The FCC is now allowing unlicensed operation in several bands: 6 GHz, 17
GHz and 24 GHz bands, are you concerned about the impact it will have on
Hams?

How many people here even use the GHz bands?

Are there enough Hams to even justify further use?


- Mike KB3EIA -

On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 18:04:32 -0500, Mike Coslo wrote:

The FCC is now allowing unlicensed operation in several bands: 6 GHz, 17
GHz and 24 GHz bands, are you concerned about the impact it will have on
Hams?

How many people here even use the GHz bands?

Are there enough Hams to even justify further use?

They used to say the same thing about the bands above 2 meters.

We lost 220-222 MHz. That isn't important unless all the 2m and 3/4m
frequency pairs are used up. It's getting that way here in Ducktown.

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

In article ws.com, "Phil
Kane" writes:

On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 18:04:32 -0500, Mike Coslo wrote:

The FCC is now allowing unlicensed operation in several bands: 6 GHz, 17
GHz and 24 GHz bands, are you concerned about the impact it will have on
Hams?

How many people here even use the GHz bands?

Are there enough Hams to even justify further use?

They used to say the same thing about the bands above 2 meters.

We lost 220-222 MHz. That isn't important unless all the 2m and 3/4m
frequency pairs are used up.

The two-twenty loss (part of the old band there) was "lost" to hams
some time ago. The Condor Net has been living and doing fine in
what is left above it. BIG network, multiple states involved, all tone
signalling to link along the net, designed that way before micro-
processors became commonplace.

Don't worry, anyone. Morsemanship is still necessary to get on HF
as an amateur. The professionals don't need any morsemanship,
don't use it.

In article , Barry OGrady
writes:

On 29 Dec 2004 05:00:06 GMT, (Len Over 21) wrote:

In article ws.com, "Phil
Kane" writes:

On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 18:04:32 -0500, Mike Coslo wrote:

The FCC is now allowing unlicensed operation in several bands: 6 GHz, 17
GHz and 24 GHz bands, are you concerned about the impact it will have on
Hams?

How many people here even use the GHz bands?

Are there enough Hams to even justify further use?

They used to say the same thing about the bands above 2 meters.

We lost 220-222 MHz. That isn't important unless all the 2m and 3/4m
frequency pairs are used up.

The two-twenty loss (part of the old band there) was "lost" to hams
some time ago. The Condor Net has been living and doing fine in
what is left above it. BIG network, multiple states involved, all tone
signalling to link along the net, designed that way before micro-
processors became commonplace.

Don't worry, anyone. Morsemanship is still necessary to get on HF
as an amateur.

No its not. My amateur license lets me use all amateur bands with no
knowledge of morse.

So...is there some secret U.S. amateur regulation restructuring
that has already removed the morse code test?!? [other than a
specific, individual medical waiver of it, possible years ago]

My commercial license let me transmit RF on a far wider range
of the EM spectrum than just the amateur bands, certainly those
few spectrum slices allocated on a primary basis to just amateurs.

Didn't even need any "license" to transmit on HF, on VHF, on UHF
and on microwaves 51+ years ago when in military service.

An amateur radio operator license is NOT a noble title indicating
a licensee is "superior" to all other human beings...except in the
personal imaginings of a few who are lost in a fantasyland.

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Barry OGrady
writes:


On 29 Dec 2004 05:00:06 GMT, (Len Over 21) wrote:


In article ws.com, "Phil
Kane" writes:


On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 18:04:32 -0500, Mike Coslo wrote:


The FCC is now allowing unlicensed operation in several bands: 6 GHz, 17
GHz and 24 GHz bands, are you concerned about the impact it will have on
Hams?

How many people here even use the GHz bands?

Are there enough Hams to even justify further use?

They used to say the same thing about the bands above 2 meters.

We lost 220-222 MHz. That isn't important unless all the 2m and 3/4m
frequency pairs are used up.

The two-twenty loss (part of the old band there) was "lost" to hams
some time ago. The Condor Net has been living and doing fine in
what is left above it. BIG network, multiple states involved, all tone
signalling to link along the net, designed that way before micro-
processors became commonplace.

Don't worry, anyone. Morsemanship is still necessary to get on HF
as an amateur.

