K=D8HB wrote:
"an_old_friend" wrote

but that is NOT what clicking on FCC.gov get you
when you click through thier link "Rules and regulations"

Yes, it is.

I don't know where you got it

I'll give you step-by-step directions.

1) Start at http://www.fcc.gov

2) On the right column of that page, click the "Wireless Telecommunicatio=
ns"
link.

3) When that page loads, in the left column click the "Rules and Regulati=
ons"
link.

4) A new frame comes up. Scroll down and click "97 Amateur radio servic=
e"

5) On the page which loads, click the link near the top ending in
"...47cfr97_04.html"

6) On the page which loads, scroll down and click the pdf icon for "97.30=
3"

7) Scroll to the bottom of page 605 and read:


Amusing that at FCC.gov there is a link labeled rules and regulation
anf then you scroll for part 97 and you get something diferent


"97.303(s) An amateur station having an operator holding a General, Advan=
ced or
Amateur Extra Class license may only transmit single sideband, suppressed
carrier, (emission type 2K8J3E) upper sideband on the channels 5332 kHz, =
5348
kHz, 5368 kHz, 5373 kHz, and 5405 kHz. Amateur stations shall ensure that=
their
transmission occupies only the 2.8 kHz centered around each of these
frequencies. Transmissions shall not exceed an effective radiated power (=
e=2Er.p.)
of 50 W PEP. For the purpose of computing e.r.p. the transmitter PEP will=
be
multiplied with the antenna gain relative to a dipole or equivalent calcu=
lation
in decibels. A half wave dipole antenna will be presumed to have a gain o=
f 0
dBd. Licenses using other antennas must maintain in their records either =
the
manufacturer data on the antenna gain or calculations of the antenna gain=
.. No
amateur station may cause harmful interference to stations authorized in =
the
mobile and fixed services; nor is any amateur station protected from
interference due to the operation of any such station."
=20
73, de Hans, K0HB

"an_old_friend" wrote


Amusing that at FCC.gov there is a link labeled rules
and regulation anf then you scroll for part 97 and you
get something diferent

Nope. Just skip Step 2 in my list. I just tried it, and it takes you to
EXACTLY the same place.

Bottom line of this whole Chinese fire drill....

..... your opening statement in this thread about "no mention" is disproven.
There's a whole paragraph devoted to "mentioning" the topic, placed there 2
years ago in July of 2003 by Docket 02-98.

Good luck on this one now!

dit dit
de Hans, K0HB

wrote:

The ONLY Parts of Title 47 available AT the FCC webiste...(SNIP)

See what being Markie's buddy get's you, Lennie...?!?!

Steve, K4YZ

K=D8HB wrote:
"an_old_friend" wrote

...of any restriction of modes on 60m nor any
mention of 60 metter in part 97 at all...

=A797.303(s) is very clear on the topic. You're correct that it doesn't
specifically call it a "60 metter" band, but it DOES spell out in detail =
the
mode restrictions and other technical requirements and restrictions of the
frequencies I think you call "60 metters".

Markie doesn't like getting his nose just RUBBBED in
something...he has to have it slammed, poked, jabbed and nearly ripped
off until the point gets through to him.

See y'all on "60 metters"...! All except Markie and Lennie, that
is!

Steve, K4YZ

K4YZ wrote:
K=D8HB wrote:
"an_old_friend" wrote

...of any restriction of modes on 60m nor any
mention of 60 metter in part 97 at all...

=A797.303(s) is very clear on the topic. You're correct that it doesn't
specifically call it a "60 metter" band, but it DOES spell out in detai=
l the
mode restrictions and other technical requirements and restrictions of =
the
frequencies I think you call "60 metters".

Markie doesn't like getting his nose just RUBBBED in
something...he has to have it slammed, poked, jabbed and nearly ripped
off until the point gets through to him.

See y'all on "60 metters"...! All except Markie and Lennie, that
is!

as is normal for HIm Steve chooses to post without bothing with the
subject
=20
Steve, K4YZ

an_old_friend wrote:
K4YZ wrote:
K=D8HB wrote:
"an_old_friend" wrote

...of any restriction of modes on 60m nor any
mention of 60 metter in part 97 at all...

=A797.303(s) is very clear on the topic. You're correct that it does=
n't
specifically call it a "60 metter" band, but it DOES spell out in det=
ail the
mode restrictions and other technical requirements and restrictions o=
f the
frequencies I think you call "60 metters".

Markie doesn't like getting his nose just RUBBBED in
something...he has to have it slammed, poked, jabbed and nearly ripped
off until the point gets through to him.

