eHam.net - Amateur Radio (Ham Radio) Community

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



[Articles Home]  [Add Article]  

Pave Paws Report from Pacificon Forum:

from NARCC - Yahoo Public Forum on October 23, 2007
View comments about this article!

Forum Members,

I'm sure many of you attended the standing room only Pave Paws presentation by Dan Henderson at Pacificon 2007, as did several of the NARCC board. We on the board, have attempted to combine our collective memories and provide those who couldn't attend with a reasonable summary of the primary points. This summary is a joint venture of NARCC President Bob Lanning and Board members Tim Barrett and Art Mayoff and in no way is meant to represent all points covered in the 75 minute presentation.

Bob Lanning met with Dan Henderson N1ND on Saturday for breakfast. They discussed Pave Paws, local conditions and thinking regarding the problem. It was good thing so during the talk there would be no confusion if Bob was called upon.

There were a number of new pieces of information including the attitude of the USAF (good), the role of the FCC and the ARRL. The disappointing point was that only about 20 recipients of the "db" letters (about 100) have notified Dan they had complied. (But we believe that far more than that have taken corrective measures.) Stations that have in fact taken action, whether that was a reduction of power, antenna work, elevation/location change, etc or have gone QRT, should notify Dan immediately if they have not already done so. We need to show the USAF that we're taking action as they were disappointed in the lack of willingness displayed by the northern California hams to mitigate the interference. The USAF insists that we and they use a "Single Point of Contact" and only want to deal with the league and so we in the field need to be responding to Dan so the USAF knows there is a good effort being made.

The USAF has either written letters to East Coaster or had the FCC do so to notify the hams they must comply. We now know on the east coast they have until November 15 to comply. (Their 2nd pass was completed a few weeks ago) At that point any remaining interference is being addressed by the commission directly. The DoD has asked Riley Hollingsworth to take enforcement action immediately, with compliance by Nov 15 in the East. Dan said five repeaters came into compliance, four went QRT and about 4 or 5 (I forget) have not responded. Those would be the ones the DoD has asked Riley to contact.

Beale

The second pass of interference evaluation for Beale is supposed to start this week or so. On the east coast it lasted for 17 days 24/7. They will be recording and identifying stations in a much better manner than we saw in the first pass. Any station interfering at that point will have 30 days (we assume) to correct it or the USAF will have the FCC deal with the owner.

Dan said that in the last conference call one of the bird-colonels mentioned that "…maybe we should look at the footnote again…" That meant they are prepared to make this a "quiet zone" meaning we just lost the band. The idea is the repeater owners have to do something or that will be the end of it. Additionally Dan said that any 440 repeater owner, even those not on "the list" may voluntarily submit station parameters to Ed Hart at ARRL for Longley/Rice analysis to see how their systems comply.

We also point out Dan's suggestion that Amateurs (in Beale's coverage area) delay or refrain from activating new repeaters on 440 for the foreseeable future.

Dan spelled out very clearly that the 150 mile protected area is out the window. Interference from ANYWHERE, even beyond the 150 mile mark, is unacceptable. The 150 mile mark only applies to the 50 watt maximum power restriction. It has nothing to do with interfering signals.

Respectfully submitted,

Art Mayoff, AB6HB, Director

Member Comments:
This article has expired. No more comments may be added.
 
Pave Paws Report from Pacificon Forum:  
by NXET on October 23, 2007 Mail this to a friend!
In the name of defense of our country against people and countries the politicians have miffed off. We must do this.


Time to move away from the base. Its got this big bulls eye nuke first strike written all over it. Why do I get the feeling that they are not telling the right story about PAVE PAWS? Could this be another FLT 800 thing?

Seems strange that the new un-maned preditors and its new larger cousin are also based at those fields. Maybe I'll have to turn in my 430mc RC gear too now that they are using the frequency.
 
