Re: [digitalradio] ROS update
Amateur radio technology must not advance and we must continue to use only old modes. Make sure we keep ham radio stagnant and only hope commercial businesses move forward and kill our hobby Bob, AA8X . - Original Message - From: Dave Ackrill To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2010 6:00 PM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] ROS update KH6TY wrote: > Unfortunately, it appears that ROS is actually FHSS, as originally > described on the ROS website, and therefore is not legal for US hams > below 222MHz. :-( I think that I now no longer care about whether ROS is, or is not, legal in the USA. I see that I am now subject to moderation on here, so my freedom of speech on the subject seems to be curtailed. Strange that, don't you think for those of you that are from the land of free speech, that the moderators, who seem to live in the USA, now want to vet my posts to this group? My previous posts were to give details of the band plans in the UK by reference to the RSGB website. I'm not sure why, but they never were allowed to be posted. I wonder if this will be allowed? Dave (G0DJA)
Re: [digitalradio] ROS update
KH6TY wrote: > Unfortunately, it appears that ROS is actually FHSS, as originally > described on the ROS website, and therefore is not legal for US hams > below 222MHz. :-( I think that I now no longer care about whether ROS is, or is not, legal in the USA. I see that I am now subject to moderation on here, so my freedom of speech on the subject seems to be curtailed. Strange that, don't you think for those of you that are from the land of free speech, that the moderators, who seem to live in the USA, now want to vet my posts to this group? My previous posts were to give details of the band plans in the UK by reference to the RSGB website. I'm not sure why, but they never were allowed to be posted. I wonder if this will be allowed? Dave (G0DJA)
Re: [digitalradio] ROS update
Jose, Is THIS really true: "[T]he information contained on the ROS Web site was /not/ provided by the FCC." la5vna S On 04.03.2010 23:10, KH6TY wrote: > Unfortunately, it appears that ROS is actually FHSS, as originally described on the ROS website, and therefore is not legal for US hams below 222MHz. :-( > > From the ARRL website, http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2010/03/04/11377/?nc=1, > > "When queried about this new statement, the FCC's Consumer Assistance Office stated that "[T]he information contained on the ROS Web site was /not/ provided by the FCC." They then reaffirmed the original statements that originated from the FCC's Wireless Bureau, which handles Amateur Radio rules for the US." > > http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2010/03/04/11377/?nc=1 > > Hope to see you on ROS on UHF, 432.090 MHz, every morning between 7:30 AM and 8:00 AM. > > 73, Skip KH6TY FM02BT > > >> >> >
[digitalradio] ROS update
Unfortunately, it appears that ROS is actually FHSS, as originally described on the ROS website, and therefore is not legal for US hams below 222MHz. :-( From the ARRL website, http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2010/03/04/11377/?nc=1, "When queried about this new statement, the FCC's Consumer Assistance Office stated that "[T]he information contained on the ROS Web site was /not/ provided by the FCC." They then reaffirmed the original statements that originated from the FCC's Wireless Bureau, which handles Amateur Radio rules for the US." http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2010/03/04/11377/?nc=1 Hope to see you on ROS on UHF, 432.090 MHz, every morning between 7:30 AM and 8:00 AM. 73, Skip KH6TY FM02BT