There's also some 'I live outside the US but still feel your pain'. I'm with
you in spirit(s).
Simon Brown, HB9DRV
--
From: johnhutchinsusa [EMAIL PROTECTED]
There is a lot of
I only care what you think if you agree with me!
on this forum,
Mark N5RFX wrote:
I am disappointed that the FCC did not elaborate on the
purpose of Section 97.307(f) which limits specified
RTTY or data emissions to a symbol rate not to
exceed 300 bauds...
Why is that there?
The FCC has spoken and the status quo prevails.
Hi Mark,
This FCC order
bruce wa4gch wrote:
So does this meen we can junk 99% of all ham stations
for your idea of what ham radio should be?
Ha ha, Bruce! Good one.
Seriously, though, this is more of a rejection of
backward-thinking attempts to stifle USA hams' future
while the rest of the world passes us by.
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, expeditionradio
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
bruce wa4gch wrote:
So does this meen we can junk 99% of all ham stations
for your idea of what ham radio should be?
Ha ha, Bruce! Good one.
Seriously, though, this is more of a rejection of
And if this became law we in the USA would be sitting
back watching while the rest of the world operated the modes
that we now could not.
Bonnie makes a very good point when she say we would
be back in the stone age.
John, W0JAB
At 10:05 PM 5/8/2008, John WB4NNY wrote:
Bruce makes a serious
Hello Bonnie,
I was wondering if you could bring me ( others in the group) up-to-date
with your MIL 188-141A ALE experiments? specifically I would be be
interested in knowing how most messages are passed? are they AMD/DBM or
DTM? The only ALE signals I have heard recently (at least on 30m)
