Bought cool new digital charger....$89? WalMart?!!
Larry W4CSC
of returning it under my road hazard warranty for another free,
no-hassle replacement at WalMart, today. It cost me over $100 to
replace the tire which cost me $0.00 labor and tire. WalMart is slick
marketing. You can't help but look around while waiting....(c;
WalMart is handling a new line of Vector switching,
microprocessor-controlled "Smart" battery chargers. I had to buy the
biggest one, of course. It's a manly charger...(c; AR! AR!
The model is VEC1093A.
http://www.battery-rechargeable-charger.com/vector-VEC093-VEC1093A-VECo93-car-battery-charger.html
WalMart has it discounted to $89 and change from its $110 retail.
Walmart also makes refunds and returns just too easy, any port in the
country.
This charger uses a 100A switching power supply controlled by a
job-specific microprocessor. Click on the downloadable owner's manual
on the page to see how it works. It will charge a wide variety of
batteries from 2, 10, 20 and 40 amps and provide 100A of starting
current to get an engine moving WHEN THE COMPUTER SAYS YOU CAN.
Here in the shop, tonight, it's in its desufinating mode pulsing and
discharging my deep cycle trollilng motor battery for the free dingy's
auxiliary thruster. This mode is supposed to clean off and recover
the surface lead sulphate that didn't get recovered during the regular
charge cycle.
The charger is VERY light, being a switcher, not an analog with a huge
transformer. It doesn't have any transformer at all, at least not a
clunky 60Hz one. It has the SAME 3-stage constant current, then
tapering current constant voltage, then floating voltage technology
your favorite Waste Marine store wants $800 for with the yacht club
flag sticker on it. I think this thing has better metering at $89.
You can buy a SEPARATE charger for EACH battery bank at this price!
Its only drawback as a "boat charger" I see is it shuts off after the
charging cycle is complete, going to sleep until you press the button
again. But, for $720, I could click that ON button a LOT of times on
THIS 40 amp fancy house battery charger, couldn't you?
Go take a look. Cool technology at a VERY reasonable price.....
I should have stayed out in the cold rain behind the tire shop....(c;
http://www.battery-rechargeable-charger.com/vector-VEC093-VEC1093A-VECo93-car-battery-charger.html
Larry W4CSC
Is it just me or did the US and UK just capture 1/3
of the world's sweetest oil supply? What idiot wants to
GIVE IT BACK?!!
Harry Krause
> One of my WalMart tires had another nail in it so I made the mistake
> of returning it under my road hazard warranty for another free,
> no-hassle replacement at WalMart, today. It cost me over $100 to
> replace the tire which cost me $0.00 labor and tire. WalMart is slick
> marketing. You can't help but look around while waiting....(c;
>
> WalMart is handling a new line of Vector switching,
> microprocessor-controlled "Smart" battery chargers. I had to buy the
> biggest one, of course. It's a manly charger...(c; AR! AR!
>
It just figures that you would be a big fan of Wal-Mart, the rogue
emplouer, predatory retailer and largest U.S. purveyor of goods made by
exploited workers in the communist People's Republic of China.
> Larry W4CSC
>
> Is it just me or did the US and UK just capture 1/3
> of the world's sweetest oil supply? What idiot wants to
> GIVE IT BACK?!!
Perhaps those people who think that a military invasion of another
country to steal its assets is immoral? But, then, what would you know
about that kind of morality?
--
Email sent to piedty...@yahoo.com is never read.
Ken Heaton
"Harry Krause" <piedty...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:bv5ea4$o8rhj$1...@ID-21096.news.uni-berlin.de...
This must be a record for haw fast you can take a thread off topic. Isn't
it customary to put OT in the header (as a courtesy) if you're going to do
this?
--
Ken Heaton & Anne Tobin
Cape Breton Island, Canada
kenheaton AT ess wye dee DOT eastlink DOT ca
Short Wave Sportfishing
~~ snippity do da ~~
>Go take a look. Cool technology at a VERY reasonable price.....
>
>I should have stayed out in the cold rain behind the tire shop....(c;
>
>http://www.battery-rechargeable-charger.com/vector-VEC093-VEC1093A-VECo93-car-battery-charger.html
Hmmmmm - I need to go to Walmart today - I'll check it out. Sounds
like something I can use for the trolling motor batteries on the
Ranger.
Later,
Tom
S. Woodstock, CT
----------
The years will bring their Anodyne,
But I shall never quite forget,
The fish that I had counted mine
And lost before they reached the net.
Colin Ellis, "The Devot Angler" quoted
in A. R. Macdougall, Jr's "The Trout
Fisherman's Bedside Book" (1963).
Christopher Robin
> >
>
> It just figures that you would be a big fan of Wal-Mart, the rogue
> emplouer, predatory retailer and largest U.S. purveyor of goods made by
> exploited workers in the communist People's Republic of China.
>
>
>
>
> Perhaps those people who think that a military invasion of another
> country to steal its assets is immoral? But, then, what would you know
> about that kind of morality?
It's not working, Hairball. You're a lousy troll and a has-been.
Charles
Harry Krause wrote:
> It just figures that you would be a big fan of Wal-Mart, the rogue
> emplouer, predatory retailer and largest U.S. purveyor of goods made by
> exploited workers in the communist People's Republic of China.
For a moment, let's go with your rant and pretend it's true.
Tell us then, is what Walmart does any different than the theft going on
at Ullico?
> Perhaps those people who think that a military invasion of another
> country to steal its assets is immoral? But, then, what would you know
> about that kind of morality?
Yes, let's talk about morality, something you know little about
personally. Let's talk about Ullico, and stealing and fraud:
-----------------------
For media inquiries, please contact the individual listed below:
Harry Krause
ULLICO Inc.
