Reply by Fred Bloggs June 21, 20212021-06-21
On Saturday, June 19, 2021 at 4:26:30 AM UTC-4, Rheilly Phoull wrote:
> On 19/06/2021 2:25 pm, Unlisted wrote: > > Im setting up a low powered FM radio station transmitter to play > > continuous music 24/7 from a remote off grid location. The entire setup > > will run from solar panels and batteries. The station will consist of > > the transmitter, a small mixer board, audio compressor, and a laptop > > computer filled with MP3 music. > > > > The station should run 98% of the time without human intervention. But > > many cloudy days in a row, or snow on the solar panels may cause a > > battery drain and shutdown of the station. > > > > When the sun comes back the station transmitter and controls should > > restart on their own. However I am working on a system using relays, to > > reboot the computer. > > > > However, one problem. When the sun comes back and the batteries begin > > recharging, I dont want the equipment to turn on until the batteries are > > up to at least 20% charge, or the equipment will begin cycling on and > > off. (Bad for the equipment). > > > > What can I use to sense percent of charge and delay turning on the > > equipment until that (pre set) % of charge is achieved? Im sure it can > > be done, but I have no clue how..... > > > > Most of the time no persons will be there to manually flip switches. But > > I have thought of sending charge data to my smartphone, where I can > > manually turn things on via my phone. But I have no knowledge of > > smartphone controls. I just know its possible...... > > > > > Perhaps a micro like Arduino would suit the task. It could for instance > measure the battery voltage and charging current and deduce battery > state from that data. Amongst the many other things you may want to > monitor or control.
He needs to size the solar cell for 4x power draw of the equipment minimum. Battery stays fully charged and only kicks in to smooth out the occasional sun block event.
Reply by Don Y June 21, 20212021-06-21
On 6/20/2021 7:56 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Sun, 20 Jun 2021 12:25:53 -0700, Don Y > <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote: > >> But, then I thought: "And what am I going to actually *do* with >> this, given that my waking hours are already spoken for... I'd >> much rather listen to some good music than hunt for idle chatter!" > > Well, ham radio has turned into a direction which I fail to > appreciate. In the distant past, it was a technical hobby. Hams > would build their own equipment, exchange (or steal) ideas, and > discuss their accomplishments when on the air. In high skool, the
Yes. There were economies to be had as well as lessons to learn. But, nowadays, I doubt you could compete with COTS products in terms of cost per unit functionality (even if all the "parts" were free). A friend of the family tries to get me interested half a century ago. It was a significant part of his life (I recall his pride when he got his 4-letter call sign -- W1Asomething or other). He gave me an old key and a (tube based!) audio tone generator (built in a wooden box, spray painted silver) in the hope that I would learn the code. But, it was way too much work for what it MIGHT give me. (and which 10 year old would want to listen to beeps and bops instead of be outside playing?)
> electronics instructor encouraged everyone to get into ham radio. I > think that might have been where I become seriously interested in > electronics, radio, and later got into commercial radio: > <http://www.learnbydestroying.com/jeffl/pics/Old%20Repeaters/index.html>
In junior high school, they had a ham shack at one of the places I studied at. SloScan TV was cool. But, I decided to pursue computers and another science field, instead (only so many hours in the program so pick and choose how you're going to spend them!)
> Today, it's very different. Instead of building or designing > something, the trend is to buy ready made commercial equipment and > operate it as part of a sport, contest or service. Much of the > technical part of ham radio has almost disappeared. There are many > reasons for this, but the biggest is that the "magic" of talking > directly to someone half way around the world is gone. All someone > need do today is pickup a cell phone, which is hardly magic. If you > want to send a message around the world, nobody is going to get > excited about doing it on packet radio at about 300 baud maximum on HF > or 9600 baud on UHF.
Yup. A neighbor had a rig and, years ago, tried to get me interested. The code requirement had just been dropped. But, again, too many other interests competing for my time. I can make far more interesting "things" than he could ever attempt in THAT application domain.