No its not. My amateur license lets me use all amateur bands with no
knowledge of morse.


So...is there some secret U.S. amateur regulation restructuring
that has already removed the morse code test?!? [other than a
specific, individual medical waiver of it, possible years ago]

Barry would appear to be from Australia, Len. I'm not up on the
Australian amateur rules, but I guess they are different than the US
with regard to HF access.

My commercial license let me transmit RF on a far wider range
of the EM spectrum than just the amateur bands, certainly those
few spectrum slices allocated on a primary basis to just amateurs.

Didn't even need any "license" to transmit on HF, on VHF, on UHF
and on microwaves 51+ years ago when in military service.

An amateur radio operator license is NOT a noble title indicating
a licensee is "superior" to all other human beings...except in the
personal imaginings of a few who are lost in a fantasyland.

Sure isn't! Some are just born that way - then they get a ham license! 8^)

- Mike KB3EIA -

In article , Mike Coslo
writes:

Ahhhh, now I get it. Here we use "meter" as the spelling where you would
use "metres". Just like color vs. colour.

A litre is two pints and a quartre... :-)

In article , Barry OGrady
writes:

On 29 Dec 2004 05:00:06 GMT, (Len Over 21) wrote:

In article ws.com, "Phil
Kane" writes:

On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 18:04:32 -0500, Mike Coslo wrote:

The FCC is now allowing unlicensed operation in several bands: 6 GHz, 17
GHz and 24 GHz bands, are you concerned about the impact it will have on
Hams?

How many people here even use the GHz bands?

Are there enough Hams to even justify further use?

They used to say the same thing about the bands above 2 meters.

We lost 220-222 MHz. That isn't important unless all the 2m and 3/4m
frequency pairs are used up.

The two-twenty loss (part of the old band there) was "lost" to hams
some time ago. The Condor Net has been living and doing fine in
what is left above it. BIG network, multiple states involved, all tone
signalling to link along the net, designed that way before micro-
processors became commonplace.

Don't worry, anyone. Morsemanship is still necessary to get on HF
as an amateur.

No its not. My amateur license lets me use all amateur bands with no
knowledge of morse.

So...is there some secret U.S. amateur regulation restructuring
that has already removed the morse code test?!? [other than a
specific, individual medical waiver of it, possible years ago]

My commercial license let me transmit RF on a far wider range
of the EM spectrum than just the amateur bands, certainly those
few spectrum slices allocated on a primary basis to just amateurs.

Didn't even need any "license" to transmit on HF, on VHF, on UHF
and on microwaves 51+ years ago when in military service.

An amateur radio operator license is NOT a noble title indicating
a licensee is "superior" to all other human beings...except in the
personal imaginings of a few who are lost in a fantasyland.

"Len Over 21" wrote in message
...
In article , Barry OGrady
writes:

On 29 Dec 2004 05:00:06 GMT, (Len Over 21) wrote:

In article ws.com,
"Phil
Kane" writes:

On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 18:04:32 -0500, Mike Coslo wrote:

The FCC is now allowing unlicensed operation in several bands: 6 GHz,
17
GHz and 24 GHz bands, are you concerned about the impact it will have
on
Hams?

How many people here even use the GHz bands?

Are there enough Hams to even justify further use?

They used to say the same thing about the bands above 2 meters.

We lost 220-222 MHz. That isn't important unless all the 2m and 3/4m
frequency pairs are used up.

The two-twenty loss (part of the old band there) was "lost" to hams
some time ago. The Condor Net has been living and doing fine in
what is left above it. BIG network, multiple states involved, all
tone
signalling to link along the net, designed that way before micro-
processors became commonplace.

Don't worry, anyone. Morsemanship is still necessary to get on HF
as an amateur.

No its not. My amateur license lets me use all amateur bands with no
knowledge of morse.

So...is there some secret U.S. amateur regulation restructuring
that has already removed the morse code test?!? [other than a
specific, individual medical waiver of it, possible years ago]

My commercial license let me transmit RF on a far wider range
of the EM spectrum than just the amateur bands, certainly those
few spectrum slices allocated on a primary basis to just amateurs.