RE: Pave Paws Report from Pacificon Forum:  
by NXET on October 23, 2007 Mail this to a friend!
Got a funny feeling the boys out west around the airbase are going to start dumping a lot 440 stuff real cheap soon. Will that mean the resurgence of the 220 band?
 
RE: Pave Paws Report from Pacificon Forum:  
by TOYBOX on October 24, 2007 Mail this to a friend!
220mHz band is better anyway. I think a lot of repeaters are on the air because simply for the the owner's vanity.

There are too many repeaters out there anyway. Some counties with 20 repeaters?
 
RE: Pave Paws Report from Pacificon Forum:  
by K1CJS on October 24, 2007 Mail this to a friend!
There has been a slight shift of interest to 220 here around Otis AFB in Massachusetts, but not much.

There have been several immediate vicinity 440 mhz repeaters which have gone silent, one twenty watt machine was informed their transmissions would have to be reduced to 50 milliwatts to remain active. Is it any wonder they have been withdrawn from service by their owners?

It seems the upgrade by the vendors have increased the sensitivity to the point that just about any transmission in the 440 ham band is troublesome--or is it that the budget provided wasn't enough to give the radar upgrade needed resistance for ham radio to co-exist with the military system.

Maybe we should be asking that question. The government has clearly expressed their attitude toward ham radio by their acceptance--indeed their promotion--of BPL. Who is to say this sudden problem of co-existance with military frequencies isn't more of the same?
 
Pave Paws Report from Pacificon Forum:  
by K7AGE on October 24, 2007 Mail this to a friend!
Yes, 220 will become the primary band for many of the 440 evacuees in the Grass Valley area. I know several guys that have recently bought the Alinco 220 radio.

Some of us are also adding 6M FM to our stations and mobiles. Alinco has a new 50 watt 6 M rig, that I think is still on the boat from Japan.

Randy
K7AGE
 
RE: Pave Paws Report from Pacificon Forum:  
by KI6BEO on October 24, 2007 Mail this to a friend!
"Will that mean the resurgence of the 220 band?"

I'm sure that Alinco hopes so. They're pretty much the only ones making 220 radios anymore anyhow.

Our local club repeater on top of Mt. Diablo (Concord, CA) has had to drop their 440 output so low that if you're not actually ON the mountain, you can't hear it. Fortunately, they also operate 2m and 220 repeaters. They've linked the 220 and 440 repeaters to accept 440 input and 220 output. It's a good thing that most manufacturers include wide-band receivers on their dual-band radios!
 
Pave Paws Report from Pacificon Forum:  
by K7IJ on October 24, 2007 Mail this to a friend!
There is something dubious about the whole Pave Paws push and IMO it reeks of an obsolete enterprise trying to reinvent itself to forestall oblivion. Pave Paws was conceived in the early 70s as a defense against missile attacks. It was well before the development of satellite systems that have displaced the relatively primitive Pave Paws technology. The Pave Paws system operated for decades without a complaint regarding co-channel UHF users and it wasn't until the recent award of the defense contract for this program to a new contractor that it suddenly became a problem. None of this hardly has anything to do with the current defense operations of Homeland Security. It's a boondoggle pure and simple. Name me any other defense technology that is well over three decades old that is still in place -except for the landline telephone.
 
RE: Pave Paws Report from Pacificon Forum:  
by G3RZP on October 25, 2007 Mail this to a friend!
If a few repeaters can jam Pave Paws, then it can't be that difficult for an enemy - or someone wishing to annoy. OK, so you go shoot an enemy down, but what you're detecting with the radar could be a threat, so you probably haven't got the time before whatever it is coming in hits you.

So how come the contractor can't fix it? We've had intermittent problems on 1296 over here when they turn off some of the anti clutter software and forget to put it back on, and then complain about hams casing them interference. But in general, there's no real problem.

All in all, it doesn't say much for the security of the US if the radar is so easy to jam!! Plus everybody knows how to now.
 
