Results-everyday logging survey

[JPontek at aol.com]

In a message dated 95-12-07 02:25:18 EST, N3ADL at aol.com writes:

>I've been about as loyal as I can be but lets call a spade a spade
>We were promised DXBase for Windows was in the works at Dayton 2 years ago.
Hmm???? When I overheard Jack speak about a Windows version at Dayton, I
heard him say that it was in the works, no promise or date, though. 
>The program is good in present form but not supported well and a pain in the
>posterior to manipulate the databases.
I have had excellent support. Every problem solved.
> AND I STILL AWAIT AN UPDATED CTY FILE!! Getting real tired of "Unrecognized
>country"! 
I would say you have gotten lazy. I keep mine Prefix database updated with no
problem. IT IS NOT A *.CTY file. They have made the Prefix data base very
easy to update. It is very easy to add a new Prefix to the Prefix mapped data
base. Just as easy as it is to add a prefix to the *.cty files.
>Has anyone done a DXers/Contesters "dream" survey  for an everyday logger??
 Has
>anyone tried  the WJ20 logger?? Comments on that one would be appreciated.  
I can see the usefullness of a daily logging program for windows, but when
you're contesting, you should be contesting, right? The survey was directed
at everyday programs. Haven't tried Dave, WJ2O's program yet, maybe it's an
all-in-one program.
>                                                  73 de Doug // N3ADL

73, Seasons Greetings,  K8Joe"Palooka"
jpontek at aol.com


>From Bob Patten <z002816b at bcfreenet.seflin.lib.fl.us>  Fri Dec  8 13:04:04 1995
From: Bob Patten <z002816b at bcfreenet.seflin.lib.fl.us> (Bob Patten)
Date: Fri, 8 Dec 1995 08:04:04 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Ameritron AL-xxx Amplifier Problems
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9512080801.D8291-0100000 at bcfreenet.seflin.lib.fl.us>

On Thu, 7 Dec 1995, Albert Crespo wrote:

> 	Have used the Al 1500 with a TS850, FT990, Ft 1000D, FT 
> 1000MP-have never used the ALC circuit and don't see a reason to do so.

Al, my only radio is a TS-430S.  The ALC works well with it and the 
inability to monitor it on the AL-1500 is a minor annoyance.  Using ALC 
is important to me since it insures that I will remain within the legal 
limit.  Without it, the AL-1500 will make 2000+ watts.  With it, I simply 
tune for max output (set for 1400W) as I did with my old SB-220.

>From btippett at ctc.net (Bill Tippett)  Fri Dec  8 12:12:11 1995
From: btippett at ctc.net (Bill Tippett) (Bill Tippett)
Date: Fri, 08 Dec 1995 08:12:11 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: ARRL 160 Contest DX Window
Message-ID: <01HYK3BD0WVA8WWH9B at SUNBELT.NET>

WB1GQR wrote:

>The last time I checked Part 97, malicious interference is still not
>permitted.  Even when chasing DX.

In my opinion, operating in the window is just as malicious as the
police.  Rules are made to be obeyed, otherwise those who dis-
obey them are being malicious to those who do.  Why is it some
stations cannot get their frequency right in the window but still manage
to stay within amateur bands?  Why do the same chronic offenders
violate the rules every year?  I don't participate in the ARRL 160
because I don't like any competition where rules are not enforced.  I
would rather see ARRL eliminate the window and make it a 160
Sweepstakes (which is essentially what it has become) rather than
allowing the same stations, year after year, to violate the rules with
absolutely no consequences.  If ARRL seriously wants to make this
an international event, perhaps they should do something to try
to enforce the window, such as requiring entrants to specifically 
state that they did not violate the window rule when they submit their
entry.  Yes, we'll always have some liars and cheaters who violate power
limits and then casually perjure themselves stating that they "operated 
their stations within legal limits", but this is not such an obvious violation 
as the chronic alligators in the window, which all of us hear year after
year.  If ARRL wants a window, enforce it.  If it is not enforced, eliminate it.
Unenforced rules are worse than no rules.

                                                                73,  Bill  W0ZV
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Tippett, PO Box 37, New London, NC  28127-0037 USA
Phone/FAX:  +1 704-463-1445        E-mail:  btippett at ctc.net


>From Bob Patten <z002816b at bcfreenet.seflin.lib.fl.us>  Fri Dec  8 13:17:30 1995
From: Bob Patten <z002816b at bcfreenet.seflin.lib.fl.us> (Bob Patten)
Date: Fri, 8 Dec 1995 08:17:30 -0500 (EST)
Subject: AL-1500 ALC problem
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9512080805.E8291-0100000 at bcfreenet.seflin.lib.fl.us>

I asked if anyone had the same experience with ALC on the AL-1500 as I 
did and had any ideas on how to correct it - the problem being that, if 
the multimeter is switched to monitor ALC, the ALC line is loaded down 
and the characteristics are completely changed.

The curious response in every case (about 8-10 so far) was not to bother 
to use ALC.  Am I being too much of a perfectionist to want to correct 
this very minor problem.

Using ALC with this power house is important to me.  It allows me to tune 
the amp for maximum output without exceding the legal limit (set for 
1400W).  Without ALC, if I used this simple tuning method, my output 
could easily exceed 2000W!  I certainly don't need to monitor the ALC 
line on the amp, I can do that on the exciter.  But the meter position is 
there.  I paid megabucks for this thing, I would like it to be bug free.

I went to great pains on my TS-130V modifying the ALC circuit so that I 
could set the output at any level down to one watt and have it hold there 
as I switched from band to band.  ALC is very useful for holding your 
power to a desired level...

Still looking for help if anyone DOES use ALC on an AL-xxx and has had the 
same observations as me!


Bob Patten
bobpatt at bcfreenet.seflin.lib.fl.us



>From Jim Hollenback" <jholly at hposl62.cup.hp.com  Fri Dec  8 15:23:13 1995
From: Jim Hollenback" <jholly at hposl62.cup.hp.com (Jim Hollenback)
Date: Fri, 8 Dec 1995 07:23:13 -0800
Subject: TS-950S CW VOX problem?
References: <199512080150.UAA20818 at cais.cais.com>
Message-ID: <9512080723.ZM8236 at hpwsmjh1.cup.hp.com>

On Dec 7,  8:50pm, Tyler Stewart wrote:
> Everyone send K1EA mail requesting a CW PTT line in CT!!!  Then we wont have
to
> run VOX in CW anymore or lose any bit of a character.
>

On his last go-around on the LPT pinouts, this was in the "spec". Don't
know if it made it to 9.27.

73, Jim, WA6SDM
jholly at cup.hp.com