> Idle chatter is a good description of what I hear on radio most modes. > Long winded monologs might be a better description. In the early days > of radio, equipment was so bad, that messages had to be repeated
The guy who first tried to get me interested was quite proud of his QSL card collection. But, he spoke 5 or 6 languages, fluently, so it was easy for him to get engaged with all sorts of other hams. To me, it sort of looked like collecting baseball cards... <frown>
> multiple times. That inspired long winded monologs, which are still > with us today. Political transmission tend to be even longer. I > don't bother with these styles, but do try to get involved in > technical discussions. However, there's a problem. Random visitors > will rapidly join a technical discussion, contribute nothing useful, > and usually slow down the exchanges to the point of frustration. So, > I don't talk much on the air. > > I suppose it's a futile effort, but I still do my best to encourage > those with an interest in building things. Before the pandemic, I > would give technical talks at meetings of the two local radio clubs > and local Linux user group. They were generally well received, but I > could tell that I was going over the heads of most of the attendees. > It also took me a day or two to prepare for a 1 hr talk, which a bit > much.
I think "tinkering" has now devolved to "buying subassemblies (hardware or software) and patching them together". I can recall building a digital combination lock for my bedroom when I was a young kid -- using locking relays and time delay relays harvested from a pinsetter! Or an interactive football game using analog computers and "logic boxes". Nowadays, someone would google the "parts" and paste them together without understanding how they actually work!
> So, what can you do with ham radio? That depends on what you enjoy > doing. There are many aspects to choose from. If you find one aspect > or mode you enjoy, try it. If you find nothing interesting, put the > license in a picture frame and show it off to those who might find an > interest in ham radio.
I thought of making an external antenna for a cordless phone system I have, here. But, by the time I did the math, found the various components for the aerial, connectors, etc. and assembled the damn thing, I'd easily have "wasted" more than the $200 I could purchase a ready-made unit! One of the hardest things I've found with getting older is disciplining yourself NOT to do things "just because you can" but, rather, to think about whether or not that's the way you want your time used.
Reply by Jeff Liebermann June 20, 20212021-06-20
On Sun, 20 Jun 2021 12:25:53 -0700, Don Y
<blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote:

>But, then I thought: "And what am I going to actually *do* with >this, given that my waking hours are already spoken for... I'd >much rather listen to some good music than hunt for idle chatter!"
Well, ham radio has turned into a direction which I fail to appreciate. In the distant past, it was a technical hobby. Hams would build their own equipment, exchange (or steal) ideas, and discuss their accomplishments when on the air. In high skool, the electronics instructor encouraged everyone to get into ham radio. I think that might have been where I become seriously interested in electronics, radio, and later got into commercial radio: <http://www.learnbydestroying.com/jeffl/pics/Old%20Repeaters/index.html> Today, it's very different. Instead of building or designing something, the trend is to buy ready made commercial equipment and operate it as part of a sport, contest or service. Much of the technical part of ham radio has almost disappeared. There are many reasons for this, but the biggest is that the "magic" of talking directly to someone half way around the world is gone. All someone need do today is pickup a cell phone, which is hardly magic. If you want to send a message around the world, nobody is going to get excited about doing it on packet radio at about 300 baud maximum on HF or 9600 baud on UHF. Idle chatter is a good description of what I hear on radio most modes. Long winded monologs might be a better description. In the early days of radio, equipment was so bad, that messages had to be repeated multiple times. That inspired long winded monologs, which are still with us today. Political transmission tend to be even longer. I don't bother with these styles, but do try to get involved in technical discussions. However, there's a problem. Random visitors will rapidly join a technical discussion, contribute nothing useful, and usually