At the time I bought my FT-897D (used), I found out that the warranty was only good for the original owner.

From the warranty card:
"The Limited Warranty extends only to the original retail purchaser"

73,

Richard - K4KRW

More off topic comments:

1.  Vinyl vs CD
I still have a turntable.  I still play my vinyl.  I have been digitizing my records just because the digital format is so much more convenient.  I love the sound of vinyl.  Yes the pops and clicks, surface noise, wow, flutter and rumble are there.  But the quality of the sound of the music is still phenomenal even though my newest album is almost 20 years old. 

The interesting thing is that the albums that I digitize myself sound better than the same album when bought in CD form from the record company.  I have a half speed master of Pink Floyd's 'Dark Side of the Moon' and also Joni Mitchel's 'Court and Spark'.  I also have the record company CDs.  The CD's that I created myself from my vinyl just sound better.  I do remove the pops and clicks and noise using software when I digitize.  I think much of the reason I like my CD's better is because I don't compress the heck out of the audio when I digitize it.  And I think that is why many critical listeners like the sound of vinyl better.  The material going on CDs nowadays is so overproduced and compressed (look up 'The Loudness Wars') that it just sounds dead to a critical ear.  I have heard well engineered CDs that do sound very good to me.  Too many of them do not.

2. Tubes vs. Solid State
The best sound quality audio recordings I have ever heard were created by Sheffield Labs in the early 80's I believe.  The signal went straight from the microphone, through 'ALL TUBE' electronics (that's right, no solid state) and straight to the cutting head that cut the record.  Didn't even go to tape.  An entire side was performed and cut at a time.  You could hear people flipping through their sheet music.  The sound quality was just superb.  So, that tells me that tube equipment can sound every bit as good as solid state, if not better.

In response to 'because it's tubes', I just bought an electric guitar amp for my daughter.  I listened to every solid state amp in the store that was 75 Watts or less.  None of them sounded as good as the 15 Watt tube amp I bought her.  We also looked at a second 15 Watt tube amp from a different manufacturer.  It too sounded better than any of the solid state amps.  Both of these tube amps reproduced dynamics much much better.  And they just sounded better.  And it wasn't a difference where you had to do back to back comparisons to find some small change in the character of the sound.  It was blatantly obvious.  I was quite surprised at the difference.  I had walked in the door fully expecting to buy a solid state amp.  The added bonus?  Tubes are cool! 

Regarding a dummy load.

Oak Hills Research (OHR) has a nice little kit for a 100 watt dummy load.  It is about $40.  If you are thinking about amplifiers down the road, it will not be sufficient.  But, I never run over 100 watts and decided to build one.  It is a well made kit.  It is very easy to assemble.  And it has worked very well for me.

I added additional rf-probe circuitry to mine so I could hook my digital volt meter in and make measurements on my output power.  It was a fun little project.

There are some sites online that give instructions on how to build your own dummy load.  To me, the case that came with the OHR one made it a better deal.

73,

Richard - K4KRW

Regarding peak vs. peak hold.  I don't think you really got an answer concerning this.

As mentioned by others, meters that will read Peak Envelope Power (PEP) are nice to have.  Most ham radio RF power meters read average power rather than peak.  So, when you are operating in modes like SSB, it looks you are transmitting at a much lower power than you actually are.  Meters that read PEP give you the real picture.  But, to do this they have additional electronics which make the meter more expensive.  And this also requires that the meter have a power source.  For standard meters, the RF signal is the power source.

Peak hold is a different animal.  If you find the feature on an RF power meter, it is most likely one that reads PEP.  But, peak hold itself has nothing to do with PEP.  It is just additional circuitry that makes the meter stop at it's highest reading for a brief period of time (maybe .25 seconds for example) so you can easily read the meter while it is stopped at that peak reading.  Peak hold is not unique to RF power meters.  Some high end cassette and reel to reel tape recorders had peak hold functionality built into their VU meters.  I've actually seen some that just maintain the highest reading they've encountered until they are reset by the user.

If the Diawa doesn't show SWR when in PEP mode, it is probably because they didn't want to increase the price of the meter by adding the PEP circuitry to the meter that reads reverse power.

