Sounds to me like you understand perfectly. 73 Buddy WB4M
----- Original Message ----- From: "Brian A" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <digitalradio@yahoogroups.com> Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 12:01 PM Subject: [digitalradio] Let me understand > The digital systems being proposed for emergency use require a rig > with antenna, a computer with soundcard and functional software. Also > an operator trained with the protocol in use. Right? > > My perception of emergency situations is that just having a > rig/antenna available and working may be no small task. Throw in the > need for the a working computer, sound card and and software and > you're adversely affecting your ability to respond? Seems like that > to me. The more parts required, the less chance they will all work. > The more power used as well. > > What about the guy in the field with an HT? Where does he fit in? > Certainly you don't expect him to be digital. > > I must be missing something... My perception is that the most reliable > and practical system must be a minimialistic one in terms of parts and > complexity. > > 73 de Brian/K3KO > >