slow down the exchanges to the point of frustration. So, I don't talk much on the air. I suppose it's a futile effort, but I still do my best to encourage those with an interest in building things. Before the pandemic, I would give technical talks at meetings of the two local radio clubs and local Linux user group. They were generally well received, but I could tell that I was going over the heads of most of the attendees. It also took me a day or two to prepare for a 1 hr talk, which a bit much. So, what can you do with ham radio? That depends on what you enjoy doing. There are many aspects to choose from. If you find one aspect or mode you enjoy, try it. If you find nothing interesting, put the license in a picture frame and show it off to those who might find an interest in ham radio. -- Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272 Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
Reply by bitrex June 20, 20212021-06-20
On 6/20/2021 7:21 PM, bitrex wrote:
> On 6/20/2021 6:58 PM, John S wrote: >> On 6/20/2021 8:47 AM, bitrex wrote: >>> On 6/19/2021 9:40 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote: >>>> On Sat, 19 Jun 2021 19:57:55 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote: >>>> >>>>> I got my technician license late last year cuz I figured at age 40 it >>>>> was probably something I should do and might be useful to have at some >>>>> point, my "rig" so far is an N-75 transceiver: >>>>> >>>>> <http://www.4sqrp.com/n-75.php> >>>> >>>> RetroTech AM modulation on 75 meters?&nbsp; I can see some value in raising >>>> the dead, but not for anything that is expected to be "useful".&nbsp; If >>>> you want to irritate the "old timers", design a radiation hardened >>>> transceiver that will survive a nuclear apocalypse.&nbsp; The politics on >>>> 75 meters is worse than in S.E.D. >>> >>> Oh, I've basically been using it just as a receiver which it works >>> pretty well at over 3 - 6.2 MHz to experiment with different antenna >>> configs. >>> >>> Full-power transmit is limited to 3.6-4 MHz and for the moment >>> technician privs are very limited on HF, the only non-CW allocation >>> is some USB in the 10 meter band for that class. Trouble is phone on >>> the higher freqs in my area is kinda dead...but looks like the new >>> band plan for 2021 is going to add some more phone allocation in HF >>> including 3.6-4 MHz for that class to use which I'm sure the old >>> timers will hate but whatevs. >> >> Actually, the document you linked to says 3.605 MHz to 3.995 MHz. >> >> >>> Or I could just upgrade to general, the test doesn't seem hard. >> >> You probably have the knowledge to upgrade even higher. Why not go for >> it? > > Frustratingly they weren't doing remote tests during the winter surge > and I didn't feel like hanging around too long.
Not that there's really any mechanism to do that I guess, you could just have the answer key at home...
Reply by bitrex June 20, 20212021-06-20
On 6/20/2021 6:58 PM, John S wrote:
> On 6/20/2021 8:47 AM, bitrex wrote: >> On 6/19/2021 9:40 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote: >>> On Sat, 19 Jun 2021 19:57:55 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote: >>> >>>> I got my technician license late last year cuz I figured at age 40 it >>>> was probably something I should do and might be useful to have at some >>>> point, my "rig" so far is an N-75 transceiver: >>>> >>>> <http://www.4sqrp.com/n-75.php> >>> >>> RetroTech AM modulation on 75 meters?&nbsp; I can see some value in raising >>> the dead, but not for anything that is expected to be "useful".&nbsp; If >>> you want to irritate the "old timers", design a radiation hardened >>> transceiver that will survive a nuclear apocalypse.&nbsp; The politics on >>> 75 meters is worse than in S.E.D. >> >> Oh, I've basically been using it just as a receiver which it works >> pretty well at over 3 - 6.2 MHz to experiment with different antenna >> configs. >> >> Full-power transmit is limited to 3.6-4 MHz and for the moment >> technician privs are very limited on HF, the only non-CW allocation is >> some USB in the 10 meter band for that class. Trouble is phone on the >> higher freqs in my area is kinda dead...but looks like the new band >> plan for 2021 is going to add some more phone allocation in HF >> including 3.6-4 MHz for that class to use which I'm sure the old >> timers will hate but whatevs. > > Actually, the document you linked to says 3.605 MHz to 3.995 MHz. > > >> Or I could just upgrade to general, the test doesn't seem hard. > > You probably have the knowledge to upgrade even higher. Why not go for it?
