DVK Integration

Mon Sep 16 18:16:34 EDT 1996

Hi all!
Have a question. Two of the PJ9B operators are trying to integrate an old 
DVK 100 with a modern Icom transceiver. One is working with a 765 and one 
with a 761. So far neither have been successful. Has anyone on th 
reflector integrated a modern Icom radio and old DVK 100? If so, would 
they be willing to tell me what the trick was. Many thanks and 73-Ed, 
N3ED

>From k5na at bga.com (Richard L. King)  Mon Sep 16 22:22:18 1996
From: k5na at bga.com (Richard L. King) (Richard L. King)
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 1996 16:22:18 -0500
Subject: Vanity Callsigns..Twisted
Message-ID: <199609162122.QAA25113 at zoom.bga.com>

>KR4UJ writes:
>
>>Lets say 5000 (not a realistic number, but one easy to work with)
>>applications >show up that weekend. That would mean I have a one in 5000
>>chance of getting my >first choice. Well what if I send in 5 applications.
>>They will only process the >first one, and I now have a 1 in 1000 chance
>>of getting first call on the list.
>
>I think by sending in 5 applications instead of 1, your chances go from one
>in 5000 to 5 in 5000, not 1 in 1000.
>
>de Hose  KN5H

No, your chances are one in 5000!-4995! ( ! = factoral), a very big number,
of now getting your 5th choice as a call and the FCC keeps your $150.

73, Richard
K5NA at BGA.COM
http://www.realtime.net/~k5na

>From jreid at aloha.net (Jim Reid)  Mon Sep 16 23:55:49 1996
From: jreid at aloha.net (Jim Reid) (Jim Reid)
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 1996 12:55:49 -1000
Subject: WWW 610V's
Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19960916225549.0069d38c at aloha.net>

Thanks to all who reponded to my speculation.  An informed
source,  with the usual connections,  has advised that the
most probable date of FCC use of electronic filing for
vanity calls will occur during November.

73,  Jim, AH6NB

>From Bill.Gallier.KQ4GC at postoffice.worldnet.att.net (Billy R. Gallier)  Tue Sep 17 00:12:41 1996
From: Bill.Gallier.KQ4GC at postoffice.worldnet.att.net (Billy R. Gallier) (Billy R. Gallier)
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 1996 23:12:41 +0000
Subject: Contesting w/Yaesu FT7000
Message-ID: <19960916231239.AAA189 at LOCALNAME>

Is anyone using FL7000 for SSB contesting?  Thinking about using one during
CQWW in October at St Croix.  At home I use Alpha and never using FL7000 in
a contest.  What are your thoughts?  Comments appreciated! De Bill/KQ4GC

>From k7fr at ncw.net (Gary Nieborsky)  Tue Sep 17 00:33:57 1996
From: k7fr at ncw.net (Gary Nieborsky) (Gary Nieborsky)
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 1996 16:33:57 -0700
Subject: times lmr coax
Message-ID: <199609162333.QAA20997 at bing.ncw.net>

I keep seeing the Times LMR ad in the rags.  We use some of the bigger stuff
here (LMR 600 & 1200) and like it. Anyone out there use the 200?  The losses
look real good for its diameter.  How is it in the real world environment?
Use the same connectors as RG-58? Weather OK?  Need a truck to pull it
through conduit?

Reply direct please.

Many thanks!

Gary K7FR

>From adnixon at akorn.net (Dan Nixon)  Tue Sep 17 00:48:16 1996
From: adnixon at akorn.net (Dan Nixon) (Dan Nixon)
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 1996 19:48:16 -0400
Subject: Vanity Callsigns..Twisted
References: <v01530500ae636149b614@[207.69.140.47]>
Message-ID: <323DE740.94 at akorn.net>

Paul Pescitelli wrote:
> 
> I have seen nothing mentioned about sending multiple applications to the
> "lottery" on the weekend before the 23rd. 

Ok, that may work for the first one. Then when your second one is opened,
the system looks through your list, finds your new call has been issued, 
then assigns the next available choice........and so on, and so on for
three more times. You might be lucky to get back your original call, KR4UJ.

Good Luck Paul! We'll be in there rooting for you!

Dan Nixon, N4DVW (For only a few more days, probably weeks)
Loganville, GA USA
adnixon at akorn.net

>From km9p at contesting.com (Bill Fisher, KM9P)  Tue Sep 17 01:10:22 1996
From: km9p at contesting.com (Bill Fisher, KM9P) (Bill Fisher, KM9P)
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 1996 20:10:22 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: ON4UN 80M Antenna & my mistake
Message-ID: <199609170010.UAA18960 at paris.akorn.net>

The antenna (sloping wire vertical 4-square) from ON4UN's Low Band DXing is
on page 11-60 and pictured in Figure 11-78.  The reason I assumed John was
using this antenna is because of the following exerpt from this section:

---
"Because I had put up my full-size 133' vertical for 160 meters, I was
looking for something better than a single vertical on 80, something I could
support from the tall tower without too much coupling from the 160-meter
antenna into the 80-meter one and vice versa.  Fig 11-78 shows the array
that evolved"
---

I guess the array evolved on the computer but not on the tower.  :)

My fault.

73

Bill, KM9P
 ---------------------------------------------
| Contesting Online... The ultimate           |
| source of ham radio contest information     |       
| http://www.contesting.com                   |
 --------------------------------------------- 

>From n6bfm at avana.net (Bob Furzer)  Tue Sep 17 01:43:41 1996
From: n6bfm at avana.net (Bob Furzer) (Bob Furzer)
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 1996 20:43:41 -0400
Subject: Vanity callsigns
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19960917004341.00739d78 at tiger.avana.net>

Enough!  Who cares?

The only frightening thing about everyone changing their callsigns is that
there will be countless e-mail announcing relocation of web pages and new
e-mail addresses (all reflecting the owners new - improved - callsign),
these in turn followed by the obligatory e-mails of congratulations (copied
to everyone of course).

Why would anyone want to change their callsign anyway?  They have gone out
of style.  Simply call using the 'last two' letters of your callsign (like
everyone else).

Oh well, DX was,
Bob.