This is little more than a frequency grab by Bonnie that would benefit the
HF-ALE group, I feel, the most. If adopted, this would give Bonnie her own
frequencies...channels if you will, that she or ANYONE else from the HF-ALE
network could claim...and then chase away legal ops using her/their
On Wed, Apr 07, 2010 at 12:37:25PM -, kb2hsh wrote:
This is little more than a frequency grab by Bonnie that would
benefit the HF-ALE group, I feel, the most. If adopted, this would
give Bonnie her own frequencies...channels if you will, that she or
ANYONE else from the HF-ALE network
kb2hsh wrote:
This is little more than a frequency grab by Bonnie that would benefit the
HF-ALE group, I feel, the most.
OK, so I have to ask how would it benefit HFLink
- HFLink already has well established centers of activity in the current
bandplan
- ALE by definition does not
Transmitting soundings without checking for activity on the frequency,
or by not sounding if there is activity, is an AUTOMATIC operation. Do
you deny that soundings that cover many frequencies in a short time are
not transmitted without ALWAYS listening first! That would be hard to
believe!
KH6TY wrote:
It would give ALE ops more frequencies
This is a huge leap of paranoia.. ALE operation by definition does
not want or even can utilize more frequencies. Hams who want to use
ALE already have well established frequencies to use. There is no
advantage to adding more, and really
It does not matter if ALE ops do not intend to USE more frequencies or
not. Apparently the interest in PC-ALE is so small, the impact would be
minimal anyway.
However, to support changing any allocations to provide more space for
wide-bandwidth automatic stations, no matter who will use them,
Want to fight to get rid of semi-auto operation? Knock yourself out.
It's allowed now under FCC regs and is not likely to change. More
influential groups than the mythical omnipotent evil mastermind Bonnie
will make sure that will not change!
I think this misses the point. Yes, there are some
