On 10/21/2015 10:24 PM, Don AA5AU wrote: In 2011, I did an analysis on the ages of those competing in JARTS that year from logs received by various operators. The most populous age group in 2011 was
I didn't get on for this one hope everyone had fun. If your worked W5DT you worked some real iron, maybe send him a note of congrats......from the Grenkeys list Well, I wont get any awards or plaques
Hi Dick, I don't know if you solved this yet but here's what I have F2 Run Exch, {TX} 599 NE NE {RX} F5 His Call, {TX}{ENTER} !{RX} Pay attention to the spaces, N1MM will do the F5-F2 sequence for yo
You could always ask your directors for clarification, there's a board meeting Jan 15-16 by the way. It is a bit odd though, all the references to protecting narrow band just don't make sense......ye
WSPR beacons Jeff. The QRP cw guys have been complaining about it for awhile. Poor choice of frequency for what's mostly unattended beacons. Ron K0IDT The group of guys sitting on an iceberg at the b
Hi Hoop, Welcome aboard! A question for you, how can using a Mac be a disadvantage? If you're not using cocoaModem then I can understand but you'll be missing some premo software if you don't :) 73,
Pretty much what Chen said. My comment hasn't shown up yet, hate to be in agreement with the ones opposed.They're mostly emotional and I wasn't aware RTTY was a "spectrum hog" also thought the phone
Dick, I think what you're after is designated "ACDS" in the band plan. That's about the only place Pactor is used now, email messaging use and abuse. Ron K0IDT The ARRL Board of Directors' HF Band Pl
Just a heads up, the FCC launched a new ECFS site on June 20, yeah I know this is the 18th but someone doesn't. If you have any RSS feeds from there they need to be updated and not all the most recen
RM-11708 has advanced to NPRM status, WTB 16-239, you may access it from the FCC ECFS site. 60 day comment period, 90 day reply to comments. Please read and understand what the FCC is requesting for
Thanks David and it's something everyone should consider in comments. Take a look at the Region 2 band plan, with minor tweaking to fit some of the license class rules it's quite workable for US hams
A fine example of FUD, since neither the ARRL or FCC are changing 97.221 in any way, nor is it likely that any significant increase in interference will result with "new" technologies already having
The only thing I don't agree with Ted on is giving the stinkers anything above the lower 100kHz. The next shoe to drop will be eliminating 97.221, there will never be enough spectrum for these clowns
Yup, and the Canadians got a bit upset over the proposed ARRL band plan because they use or RTTY/Data sub band for SSB to get away from US stations. The other problem is that Matthew failed to recogn
Matthew, it's happening now with the 97.221(c) stations. What makes you think the wide band stuff will behave any better? The big problem is no one, not the FCC or the ARRL, is watching or responding
Matthew, try to stick to the subject. Stations operating under 97.221(c) regularly blast anything in their way and if the P3 stations would stay where they belong it would help. No one said anything
Jeff, sorry email problems and I'm behind. I think if you have software or a hardware modem you can get callsigns, I've done it with P2-3 but not tried P4. There is a small problem with decoding the
Be very careful with Sorcerer, it's a cracked commercial product and not always malware free. It will decode callsigns of P2-3 but the message remains hidden. I think one of the Hoka products works o
Matthew, the reason you don't see wide band digi voice in the sub band is simple. In the case of System Fusion, 12.5kHz, the baud rate is 9600 and not legal under current rules but.....you knew that
Sorry forgot to add this "And, for what it's worth, where else are hams using peer to peer digital (Pactor 3 and Winmor 1600) supposed to operate?" How much p2p P3 or Winmor 1600 is actually used for