Re: [AMRadio] The zeal to eliminate AM mode on the amateur bands.
Since Don mentioned the AM Forum, I would encourage those that have not visited lately to come take a look. The forum now has over 800 members; is more feature rich (you can post pictures, files from your PC, colors, fonts, animation, etc.) and lots of great info gets posted. Simple to join and tons of pleasure. http://amfone.net/Amforum/index.php Likewise AMFONE web site has tons of info to browse. http://amfone.net/index.php Pete, wa2cwa On Mon, 19 Sep 2005 21:27:08 + "Donald Chester" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> Coincidentally, I posted a message on the AM Forum about an hour ago, on this very subject. Since there are participants on this reflector > who do not monitor the AM Forum, I have copied it here. >
Re: [AMRadio] The zeal to eliminate AM mode on the amateur bands.
SSB was devleoped by AT&T in the 20's for use on the Trans Atlantic cable. No, it was used on longwave. The early transatlantic cable had so much capacitance that it could only be used for telegraphy, and at extremely slow speed. I don't think transatlantic voice cables were developed until mid 30's or even during or after WW2. BTW, an interesting exhibit regarding transatlantic cables is on display in the London science museum. I would highly recommend it to anyone who happens to visit that city. When I was last there about 5 years ago, the Science Museum was sort of a museum of a museum. Some of the dusty exhibits were so old they were museum pieces themselves, but I thought it was extremely interesting, with more appeal to me than most modern day multi-media museum displays. Hope all that stuff is still there. Much old radio apparatus as well. Don k4kyv
RE: [AMRadio] The zeal to eliminate AM mode on the amateur bands.
H - I thought SSB was developed by the telephone companies or the military back in the 1930s, rather than by AM ham ops. Maybe I was given wrong information. Actually it was before 1920, for transatlantic communication on longwave. To get any kind of efficency at all out of the antennas for those frequencies, the tuned circuit had to be so high Q that the bandwidth of the antenna was too narrow to allow a full double sideband signal to pass, so someone at Bell Labs figured out that all the information could be transmitted on one sideband. I have seen circuit diagrams for balanced modulators in pre-1920 radio books. The SSB signal was basically generated with a balanced modulator and the antenna itself served as the sideband filter. I think the intended meaning of the message is that it was AM hams who first investigated using SSB on the ham bands and shortwave. There was a short article on SSB in the mid 1930's in QST, with the promise of more articles to come on practical construction. That article was mysteriously cut in mid paragraph, and nothing more was heard of it, nore were there any subsequent followups. SSB began to be developed for HF on the ham bands just after WW2.
RE: [AMRadio] The zeal to eliminate AM mode on the amateur bands.
Having only been active on AM mode for just two short years, I consider myself to still be a newbie, still not understanding the zeal and fervor by some in the amateur community to eliminate or totally outlaw the use of AM mode transmissions in the MF/HF amateur bands in the USA. Could someone more familiar with the issue please give me a better understanding of why these people are so intent to get rid of this mode? Coincidentally, I posted a message on the AM Forum about an hour ago, on this very subject. Since there are participants on this reflector who do not monitor the AM Forum, I have copied it here. QUOTE: The great AM vs SSB wars took place in the mid 60's. At that time there indeed was a concerted effort by the League, other ham radio publications, equipment manufacturers, the FCC and a segment of the amateur community to make every amateur feel compelled to abandon his older equipment and go SSB. Almost every page of the ham magazines of that era had a pro-SSB spin. Members of ham clubs were made to feel inferior if they still ran AM. At hamfests hams were derided for purchasing AM equipment and building parts at the fleamarket. Rumours abounded that the FCC was about to outlaw AM and force everyone to switch over whether they wanted to or not. Although FCC officials never came out and specifically stated that this was their intent, they never missed an opportunity to praise SSB, based on its alleged virtue of "spectrum conservation." Probably the main reason that I stayed on AM was because I very much resented all the arm-twisting, and declared to myself that come hell or high water I did NOT intend to be forced to change over. I recall the AM/SSB wars heating up in about 1963-65. It was largely between the holdouts who refused to change and the arrogant, self-righteous newly converted. That's when malicious interference exploded and became mainstream over-the-air conduct, which continues to this day to a certain degree. Then came incentive licensing. That seemed to be the final nail in the coffin of AM and largely, homebrewing in general. As the bands became divided into licence-class subbands, many of the old regulars simply disappeared. I was out of the country right at that time, but I recall coming home for a visit in 1969, and still hearing a lot of AM on the air, as the new subband restrictions were just going into effect. About a year and a half later I returned home, and by then 99% of the AM activity was gone. In the early 70's you could go to a hamest and find AM rigs, high power transmitting tubes and parts for homebrew projects, for near giveaway prices. I recall large triode transmitting tubes such as 450TL's, 250TH's, 833A's, etc going for about $5 NIB; nobody wanted them because weren't very good for use in a "linear." While most hams were dumping this sort of stuff at hamfests and landfills, I was grabbing up as much as I could haul home. I used to come back from hamfests with the car nearly dragging the ground. I was often subject of derisive remarks at fleamarkets "Look, somebody's found himself a boat anchor, haw, haw!" To this day, I have a repulsion to the term "boatanchor." In about 1973 AM began to come back. First, in the northeast, especially in New England, AM signals began to spring up. Most unexpectedly of all, a large portion of these new AM'ers were young, many still in university or even high school. I remember, as I had moved to the Boston area at that time, the AM vs SSB conflict had taken on somewhat of a generation-gap aspect. Many of the most anti-AM people were older hams who had converted to SSB years earlier, and had little good to say about the "hippie types" who were "trashing up the bands" with all that old "AM junk." During that era, the League stayed silent on the AM issue. Another otherwise good technical publication, "Ham Radio" was openly hostile towards AM. I went to a New England ARRL convention at the Statler Hilton in downtown Boston, and recall a very attractive young lady (don't remember her name or callsign) speaking for the League at one of the forums, and the subject of Docket 20777 came up (which proposed to "deregulate" AM out of existence with a bandwidth proposal not too different from the present one being promoted by the League). She responded that the League was not in favour of outlawing AM, but instead, "letting it die a natural death." She described ARRL policy towards AM as one of "benign neglect." Despite the fact that the hotbed of AM activity took place on 75, there were a few operators who hung out on 160. Many of these hams were old timers, who had formed into groups such as the Grey-Haired Net. I recall reading a news item in Ham Radio on the subject of Docket 20777 describing the fact that "many 160 m AM operators are just now becoming aware of their peril," with the implication that AM operation was limited to a fe
Re: [AMRadio] The zeal to eliminate AM mode on the amateur bands.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 18 Sep 2005 at 22:22, Geoff wrote: and BJ/WB5PKD (and his pretty wife Evelyn). "I think I need another, just for self-defence" 73 = Best Regards, -Geoff/W5OMR WIFE??? Oh, good lord, no... Although, I'm not sure who's got more Ex's... K5SWK, or WA5BXO, or WB5PKD. I've only got one ex-wife. *IF* I ever get married again, it'll be my -last- (she'll probably kill me - you know how women change after they slip that ring on their finger). -Geoff
Re: [AMRadio] The zeal to eliminate AM mode on the amateur bands.
