Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Amps\]\s+New\s+FCC\s+Amplifier\s+Rule\s*$/: 12 ]

Total 12 documents matching your query.

1. [Amps] New FCC Amplifier Rule (score: 1)
Author: Pete Smith <n4zr@contesting.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2006 08:09:21 -0400
The FCC Omnibus R&O released yesterday requires: &sect; 2.815 External radio frequency power amplifiers. ... (1) The external radio frequency power amplifier shall not be capable of amplification in
/archives//html/Amps/2006-10/msg00083.html (7,668 bytes)

2. Re: [Amps] New FCC Amplifier Rule (score: 1)
Author: "Ed Swynar" <gswynar@durham.net>
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2006 07:55:57 -0500
...Regarding the 10-meter FCC rule on commercial linear amplifiers... Hi Pete, What a mis-guided, self-deluded rule your FCC perpetuates in the matter of 10-meters & linear amplifiers! Why don't they
/archives//html/Amps/2006-10/msg00085.html (8,940 bytes)

3. Re: [Amps] New FCC Amplifier Rule (score: 1)
Author: Vic K2VCO <vic@rakefet.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2006 07:58:44 -0700
As another unintended consequence, the freebanders might just move up above 28 MHz. into the CW band! When will they learn? -- 73, Vic, K2VCO Fresno CA http://www.qsl.net/k2vco ______________________
/archives//html/Amps/2006-10/msg00086.html (7,277 bytes)

4. Re: [Amps] New FCC Amplifier Rule (score: 1)
Author: "Will Matney" <craxd1@verizon.net>
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2006 16:13:37 -0400
Pete, It's untelling how hard they will try to enforce this. Even though the FCC has made several large busts in the past I know about, stuff is still coming into the US like illegal amps and transce
/archives//html/Amps/2006-10/msg00099.html (14,894 bytes)

5. Re: [Amps] New FCC Amplifier Rule (score: 1)
Author: "Harold Mandel" <ka1xo@juno.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2006 11:14:23 -0400
Is this what the Politically Correct name for bootleggers has become? "Freebanders?" Forgetaboutit! They are criminals breaking Federal and International Laws. I had to study my butt off to pass four
/archives//html/Amps/2006-10/msg00102.html (8,316 bytes)

6. Re: [Amps] New FCC Amplifier Rule (score: 1)
Author: Vic K2VCO <vic@rakefet.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2006 08:32:51 -0700
Hey, I'm not being polite to them! Just distinguishing a particular group from the larger class of bootleggers, which include the fishermen and Spanish speakers who are already using our CW band. --
/archives//html/Amps/2006-10/msg00103.html (7,833 bytes)

7. Re: [Amps] New FCC Amplifier Rule (score: 1)
Author: "kenw2dtc" <kenw2dtc@comcast.net>
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2006 08:52:18 -0400
Hal's question: "Why in the Hell was 11 meters ever taken?" One reason was a lack of use. Many amateurs used crystals and the old transmitters were built with multipliers, not mixers, thus a 3.5 mHz
/archives//html/Amps/2006-10/msg00110.html (8,020 bytes)

8. Re: [Amps] New FCC Amplifier Rule (score: 1)
Author: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2006 05:01:11 -0400
The 11 meter band was used for commercial 2-way and radio control also, but the "I can do anything I want" CB mentality ruined that also. The FCC's original intention was good. CB was intended to be
/archives//html/Amps/2006-10/msg00130.html (8,777 bytes)

9. Re: [Amps] New FCC Amplifier Rule (score: 1)
Author: RCM <robrk@nidhog.net>
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2006 01:14:36 -0400
And the FCC broke the international rules or agreements about operators knowing CW below 30mc....yes megacycles. _______________________________________________ Amps mailing list Amps@contesting.com
/archives//html/Amps/2006-10/msg00131.html (9,578 bytes)

10. Re: [Amps] New FCC Amplifier Rule (score: 1)
Author: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2006 04:42:16 -0400
There never was a restriction or agreement on commercial or business two-way below 30MHz requiring Morse that I am aware of. Only amateur. _______________________________________________ Amps mailin
/archives//html/Amps/2006-10/msg00132.html (7,986 bytes)

11. Re: [Amps] New FCC Amplifier Rule (score: 1)
Author: Peter Chadwick <g3rzp@g3rzp.wanadoo.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2006 11:20:08 +0200 (CEST)
business two-way below 30MHz requiring Morse that I am aware of. Only amateur. < This is correct. A lot of HF R/T below 30MHz is (and always has been) carried out by ops who con't read Morse. 73 Pete
/archives//html/Amps/2006-10/msg00135.html (8,225 bytes)

12. Re: [Amps] New FCC Amplifier Rule (score: 1)
Author: Bob Nielsen <nielsen@oz.net>
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2006 10:13:13 -0700
I still have a few QSLs from 11 meter operating in the early 1950s. Does anyone else remember the "Save 11" contest, which I think was put on by CQ magazine? Bob, N7XY _______________________________
/archives//html/Amps/2006-10/msg00140.html (8,274 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 12
Page: [1]
This search system is powered by Namazu