No the topic is still the same!
Point is that there should not be a number placed on this - there are
already enough friggin' laws governing this stuff ALL WE NEED IS AN
EXCEPTION FOR ANTENNAS DEDICATED TO AMATEUR RADIO USAGE!
We stay within FAA guidelines and when over 200 ft install our
beacons....why is that not enough!
WHY DO WE INSIST ON LEGISLATION!
With reasonable leadership in the Whitehouse which has recognized the
contribution Amateur Radio makes why not simply push for "leave the hams
It does not matter that I am a good operator, when I compete I wish to be
unfettered by government and that means freedom to erect large antenna
structures...simple. The argument that there could be another category
further weakens things...there are way too many already - there has not been
proof this has added to the level of operating - if anything the contrary -
the additional awards have just put more paper out there...devalued in a lot
If you want to get the most from an individual - leave him alone - don't put
him in a straight jacket and then be upset with the fact that he cannot
----- Original Message -----
To: <email@example.com>; <firstname.lastname@example.org>;
Sent: Sunday, June 30, 2002 4:41 PM
Subject: Re: [Towertalk] NY State antenna legislation
> In a message dated 6/30/2002 4:10:11 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> email@example.com writes:
> > Put me on the list for unhappy with 95 feet - I am not an average ham, I
> > the one who specializes in making radio contacts and as such seeks to
> > obtain
> > optimum antennas to do it with...95 does not cut it.
> > I am not a communicator I am an operator, something that seems to be
> > slipping away as we become more and more a bunch of clones. I am a
> > competitive soul, I want to be the first one through the pileup and the
> > with the highest rates in the contest BECAUSE I DESIGNED DEBUGGED AND
> > EXECUTED the best antenna system.
> OJ, with your skill as a contest operator, one does not need the highest
> most elaborate antenna. You could compete on a CB whip. Contest rules
> categories for MM, SO, HP, LP, QRP etc. If there was a category for "all
> antennas below 95 ft" I bet there would be more entries, and more
> competition. Let the superstations compete. But also let the average
> compete. It would also test ones skill in designing a competitive antenna
> system within the 95 ft limit. It can be done. By the way, IMHO the skill
> the OPERATOR and the height of his antenna are not in any way related.
> I think we have strayed a bit from the theme of the reflector!!
> Bruce AA4Z
> --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
> text/plain (text body -- kept)
> Towertalk mailing list