RM-11306 COMMENTS TALLY!

[rayfri]

now THERE'S another fine bunch back there in Newington.    Those who 
also believe they are the repository of all that is best for ham 
radio.    The same ones who decided that because there werent enough of 
us applying for awards such as the RCC they would just dump all the 
unused certificates in the trash and not issue any ...    As Brian said, 
not enough money.

Those spineless bunch of noodle heads who will sit and moan and groan 
and stomp their feet and throw temper tantrums when the FCC wont accede 
to their demands that a BPL system be shut down because it generates too 
much interference, yet dont have enough in their spines to actually file 
a lawsuit against the FCC and the offending BPL system to ask the courts 
to make the FCC follow their own regulations and shut down the 
system...    Yep.. this is the same organization that makes the FCC show 
some respect and sit up and take notice.    An organization about as 
useful and caring as your local politician on a political junket.

YEP ....  MY HEROES back there in Newington ...    ol Hyrum Percy would 
be a mighty proud papa now....     HI HI.

Ray  WA7ITZ


Brian Carling wrote:

>On 19 Feb 2006 at 17:26, LM Picard wrote:
>
>  
>
>>The ARRL should address the issue of HF band plans in a realistic 
>>fashion.  I suggest that they monitor actual usage of the HF bands and 
>>re-apportion them according to need. 
>>    
>>
>
>But gosh that would take EFFORT and DILIGENCE, and to 
>make matters even worse, it would not generate any
>REVENUE. "Strike that idea" - ARRL.
>
>  
>
>>It appears to me that voice modes are the most popular and this includes 
>>AM.  AM is never again going to be in widespread use and a small segment 
>>set aside for its use will not harm anyone. 
>>    
>>
>
>No I think we need to reserve the right to use AM anywhere we want. 
> 
>  
>
>>Technology has come a long way and digital modes can be accomplished 
>>with less band occupancy than in the past.  
>>    
>>
>
>No - they want more and more and more wide signals.
>Didn't you see the one proposal where they want some 
>segments for 20 kHz WIDE DIGITAL PACKET SIGNALS on HF!!
>
>  
>
>>Fair and appropriate 
>>re-allocation of the HF bands favoring voice modes is needed. 
>>    
>>
> 
>What EVER they decide to do is going to disappoint a lot of people.
>I seriously doubt that the FCC and ARRL leaders combined have
>enough ideas or IQ to come up with a plan that makes any sense 
>at all.  If they do it will be one of the first changes that is positive 
>in the past 30+ years of regulatory tom-foolery.
>
>  
>
>>The rule that comms should be carried out with the least amount of 
>>bandwidth required (for any given mode) should be more strictly enforced. 
>>    
>>
>
>By whom? FCC has two engineers to monitor the entire southeast 
>United States for ALL services, including broadcast radio, TV, commercial, 
>CB and amateur. At least that was all they had in around 1981 or so 
>the last time that I checked. OK add the Regional EIC and you have 
>three guys!
>
>The JUST want amateur radio to GO AWAY. So they are slowly 
>making it into something else. You can order a pizza on 2m FM now 
>and it is legal. Unattended HF stations jam the regular radio amateur 
>functions of hundreds of real stations every day. Let's just call it:
>"BRAVE NEW BANDWIDTH."
> 
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------
>This list is a public service of the City of Tempe, Arizona
>-----------------------------------------------------------
>
>Subscription control - http://www.tempe.gov/lists/control.asp?list=BOATANCHORS
>To post - BOATANCHORS at LISTSERV.TEMPE.GOV
>Archives - http://listserv.tempe.gov/archives/BOATANCHORS.html
>
>
>  
>

-----------------------------------------------------------
This list is a public service of the City of Tempe, Arizona
-----------------------------------------------------------

Subscription control - http://www.tempe.gov/lists/control.asp?list=BOATANCHORS
To post - BOATANCHORS at LISTSERV.TEMPE.GOV
Archives - http://listserv.tempe.gov/archives/BOATANCHORS.html