(202) 682-7957
hkr...@ullico.com
Union Pension-Owned Company Set to Lose $20-$30 Million
Its stock windfall from the bankrupt Global Crossing now gone, Georgine,
former head of the AFL-CIO's Bldg. & Construction Trades Dept., blamed
chief financial officer John Grelle for the losses. Days later, Grelle
resigned in protest, blasting Georgine for not selling the company jet,
which costs $3 million a year. There was no indication if Grelle also
called on Georgine and other union boss directors of Ullico to return
the more than $6 million they made in inside deals of Ullico stock in
2000 and 2001. In the late 90s, Ullico was able to buy Global Crossing
stock at its initial public offering (IPO) price. By 1999, a $7.6
million investment had mushroomed to $335 million. After pricing its own
stock at a set $25 per share, Ullico directors changed the rules,
setting a new price at the beginning of each year.
Global Crossing spiraled toward bankruptcy, and Ullico's stock took a
tumble, the Ullico directors who had bought their stock at $54 a share
were given two opportunities to sell it back, the first time for $146 a
share, the second time for $75. As Georgine and the other Ullico
officials made $6.7 million in profits, the union pension funds that own
Ullico could not take advantage of the same deal.
[New York Times 3/28/03]
-----------------------
Oh, right, I forgot. This Ullico fraud is something you will not talk
about. You just want to talk about others and not about your own
involvement in immoral acts.
One has to shake ones head about someone who has taken a sanctimonous
attitude about workers rights, fairness, and compensation, and then is
involved with a company who is stealing from those very workers. Such is
democratic liberalism: watch my mouth not my hand.
-- Charlie
----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
JimL
Performance Features, it's very impressive. Especially the
Recondition mode. Got an old battery to test that feature?
Don't forget to send that warranty card in! I noticed that it
has a five year warranty *IF* you send in the warranty card within
10 days of purchase.
-JimL
Backyard Renegade
Your trolling is not working anymore, this must be very upsetting to
you. Why bother addressing your posts, they are not based on fact and
you have freely admitted you are only here to shill for the party, and
screw with us?
Later troll...
Gary Schafer
detailed as to what the three stages really are. They seem to indicate
that the last stage is a float mode but the unit turns off soon after
entering that third stage. If it was really a float mode I would think
that they would keep it on.
Now, you have to buy the "battery life saver". This thing looks like
some new magic that is akin to the magnetic fuel conditioning device.
Regards
Gary
On Tue, 27 Jan 2004 05:50:12 GMT, n...@home.com (Larry W4CSC) wrote:
Doug Kanter
news:40167B75...@yahoo.com...
>
> Yes, let's talk about morality, something you know little about
> personally. Let's talk about Ullico, and stealing and fraud:
>
How was Harry involved with the Ullico saga?
Charles
Ha ha ha ha ha. Good one Douglas.
Doug Kanter
>
>
> Doug Kanter wrote:
> >
> > "Charles" <charles...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:40167B75...@yahoo.com...
> >
> > >
> > > Yes, let's talk about morality, something you know little about
> > > personally. Let's talk about Ullico, and stealing and fraud:
> > >
> >
> > How was Harry involved with the Ullico saga?
>
>
> Ha ha ha ha ha. Good one Douglas.
>
> -- Charlie
I honestly don't know! Do you have an answer?
NOYB
"Doug Kanter" <ancien...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:8HzRb.11784$HZ3...@news01.roc.ny...
Harry reported that he owned Global Crossing and turned a nice profit a year
before news of the Global Crossing scandal broke.
In February 2002, Harry wrote:
"Speculation futures? Is that on the NASDAQ? Sorry, Markie, but the last
speculative investment I made (and got out of a year ago) wasn't in
commodities. It was the now notorious Global Crossing."
In March, 2003, the NY Times wrote:
"In the late 90s, Ullico was able to buy Global Crossing
stock at its initial public offering (IPO) price. By 1999, a $7.6
million investment had mushroomed to $335 million. After pricing its own
stock at a set $25 per share, Ullico directors changed the rules,
setting a new price at the beginning of each year.
Global Crossing spiraled toward bankruptcy, and Ullico's stock took a
tumble, the Ullico directors who had bought their stock at $54 a share
were given two opportunities to sell it back, the first time for $146 a
share, the second time for $75. As Georgine and the other Ullico
officials made $6.7 million in profits, the union pension funds that own
Ullico could not take advantage of the same deal."
----------------------------------------------------
Harry was working for ULLICO and using insider info to make a profit, while
those with money in the union pension funds got screwed.
Doug Kanter
news:_2ARb.27760$i4.2...@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>
> Harry was working for ULLICO and using insider info to make a profit,
while
> those with money in the union pension funds got screwed.
>
What does Harry say about this? I've only seen KSmith's streams of vomit,
which I have no patience for.
Ken Heaton
"Harry Krause" <etaoin_shr...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:c3dhc2g=.4c5c86796eb9b8d5e9b813243cdee911@1075221877.cotse.net...
> Ken Heaton wrote:
>
> > Comments below:
> >
> > "Harry Krause" <piedty...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:bv5ea4$o8rhj$1...@ID-21096.news.uni-berlin.de...
> > > Larry W4CSC wrote:
<snipped bits were here>
> > > > Larry W4CSC
> > > >
> > > > Is it just me or did the US and UK just capture 1/3
> > > > of the world's sweetest oil supply? What idiot wants to
> > > > GIVE IT BACK?!!
> > >
> > > Perhaps those people who think that a military invasion of another
> > > country to steal its assets is immoral? But, then, what would you know
> > > about that kind of morality?
> > > --
> > > Email sent to piedty...@yahoo.com is never read.
> >
> > This must be a record for haw fast you can take a thread off topic.
Isn't
> > it customary to put OT in the header (as a courtesy) if you're going to
do
> > this?
> > --
> > Ken Heaton & Anne Tobin
> > Cape Breton Island, Canada
> > kenheaton AT ess wye dee DOT eastlink DOT ca
>
> I believe Larry took this post "off-topic" with the bit of garbage he
> puts at the end of his posts, extolling U.S. imperialism.
