Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[AMPS\]\s+ARRL\s+and\s+QST\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[AMPS\]\s+ARRL\s+and\s+QST\s*$/: 37 ]

Total 37 documents matching your query.

1. [AMPS] ARRL and QST (score: 1): Author: jreid@aloha.net (Jim Reid); Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 13:21:24 -1000; Mike wrote, in part: The ARRL membership is evidently shrinking, per info from them. Also, as new Tech's far exceed the number of new licenses of other classes, the ARRL has found that few Techs beco; /archives//html/Amps/1999-01/msg00425.html (10,889 bytes)
2. [AMPS] ARRL and QST (score: 1): Author: andywallace@home.com (Andy Wallace); Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 18:03:19 -0600; Shrinking of QST and the lack of interest by Techs in the ARRL is real simple--the ARRL preoccupation with CW, an archaic mode of communication that all commercial users and the military have long si; /archives//html/Amps/1999-01/msg00427.html (12,772 bytes)
3. [AMPS] ARRL and QST (score: 1): Author: sheepdip@continet.com (Larry L. Ravlin); Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 17:48:09 -0800; I hardly think that cw is an archaic mode of communication, that is tatamount to saying that am is useless because it has been around for a long time and everyone is now using fm and now we come to s; /archives//html/Amps/1999-01/msg00432.html (15,704 bytes)
4. [AMPS] ARRL and QST (score: 1): Author: sheepdip@continet.com (Larry L. Ravlin); Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 18:10:13 -0800; -- <mgilmer@gnlp.com> To: <amps@contesting.com> has outmoded. say for Mike To: <amps@contesting.com> communication is Also, -- FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/ampfaq.html Submissions: amps@cont; /archives//html/Amps/1999-01/msg00433.html (17,373 bytes)
5. [AMPS] ARRL and QST (score: 1): Author: k1ta@earthlink.net (Bob Marston); Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 20:09:18 -0800; ...Snip.... What do you base that on? I've been licensed for 25 years and have met quite a few hams that have remained Techs despite having worked for years to get there code speed up to 13 WPM. Most; /archives//html/Amps/1999-01/msg00435.html (10,270 bytes)
6. [AMPS] ARRL and QST (score: 1): Author: sheepdip@continet.com (Larry L. Ravlin); Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 20:54:12 -0800; You have totaly misunderstood what I have been sayin or misconstrued it. This is not only cw that I have referring to (and I probably should have mentioned it previously)I hate to see cw being sideli; /archives//html/Amps/1999-01/msg00443.html (12,745 bytes)
7. [AMPS] ARRL and QST (score: 1): Author: k1ta@earthlink.net (Bob Marston); Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 21:18:29 -0800; Mr Reid I included the opening sentence in the first paragraph to give the readers a point of reference. My response was to the the second point. It does not surprise me that those who would smear an; /archives//html/Amps/1999-01/msg00444.html (11,324 bytes)
8. [AMPS] ARRL and QST (score: 1): Author: jreid@aloha.net (Jim Reid); Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 19:29:42 -1000; the Jim Reid responds: I have absolutely no idea what the above paragraph is about!! It certainly has nothing to do with my post of the title, "CW, the ARRL and QST"! Which was about the "thinning" o; /archives//html/Amps/1999-01/msg00447.html (10,051 bytes)
9. [AMPS] ARRL and QST (score: 1): Author: jono@enteract.com (Jon Ogden); Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 23:37:39 -0600; I think that's what they were trying to say. However, if it weren't for CW, Campbell Island would have worked far fewer QSOs. This would have meant a less successful expedition, less positive press; /archives//html/Amps/1999-01/msg00449.html (9,600 bytes)
10. [AMPS] ARRL and QST (score: 1): Author: jono@enteract.com (Jon Ogden); Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 23:42:55 -0600; But nothing does prohibit a Technician Class ham from building an amp for his license class. And I don't think that spread spectrum is going to fly in HF. Both of these are doable in with a Tech lic; /archives//html/Amps/1999-01/msg00450.html (9,459 bytes)
