At 06:08 PM 2/13/97 +0000, you wrote:
>CW _is_ Digital. The FCC will only go as far as defining the digital vs
>phone portions of the band. Subbands are still a matter of "Gentlemen's
>Agreements", and that puts us back to where we started.
>
>
This is a "cop out"!!! To equate manual CW telegraphy as "digital" is a
gargantuan stretch! They managed to divide the CW portion into sub bands
for Novice licensees.....what is so damned difficult about "digital"
(RTTY/Packet/AMTOR/
Pactor/Clover etc.) modes that are VERY easy to distinguish from Manual or
even high speed computer generated CW?
They ONLY way we will get the FCC to do anything is to make a lot of
noise. Writing to your Representitive or Senator about it CAN do some good,
as I'm sure the FCC doesn't want any "budget cuts"! We must lobby them to
institute changes BEFORE any band plan is finalized, or we can forget it for
a while! With a big push to squeeze the CW/digital portion of the band
again into less space, this space needs to be defined better than a
"Gentlemen's Agreement".
My 2 cents worth.
73,
E. V. Sandy Blaize, W5TVW
"Boat Anchors collected, restored, repaired, traded and used!"
417 Ridgewood Drive,
Metairie, LA., 70001
ebjr@worldnet.att.net
**Looking for: 860 tubes, WL-460 tubes, RK-18,20,28 tubes**
**Butternut HF2V antenna, G-R test gear.....................***
[
QRP-L Archive |
]
[
1993 |
1994 |
1995 |
1996 |
1997 |
1998 |
1999 |
2000
]