Red Wave Radio

: Thanks in advance.

kim -

well, the quick answer is that you may operate on all amateur frequencies
above 10 meters with a tech no-code. i urge you to pass the code test -
this will permit voice on a portion of 10 meters and open the door to the
lower frequencies using cw. the no-code tech freqs are just not that
exciting to use. i *have* been active on 2m ssb (available to a tech
no-code) and i find that interesting and challenging.

regards, richard kd6lwd

Quote:>exciting to use. i *have* been active on 2m ssb (available to a tech
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>no-code) and i find that interesting and challenging.

>regards, richard kd6lwd

                                                ==Ken

Thanks in advance.

Quote:>But to say that 50+ MHz isn't exciting
>is a bit strong.  This type of mentality is what helps fuel the code
>wars -- I myself find all frequencies "exciting", for each has
>its own characteristics.

Leave him alone.  This "you're different so I'll jump on your back"
mentality seems to have much more to do with fueling the code wars
than what frequencies we find exciting.

As for magazines, well of course you want QST, which you'll get when
you join the ARRL. The best magazine is Communications Quarterly,
though QEX sometimes is worthwhile. For general interest hamming,
you can't avoid 73 Magazine and the irascible Wayne Green. If, heaven
forbid, you decide to work DX, then you'll want that CBer's dream
magazine, CQ. Since you said you were interested in satellites,
you'll want to join AMSAT and receive their informative magazine.

For equipment, I'd suggest looking at the used market first. Unless
you *enjoy* taking that big depreciation hit as you walk out of the
store, you'll get better value by buying used. A good HT with a
friendly user interface is the Yaesu FT470. A good desktop satellite
radio is the Yaesu FT736R. Icom makes good desktops too, with the
IC275 and IC475 best for satellite work. (Icom has two combo radios
pushed for satellites, but neither is as good as the twins.) Avoid
the Kenwood 790A if satellite is your thing. This is a *** radio.
For general mobile FM use, I think the Alinco radios offer the best
value, but all the major manufacturers offer serviceable radios for
this purpose. It's hard to beat an old IC28H as a 2 meter mobile
or packet rig, and the Icom IC2AT and IC4AT, while getting long in
the tooth, are still about the most rugged, simple, and reliable
HTs on the market.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | uunet!rsiatl!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary

Ken

Quote:>I know this question has probably been ask a hundred times before but IJam
>new to amateur radio, and internet,  and IJwant to know exactly what
>frequencies you can operate on with the no code license. Such as 2m,
>220mhz, 440mhz 6m, etc..?

Quote:>Also, what brand(s) of handheld and desktop
>radios are the popular ones. I want something that is going to be reliable
>and have user friendly features.  

Quote:>One more thing, I need recommendations on
>amateur radio and satellite magazines.

73, bill wb9ivr

: Does Communications Quarterly have a particular focus ...contesting,
: build-it project, DXing, etc. ?

    There are plenty of magazines covering contesting and DX'ing. They
don't seem to have any problem finding enough material.

    The US magazine "Ham Radio" was a playground for the more
technically adventurous. It had no interest in contests, DX'ing etc.
This magazine was shut down shortly after being taken over by the
publishers of CQ.   These same publishers, a little later, started
"Communications Quarterly"  (note the initials)  Opinions vary, but it
is not really as good as what it replaced, some authors have gone.
"Ham Radio" was not really a mainstream magazine, it appealed to builders
not buyers, so the Japanese radio marketeers saw it as infertile ground
for their advertising budgets. Component and surplus dealers don't have
advertising budgets even in the same league. Most amateurs saw it as
"too technical" for them and opted for easier reading. It may be that
there is insufficient market to safely support such a magazine. At least
the operators of "Communications Quarterly" and QEX have other
enterprises which will allow them, should they want to, of course, ride
out the occasional rough patch, but there is still the possibility of a
publisher deciding it is not worth the trouble.

    The mainstream publications want to include some technical material
so that they seem "balanced", but from seeing the ARRL and RSGB as well
as some independant publishers advertise for specifically technical
articles, it seems they are in short supply. The mainstream publications
tend to avoid (there have been honourable exceptions) anything that
looks too advanced, fearing that it may discourage readers, or that
no-one will build it anyway. Surveys have shown that many people read
constructional articles, yet few build the project. This means that much
of the value of even a constructional article is
entertainment/educational in nature.  The RSGB seem to have responded to
the results of their last survey, the last few RADCOMs have carried a
series about an advanced receiver at circuit diagram and explanation
level, but without constructional details. This has made some people
aware of newer circuit techniques beyond the classical ones. The ARRL
has recently published a series of non-constructional articles by Ulrich
Rohde, very much in the style of what he used to put in "Ham Radio" that
illustrates the bad design choices that have become the norm in the main
brands of "store-bought radio".  