See y'all on "60 metters"...! All except Markie and Lennie, that
is!

as is normal for HIm Steve chooses to post without bothing with the
subject

It had everything to do with the subject, Markie. You.

For the last 2 weeks I've been berating you for your childish,
uncivil behaviour towards Hans. You treated him rudely, and there was
no excuse for it.

Hans already gave you the exact information that you needed...And
THEN you said "I don't need to know that since I can't operate
there"...Well...Obviously it's an issue for you since you DO keep going
"there".

So instead of letting it drop, you further exacerbate the issue by
opening a whole new thread and get your nose rubbed even deeper in your
arrogance and ignorance.

This had zero-point-squat to do with your "cmoment about Part
97"....It had everything to do with you trying to find some way out of
the spanking you were taking for your behaviour. You were looking for
SOME vector to allow you to redirect ANY of that to Hans.

It didn't work. Landed right back in YOUR lap AGAIN.

Steve, K4YZ

K4YZ wrote:
an_old_friend wrote:
K4YZ wrote:
K=D8HB wrote:
"an_old_friend" wrote

...of any restriction of modes on 60m nor any
mention of 60 metter in part 97 at all...

=A797.303(s) is very clear on the topic. You're correct that it do=
esn't
specifically call it a "60 metter" band, but it DOES spell out in d=
etail the
mode restrictions and other technical requirements and restrictions=
of the
frequencies I think you call "60 metters".

Markie doesn't like getting his nose just RUBBBED in
something...he has to have it slammed, poked, jabbed and nearly ripped
off until the point gets through to him.

See y'all on "60 metters"...! All except Markie and Lennie, that
is!

as is normal for HIm Steve chooses to post without bothing with the
subject

break

It had everything to do with the subject, Markie. You.

Nope the Subject was amonoulous data coming fromt the FCC on the Rules
of the ARS

For the last 2 weeks I've been berating you for your childish,
uncivil behaviour towards Hans. You treated him rudely, and there was
no excuse for it.

wether I was or wasnt has nothing to do with what posted and accesd
through FCC.gov


Hans already gave you the exact information that you needed...And
THEN you said "I don't need to know that since I can't operate
there"...Well...Obviously it's an issue for you since you DO keep going
"there".

So instead of letting it drop, you further exacerbate the issue by
opening a whole new thread and get your nose rubbed even deeper in your
arrogance and ignorance.

no I was comening on content of FCC.gov

you are the one that never let anything drop

You are still harrasing me about changing ISP's In 1998

This had zero-point-squat to do with your "cmoment about Part
97"....It had everything to do with you trying to find some way out of
the spanking you were taking for your behaviour. You were looking for
SOME vector to allow you to redirect ANY of that to Hans.

nope

It didn't work. Landed right back in YOUR lap AGAIN.
=20
Steve, K4YZ

an_old_friend wrote:
K4YZ wrote:

It had everything to do with the subject, Markie. You.

Nope the Subject was amonoulous data coming fromt the FCC on the Rules
of the ARS

Nope.

It had to do with YOUR gross ignorance and inability to comprehend
even the

For the last 2 weeks I've been berating you for your childish,
uncivil behaviour towards Hans. You treated him rudely, and there was
no excuse for it.

wether I was or wasnt has nothing to do with what posted and accesd
through FCC.gov

I found the items Hans was refering to without the slightest
impediment or error.

Hans already gave you the exact information that you needed...And
THEN you said "I don't need to know that since I can't operate
there"...Well...Obviously it's an issue for you since you DO keep going
"there".

So instead of letting it drop, you further exacerbate the issue by
opening a whole new thread and get your nose rubbed even deeper in your
arrogance and ignorance.

no I was comening on content of FCC.gov

You were trying to find a way out of the public spanking you've
been taking for your rude behaviour.

It backfired on you.

you are the one that never let anything drop

Sure I can. As a matter of fact, I'm letting the hammer drop on
you right now.

You are still harrasing me about changing ISP's In 1998

You just stated 2 days ago that you allegedly continue to use the
fictitious $5.00/hr ISP.

And it wasn't about changing ISP's to which I alluded...It was to
your humourous

This had zero-point-squat to do with your "cmoment about Part
97"....It had everything to do with you trying to find some way out of
the spanking you were taking for your behaviour. You were looking for
SOME vector to allow you to redirect ANY of that to Hans.

nope

Yep. And it STILL didn't work.

It didn't work. Landed right back in YOUR lap AGAIN.

Do you not see that there's nothing you do that even the most
common of common sense can't see through, Markie? You're SO
transparent that one not need be a gastroenerologist to see where your
head is....

