Mike:
With all due respect, are you attempting to replace the late Wayne Green
as an
ARRL critic??
It seems endless....
73!
ED k0kl
On 6/4/2014 8:25 PM, W0MU Mike Fatchett wrote:
I have sent a letter to K1ZZ asking for an explanation. This should
be interesting.
Mike W0MU
On 6/4/2014 7:01 PM, Kok Chen wrote:
On Jun 4, 2014, at 5:37 PM, W0MU Mike Fatchett wrote:
What does this have to do with an ARRL Bulletin?
I think Jay may be alluding to 197.113(d) [from Feb 23, 2007 edition
of the ARRL Part 97 rules book] which stipulates that W1AW can pay
the operators, which on the surface runs counter to the amateur service.
That rule was probably very finely crafted to "barely" allow them to
broadcast back when they petitioned for the rules. This way, you and
I and K1MAN cannot broadcast unless we dedicate at least 40 hours per
week doing it.
We need to check though, that W1AW actually *still* operate bulletins
and code practices for a total of 40 hours a week. It occurs to me
that it is possible that they still transmit code practices just to
fill up the 40 hours of air time, not because the code transmissions
are of any real use today.
(They could also be weaseling by counting each band as a separate
*time* slot. Lawyers are never good at Physics.)
IMHO, your other point is definitely 100% correct. That FCC Part
97.111 say they can broadcast. But it does not give W1AW the license
to hog any particular frequency.
73
Chen, W7AY
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection
is active.
http://www.avast.com
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
|