Driver to drive?

[Jonathan Kirwan]

On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 01:37:31 +0000 (UTC), toor@iquest.net (John S. Dyson) wrote:

To find a liberal, one needs to find someone who is an open minded,
intelligent and tolerant individual truly participating in society,
but oddly enough, that is most likely to be a middle-of-the-road GOPer

Do they still exist? I thought they were all being called RINOs (Republican in
Name Only, for those who haven't heard the term) now and run out of the party on
a rail, years ago. I personally knew and respected several such folks here in
Oregon (names some of you may have heard of) and they have personally lamented
the fact that they have no place or voice in the GOP, today. The religious nuts
and extremists dominate the party.

and much less likely a Democrat

I personally spend 300-500 hours a year in volunteer activities helping disabled
children and volunteering at local schools as an aide. While I do meet some
great Republicans (one of them happens to be my dentist, for example, who just
recently went to northern Iraq for two weeks as a volunteer there and for whom I
have great respect), they are rather rarer by proportion to Democrats who put in
similar levels of personal effort. My experience these last 20 years of active
participation is quite different than your implications -- and I live in a state
that is about 50/50 split Republican/Democrat. I meet far more Democratic
activists in providing substantial personal time in helping those who are "less"
well off and need support. And among the active Republicans I do get a chance
to talk with and otherwise grow to know, those providing substantial personal
time, they are rather uniformly against Bush this time around.

(In terms of registration, there are 39% Democrat, 35% Republican, and 22%
independent in Oregon, as of last August this year.)

I don't know where you hail from, but out here my actual experiences remain at
continuing odds with your comment. Which makes me wonder if you are speaking
from substantial personal experience in your area or simply citing some pap from
a right wing brochure or web page. My opinion comes from substantial, direct
experience in the field doing the work shoulder to shoulder, but is of course
limited by the range of that experience.

Jon

 

[Rich Grise]

On Thu, 28 Oct 2004 00:46:08 +0000, Jim Yanik wrote:

Robert Monsen <rcsurname@comcast.net> wrote in
news:53Sfd.316329$MQ5.143206@attbi_s52:

Jim Yanik wrote:


Ever been hit in the face with a vegetable like you suggest? Think it
doesn't hurt? Would you like to risk YOUR eyesight in that manner?

What this means is that you support violence against those of differing
opinions.



Well, if you equate pie throwing to the indescriminate violence we are
doing to civilians in Iraq, then, no, I can say I don't support that. I
can firmly say that there is a point where I draw the line.

I wouldn't support air strikes on a building next to Ann Coulter and her
small children in order to kill an insurgent that may or may not be
there, for example. I wouldn't support shooting whole families
(including Ann's) who are fleeing a war zone in order to 'maintain
order'. I wouldn't support torturing Ann while she hung naked in chains,
with dogs and electrodes, without any real evidence that she had done
anything wrong.


But you DO support violence against individuals exercising their free
speech right. You said so,right here. Don't try to weasel out of it.
Getting struck in the face with a "pie" IS violence.
This sort of act is intimidation of people speaking their opinions,and YOU
favor it.You are the sort of person we as a country have to guard against.

Actually, he is the sort of person that America is for.

Say you say something to a woman that she doesn't like, and she slaps you.

Would you call that violence and have her jailed?
Are you that much of a pantywaist?

I suspect if YOU were the target,you'd scream bloody murder,too.

I'd probably throw it back at him, nitwit.

You and der fuehrer will get along very well, I think. You're his kind
of sheeple. Everybody's got a right to say whatever they want, as long
as you agree with it.

And if a pie is violence, it's such a little bitty bit of violence
that it's really insane to lump it in with mass murder.

Good Luck.
RIch

 

[Rich Grise]

On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 16:08:52 -0700, John Larkin wrote:

On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 22:59:25 GMT, Rich Grise <rich@example.net> wrote:


When I'm elected president, I'm gonna have my inauguration in a big
stadium, and issue an assault weapon to everybody who shows up.


Sounds like a refreshingly short Presidency.