On 18 Sep 2005 at 22:22, Geoff wrote: > and BJ/WB5PKD (and his > pretty wife Evelyn). > "I think I need another, just for self-defence" > 73 = Best Regards, > -Geoff/W5OMR WIFE???
Re: [AMRadio] The zeal to eliminate AM mode on the amateur bands.
John Coleman ARS WA5BXO wrote: I am very fortunate to have the support of my wife in these ham radio things. She used to like to travel with me to meet the other people but now days all we have time for is rearing kids and doing scout activities. That's not a bad thing, but we do look forward to the future of not being locked down so much. Of course with the fuel cost the way it is, we may not do a lot of traveling to meet others in the future. John, WA5BXO What does that make me? chopped liver? ;-) It was good to see you, and Vickie and the boys, this weekend, John. Was great to see the N.O.S. gang in Dallas, yesterday. I had a ball today too, after I left y'all, and visited with Otis/K5SWK (and the cats), Larry/WD5CFJ (and his pretty wife Pam), and BJ/WB5PKD (and his pretty wife Evelyn). "I think I need another, just for self-defence" -- 73 = Best Regards, -Geoff/W5OMR
Re: [AMRadio] The zeal to eliminate AM mode on the amateur bands.
Yes Charlie, Yep. Shields up! I was one of those geeky guys who rode a bicycle and had to put up with all the garbage from the jocks in cars with all the remarks. In time, I learned to overcome the problems caused by this bunch. (Gaining a 5th degree black belt in Judo and being able to bench press 325 pounds at age 17 kinda helped the situation too!) I changed tactics by going on the defensive. It worked. ...In the case of folks wanting to elinate our niche of the amateur radio hobby, a strong defense here might help too. Lobbying the local League staff and SC's, and educating other hams as to the existance of AM'ers might be helpful. 73, Mark Cobbeldick, KB4CVN Monroe, VA --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Mark: Yet another opinion... Some of these AM haters are very much > like the > big car drivers in high school who would haul around a gaggle of guys > who would laugh at a practical good mileage car and make fun of the > operator. > Same mentalitydumb and dummmber. (no.. I couldnt afford a car). > > Also, I think some of the folks are just plain jelous (sp), They cant > build > AM or maintain or operate it but they "shore can buy leenears". > > Its a class conscious society, if I cant have it neither can you. > > Shields up. Charlie, K0NG . > __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
RE: [AMRadio] The zeal to eliminate AM mode on the amateur bands.
Well Brian it seems that Western Electric is the culprit, in 1915s or 1920s. It would be impossible to speak directly with any of the founders as I'm sure they are gone but I wonder if there are folks that have a BIO on the individuals that worked on the project. John, WA5BXO -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bob Macklin Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2005 8:54 PM To: Discussion of AM Radio Subject: Re: [AMRadio] The zeal to eliminate AM mode on the amateur bands. Brian comments: "H - I thought SSB was developed by the telephone companies or the military back in the 1930s, rather than by AM ham ops. Maybe I was given wrong information." SSB was devleoped by AT&T in the 20's for use on the Trans Atlantic cable. Bob Macklin K5MYJ Seattle, Wa. __ AMRadio mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html Post: mailto:AMRadio@mailman.qth.net AMfone Website: http://www.amfone.net AM List Admin: Brian Sherrod/w5ami
Re: [AMRadio] The zeal to eliminate AM mode on the amateur bands.