Frustratingly they weren't doing remote tests during the winter surge and I didn't feel like hanging around too long. Next scheduled one is mid July and I think I'll go back for the general at that point
Reply by John S June 20, 20212021-06-20
On 6/20/2021 5:58 PM, John S wrote:
> On 6/20/2021 8:47 AM, bitrex wrote: >> On 6/19/2021 9:40 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote: >>> On Sat, 19 Jun 2021 19:57:55 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote: >>> >>>> I got my technician license late last year cuz I figured at age 40 it >>>> was probably something I should do and might be useful to have at some >>>> point, my "rig" so far is an N-75 transceiver: >>>> >>>> <http://www.4sqrp.com/n-75.php> >>> >>> RetroTech AM modulation on 75 meters?&nbsp; I can see some value in raising >>> the dead, but not for anything that is expected to be "useful".&nbsp; If >>> you want to irritate the "old timers", design a radiation hardened >>> transceiver that will survive a nuclear apocalypse.&nbsp; The politics on >>> 75 meters is worse than in S.E.D. >> >> Oh, I've basically been using it just as a receiver which it works >> pretty well at over 3 - 6.2 MHz to experiment with different antenna >> configs. >> >> Full-power transmit is limited to 3.6-4 MHz and for the moment >> technician privs are very limited on HF, the only non-CW allocation is >> some USB in the 10 meter band for that class. Trouble is phone on the >> higher freqs in my area is kinda dead...but looks like the new band >> plan for 2021 is going to add some more phone allocation in HF >> including 3.6-4 MHz for that class to use which I'm sure the old >> timers will hate but whatevs. > > Actually, the document you linked to says 3.605 MHz to 3.995 MHz.
Oops! I just noticed that you got close enough :O
> >> Or I could just upgrade to general, the test doesn't seem hard. > > You probably have the knowledge to upgrade even higher. Why not go for it?
Reply by John S June 20, 20212021-06-20
On 6/20/2021 8:47 AM, bitrex wrote:
> On 6/19/2021 9:40 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote: >> On Sat, 19 Jun 2021 19:57:55 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote: >> >>> I got my technician license late last year cuz I figured at age 40 it >>> was probably something I should do and might be useful to have at some >>> point, my "rig" so far is an N-75 transceiver: >>> >>> <http://www.4sqrp.com/n-75.php> >> >> RetroTech AM modulation on 75 meters?&nbsp; I can see some value in raising >> the dead, but not for anything that is expected to be "useful".&nbsp; If >> you want to irritate the "old timers", design a radiation hardened >> transceiver that will survive a nuclear apocalypse.&nbsp; The politics on >> 75 meters is worse than in S.E.D. > > Oh, I've basically been using it just as a receiver which it works > pretty well at over 3 - 6.2 MHz to experiment with different antenna > configs. > > Full-power transmit is limited to 3.6-4 MHz and for the moment > technician privs are very limited on HF, the only non-CW allocation is > some USB in the 10 meter band for that class. Trouble is phone on the > higher freqs in my area is kinda dead...but looks like the new band plan > for 2021 is going to add some more phone allocation in HF including > 3.6-4 MHz for that class to use which I'm sure the old timers will hate > but whatevs.
Actually, the document you linked to says 3.605 MHz to 3.995 MHz.
> Or I could just upgrade to general, the test doesn't seem hard.
You probably have the knowledge to upgrade even higher. Why not go for it?
Reply by Don Y June 20, 20212021-06-20
On 6/20/2021 11:51 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> So, if you know anything about electronics and RF, and can memorize > some arcane FCC rules and regulations, you can certainly pass the > General class exam, and probably also pass the Extra class exam. I > suggest you hurry before the FCC imposes a $35 application fee: > <http://www.arrl.org/news/fcc-reduces-proposed-amateur-radio-application-fee-to-35>
That was my attitude. But, then I thought: "And what am I going to actually *do* with this, given that my waking hours are already spoken for... I'd much rather listen to some good music than hunt for idle chatter!"
