I used to be a Mars Operator many years ago while in the Navy. (I was a
shipboard MARS operator).
I do agree that it should be a Menu item, Having to get approval from the
manufacturer for a piece of equipment that I Own does not sit well with me.
(and is the reason I refuse to do business with another well know radio vendor,
over this very point).
From: Mike Morrow <[email protected]>
To:
Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2015 2:48 PM
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] 2-30 MHz Transmit? MARS
> ...Military Amateur Radio System...
> ...Military Affiliate Radio System...
> ...Military Auxiliary Radio System...
MARS has stood for *all three* of the above proposed phrases since its creation
after WWII for the Army and (later) Air Force as a formal organization of
military and amateur stations operating on military frequencies to handle
written and phone patch traffic for military servicemen. Because an amateur
license was used only as an individual's technical qualification for membership
while MARS conducted none of its business on amateur frequencies, AMATEUR was
changed to AFFILIATE shortly thereafter. The Navy/Marine Corps finally created
its own MARS in the early 1960s. Throughout the first 25 years of MARS's
existence the primary task was to serve the serviceman as one of the limited
means he had to communicate rapidly with his family. That mission was last
carried out to any great extent during the Vietnam war. MARS has had to create
an Emergency Communications mission to justify its existence since. About a
decade ago, for reasons best understood by builders of bureaucr
acies, AFFILIATE was changed to AUXILIARY. MARS HF gear as yet does not need
to meet NTIA specs.
Once "CAP" was often cited along with MARS...the Civil Air Patrol operates
HF/VHF nets similar to MARS, on Air Force frequencies. But about a decade ago
CAP required communications equipment to meet NTIA specs...something no ham
gear is going to meet.
With respect to the issue of a manufacturer artficially limiting the transmit
frequency coverage of its equipment to ham bands only, I find such an attitude
paternalistic and condescending. It plainly conveys the attitude that the
customer is too stupid to avoid improper or illegal operation of the equipment.
There should be a menu item that allows either full or ham-band-only coverage.
That is all. I have over several decades found full band transmit coverage to
be routinely useful for test signal generation in addition to MARS work.
The manufacturer should not presume to become enforcer of regulations.
Mike / KK5F
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[email protected]
This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [email protected]
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[email protected]
This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [email protected]