Didn't even need any "license" to transmit on HF, on VHF, on UHF
and on microwaves 51+ years ago when in military service.

An amateur radio operator license is NOT a noble title indicating
a licensee is "superior" to all other human beings...except in the
personal imaginings of a few who are lost in a fantasyland.





Hello, Len

That commercial license wasn't a particularly big deal, except that you were
expected to memorize the "band plan", as it were, for VHF television. I had
to laugh, no problem with the video or audio carrier nor the allotted 6 MHz
per channel space. First question, I think, was "what is the frequency of
the video carrier of channel 6 television in the United States?". Well, I
guessed they couldn't all be that bad, so I flipped a couple of pages, put
my finger down, and examined the question by my finger. "What is the color
burst frequency?". Ah, simple. 3.58 MHz .... oops, all of the 4 answers
started with 3.579 .....

So, I had to take it a second time and this time I simply memorized the
splits and took a good hard look at how tightly various frequencies were
specified. Then it was easy.

The second class ticket was a joke. 45 ohms resistance with 45 ohms
inductive reactance. What is the phase angle?
a) voltage leads current by 90 degrees
b) current leads voltage by 90 degrees
c) voltage leads current by 45 degrees
d) current leads voltage by 45 degrees

Not exactly IEEE stuff.

The commercial telegraph license and radar endorsement were also not very
difficult. Such brain-strainers as "why do you avoid long horizontal
sections of waveguide".

A commercial license is not a noble title indicating a licensee is
"superior" to all other human beings (amateurs included) LOL


Best regards from Rochester, NY
Jim AA2QA

In article , "JAMES HAMPTON"
writes:

"Len Over 21" wrote in message
...
In article , Barry OGrady
writes:

On 29 Dec 2004 05:00:06 GMT, (Len Over 21) wrote:

In article ws.com,
"Phil
Kane" writes:

On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 18:04:32 -0500, Mike Coslo wrote:

The FCC is now allowing unlicensed operation in several bands: 6 GHz,
17
GHz and 24 GHz bands, are you concerned about the impact it will have
on
Hams?

How many people here even use the GHz bands?

Are there enough Hams to even justify further use?

They used to say the same thing about the bands above 2 meters.

We lost 220-222 MHz. That isn't important unless all the 2m and 3/4m
frequency pairs are used up.

The two-twenty loss (part of the old band there) was "lost" to hams
some time ago. The Condor Net has been living and doing fine in
what is left above it. BIG network, multiple states involved, all
tone
signalling to link along the net, designed that way before micro-
processors became commonplace.

Don't worry, anyone. Morsemanship is still necessary to get on HF
as an amateur.

No its not. My amateur license lets me use all amateur bands with no
knowledge of morse.

So...is there some secret U.S. amateur regulation restructuring
that has already removed the morse code test?!? [other than a
specific, individual medical waiver of it, possible years ago]

My commercial license let me transmit RF on a far wider range
of the EM spectrum than just the amateur bands, certainly those
few spectrum slices allocated on a primary basis to just amateurs.

Didn't even need any "license" to transmit on HF, on VHF, on UHF
and on microwaves 51+ years ago when in military service.

An amateur radio operator license is NOT a noble title indicating
a licensee is "superior" to all other human beings...except in the
personal imaginings of a few who are lost in a fantasyland.





Hello, Len

That commercial license wasn't a particularly big deal, except that you were
expected to memorize the "band plan", as it were, for VHF television. I had
to laugh, no problem with the video or audio carrier nor the allotted 6 MHz
per channel space. First question, I think, was "what is the frequency of
the video carrier of channel 6 television in the United States?". Well, I
guessed they couldn't all be that bad, so I flipped a couple of pages, put
my finger down, and examined the question by my finger. "What is the color
burst frequency?". Ah, simple. 3.58 MHz .... oops, all of the 4 answers
started with 3.579 .....

NTSC color subcarrier is exactly 3.579545454545454545454545....
MHz. :-)

Frankly speaking, I don't give a damn about that FCC field office test
I took in Chicago in March, 1956. It DID allow me to work at some
broadcast stations and earn a bit of money. I don't remember that
four-part test for a 1st 'Phone as being exclusively about broadcasting.
Maybe it changed later. Irrelevant.