>
Harry, you've certainly got a point there.
Larry, why do you put that bit on the end of your posts? You don't actually
believe the US should take by force the resources of another country? Do
you believe the US has the right to take what it pleases? Curious.
NOYB
Harry says nothing...methinks under the advice of counsel.
Harry Krause
BTW, I took a look at that site...there's no indication where the goods
are manufacturerd. Further, the chargers are for old-tech wet batteries
only...no AGM batteries.
Charles
Well perhaps, but more likely his hand is still in the Ullico cookie
jar. He just happened to get exposed this time.
Whichever it is, it illustrates what krause fundamentally is: A flaming hypocrite.
Doug Kanter
Was he a director? Or "other" within the company, listening to whispers?
Harry Krause
I don't normally comment on the business of companies with whom I do
business.
Harry Krause
Check your email account listed here, Doug.
Harry Krause
> "Doug Kanter" <ancien...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:8HzRb.11784$HZ3...@news01.roc.ny...
>> "Charles" <charles...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:4016C278...@yahoo.com...
>> >
>> >
>> > Doug Kanter wrote:
>> > >
>> > > "Charles" <charles...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> > > news:40167B75...@yahoo.com...
>> > >
>> > > >
>> > > > Yes, let's talk about morality, something you know little about
>> > > > personally. Let's talk about Ullico, and stealing and fraud:
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > > How was Harry involved with the Ullico saga?
>> >
>> >
>> > Ha ha ha ha ha. Good one Douglas.
>> >
>> > -- Charlie
>>
>> I honestly don't know! Do you have an answer?
>
> Harry reported that he owned Global Crossing and turned a nice profit a year
> before news of the Global Crossing scandal broke.
That's correct. I owned a few shares.
>
> Harry was working for ULLICO and using insider info to make a profit, while
> those with money in the union pension funds got screwed.
You're wrong on all three counts.
Joe Della Barba
charging. Obviously this unit is not intended to be installed aboard a
boat.
Joe
BTW, the reason we are not keeping Iraq's oil is that the USA and the
UK are honourable nations and are not going around the world stealing
things that look interesting.
Larry W4CSC
<lukowski...@carolina.rr.com> wrote:
> I Looked at the owners manual from their website. Looking at the
>Performance Features, it's very impressive. Especially the
>Recondition mode. Got an old battery to test that feature?
The carefully worded manual says it is to rejuvie working batteries,
not raise the dead. I reconditioned an old trolling motor battery
last night and all day today, but I've been in Orangeburg, SC, all day
trying to save my father's home from the terrible ice storm which just
tore Orangeburg apart Monday. Worst ice storm we've had since the
1970's! So, I haven't had time to test the AH rating of the trolling
motor battery.
Tonight, I'm reconditioning the 330AH golf cart house batteries in my
stepvan electronics shop. They're good batteries, too, but this is
probably good for them. They go through hell when I jerk 60ADC out of
them to power a loud music system at some outdoor party. I'm sure
they could use it.
>
> Don't forget to send that warranty card in! I noticed that it
>has a five year warranty *IF* you send in the warranty card within
>10 days of purchase.
>
Yes, already sent...(c; Noticed they have no online registration. I
also sent them my OPT-OUT warning with the card, properly encoded data
so I can tell if they sell my information to outside parties, the
usual reason they are so adamant these days about having your personal
information....so they can sell it to the spammers.
Charles
Harry Krause wrote:
>> Harry was working for ULLICO and using insider info to make a profit, while
>> those with money in the union pension funds got screwed.
> You're wrong on all three counts.
Of course as one who has a relationship with this company, who is the
spokesperson for them, you are to be believed? Kind of like we should
believe what President Bush's aides say.
Yea, right.
NOYB
> > Harry was working for ULLICO and using insider info to make a profit,
while
> > those with money in the union pension funds got screwed.
>
> You're wrong on all three counts.
No I'm actually pretty accurate. Let's review:
Count #1: Harry was working for ULLICO
Proof: For media inquiries, please contact the individual listed below:
Harry Krause
ULLICO Inc.
(202) 682-7957
hkr...@ullico.com
Count #2: using insider info to make a profit
Proof: Difficult to prove that the info was "insider trading"...but one has
to ask why would a guy who says he *never* does speculative investing
suddenly do speculative investing in a company like Global
Crossing...specifically, a company that his employer had close contacts with
and large investments in?
Count #3: "while those with money in the union pension funds got screwed"
Proof: From the NY Times
"Global Crossing spiraled toward bankruptcy, and Ullico's stock took a
tumble, the Ullico directors who had bought their stock at $54 a share
were given two opportunities to sell it back, the first time for $146 a
share, the second time for $75. As Georgine and the other Ullico
officials made $6.7 million in profits, the union pension funds that own
Ullico could not take advantage of the same deal."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sure doesn't look like I'm wrong...
NOYB
> Doug Kanter wrote:
>
> > "NOYB" <NO...@NOYB.COM> wrote in message
> > news:_2ARb.27760$i4.2...@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> >>
> >> Harry was working for ULLICO and using insider info to make a profit,
> > while
> >> those with money in the union pension funds got screwed.
> >>
> >
> > What does Harry say about this? I've only seen KSmith's streams of
vomit,
> > which I have no patience for.
> >
>
> I don't normally comment on the business of companies with whom I do
> business.
Ha! You're in public relations. It's your *business* to comment on the
business of companies with who you do business.
NOYB
> Check your email account listed here, Doug.
See, Doug? Innocent people don't behave this way.
Charles
You're not wrong, but what will happen next is that kanter will get the
secret handshake email from krause with "proof" and will become the
krause puppet for rebutting allegations of krause's involvement in
Ullico, much like gould became the krause puppet on a different matter.
krause chooses his puppets carefully...