I thought it was the amateur radio service. That's how the FCC identifies it. Pete ,wa2cwa On Sun, 18 Sep 2005 19:40:33 -0500 "Dave Harmon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Gentlemenplease read what I said. > This is not a hobby. > > Regards > > Dave Harmon > NSRCA 586 > K6XYZ[at]valornet[dot]com > Broken Arrow, Ok. > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Coleman > ARS > WA5BXO > Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2005 7:35 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'Discussion of AM Radio' > Subject: RE: [AMRadio] The zeal to eliminate AM mode on the amateur > bands. > > Yes, it's true to some extent, for some it may be a hobby as > you > described but for a lot of us it is some thing that we look forward > to > spending a lot of time with and has become a very major part of our > lives and our families lives, some times to the dismay of others in > the > family. I am very fortunate to have the support of my wife in these > ham > radio things. She used to like to travel with me to meet the other > people but now days all we have time for is rearing kids and doing > scout > activities. That's not a bad thing, but we do look forward to the > future of not being locked down so much. Of course with the fuel > cost > the way it is, we may not do a lot of traveling to meet others in > the > future. > > John, WA5BXO > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dave Harmon > Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2005 7:08 PM > To: 'Discussion of AM Radio' > Subject: RE: [AMRadio] The zeal to eliminate AM mode on the amateur > bands. > > As bad as any of the mentioned groups are on AM ...and in fact > amateur > radio in general is the increasing difficulty of putting up a HF > antenna. > ANY HF antenna. > I am going through a lot of trouble to find a place to buy that > will > allow anything at all. > Yes, I know that I may have to have a home built but I really don't > want > to mess around with contractors. > You would think in all the millions of acres of nothing around here > that > hamming would be easy..wrong. > One more thing.a hobby is something you do if you are totally > bored > and have absolutely nothing else to do. > I think most hams and especially everyone on this list that this is > not > a hobby. > I don't know what the hell it is but it is not a hobby. > > > Regards > > Dave Harmon > NSRCA 586 > K6XYZ[at]valornet[dot]com > Broken Arrow, Ok.
Re: [AMRadio] The zeal to eliminate AM mode on the amateur bands.
Depends on who's making the statement. If you read this on the QRZ or similar type forum, I would ignore it. And, if I remember correctly, the person you quoted is generally clueless and normally an antagonist. All the major manufacturers now include the AM mode in their rigs. Even the ARRL WAS award, now has provision in the phone award for AM. The mode is not "current state of the art" but neither is SSB. As Glen would say something like, "AM is double sideband with carrier". Like SSB, AM is a mode that will be with us for as long as hams want to use it. Programming AM and SSB in today's rigs is not a difficult task. Pete, wa2cwa On Sun, 18 Sep 2005 10:10:02 -0700 (PDT) "Mark Cobbeldick [KB4CVN]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Having only been active on AM mode for just two short years, I > consider > myself to still be a newbie, still not understanding the zeal and > fervor by some in the amateur community to eliminate or totally > outlaw > the use of AM mode transmissions in the MF/HF amateur bands in the > USA. > > > ...As quoted by one person "like using spark-gap". > > I look at AM communications as just one of the earlier modes, > something > to be preserved, not cast aside. > > Could someone more familiar with the issue please give me a better > understanding of why these people are so intent to get rid of this > mode? > > > 73, > Mark Cobbeldick, KB4CVN > Monroe, VA
Re: [AMRadio] The zeal to eliminate AM mode on the amateur bands.
Brian comments: "H - I thought SSB was developed by the telephone companies or the military back in the 1930s, rather than by AM ham ops. Maybe I was given wrong information." SSB was devleoped by AT&T in the 20's for use on the Trans Atlantic cable. Bob Macklin K5MYJ Seattle, Wa.
RE: [AMRadio] The zeal to eliminate AM mode on the amateur bands.
Brian,
You are probably correct on the organizations credited for SSB
engineering. My point was that AM was what was studied and had to exist
before SSB and it was the same type of mind set that did the
engineering. I would bet they were hams that made a living doing what
they enjoyed. What little I know of history but I have found that many
people with the design and engineering bug are hams, and that the ideas
they have, stem from their experiences in amateur radio. I would guess
that it happened something like this. An over simplification I am sure!
1. An old AM rig is being operated by an engineering and resourceful
individual.
2. He gets better receiving equipment where he can notch out an unwanted
carrier or narrow down the band pass for CW. (He probably built or
modified the receiver)
3. He finds that tuning off the side and notching the AM carrier causes
distortion. Reinserting the carrier with a LOCAL BFO improves reception.
4. Experiments and learns all the spectrum parameters of AM discovering
that the intelligence is in one sideband.
5. He works with others at work to come up with a phasing system to
eliminate the carrier (Work done by GE I think, help me here Don, K4KYV)
Later, comes up with audio phasing so that one side band can be
eliminated.
6. Collins comes up with better filtering circuits and decides that the
filtering circuit is better for the military systems due to its
simplicity for the user and get a contract with the military.
7. Mean while, back on the ranch, hams that work for "Bell Tell" are
trying to do multiplexing using independent DSB.
The scenarios could go on and on but I bet they were HAMS and had AM
rigs in 1930.
John, WA5BXO
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2005 7:32 PM
To: Discussion of AM Radio
Subject: RE: [AMRadio] The zeal to eliminate AM mode on the amateur
bands.
H - I thought SSB was developed by the telephone
companies or the military back in the 1930s, rather than by
AM ham ops.
Maybe I was given wrong information.
On 18 Sep 2005 at 18:21, John Coleman ARS WA5BXO wrote:
> Yes, AMers are mavericks but I feel that the ones that did not
> go to SSB (100%) back in the 60s and 70s, are the ones that didn't
have
> any trouble communicating with whom ever they wanted and for the most
> part this took place because they were very knowledgeable folks with a
> desire to experiment and modify, or build from scratch, a better rig.
> ("That was a run on sentence if there was", somebody help me with
that.)
> Where as, the folks that just wanted to talk, collect cards and handle
> traffic found that buying a new SSB rig made that easier. I don't
think
> there is anyone among us that will deny the communication capabilities
> of a good SSB station. What many folks do forget is that the
engineers
> that researched and designed the SSB technologies were AM ops with
> mostly home brewed or highly modified stuff. Where do you think the
> ingenuity and knowledge to design the SSB stuff came from? I don't
mean
> to put down the folks that like to handle traffic, etc. There
expertise
> is certainly welcome in any part of the world. A lot of these
arguments
> can be said for CW as well. But when a SSB station, running 100
watts,
> can't cut the mustard or the rig don't work, I would be willing to
bet
> there or a lot of us AMers that could build a self oscillating single
> tube or Xsistor transmitter and be on the air with CW in short order
> with some junk parts.
