RTTY
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [RTTY] ARRL

To: RTTY Contesting <rtty@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [RTTY] ARRL
From: Mark n2qt <n2qt.va@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2015 07:05:13 -0500
List-post: <rtty@contesting.com">mailto:rtty@contesting.com>
Be sure to read the article Seven Seas Shack in Feb. QST.  for more on the use 
of WinLink.
in a way I thought, would garner support.  (As he was using it for aRRL 
bulletins and 
propagation reports).  

Mark. N2QT

> On Mar 2, 2015, at 12:39 AM, Ron Kolarik <rkolarik@neb.rr.com> wrote:
> 
> Ed, Joe has answered most of your points pretty well but he missed a few
> 
>> On 3/1/2015 10:16 PM, Ed Karl wrote:
>> 
>> Lastly, divulge un- encrypting methods for select OO's to police the traffic 
>> so rendered.
>> There recently was congratulatory emails regarding possible rescue at sea 
>> thanks to
>> Winlink . No definite answer as to "was the station a ham?"
> Ed if you're referring to the Bounty incident for the rescue at sea that's 
> mostly a lot of PR.
> The Coast Guard does not have an email address for sinking vessels and I'm 
> quite sure
> if the boat was going down the last thing I would grab is the HF, modem, 
> battery and laptop.
> 
> The OO's can't police the traffic now, I turned a case over to them and part 
> of the reply was
> "we don't normally monitor those frequencies/modes". Why is the traffic 
> hidden/encrypted to
> begin with? Makes it hard to self police like we're supposed to.
> 
> 73,
> Ron
> K0IDT
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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>