SB
Any chance you can share that opt out encoding with any of us? Sounds like
fun and a good way to complete some of those mandatory registration
processes.
BTW: I got a kick out of your tag line.
Bob
"Larry W4CSC" <n...@home.com> wrote in message
news:4016f6c...@news.knology.net...
Harry Krause
He wasn't.
Charles
Harry Krause wrote:
> No, you're wrong; your conclusions are based upon nothing more than what
> *you* believe to be fact and some coincidence, even though the facts are
> otherwise and coincidence is nothing more than coincidence. In that
> regard, you're not unlike the idiot in the White House and his invading
> of Iraq based upon nothing more than bad intel and even worse politics.
> Although in the case of Bush, I also think he was lying. I have no
> reason to believe you are; you simply don't have the facts, and you've
> made erroneous conclusions based upon what you think are facts.
Nope, you're a union shill, and a company shill, nothing more or less
than an expensive whore who will sleep with anyone who will pay your
price. You're moral-less, and will stop at nothing to try to make make
yourself smell good, or at least what you think the public will swallow.
Are we really to believe that all you did was produce a magazine for
them when their website listed you as the media contact? There is no end
to your attempts at deception.
We would not expect that someone who is hired to handle media contacts
to tell us anything otherwise about Ullico than what you've said. It's
amazing the details you're able to tell, things only an "insider" would
be privy to. Sure, you're a master at "spin"; Spin is nothing less than
an attempt to deceive people about the truth.
> My business relationship with the company just before 9-11 and,
> in fact, my first deliverable was to research, write and produce
> a magazine based upon 9-11. It's a classic, has won numerous
> awards, and I would be delighted to send you or anyone else a copy.
No, I'd rather keep my meal down. I can just imagine the appeal of
something you might write about 9-11 to a company of union-boss thieves
who perpetrated stock manipulation, fraud, and theft. Why am I not
surprised that you'd hook up with such a bunch of immoral people?
> By the way, speaking of good information, a year or so ago, I reported
> that I had purchased some shares of Garmin for around $18.00 a share,
> and that I expected to do very well with the company.
Don't change the subject krause. This is about you and your connection
with the Ullico fraud which was ultimately perpetrated upon the poor
union working slobs for whom you claim to care so much. The only person
you have ever cared about is yourself -- "Look at me! I bought Garmin
stock and I got richer!"
"I did not have relations with Ullico."
Yea, right. You're in bed with them.
Jim
Chris
> UK are honourable nations and are not going around the world stealing
> things that look interesting.
Well, THAT was a good one. ;>
Chris
JimL
but did happen to notice that on the last page. Personally,
I *NEVER* send in warranty cards. Well, lo and behold, this
past fall I managed to fry my Schumacher 2/15/100 charger
by jump starting a mower and when one battery clip popped
off and made contact with the other while in 100 amp mode,
the charger mysteriously stopped working. :^) I called
Schumacher, told them I had bought it a year before and
didn't hide the fact of what happened. They told me to
send it in. No questions asked, not even proof of purchase
for when I bought it. I did and they fixed it. I don't
remember if there was a warranty card to even send in as I
noted above, I wouldn't have sent it anyway. I'll reconsider
in the future. :^)
-JimL
Larry W4CSC wrote:
<removed>
John H
Interesting post. Thanks, Charlie.
John H
On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!
Doug Kanter
"I, tooth-boy, never have made and never will make any investment decision
based on information gleaned from sources not normally accessible to the
general public, such as personnel representing companies which develop
hot-selling products for the dental industry. Furthermore, if friends at the
marina or social gatherings begin discussing investments which my be good
ideas based on some special knowledge of their own, I immediately leave the
room, turn on loud music, or jump overboard".
Curtis CCR
> Larry W4CSC wrote:
>
> > One of my WalMart tires had another nail in it so I made the mistake
> > of returning it under my road hazard warranty for another free,
> > no-hassle replacement at WalMart, today. It cost me over $100 to
> > replace the tire which cost me $0.00 labor and tire. WalMart is slick
> > marketing. You can't help but look around while waiting....(c;
> >
> > WalMart is handling a new line of Vector switching,
> > microprocessor-controlled "Smart" battery chargers. I had to buy the
> > biggest one, of course. It's a manly charger...(c; AR! AR!
> >
>
> emplouer, predatory retailer and largest U.S. purveyor of goods made by
> exploited workers in the communist People's Republic of China.
Pictures just in from Mars. Why is it that this picture doesn't seem
so far fetched to me????
Doug
of these running in a marine if they are noisy as I suspect they be.
73
Doug K7ABX
Larry W4CSC
wrote:
No, I sure haven't, Doug. Mine's reconditioning the 6-year-old diesel
starting battery in my restored 1973 Mercedes 220D antique car,
tonight. I'll check it, when I can.
It can't be any noisier than that damned dual 10A Guest under the aft
cabin bunk in Lionheart. It's 20 over S9 across the HF bands on the
M802/AT140/backstay. Damned thing makes more noise than an electric
drill and VERY wideband!
del cecchi
> On Thu, 29 Jan 2004 01:29:17 GMT, "Doug" <do...@rodgersmarine.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Have you checked for RF noise on an HF receiver? I would hate to see
a bunch
> >of these running in a marine if they are noisy as I suspect they be.
> >73
> >Doug K7ABX
> >
> >
> No, I sure haven't, Doug. Mine's reconditioning the 6-year-old diesel
> starting battery in my restored 1973 Mercedes 220D antique car,
> tonight. I'll check it, when I can.
>
> It can't be any noisier than that damned dual 10A Guest under the aft
> cabin bunk in Lionheart. It's 20 over S9 across the HF bands on the
> M802/AT140/backstay. Damned thing makes more noise than an electric
> drill and VERY wideband!
>
about as noisy as a PC?
del cecchi
Wayne.B
Most of the marine inverters spray around enough HF noise that one
more source will probably never be noticed.
