Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net

   Home   Help Search  
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 Next
 41 
 on: Today at 05:18:39 PM 
Started by WB2KSP - Last post by KC2UGV
I love those shills, the CAI must be salivating over the KAPOS who will parrot the company line!!! 

NOTE  TO CAI:

These folks are the only Amateurs against antennas, the rest of us, would like to see reasonable added to the law.  NOTE REASONABLE.

 

You already have reasonable:  Not view-able from outside of the structure.  If it wasn't reasonable, why did you agree to it?

 42 
 on: Today at 05:17:58 PM 
Started by WY0Q - Last post by KB4QAA
they will conduct and work fine.  Strip them out.  The trade off is somewhat higher resistance (bigger is always better) but adding more radials will no doubt any minor losses.

Keep in mind the purpose of radials is to provide a low loss return path compared to earth, and copper is several thousand times more conductive than soil.

 43 
 on: Today at 05:05:42 PM 
Started by N9AOP - Last post by WA8UEG
I have never ran a matched set of tubes and never had any problems.

 44 
 on: Today at 05:04:54 PM 
Started by KA4WJA - Last post by K2LGO
Well I don't know who nominated you, but I tip my hat to you and your operating ethics...I try to force myself to reply to any stranger who might wander to our very underused repeater...I hope a lot of old timers, and newbe's alike will take a lesson from you....BOB

 45 
 on: Today at 04:55:12 PM 
Started by SHORTWIRE - Last post by W3UEC
There are two UK stations whose call signs look like Yiddish words. One is G0NEF which would translate to "thief" and the other is M0HEL which translates as "ritual circumciser." My grandmother, of blessed memory, had a motto, "Koif kein grievenes bei a mohel." = Don't buy cracklings from a circumciser."

73 de W3UEC

 46 
 on: Today at 04:55:11 PM 
Started by W1IT - Last post by W8AAZ
I have no opinion on that.  I do not care.  If the rest of you critics would respond to him that way, he would shrink away to nothing in short order on these forums. Treat his posts as if they were 14.313(amongst others), tune away or turn off.  Works for me.  Bye bye.   

 47 
 on: Today at 04:54:49 PM 
Started by K7CO - Last post by N6PSE
WO7R, very well said.

In addition to RHR and personal remote stations that are affected, there is also the group known as www.remotehams.com

This is a group of experimenters that set up and share a network of remote stations. This network has been operating for some time and is quite effective. I have been experimenting on my own with this network. It was developed and is maintained by one of the Engineers at Elecraft who creates some of their great products. This is what he does in his spare time. I hate to see these kind of efforts go down the drain due to a rule change.

 48 
 on: Today at 04:48:18 PM 
Started by WB2KSP - Last post by N5PZJ
I love those shills, the CAI must be salivating over the KAPOS who will parrot the company line!!! 

NOTE  TO CAI:

These folks are the only Amateurs against antennas, the rest of us, would like to see reasonable added to the law.  NOTE REASONABLE.

 

 49 
 on: Today at 04:38:35 PM 
Started by K1CJS - Last post by K9AIM

Agreed, there might have been valid reasons for people, especially older hams, to complain back then.  But those still complaining today couldn't have been that old when incentive licensing was implemented.  If they're, say, 95 now, they were no more than 50 then, hardly an age where infirmity would be likely to present problems with taking more tests.  To put it another way, anyone who lost privileges but is still complaining about that loss today has had almost 50 years to upgrade.  For those who have upgraded, why nurse the grudge?  And for those who haven't, why not take those tests you keep telling us are absurdly easy compared to the ones you took in the good old days? 

(Aside: for what it's worth, it was extremely difficult for me to get to an FCC office in those days; I had to wait for 5 years after taking the General to take the Advanced.  That wasn't worth whining about, either.  There were plenty of frequencies available to me as a General, even after incentive licensing.)

QSL, you are 59.  i think one of the rubs was that top class used to be the only one with full HF phone privileges till the FCC decided to give all license classes all privileges.  then 1968 rolls around and suddenly they get HF phone frequencies taken away (small amount or not is beside the point).  Doing that was tone deaf on the part of the bureaucrats who implemented it. former Advanceds (since those who were once Original extra's or Class A's all got folded into Advanced at a later date) should have either been grandfathered or still allowed full phone privileges. 

like you said -- anyone around now would to have been fairly young in 1968 and could either have upgraded or remained Advanceds as a matter of principle or stubborness, depending on how you look at it.     Wink

 50 
 on: Today at 04:34:19 PM 
Started by WB2KSP - Last post by KD8GTP
Quote from: KC2UGV on Today at 01:30:09 PM
  Only less than 2% of the US populations are hams.

The percentage of licensed Hams has absolutely no correlations to the amount of public service provided by Hams, which is significant.

You have to be joking:)
I think public safety will be fine without Hams.  If the public service you are referring to is the fellas in the orange vests with the HTs hanging off their fat waists and the old crown vics with lightbars, then I am sure things will be just fine without you Wink

And one more time, please tell me..... who held the gun to these guys heads that moved to the HOA and signed a contract ?
A smart man would not do such a thing, now would they?
CAIonline.org now has a link to this forum. They need to read these posts and get intel, I'm sure once they read these posts and see how many Hams are against this HR bill it will help their lobbyists in DC.  GOD willing.

Pages: Prev 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!