73,

Richard - K4KRW

I also have the old Radio Shack key (same as the Ameco AM-K4).  I agree with AE5QB.  For not a lot more money, you can do much better.  I bought a J-38 key made by E.F. Johnson at a hamfest last year for $15 I think.  I should have done it years ago.  The AM-K4 is usable.  But, that lever is awfully thin.  So thin mine actually flexes.  My J-38 is just much more solid.  I find I enjoy using it much more than the AM-K4.

73,
Richard - K4KRW

You may already have one.  If you already have an HF rig, many will work as a code practice oscillator.  My FT-897D for example has a setting with which you can hear the side tone without actually transmitting.  That is all I use when I want to practice sending.  Of course, you have to be at the radio to do this.  A true code practice oscillator would be more portable.

73,
Richard, K4KRW

I remember reading this a while back:

From the Comet Antennas FAQ page:

A.In the past, most people preferred drilling a hole in the center of the roof or trunk to provide the best ground plane. This made a lot of sense when the repeater systems were poor and most antennas were single band and needed the ground plane. Current antenna design produces antennas that are ground independent. The sensitivity, coverage area and height of most modern repeater systems is outstanding. The antenna no longer needs to be in the middle of a ground plane for excellent coverage.
The benefit of drilling a hole and mounting your antenna in the middle of the roof or trunk is minimal.

Any comments?

I have read all of the aforementioned LOTW review postings and also noticed the person who posted a negative review without trying to use it.

I would like to comment on this statement:

"Someone in these forums once pointed out to me that LoTW is more difficult to use than their on-line banking site.  And that's kind of a good point.  Access to my money requires fewer actions on my part than verifying my identity to the ARRL so I can get some awards for beeping at distant rocks on my shortwave set."

Something is being completely missed here.  The reason it is easy to give you access to your money is you already have a relationship with your bank.  According to Federal law, you cannot open a personal banking account without the following:

1. A picture ID
2. Your Social Security Number
3. A bill that you have received at your residence as proof of your address.

Some states have additional requirements on top of that.

Upon this foundation is all other account access built.  This prior relationship started on the basis of verifiable documentation is what is allowing you to access your account at all - including on-line.

That post card in the mail to your FCC listed address is doing the same thing you have already done with your bank.  And you didn't even have to provide your SSN and your water bill.

In regards to ease of use.  Could LOTW be easier to use?  Sure.  But, if you use good logging software, it is already not too bad. 

One more thing.  The reason they use the scheme they do (signing files ...) is that public key cryptography works very well.  It is hard enough to break that people won't bother trying.

Awards don't mean anything if you can manufacture your own due to a system with weak or no verification.

I do wish they would apply some polish to LOTW.  But, I can use it as it is and I find it a valuable service.

73,

Richard - K4KRW

I enjoyed the video very much.  Thanks for posting it.  Nice work.  It must have been a lot of fun putting that together.  I'll have to check out that series of books.

73,

Richard - K4KRW

Social graces are not exactly thriving on the local repeaters.  This same kind of thing happens to me quite frequently.  I'm not really sure what can be done about it.  When you add extended transmissions and extremely brief breaks between transmissions it is hard to even interject yourself at times to rejoin the conversation.

I do find that I have a core group of friends on the repeater whom I can usually maintain a conversation with without too much trouble.  We really enjoy talking to each other.  We have much in common.  So, there is effort on both ends to maintain the conversation.

I have other people who I really enjoy talking to.  But, we don't have much in common or are just at different stages of life.  I'm in my 40s.  Many of these folks are retired.  They see and talk to each other all of the time.  And so, what starts as a conversation between me and one of them sometimes morphs into one not including me.  I don't think there is any bad intent.  

There are quite a few hams on our local repeaters who do try to make sure everyone is included in the conversation.  On my favorite local repeater, this is common practice.  But even there I find myself having to work to stay in the conversation at times.

Good practice is to do the following.  Keep a mental list of who is in the conversation.  If you hear someone being left out, when it is your turn just list off the participants and their order in the conversation.  People usually fall in line.  If you have a group of hams on the repeater that take up this habit, others will eventually pick it up.