RE: Pave Paws Report from Pacificon Forum:  
by W7AIT on October 25, 2007 Mail this to a friend!
K7IJ & G3RZP: Your "Attitudes" like that are going to get us all thrown off the band. This band has been shared and its a privilege, not a right to have access. Same can be said about any ham radio, its a privilege not a right

The government has the authority and the right to rescind our privleges at any time.

I for one will gladly give up the band for my national defense. The thought of missiles hitting San Francisco that weren’t detected because of some damn ham operator doesn't make sense to me.
 
RE: Pave Paws Report from Pacificon Forum:  
by G3RZP on October 25, 2007 Mail this to a friend!
W7AIT,

Your're missing the point! If a ham repeater can jam the radar, so can anyone else. Including an incoming missile. OK, you would probably get a bearing but not a range. And stand off jamming would be a fairly obvious ploy, and not too difficult.

Having worked in ECM (Electronic Counter Measures) at one time, I figure that if Pave Paws can be jammed by a few ham repeaters, it is in reality about as much real use as teats on a bull.
 
RE: Pave Paws Report from Pacificon Forum:  
by NS6Y_ on October 25, 2007 Mail this to a friend!
Er, or a sleeper agent with a Ramsey kit......
 
Pave Paws Report from Pacificon Forum:  
by K0RGR on October 26, 2007 Mail this to a friend!
If the primary owner of the band says "jump" we have to be on the way, and asking "how high?".

Once we have all complied, then we can ask questions. Of course, the military is usually not open to such things. We can ask, but don't expect an answer.

It has been suggested that the reason for the new problem is that Pave Paws is now looking at the horizon to detect cruise missiles, in addition to skyward. If this is the case, I don't understand how Beale AFB is in a good location for that. There's a range of mountains to the west that obscures the horizon very effectively. Any VHF ham can tell you that.

Now that cable TV has pretty well eliminated Channel 2 TVI, and theoretically VHF TV will be toast in 2009, anyway, barring unfair interference from Congress, it's probably time for us to rediscover the 6 meter band. That's something we could all get a hand in, now that so many radios have 6 meter FM built in. Yes, 222 is inviting, too - we should petition FCC to give us back 220-222 since UPS' dream radio system never happened.

The next big hop to Amateur primary status is 2300 Mhz., and we already have too much competition there.
 
RE: Pave Paws Report from Pacificon Forum:  
by K7IJ on October 26, 2007 Mail this to a friend!
"Once we have all complied, then we can ask questions. Of course, the military is usually not open to such things. We can ask, but don't expect an answer."

Isn't that sort of like appealing the verdict after
the execution?


"If the primary owner of the band says "jump" we have to be on the way, and asking "how high?"."

I disagree. DOD as the primary user of the band does not have the categorical right to tell secondary users to get off the band. Secondary users have every right to use the band on a non-interfering basis. The primary user has to do more than simply claim they are being interfered with. They have to document the existence of the interference and demonstrate that the interference is significant. In this situation, DOD is claiming interference but they will not provide any evidence of this because they claim that providing the evidence would be a breach of security. So, in effect, the DOD is claiming the power of the accuser, judge and jury. It's Alice in Wonderland, all over again.


 
RE: Pave Paws Report from Pacificon Forum:  
by G3RZP on October 26, 2007 Mail this to a friend!
The suggestion that Pave Paws is looking at the horizon for cruise missiles doesn't make a lot of sense, as the horizon distance isn't very high - in miles, roughly the square root of 2 times the antenna height in feet. Less with mountains in the way. Much better is to use an HF radar similar to the Australian Jindalee, which was developed for this purpose, and is also very narrow band, thus causing little QRM. Additionally, because it's narrow band and at HF, it's harder to find and jam. And it still doesn't get around the fact that putting jammers in missiles or using a stand off jammer to jam the system can't be that difficult if a few ham repeaters cause so much trouble.