11. [AMPS] ARRL and QST (score: 1): Author: k1ta@earthlink.net (Bob Marston); Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 22:47:30 -0800; You're advancing a facile arguement. To say that cw will be sidelined because a codeless HF license comes into existance is a leap in logic not substantiated by fact. Two Points 'believe' is the oper; /archives//html/Amps/1999-01/msg00451.html (11,387 bytes)
12. [AMPS] ARRL and QST (score: 1): Author: km1h@juno.com (km1h@juno.com); Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 02:49:57 -0500; SNIPPED Yes they are Jim, the QST technical content has been diminishing for at least 10 years. Why? Because they and everyone else in the publishing biz is after revenue. So what do you get...QEX, N; /archives//html/Amps/1999-01/msg00456.html (10,583 bytes)
13. [AMPS] ARRL and QST (score: 1): Author: n4kg@juno.com (T A RUSSELL); Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 06:37:18 -0600; On Tue, 26 Jan 1999 18:03:19 -0600 Andy Wallace <andywallace@home.com> writes: You don't use, or like, CW, so you want to drop it from the requirements. Why should YOU have to put forth any time and; /archives//html/Amps/1999-01/msg00464.html (9,490 bytes)
14. [AMPS] ARRL and QST (score: 1): Author: wrt@eskimo.com (Bill Turner, W7TI); Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 12:01:00 GMT; ______________________________________________ Ham radio is the only hobby I can think of where one is "forced" to learn a skill they don't want and will probably never use. If you're taking up photo; /archives//html/Amps/1999-01/msg00465.html (8,787 bytes)
15. [AMPS] ARRL and QST (score: 1): Author: andywallace@home.com (Andy Wallace); Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 08:17:16 -0600; Bob-- Well put. As you know there are a lot of hams who think those of us who enjoy linears are "lazy"--that we should devote all our time and effort to low power and aluminum, preferably home built.; /archives//html/Amps/1999-01/msg00469.html (12,092 bytes)
16. [AMPS] ARRL and QST (score: 1): Author: K3BU@aol.com (K3BU@aol.com); Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 09:26:07 EST; << I have an extra class and am proud of it, but I don't see any point in forcing someone else to learn something against their will. The operative word here is HOBBY, remember? Nobody is forcing any; /archives//html/Amps/1999-01/msg00470.html (9,527 bytes)
17. [AMPS] ARRL and QST (score: 1): Author: andywallace@home.com (Andy Wallace); Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 09:12:07 -0600; I'm a pilot and I didn't have to learn to handcrank a biplane to get my license. I also didn't build my airplane--I'm a proud appliance operator like most pilots. I don't repair the plane either. Wha; /archives//html/Amps/1999-01/msg00473.html (9,597 bytes)
18. [AMPS] ARRL and QST (score: 1): Author: jduffer@mnsinc.com (James D. Duffer); Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 10:07:44 -0500; HOBBY HOBBY HOBBY......are you sure? Is that the definition and purpose of the Amateur Radio Service?? Review Part 97. 73, Jim, WD4AIR -- FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/ampfaq.html Submission; /archives//html/Amps/1999-01/msg00474.html (8,793 bytes)
19. [AMPS] ARRL and QST (score: 1): Author: broz@csn.net (John Brosnahan); Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 08:25:48 -0700 (MST); Bill, I must disagree with you on this one because of your flawed logic. You have compared amateur radio and its licensing requirments with other hobbies that have no licensing requirments, such as w; /archives//html/Amps/1999-01/msg00475.html (10,938 bytes)
20. [AMPS] ARRL and QST (score: 1): Author: k1ta@earthlink.net (Bob Marston); Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 07:41:41 -0800; Jim there was a recent ruling by the FCC that reclassified Amateur Radio strictly as a Hobby. (within the last 6 months) So unless your copy of 97 has been recently revised the definition and purpose; /archives//html/Amps/1999-01/msg00476.html (8,778 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1] [2]