- 1. [TenTec] FCC says CW dead? Naw... (score: 1)
- Author: Able2fly@aol.com
- Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2005 14:54:55 EDT
- I hope CW stays with us . John kb2huk Its not a matter of CW staying with us. No body is taking anything away. Its a matter of newcomers embracing it as a mode of choice that will sustain it. As long
- /archives//html/TenTec/2005-07/msg00870.html (6,846 bytes)
- 2. Re: [TenTec] FCC says CW dead? Naw... (score: 1)
- Author: "Ron Zond" <k3miy@csonline.net>
- Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2005 15:07:07 -0400
- hi guys CW won't go away. After all, hams had to wait about 11 years (March 18, 1956) for the FCC to recognize RTTY for ham use. After that, it wasa only that any mode for which there is public docum
- /archives//html/TenTec/2005-07/msg00872.html (8,404 bytes)
- 3. [TenTec] FCC says CW dead? Naw... (score: 1)
- Author: Robert & Linda McGraw K4TAX <RMcGraw@Blomand.Net>
- Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2005 14:29:24 -0500
- While not knowing the true political background of this issue, and I'm sure there is a political basis for this issue, in my reading the FCC actions and I quote: "The NPRM&O consolidated 18 petitions
- /archives//html/TenTec/2005-07/msg00873.html (8,795 bytes)
- 4. Re: [TenTec] FCC says CW dead? Naw... (score: 1)
- Author: Ken Brown <ken.d.brown@verizon.net>
- Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2005 09:45:35 -1000
- It will make a difference for those who do operate CW, because there are no CW exclusive sub-bands. All those new "Extras" who have passed the memorization tests and have hooked up their computer so
- /archives//html/TenTec/2005-07/msg00877.html (7,732 bytes)
- 5. Re: [TenTec] FCC says CW dead? Naw... (score: 1)
- Author: Ira Franklin <k4ymq@yahoo.com>
- Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2005 14:19:33 -0700 (PDT)
- Guys you know it was an amazing thing before the sub bands came about I dont remember any great big problems, so why does the thought process have to be that it going to be a disaster. And the statme
- /archives//html/TenTec/2005-07/msg00882.html (9,066 bytes)
This search system is powered by
Namazu