>
> What I am saying is that it takes all sorts of people with
> expertise in different areas to make this hobby work and if we forget
> the old technologies then where are the building blocks for the
future.
> And if there is only a few modes to operate then where is the
incentive
> to learn.
>
> There will always be some nuts that go buy a rig just to get on
> the air and talk trash. They were there in the 50s, 60s, and 70s as
> well.
>
> I love to find a use for things for which it was not intended.
>
> John, WA5BXO
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bob Bruhns
> Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2005 5:39 PM
> To: Discussion of AM Radio
> Subject: Re: [AMRadio] The zeal to eliminate AM mode on the amateur
> bands.
>
> It's because a lot of people in authority are
> control freaks. Control was the reason they went
> after authority in the first place, and they
> consider it to be the proper reward for their
> work.
>
> AMers have long been mavericks, often behaving a
> bit wildly and holding unusual opinions, and above
> all being highly visible and audible on the ban
Re: [AMRadio] The zeal to eliminate AM mode on the amateur bands.
Western Electric developed it for use on phone lines in 1915. It was not used very much until 1947 on the ham bands until W6QYT and the group at Stanford began using it on 75m. There was mention of ham use of SSB in 1933, but it took W6QYT to spearhead the thing. Of course, Collins pushing the use of it to Gen. LeMay for military communications in the late 1950's really spurred it on. However, I love the sound of AM. The problem with SSB is that the fidelity stinks. Most everyone has to use phonetics. Long like double sideband, full carrier,Advanced Modulation, not Scientific Step Backwards! 73 de Joe W4AAB Bry AF4K said: > H - I thought SSB was developed by the telephone > companies or the military back in the 1930s, rather than by > AM ham ops. > > Maybe I was given wrong information. > >
RE: [AMRadio] The zeal to eliminate AM mode on the amateur bands.
Gentlemenplease read what I said. This is not a hobby. Regards Dave Harmon NSRCA 586 K6XYZ[at]valornet[dot]com Broken Arrow, Ok. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Coleman ARS WA5BXO Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2005 7:35 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'Discussion of AM Radio' Subject: RE: [AMRadio] The zeal to eliminate AM mode on the amateur bands. Yes, it's true to some extent, for some it may be a hobby as you described but for a lot of us it is some thing that we look forward to spending a lot of time with and has become a very major part of our lives and our families lives, some times to the dismay of others in the family. I am very fortunate to have the support of my wife in these ham radio things. She used to like to travel with me to meet the other people but now days all we have time for is rearing kids and doing scout activities. That's not a bad thing, but we do look forward to the future of not being locked down so much. Of course with the fuel cost the way it is, we may not do a lot of traveling to meet others in the future. John, WA5BXO -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dave Harmon Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2005 7:08 PM To: 'Discussion of AM Radio' Subject: RE: [AMRadio] The zeal to eliminate AM mode on the amateur bands. As bad as any of the mentioned groups are on AM ...and in fact amateur radio in general is the increasing difficulty of putting up a HF antenna. ANY HF antenna. I am going through a lot of trouble to find a place to buy that will allow anything at all. Yes, I know that I may have to have a home built but I really don't want to mess around with contractors. You would think in all the millions of acres of nothing around here that hamming would be easy..wrong. One more thing.a hobby is something you do if you are totally bored and have absolutely nothing else to do. I think most hams and especially everyone on this list that this is not a hobby. I don't know what the hell it is but it is not a hobby. Regards Dave Harmon NSRCA 586 K6XYZ[at]valornet[dot]com Broken Arrow, Ok. __ AMRadio mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html Post: mailto:AMRadio@mailman.qth.net AMfone Website: http://www.amfone.net AM List Admin: Brian Sherrod/w5ami
RE: [AMRadio] The zeal to eliminate AM mode on the amateur bands.
Yes, it's true to some extent, for some it may be a hobby as you described but for a lot of us it is some thing that we look forward to spending a lot of time with and has become a very major part of our lives and our families lives, some times to the dismay of others in the family. I am very fortunate to have the support of my wife in these ham radio things. She used to like to travel with me to meet the other people but now days all we have time for is rearing kids and doing scout activities. That's not a bad thing, but we do look forward to the future of not being locked down so much. Of course with the fuel cost the way it is, we may not do a lot of traveling to meet others in the future. John, WA5BXO -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dave Harmon Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2005 7:08 PM To: 'Discussion of AM Radio' Subject: RE: [AMRadio] The zeal to eliminate AM mode on the amateur bands. As bad as any of the mentioned groups are on AM ...and in fact amateur radio in general is the increasing difficulty of putting up a HF antenna. ANY HF antenna. I am going through a lot of trouble to find a place to buy that will allow anything at all. Yes, I know that I may have to have a home built but I really don't want to mess around with contractors. You would think in all the millions of acres of nothing around here that hamming would be easy..wrong. One more thing.a hobby is something you do if you are totally bored and have absolutely nothing else to do. I think most hams and especially everyone on this list that this is not a hobby. I don't know what the hell it is but it is not a hobby. Regards Dave Harmon NSRCA 586 K6XYZ[at]valornet[dot]com Broken Arrow, Ok.
RE: [AMRadio] The zeal to eliminate AM mode on the amateur bands.
On 18 Sep 2005 at 19:08, Dave Harmon wrote: > .a hobby is something you do if you are totally bored > and have absolutely nothing else to do. For a lot of us the hobby is a way of finding relaxation in a stressed out busy world. We retreat to the comfort of the shack for a warm conversation, or out to the workshop to build a nice tube modulator etc. Bored? NEVER!
RE: [AMRadio] The zeal to eliminate AM mode on the amateur bands.
H - I thought SSB was developed by the telephone
companies or the military back in the 1930s, rather than by
AM ham ops.
Maybe I was given wrong information.
