glasses!), one CAN solder to aluminum with standard solder and without buying some expensive stuff for a onesies/twosies job. I don't remember how strong the solder joint was nor did I test how long such a joint might last, but it DID solder and stick! --Myron A. Calhoun. -- Five boxes preserve our freedoms: soap, ballot, witness, jury, and cartridge PhD (retired) W0PBV Barbershop Tenor CDL(PTXS) (785) 539-4448 NRA Life Member and Rifle, Pistol, & Home Firearm Safety Certified Instructor Certified Instructor for the Kansas Concealed-Carry Handgun license Article: 228831 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" References: <2eSdnYZzr7pWyXbZRVnytA@bt.com> <4a6dnao4y86hF3PZnZ2dnUVZ8qadnZ2d@bt.com> Subject: Re: Mismatched Zo Connectors Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2006 14:36:24 +0100 Message-ID: > Hello, Reg. What I didn't understand was your statement "Reflections are > functions of TIME, not frequency." That statement immediately invited > conflict with the info contained in my electromagnetics and transmission > line theory texts lining my office bookshelf. I attempted to provide some > clarification and hopefully not insult anyone's intelligence. Sincerely, > > John Wood (Code 5550) e-mail: wood@itd.nrl.navy.mil > Naval Research Laboratory > 4555 Overlook Avenue, SW > Washington, DC 20375-5337 =================================== Hi John, Your comments were perfectly inoffensive to anyone. Sorry if I gave you the impression that I thought so. I don't agree that my statement about Time and Reflections is in conflict with transmission line theory as described in the books (bibles) lining your office shelves. We diverge because my education was probably altogether different to yours and so we don't speak the same language. Time is represented in Phase Shift. Reflections are echos. Line Length = Distance. Propagation Velocity = Distance vs Time. ---- Reg. Article: 228832 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: Mismatched Zo Connectors References: <2eSdnYZzr7pWyXbZRVnytA@bt.com> <4a6dnao4y86hF3PZnZ2dnUVZ8qadnZ2d@bt.com> <1156512688.306777.324280@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> Message-ID: Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2006 14:31:11 GMT n3ox.dan@gmail.com wrote: > I think you are conflating models with nature, and trying to champion > one correct model over another correct model! Nope, the mainstream wave reflection model is being attacked as incorrect. I'm trying to correct some misconceptions concerning violations of the conservation of energy principle by simplified model shortcuts. Modern RF EM textbooks don't deal with conservation of energy. There's no equations to quote because the textbooks ignore the problem. For instance, it can be shown that a one-second long lossless transmission line with a measured forward power of 200 watts and a measured reflected power of 100 watts does indeed in reality contain 300 joules of RF energy traveling at the speed of light. Is there really any more logical location for those 300 joules than in the forward and reflected waves which are necessary for standing waves to exist? Einstein said a math model of reality should be as simple as possible but not too simple. -- 73, Cecil, http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 228833 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" References: <2eSdnYZzr7pWyXbZRVnytA@bt.com> <4a6dnao4y86hF3PZnZ2dnUVZ8qadnZ2d@bt.com> Subject: Re: Mismatched Zo Connectors Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2006 15:37:54 +0100 Message-ID: The fundamental partial differential equations of transmission lines are - - dv/dz = R + L*di/dz - di/dz = G + C*dv/dz where volts v and current i are incremental functions of distance and time, and z is incremental distance along line. Everything else follows. Similar equations can be written in terms of frequency. It is often easier to think in terms of Time and Distance rather than Frequency and Impedance. ---- Reg. Article: 228834 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" References: <2eSdnYZzr7pWyXbZRVnytA@bt.com> <4a6dnao4y86hF3PZnZ2dnUVZ8qadnZ2d@bt.com> Subject: Re: Mismatched Zo Connectors Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2006 16:26:48 +0100 Message-ID: "Cecil Moore" wrote > If forward and reverse waves do not exist separately, > how is it possible for a circulator to separate them? ========================================= Cec, You forgot to allow TIME into the argument. The two waves do NOT, and cannot, exist seperately in time. The circulator merely divides the STEADY STATE, instantaneous, at the same time, power in the wave into two parts according to what the operator, or by design, has set it to do. When the generator is switched off both parts disappear simultaneously. I know this won't satisfy you. ---- Reg. Article: 228835 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: kennnick@gmail.com Subject: Re: Working in strong 60Hz magnetic fields Date: 25 Aug 2006 08:53:42 -0700 Message-ID: <1156521222.483712.35640@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com> References: <1156357951.687505.203010@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> Thanks Jim. You're correct in every respect of course, and the cautions you've given are essentially the same as what I had already established for myself. However, I think you'd be a little surprised (as I was) to find that there's a lack of specific guidance in the industry on these situations. At least based on my research to date. I've found lots of anecdotal tales of arcing and sparking in these situations, but thus far nothing involving personal injury or worse. Thus far, the worst consequence I've heard of has been a plant trip. Even that is a million dollar or so event though. I'm not asking anyone to provide input on safety procedures; just trying to pick up some ideas on what theory predicts. Maybe I should pose a purely theoretical puzzler unrelated to safety, scaffolding, or power plants. There's a loop in a square configuration, 3 meters on a side, adjacent to a long conductor