So, elect me and find out! ;-)

"Ladies And Gentlemen, The President of The United *BLAM!*

Cheers!
Rich

 

[Rich Grise]

On Thu, 28 Oct 2004 00:49:52 +0000, Jim Yanik wrote:

Rich Grise <rich@example.net> wrote in
newsan.2004.10.27.22.59.00.258916@example.net:

On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 17:39:10 -0700, John Larkin wrote:

On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 19:32:00 GMT, Robert Monsen
rcsurname@comcast.net> wrote:


By the way, if your scroll down to the bottom of the link that mr
Yanik has posted, which attempts to corroborate the iraqi terrorist
story, you find an add for an Ann Coulter book "How to talk to a
Liberal (if you must)". Coulter, of course, deserves a pie in the
face:


What a disgusting statement.

What? That that nazi apologist deserves a pie in the face?

Yes. Terribly disgusting.

The nazis deserve to feel the pain of every torture they have
inflicted since the beginning of time.

Pie in the face. Hah! Try death camp.

Thanks,
Rich



That makes you no different than the Nazis.
What a fine pacifist you are!

What? Hoping that they'll hurry up and work off their karma so they
can get gone, makes me one of them?

I don't think so.

You're really grasping at straws, aren't you? Do you think if you
spray insults at me, it will make reality conform to your fantasies?

But yes, I believe that whoever inflicts pain deserves to have an equal
pain inflicted on him. Or her. I didn't necessarily mean that I was eager
to be that instrument, however.

Hope This Helps!
Rich

 

[ChrisGibboGibson]

I fondly remember my first contruction project, from "The Ladybird book of
radio" (or some similar title).

It started with a crystal set, constructed on a piece of wood (mum's
breadboard) using brass screws and cup washers (is that where the term
"breadboard" came from?)

Then an AF amplifier was added (AC127 if I remember correctly) that allowed the
use of normal high impedance headphones.

Then an RF stage (an AC128?).

The AC127 was bought surplus and had to be repainted to stop it being a
phototransistor. Or was that an OC44? t'was all such a long time ago.

Then regeneration through both stages.

Totally fascinating to me at the time (still is).

Then, in later years, grandad (an ex WWII POW) showed me (and completed) a SW
radio made with "bits" from the kitchen.... "tuning condenser" made from a food
tin and a pencil, "detector" made from coal and piano wire, "aerial" of wire in
the washing line, "tuning coil" made from electric heater element wrapped round
a large lump of iron.

I *still* can feel the utter amazement and excitement when it worked. It
*still* gives me a buzz. The whole idea of it.

Nostalgia, fascination and admiration.

Gibbo

 

[Jim Yanik]

rustyrd@aol.com (B.Taylor) wrote in
news:b9ef7858.0410281124.e2ad962@posting.google.com:

Thanks to all for your input and responses. It is all most
appreciated! As Paul pointed out, as far as amateur radio goes for
right now it's mainly VHF and soon to be HF. However I don't want to
buy a 'scope that just meets my needs for today. I would like to buy
something that would also be useful in the event I do decide to
experiment with 23cm or 70cm. How about a DSO scope? Would that be
even more useful? Thanks again for all the input. Bruce

For a good analog Ham scope,look at TEK 7904 mainframe(above B250K
s/n's)(or 7904A),a 7A26 vertical,a 7A29 or 7A24 vertical,and a 7B10/15
horiz plug-in pair. Then later you can get a 7L12 or 7L13 spec analyzer.
When looking at HF RF,a SA is the thing to have.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik-at-kua.net

 

[Joerg]

Hi Chris,

The AC127 was bought surplus and had to be repainted to stop it being a
phototransistor. Or was that an OC44? t'was all such a long time ago.


Must have been the OC which had a glass enclosure with black paint. The

AC127 was metal. My favorite was the AF116 and later the AF126, a real
hot rod.

Then regeneration through both stages.

Totally fascinating to me at the time (still is).


Same here. My first radio that I built boasted one lone tube, a

triode/pentode combo. Ok, I guess that almost counts as an IC. The
triode had to do as the whole 'radio', the pentode was just for audio.
With one hand on the variable feedback 'condenser' you could listen to
far away stations and even SSB. This was pure "Q multiplication" since
that feedback was the only means of achieving any selectivity, the unit
didn't have any other filters.

Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com

 

[Pooh Bear]

Joerg wrote:

They had a metre long coax cable with a load attached if I remember
correctly - I assumed it was 75R, but looking now at the EMC report, it
lists a 50R load(?!) in the equipment used list (no 75R anywhere)


Wrong termination and driving the cable hard without the source
resistance being equal to the cable Z will cause a coax to become a
radiator.