If I had to guess, I'd suspect that the contractor has to screwed up, and knows sortinbg it out will cost money, so doesn't want to!
 
RE: Pave Paws Report from Pacificon Forum:  
by K7IJ on October 26, 2007 Mail this to a friend!
The facts will be buried in the "classified" section for the forseeable future but but mark my words, this current incantation of PAVE PAWS will someday be revealed as one of the most outrageous and hiiarious boondogles of the 21st century. It might even top the Alaska bridge to nowhere.
 
RE: Pave Paws Report from Pacificon Forum:  
by G3RZP on October 27, 2007 Mail this to a friend!
K7IJ

I figure that you've hit it in one!
 
RE: Pave Paws Report from Pacificon Forum:  
by W7CSD on October 28, 2007 Mail this to a friend!
Here is a good one...

This person wrote to let Dan know that 2 of his 3 repeaters were off the air.
How does Dan expect someone to "tweak" a repeater that is off the air?

*****************************************************************************************


Hi XXXX:

I have noted the 3 repeaters in the database. Thanks for your response.

After the retesting is completed by the DoD, I would expect that anyone
who is "close" will have a chance to "tweak" a little bit before an FCC
notice of shut down is sent. I will have to ask this of the DoD in out
next conversation.

As far as the antenna change, it sounds like something to try. You can
contact Ed Hare in our lab at w1rfi@arrl.org and see what he might
suggest to it though - he is the technical expert.

73


Dan Henderson, N1ND
Regulatory Information Manager
ARRL - The national association for Amateur Radio
860-594-0236
dhenderson@arrl.org
 
RE: Pave Paws Report from Pacificon Forum:  
by W9WHE-II on October 30, 2007 Mail this to a friend!
Amateur radio has a SECONDARY allocation on 440 Mhz. The government is PRIMARY. So no matter how wild, how far-fetched your conspiracy theory, it just doesn't matter. This is a SLAM DUNK looser for ham radio.

Deal with it.
 
RE: Pave Paws Report from Pacificon Forum:  
by K7IJ on October 30, 2007 Mail this to a friend!
by W9WHE-II on October 30, 2007
"Amateur radio has a SECONDARY allocation on 440 Mhz. The government is PRIMARY. So no matter how wild, how far-fetched your conspiracy theory, it just doesn't matter. This is a SLAM DUNK looser for ham radio.

Deal with it."

******************

I've searched through every post regarding this issue and have found no allegation or even innuendo of any conspiracy unless you choose to call a government-business boondoggle a conspiracy. I don't. For me, in this day and age, it's pretty much business as usual.

Unfortunately, you miss the major point. The DOD has the primary allocation on the 420-450 band and amateur radio has the secondary allocation. But this does not give the DOD the unbridled discretion to run amateurs off the band without a rationale for doing so, and simply stating they have a rationale, doesn't prove it. They are obligated to provide some convincing evidence that our operation represents a significant interference with their mission. I have not seen any evidence of this. Have you seen any evidence of this? The only evidence I have seen is an allegation that there is such evidence. The creation of Homeland Security and all its permutations should not abridge our rights as individuals to elementary due process and it was a far wiser gentleman than either of us that observed that those who willingly sacrifice their liberty for security, will end up with neither. This situation emits the same fragrance of some truly bizarre recent episodes where people have been arrested, imprisoned and charged with crimes only to be told they can't see the evidence that ostensibly supports the criminal complaint because, well gee, it would violate national security.

Even adopting the dubious assumption that amateur UHF operations can potentially interfere with the PAVE PAWS mission, it has to be the height of stupidity for DOD to make a public issue out of it and at this point, you can be sure that any miscreant that attempts in the future to make it through the PAVE PAWS system will include a UHF broadband generator in their arsenal.

