Re: K5FO Inventory (fwd)


From: Stan Goldstein, N6ULU (
Date: Thu Sep 15 1994 - 03:55:54 EDT

Jim Cummings writes:
> In a previous mailing, C. Adams wrote:
> >
> > I wanna add one more thing to my inventory. Oh please
> > forgive me, one and all. I want to obtain a TNC or
> > whatever to listen to packet/amtor/crickets or whatever.
> >
> > I turned on the Argosy I last night and the night before
> > and there is some strong critter sitting at 7.035MHz and
> > I want to identify this sucker (or someone else can do
> > it on the net). I think we outta publicly announce the
> > callsigns and duration of such transmissions, even if
> > it is legal, it is a pain in the rear. Give an inch
> > and they'll take a mile or KHz.
> >
> > Soap box off.
> >
> > dit dit
> > Chuck Adams K5FO CP-60
> >
> >
> >
> >
> For what reason would Adams wish to broadcast the name or callsign of the
> station? Since he admits that it's legal, what does he hope to
> accomplish? Quite frankly, a couple of good doses of castor oil would go
> a much longer way in relieving his painful gluteus maximus.
> I also wish to draw to Adams attention to page 37-3, 1991 edition of the
> ARRL Handbook for Radio Amateurs. On this page is Table 2 entitled
> "Voluntary HF band Plands for Considerate US Operators" (please note the
> adjective "considerate"). In that table, one will notice that 7040 kHz is
> designated as the DX frequency for RTTY communications, in accordance with
> mutual agreements among amateurs. Therefore, digital operation on this
> frequency is not out of line of recognized practise. As a result, digital
> operation on 7035 is at most, a minor transgression.
> I must caution all those who may not be aware, but the 40 metre allocation
> outside of ITU Region 2 is from 7000 kHz to 7100kHz. Under those
> circumstances, most digital operation is below 7050 kHz. Therefore, any
> attempts to move digital operations off those frequencies is likely to be
> held with contempt and will be politely, but disdainfully, ignored. If I
> may add a personal note, I have had a number of nice digital chats in that
> range of frequency and I have taken great delight when the CW operators
> try to kick us off... We just "cricket" away to our hearts content.
> Finally, I would highly recommend that dyed-in-the-wool CW operators should
> not obtain the means to listen in or operate digital modes. I have come to
> this conclusion because after reading many of the messages in the
> newsgroups, most of the CW operators that campaign for the retention of CW
> testing, et al., could not physically or intellectually cope with inescapable
> conclusion that CW communications in amateur radio is becoming a quaint
> anachronism. Such losses, either through early death or many years in
> therapy while isolated in a rubber room, would clearly be a loss to
> society because I am sure that they would have other talents to bring to
> the betterment of society and their fellow man.
> 73 and live better digitally
> Jim Cummings, VE3XJ
> ** Don't get too excited, because remember, today **
> ** is the first day of the rest of your life! **

Perhaps you could just pick up the telephone and use the newest,
latest and most efficient methods available.
You don't seem to understand the spirit of cw qrp and probably
ham radio in general.

Stan Goldstein , N6ULU

Search QRP-L Archives

[ QRP-L Archive | ]
[ 1993 | 1994 | 1995 | 1996 | 1997 | 1998 | 1999 | 2000 ]


This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 on Fri Jun 02 2000 - 11:27:00 EDT