A whole lot of changes have taken place in radio and electronics in
the last almost 49 years.

So, I had to take it a second time and this time I simply memorized the
splits and took a good hard look at how tightly various frequencies were
specified. Then it was easy.

I took mine just once. Everything. My "Q&A" book was a borrowed
Regulations set then printed up in loose-leaf form. All I did was
memorize what seemed to be important regulations. The theory I'd
already learned from the military experience, high-power HF trans-
mitters plus VHF, UHF, microwave radio relay. No real problem.

Not exactly IEEE stuff.

It was never intended to be such...any more than the amateur
written test is some kind of academic accomplishment.

The commercial telegraph license and radar endorsement were also not very
difficult. Such brain-strainers as "why do you avoid long horizontal
sections of waveguide".

Why would you? :-)

A commercial license is not a noble title indicating a licensee is
"superior" to all other human beings (amateurs included) LOL

I've never stated that nor implied it was. However, a lot of hams
go on and on, terribly full of themselves, on implying that Their
accomplishment is academic PhD level stuff. :-) [ ptui...]

Since 1958 I've been working in the microwaves, topping out at
the top of Ka Band (25 GHz) with only a brief time with some
2mm wavelength stuff where the waveguide had to be coin silver
electro-deposited on a polished copper mandrel (due to RF
surface conduction being too high a resistance with ordinary
silver plated guide...too much loss). I think of that lil-bitty guide
stuff as my "first SMT" exposure... :-)

A couple good reasons why amateur operations aren't widespread
at microwaves, particularly above X Band (greater than 12 GHz)
are Co$t of guide, flanges, measuring equipment, and RF sources;
there's no "magical" round-the-world bounce off the ionosphere as
with HF; so few amateurs know what they're doing at those very
short wavelengths (nearly all the present-day record setters have
commercial/military microwave experience).

One big plus at microwaves is that antenna gain can be terrific
due to beam-forming. Very little power is needed. Sure, there's
no "skip" at those frequencies, it's all line-of-sight, but eventually
there's going to be humans out there, far away. HF techniques
won't be good for interplanetary QSOs. :-)

"Lenof21" wrote in message
...
In article , "JAMES HAMPTON"
writes:

"Len Over 21" wrote in message
...
In article , Barry OGrady
writes:

On 29 Dec 2004 05:00:06 GMT, (Len Over 21) wrote:

In article ws.com,
"Phil
Kane" writes:

On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 18:04:32 -0500, Mike Coslo wrote:

The FCC is now allowing unlicensed operation in several bands: 6
GHz,
17
GHz and 24 GHz bands, are you concerned about the impact it will
have
on
Hams?

How many people here even use the GHz bands?

Are there enough Hams to even justify further use?

They used to say the same thing about the bands above 2 meters.

We lost 220-222 MHz. That isn't important unless all the 2m and
3/4m
frequency pairs are used up.

The two-twenty loss (part of the old band there) was "lost" to
hams
some time ago. The Condor Net has been living and doing fine in
what is left above it. BIG network, multiple states involved, all
tone
signalling to link along the net, designed that way before micro-
processors became commonplace.

Don't worry, anyone. Morsemanship is still necessary to get on HF
as an amateur.

No its not. My amateur license lets me use all amateur bands with no
knowledge of morse.

So...is there some secret U.S. amateur regulation restructuring
that has already removed the morse code test?!? [other than a
specific, individual medical waiver of it, possible years ago]

My commercial license let me transmit RF on a far wider range
of the EM spectrum than just the amateur bands, certainly those
few spectrum slices allocated on a primary basis to just amateurs.

Didn't even need any "license" to transmit on HF, on VHF, on UHF
and on microwaves 51+ years ago when in military service.

An amateur radio operator license is NOT a noble title indicating
a licensee is "superior" to all other human beings...except in the
personal imaginings of a few who are lost in a fantasyland.





Hello, Len

That commercial license wasn't a particularly big deal, except that you
were
expected to memorize the "band plan", as it were, for VHF television. I
had
to laugh, no problem with the video or audio carrier nor the allotted 6
MHz
per channel space. First question, I think, was "what is the frequency
of
the video carrier of channel 6 television in the United States?". Well,
I
guessed they couldn't all be that bad, so I flipped a couple of pages,
put
my finger down, and examined the question by my finger. "What is the
color
burst frequency?". Ah, simple. 3.58 MHz .... oops, all of the 4 answers
started with 3.579 .....