On 18 Sep 2005 at 18:21, John Coleman ARS WA5BXO wrote:
> Yes, AMers are mavericks but I feel that the ones that did not
> go to SSB (100%) back in the 60s and 70s, are the ones that didn't have
> any trouble communicating with whom ever they wanted and for the most
> part this took place because they were very knowledgeable folks with a
> desire to experiment and modify, or build from scratch, a better rig.
> ("That was a run on sentence if there was", somebody help me with that.)
> Where as, the folks that just wanted to talk, collect cards and handle
> traffic found that buying a new SSB rig made that easier. I don't think
> there is anyone among us that will deny the communication capabilities
> of a good SSB station. What many folks do forget is that the engineers
> that researched and designed the SSB technologies were AM ops with
> mostly home brewed or highly modified stuff. Where do you think the
> ingenuity and knowledge to design the SSB stuff came from? I don't mean
> to put down the folks that like to handle traffic, etc. There expertise
> is certainly welcome in any part of the world. A lot of these arguments
> can be said for CW as well. But when a SSB station, running 100 watts,
> can't cut the mustard or the rig don't work, I would be willing to bet
> there or a lot of us AMers that could build a self oscillating single
> tube or Xsistor transmitter and be on the air with CW in short order
> with some junk parts.
>
> What I am saying is that it takes all sorts of people with
> expertise in different areas to make this hobby work and if we forget
> the old technologies then where are the building blocks for the future.
> And if there is only a few modes to operate then where is the incentive
> to learn.
>
> There will always be some nuts that go buy a rig just to get on
> the air and talk trash. They were there in the 50s, 60s, and 70s as
> well.
>
> I love to find a use for things for which it was not intended.
>
> John, WA5BXO
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bob Bruhns
> Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2005 5:39 PM
> To: Discussion of AM Radio
> Subject: Re: [AMRadio] The zeal to eliminate AM mode on the amateur
> bands.
>
> It's because a lot of people in authority are
> control freaks. Control was the reason they went
> after authority in the first place, and they
> consider it to be the proper reward for their
> work.
>
> AMers have long been mavericks, often behaving a
> bit wildly and holding unusual opinions, and above
> all being highly visible and audible on the bands.
> Guys with sideband gear didn't like the whistles
> and the sibilent splash, and control freaks went
> nuts wanting to rein in the independent and
> outspoken AMers.
>
> SWLs would tune the bands, but sidebanders sounded
> like Donald Duck, so the AMers were the ones the
> SWLs listened to. The control freaks sure didn't
> like that!
>
> So it went for many years. The sideband guys are
> still opposed to AM, and the control freaks still
> want control. There is not enough real activity
> on the bands to justify any conflict, but the
> control freaks still want control, and their
> failure to establish that control has made them
> really angry. Hence the zeal to eliminate AM.
>
>Bacon, WA3WDR
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Mark Cobbeldick [KB4CVN]"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To:
> Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2005 1:10 PM
> Subject: [AMRadio] The zeal to eliminate AM mode
> on the
> amateur bands.
>
>
> > Having only been active on AM mode for just two
> short
> years, I consider
> > myself to still be a newbie, still not
> understanding
> the zeal and
> > fervor by some in the amateur community to
> eliminate
> or totally outlaw
> > the use of AM mode transmissions in the MF/HF
> amateur
> bands in the USA.
> >
> >
> > ...As quoted by one person "like using
> spark-gap".
> >
> > I look at AM communications as just one of the
> earlier modes, something
> > to be preserved, not cast aside.
> >
> > Could someone more familiar with the issue
> please
> give me a better
> > understanding of why these people are so intent
> to
> get rid of this
> > mode?
> >
> >
> > 73,
> > Mark Cobbeldick, KB4CVN
> > Monroe, VA
> >
> >
>
Re: [AMRadio] The zeal to eliminate AM mode on the amateur bands.
Dave Harmon said: "One more thing.a hobby is something you do if you are totally bored and have absolutely nothing else to do." I couldn't disagree more. I think a hobby is so much fun that you would rather do the hobby than work or do other things. I'm glad I'm retired so I can have more fun with my hobbies. Totally bored is when someone retires with no hobby. These poor guys return to work or die within 5 years of retirement. Regards, Ken W2DTC
Re: [AMRadio] The zeal to eliminate AM mode on the amateur bands.
Mark: Yet another opinion... Some of these AM haters are very much like the big car drivers in high school who would haul around a gaggle of guys who would laugh at a practical good mileage car and make fun of the operator. Same mentalitydumb and dummmber. (no.. I couldnt afford a car). Also, I think some of the folks are just plain jelous (sp), They cant build AM or maintain or operate it but they "shore can buy leenears". Its a class conscious society, if I cant have it neither can you. Shields up. Charlie, K0NG . Quoting "Mark Cobbeldick [KB4CVN]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Having only been active on AM mode for just two short years, I consider > myself to still be a newbie, still not understanding the zeal and > fervor by some in the amateur community to eliminate or totally outlaw > the use of AM mode transmissions in the MF/HF amateur bands in the USA. > > > ...As quoted by one person "like using spark-gap". > > I look at AM communications as just one of the earlier modes, something > to be preserved, not cast aside. > > Could someone more familiar with the issue please give me a better > understanding of why these people are so intent to get rid of this > mode? > > > 73, > Mark Cobbeldick, KB4CVN > Monroe, VA > > __ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > __ > AMRadio mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html > Post: mailto:AMRadio@mailman.qth.net > AMfone Website: http://www.amfone.net > AM List Admin: Brian Sherrod/w5ami > This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
RE: [AMRadio] The zeal to eliminate AM mode on the amateur bands.
As bad as any of the mentioned groups are on AM ...and in fact amateur
radio in general is the increasing difficulty of putting up a HF
antenna.
ANY HF antenna.
I am going through a lot of trouble to find a place to buy that will
allow anything at all.