Reply by bitrex June 20, 20212021-06-20
On 6/20/2021 2:51 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Sun, 20 Jun 2021 09:47:57 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote: > >> Or I could just upgrade to general, the test doesn't seem hard. > > Some time in the distant past, the FCC removed the 13 wpm Morse code > requirement for the General class license. Since the technical part > of the Technician and General class license exams were identical (when > I passed the Tech exam), the FCC offered me an easy upgrade to General > without having to retake the exam. So, I arrived at the designated > place ready to fill out a form, pay a few dollars, and receive and > instant upgrade. Instead, one of the volunteer examiners suggested I > take the Extra Class exam instead. Same low price. If I failed the > exam, I would still get the General class upgrade as a consolation > prize. Great.
Yeah, they were OK with me taking further tests that night to move on up but I hadn't studied for 'em and it feels bad to just make guesses. Plus it was relatively crowded at the testing location that night; about a dozen test-takers and maybe a half-dozen guys proctoring (seemed like more than necessary), a number of both weren't bothering with masking, and the room at the local fish & game was small enough that I didn't much feel like spending more than a half hour there, it was during the winter 2020 case surge.
> However, there was a small problem. Since I didn't expect to take an > exam, I hadn't studied. I was fairly certain that I could pass the > theory sections, but there were some questions dealing with rules, > operations, and on the air protocols, where I wasn't so certain. I > borrowed a calculator and began guessing answers. After checking my > answers at least 3 times, and probably changing some correct guesses > to incorrect answers, I decided that it was time to give up. Much to > my surprise, I passed the exam. I was now an Extra Class license > holder. > > I was then informed that this entitled me to change my call sign. > However, I couldn't just pick my personalized preference but had to > take the next available call sign in the pool. It wasn't great, but > was an improvement over my previous call sign: > <https://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/UlsSearch/license.jsp?licKey=2482894> > > So, if you know anything about electronics and RF, and can memorize > some arcane FCC rules and regulations, you can certainly pass the > General class exam, and probably also pass the Extra class exam. I > suggest you hurry before the FCC imposes a $35 application fee: > <http://www.arrl.org/news/fcc-reduces-proposed-amateur-radio-application-fee-to-35>
Can't remember what I paid for the first test end of 2020, pretty sure I paid something though it may have been $15 or $25. I received a nice welcome Radiogram in the mail soon after from "Kate" K6HTN in Pasadena CA, my girlfriend though that was very cool and old-timey.
Reply by Jeff Liebermann June 20, 20212021-06-20
On Sun, 20 Jun 2021 09:47:57 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:

>Or I could just upgrade to general, the test doesn't seem hard.
Some time in the distant past, the FCC removed the 13 wpm Morse code requirement for the General class license. Since the technical part of the Technician and General class license exams were identical (when I passed the Tech exam), the FCC offered me an easy upgrade to General without having to retake the exam. So, I arrived at the designated place ready to fill out a form, pay a few dollars, and receive and instant upgrade. Instead, one of the volunteer examiners suggested I take the Extra Class exam instead. Same low price. If I failed the exam, I would still get the General class upgrade as a consolation prize. Great. However, there was a small problem. Since I didn't expect to take an exam, I hadn't studied. I was fairly certain that I could pass the theory sections, but there were some questions dealing with rules, operations, and on the air protocols, where I wasn't so certain. I borrowed a calculator and began guessing answers. After checking my answers at least 3 times, and probably changing some correct guesses to incorrect answers, I decided that it was time to give up. Much to my surprise, I passed the exam. I was now an Extra Class license holder. I was then informed that this entitled me to change my call sign. However, I couldn't just pick my personalized preference but had to take the next available call sign in the pool. It wasn't great, but was an improvement over my previous call sign: <https://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/UlsSearch/license.jsp?licKey=2482894> So, if you know anything about electronics and RF, and can memorize some arcane FCC rules and regulations, you can certainly pass the General class exam, and probably also pass the Extra class exam. I suggest you hurry before the FCC imposes a $35 application fee: <http://www.arrl.org/news/fcc-reduces-proposed-amateur-radio-application-fee-to-35> -- Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272 Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558