[Scan-DC] RE: Scan-DC digest, Vol 1 #230 - 17 msgs
Danes, Greg S Mr Army G-4/INNOLOG
[email protected]
Thu, 26 Jun 2003 06:57:27 -0400
Speaking of lists,
I remember back in 95 a list I think Alan Heney put together for a local BBS
called SCANDC95.zip, I have this list and it later got updated to SCANDC97
and then I never herad anymore about it. It was pretty comprehensive and fit
well into Excel. Anyone know if it ever got updated beyond 97?. Even though
many of the frequencies are now changed or outdated it would be a good
reference list for our area.
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2003 6:39 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Scan-DC digest, Vol 1 #230 - 17 msgs
Send Scan-DC mailing list submissions to
[email protected]
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/scan-dc
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
[email protected]
You can reach the person managing the list at
[email protected]
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Scan-DC digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Andrews Area Logs, 20 Jun 03 (eMISSARY)
2. Re: cordless phones (Steve Rigby)
3. Howard Co Trunk Activity (Denis Trapp)
4. illegal cordless phones (Mike Agner)
5. WDisney Orlando, FL ([email protected])
6. Re: illegal cordless phones (Shawnerz)
7. Scanning email lists (Mike Agner)
8. Cordless Phones/Aircraft Interferance (William D. Rossiter III)
9. Re: Cordless Phones/Aircraft Interferance (Shawnerz)
10. Re: Cordless Phones/Aircraft Interferance (Shawnerz)
11. Re: Cordless Phones/Aircraft Interferance ([email protected])
12. city of Baltimore license expired? (Mike Agner)
13. Dorchester county moving from LTR (Mike Agner)
14. going on a cruise? (Mike Agner)
15. DC CAP 228.9 (listen13579)
16. DC CAP 228.9 (Jeff)
17. vote on moving scan dc cap (knowlton)
--__--__--
Message: 1
From: "eMISSARY" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>,
<[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Scan-DC] Andrews Area Logs, 20 Jun 03
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2003 11:19:47 -0400
Organization: sEEKRET
Don't forget...
There was a SAM XXXX flight that landed just before AF1.. forgot the number
but I'd know it if i saw it, and it wasnt listed in your post.
AIR FORCE 1
132.775<124.2<119.3<118.4
Land Andrews Air Force Base (ADW)
Shortly after...
MARINE 1
118.4<120.75
To Land at White House Helipad
Didn't manage to catch any A-A or CAP activity regarding AF1
j
----- Original Message -----
From: <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>; <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 16:35
Subject: [Scan-DC] Andrews Area Logs, 20 Jun 03
> HIGHLIGHTS:
>
> 1. ANDREWS AFB:
> [Tower (118.4/349.0); Potomac
> APP/DEP(119.3;335.5;124.2;118.95;119.85;125.65); CP (141.55;378.1); PTD
(122.85; 372.2)]
...
........
--__--__--
Message: 2
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2003 11:06:27 -0400
From: Steve Rigby <[email protected]>
To: Scan-DC <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Scan-DC] cordless phones
knowlton wrote:
> A0015/01 - ATTENTION INTERNATIONAL OPERATORS: INTERFERENCE
> IMPACTING AERO- NAUTICAL AIR TRAFFIC FREQUENCIES CAUSE BY ILLEGAL
> HIGH POWER CORDLESS TELEPHONES.
There are many "high power" cordless phones available for sale
that operate outside of the normal commercial aircraft control
frequencies, including phones that are FCC certified for use in the
United States. I would suspect that any of these could produce
spurious radiation in the frequency ranges that are used by
aviation, perhaps even those approved for use in the United States.
There may even be such phones that are set up to transmit within
the normal commercial aircraft radio frequency ranges although I do
not know of any.
Certain baby monitors that have been FFC approved, and are thus
perfectly legal to operate, have been found to be causing similar
interference in the aircraft bands.
Of course, in the eyes of the law, even a certified device that
winds up causing interference, totally unbeknownst to the user, is
considered illegal. Some of these interferences are probably from
intentional illegal use of these phones, but others may be
unintentional. Additionally, persons visiting the United States
from abroad, where FCC restriction do not apply, quite likely will
bring these phones with them, and use them here for whatever purposes.
