On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 8:14 AM, Harry Bloomberg <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > On Mon, 8 Nov 2010, Brian Lloyd wrote: > > >> My question is whether this is a ham-radio requirement or an agency >> requirement. If it is strictly a ham-radio requirement then I am wondering >> about the efficacy of just going around it. >> >> Just thinking aloud here. >> >> This is a ham-radio requirement, Served Agencies do not use ARRL > Radiograms. > > The problem is political. We do want to see NTS use this new technology > and here in Western PA our Section Manager has been working with the NTS > people with these new tools. But if we just decide to ignore the NTS > formats and go our own way, we risk alienating the NTS community and change > will never happen. I understand. At the risk of being callous, I suspect that this problem will be self-correcting with time. People die and their old ways die with them. CW is interesting and fun but in no way does it make sense today for message handling. Ham radio almost doesn't have a reason to exist anymore. Its last vestige of use to the world which would dearly love to reuse the allocated spectrum for something else, is EmComm. If amateur radio doesn't conform to the best engineering practices of the day, that will go away too. So, are any of the folks here going around the NTS on their own to work with their local, regional, state, or federal agencies directly? I know that is impolitic to suggest but I suspect there is the occasional disgruntled op who would like to leapfrog the enmired, entrenched, and embedded establishment. If talking about this openly bothers you, please contact me directly off-list. -- Brian Lloyd, WB6RQN/J79BPL 3191 Western Dr. Cameron Park, CA 95682 [email protected] +1.767.617.1365 (Dominica) +1.931.492.6776 (USA) (+1.931.4.WB6RQN)
_______________________________________________ fldigi-alpha mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/fldigi-alpha