Pretty certain it should be 75 ohms for SPDIF. And check that the driver output
Z is 75 ohms too ( maybe it needs a series R ? ).

I was wondering how a screened cable correctly connected to chassis could
radiate.

Were they using the clamp ?


Graham

 

[Paul Burridge]

On 28 Oct 2004 23:33:29 GMT, chrisgibbogibson@aol.com
(ChrisGibboGibson) wrote:

The AC127 was bought surplus and had to be repainted to stop it being a
phototransistor. Or was that an OC44? t'was all such a long time ago.

Could it have been these?

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=36332&item=2279587093&rd=1
--

"What is now proved was once only imagin'd." - William Blake, 1793.

 

[ChrisGibboGibson]

Well.... as there are clearly some people on this NG who *really* know their
stuff (and we all know plenty within our own field) perhaps a solution might be
to add a moderator to this group to get rid of all the shite (ie political
fuckbollockswank) that many people aren't interested in.

Gibbo

 

[Jonathan Kirwan]

On Thu, 28 Oct 2004 17:36:31 -0700, John Larkin
<jjlarkin@highSNIPlandTHIStechPLEASEnology.com> wrote:

Running a business is hands-on, and does result in a lot of
connectivity to real people. I'm reminded of this every time I have to
bail an employee out of jail, or loan somebody money because of a
crisis, or try to settle a harassment dispute without being forced to
fire someone, or discover that somebody just made a $20,000 mistake.
Or do the worst thing that I have to do, fire someone because they're
just not good enough.

Yes. I hadn't said that it wasn't hands on. It's just not hands on in the
areas I talked about earlier. Running a business, each and every day you do it,
pulls you away and separates your experiences from those who don't share what
you do. Doing it makes you more in touch with the hands-on of running a
business. But to the degree that this takes time away from the direct services
I was alluding to before, it takes away from that hands-on knowledge, over time.

It's like marriage. You do one thing, your partner does other things. This is
important, to be efficient and practical. But it also means that each and every
day your concerns slowly change you, just as theirs do. And, if you don't keep
washing your experiences over each other, looking for a thread of interest here
and there, over the long time of a life you will gradually grow apart.

It takes effort to keep growing together as well as growing better.

The best thing *I* can do for society is design electronics, because
that's what I'm good at. I have 20 people and their families to
support.

Of course. But as I tell some presidents I know personally, you cannot
completely isolate yourself. Set aside a certain percent of time as the "cost
of doing business," to remain connected in ways *other* than what you are most
skilled at. Wash a floor or two, help pour soup into someone's bowl, etc.
Don't be one-sided. 5% or 10% is a fair part and TIME, not money, is what
really counts. Since I'm well off enough to be able to, I make sure I put in
the personal time.

There's a constant tension between consumption and investment,
accumulating wealth (ie, resources to act) and taxing it (ie, fairly
distributing the benefits of civilization.) This is, sort of, the
Democratic/Republican borderline. What's insane if for either side to
ignore the value of the other, or to scream that the other is a Commie
or a Nazi.

I think all must be valued for what contributions they really do make.

Jon

 

[Ken Taylor]

"ChrisGibboGibson" <chrisgibbogibson@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041028190247.25170.00003271@mb-m04.aol.com...

....reading only part of it means I can show off my expertise at
electronics
and total ignorance of language and reading..... ?

Geez Gibbo, with a start like that it reminds me of an old exam paper which
told people to follow instructions and gave a list which included
contradictory instruction at the end.

Gibbo

Ken

Fe'y.

 

[ChrisGibboGibson]

Paul Burridge wrote:

On 28 Oct 2004 23:33:29 GMT, chrisgibbogibson@aol.com
(ChrisGibboGibson) wrote:


The AC127 was bought surplus and had to be repainted to stop it being a
phototransistor. Or was that an OC44? t'was all such a long time ago.

Could it have been these?


http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=36332&item=22795
87093&rd=1

Almost brought a tear to my eye!

For one brief moment I thought you'd put up a link to the "ladybird book of "
radio or electronics (whichever it was).

I'd have bid 25 quid for it.

Gibbo

 

[ChrisGibboGibson]

Joerg wrote:

The AC127 was bought surplus and had to be repainted to stop it being a
phototransistor. Or was that an OC44? t'was all such a long time ago.


Must have been the OC which had a glass enclosure with black paint.