Steve
--__--__--
Message: 3
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2003 12:32:22 -0400
From: Denis Trapp <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: [Scan-DC] Howard Co Trunk Activity
Some heavy activity on the Howard Co Trunk Digital Talkgroup 42448, today.
Anybody know of some special event??? Haven't been able to figure out
who/what it is...
Trunk details: http://www.qsl.net/n8wsh/freqs.html#HOWDIGTRK
=============================
Denis A.Trapp/N8WSH
mailto:[email protected]
BC785D/BC780XLT/BC245XLT
ICQ: 5625443
http://www.qsl.net/n8wsh
=============================
--__--__--
Message: 4
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2003 13:50:10 -0400
To: [email protected]
From: Mike Agner <[email protected]>
Subject: [Scan-DC] illegal cordless phones
The article Mark sent in just a bit ago brings to mind a rather
unpleasant thought - these hi power cordless phones are, I think, Asian in
manufacture. In fact, if memory serves, the ARRL filed a formal protest
with one whose product was radiating in the lo end of the 2 meter band some
time ago.
That's bad enough for us hams - but what makes it worse is that the
transmitter is dirty as all get out. So if it starts clobbering the VHF air
band, it could conceivably cost lives down the road.
If you see these pieces of junk advertised in the various radio mags, I'd
report them to the authorities fortwith. There's enough junk out there
causing RFI problems without these illegal phones doing more damage - and
maybe killing someone down the road apiece.
My $.02 worth, for all it's worth. Soapbox mode off :.)
73s Mike
--__--__--
Message: 5
Reply-To: <[email protected]>
From: <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2003 16:48:45 -0400
Subject: [Scan-DC] WDisney Orlando, FL
Hello Everyone,
Its my time for a vacation. Does anyone have any info on GMRS repeaters =
in Orlando, FL area? also any intresting stuff I should look into while =
in at Disney
Thanx,
JOHN
--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
text/plain (text body -- kept)
text/html
The reason this message is shown is because the post was in HTML
or had an attachment. Attachments are not allowed. To learn how
to post in Plain-Text go to: http://www.expita.com/nomime.html ---
--__--__--
Message: 6
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2003 16:35:20 -0700 (PDT)
From: Shawnerz <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Scan-DC] illegal cordless phones
To: [email protected]
Mike,
You are correct. In addition to RFI is direct
interference to military comms. There are two main
companies that make long range, high powered cordless
phones. One is Senao and another is Voyager. I think
the Voyager phones are in the 136 to 140 MHz range and
are causing the interfence the FAA is refering to.
The Senao phones base units transmit around 375 MHz
while the handsets transmit around 258 MHz. That's
smack dab in the MilAir/Milsatcom band.
The base units can put out as much as 35 watts with a
range of about 25 KM (with external rooftop antenna).
You can check them out at www.senao.com. Click on
PLAM then LRCP (Long Range Cordless Phones).
I don't have a direct website for the Voyager line of
"phones." Only vendor sites.
Of course, they're not legal in the US but from the
FAA bulletin, it looks like people in neighboring
countries have a few.
-Shawn
--- Mike Agner <[email protected]> wrote:
> The article Mark sent in just a bit ago brings to
> mind a rather
> unpleasant thought - these hi power cordless phones
> are, I think, Asian in
> manufacture. In fact, if memory serves, the ARRL
> filed a formal protest
> with one whose product was radiating in the lo end
> of the 2 meter band some
> time ago.
> That's bad enough for us hams - but what makes it
> worse is that the
> transmitter is dirty as all get out. So if it starts
> clobbering the VHF air
> band, it could conceivably cost lives down the road.
>
> If you see these pieces of junk advertised in the
> various radio mags, I'd
> report them to the authorities fortwith. There's
> enough junk out there
> causing RFI problems without these illegal phones
> doing more damage - and
> maybe killing someone down the road apiece.
>
> My $.02 worth, for all it's worth. Soapbox mode
> off :.)
>
> 73s Mike
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com
--__--__--
Message: 7
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2003 21:03:01 -0400
To: [email protected]
From: Mike Agner <[email protected]>
Subject: [Scan-DC] Scanning email lists
The question about Walt Disney World got me thinking a little; I've been
developing a list of email reflectors that are devoted to scanning in
specific geographic areas for another project. After all, who better to
advise someone about freqs in use in a given area then someone who's
actually there?
Anyway, some 40 states and 5 Canadian provinces are on this list. By no
means is this comprehensive; there's probably many more that I didn't find
simply because I didn't search properly. Most - tho not all - of these
lists are yahoo and qth.net based.
