Hello! My nephew has a neat treehouse in his backyard. I would like to take
readily available parts and make a weather proof solar powered family radio
intercom system for him for X-mas. Is there plans for this out there or any
ideas on where I should start?

Happy T-Giving to all!
Tank

On Nov 21, 4:19 pm, "Tank 'm o'Niel" <ta...@tanktank.com> wrote:
> Hello! My nephew has a neat treehouse in his backyard. I would like to take
> readily available parts and make a weather proof solar powered family radio
> intercom system for him for X-mas. Is there plans for this out there or any
> ideas on where I should start?
>
> Happy T-Giving to all!
> Tank

A good starting point would be with a packaged wireless intercom
system, example from radio shack

http://www.radioshack.com/product/index ... =techSpecs

You could add to that a small solar cell power source that could
provide the 6 volts needed and be in business.

Thanks - that's just the tip I was looking for!

"Dave22" <dsquier1@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:4d81aaed-6307-40f6-a84e-59f98963ac16@g21g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> On Nov 21, 4:19 pm, "Tank 'm o'Niel" <ta...@tanktank.com> wrote:
>> Hello! My nephew has a neat treehouse in his backyard. I would like to
>> take
>> readily available parts and make a weather proof solar powered family
>> radio
>> intercom system for him for X-mas. Is there plans for this out there or
>> any
>> ideas on where I should start?
>>
>> Happy T-Giving to all!
>> Tank
>
> A good starting point would be with a packaged wireless intercom
> system, example from radio shack
>
> http://www.radioshack.com/product/index ... =techSpecs
>
> You could add to that a small solar cell power source that could
> provide the 6 volts needed and be in business.
>

With solar panels I think I'd have to have a rechargable battery to store
the charge if the sun was not out.


"Dave22" <dsquier1@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:4d81aaed-6307-40f6-a84e-59f98963ac16@g21g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> On Nov 21, 4:19 pm, "Tank 'm o'Niel" <ta...@tanktank.com> wrote:
>> Hello! My nephew has a neat treehouse in his backyard. I would like to
>> take
>> readily available parts and make a weather proof solar powered family
>> radio
>> intercom system for him for X-mas. Is there plans for this out there or
>> any
>> ideas on where I should start?
>>
>> Happy T-Giving to all!
>> Tank
>
> A good starting point would be with a packaged wireless intercom
> system, example from radio shack
>
> http://www.radioshack.com/product/index ... =techSpecs
>
> You could add to that a small solar cell power source that could
> provide the 6 volts needed and be in business.
>

On Wed, 21 Nov 2007 19:52:41 -0500, "Tank 'm o'Niel"
<tanky@tanktank.com> wrote:

>With solar panels I think I'd have to have a rechargable battery to store
>the charge if the sun was not out.

---
Yes, that's how it usually works.

Also, please bottom post.


--
JF

Who put you in charge?
I always top post. Why should I have to scroll through lines and lines of
text I've already read to get to the subject of the message.

>
> Also, please bottom post.
>
>
> --
> JF

42 wrote:
>
> Who put you in charge?
> I always top post. Why should I have to scroll through lines and lines of
> text I've already read to get to the subject of the message.


PLONK


--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida

On Wed, 21 Nov 2007 21:43:44 -0800, "42" <paulinlapine@msn.com>
wrote:

>
>Who put you in charge?
> I always top post.

---
Then you're an asshole.
---

>Why should I have to scroll through lines and lines of
>text I've already read to get to the subject of the message.

---
It's not about you, you self-centered piece of shit.

From:

http://groups.google.com/support/bin/an ... &topic=250

"Summarize what you're following up.

When you click "Reply" under "show options" to follow up an existing
article, Google Groups includes the full article in quotes, with the
cursor at the top of the article. Tempting though it is to just
start
typing your message, please STOP and do two things first.
Look at the quoted text and remove parts that are irrelevant.
Then, go to the BOTTOM of the article and start typing there.
Doing this makes it much easier for your readers to get through your
post. They'll have a reminder of the relevant text before your
comment, but won't have to re-read the entire article.
And if your reply appears on a site before the original article
does,
they'll get the gist of what you're talking about."


>> Also, please bottom post.

---
Geez, and I was even polite...


--
JF

On Wed, 21 Nov 2007 21:43:44 -0800, "42" <paulinlapine@msn.com> wrote:

>
>Who put you in charge?
> I always top post. Why should I have to scroll through lines and lines of
>text I've already read to get to the subject of the message.
>
>>
>> Also, please bottom post.
>>
>>
>> --
>> JF
>
Yeah! The perennial top/bottom post argument is alive and well.