Yes, I know that I may have to have a home built but I really don't want
to mess around with contractors.
You would think in all the millions of acres of nothing around here that
hamming would be easy..wrong.
One more thing.a hobby is something you do if you are totally bored
and have absolutely nothing else to do.
I think most hams and especially everyone on this list that this is not
a hobby.
I don't know what the hell it is but it is not a hobby.
Regards
Dave Harmon
NSRCA 586
K6XYZ[at]valornet[dot]com
Broken Arrow, Ok.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Coleman ARS
WA5BXO
Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2005 6:22 PM
To: 'Discussion of AM Radio'
Subject: RE: [AMRadio] The zeal to eliminate AM mode on the amateur
bands.
Yes, AMers are mavericks but I feel that the ones that did not
go to SSB (100%) back in the 60s and 70s, are the ones that didn't have
any trouble communicating with whom ever they wanted and for the most
part this took place because they were very knowledgeable folks with a
desire to experiment and modify, or build from scratch, a better rig.
("That was a run on sentence if there was", somebody help me with that.)
Where as, the folks that just wanted to talk, collect cards and handle
traffic found that buying a new SSB rig made that easier. I don't think
there is anyone among us that will deny the communication capabilities
of a good SSB station. What many folks do forget is that the engineers
that researched and designed the SSB technologies were AM ops with
mostly home brewed or highly modified stuff. Where do you think the
ingenuity and knowledge to design the SSB stuff came from? I don't mean
to put down the folks that like to handle traffic, etc. There expertise
is certainly welcome in any part of the world. A lot of these arguments
can be said for CW as well. But when a SSB station, running 100 watts,
can't cut the mustard or the rig don't work, I would be willing to bet
there or a lot of us AMers that could build a self oscillating single
tube or Xsistor transmitter and be on the air with CW in short order
with some junk parts.
What I am saying is that it takes all sorts of people with
expertise in different areas to make this hobby work and if we forget
the old technologies then where are the building blocks for the future.
And if there is only a few modes to operate then where is the incentive
to learn.
There will always be some nuts that go buy a rig just to get on
the air and talk trash. They were there in the 50s, 60s, and 70s as
well.
I love to find a use for things for which it was not intended.
John, WA5BXO
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bob Bruhns
Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2005 5:39 PM
To: Discussion of AM Radio
Subject: Re: [AMRadio] The zeal to eliminate AM mode on the amateur
bands.
It's because a lot of people in authority are
control freaks. Control was the reason they went
after authority in the first place, and they
consider it to be the proper reward for their
work.
AMers have long been mavericks, often behaving a
bit wildly and holding unusual opinions, and above
all being highly visible and audible on the bands.
Guys with sideband gear didn't like the whistles
and the sibilent splash, and control freaks went
nuts wanting to rein in the independent and
outspoken AMers.
SWLs would tune the bands, but sidebanders sounded
like Donald Duck, so the AMers were the ones the
SWLs listened to. The control freaks sure didn't
like that!
So it went for many years. The sideband guys are
still opposed to AM, and the control freaks still
want control. There is not enough real activity
on the bands to justify any conflict, but the
control freaks still want control, and their
failure to establish that control has made them
really angry. Hence the zeal to eliminate AM.
Bacon, WA3WDR
- Original Message -
From: "Mark Cobbeldick [KB4CVN]"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2005 1:10 PM
Subject: [AMRadio] The zeal to eliminate AM mode
on the
amateur bands.
> Having only been active on AM mode for just two
short
years, I consider
> myself to still be a newbie, still not
understanding
the zeal and
> fervor by some in the amateur community to
eliminate
or totally outlaw
> the use of AM mode transmissions in the MF/HF
amateur
bands in the USA.
>
>
> ...As quoted by one person "like using
spark-gap".
>
> I look at AM communications as just one of the
earlier modes, something
> to be preserved,
RE: [AMRadio] The zeal to eliminate AM mode on the amateur bands.
Good one Dave ! I like some of the wideband sound but without a compandor or a carrier, it just aint the same nor will it ever be AM. AM is AM. 73 DE Charlie, K0NG. Quoting Dave Harmon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Probably because they want more spectrum to run their wideband SSB rigs > that they think sounds as good as AM. > > Regards > > Dave Harmon > NSRCA 586 > K6XYZ[at]valornet[dot]com > Broken Arrow, Ok. > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Cobbeldick > [KB4CVN] > Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2005 12:10 PM > To: amradio@mailman.qth.net > Subject: [AMRadio] The zeal to eliminate AM mode on the amateur bands. > > Having only been active on AM mode for just two short years, I consider > myself to still be a newbie, still not understanding the zeal and > fervor by some in the amateur community to eliminate or totally outlaw > the use of AM mode transmissions in the MF/HF amateur bands in the USA. > > > ...As quoted by one person "like using spark-gap". > > I look at AM communications as just one of the earlier modes, something > to be preserved, not cast aside. > > Could someone more familiar with the issue please give me a better > understanding of why these people are so intent to get rid of this > mode? > > > 73, > Mark Cobbeldick, KB4CVN > Monroe, VA > > __ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > __ > AMRadio mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html > Post: mailto:AMRadio@mailman.qth.net > AMfone Website: http://www.amfone.net > AM List Admin: Brian Sherrod/w5ami > > > __ > AMRadio mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html > Post: mailto:AMRadio@mailman.qth.net > AMfone Website: http://www.amfone.net > AM List Admin: Brian Sherrod/w5ami > This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
RE: [AMRadio] The zeal to eliminate AM mode on the amateur bands.
Yes, AMers are mavericks but I feel that the ones that did not
go to SSB (100%) back in the 60s and 70s, are the ones that didn't have
any trouble communicating with whom ever they wanted and for the most
part this took place because they were very knowledgeable folks with a
desire to experiment and modify, or build from scratch, a better rig.
("That was a run on sentence if there was", somebody help me with that.)