Ex: "I'll give to Mike.  I think Darrel is next.  Bill is after him and Dr. Bill follows Bill.  Go ahead Mike.".

This can be a challenge if you are not good with names (I am not).  But, I usually find I can do this.  This is what we do on my favorite repeater.  It works pretty well.  

If it is a club repeater, a 'repeater etiquette' discussion at the next club meeting might be helpful.  But, as always, the best thing to do is lead by example and make sure you are courteous to others.  This might be a good article in a club newsletter or a good posting for the club web site.

73,

Richard - K4KRW

The easiest way to record and play back audio is using a personal computer.  If you have a sound card interface that you use for digital modes (PSK31 for example) you have all you need.  If you don't have the interface, get one.  Digital modes are a lot of fun.  There should be plenty of information online about hooking a sound card interface to your 950. 

From looking at the manual, it looks like the RTTY/PKT jack on the back of the transceiver should be where you hook in.  You should be able to buy the sound card interface with the appropriate cable to connect to that jack.

West mountain radio's Rigblaster, and Tigertronics' SignalLink would be examples of these interfaces.  (You can even make your own interface). 

Once you have your computer and your transceiver connected, any software that can record and play back audio should allow you to do what you wish to do.  And it will be a lot easier than using a recorder like a cassette recorder.  You can easily select exactly which piece of audio you want to play back using the software.  No searching through audio tape to cue to the right location.

Ham radio deluxe should have this capability built in.  And, it is free.

73, Richard - K4KRW

Our club posts our newsletter on our web site and then sends an email informing members it is there.  We had a few older members who we mailed hard copies to.  But that has gradually dwindled down to somewhere around 10 out of 140 or so members.  New members have to get it electronically.  When I produced the newsletter, it was usually around 10 to 12 pages (5-6 front and back).  Printing and postage costs were significant even for that small a number. 

I also like posting it on the web because it can be updated.  So, if you find an error, your worst case situation is you have to send an email to the members to read the updated copy on the web site. 

Best wishes,

Richard - K4KRW

I'd hardly call this a discretion situation.

The ham in Wytheville (Walmart employee) got caught when he unintentionally interfered with local police frequencies.  I'm sure he thought 'no one would ever know'.  Can your equipment be capable of transmitting outside of the ham bands?  Sure.  MARS folks do it all of the time (of course they are licensed to do that).  Is it a good idea to actually use ham radio equipment outside of your licensed frequency allocations?  Only in very unusual situations (like emergencies). 

Why would you want to borrow trouble like this?  It just makes no sense.

I have not had much success using the Windows built in Remote Desktop terminal over a wireless network.  I use digital modes quite often.  The remote desktop session gets network bound due to the waterfall display.  The wireless network, in my experience has just not been fast enough. 

Like Pete said, I would try to just use HRD.  You can definitely control the radio as HRD has built in client and server interfaces that let you link between two computers.  That control traffic is pretty light.  So, the wireless network shouldn't be a problem for that. 

You will then have to solve the problem of getting the audio back and forth between the two computers.  Skype is what some people are using.  I haven't tried this myself.  But, using Skype means using the internet which you said you don't want to do.  I'm pretty sure there are other software packages for routing the sound that could do it directly from box to box.  There are probably hardware solutions too.

73,

Richard
K4KRW

Tom,

Tracing by IP address is not as easy as you would think. 

Many IP addresses are assigned somewhat dynamically and can change periodically.  So, you would have to know who had the IP address when the posting was made.  So, you would probably have to have the cooperation of the person's internet service provider.  That would be very unlikely to happen.

Another thing to consider is that many folks have unsecured wireless routers.  So, even if you could trace the posting to someone's house (they had the IP address at the time), it might have been a neighbor one or two doors down (maybe further with the right antenna) who made the posting.

There are also ways to use computers as proxies.  So, if your computer was compromised and acting as a web proxy, a posting might look like it came from you when it did not.

There are also anonomyzing services that you can use as a proxy for a fee. 

Even if you make it through all of that, who was sitting at the computer? 

Hope this helps.

73,

Richard
K4KRW