Floyd in Tampa
warning that you can't charge a dead battery with it, which means that you
still need another charger to get it up to the minimum required level for
this charger to start working.
Larry W4CSC
wrote:
>Maybe you ought to rat them out to the FCC. Shouldn't it be Class B, or
>about as noisy as a PC?
>
>del cecchi
>
Not made for use in the home, where the FCC really cares, I doubt it
comes under Class B.
Larry W4CSC
You don't run them down until their voltage is less than 5 volts, do
you?!! Normal discharge is 50% of capacity.....unless you can afford
the monthly replacement costs, I suppose.
Del Cecchi
> On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 21:13:15 -0600, "del cecchi" <dce...@msn.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Maybe you ought to rat them out to the FCC. Shouldn't it be Class B, or
> >about as noisy as a PC?
> >
> >del cecchi
> >
> Not made for use in the home, where the FCC really cares, I doubt it
> comes under Class B.
> Larry W4CSC
>
construed as class B.
del cecchi
John H
It's not you. A whole potfull of liberals stated the only reason we
went to Iraq was to get their oil.
Doug Kanter
news:5tqi10te1qgiih623...@4ax.com...
Well, we certainly didn't do it for humanitarian reasons, John.
Harry Krause
Get their oil AND of course prop up Dubya the Dummy in the polls.
Looks like neither is working.
Larry W4CSC
wrote:
>At the least it has to be class A. And I bet pleasure boats would be
>construed as class B.
>
>del cecchi
>
If so, Adler-Barbour solid state fridge will never pass. Just listen
to the pulses on Marine VHF Channel 16....dammit....
Harry Krause
> Is it just me or did the US and UK just capture 1/3
> of the world's sweetest oil supply? What idiot wants to
> GIVE IT BACK?!!
An Ugly American personified...just the kind of low-brain output that
enrages those in less developed nations and incites them to attack us.
NOYB
> Larry W4CSC wrote:
>
>
> > Is it just me or did the US and UK just capture 1/3
> > of the world's sweetest oil supply? What idiot wants to
> > GIVE IT BACK?!!
>
> An Ugly American personified...just the kind of low-brain output that
> enrages those in less developed nations and incites them to attack us.
LOL. Larry's comment is definitely the funniest one I've read today.
However, I didn't realize how funny it was until I saw that Harry took it
seriously.
Harry Krause
Larry is serious. You don't know Larry very well. He's five beers short
of a six pack.
NOYB
Larry doesn't strike me as someone who would be affected by 5 beers. He
seems like a Stroh's 30-packer to me. Nevertheless, his comments were
pretty funny. Can't say I disagree with him either.
Meindert Sprang
> On Thu, 29 Jan 2004 09:09:44 -0600, "Del Cecchi" <cec...@us.ibm.com>
> wrote:
>
> >At the least it has to be class A. And I bet pleasure boats would be
> >construed as class B.
> >
> >del cecchi
> >
> If so, Adler-Barbour solid state fridge will never pass. Just listen
> to the pulses on Marine VHF Channel 16....dammit....
Not to mention your 'favorite' Noland multiplexer.... They even admitted to
me once, that they did not have any kind of approval (FCC, CE)
Meindert
Larry W4CSC
There's a source of information, guys. Meindert, what are the FCC
radiation requirements for this boat electronics? Are these items
required to pass FCC's consumer radiation requirements? Is Norland
violating the law?
My contention is marine electronics isn't covered, otherwise we'd have
a data system that's shielded, not the stupid NMEA-0183 with
unshielded connections screwed down helter-skelter balanced and
unbalanced any old way you builders want to do it with wires hanging
out, radiating like hell. Is this the TRUTH?
Larry W4CSC
No, no, Scotty! I said, "Beam me a wrench.", not a WENCH!
Kirk Out.....
Meindert Sprang
> There's a source of information, guys. Meindert, what are the FCC
> radiation requirements for this boat electronics? Are these items
> required to pass FCC's consumer radiation requirements? Is Norland
> violating the law?
>
> My contention is marine electronics isn't covered, otherwise we'd have
> a data system that's shielded, not the stupid NMEA-0183 with
> unshielded connections screwed down helter-skelter balanced and
> unbalanced any old way you builders want to do it with wires hanging
> out, radiating like hell. Is this the TRUTH?
According to FCC Part 15, a class B digital device is:
---QQQ---
A digital device that is marketed for use in a residential environment
notwithstanding use in commercial, business and industrial environments.
Examples of such devices include, but are not limited to, personal
computers, calculators, and similar electronic devices that are marketed for
use by the general public. Note: The responsible party may also qualify a
device intended to be marketed in a commercial, business or industrial
environment as a Class B device, and in fact is encouraged to do so,
provided the device complies with the technical specifications for a Class B
digital device. In the event that a particular type of device has been found
to repeatedly cause harmful
interference to radio communications, the Commission may classify such a
digital device as a Class B
digital device, regardless of its intended use.
---UQUQ---
Navigation electronics fall in the category of "digital devices marketed for
use by the general public". For professional use, there are even more
stringent standards (IEC945).
And it is my understanding that FCC approval or compliance is mandatory.
When I export to the US and ship with Fedex, they ant me to fill out a form,
stating that the my multiplexers comply with FCC Part 15 class B. Otherwise
they (Fedex, being the importer) can be held liable.
So you might think Noland is violating the law here. They are for sure with
the units they export to Europe, because they have no CE marking.
The limits for radiated emmission for class B devices are:
30 - 88MHz: 100uV/m
88 - 216MHz: 150uV/m
216 - 960MHz: 200uV/m
Above 960MHz: 500uV/m
All measured at 3 meters distance.
Meindert
Larry W4CSC
<mhsp...@NOcustomSPAMware.nl> wrote:
>
>The limits for radiated emmission for class B devices are:
>30 - 88MHz: 100uV/m
>88 - 216MHz: 150uV/m
>216 - 960MHz: 200uV/m
>Above 960MHz: 500uV/m
>All measured at 3 meters distance.
