RTTY
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [RTTY] List of Winlink stations

To: "'John Becker'" <w0jab@big-river.net>
Subject: Re: [RTTY] List of Winlink stations
From: "Dave AA6YQ" <aa6yq@ambersoft.com>
Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2014 13:35:27 -0400
List-post: <rtty@contesting.com">mailto:rtty@contesting.com>
>>>AA6YQ comments below

-----Original Message-----
From: RTTY [mailto:rtty-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of John Becker
Sent: Sunday, March 16, 2014 1:02 PM
To: rtty@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [RTTY] List of Winlink stations


On 3/16/2014 10:16 AM, Jeff AC0C wrote:
> John,
>
> Ah, if it were only so in reality.
>
> Winlink interprets the subband restriction as specifically **not** 
> applying to their system.  See paragraph #2 on this page:

Then what was the purpose of the sub band from the get go?

>>>You have asked this question many times on may groups and reflectors over
the years. Each time, I have posted the FCC's rationale that accompanied
97.221.  It effectively says "so that hams can develop techniques to reduce
the interference from automatic stations".

>>>It does NOT say "so automatic stations will have a set of frequencies for
their exclusive use".

 

     



Seems that some (pactor operators) played be that but other did not.

JAB
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty


_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>