"Deal with it"? Yes, I'm dealing with it. And you are obviously also dealing with it. But how we're dealing with it obviously differs. You are dealing with it by bending over in abject subjugation. I've operated an open UHF repeater for over 25 years and I have no intention of having this repeater bludgeoned into oblivion to preserve what is, IMO, clearly an obsolete dog-and-pony show, without at least using every legal means at my disposal to prevent this. Perhaps I'll start with a demand for an explanation as to why I am on the DOD execution list while another 440 UHF repeater within a few feet of my box at the site is not even mentioned.

You, of course, undoubtedly think that this is, well, un-American, but for me, questioning the dubious tactics of government gum-shoes, is as American as it gets.

K7IJ





 
RE: Pave Paws Report from Pacificon Forum:  
by G3RZP on October 31, 2007 Mail this to a friend!
K7IJ said:

>Even adopting the dubious assumption that amateur UHF operations can potentially interfere with the PAVE PAWS mission, it has to be the height of stupidity for DOD to make a public issue out of it and at this point, you can be sure that any miscreant that attempts in the future to make it through the PAVE PAWS system will include a UHF broadband generator in their arsenal.<

Exactly! Anyone who has worked in EW/ECM knows that there are techniques for jamming radars, and that there are countermeasures, too. But if the jamming can be achieved by something so simple as a repeater or two, the US taxpayer is NOT getting value for money, because the countermeasures are inadequate to counter a simple threat.

Your tax dollars at work - or not, as the case maybe.
 
RE: Pave Paws Report from Pacificon Forum:  
by W9WHE-II on October 31, 2007 Mail this to a friend!
K7IJ writes:

"The DOD has the primary allocation on the 420-450 band and amateur radio has the secondary allocation. But this does not give the DOD the unbridled discretion to run amateurs off the band without a rationale for doing so, and simply stating they have a rationale, doesn't prove it. They are obligated to provide some convincing evidence that our operation represents a significant interference with their mission. I have not seen any evidence of this".

First, Pave paws is run by the US millitary. System details fall within the purview of national secutity. Therefore, they need not share any such details with you, despite your false sense of "entitlement".

Second, do you really think the US Millitary would "make up" the interference issue? If so, for what reasons? Some secret conspiracy? Doubtful.

Third, the US Military does NOT need to come up with "convincing evidence". That is NOT the legal standard. All they need do is convince FCC that hams (with a secondary allocation) cause interfere with millitary operations (which have primary allocation).

Fourth, the US Millitary does not need to satasfy a bunch of hams that their operations "significantly interfere". That is not the legal standard.

So whine, moan, complain, sing kum-by-ya all you want, but anybody that has even a modicum of understanding of the applicable law here knows that the US millitary is in the right and we, as hams, will have to yeild. So deal with it.
 
RE: Pave Paws Report from Pacificon Forum:  
by W9WHE-II on October 31, 2007 Mail this to a friend!
K7IJ writes:

"I've operated an open UHF repeater for over 25 years and I have no intention of having this repeater bludgeoned into oblivion to preserve what is, IMO, clearly an obsolete dog-and-pony show, without at least using every legal means at my disposal to prevent this"

Your "opinion" of the Pave Paws system is TOTALLY AND COMPLETELY IRRELEVENT. The issue boils down to a single question.....do your operations (as a secondary station) cause interference to a primary station? \If the answer is yes, then you either mitigate or go off the air. It really is that simple. And getting a shut-down order is pretty easy.

I recognize that some in the people's Republic of Kalifornia hate the US millitary and all they do. But such hatetred is no substitute for logic and reason. So go find some lawyer willing to ignore Federal Rule 11 and fight till then end....but in the end, you will be poorer and you will still have lost. Emotion and whining will not prevail over the law.
 
RE: Pave Paws Report from Pacificon Forum:  
by K7IJ on October 31, 2007 Mail this to a friend!

"Your "opinion" of the Pave Paws system is TOTALLY AND COMPLETELY IRRELEVENT."