If you're doing a great deal of travel in the next several months, and
would like to see this list, drop me an email. It's in text format,
Notepad compatible. Remember, of all the web pages out there, it's the
people in a club or group that's most likely to have the accurate scoop on
frequencies in an area to which you're traveling.
73s Mike
--__--__--
Message: 8
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2003 09:34:43 -0400
From: "William D. Rossiter III" <[email protected]>
To: "Scan-DC (E-mail)" <[email protected]>
Subject: [Scan-DC] Cordless Phones/Aircraft Interferance
Woundn't two meter ham gear cause interfearance in the milaircraft region?
I say this because the first harmonic of the 2 meter band is between 290 and
300 MHz, and would'nt any planes flying over one's house hear the harmonics
of these hams?
--__--__--
Message: 9
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2003 07:32:31 -0700 (PDT)
From: Shawnerz <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Scan-DC] Cordless Phones/Aircraft Interferance
To: "William D. Rossiter III" <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
HHmmm...it could, but let me think this through for a
second.
*Typically* the 3rd harmonic is more troublesome than
the 2nd.
But looking at the 2nd harmonic, a 5 watt HT would be
putting out +37dBm. Does anyone know how far down
harmonics have to be for FCC type accecptance?
If the harmonics are, say, 60 dB down, then the
harmonics would be at -23 dBm into a poorly matched
antenna.
0 dBm is 1 mW so -20 dBm would be .01 mW or .00001
watt. Another half power for the remaining 3 dB would
be .000005 watts of RF power.
-23 dBm is still a healthy level however most
non-secure military comms in that band is AM and most
ham communication is FM. The presense of a RF carrier
would still interfere, but -37 into a poorly matched
antenna, travelling, say, 5000 ft, to a receiver tuned
to detect a different mode of modulation, *probably*
wouldn't cause any problems.
Anybody have any experience in this arena?
-Shawn
--- "William D. Rossiter III" <[email protected]>
wrote:
> Woundn't two meter ham gear cause interfearance in
> the milaircraft region?
> I say this because the first harmonic of the 2 meter
> band is between 290 and
> 300 MHz, and would'nt any planes flying over one's
> house hear the harmonics
> of these hams?
>
> _______________________________________________
> Scan-DC mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/scan-dc
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com
--__--__--
Message: 10
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2003 07:32:39 -0700 (PDT)
From: Shawnerz <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Scan-DC] Cordless Phones/Aircraft Interferance
To: "William D. Rossiter III" <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
HHmmm...it could, but let me think this through for a
second.
*Typically* the 3rd harmonic is more troublesome than
the 2nd.
But looking at the 2nd harmonic, a 5 watt HT would be
putting out +37dBm. Does anyone know how far down
harmonics have to be for FCC type accecptance?
If the harmonics are, say, 60 dB down, then the
harmonics would be at -23 dBm into a poorly matched
antenna.
0 dBm is 1 mW so -20 dBm would be .01 mW or .00001
watt. Another half power for the remaining 3 dB would
be .000005 watts of RF power.
-23 dBm is still a healthy level however most
non-secure military comms in that band is AM and most
ham communication is FM. The presense of a RF carrier
would still interfere, but -23 into a poorly matched
antenna, travelling, say, 5000 ft, to a receiver tuned
to detect a different mode of modulation, *probably*
wouldn't cause any problems.
Anybody have any experience in this arena?
-Shawn
--- "William D. Rossiter III" <[email protected]>
wrote:
> Woundn't two meter ham gear cause interfearance in
> the milaircraft region?
> I say this because the first harmonic of the 2 meter
> band is between 290 and
> 300 MHz, and would'nt any planes flying over one's
> house hear the harmonics
> of these hams?
>
> _______________________________________________
> Scan-DC mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/scan-dc
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com
--__--__--
Message: 11
From: [email protected]
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2003 11:37:42 EDT
Subject: Re: [Scan-DC] Cordless Phones/Aircraft Interferance
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
In the military i was a radar nav tech but sometimes had to work on vhf and
uhf receivers and as i remember they were triple conversion and had lots of
tuned tanks in the imput such as the arc27 and arc 34 so other equipment on
harmonics never posed a problem even transmitting right under the aircraft
on ramp
radios in the 148 mch spectrum Joe
--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
text/plain (text body -- kept)
text/html
The reason this message is shown is because the post was in HTML
or had an attachment. Attachments are not allowed. To learn how
to post in Plain-Text go to: http://www.expita.com/nomime.html ---
--__--__--
Message: 12
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2003 20:36:02 -0400
To: [email protected]
From: Mike Agner <[email protected]>
Subject: [Scan-DC] city of Baltimore license expired?
