January 2008 QST Received

[Tom WA3KLR]

I received my January 2008 QST magazine yesterday.  It's called the "Annual Vintage Issue". 

There are articles on mods to the KWM-2 for cw, a 6V6/807 cw transmitter, a restored WWII Japanese wireless set, and John Dilks column "Old Radio" covers a 40 meter cw transmitter "replica" kit. 

In the 807 transmitter schematic, the screen grid bypass capacitor is missing.

No vintage AM stuff.

The new Icom IC-R9500 is reviewed; price is $13,500.  I hear one being used on 75 meters AM at night by Jerry KC8TUL.

Dave Sumner's editorial "It Seems to Us" is on the WRC-07 conference.

So far, I haven't seen any mention of the new IARU Region 2 band plan.

[k4kyv]

The new Icom IC-R9500 is reviewed; price is $13,500.  I hear one being used on 75 meters AM at night by Jerry KC8TUL.

Just think... you could buy two of them for the going price of a KW-1.

[W1IA]

I received my January 2008 QST magazine yesterday.  It's called the "Annual Vintage Issue". 

There are articles on mods to the KWM-2 for cw, a 6V6/807 cw transmitter, a restored WWII Japanese wireless set, and John Dilks column "Old Radio" covers a 40 meter cw transmitter "replica" kit. 

In the 807 transmitter schematic, the screen grid bypass capacitor is missing.

No vintage AM stuff.

The new Icom IC-R9500 is reviewed; price is $13,500.  I hear one being used on 75 meters AM at night by Jerry KC8TUL.

Dave Sumner's editorial "It Seems to Us" is on the WRC-07 conference.

So far, I haven't seen any mention of the new IARU Region 2 band plan.

I think his call is KC8ZUL Geri...I was teasing him about spending all that money.
I could build a lot of rigs for that price.


Brent W1IA

[Tom WA3KLR]

You could buy 10 R390A's and build 10 legal-limit Class E transmitters.  You wouldn't be able to listen to 5 kHz or 3000 MHz.

[k4kyv]

I liked the part about all the deleted coverage ranges in US models because of US restrictions on receivers capable of tuning mobile phones and now, analogue TV signals.  If I were going to spend that kind of money on a receiver I would damn sure want full uninterrupted coverage from DC to daylight.

They probably sell full range versions in Canada, but every piece of equipment of that genre seems to cost about 30-50% more up there.  Maybe someone who had a reason to travel to Japan could pick one up for a lot less while they were there.

Funny about how you always  hear about this being the free-est country in the world, but this is the only place where those radios have to be sold with restricted frequency coverage.

[WA3VJB]

Steve, you'd better check the ARRL AM website, they may already have started airbrushing out all the old QST articles that had anything to do with AM.

It's real politburo stuff until we get rehabilitated.

[W3SLK]

Paul said:

It's real politburo stuff until we get rehabilitated

Heh, heh

[Jim, W5JO]

Funny about how you always  hear about this being the free-est country in the world, but this is the only place where those radios have to be sold with restricted frequency coverage.

You can thank Mr. Gingrich for this one Don.  He just won a lawsuit against his peer that made his conversation public.

[Todd, KA1KAQ]

You can thank Mr. Gingrich for this one Don.  He just won a lawsuit against his peer that made his conversation public.

More accurately, the fool who publicized what he heard should've been sent up the river. Tap someone's landline and see what happens. IIRC, the Communications Act of 1934 and the previous Federal Radio Act of 1927 were fine as they were with respect to receiving radio signals. Rather than deal with criminals, we have the Telecommunications Act of 1996 and other little niceties added along the way.

Not a lot different than the whole gun control debate, really. It's not the poor criminal's fault, blame the gun instead. Radios can't even shoot back.   

[Steve - WB3HUZ]

And I don't think it was Gingrich who was responsible for the law in the first place.

Thank the telephone companies. They are the ones who sold Congress on the idea of an "expectation of privacy" when using a cell phone.

You can thank Mr. Gingrich for this one Don.  He just won a lawsuit against his peer that made his conversation public.

More accurately, the fool who publicized what he heard should've been sent up the river. Tap someone's landline and see what happens. IIRC, the Communications Act of 1934 and the previous Federal Radio Act of 1927 were fine as they were with respect to receiving radio signals. Rather than deal with criminals, we have the Telecommunications Act of 1996 and other little niceties added along the way.

Not a lot different than the whole gun control debate, really. It's not the poor criminal's fault, blame the gun instead. Radios can't even shoot back.  

[WA3VJB]

Gee now that analog cellular radio service is gone from that part of the band, do ya think they will roll back that part of the ECPA ?

ah-hehnh !

[Steve - WB3HUZ]

Good point. They should for any radio that cannot decode/demodulate the various cell protocols.

Gee now that analog cellular radio service is gone from that part of the band, do ya think they will roll back that part of the ECPA ?

ah-hehnh !

[WB2G]

If any of you get the ARRL Club News email read the "remember when'.I almost canceled my membership,but I like to know what the enemy is doing .These people are bad news.Joe

[k4kyv]

You can thank Mr. Gingrich for this one Don.  He just won a lawsuit against his peer that made his conversation public.

More accurately, the fool who publicized what he heard should've been sent up the river. Tap someone's landline and see what happens. IIRC, the Communications Act of 1934 and the previous Federal Radio Act of 1927 were fine as they were with respect to receiving radio signals. Rather than deal with criminals, we have the Telecommunications Act of 1996 and other little niceties added along the way.

Not a lot different than the whole gun control debate, really. It's not the poor criminal's fault, blame the gun instead. Radios can't even shoot back.

The couple that intercepted the conversation weren't wiretapping by any stretch of the imagination.  Listening to the radio is a far different situation from tapping a landline. They merely picked up a two-way radio conversation that was transmitted unincrypted, received on an ordinary FM scanner installed in a car.  The parties involved in the conversation had no reasonable expectation of privacy, since they were essentially broadcasting out in the clear, transmissions readily accessible to anyone with a receiver tuned to the frequency.  The content of the conversation revealed some questionable shenanigans by Mr. Gingrich and his cohort, and indicated that he had been less than truthful when he made a public statement or testimony (I don't recall the specific matter involved, but it was a hot political issue at the time.)  The couple who intercepted the call basically discovered a high government official with his pants down in the act of lying about some issue in the public interest, and passed the information to the media (NY Times?), which in turn made the decision to publish the story.

The only fools in this case were Mr. Gingrich and his interlocutor who openly discussed sensitive matters over an insecure radio circuit.  No different from government employees with security clearances and who know better, who nevertheless openly discuss classified information on a busy city street in the presence of passers-by.

I was hoping that couple would get some legal backing to form a test case and appeal the constitutionality of the ECPA, but instead they simply agreed to pay a $100 fine and be done with it, which I found very disappointing.

I suspect that to-day that same couple would be stopped at the border and denied entry if they were on their way to visit Canada.

If you don't want me to listen in on your wireless conversation, then keep your goddam photons off my property.

[Steve - WB3HUZ]

The couple that intercepted the conversation weren't wiretapping by any stretch of the imagination.

According to the law, they were. Then they recorded it. Strike two. Then they did something with the recording. Strike three. They should be in jail.