t;
> Original Message Follows
> From: bruce mallon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
> To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Digi Voice: No Bandwidth
> Limit (was Re: ARRL
> wake up ..)
> Date: Fri, 4 May 2007 0
t;[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Digi Voice: No Bandwidth Limit (was Re: ARRL
wake up ..)
Date: Fri, 4 May 2007 03:06:17 -0700 (PDT)
John
WELL someone has to do it ( LOL )
I work on 460 MHz ra
of my
> chair when the squelch breaks! (HI)
>
> John
>
> Original Message Follows
> From: bruce mallon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
> To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Digi Voice: No Bandwidth
>
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, kd4e <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> There *will* be such a requirement in the next FCC
> go-around --
Only in your dreams.
Bonnie KQ6XA
There *will* be such a requirement in the next FCC
go-around -- failure to ID in a common mode so our
self-policing hobby has a prayer of self-policing
has been a major concern of folks communicating to
the FCC.
They have heard that loud -- and in the clear. :-)
Add to that the concerns about fu
#x27;s impressive! Good for you...
>
> John
>
> Original Message Follows
> From: bruce mallon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
> To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Digi Voice: No Bandwidth
> Limi
[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
> To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Digi Voice: No Bandwidth
> Limit (was Re: ARRL
> wake up ..)
> Date: Thu, 3 May 2007 09:17:59 -0700 (PDT)
>
> John
>
> I averag
Bruce,
That's impressive! Good for you...
John
Original Message Follows
From: bruce mallon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Digi Voice: No Bandwidth Limit (was Re: ARRL
wake up ..)
D
he air more, OM! (HI)
> And stop wasting your time on this reflector...
>
> John
>
> Original Message Follows
> From: bruce mallon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
> To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [digitalradio]
lradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Digi Voice: No Bandwidth Limit (was Re: ARRL
wake up ..)
Date: Thu, 3 May 2007 04:21:45 -0700 (PDT)
then how do you expect to know if you are interfering
with someone if they cant id you ?
__
Do You
then how do you expect to know if you are interfering
with someone if they cant id you ?
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
so pls upload to LOTW
or hard card.
moderator [EMAIL PROTECTED]
moderator http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DXandTalk
- Original Message -
From: "expeditionradio" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2007 8:58 PM
Subject: [digitalradio] Digi Voice: No Bandw
]
moderator http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DXandTalk
- Original Message -
From: "expeditionradio" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2007 8:58 PM
Subject: [digitalradio] Digi Voice: No Bandwidth Limit (was Re: ARRL wake up
..)
> --- In digitalradio@yahoogroup
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, bruce mallon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Go for it but make shore all of you ID in CW so your
> calles can be noted by the stations who will complain
> ...
There is no FCC requirement for CW ID on Digital Voice.
Bonnie KQ6XA
Go for it but make shore all of you ID in CW so your
calles can be noted by the stations who will complain
...
--- bruce mallon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think this is a good idea Bonnie.
>
> Get on 20 meters with a few hundered of your wide
> band
> digital users on field day and demand t
from us.
>
> Dave
> AF6AS
>
> -Original Message-
>
> From: bruce mallon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subj: Re: [digitalradio] Digi Voice: No Bandwidth
> Limit (was Re: ARRL wake up ..)
> Date: Wed May 2, 2007 7:05 am
> Size: 1K
AF6AS
>
> -Original Message-
>
> From: bruce mallon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subj: Re: [digitalradio] Digi Voice: No Bandwidth
> Limit (was Re: ARRL wake up ..)
> Date: Wed May 2, 2007 7:05 am
> Size: 1K
> To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
>
&g
Interesting dilemma. We love uncrowded bands but if they're too uncrowded they
might be considered under-utilized and be in danger of being taken away from us.
Dave
AF6AS
-Original Message-
From: bruce mallon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subj: Re: [digitalradio] Digi Voice: No Band
I think this is a good idea Bonnie.
Get on 20 meters with a few hundered of your wide band
digital users on field day and demand they not
interfere with your group ...
It will make for a interesting test case.
your comment
I will be happy to provide a examples of how the
> rules allow v
r the phone/image segments. I agree
that digital phone has no bandwidth limit, but image does.
73,
John
KD6OZH
- Original Message -
From: expeditionradio
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2007 22:43 UTC
Subject: [digitalradio] Digi Voice: No Bandwidth Limit
PROTECTED]
moderator http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DXandTalk
- Original Message -
From: "John Champa" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2007 6:58 PM
Subject: RE: [digitalradio] Digi Voice: No Bandwidth Limit (was Re: ARRL
wake up ..)
> John,
>
> Didn&
posal that nobody wants to talk
about, except Jeff king, WB8WKA, of course (HI).
73,
John
K8OCL
Original Message Follows
From: "expeditionradio" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [digitalradio] Digi Voice:
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "John B. Stephensen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> 47cfr97.307(f)(2) limits the bandwidth of all transmissions in the
phone/image segments to that of AM or SSB communications quality audio
which is usually interpreted as 3 kHz.
> John
> KD6OZH
Hi John,
Di
23 matches
Mail list logo