Yes you're quite correct.

The
AC127 was metal. My favorite was the AF116 and later the AF126, a real
hot rod.

Used commonly in radios using an LT77 audio transformer if I remember
correctly.

Why is electronics just not as interesting as it used to be?

Then regeneration through both stages.

Totally fascinating to me at the time (still is).

I feel like a right old bastard now.

Gibbo

 

[ChrisGibboGibson]

"Ken Taylor" wrote:

"ChrisGibboGibson" <chrisgibbogibson@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041028190247.25170.00003271@mb-m04.aol.com...
....reading only part of it means I can show off my expertise at
electronics
and total ignorance of language and reading..... ?


Geez Gibbo, with a start like that it reminds me of an old exam paper which
told people to follow instructions and gave a list which included
contradictory instruction at the end.

Gibbo

Ken

Fe'y.

F'kin brilliant.

Couldn't have wished for a better reply!

Gibbo

 

[ChrisGibboGibson]

Terry Given wrote:

[snip]

Its because you have a built-in "will not work" feature.

Cracking phrase Grommit.

Never stopped Sinclair, Amstrad or Tandy.

Gibbo

 

[ChrisGibboGibson]

chickenwing2010 wrote:

Dear All,

I'm investigating how a PFM signal can be converted into PWM signal by
hardware. Any suggestions would be very appreciated.

Sounds like homework but what the hell...

Signal into a monostable, LP filter it, remodulate it to PWM using a comparator
and triangle waveform.

Gibbo

 

[john jardine]

"Steve" <aeroman10@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1099003721.067016.22050@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...

Hello,
My group and I built the following dc motor control circut:
http://forum.webzila.com/index.php?act=Attach&type=post&id=2441

I replaced the SK100 transistor with NTE262 and the SL100 with TIP110

We have a high speed 9-18V DC Motor (18,000 RPM / 1.98A max).
When we plug a 12 V DC power supply directly to the motor it spins very
fast but when we use the circuit to drive the motor then it seems to
spin much slower.

With power supply set to 12V, we just measured to voltage going to the
motor and it says 1.5V .... what is wrong?

We just now set the power supply to 20V and the leads that connect to
the motor still only output 1.5V

The circuit is not right.
When Q1 is switched ON then the circuit works OK with Q3 OFF, (.7V at base),
and Q4 ON (11.3V at base).
When Q1 is switched OFF its collector voltage will rise to switch ON Q3
*but* the voltage at the base of Q4 cannot rise to 12.0V to allow it to
switch off. That's because there maybe a couple of ma's being taken by Q3
base when it's ON and this current is supplied by the 1k Q2 resistor and the
1k Q4 base resistor. This causes a few volts to be dropped and Q4 is still
switched ON.
The same thinking applies to both halves of the circuit so at any given time
one half of the circuit must be passing a big current through 2 of the
transistors (hot!) and not the motor. The effect is to bring the motor
voltage nearly to nothing
A redesign is needed. Not brilliant but maybe make Q1 Q2 resistors 220ohm.
Stick a 2k2 resistor in Q3 Q5 base. Change Q4 Q6 resistor to 2k2.
Where did'y'get the circuit from originally?.
regards
jhon

 

[Winfield Hill]

ChrisGibboGibson wrote...

Well.... as there are clearly some people on this NG who *really* know their
stuff (and we all know plenty within our own field) perhaps a solution might
be to add a moderator to this group to get rid of all the shite (ie political
fuckbollockswank) that many people aren't interested in.

I *really* know my stuff, but as a group moderator I certainly would not
get rid of any so-called "shite."


--
Thanks,
- Win

(email: use hill_at_rowland-dotties-org for now)

 

[ChrisGibboGibson]

Winfield Hill wrote:

ChrisGibboGibson wrote...

Well.... as there are clearly some people on this NG who *really* know
their
stuff (and we all know plenty within our own field) perhaps a solution
might
be to add a moderator to this group to get rid of all the shite (ie
political
fuckbollockswank) that many people aren't interested in.

I *really* know my stuff,

And I doubt there would be a single person here who would argue with that.

but as a group moderator I certainly would not
get rid of any so-called "shite."

Which is a shame. Because surely, the political stuff belongs elsewhere?

I have no objection to people wishing to discuss politics, afterall, it *is* a
serious subject. But surely in it's rightful place?

Gibbo