-To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Digi Voice: No Bandwidth
Limit (was Re: ARRL
wake up ..)
Date: Thu, 3 May 2007 11:32:34 -0700 (PDT)
I'm trying to keep the bands populated It gets
lonely on 432 SSB ..LOL
--- John
]
Reply-To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Digi Voice: No Bandwidth Limit (was Re: ARRL
wake up ..)
Date: Fri, 4 May 2007 03:06:17 -0700 (PDT)
John
WELL someone has to do it ( LOL )
I work on 460 MHz radios all day and love
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Digi Voice: No Bandwidth
Limit (was Re: ARRL
wake up ..)
Date: Fri, 4 May 2007 03:06:17 -0700 (PDT)
John
WELL someone has to do it ( LOL )
I work on 460 MHz radios all day and love the band
It
has good range
]
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2007 03:43 UTC
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Digi Voice: No Bandwidth Limit
After all the claims of how we are somehow being held back from new
technologies, it is interesting that there is nothing but silence from
the folks who claim so many
then how do you expect to know if you are interfering
with someone if they cant id you ?
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
John,
While I agree with you that we should be allowed to mix voice and ASCII
text (primarily for emergency communications use), what makes you think
we can use voice in the 7075 to 7100 here in the U.S.?
73,
Rick, KV9U
John B. Stephensen wrote:
WinDRM and HamDRM are good examples of modes
: [digitalradio] Digi Voice: No Bandwidth Limit
John,
While I agree with you that we should be allowed to mix voice and ASCII
text (primarily for emergency communications use), what makes you think
we can use voice in the 7075 to 7100 here in the U.S.?
73,
Rick, KV9U
John B
@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Digi Voice: No Bandwidth Limit (was Re: ARRL
wake up ..)
Date: Thu, 3 May 2007 04:21:45 -0700 (PDT)
then how do you expect to know if you are interfering
with someone if they cant id you ?
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired
)
And stop wasting your time on this reflector...
John
Original Message Follows
From: bruce mallon [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Digi Voice: No Bandwidth
Limit (was Re: ARRL
wake up ..)
Date
Bruce,
That's impressive! Good for you...
John
Original Message Follows
From: bruce mallon [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Digi Voice: No Bandwidth Limit (was Re: ARRL
wake up ..)
Date: Thu, 3
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Digi Voice: No Bandwidth
Limit (was Re: ARRL
wake up ..)
Date: Thu, 3 May 2007 09:17:59 -0700 (PDT)
John
I average 5 hours a day split between 6 meter
SSB/FM, 2 meter ssb/FM and have running in the shack
223 FM
Message Follows
From: bruce mallon [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Digi Voice: No Bandwidth
Limit (was Re: ARRL
wake up ..)
Date: Thu, 3 May 2007 09:17:59 -0700 (PDT)
John
I
There *will* be such a requirement in the next FCC
go-around -- failure to ID in a common mode so our
self-policing hobby has a prayer of self-policing
has been a major concern of folks communicating to
the FCC.
They have heard that loud -- and in the clear. :-)
Add to that the concerns about
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, kd4e [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There *will* be such a requirement in the next FCC
go-around --
Only in your dreams.
Bonnie KQ6XA
I think this is a good idea Bonnie.
Get on 20 meters with a few hundered of your wide band
digital users on field day and demand they not
interfere with your group ...
It will make for a interesting test case.
your comment
I will be happy to provide a examples of how the
rules allow
Interesting dilemma. We love uncrowded bands but if they're too uncrowded they
might be considered under-utilized and be in danger of being taken away from us.
Dave
AF6AS
-Original Message-
From: bruce mallon [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subj: Re: [digitalradio] Digi Voice: No Bandwidth Limit
Go for it but make shore all of you ID in CW so your
calles can be noted by the stations who will complain
...
--- bruce mallon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think this is a good idea Bonnie.
Get on 20 meters with a few hundered of your wide
band
digital users on field day and demand they
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, bruce mallon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Go for it but make shore all of you ID in CW so your
calles can be noted by the stations who will complain
...
There is no FCC requirement for CW ID on Digital Voice.
Bonnie KQ6XA
]
moderator http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DXandTalk
- Original Message -
From: expeditionradio [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2007 8:58 PM
Subject: [digitalradio] Digi Voice: No Bandwidth Limit (was Re: ARRL wake up
..)
--- In digitalradio
I would like to try some of the DRM-based modes which allow you to send
voice, pictures, and text.
I suppose I could do thos on 160m, now that I think of it.
73,
Leigh/WA5ZNU
On Wed, 2 May 2007 7:58 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If it is true that others are not being held back, what actual new
Good operating practice is to always ID in the mode!
Even in ATV...hold up a QSL card in front of the camera.
Original Message Follows
From: Danny Douglas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Digi Voice
After all the claims of how we are somehow being held back from new
technologies, it is interesting that there is nothing but silence from
the folks who claim so many others can do all these new things that we
supposedly can not here in the U.S. I am hopeful we have some honesty
about this in
is the only other segment that allows
mixed voice, data, RTTY and image.
73,
John
KD6OZH
- Original Message -
From: Leigh L Klotz, Jr.
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2007 02:04 UTC
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Digi Voice: No Bandwidth Limit
I would
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, John B. Stephensen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
47cfr97.307(f)(2) limits the bandwidth of all transmissions in the
phone/image segments to that of AM or SSB communications quality audio
which is usually interpreted as 3 kHz.
John
KD6OZH
Hi John,
Digital
that nobody wants to talk
about, except Jeff king, WB8WKA, of course (HI).
73,
John
K8OCL
Original Message Follows
From: expeditionradio [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [digitalradio] Digi Voice: No Bandwidth Limit (was Re: ARRL
PROTECTED]
moderator http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DXandTalk
- Original Message -
From: John Champa [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2007 6:58 PM
Subject: RE: [digitalradio] Digi Voice: No Bandwidth Limit (was Re: ARRL
wake up ..)
John,
Didn't you
for the phone/image segments. I agree
that digital phone has no bandwidth limit, but image does.
73,
John
KD6OZH
- Original Message -
From: expeditionradio
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2007 22:43 UTC
Subject: [digitalradio] Digi Voice: No Bandwidth Limit
27 matches
Mail list logo