Where as, the folks that just wanted to talk, collect cards and handle
traffic found that buying a new SSB rig made that easier. I don't think
there is anyone among us that will deny the communication capabilities
of a good SSB station. What many folks do forget is that the engineers
that researched and designed the SSB technologies were AM ops with
mostly home brewed or highly modified stuff. Where do you think the
ingenuity and knowledge to design the SSB stuff came from? I don't mean
to put down the folks that like to handle traffic, etc. There expertise
is certainly welcome in any part of the world. A lot of these arguments
can be said for CW as well. But when a SSB station, running 100 watts,
can't cut the mustard or the rig don't work, I would be willing to bet
there or a lot of us AMers that could build a self oscillating single
tube or Xsistor transmitter and be on the air with CW in short order
with some junk parts.
What I am saying is that it takes all sorts of people with
expertise in different areas to make this hobby work and if we forget
the old technologies then where are the building blocks for the future.
And if there is only a few modes to operate then where is the incentive
to learn.
There will always be some nuts that go buy a rig just to get on
the air and talk trash. They were there in the 50s, 60s, and 70s as
well.
I love to find a use for things for which it was not intended.
John, WA5BXO
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bob Bruhns
Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2005 5:39 PM
To: Discussion of AM Radio
Subject: Re: [AMRadio] The zeal to eliminate AM mode on the amateur
bands.
It's because a lot of people in authority are
control freaks. Control was the reason they went
after authority in the first place, and they
consider it to be the proper reward for their
work.
AMers have long been mavericks, often behaving a
bit wildly and holding unusual opinions, and above
all being highly visible and audible on the bands.
Guys with sideband gear didn't like the whistles
and the sibilent splash, and control freaks went
nuts wanting to rein in the independent and
outspoken AMers.
SWLs would tune the bands, but sidebanders sounded
like Donald Duck, so the AMers were the ones the
SWLs listened to. The control freaks sure didn't
like that!
So it went for many years. The sideband guys are
still opposed to AM, and the control freaks still
want control. There is not enough real activity
on the bands to justify any conflict, but the
control freaks still want control, and their
failure to establish that control has made them
really angry. Hence the zeal to eliminate AM.
Bacon, WA3WDR
- Original Message -
From: "Mark Cobbeldick [KB4CVN]"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2005 1:10 PM
Subject: [AMRadio] The zeal to eliminate AM mode
on the
amateur bands.
> Having only been active on AM mode for just two
short
years, I consider
> myself to still be a newbie, still not
understanding
the zeal and
> fervor by some in the amateur community to
eliminate
or totally outlaw
> the use of AM mode transmissions in the MF/HF
amateur
bands in the USA.
>
>
> ...As quoted by one person "like using
spark-gap".
>
> I look at AM communications as just one of the
earlier modes, something
> to be preserved, not cast aside.
>
> Could someone more familiar with the issue
please
give me a better
> understanding of why these people are so intent
to
get rid of this
> mode?
>
>
> 73,
> Mark Cobbeldick, KB4CVN
> Monroe, VA
>
>
__
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>
__
_
___
> AMRadio mailing list
> Home:
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html
> Post: mailto:AMRadio@mailman.qth.net
> AMfone Website: http://www.amfone.net
> AM List Admin: Brian Sherrod/w5ami
>
__
AMRadio mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html
Post: mailto:AMRadio@mailman.qth.net
AMfone Website: http://www.amfone.net
AM List Admin: Brian Sherrod/w5ami
Re: [AMRadio] The zeal to eliminate AM mode on the amateur bands.
Bob >From: "Bob Bruhns" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: "Discussion of AM Radio" < I like your comment about SWL'ers. I remember well listining to the AM'ers on the high end of 75 stiring my inquisitive nature and interest to "wanting to do that". I know that old Philco didn't have a BFO, so I would have gone back to my model airplanes without AM to lite my fires for a hobby that's kept me involved for more thwn 50 years. Byron, W3WKR
Re: [AMRadio] The zeal to eliminate AM mode on the amateur bands.
It's because a lot of people in authority are control freaks. Control was the reason they went after authority in the first place, and they consider it to be the proper reward for their work. AMers have long been mavericks, often behaving a bit wildly and holding unusual opinions, and above all being highly visible and audible on the bands. Guys with sideband gear didn't like the whistles and the sibilent splash, and control freaks went nuts wanting to rein in the independent and outspoken AMers. SWLs would tune the bands, but sidebanders sounded like Donald Duck, so the AMers were the ones the SWLs listened to. The control freaks sure didn't like that! So it went for many years. The sideband guys are still opposed to AM, and the control freaks still want control. There is not enough real activity on the bands to justify any conflict, but the control freaks still want control, and their failure to establish that control has made them really angry. Hence the zeal to eliminate AM. Bacon, WA3WDR - Original Message - From: "Mark Cobbeldick [KB4CVN]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2005 1:10 PM Subject: [AMRadio] The zeal to eliminate AM mode on the amateur bands. > Having only been active on AM mode for just two short years, I consider > myself to still be a newbie, still not understanding the zeal and > fervor by some in the amateur community to eliminate or totally outlaw > the use of AM mode transmissions in the MF/HF amateur bands in the USA. > > > ...As quoted by one person "like using spark-gap". > > I look at AM communications as just one of the earlier modes, something > to be preserved, not cast aside. > > Could someone more familiar with the issue please give me a better > understanding of why these people are so intent to get rid of this > mode? > > > 73, > Mark Cobbeldick, KB4CVN > Monroe, VA > > __ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > __ _ ___ > AMRadio mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html > Post: mailto:AMRadio@mailman.qth.net > AMfone Website: http://www.amfone.net > AM List Admin: Brian Sherrod/w5ami >
[AMRadio] The zeal to eliminate AM mode on the amateur bands.
