Rick,
RM-11392 is a most excellent example of a bad petition in my opinion.
As Andrew stated, The proposal has no chance of being adopted.
Also, I don't see any relevance to your CW vs. SSB comments and
RM-11392. I don't know where the heck you operate CW, even with my
oldest hybrid
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Dave Bernstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you'd actually read any of my posts, Demetre, you'd know that my
focus is on automatic stations without busy detectors -- no matter
what protocol they are using. In fact I recently posted here that
banning
Demetre SV1UY wrote:
So what you are talking about PACTOR 3 being the only offender is FAR
AWAY FROM THE TRUTH OM.
There is no system today that has such a DETECTOR you are dreaming
about.
My station does. A human operator.
Finally if you are so adament about such a detector why
Steve,
We will just have to agree to disagree on some important issues. As you
have seen there is a wide chasm of views between different interest
groups and there likely always will be. Especially when a minority gets
as much control as what happened with automatic operation over the
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Roger J. Buffington
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
OK, a couple of points.
1. No one is defending W1AW or the other practices that involve
transmitting without listening. I happen to think that all such
practices are morally wrong and legally
Rick, I usually agree with your comments but I do not agree that the petition
is dead.
The FCC has probably been waiting for the ham community to be self-policing and
handle this interference problem. Can you suggest any other reason that they
have not cited the interfering stations?
Since
The question I have in all this is: Was this interference problem an issue
BEFORE the reduction in the Amateur Licensing requirements, OR did this start
occurring AFTER it???
Either way, the FCC must make a decision that we ALL have to live with, whether
we agree with it or not!
This subject
Hi Howard,
You may be right. I hope you are. But when you look at the sheer number
of opposed to favoring it has to be at least 80% opposed, if not even
90%. That is overwhelming. It is true that almost all of the hams who
claim they oppose the petition have not really read and understood the
Hi all
I am calling on 3.590 in ale400 now
73 de LA5VNA Steinar
73 de LA5VNA Steinar
Is anyone using the HFLink ALE 400 frequencies? I have not had any luck
in contacting anyone on these frequencies using the narrow ALE and FAE
modes.
Also, if you are using these modes, when do you find it best to use
ALE400 vis a vis FAE400?
My personal preference is to call CQ with FAE400
Hi Mark,
How would this kill various digital modes with a bandwidth of 1500 hertz
or less? I operate Oliva mostly at 500 hertz wide and sometimes and
1000 hertz wide.
73, tom n4zpt
Mark Miller wrote:
The FCC has released
Hmmm. The silent majority methinks maybe.
- Original Message
From: Rick [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, December 28, 2007 1:31:19 PM
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] RM-11392
Hi Howard,
You may be right. I hope you are. But when you look at the sheer
AA6YQ comments below
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Demetre SV1UY [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
If you'd actually read any of my posts, Demetre, you'd know that my
focus is on automatic stations without busy detectors -- no matter
what protocol they are using. In fact I recently posted here
TKS for the info Simon,
don't have the spare time for digital mode software.
Yes that's the key, to have a bit of spare time.
73
Patrick
- Original Message -
From: Simon Brown
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, December 28, 2007 8:01 AM
Subject: Re:
Hi Everyone,
I have just signed up for this group and have to wonder WHAT grief I am
in for? Years ago I gave Packet away due to Packet Wars, I boxed all
my gear up and had a 10 year holiday, from Ham radio:-)
Sorecently I decide to unbox my gear, buy some new stuff and away I
go! Being
Reviewing the numerous posts on this issue it looks for me - and
might be I don't fully understand because of language problems - that
obviously
- the main target of that petition is to limit the operation of PMBO's
- we seem to forget that collateral damage like the limitation of the
Rick wrote:
Now I know that when the LF GWEN system (Ground Wave Emergency Network)
was discontinued, instead of liquidating the sites, at least some of
them were converted to special correction beacons. The surveyor was not
familiar with these and I am not clear how or when they are used
It is amazing that the developists in highly developed places forgets
that the world is far from being equally developed and connected, with
high speed digital repeater networks, easily accessible Internet, etc,
etc...
Even more, that you don't have to go to Asia, Africa or anywhere in the
Hi Jack,
Not sure about any grief. These are discussions about different
viewpoints on what is the right direction to move toward with advancing
technology. It is a bit complicated perhaps and some will intentionally
obfuscate by misrepresenting the facts. That is very disappointing to at
I'm not sure what HF Packet BBS's you're talking about but all my
packet tnc's had a carrier detect feature and would not transmit if
one was detected. Was it perfect, heck no! But it was available AND
it was turned on.
Jim
WA0LYK
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Demetre SV1UY [EMAIL
Jim
as far as I know all the hardware for pactor has the same thing.
But only for other pactor signals just like what you posted about
the packet system.
John
At 09:34 PM 12/28/2007, you wrote:
I'm not sure what HF Packet BBS's you're talking about but all my
packet tnc's had a carrier detect
Hi Rick,
I just hope this FCC thing does not make people turn sour on the
hobby, hobbies are meant to be fun!
I guess the reason for my Packet interest is the stand alone mailbox
aspect of it, no Internet connection needed. The PBBS is a repository
of messages sent by anyone and retreived by
Yep you shure had that right !
--- Jose A. Amador [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
It is amazing that the developists in highly
developed places forgets
that the world is far from being equally developed
and connected, with
high speed digital repeater networks, easily
accessible Internet, etc,
N0HR Software Resources
N0HR's ham radio website, http://www.n0hr.com has many free resources for ham
radio:
The Ham Radio Toolbar for Internet Explorer Firefox:
http://www.n0hr.com/Ham_Radio_Toolbar.htm
HamLinks is a free ham radio toolbar that extends your (Internet Explorer or
The Ham Radio ALE High Frequency Network (HFN)
http://www.hflink.com/hfn/
is the only HF 24/7 network on ham radio that can be accessed and used
for text messaging without an external computer or modem. HFN may also
be used with a regular HF ham radio and a laptop or PC computer
soundcard using
ARRL RTTY/Digital Mode Round-Up
Date: Saturday January 5-6, 2008
Location: Baudot RTTY, ASCII, AMTOR, PSK31, and Packet—attended operation only
on 80, 40, 20, 15, and 10 meter bands
Notes: 2008 ARRL RTTY Round-Up Rules
General Rules
Object: Amateurs worldwide contact and exchange QSO
27 matches
Mail list logo