Yep, so it would seem, per the lead news item on trunkedradio net. Check
it out.
Also, according to the TRS database, DC has filed FCC documents to change
their 460 mhz PD freqs from conventional to trunked. I think this has been
in the planning stages for some time; it seems now they're ready to go
ahead with it.
73s Mike
--__--__--
Message: 13
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2003 20:51:38 -0400
To: [email protected]
From: Mike Agner <[email protected]>
Subject: [Scan-DC] Dorchester county moving from LTR
There's a quick article on trunkedradio by Brian Tolley that says that
Dorchester county just allocated funds to move their LTR multi net system
to Motorola 800 mhz digital. The system will tie in with the Eastern Shore
Consortium that Queen Anne, Talbot and most recently Caroline uses/will
use. It cites poor coverage and interoperability problems with other
counties as contributing factors.
73s Mike
--__--__--
Message: 14
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 21:08:07 -0400
To: [email protected]
From: Mike Agner <[email protected]>
Subject: [Scan-DC] going on a cruise?
Then take a peek at this web site, it's most interesting...it's from the
ScanL
server
http://home.earthlink.net/~ecps92/cruise_ships.htm
73s Mike
--__--__--
Message: 15
From: "listen13579" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2003 00:22:23 -0400
Subject: [Scan-DC] DC CAP 228.9
The DC CAP was active today presumably for the visit by Pakistani
President Musharraf to Camp David. 228.9 seemed to be used by HUNTRESS
and PITMAN (sounded like) 51 & 52. Black Cat 26 (a UH-60) also assisted
with CAP duty on the return flight from the camp. Who uses the PITMAN
callsign?
--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
text/plain (text body -- kept)
text/html
The reason this message is shown is because the post was in HTML
or had an attachment. Attachments are not allowed. To learn how
to post in Plain-Text go to: http://www.expita.com/nomime.html ---
--__--__--
Message: 16
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 21:28:03 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jeff <[email protected]>
Subject: [Scan-DC] DC CAP 228.9
To: [email protected]
PITMANS are from Shaw. 20th FW 78th FS. For there A-A check 139.825 and
143.875. PITMANs used both yesterday. Also 320.6, 324. For the Tanker aand
Huntress
And yes 228.9 is Huntress as well
The DC CAP was active today presumably for the visit by Pakistani President
Musharraf to Camp David. 228.9 seemed to be used by HUNTRESS and PITMAN
(sounded like) 51 & 52. Black Cat 26 (a UH-60) also assisted with CAP duty
on the return flight from the camp. Who uses the PITMAN callsign?
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
text/plain (text body -- kept)
text/html
The reason this message is shown is because the post was in HTML
or had an attachment. Attachments are not allowed. To learn how
to post in Plain-Text go to: http://www.expita.com/nomime.html ---
--__--__--
Message: 17
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2003 18:32:24 -0400
From: knowlton <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Reply-To: knowlton <[email protected]>
Subject: [Scan-DC] vote on moving scan dc cap
ok im taking votes on 1-to leave scan cd cap on shoutcast,with its 1.5 min
delay,and alwas moving its spot in the line up or.2-moving it to
teamspeak(www.teamspeak.org) then it would be real time no need to get
winamp,and you (if you have a mic)chat with others on it,the down side is
that you would need to send me a e-mail stetting up your password and user
name on it,the up side is that the ip addresss will not change and its real
time,no player to get.you vote 1 or 2
mark
--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
text/plain (text body -- kept)
text/html
The reason this message is shown is because the post was in HTML
or had an attachment. Attachments are not allowed. To learn how
to post in Plain-Text go to: http://www.expita.com/nomime.html ---
--__--__--
End of Scan-DC Digest
End of Scan-DC Digest
--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
text/plain (text body -- kept)
text/html
The reason this message is shown is because the post was in HTML
or had an attachment. Attachments are not allowed. To learn how
to post in Plain-Text go to: http://www.expita.com/nomime.html ---