Steve, K4yz

K4YZ wrote:
an_old_friend wrote:
K4YZ wrote:

It had everything to do with the subject, Markie. You.

Nope the Subject was amonoulous data coming fromt the FCC on the Rules
of the ARS

Nope.

It had to do with YOUR gross ignorance and inability to comprehend
even the

even the ...


gues you can't even read the topic


For the last 2 weeks I've been berating you for your childish,
uncivil behaviour towards Hans. You treated him rudely, and there was
no excuse for it.

wether I was or wasnt has nothing to do with what posted and accesd
through FCC.gov

I found the items Hans was refering to without the slightest
impediment or error.

I found something very different
as well as what Hans posted


Hans already gave you the exact information that you needed...And
THEN you said "I don't need to know that since I can't operate
there"...Well...Obviously it's an issue for you since you DO keep going
"there".

So instead of letting it drop, you further exacerbate the issue by
opening a whole new thread and get your nose rubbed even deeper in your
arrogance and ignorance.

no I was comening on content of FCC.gov

You were trying to find a way out of the public spanking you've
been taking for your rude behaviour.

nope


It backfired on you.

Back fired how?

You decided as expected to attack anything and everything I post



you are the one that never let anything drop

Sure I can. As a matter of fact, I'm letting the hammer drop on
you right now.

more threats


You are still harrasing me about changing ISP's In 1998

You just stated 2 days ago that you allegedly continue to use the
fictitious $5.00/hr ISP.

which harms you how? affect you how?

I still use concentric on the road to gather my email why does that
concern you?


And it wasn't about changing ISP's to which I alluded...It was to
your humourous

you were going on and on about the ISP, one would tend to assume you
were tlaking about what you were saying but even that is rash with you


This had zero-point-squat to do with your "cmoment about Part
97"....It had everything to do with you trying to find some way out of
the spanking you were taking for your behaviour. You were looking for
SOME vector to allow you to redirect ANY of that to Hans.

nope

Yep. And it STILL didn't work.

wasn't doin git



It didn't work. Landed right back in YOUR lap AGAIN.

Do you not see that there's nothing you do that even the most
common of common sense can't see through, Markie? You're SO
transparent that one not need be a gastroenerologist to see where your
head is....

Stevie grow up


Steve, K4yz

an_old_friend wrote:
K4YZ wrote:

wether I was or wasnt has nothing to do with what posted and accesd
through FCC.gov

I found the items Hans was refering to without the slightest
impediment or error.

I found something very different as well as what Hans posted

I am sure that you find a lot of things very different, Markie.

Hans already gave you the exact information that you needed...And
THEN you said "I don't need to know that since I can't operate
there"...Well...Obviously it's an issue for you since you DO keep going
"there".

So instead of letting it drop, you further exacerbate the issue by
opening a whole new thread and get your nose rubbed even deeper in your
arrogance and ignorance.

no I was comening on content of FCC.gov

You were trying to find a way out of the public spanking you've
been taking for your rude behaviour.

nope

Absolutely. First you claim that you want the information. Then
you insult the person who gives it to you. Then you claim you don't
need to know anyway, but then open another thread about Part 97 IRT "60
mettres"

It backfired on you.

Back fired how?

You decided as expected to attack anything and everything I post

Not everything. Just the assinine, idiotic and mistruthful parts.

you are the one that never let anything drop

Sure I can. As a matter of fact, I'm letting the hammer drop on
you right now.

more threats

Nope.

Just a figure of speech.

You are still harrasing me about changing ISP's In 1998

You just stated 2 days ago that you allegedly continue to use the
fictitious $5.00/hr ISP.

which harms you how? affect you how?

It doesn't. I just laugh out loud when you complain about it on
the one hand, then defend it on the other.

I still use concentric on the road to gather my email why does that
concern you?

Concentric what?

And it wasn't about changing ISP's to which I alluded...It was to
your humourous

you were going on and on about the ISP, one would tend to assume you
were tlaking about what you were saying but even that is rash with you

You weren't paying attention. (news there, eh?)

This had zero-point-squat to do with your "cmoment about Part
97"....It had everything to do with you trying to find some way out of
the spanking you were taking for your behaviour. You were looking for
SOME vector to allow you to redirect ANY of that to Hans.

nope

Yep. And it STILL didn't work.

wasn't doin git

Huh?

It didn't work. Landed right back in YOUR lap AGAIN.

Do you not see that there's nothing you do that even the most
common of common sense can't see through, Markie? You're SO
transparent that one not need be a gastroenerologist to see where your
head is....

Stevie grow up

Back at ya, LiarBoy.

Steve, K4YZ