LOL! It's amusing that my opinions are totally and completely irrelevant while YOUR opinions, of course are literally Biblical in their breadth and validity.
Your posts portray a remarkable marriage of ignorance and arrogance and your vain posturing as some sort of self-anointed expert on this matter is hilarious. You have provided the forum some comic relief and what is really funny is that you don't even know it.




"I recognize that some in the people's Republic of Kalifornia hate the US millitary and all they do. But such hatetred is no substitute for logic and reason. So go find some lawyer willing to ignore Federal Rule 11 and fight till then end....but in the end, you will be poorer and you will still have lost. Emotion and whining will not prevail over the law. "


I really appreciate your posting this because it reveals to even a casual observer, what is really getting you all a-twitter. BTW, if you do need to feel that I am acting out of "hatetred" do yourself a favor and learn how to spell it. And if you're so enamored with the "millitary", at least, honor them by learning to spell that also. I can deal with the right wing, the left wing, both wings, all wings or no wings, but I'm not going to waste any more time dealing with an arrogant illiterate. If you insist on continuing to manifest this sort of behavior, you should understand that one of the minimum prerequisites for arrogance is the ability to spell the basic words of the language in which you express it.
 
RE: Pave Paws Report from Pacificon Forum:  
by G3RZP on November 1, 2007 Mail this to a friend!
Sure, the military has the 'right' to take the frequencies. They have the 'right' to take away Abrams tanks and give the guys 1835 Springfield muskets, too, although I admit the analogy is a bit extreme. But they have a duty to protect the country, and arguably, they are demonstrably not doing that. That is something which, as a US citizen, surely you have a right to question?
 
Pave Paws Report from Pacificon Forum:  
by K1DA on November 1, 2007 Mail this to a friend!
K7IJ: typical left coaster who would rather attack someone's spelling in typical shuck and jive fashion than address the underlying issue.
 
RE: Pave Paws Report from Pacificon Forum:  
by W9WHE-II on November 1, 2007 Mail this to a friend!
K7IJ writes:

"LOL! It's amusing that my opinions are totally and completely irrelevant while YOUR opinions, of course are literally Biblical in their breadth and validity".

What I expressed concering the rights and obligations of primary verses secondary license holders was not an opinion, its a legal FACT. On the other hand, you expressed an OPINION as to the value of the PP system, which does not even enter into the legal issue.

Nothing you or I "think" matters.
What matters is the "fact" that your operations (as a secondary licensee) appearantly cause interference to a primary licensee. Your personal opinions concerning the relative value of the primary licenseholder don't mean a darn thing. They are irrelevent. Now, that is a fact. Deal with it.


 
RE: Pave Paws Report from Pacificon Forum:  
by K7IJ on November 1, 2007 Mail this to a friend!
Posted By G3RZP

"Sure, the military has the 'right' to take the frequencies. They have the 'right' to take away Abrams tanks and give the guys 1835 Springfield muskets, too, although I admit the analogy is a bit extreme. But they have a duty to protect the country, and arguably, they are demonstrably not doing that. That is something which, as a US citizen, surely you have a right to question?"