On 18 Sep 2005 at 17:18, W2AGN wrote: > Not PACKET, but PACTOR, specifically the PACTOR II and III modes, which > are used with Winlink, which the ARRL is trying to shove down everyone's > throat. Obtaining more space for the PACTOR Robots to forward email was > the prime reason for the ARRL's recent "Bandwidth" proposal. John is 100% right, and I would state further that this is the most insidious thing to happento amateur radio in the past 30 years. Worst yet it is an attack on amateur radio being PAID FOR by our tax dollars through our wonderful Dept. of Homeland Security. The Pactor / Winlink organization is getting many thousands of dollars from Federal and local government to buy them these overpriced modems that pollute the HF bands with QRM far worse than anything BPL has so far created. It's sick - at the rate they are going, we can soon take the word "amateur" out of the whole thing. I pulled out of ARRL after their latest foray into stupidity. Thankfully there are still a few people who love AM that are toughing it out and staying in ARRL and influencing things positively. I plan to send them a letter EVERY year with a copy of my check made out to ARRL that is being WITHELD until they stop promoting WINLINK and other fool hardy proposals that are detrimental to ham radio.
Re: [AMRadio] The zeal to eliminate AM mode on the amateur bands.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: SSB is a orm of amplitude modulation. I think a large threat comes both from SSB and from the DIGITAL ops running certain modes. The majority of the digital ops are a good bunch and they respect the phone and AM mode phone ops. However, some of the proponents of PACKET on HF are very well connected politically and financially and they are exerting al ot of control ove rthe ARRL leadership now, and they even want to make all of HF digital including the voice functions, so they are a threat to both SSB and AM modes. Not PACKET, but PACTOR, specifically the PACTOR II and III modes, which are used with Winlink, which the ARRL is trying to shove down everyone's throat. Obtaining more space for the PACTOR Robots to forward email was the prime reason for the ARRL's recent "Bandwidth" proposal. -- _ _ _ _ _ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ John L. Sielke ( W ) ( 2 ) ( A ) ( G ) ( N ) http://w2agn.net \_/ \_/ \_/ \_/ \_/
RE: [AMRadio] The zeal to eliminate AM mode on the amateur bands.
SSB is a orm of amplitude modulation. I think a large threat comes both from SSB and from the DIGITAL ops running certain modes. The majority of the digital ops are a good bunch and they respect the phone and AM mode phone ops. However, some of the proponents of PACKET on HF are very well connected politically and financially and they are exerting al ot of control ove rthe ARRL leadership now, and they even want to make all of HF digital including the voice functions, so they are a threat to both SSB and AM modes. A far greater threat, believe me, than the proponents of hi-fi SSB which is perfectly legal. On 18 Sep 2005 at 12:14, Dave Harmon wrote: > Probably because they want more spectrum to run their wideband SSB rigs > that they think sounds as good as AM. > > Regards > > Dave Harmon > NSRCA 586 > K6XYZ[at]valornet[dot]com > Broken Arrow, Ok. > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Cobbeldick > [KB4CVN] > Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2005 12:10 PM > To: amradio@mailman.qth.net > Subject: [AMRadio] The zeal to eliminate AM mode on the amateur bands. > > Having only been active on AM mode for just two short years, I consider > myself to still be a newbie, still not understanding the zeal and > fervor by some in the amateur community to eliminate or totally outlaw > the use of AM mode transmissions in the MF/HF amateur bands in the USA. > > > ...As quoted by one person "like using spark-gap". > > I look at AM communications as just one of the earlier modes, something > to be preserved, not cast aside. > > Could someone more familiar with the issue please give me a better > understanding of why these people are so intent to get rid of this > mode? > > > 73, > Mark Cobbeldick, KB4CVN > Monroe, VA > > __ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > __ > AMRadio mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html > Post: mailto:AMRadio@mailman.qth.net > AMfone Website: http://www.amfone.net > AM List Admin: Brian Sherrod/w5ami > > > __ > AMRadio mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html > Post: mailto:AMRadio@mailman.qth.net > AMfone Website: http://www.amfone.net > AM List Admin: Brian Sherrod/w5ami >
RE: [AMRadio] The zeal to eliminate AM mode on the amateur bands.
Probably because they want more spectrum to run their wideband SSB rigs that they think sounds as good as AM. Regards Dave Harmon NSRCA 586 K6XYZ[at]valornet[dot]com Broken Arrow, Ok. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Cobbeldick [KB4CVN] Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2005 12:10 PM To: amradio@mailman.qth.net Subject: [AMRadio] The zeal to eliminate AM mode on the amateur bands. Having only been active on AM mode for just two short years, I consider myself to still be a newbie, still not understanding the zeal and fervor by some in the amateur community to eliminate or totally outlaw the use of AM mode transmissions in the MF/HF amateur bands in the USA. ...As quoted by one person "like using spark-gap". I look at AM communications as just one of the earlier modes, something to be preserved, not cast aside. Could someone more familiar with the issue please give me a better understanding of why these people are so intent to get rid of this mode? 73, Mark Cobbeldick, KB4CVN Monroe, VA __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com __ AMRadio mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html Post: mailto:AMRadio@mailman.qth.net AMfone Website: http://www.amfone.net AM List Admin: Brian Sherrod/w5ami
[AMRadio] The zeal to eliminate AM mode on the amateur bands.
Having only been active on AM mode for just two short years, I consider myself to still be a newbie, still not understanding the zeal and fervor by some in the amateur community to eliminate or totally outlaw the use of AM mode transmissions in the MF/HF amateur bands in the USA. ...As quoted by one person "like using spark-gap". I look at AM communications as just one of the earlier modes, something to be preserved, not cast aside. Could someone more familiar with the issue please give me a better understanding of why these people are so intent to get rid of this mode? 73, Mark Cobbeldick, KB4CVN Monroe, VA __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