>
>Meindert
>
Thanks, but the keywords I see are RESIDENTIAL. They are
"encouraged", but not "required" to do so in an industrial
environment, same as computers. Also of interest if the 30 Mhz lower
limit in the above table. It doesn't say 0-88 Mhz. The most
important 30 Mhz is missing....for the HF SSB radios.
Meindert Sprang
> On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 15:30:30 +0100, "Meindert Sprang"
> <mhsp...@NOcustomSPAMware.nl> wrote:
> >
> Thanks, but the keywords I see are RESIDENTIAL. They are
> "encouraged", but not "required" to do so in an industrial
> environment, same as computers.
What is meant here is that for industrial environment, Class A is
sufficient, (which accepts a higher level of interference), bu they
arecouraged to qualify for Class B.
> Also of interest if the 30 Mhz lower
> limit in the above table. It doesn't say 0-88 Mhz. The most
> important 30 Mhz is missing....for the HF SSB radios.
The figures I qouted were for radiated emission, which is hardly present on
lower frequencies. Below 30MHz, conducted emission is more the problem. This
is emission through connected wires and is measured with a current probe
setup.
Meindert
Meindert Sprang
news:401ae6d4$1...@news.nb.nu...
> "Larry W4CSC" <n...@home.com> wrote in message
> news:401accf0...@news.knology.net...
> > On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 15:30:30 +0100, "Meindert Sprang"
> > <mhsp...@NOcustomSPAMware.nl> wrote:
> > >
> > Thanks, but the keywords I see are RESIDENTIAL. They are
> > "encouraged", but not "required" to do so in an industrial
> > environment, same as computers.
In section 15.103 sub (a) it says that devices operating exclusively in any
transportation vehicle (including motor vehicles and aircraft) are exempted.
Now according to my dictionary, a vehicle usually has wheel and mover over
land. What about boats?
Meindert
Larry W4CSC
<mhsp...@NOcustomSPAMware.nl> wrote:
>
>The figures I qouted were for radiated emission, which is hardly present on
>lower frequencies. Below 30MHz, conducted emission is more the problem. This
>is emission through connected wires and is measured with a current probe
>setup.
>
>Meindert
>
The radiation from the unshielded wires, with many of them sucking
noise from inside the shielded pair because you must hook one side
(NMEA B) to many grounds creating a giant HF antenna out of your
carefully shielded cabling, is the problem on the HF receivers......
Let's just dump all this NMEA crap from 1970 and build Bluetooth
compatibility into every new marine electronic gadget. No need for
multiplexers for ancient technology mistakes, wires radiating crap to
all the radios, wires picking up the 150 watt SSB transmitter and
trashing all the NMEA crap it's hooked to.
I was for USB until I got looking at Bluetooth......
http://www.bluetooth.com/news/index.asp?A=2&PID=1130&ARC=1
"NAVMAN GPS 4460 LEADS THE WAY FOR PALM OS 5 USERS
Navigation Leader Unveils New palmOne Handheld Compatible Bluetooth
GPS Device
Foothill Ranch, Calif. – Navman, a leading designer and manufacturer
of world-class global positioning systems (GPS), communication and
marine products, announced today the latest addition to its innovative
line of GPS products for the consumer electronics market. The Navman
4460 is a voice-enabled, Bluetooth™ GPS receiver designed for Palm®OS
5-based handhelds (e.g. select devices from PalmOne, Inc. and Sony).
The device is powered by the latest version of Navman’s award winning
SmartST™ Professional navigation software and offers consumers the
most comprehensive self-contained guidance solution on the market. The
GPS 4460 is being unveiled at the 2004 International Consumer
Electronics Show.
SmartST Version II provides detailed street-level mapping for all of
North America, including Hawaii and Canada. The software is fully
automatic and provides voice (male or female) guidance, in addition to
visual driving instructions. Features include address-to-address
routing, Back-on-track? rerouting when off-course and an extensive
points-of-interest (POI) library. The POI database contains: retail
shops, entertainment venues, local amenities, restaurants, bars,
buildings and monuments, hotels, public transportation, gas stations,
garages, sports facilities, institutions, medical services and natural
attractions, allowing users to plan routes more easily and
effectively. SmartST options provide the ability to find the shortest
or quickest route to any destination, set locations as favorites,
select from a list of recent address entries, and hear spoken
instructions in one of seven languages. Large display icons and
easy-to-read maps provide an operator-friendly interface for added
safety while driving. SmartST is also optimized for palmOne’s new
Tungsten™ T3 handheld, allowing users to take advantage of the
device’s full 320x480 screen in both portrait and landscape modes.
The 4460 device employs a high-performance GPS receiver combined with
an embedded, Class 2 Bluetooth transceiver, which facilitates the
wireless communication of accurate satellite navigation information to
the handheld device. Once the SmartST software is installed onto the
user’s computer, it can be downloaded to the PDA via synchronization,
and map, voice and POI data is stored on an SD Card. A blinking LED
displays connectivity status and low battery indication. The complete
GPS 4460 solution includes a wireless GPS antenna, SmartST
Professional navigation software, a vehicle power adapter, vehicle
mounting brackets, and both an armband and lanyard for outdoor
personal use. The unit operates for 30 hours on 3 AAA Alkaline
batteries (included)."
Isn't it time to DUMP NMEA-XXXX and move all boat instruments on to
wireless technology?
Yes, it is.....
Larry W4CSC
<mhsp...@NOcustomSPAMware.nl> wrote:
>"Meindert Sprang" <mhsp...@NOcustomSPAMware.nl> wrote in message
>news:401ae6d4$1...@news.nb.nu...
>> "Larry W4CSC" <n...@home.com> wrote in message
>> news:401accf0...@news.knology.net...