NTSC color subcarrier is exactly 3.579545454545454545454545....
MHz. :-)

Frankly speaking, I don't give a damn about that FCC field office test
I took in Chicago in March, 1956. It DID allow me to work at some
broadcast stations and earn a bit of money. I don't remember that
four-part test for a 1st 'Phone as being exclusively about
broadcasting.
Maybe it changed later. Irrelevant.

A whole lot of changes have taken place in radio and electronics in
the last almost 49 years.

So, I had to take it a second time and this time I simply memorized the
splits and took a good hard look at how tightly various frequencies were
specified. Then it was easy.

I took mine just once. Everything. My "Q&A" book was a borrowed
Regulations set then printed up in loose-leaf form. All I did was
memorize what seemed to be important regulations. The theory I'd
already learned from the military experience, high-power HF trans-
mitters plus VHF, UHF, microwave radio relay. No real problem.

Not exactly IEEE stuff.

It was never intended to be such...any more than the amateur
written test is some kind of academic accomplishment.

The commercial telegraph license and radar endorsement were also not very
difficult. Such brain-strainers as "why do you avoid long horizontal
sections of waveguide".

Why would you? :-)

A commercial license is not a noble title indicating a licensee is
"superior" to all other human beings (amateurs included) LOL

I've never stated that nor implied it was. However, a lot of hams
go on and on, terribly full of themselves, on implying that Their
accomplishment is academic PhD level stuff. :-) [ ptui...]

Since 1958 I've been working in the microwaves, topping out at
the top of Ka Band (25 GHz) with only a brief time with some
2mm wavelength stuff where the waveguide had to be coin silver
electro-deposited on a polished copper mandrel (due to RF
surface conduction being too high a resistance with ordinary
silver plated guide...too much loss). I think of that lil-bitty guide
stuff as my "first SMT" exposure... :-)

A couple good reasons why amateur operations aren't widespread
at microwaves, particularly above X Band (greater than 12 GHz)
are Co$t of guide, flanges, measuring equipment, and RF sources;
there's no "magical" round-the-world bounce off the ionosphere as
with HF; so few amateurs know what they're doing at those very
short wavelengths (nearly all the present-day record setters have
commercial/military microwave experience).

One big plus at microwaves is that antenna gain can be terrific
due to beam-forming. Very little power is needed. Sure, there's
no "skip" at those frequencies, it's all line-of-sight, but eventually
there's going to be humans out there, far away. HF techniques
won't be good for interplanetary QSOs. :-)




Hello, Len

Well, I never did have any Q&A manuals. I also never studied for any of the
exams I took, including Novice, General, Amateur Extra, 2nd phone, and 2nd
telegraph. I was simply up on the material (other than the band plans,
which I learned through exposure as a Novice. Didn't help a bit when I
retested in 93; I was quite wrong on at least where 40 meters was). The
only study I did do was when I did fail the 1st phone and realized that I
needed to know *exactly* what the numbers were to be. I must admit that the
CW was a bit shaky in 1993 when I simply retested for everything through
extra, however; I hadn't copied CW since 1969 (excluding the fact that I
couldn't help myself when the Moose Cud was sent during the movie "Fantastic
Voyage" back when

I didn't mean to imply a slam against the commercial license; I did serve in
4 AM radio stations, 2 FM stations, and 2 television stations. Two stints
as a disk jockey, all as an "engineer" (LOL), and one as chief engineer
(5,000 watt am/fm station). Never forget the first job when I tore off the
teletype from the A-P. Went to do the news (running late; didn't read
everything. Crossed out some I wouldn't use) and the stupid thing took a
hit and went into figures for about two sentences. Fortunately, serving for
4 years as a radioman in the Navy (much of it with teletype) allowed me to
simply read it. Impressed the heck out of the guy breaking me in. Of
course, I had to go clean my drawers out in the W.C. right after that )


73 from Rochester, NY
Jim AA2QA