members needed for SPRINT TEAM

KU8E at KU8E at
Thu Feb 9 19:04:23 EST 1995

Hello All,

               I still have 2 slots open for the Mad River Radio Club
          Sprint Team for this weekend. email me at KU8E at
          if you are interested.

                                                Jeff  KU8E

>From aa6tt at (William H. Hein)  Fri Feb 10 02:19:35 1995
From: aa6tt at (William H. Hein) (William H. Hein)
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 1995 19:19:35 -0700
Subject: Top Band Internet Reflector
Message-ID: <199502100219.TAA01140 at>

Gonna take up some more CQ-Contest bandwidth.  Sorry Trey.

I have noticed several 160m Internet mailing list subscription requests
sent to the "topband at" posting address.  THIS WON'T WORK.
Please send subscription requests to "topband-request at" with
the message "subscribe topband".

If you sent a subscription request to "topband at", please try again.

Bill AA6TT

William H. Hein, PO Bx 579, Ignacio, Colorado 81137-0579 USA
fone 303/883-2415  fax 303/883-2408  Internet aa6tt at
AA6TT is in Tiffany, Colorado, grid square DM67fb
*** To subscribe to the 160m DX Internet mailing list, email the message
"subscribe TopBand" to topband-request at ***

>From Douglas S. Zwiebel" <0006489207 at  Fri Feb 10 00:56:00 1995
From: Douglas S. Zwiebel" <0006489207 at (Douglas S. Zwiebel)
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 95 19:56 EST
Subject: mci users
Message-ID: <63950210005636/0006489207PK2EM at MCIMAIL.COM>

Here is the reply I got from MCI about lost mail:

Date:     Thu Feb 09, 1995 10:32 am  EST
From:     Carol Hayes / MCI ID: 234-9875
TO:     * Douglas S. Zwiebel / MCI ID: 648-9207
Subject:  Re: followup
I checked with MCI Tech Support and they confirmed that there were
delays with message deliveries through the Internet gateway 
from 1-30-95 to 2-1-95.  
When sending to people who are on MCI Mail, go directly, and not through
Take Care,

By the way, the DELAY was infinite (aka:lost)


>From Kenneth G. Kopp" <0006485696 at  Fri Feb 10 05:37:00 1995
From: Kenneth G. Kopp" <0006485696 at (Kenneth G. Kopp)
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 95 00:37 EST
Subject: FT1000  !CAUTION!
Message-ID: <05950210053750/0006485696PK2EM at MCIMAIL.COM>

Hello Gang!

Boy, can sure tell the stopper was pulled out at the dx reflector!
Getting LOTS of replys to my "is anyone getting this" query sent
many days ago.  Thanks all!  But those via the dx reflector (still)
missing headers.  Use those e-mail address signatures, guys.

My warning about the FT-1000 relates to the external antenna (phono)
jack that is selected by the front panel's RX ANT switch ... IT IS NOT
PROTECTED and severe damage can be done to the antenna input circuitry 
and the PC board of the FT-1000's RF BOARD if this jack is subjected 
to high levels of RF.  What's "high"? ... dunno ... sad tale follows:

I have a dedicated, insulated, top loaded 70' tower with 120 radials
for 80/160M.  Nearby (about 20' and end-on) is a 135' C/F Zepp that
is tuned to 80M by a Matchbox.  A run of Phillystran ties one end of 
the Zepp to the tower ... not an uncommon situation.

I've used an outdoor 6' loop (with built-in preamp) on 160M for many
years and on several different rigs.  An interest in finishing off
5BDXCC with a few more countries on 80M led me to try the 80M Zepp
as a receiving antenna and so connected it to the FT-1000's RX ANT 
input.  It worked as expected ... "quieter" than the tower.

Tuned up the amplifier to 1.5 KW and -immediately- smelled smoke!
Traced the smell to the FT-1000 and was dismayed to find it essentially
dead on all bands.  My first thought was that something had failed in
the antenna relay circuit of the amp, but not so.  Took the rig to the
bench and as soon as pulled off the botton cover saw the little black
spots on the PC board where components used to be.  Enough to make a 
guy say; "Shucks!"  

Connected a Bird (50W HF element) and dummy load to the cable from the
Matchbox that had fed the RX ANT input and keyed the amp again ... the 
meter gently gently pegged at 50+ watts!

The loop's preamp had taken the pounding from 1.5 KW on 160 for years,
and of course had protected the various receiver's inputs from damage.

I caution those of you who may use or be thinking of using any sort of
passive (un-amplified) antennas for receiving to do so with care.  I'll
be building #49 lamp (60 mA) and 1/100 amp fuse boxes for both the FT-1000
and the FT-990, AND measuring RF levels before I try this scheme again.

I would think that there must be others out there, at multi stations
for example, who have been "burned" by this "gotcha!" ... surely, I'm
not the only one?

Oh ... the input to the FT-1000's BPF filter IS PROTECTED and (in theory)
can be used as an auxillary RX input in the presence of strong transmitted
signals ... with it's frequency-range limitations, of course ... but the
second receiver's performance is terrible ... yes, I have the 600 HZ 

Talked with Chip at Yaesu and arranged to send just the board for 
repair ... expected to have to buy complete board ... came back in about
four weeks ... so "pretty" thought they had tossed the old board and sent
new one ... but it was mine.  The workmanship was EXCELLENT ... hard to 
tell where the damage was ... and the cost was only about $70 ... I'm

73! de Ken Kopp/K0PP
k0pp at

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list