| |
PA2AGA > HDDIG 08.08.00 00:38l 171 Lines 5821 Bytes #999 (0) @ EU
BID : HD_2000_203B
Read: GUEST
Subj: HamDigitalDigest 2000/203B
Path: DB0AAB<DB0PV<DB0MRW<DB0ERF<DB0ROF<DB0CWS<DB0SRS<DB0AIS<DB0ME<DB0OVN<
PI8JOP<PI8ZAA<PI8HGL
Sent: 000807/2155Z @:PI8HGL.#ZH1.NLD.EU #:3166 [Den Haag] FBB $:HD_2000_203B
From: PA2AGA@PI8HGL.#ZH1.NLD.EU
To : HDDIG@EU
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 00 14:16:59 MET
Message-Id: <hd_2000_203B>
From: pa2aga@pe1mvx.ampr.org
To: hd_broadcast@pa2aga.ampr.org
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Monitor/2254/radio2.html
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 10:20:00 GMT
From: mark_little_aus@my-deja.com
Subject: It's kind of a shame...
Did you _really_ expect anyone to believe this one?
Mark.
In article <8lrhh3$34d$1@nnrp1.deja.com>,
horseshoestew@my-deja.com wrote:
> Just passed my Extra examination, and I'm left with kind of a empty
> feeling. Even though I won't be using CW any time soon, I think it
> would have been better if I HAD had to pass a 10, 13, or even 15wpm
> test in addition to the written exam(forget 20wpm!).
>
> If there hadn't have been such ruthless opposition to the lowering of
> the requirements at some earlier date, to some reasonable numbers(say
> 5/10/15 N/G/E), I doubt if we would have seen this "rubber-band"
effect
> of having 5wpm Extras.
>
> Oh well, now I can devote more time to my applications, like the
towers
> I'm building, and the high-speed wireless Internet gateways I want to
> set up. I even decided to finally join the ARRL. I'll probably even
> buy a new ARRL handbook(my 1994 version is getting a bit old).
>
> For me, restructuring has been a pretty good thing. It got me back
> into the hobby(which I had distanced myself from back in 1995, when it
> appeared to me to be firmly stuck in the past). However, I think it
> just went a bit too far. The ARRL's recommendation of 13wpm(or was it
> 10 or 12?) for Extras was pretty much right on. It just came so late,
> that they had lost all credibility by then. What a shame.
>
> Stewart - N0MHS
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 04:41:07 -0600
From: kenny@kacweb.com (Kenny A. Chaffin)
Subject: It's kind of a shame...
In article <8lrhh3$34d$1@nnrp1.deja.com>, horseshoestew@my-deja.com
says...
> Just passed my Extra examination, and I'm left with kind of a empty
> feeling. Even though I won't be using CW any time soon, I think it
> would have been better if I HAD had to pass a 10, 13, or even 15wpm
> test in addition to the written exam(forget 20wpm!).
Congratulations. There is something to be said for passing the written
exam! And yes I agree about the code, but if you are not going to use it,
then what the heck. I personally love cw and prefer it over voice, but
whatever works to assure the health of the hobby.
>
> If there hadn't have been such ruthless opposition to the lowering of
> the requirements at some earlier date, to some reasonable numbers(say
> 5/10/15 N/G/E), I doubt if we would have seen this "rubber-band" effect
> of having 5wpm Extras.
>
> Oh well, now I can devote more time to my applications, like the towers
> I'm building, and the high-speed wireless Internet gateways I want to
> set up. I even decided to finally join the ARRL. I'll probably even
> buy a new ARRL handbook(my 1994 version is getting a bit old).
hey, mine's a 1985 and the last time I looked it wasn't that out of date
<grin>.
>
> For me, restructuring has been a pretty good thing. It got me back
> into the hobby(which I had distanced myself from back in 1995, when it
> appeared to me to be firmly stuck in the past). However, I think it
> just went a bit too far. The ARRL's recommendation of 13wpm(or was it
> 10 or 12?) for Extras was pretty much right on. It just came so late,
> that they had lost all credibility by then. What a shame.
Take it on as your challenge to become a technical expert in the advanced
areas of radio, learn and share the knowledge -- that builds credibility!
Congrats on passing the exam and best wishes!!
KAC
WB0E
--
KAC Website Design
Custom Programming, Web Design, and Graphics
kenny@kacweb.com - http://www.kacweb.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 09:40:46 +1000
From: "Knuts" <petern@vic.ozland.net.au>
Subject: PAD-207
I'm building a PAD-207 TNC kit but having trouble getting it going does
anyone know of a site that would have a BIN file of the EPROM software. The
E-PROM is only marked TNC +. The source of the kit is unknown and i have had
it for about 18 months now.
Thanks for you help.
Peter VK3JUG
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 08:18:31 -0700
From: "Dana H. Myers K6JQ" <dana@source.net>
Subject: THD-7A as a TNC
Rick Ruhl wrote:
>
> Tracy,
>
> The Kenwood units dont have a host mode in them, but they do have kiss mode.
> The new Alinco units have the same TNC in then.. (from Tasco, Japan).
Do the Alinco TNCs share the bug present in the Kenwood TNCs - which is
the failure to acknowledge frames unless the Poll bit is set?
The Kenwood TNCs seem to have no ack timer, and simply do not acknowledge
frames without the Poll bit set. What usually happens, is the the 'other end'
times-out waiting and issues a RR with the Poll bit set, which elicits an
ack from the Kenwood.
This doesn't happen when using one Kenwood to connect to another, as it
*always* sets the Poll bit and always receives an ack immediately.
It really kills the effective throughput when connecting to most any
other station. Kenwood seems to have ignored my letter written in
May, complete with a packet trace of the problem.
--
Dana K6JQ DoD #j
Dana@Source.Net
------------------------------
End of Ham-Digital Digest V2000 #203
******************************
Attachment converted: Macintosh HD:0726.gif (GIFf/ÇICÈ) (00118D89)
You can send in your contribution to this digest by
sending an e-mail to: hd-group@pa2aga.ampr.org
or (via BBS-net) to: hdaga@pi8vnw.#zh2.nld.eu
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