carrying 1400 amps AC at 60 Hz. The side nearest the conductor is 1 meter from it. The loop is made of aluminum tubing 75cm in diameter. What current is induced in the loop when it is closed? What voltage exists across the gap if a gap is cut into the loop? 73--Nick, WA5BDU BTW: 1,400 is 5% of 28,000 -> I've worked on some of those really big battery banks too. Jim Higgins wrote: > On 23 Aug 2006 11:32:31 -0700, kennnick@gmail.com wrote: > > >I'm a long-time reader of this NG and so realize that there is a lot > >of knowledge of EM principles on tap here. I'm pondering a non-ham > >issue from my workplace (a power plant) and could use a little > >education or peer checking of my ideas. > > > I think it's good that you're pondering, but I think any consideration > of changes in the established work methods should be avoided unless > they are discussed with and approved by personnel charged with > workplace safety. The power industry wasn't born yesterday and if > people aren't dying or being injured using current practices I think > it ill advised to make changes on your own based on your own > conjecture and most especially based on conjecture from others without > experience in the same environment. > > Working around large lead acid batteries for 30 years - and I'm > talking stuff that will easily deliver 10,000 DC amperes to a short, > I've seen people who thought they knew better than the those who > established procedures for them to follow very severely injured. > > Not the same thing at all as 28,000 AC amperes, but if you have to ask > first then you shouldn't be making changes. Just my opinion. No > offense intended. Article: 228836 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: Mismatched Zo Connectors References: <2eSdnYZzr7pWyXbZRVnytA@bt.com> <4a6dnao4y86hF3PZnZ2dnUVZ8qadnZ2d@bt.com> Message-ID: Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2006 15:53:25 GMT Reg Edwards wrote: > "Cecil Moore" wrote >> If forward and reverse waves do not exist separately, >> how is it possible for a circulator to separate them? > > You forgot to allow TIME into the argument. > The two waves do NOT, and cannot, exist seperately in time. I'm not sure what your point is. If a laser beam is aimed at a mirror, do the forward wave and reflected wave exist separately in time? If we send a forward wave down a one-second lossless feedline for one second and turn it off, nothing happens for one second. Then we receive a reflected wave for one second. Do those waves not exist separately in time? > The circulator merely divides the STEADY STATE, instantaneous, at the > same time, power in the wave into two parts according to what the > operator, or by design, has set it to do. The point is that one of those parts has made a round trip to the load and back as can be proved by observing ghosting in TV signals. > When the generator is switched off both parts disappear > simultaneously. Not entirely true. The reflected wave would continue to exist until the energy in the transmission line is dissipated. -- 73, Cecil, http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 228837 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Gene Fuller Subject: Re: Mismatched Zo Connectors References: <2eSdnYZzr7pWyXbZRVnytA@bt.com> <_qtHg.17293$gY6.8636@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com> Message-ID: Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2006 15:55:30 GMT Cecil Moore wrote: > Gene Fuller wrote: >> If you refuse to accept standard technical conventions, then there is >> little hope of getting others to agree with you. > > Gene, have you stopped beating your wife? Your usual ad > hominem attack completely devoid of any technical content > is duly noted. > > In a one second long lossless transmission line where the > forward power is 200W and the reflected power is 100W, it > can be proved that the source has supplied 300 joules that > have not been accepted by the load. If those joules are not > contained in the forward and reflected waves, where are they? Cecil, I recall that you selectively quote only those parts of messages to which you disagree. I guess you accepted the remainder of my comments. You quite clearly said that "steady state" is not really steady. I challenged that in a straight-forward manner. So what is "ad hominem" about my message? This is a typical trick, Cecil, when you have been caught dealing nonsense. You ignore the issue and attempt diversion. It won't work here. The meaning of steady state is not controversial. 73, Gene W4SZ Article: 228838 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "an old friend" Subject: Re: PING: Slow Code Date: 25 Aug 2006 09:00:53 -0700 Message-ID: <1156521653.389923.238120@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> References: <1156186858.857772.22110@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> kb9rqz_child_molester@yahoo.com wrote: cease and desist Article: 228839 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Gene Fuller Subject: Re: Mismatched Zo Connectors References: <2eSdnYZzr7pWyXbZRVnytA@bt.com> Message-ID: Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2006 16:01:58 GMT Cecil Moore wrote: > Gene Fuller wrote: >> If you refuse to accept standard technical conventions, then there is >> little hope of getting others to agree with you. > > I am advocating the wave reflection model as explained in: > > Johnson's, "Transmission Lines and Networks", 1st Edition > > Ramo/Whinnery's, "Fields and Waves in Modern Radio", 2nd Edition > > Hecht's, "Optics", 4th Edition > > Maxwell's, "Reflections" and "Reflections II" > > "The ARRL Antenna Book", 15th Edition > > I am also advocating the conservation of energy principle. > I hope that one doesn't need references. > > Exactly what is it about the wave reflection model and the > conservation of energy principle with which you disagree? Cecil, My only comment was in regard to the definition of steady state. I am not sure why you directed this list to me. I have three out of the five references you list, and I have multiple equivalents for the others. 73, Gene W4SZ