Post where you damn well please and don't worry about what others
think. It makes sense to bottom post when a message travels from the
hinterlands of Usenet to the server that gave you a message and the
answer still may come before the question to a part of the world. So
top posting threatens logical progression - and not everyone uses a
newsreader that organizes information well.

Some folks are just so comfortable and secure with ritual and rote
that the mere idea that there are people who think outside the box -
seems to threaten their very existence.

You want to top post? That's OK.
--

On Thu, 22 Nov 2007 12:08:41 -0500, default <default@nowhere.net>
wrote:

>On Wed, 21 Nov 2007 21:43:44 -0800, "42" <paulinlapine@msn.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>Who put you in charge?
>> I always top post. Why should I have to scroll through lines and lines of
>>text I've already read to get to the subject of the message.
>>
>>>
>>> Also, please bottom post.
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> JF
>>
>Yeah! The perennial top/bottom post argument is alive and well.
>
>Post where you damn well please and don't worry about what others
>think. It makes sense to bottom post when a message travels from the
>hinterlands of Usenet to the server that gave you a message and the
>answer still may come before the question to a part of the world. So
>top posting threatens logical progression - and not everyone uses a
>newsreader that organizes information well.
>
>Some folks are just so comfortable and secure with ritual and rote
>that the mere idea that there are people who think outside the box -
>seems to threaten their very existence.

---
And some people are just so goddam ornery that they'd rather make
trouble than try to get along with the Romans.
---

>You want to top post? That's OK.

---
Not here, it's not.


--
JF

"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:ftmbk3pqsvctu9qa8gja1bchcu69vmv71g@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 22 Nov 2007 12:08:41 -0500, default <default@nowhere.net>
> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 21 Nov 2007 21:43:44 -0800, "42" <paulinlapine@msn.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>Who put you in charge?
>>> I always top post. Why should I have to scroll through lines and lines
>>> of
>>>text I've already read to get to the subject of the message.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Also, please bottom post.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> JF
>>>
>>Yeah! The perennial top/bottom post argument is alive and well.
>>
>>Post where you damn well please and don't worry about what others
>>think. It makes sense to bottom post when a message travels from the
>>hinterlands of Usenet to the server that gave you a message and the
>>answer still may come before the question to a part of the world. So
>>top posting threatens logical progression - and not everyone uses a
>>newsreader that organizes information well.
>>
>>Some folks are just so comfortable and secure with ritual and rote
>>that the mere idea that there are people who think outside the box -
>>seems to threaten their very existence.
>
> ---
> And some people are just so goddam ornery that they'd rather make
> trouble than try to get along with the Romans.
> ---
>
>>You want to top post? That's OK.
>
> ---
> Not here, it's not.
>
What's needed here is a program that causes a news reader to automatically
scroll to the bottom when a post is opened!
Oh! I like that idea, even if I did think of it myself.
Please start with Outlook Express.
Mike

On Thu, 22 Nov 2007 14:59:42 -0600, "amdx" <amdx@knology.net> wrote:

>
> What's needed here is a program that causes a news reader to automatically
>scroll to the bottom when a post is opened!
> Oh! I like that idea, even if I did think of it myself.
> Please start with Outlook Express.
> Mike
>

Good point. I wonder that newsreaders don't allow a choice. The
header does have the time a message is posted.
--

On Thu, 22 Nov 2007 14:59:42 -0600, "amdx" <amdx@knology.net> wrote:


> What's needed here is a program that causes a news reader to automatically
>scroll to the bottom when a post is opened!
> Oh! I like that idea, even if I did think of it myself.
> Please start with Outlook Express.
> Mike
>
>

When replying to a newsgroup message, Outlook Express puts the cursor
at the top of the quoted message, so that the user may easily place
his reply at the top of the reply.

In contrast, Forte Agent places the cursor at the top of the quoted
message so that the user can easily read through the message, deleting
unwanted material and inserting his comments where appropriate.


--
Peter Bennett, VE7CEI
peterbb4 (at) interchange.ubc.ca
new newsgroup users info : http://vancouver-webpages.com/nnq
GPS and NMEA info: http://vancouver-webpages.com/peter
Vancouver Power Squadron: http://vancouver.powersquadron.ca

u guys should start a topic on this, because your drifting away from this one, btw thx Tank 4 the idea all dough i'm thinking on a slightly larger scale