>> > On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 15:30:30 +0100, "Meindert Sprang"
>> > <mhsp...@NOcustomSPAMware.nl> wrote:
>> > >
>> > Thanks, but the keywords I see are RESIDENTIAL. They are
>> > "encouraged", but not "required" to do so in an industrial
>> > environment, same as computers.
>
>In section 15.103 sub (a) it says that devices operating exclusively in any
>transportation vehicle (including motor vehicles and aircraft) are exempted.
>Now according to my dictionary, a vehicle usually has wheel and mover over
>land. What about boats?
>
>Meindert
>
>
A boat is a transportation vehicle, so is exempt and manufacturers can
go all to hell screwing up the Icom with radiating chargers, NMEA
gadgets, computer displays and use cheap screw terminals on
un-shielded, unbalanced feed lines to turn the whole damned boat into
a giant broadband transmitter.
(See my comment about Bluetooth.....last message)
Harry Krause
> Charles wrote:
>
>>
>> Harry Krause wrote:
>>
>>
>>>The chargers Larry is spamming
>>
>>
>> Why is it spam when Larry recommends something, but when you do the same
>> thing it's not spam?
>>
>> Flaming hypocrite asshole.
>>
>> -- Charlie
>>
>>
>> ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
>> http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
>> ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
> Whoa your a little hostile. Ignore it.
>
"Charlie" is a well-known jackal in rec.boats. Of every 500 of his
posts, 499 take a cheap shot at me. He's a semi-permanent member of most
"ignore" lists, and rarely gets a comment from anyone.
Meindert Sprang
> The radiation from the unshielded wires, with many of them sucking
> noise from inside the shielded pair because you must hook one side
> (NMEA B) to many grounds creating a giant HF antenna out of your
> carefully shielded cabling, is the problem on the HF receivers......
Agreed. It is therefore very important to have RF filtering in a device on
the terminals, to prevent any RF from leaking out over wires.
> Let's just dump all this NMEA crap from 1970 and build Bluetooth
> compatibility into every new marine electronic gadget. No need for
> multiplexers for ancient technology mistakes, wires radiating crap to
> all the radios, wires picking up the 150 watt SSB transmitter and
> trashing all the NMEA crap it's hooked to.
Yes and no. I will have a Bluetooth mulitplexer soon, but the problem with
Bluetooth is that it allows either data over a 'serial profile', which is a
point to point connection between two devices only (which my BT multiplexer
will be: mux <-> PDA or computer) or you can have a piconet, which creates
an RF network with a limit of 8 devices. I wonder though what an average BT
device does when 150 W of RF is emitted in the near vincinity....
One think is for sure: BT or any RF datalink is far away from any approval
needed for commercial vessels.
Meindert
Ed Price
"Meindert Sprang" <mhsp...@NOcustomSPAMware.nl> wrote in message
Meindert has beaten me to the quote, citing the correct subsection which
exempts electronics used in ANY US vehicle. This is simply an exclusion
granted by the FCC, other groups and agencies may have regulatory compliance
requirements for vehicles under their control or authority. For instance,
the FAA will not allow any random electronics installation in an aircraft.
Auto manufacturers place stringent compliance requirements on their vendors,
but after the sale, the manufacturer has no control over the vehicle
(although theoretically, some electronic aftermarket additions might void
the manufacturer's warranty).
In Europe, the automakers have pulled a sneaky exclusion, for automotive
products from the EMC Directive, that will last about 10 more years. They
have a parallel, but not harmonized compliance structure, and thus an EN
marking and a Declaration of Conformity for goods going into European autos
is not required. (No Directive, so nothing to conform to, so no way to
declare conformity!)
I can't recall what they formally call the automotive system; maybe it is
the Automotive Directive. Naah, too simple!
Ed
Ed Price
"Meindert Sprang" <mhsp...@NOcustomSPAMware.nl> wrote in message
more secure and robust in the presence of a hostile RF environment. And in a
commercial vessel, it shouldn't be a hardship to route sufficient fiberoptic
cabling.
True, I can see certain advantages in having a roving port with an RF link
to the ship's systems, and if you really feel you need this in a personal
watercraft environment, then Bluetooth looks like the way to go. But RF data
links are a "complicating" option, and you should always try to make systems
as "simple" as possible.
Ed
Larry W4CSC
<mhsp...@NOcustomSPAMware.nl> wrote:
>
>Yes and no. I will have a Bluetooth mulitplexer soon, but the problem with
>Bluetooth is that it allows either data over a 'serial profile', which is a
>point to point connection between two devices only (which my BT multiplexer
>will be: mux <-> PDA or computer) or you can have a piconet, which creates
>an RF network with a limit of 8 devices. I wonder though what an average BT
>device does when 150 W of RF is emitted in the near vincinity....
>One think is for sure: BT or any RF datalink is far away from any approval
>needed for commercial vessels.
>
>Meindert
>
Bluetooth is unaffected by a 1,500 watt HF ham radio station operating
with a vertical antenna virtually on top of the system. I have a
9-band Butternut vertical mounted right over the station on my sheet
metal roof (ground plane) I prefer to the beam. Amp is an old Drake
L4B with a pair of 3-500ZG graphite plate monsters that will run the
legal limit on RTTY and the digital modes. Doesn't bother Bluetooth a
bit as Bluetooth is just too high in freq and its antennas are way too
small to acquire any kind of RF from a transmitter under 30 Mhz.
Larry W4CSC
wrote:
>>
>I would much prefer fiberoptic in a commercial or military vessel. It's much
>more secure and robust in the presence of a hostile RF environment. And in a
>commercial vessel, it shouldn't be a hardship to route sufficient fiberoptic
>cabling.
Fiber sounds great until you have to install it. Fiber requires
amazingly expensive equipment to splice and connector to it and
specialized training to do it right, things pleasure boaters will
simply not pay for. It's not an option when a large corporation or
the government bureaucrats aren't paying the bills.
