K7LXC at aol.com
K7LXC at aol.com
Thu Feb 29 10:29:16 EST 1996
message dated 96-02-28 23:50:03 EST, you write:
> Simply open the motor
>box and force a shim under the plate that holds the pot. This
>increases the engagement and solves the problem.
Hiya, Chuck --
You don't suppose this is something that could be done at the factory?
73, Steve K7LXC
>From richard.frey at Harris.COM (dfrey) Thu Feb 29 20:37:34 1996
From: richard.frey at Harris.COM (dfrey) (dfrey)
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 15:37:34 -0500
Subject: Icom 706 and linear problems
Message-ID: <135cb230 at maila.harris.com>
I remember when the new Collins KWM380(?) came out and we discovered
it had a 250W un-ALC'd spike on each PTT closure. Played havoc with
the Ten-Tec solid state linear.
The problem is the ALC loop attack time. It is too slow. I would
jump on Icom. This is an amp killer. It is lucky you tried it on an
amp with a true peak reading wattmeter. You could probably solve it
with some modifications to the loop filter, but I can't suggest
anything from waaaay over here.
Dick 9A/K4XU in beautiful downtown Zagreb
>From WILLIAM H HENDRICK" <whhendrick at dmacc.cc.ia.us Thu Feb 29 10:05:39 1996
From: WILLIAM H HENDRICK" <whhendrick at dmacc.cc.ia.us (WILLIAM H HENDRICK)
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 10:05:39 CST6CDT
Subject: CT users group
Message-ID: <30107752845 at an2.dmacc.cc.ia.us>
WhAt is the address for the CT users group.
Tnx, Bill WD0GVY
>From jdcolson at aplcomm.jhuapl.edu (Jack D.Colson) Thu Feb 29 17:01:33 1996
From: jdcolson at aplcomm.jhuapl.edu (Jack D.Colson) (Jack D.Colson)
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 12:01:33 -0500
Subject: FREE INTERNET ACCESS & SOFTWARE
Message-ID: <9602291701.AA27098 at aplcomm.jhuapl.edu>
Doug - I just called and I believe in your message you state an additional
$2.50/month. According to the message I heard, it is $2.50/hour over the
5 hour initial.
I'm paying $13/month now for unlimited.
>From aa4lr at radio.org (Bill Coleman AA4LR) Thu Feb 29 16:04:16 1996
From: aa4lr at radio.org (Bill Coleman AA4LR) (Bill Coleman AA4LR)
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 12:04:16 -0400
Subject: 160 Contests
>It is obvious from some of the recent comments made on this and other forums
>that there is a lot of discontent with the present 160M contests.
Is there? There seems to be this huge battle over the "window." Other than
that, there doesn't seem to be a tremendous problem.
>situation develops, it is up to the organisers to address those issues and
>make adjustments to the rules accordingly. Since the begining of time,
>mankind has exploited every loophole in every rulebook, amateur radio
>operators are no different. It is time for "us" ie those interested and those
>uninterested in 160M contests, to put forward a cohesive set of requirements
>that the contest organisers should include in their rules.
Is it necessary to "close" every loophole?
>I will starty the ball rolling, here are my list of requirements for 160
>contests, please let me know what you think.....
>1 Each contest to last from "local dawn to dusk" not from 'x' hours Zulu
I Think you mean "dusk to dawn".
This is only fair if the contest takes place at either the spring or autumn
equinox. Otherwise, some regions of the earth will have considerably more
"darkness" to work with than others.
Further, by requiring off time during daylight, you prohibit operation
during potentially anomalous openings. What fun is a contest if you get
locked out of a freak opening?
Best bet is to require a certain amount of off time, and leave it up to the
operators to decide when to take it.
>2 Points based upon radial measurement from stations QTH.
This is only practical if either concise QTH, or generalised QTH (grid
squares) information is exchanged. While a grid-square contest would
certainly be fun on HF, it may be difficult to score such a system without
a computer. We wouldn't want to exclude our paper-bound breathren from the
fun of contesting.
>3 Band split into 3, .....non participants....US EAST + US West.....DX....
>4 DX to US qsos can only be between windows ie split freq only.
Ooo. This seems ugly. This has the potential of using TWICE as much
bandwidth for each QSO on a single band contest. (ie band limited) Further,
there would be tremendous frustration level when a CQer isn't listening in
If the problem is the Window, making more windows doesn't solve it. Perhaps
the solution is to either abolish the window -- or to go back and figure
out why the DX window exists. Why does it exist? I thought it existed
because certain DX countries only had allocations in this area. Perhaps
specific rules for behavior in the Window need to be defined. Stations are
only implored to "observe" the DX window. Since everyone has a different
interpretation of "observing" the window, hence the problem.
>5 Each organiser must appoint someone who's job is to tune the band logging
>infringements. Disqualification rewards bad operating behaviour.
Initially, I thought this might be unenforcable, given that someone could
pirate someone else's call, and have them disqualified.
Then it occurred to me that an observer need only record contacts being
made inappropriately and their time, and look for them in the submitted
log. This could work.
>6 QSO must include serial number, lets reintroduce some skill into the qso
I've personally suggested getting rid of ALL "59(9)" reports in all
contests and replacing them with a sequential serial number. So far, it has
fallen on deaf ears.
Bill Coleman, AA4LR Mail: aa4lr at radio.org
Quote: "Not in a thousand years will man ever fly!"
-- Wilbur Wright, 1901
>From DANIEL VIOLETTE <0002090328 at mcimail.com> Thu Feb 29 17:22:00 1996
From: DANIEL VIOLETTE <0002090328 at mcimail.com> (DANIEL VIOLETTE)
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 96 12:22 EST
Subject: MCI e-mail
Message-ID: <60960229172206/0002090328PK5EM at MCIMAIL.COM>
As an MCI customer I got MCI Friends and Family Mail. This is MCIMail
Windows interface supplied. I use a modem and Procom to access from work and a
Networked modem in text form. At home use the Windows program which downloads
and hangs up atuomatically and lets you compose and read mail off-line. Cost
$0 for unlimited incoming and 10 free outgoing a month (0.25/message after).
Don't send a lot so good for me. I can send from a couple other sources if
I have a lot to send. Keeps me from getting the dreaded don't use the work
system for those large mailing lists phone calls.
73, Dan KI6X <DViolette at mcimail.com>
More information about the CQ-Contest