I just reposted again to your original post - having problems with the
new google beta interface.

Odd. You responded to my earlier post, yet that post doesn't appear in
the thread tree.
Have any of the resident experts jumped on your wagon?

bb

bb wrote:
Welp, Mike, it really is all about the code. Such a shame.

Anyhow, I just got my copy of QST in the mail today. Says "Annual
Vintage Radio Issue" on the banner. Kind of like the rest of the
year
except maybe April. I guess the joke's on us.
How's the balloon project coming along?
Uh-oh. Now ya done it.


bb

N2EY wrote:
In article , Mike Coslo
writes:


Hey homies, how about some new topics in here?


"Homey the clown don't do that"


THe neighborhood's gone
to hell in a handcart.


How?


Even Len's posted some stuff just to get the
converstaions going.


He has?


Code trainers are nice and all, but.......


Well, here's a revival of an old subject:

FCC recently turned down an ARRL proposal to divide the HF bands by bandwidth
only. While the basic concept looks good, some of the resu;ts (like allowing
automatic stations anywhere on the bands) would not have been.

And How! The PSK "segment" of 20 meters is being ruined by Pactor
stations that transmit, looking for a signal, and hardly ever break,
just a short pause to listen, then start up again. These are
w i d e signals with lots of spurs and (splatter?). The net effect is
that the signal often takes up the whole segment. Since most of us are
using almost qrp levels, we get stomped. That is why Digipan now
includes a Pactor receiver, so we can report the miscreants.


Some time back, a few of us here discussed the idea of "refarming" the Novice
segments as "digital playgrounds". The idea was that Novices and "Techs with
HF" would get more bandwidth on their current bands (say, all of the CW/data
parts of 80/40/15 now allowed to Generals, but at the Novice/Tech Plus power
level) and the present "Novice bands" on 80/40/15 would be opened up to digital
experimentation. Meaning any properly documented mode except analog voice would
be allowed there.

A better idea?

That is a very good idea. If we are ever going to get digital voice
going, we need a playground that doesn't interfere with the rest of the
world. Or I should say it would be a help.


Then there's Hans' (K0HB) two-class upgrade-in-ten-years-or-leave license
concept. Perhaps it's time for that to become a formal proposal. While I don't
agree with all of it, I'd really like to see what reaction and comments it
would generate.

Arrgh, not that one again! ;^)

- Mike KB3EIA -

"Mike Coslo" wrote

Hey homies, how about some new topics in here?

Hey, Mike! You wanted new topics --- I gave you new topics! Poked that
Tennesee beehive real good, now didn't I? He'll be ranting till Chrismas Eve I
bet. Then maybe I'll do an expose` on Santa and Vixen to keep him spun up till
New Years Eve.

Best to ya,

de Hans, K0HB