ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
At 09:54 AM 1/14/2006, George Henry wrote:
>The only reasonable solution that I can see is to relegate semi-automatic
>operation to a small set of discrete frequencies, like the beacon system,
>and we all steer clear of them. There needs to be at least this one
>exception to regulation-by-bandwidth. That will go in my comments to the
>FCC.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I think what the original poster really wants is to outlaw automatic
operation, which I heartily agree with, at least for HF.
As a matter of philosophy, I believe HF ham radio should be run by
humans, not machines. HF is especially sensitive to this because of
the constantly changing propagation, unlike for example, VHF
repeaters. If one wants to negate this principle, then one needs to
have dedicated frequencies, which I am also against having embedded
in the FCC rules, at least for HF.
In my opinion, any amateur HF transmitter should be controlled by a
human who is REQUIRED to listen before transmitting. Otherwise, chaos
will ensue, as it has.
Bill, W6WRT
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
|