>
>True, I can see certain advantages in having a roving port with an RF link
>to the ship's systems, and if you really feel you need this in a personal
>watercraft environment, then Bluetooth looks like the way to go. But RF data
>links are a "complicating" option, and you should always try to make systems
>as "simple" as possible.
>
I have a Netgear wireless router under its own LAN DHCP server
connecting to a serial to ethernet device that configures from the
DHCP the Netgear provides. The serial port is connected to the Noland
NMEA multiplexer's serial port. In the computer, a "virtual serial
port" driver fools The Cap'n into thinking it's talking to a real
serial port, when, in fact, the driver has it talking to the wireless
router and serial-to-ethernet box via the notebook's 802.11b wireless
card.
The Cap'n operates fine, even from the other end of E-dock where the
signal from the little antenna on the Netgear starts to peter out.
You can lay on a beanbag behind the anchor windlass and navigate the
boat....(c;
802.11b would be better than Bluetooth to replace the NMEA stupidity
we use now, but Bluetooth is SO easy to configure and operate and is
supported by all the computer manufacturers and PDA manufacturers,
already. It simply configures itself and everybody can talk to
everybody else.
Imagine a complex NMEA system with NO WIRES and NO SIGNAL INTRUSION
and NO CORRODED TERMINALS.
I'm just dreaming. We all know marine electronics is a hodge-podge of
proprietary crap to try to force us to buy one brand of equipment.
Seatalk, H-1000 bus, Garmin, etc. What a stupid mess it all is.
Meindert Sprang
news:BzMSb.8390$fD.338@fed1read02...
>
> I would much prefer fiberoptic in a commercial or military vessel. It's
much
> more secure and robust in the presence of a hostile RF environment. And in
a
> commercial vessel, it shouldn't be a hardship to route sufficient
fiberoptic
> cabling.
Especially with the cheap plastic fibre optic. of less than $1/m.
Meindert
Ken Heaton
"Larry W4CSC" <n...@home.com> wrote in message
news:401bb333...@news.knology.net...
> On Sat, 31 Jan 2004 03:47:00 -0800, "Ed Price" <edp...@cox.net>
> wrote:
> >>
> >I would much prefer fiberoptic in a commercial or military vessel. It's
much
> >more secure and robust in the presence of a hostile RF environment. And
in a
> >commercial vessel, it shouldn't be a hardship to route sufficient
fiberoptic
> >cabling.
>
> Fiber sounds great until you have to install it. Fiber requires
> amazingly expensive equipment to splice and connector to it and
> specialized training to do it right, things pleasure boaters will
> simply not pay for. It's not an option when a large corporation or
> the government bureaucrats aren't paying the bills.
I'm not an expert in fibre in any way, but have been around television
technicians when they are working with it. Ten or more years ago when I
first saw it being installed they were using $10,000.00/$20,000.00
cutting/polishing/splicing/testing gear on terminations. More recently I've
seen them using "cam terminations"?? which the technician used to install
connectors onto bare, freshly cut fibre using simple hand tools. They
didn't even seem to test the terminations except to confirm the head end was
receiving a good signal at the other end many miles away. So it seems to me
fibre is becoming much more user friendly. Perhaps we will see it in
pleasure boater marine use sooner than you think as prices come down due to
increased use in commercial computer network wiring. I can certainly see
advantages with no RF interferance or emmissions and no corrosion of
connections, etc.
>snipped bit was here<
Meindert Sprang
>
> Fiber sounds great until you have to install it. Fiber requires
> amazingly expensive equipment to splice and connector to it and
> specialized training to do it right, things pleasure boaters will
> simply not pay for. It's not an option when a large corporation or
> the government bureaucrats aren't paying the bills.
There is also plastic fibre, the stuff that is also used for optical audio
links on high class CD players. This stuff needs no special tools. Just cut
it with a stanley knife, stuff it into the hole and tighten the plastic nut.
Ready.
Installed this way, it is good for 1Mbit/s over several 10's of meters. When
you polish the end with 8000 grit, you can go up to 15MHz over 50 meters or
so. Ideal stuff for some sort of NMEA-183Optical :-)
Meindert
Charles
Harry Krause wrote:
> "Charlie" is a well-known jackal in rec.boats. Of every 500 of his
> posts, 499 take a cheap shot at me. He's a semi-permanent member of most
> "ignore" lists, and rarely gets a comment from anyone.
"Well known" but "a semi-permanent member of most "ignore" lists".
Hmmmmm <shakin head>.
fred
While his comment does not make much sense, it does make sense for most
people to put the people who insist on keeping the off topic threads in
their "ignore" lists. Like little kids, these people are looking for
attention, either positive or negative attention. If people stop responding
to the off topic shit, they will be forced into going to another NG or
discussing boats.
"Charles" <charles...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:401C10A5...@yahoo.com...
Charles
fred wrote:
> Charles,
> While his comment does not make much sense, it does make sense for most
> people to put the people who insist on keeping the off topic threads in
> their "ignore" lists. Like little kids, these people are looking for
> attention, either positive or negative attention.
Indeed, no arguement with that.
> If people stop responding
> to the off topic shit, they will be forced into going to another NG or
> discussing boats.
Sadly, this has proved not to be true, probably for the reason you
stated above.
Larry W4CSC
Again, we are talking about ONE talker connected to ONE listener, the
same old NMEA crap problem that's making Meindert rich, now. Will we
make each unit an optical repeater to daisy-chain them together,
replacing the cabling monsters with fiber monsters?
Calif Bill
Firewire or 1401 is probably better for boats. Is a direct connect, run the
wires, and no problem with the next guy transmitting, and your Bluetooth
getting confused. Want Bluetooth wireless? Get a Firewire to Bluetooth
adapter. And a lot less non-ionizing radiation running around.
Bill
"Meindert Sprang" <mhsp...@NOcustomSPAMware.nl> wrote in message
news:401b56aa$1...@news.nb.nu...