It's a vexed question. Notwithstanding the dinosaur technology embodied in PAVE PAWS, we do have some excellent defense systems in place to protect the country from hostile acts. But I think our concept of defense largely misses the point and it's not a political problem but an idiosyncracy of our culture. For we Americans, our immediate reaction to threat is a confrontation with immediate resolution. Hey, we're busy! Let's get this over with one way or the other! But we're not facing a similar adversary in modern times. The one thing I can be sure of is that nobody high up in the food chain of strategic defense has ever operated a repeater in an urban environment because if they did, they would know that in the final analysis, no matter what whiz bang technology you employ to keep the repeater upright, in an outright confrontation, THE TRASHERS WILL ALWAYS WIN BECAUSE THEY HAVE LITTLE TO LOSE. If you persist in the confrontation, the result is chaos. If you shut the repeater off, by default, they win because they have demonstrated that you don't control them - they control you. What are you gonna do - revoke the license of an unlicensed jammer? That makes as much sense as it does to go to war with belligerants that don't even have a sovereign nation representing them. We can put up PAVE PAWS, PAW PAWS, PEE PAWS or POOP PAWS until the cows come home but in the final analysis it doesn't change the somber fact that the real advantage belongs to our current adversaries who not only are indifferent to whether they survive the confrontation - they actually exult in dying in the engagement. You do NOT want to casually engage in conflict with an adversary that doesn't care if they survive the episode. Your disadvantage is that your focus is divided between neutralizing your adversary while keeping your own buns intact. Their focus is significantly narrower - just neutralizing you. Advantage: nutballs.

Millions of red blooded Americans religiously watch the reruns of John Waynes and Jack Palances while they duke it out on some gritty street in a western town, (turns out most them died shot in the back by some dry gulcher), but to extrapolate this "fill yore hand" theater into a foreign policy is just flat out nuts.

So, how do you deal with repeater trashers? Sure I know, sometimes a repeater regular will find the miscreant and bust him up, but all it ends up accomplishing is to ratchet up the antagonism. There are other ways - you can quietly disregard FCC regulations (uh oh, I better duck, here it comes!) that prevent you from communicating with unlicensed users and encourage them to take the simple steps to join the fraternity and openly participate in it. Sometimes it works. It surely doesn't always work. But what is acutely evident is that ugly confrontation NEVER works. Never. I've been there. You may win a fight now and then, but you'll end up losing the war. ight I'm no Pollyanna but I sometimes wonder if we mightnot need PAVE PAWS or any of the rest of this whiz bang defensive technology if were less defensive and more focussed on efforts to convince the world that the planet is really just a giant open repeater and it's got to run by consensus and cooperation, not by a group of iron fisted control operators.

I fully acknowledge that my sensitivity to this issue results from the fact that it's my ox that is being gored. I'm willing to live with that without further complaining if I could see a scintilla of coherent evidence of the necessity for DOD's action rather than this pervasive smothering national security blanket that is being thrown over most everything our government does these days. Who is this enemy that we're defending against any way? Is Osama bin Looney expected to be firing off long range missiles from some cave in Pakistan?

It used to be China that had us shivering in our defensive boots but that seems passe these days, while we sit quietly by while China is getting the most cost-effective and ultimate revenge - by politely eviscerating our economy. Can anyone suggest even a vague rationale for spending billions of dollars trying to send half-megawatt pulses of line-of-sight UHF into space in the bizarre hope that it's going to reliably spot something as far as 3,000 miles away? And all this is being done while every waterfront port in the nation is WIDE OPEN and every back road in and out of this country is relatively unguarded? Can't anybody in government any longer spell "priorities"?

K7IJ











 
RE: Pave Paws Report from Pacificon Forum:  
by W9WHE-II on November 1, 2007 Mail this to a friend!
G3RXP writes:

"Sure, the military has the 'right' to take the frequencies".

See...even the Brits understand!



G3RXP also asks:

"But they have a duty to protect the country, and arguably, they are demonstrably not doing that. That is something which, as a US citizen, surely you have a right to question?"

I disagree with your conclusion.
But you are correct in the sense that we have a right to question. But just because we have a right to an opinion, does not make the opinion relevant in determinating the outcome. We can have any opinion we want. That does not make the opinion relevant to the legal outcome or controlling. For example. I can question the patriotism of Nancy Pelosi & Harry Reid, but my questions are not relevant to the drivel they utter.


W9WHE



 
RE: Pave Paws Report from Pacificon Forum:  
by K7IJ on November 1, 2007 Mail this to a friend!
"K7IJ: typical left coaster who would rather attack someone's spelling in typical shuck and jive fashion than address the underlying issue. "

Thanks for the constructive post. Sorry to find that you are rather myopic considering how much I have tried to address the underlying issues.

