BLIND-HAMS Archives

For blind ham radio operators

BLIND-HAMS@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Phil Scovell <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
For blind ham radio operators <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 22 Mar 2011 16:09:26 -0600
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (89 lines)
I guess those 2 megs we lost to UPS a few years ago?  Well, UPS still has 
not even put a signal on that new band they took from the hams but they have 
10 more years before their license to use it runs out.  Why haven't they 
used it?  The cost of new equipment to operate on that band so the truth is, 
they likely now will never use it and we'll eventually get it back, for what 
that is worth.

Phil.
K0NX





----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Michael Thurman" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2011 3:48 PM
Subject: Re: be aware of bill hr607


> like 220 noone will actually use it  like ups wanting 220 but ocne it's =
> gone it's gone that's the point and thousans of repeaters use linking =
> below 440 mhz there is atv ssb satellites ect  it would completely =
> destroy the ham satellites and most o them wou
> On Mar 19, 2011, at 1:20 AM, colin McDonald wrote:
>
>> well with the acception of the satelite frequencies, and some =
> designated SSB=20
>> frequencies, what would you guys be losing?
>> perhaps it's just me, but when was the last time any of you talked to=20=
>
>> anything other than a bird below 440MHZ?
>> It's the principle of the thing I know, and agree that it should be =
> fought=20
>> tooth and nail...but practically speaking, I don't suspect it would =
> have an=20
>> immediate, or direct impact on amateur radio as a whole.
>> I know letting something go can and would lead to other bands being =
> taken=20
>> away.
>> However, I can't for the life of me think why anyone would want or use =
> the=20
>> 420/440MHZ spectrum...it's hard enough getting agencies to start using =
> the=20
>> 700MHZ spectrum never mind adding in more in the UHF band.
>> 73
>> Colin, V A6BKX
>> ----- Original Message -----=20
>> From: "Harvey Heagy" <[log in to unmask]>
>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>> Sent: Friday, March 18, 2011 10:12 AM
>> Subject: Re: be aware of bill hr607
>>=20
>>=20
>>> =46rom this week's Handiham news letter.
>>>=20
>>> Website makes letter writing regarding HR-607 easy
>>> Richard Haltermon, KD4PYR, has created a website that makes it very =
> easy=20
>>> to
>>> develop a letter for your Congressional representative regarding =
> HR-607=20
>>> (the
>>> bill that would sell off 420-440 MHz). This is as easy as it gets =
> folks!
>>> Just enter your callsign and it does the rest.
>>>=20
>>> Bill Morine, N2COP, writes:
>>>=20
>>> "...we used Jim Weaver's software http://www.kd4pyr.net/hamletter.htm =
> to
>>> generate HR-607 letters this past weekend at the Charlotte Hamfest, =
> and it
>>> worked wonderfully."
>>>=20
>>> Please get this info out to clubs and groups.
>>>=20
>>> http://www.kd4pyr.net/hamletter.htm
>>>=20
>>> Send then to:
>>>=20
>>> John Chwat
>>> Chwat & Co.
>>> 625 Slaters Lane
>>> Suite 103
>>> Alexandria, VA 22314=20
> 

ATOM RSS1 RSS2