6SZ
-Original Message-
>From: W2XJ
>Sent: Jul 12, 2010 6:24 PM
>To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: Re: AW: [digitalradio] Re: Moving ROS forward in the USA?
>
>The FCC never said anything that was a commitment. A staff member wrote a
>very non committal let
sorry, my typo. It's in 97.3. (b)(9)
- Original Message -
From: "Lester Veenstra"
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2010 12:38:40 AM GMT -06:00 US/Canada Central
Subject: RE: [digitalradio] Re: Moving ROS forward in the USA?
SS is
The FCC never said anything that was a commitment. A staff member wrote a
very non committal letter basically hoping you would go away. This FCC stuff
is silly.
On 7/12/10 5:33 PM, "KH6TY" wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> Unless there is spread spectrum in ROS you cannot use it. Of course, you can
Just keep the FCC out of this. They do will not deal with such issues. If
pushed, the out come will not be pretty. This was discussed at Dayton a few
years out. Basically we either self police or risk extinction.
On 7/12/10 5:00 PM, "Rein A" wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Dear Skip,
>
> T
From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:digitalra...@yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of bg...@comcast.net
Sent: Monday, July 12, 2010 11:49 PM
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Moving ROS forward in the USA?
SS is defined in 97.1. ..Brent, KE4MZ
___
italradio@yahoogroups.com, wrote:
>
> Hear, hear
>
> rgrds
> Craig
> kq6i
>
> -Original Message-
> From: AA0OI [mailto:aa...@...]
> Sent: Monday, July 12, 2010 2:52 PM
> To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Movi
I have been followed this character Ros from the start. Sorry to say ,
but I'm not surprised at all . This fits in with his odd but fascinating
personality.
LA5VNA Steinar
On 12.07.2010 23:38, Siegfried Jackstien wrote:
> I was begging onb my knees that jose will Stopp the autospotting cause
th
, hear
>
> rgrds
> Craig
> kq6i
>
> -Original Message-
> From: AA0OI [mailto:aa...@...]
> Sent: Monday, July 12, 2010 2:52 PM
> To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Moving ROS forward in the USA?
>
>
>
> HI:
> I
, hear
>
> rgrds
> Craig
> kq6i
>
> -Original Message-
> From: AA0OI [mailto:aa...@...]
> Sent: Monday, July 12, 2010 2:52 PM
> To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Moving ROS forward in the USA?
>
>
>
> HI:
> I
Hear, hear
rgrds
Craig
kq6i
-Original Message-
From: AA0OI [mailto:aa...@yahoo.com]
Sent: Monday, July 12, 2010 2:52 PM
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Moving ROS forward in the USA?
HI:
I Just have one question... HOW THE HELL OLD ARE YOU PEOPLE
my opinion, my not using it is the right thing for me to do.
Jim - K6JM
- Original Message -
From: AA0OI
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, July 12, 2010 1:51 PM
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Moving ROS forward in the USA?
HI:
I Just have one question.
I was contacted by the person. I did not initiate the contact. I have
had dealings with the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau as a result of
a petition I amde and I guess I have earned a little measure of respect
and trust by some of them. I have been asked not to identify anyone, so
please do
e to that and will respond to a temporary boycott.
> > >
> > > One should be able to do this via the amateur radio organizations, DARC.
> > > RSGB etc
> > > They send out newsletters, get out the word so that Jose wil listen.
> > >
> > > I do no
I was begging onb my knees that jose will Stopp the autospotting cause that
made a lot of trouble
I said that we all should stop the adif in a firewall . maybe THAT will
bring jose to think
But if he has made a decision there is almost no way to change his thoughts
I do not know if boycott will
Unless there is spread spectrum in ROS you cannot use it. Of course, you
can use the part that is not spread spectrum, but the FCC is not going
to issue a blanket approval for ROS if any part of it is spread
spectrum. They are not interested in issuing approvals for programs
anyway. They just s
get permission"
and American : Thomas Jefferson
Garrett / AA0OI
*From:* "rein...@ix.netcom.com"
*To:* digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
*Sent:* Mon, July 12, 2010 2:52:47 PM
*Subject:* Re: [digitalradio] Re: Moving R
, fof them it is easy, "ROS is illegal to
> > use", so
> > why should we getting involved?
> >
> > 73 Rein W6SZ
> >
> >
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > >From: Siegfried Jackstien
> > >Sent: Jul 12, 2010 7:19 PM
&
, fof them it is easy, "ROS is illegal to
> > use", so
> > why should we getting involved?
> >
> > 73 Rein W6SZ
> >
> >
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > >From: Siegfried Jackstien
> > >Sent: Jul 12, 2010 7:19 PM
> > &
Dear Skip,
This is the second time you post this message about the FCC engineer
Why don't you tell us how we can get in touch with this engineer.
I would really like to hear that from that person and I would ask him
whether the info was for public consumption or "on background"
as used in the
al Message-
> >From: Siegfried Jackstien
> >Sent: Jul 12, 2010 7:19 PM
> >To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
> >Subject: AW: [digitalradio] Re: Moving ROS forward in the USA?
> >
> >That would mean if you would implement ros or similar in a multimode soft
> >
!
"Its better to ask forgiveness,, because you'll never get permission" and
American : Thomas Jefferson
Garrett / AA0OI
From: "rein...@ix.netcom.com"
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Mon, July 12, 2010 2:52:47 PM
Subject: Re: [di
gt;To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: AW: [digitalradio] Re: Moving ROS forward in the USA?
>
>That would mean if you would implement ros or similar in a multimode soft
>like multipsk or dm780 you would not be allowed to use it (the whole soft)
>in us ??? I think if only a pa
digitalradio] Re: Moving ROS forward in the USA?
>
>No, the problem is that the spread spectrum variants are mixed in with
>the others, all inside the ROS program, so any overall approval of ROS,
>which undiniably includes the non spread-spectrum modes, would
>accidentally approv
d of talking, thinking
> about it.
> Please lets move on, there are other digital methods, why not just
> use those?
>
> 73 Rein W6SZ
>
> -Original Message-
> >From: Dave Wright >
> >Sent: Jul 12, 2010 7:25 PM
> >To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
&
t
>Sent: Jul 12, 2010 7:25 PM
>To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Moving ROS forward in the USA?
>
>Sigi,
>
>Have to agree with you here.
>
>Since Spread Spectrum is not authorized in the US below 220MHz, and since
>CHIP 64/128 is Spr
Sigi,
Have to agree with you here.
Since Spread Spectrum is not authorized in the US below 220MHz, and since
CHIP 64/128 is Spread Spectrum, no one in the US can use MultiPSK since it
includes CHIP??? Well, of course, that isn't the case. Logic would have
to prevail, but with the negativity
That would mean if you would implement ros or similar in a multimode soft
like multipsk or dm780 you would not be allowed to use it (the whole soft)
in us ??? I think if only a part of the soft is forbidden to use (on
transmit) all other modes can be used
If for instance rtty was forbidden in germ
No, the problem is that the spread spectrum variants are mixed in with
the others, all inside the ROS program, so any overall approval of ROS,
which undiniably includes the non spread-spectrum modes, would
accidentally approve the spread-spectrum modes also. I'm sure that the
FCC is not that gu
28 matches
Mail list logo
