Dave,
Claims of potential increases in QRM, nothing more. And without at least a year
long test period where Pactor 4 and only that would be allowed, there is no way
to prove to anyone on this and other lists that your fears of being overrun by
it are ungrounded.
Matthew Pitts
N8OHU
On August 16, 2016 9:31:46 PM EDT, Dave AA6YQ <aa6yq@ambersoft.com> wrote:
>>>>AA6YQ comments below
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: RTTY [mailto:rtty-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Matthew
>Pitts via RTTY
>Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2016 9:09 PM
>To: Ron Kolarik; rtty@contesting.com
>Subject: Re: [RTTY] FW: If you care about CW and RTTY - time is of the
>essence
>
>From what I know, there's no chance of it happening any time soon; none
>of the Yaesu radios that have System Fusion capabilities can
>use that mode with anything other than one specific accessory and if
>memory serves, the FT-991 doesn't even support it, period.
>
>Yeah, I guess you're right; it's too bad folks have to feel threatened
>by things that won't happen to realize that maybe their
>version of events isn't the whole story. Sadly, it's those folks that
>are the ones that make choices that retard the advancement of
>technology in one country compared to the rest of the world.
>
>>>>It is the operators of automatic stations who refuse to deploy
>competent busy frequency detectors - and their apologists - who
>are responsible for the justifiable opposition to increases in QRM by
>stations that transmit without first verifying that the
>frequency range is clear.
>
> 73,
>
> Dave, AA6YQ
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
|