On the ARRL web site there is a new article today describing the ARRL's present plan for "regulation by bandwidth". The plan appears to disallow AM operation on all the MF/HF bands except for 10 Mete
AM forever! - read the article: "The EC made no change to its earlier recommendation that the rules continue to permit double-sideband, full-carrier AM and independent sideband (ISB) as specific exce
Oops...I guess I did not read the text carefully enough, and made the completely rediculous assumption that the pictorial chart representations would be complete and accurate. DE N6KB _______________
Guess I just get nervous with some of their plans, still remember that they were the group that brought the great boon of incentive licenseing to ham radio. Ira K4YMQ Oops...I guess I did not read th
Me also! You know if they are trying to regulate by bandwidth, they have something up there sleeve that probably is not going to be good for the hobby! Tommy W4BQF Guess I just get nervous with some
Ira, Maybe we all have reason to be nervous! Sumner, ARRL chief, said " using the FCC rules to subdivide the amateur HF bands is the wrong approach. The FCC rules are too static and too difficult to
Well there is a statement that does not make sense, or is not logical. Logic dictates (or common sense reveals): ARRL presence is dependant on the hobby of ham radio. Why would "they" be planning so
Author: "Geoffrey S. Mendelson" <gsm@mendelson.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 16:50:34 +0300
They are dependent upon hams that pay membership dues. The problem is as I said before, the 80 (no 75 at all) and 40 meter bands are much smaller outside of the America's. The voice portion of the US
It's been said before, but the ARRL is all we've got. They are hard-working and well-meaning, even if they don't measure up to some folks' wishes. If there's another organization that's doing a bette
Ron .. I'd really love to get into this but the TenTec Reflector isn't the place. I have been wondering the same thing myself though. Like why have they consistently favored "dumming down" the hobby?
AMEN MARTIN, THANK YOU THE COMMENTS. Mac David S. McCallum/USAF RET./CMSGT/W7SAC/4 -- Original Message -- From: "Martin, AA6E" <martin.ewing@gmail.com> To: "Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment" AMIt's be
Look back at the record about 30 years ago. ARRL was not the instigator of incentive licensing. It was FCC; ARRL did what could be done to make what FCC was going to do anyway as acceptable as possib