ARC-1 Transceiver 100-156 Mc. 28 tubes, $20.00
Command Xmtr. 4-5.3Mc. Less tubes, fair condition. $3.00
Loading Capacitor, 5-sections, 4Q0pf* per sections, with '/(" saft adapter. $2,30
Please add shipping charges Hundreds of other surplus parts and equipment.
Send 10c for flyer.
4252 Pearl Road—Dept. J8 CLEVELAND, OHIO 4410?
Lately I've read a few comments on the intruders in the JO meter hand, It is my opinion they present us with ft golden opportunity to demonstrate our skill as radio operators.
Having seen the Heath SB-101 with its 400 Hz filter* it is my opinion that anybody with this kind of equipment could work as close as 200 Hz from the intruder's carrier.
This suggests a contest. I hope somebody with more experience and skill than I agrees to organize £ome.
Ron F. Harbin WA8DBO
I agree lOO^f with the May editorial on Foreign Broadcast interference. Yesterday and today I lodged the following intruders on our 15 meter band: May 9, 1530-1600, 21.32 MHz; Armed Forces Radio and TV Network . . . S5-6. May 10, 1800-1830, 21.446 MHz: Voice of Democratic German Republic i transmits in French i. Í800-1830, 2L360; Radio Fragile. 1930-2030, 21.437 MHz; Voice of Africa in Arabic. S7-8.
Why not devote a section of 73 to reports of freq., times, and identity of these new intruders. Then cither hams could log the intruders, confirm their call and have something definite to say when protesting to FCC, ARRL, and the intruder stations themselves. I'm willing to spend some of my valuable operating time Maten i off to these intruders, logging them and writing letters. Let's pet as many hams doing that as possible. Complacency will only result in 15 becoming like <10 is now. There is no time to lose!
Gabe Gárrulo WA1GFJ
Somuls pontí tr> tne. St>ld if our loffx muí 77/ them each ixtivr. Thfltt we. mu turn them ovt r to tin* proper ttut.haritU&
I am 100<# for your policies against broadcasting intruders rxn<l hope that every ham will participate in eliminating them from our bands.
Edwin Barnett WN2DYD
Your "Editorial Liberties" in the May issue touches on one of the most crucial problems facing amateur radio today. The steady influx of international broadcasters on our bands is without a doubt gradually pushing us off the air.
Will we be ultimately driven off our reservation and relegated to the dummy antenna "happy hunting ground" on these frequencies? The answer an emphatic '"yes," unless we start using these frequencies and reduce the listening audience with QRM.
I refer you to the excellent article by WB2CPC» in the March 1968 issue wherein he states that the FM mode requires only 6 db or two times the signal strength of the interfering signal to wipe out an AM signal using a discriminator detector. Here then is the answer to joint frequency occupancy on these bands. There are a lot of old AM rigs around with NBFM capability and a simple NBFM adaptor for the receiver should be well within the construction abilities of most hams
How about it? Let's form a QRM net on 40 on a transcontinental basis as a beginning. Perhaps this would be n good plaee for the UFO net to operate. It might even offer the amateur a good opportunity to develop a "new*1 communication technique and thus further the electronic art,
F, J, Bauer W6FPO
A recent editorial in 73 mentioned the illegal operation going on in the Citizen's Band. I was surprised to hear this existed, so 1 built a simple converter for my NCX-3 which tuned 11 meters. When I tuned across the band, I got the shock of my ham career. Profanity, music, hate messages, all the rules set by FCC were being broken by hundreds of "bootleg" stations. The legal operations were having no easy time trying to carry on communications.
It seems the FCC has their hands full because of the multitude of these iUega] stations. They don't have enough men and equipment to track down all these stations. The legal stations are not organized enough to do much on their own. Did we give up 11 meters to create a playground for any illegal station that wanted to amuse himself at the expense of the iegal CB stations? If you find al3 this activity hard to swallow, get an 11 meter receiver and take a listen.
Now, after you've become interested, you want to know what we as amateurs can do. By helping the CB operators we might also gain a little goodwill. We can start by letting the FCC know we want to help. Then we can get out the old direction finding loop, 11 meter converter* and track these illegal stations. We can then report them to FCC and let them investigate further. Besides, it might be more fun than a club transmitter hunt I In this effort, we will also be involved in public service. But, if we remain uninterested, we might find them taking over our bands!
Jim Brenner WA6NEV
I have been sitting back and reading 73 without much real complaint. But being a human being and a fellow ham, here I go. On page four of the June 1968 issue, the E.I.A. has Hipped 1
1. Novice code speed is simple as all hell. Even I got that two years before I mastered the theory, and I'm only 14.
2. I was on two meter AM for a while, and it spoiled me. It took a while to get my speed up to 15 wpm ; AM simply ruined me. I think Novices should have no phone privileges at all,
3. The only thing wrong with this part is that above 29.1 megahertz, it's dead. True, this would be ideal for Novices, but isn't 15 meters enough?
4. If the Novice was renewable, think of all the crummy QRM we'd have. And five years? Who would graduate? A straight 2-year license (mine was one year) is good enough, and enough time is provided for the Novice to decide whether he wants to continue it,
5. Why? After a Novice expires, he is supposed to advance, or (God forbid) quit.
Paul T. Snyder WA3HWI
In regard to your comments on the EXA, and it's proposals concerning Novices in the June issue, I am almost in complete agreement. There are two points on which I disagree, however. I don't think Novices should be allowed phone privileges on any band. This may sound strange since I am a Novice at present, I feel that if Novices were allowed to work phone on 29*5-29.6 MHz, he would spend all of his time working DX on phone, I know that if I had had this privilege, 1 woukl probably give up hamming when I had to face a General exam at the end of my license term.
Good code proficiency is, I believe, necessary to hams. I am not cutting down AM and SSB ops, but I think it takes a better operator to work CW efficiently than it does to talk into a mike, I now wait with bowed head for the storm.
Larry Irwin WN4HLX
Ver r-r-y Inler-H-esling Bar-gains!!!
Send for our ver-r-r-r-y inter-r-r-esting 68 page catalog! ! ! 25c (Free with an order! ! I)
Was this article helpful?