   I can see evidence that some mainstream publications are broadening
their coverage. It seems good to me. If you are a contester or DXer, it
would still be worth your while reading "heavy" technical articles if
you want to get the best results in your main pursuit. The ARRL series
mentioned might look heavy going to some people, but it tells a lot
about bad design practices present in the radios the contesters are
using - it also shows a very very simple fix for one big design error in
just about every HF radio in production.  Contesters and DX'ers like to
compare themselves with long endurance motor racers - well, a competent
engineer has just discovered that all current production HF rigs have
the wrong grade of spark-plugs fitted, and are badly down on power
as a result.  What spoils the analogy is that car racers are unlikely to
say "That's too technical for me - I never open the hood" and go out
onto the track to race for their reputations with the bad plugs.

  How many amateurs are going to fit more suitable diodes in their
receiver front-end filter switching ?

   Ironically, this is a problem that will most spoil reception in
crowded band conditions and co-sited station conditions - exactly where
the contesters and DXers work hardest.

   Stirrer done with !

              David  GM4ZNX

73,
C. C. (Clay) Wynn, N4AOX

=========================================================================
=       ...-  .. ...-  .-   - . .-.. . --. .-. .- .--. .... -.--        =
=========================================================================

--
___________________________________________________________

       Kenneth D. Grimm                 K4XL

___________________________________________________________

: Well, they are doing it here.  The rf shops are full of those contester rigs in
: for the sparkplug changeouts.  One of the biggest problems was finding a cheap

: 73,
: C. C. (Clay) Wynn, N4AOX

   Right!   I can appreciate why someone might not feel confident or well
enough equipped to try to fault find in a current "contester rig", but
this is a simple soldering job, no fault finding or set-up needed.
Perhaps those shops filled with radios for diode swaps are evidence of
the progressive de-skilling of amateur radio?  Or could it just be a
case of people now being more prepared to throw money at problems ?

   It seems to me that folk used to be a lot more prepared to "Have a
go".   I'll be pleased if we've left poverty behind, but I do hope that we
haven't left curiosity or skill behind.

   There's a free market in RF semiconductors, and several sources of
PINs around the world. Seeking alternative parts is a long established
amateur tradition. There is some effort involved in finding a potential
part and in trying it out, but this can often give the seeker knowledge
and experience worth more than the savings on parts. Long period PIN
diodes are not really mainstream components, so price and availability
won't be wonderful, no matter who made them. There may be some parts
available from surplus dealers that could still be better than the
standard parts built into the radios.

  That reply cheered me a little, maybe I'm pessimistic about the scale
of reading of technical atricles ?

  Cheers,
             David  GM4ZNX

  (Just personal thoughts and opinions)

: : Well, they are doing it here.  The rf shops are full of those contester rigs in
: : for the sparkplug changeouts.  One of the biggest problems was finding a cheap

[deletions]

More news coming in a subsequent *QST*, but we have discovered that the
lower-cost answer--and one that should provide practically the same IMD
reduction at amateur frequencies--is to use *Motorola MPN3700* diodes
instead of the HPs.

We will also show that 1N4007 rectifier diodes, although they contain PIN
structures that can provide reasonably good IMD performance compared to
intended-for-RF-switching PINs like the 3081 and MPN3700 *in forward
conduction*, *aren't* a suitable low-cost answer to the 3081 and 3700
because they must be *reverse*-biased to exhibit similar "turned off"
IMD dynamic range compared to 3081s and 3700s that simply have forward bias
removed.

To answer the begged question ("What do I mean by "lower-cost"?): Allied
Electronics carries the HP diodes for (rounded number) $2 each. Newark
Electronics carries the Motorola diodes for (rounded) $1 each. (I suppose
there are volume discounts; haven't factored that in.)

What's also neat is that the Motorola parts are available both in leaded and
surface-mount form--important because so many of our radios are now full of
SMDs. The leaded part is MPN3700; the surface mount (SOT-23
package) is MMBV3700. Newark carries both; they list the MMBV3700 as
MMBV3700L; dunno what the *L* means.

Regards,

David Newkirk, WJ1Z
Senior Assistant Technical Editor, *QST*