LOL! You don't know how comforting it is to me that I am at least a TYPICAL left coaster. For a while, I thought there was odd about me.

FYI, I'm a veteran. I spent time in Vietnam, and, Junior, I owe you nothing, nada, zilch, bupkis.

K7IJ

 
RE: Pave Paws Report from Pacificon Forum:  
by W9WHE-II on November 1, 2007 Mail this to a friend!
K7IJ writes:

"For we Americans, our immediate reaction to threat is a confrontation with immediate resolution".

Oh yes, much better we allow a threat to get stronger before we confront it. Nevel Chamberlain advocated that approach leading up to WWII. And we all know how successful that was.....

Some hams are just angry that their pet project is being shut down. Nevermind that we have subordinated rights. Nevermind that we have a secondary allocation. Nevermind that we use the spectrum for about $1 per year. Everybody else is just stupid. Everything else is just pointless and of no value. Someone's pet project is more important then national defense. Me, me, me, me, me, me......

Talk about arrogance and huberus........
 
RE: Pave Paws Report from Pacificon Forum:  
by W9WHE-II on November 1, 2007 Mail this to a friend!
K1DA writes:

"typical left coaster who would rather attack someone's spelling in typical shuck and jive fashion than address the underlying issue"

When you can't win on the merits, then attack the person. How many times have we all seen that approach? Anybody that disagrees with a liberal is just "stupid". Its tactic #2, right after calling people that disagree with you a "racist", "baby-killer", or "wanting people to die".

No biggie. Just see the tactic for what it really is. An inabillity to win the debate on the merits.


 
RE: Pave Paws Report from Pacificon Forum:  
by K7IJ on November 1, 2007 Mail this to a friend!
"Talk about arrogance and huberus........"

huberwhat? huberwho? Poopsie, you're just pathetic! Why don't you profit from the example of the communications challenged and minimize your lingual blunders by restricting yourself to one syllable words? And use more dots. There's no way to misspell those. huberwhich? huberwhere? huberwhen? Ach du lieber! Will this huber ever be uber?

 
RE: Pave Paws Report from Pacificon Forum:  
by K7IJ on November 1, 2007 Mail this to a friend!
"When you can't win on the merits, then attack the person. How many times have we all seen that approach? Anybody that disagrees with a liberal is just "stupid". Its tactic #2, right after calling people that disagree with you a "racist", "baby-killer", or "wanting people to die". "




I'm a fragile old man and my memory is not the greatest. Can you remind me what tactic #3 is?

And labeling you racist, a baby-killer and wanting people to die - was that supposed to be tactic #1? I sincerely hope not because if it was, I really screwed tactic #1 up by not delivering the goods and this is not going to look good on my resume.


 
Pave Paws Report from Pacificon Forum:  
by K7IJ on November 1, 2007 Mail this to a friend!
PAVE PAWS is a hush hush deep secret military defense operation for which no details can be provided - for radio amateurs, that is. But for everyone else, it's THE DOORS ARE OPEN, Y'ALL COME ON DOWN!!!!

http://ed-thelen.org/BealeTour.html
 
RE: Pave Paws Report from Pacificon Forum:  
by G3RZP on November 2, 2007 Mail this to a friend!
W9WHE said:
Nevel Chamberlain advocated that approach leading up >to WWII. And we all know how successful that was..... <

Very succesful. It gave us an extra year to build radar stations, airfields, Spitfires, Hurricanes, corvettes, set up the RAF Civilian Wireless Reserve which was a volunteer organisation mainly staffed by hams who were available from day one, the Radio Security Service - mainly staffed by hams on a volunteer part time basis - intercepting enemy comms and so on. That year was needed!
 
RE: Pave Paws Report from Pacificon Forum:  
by W9WHE-II on November 2, 2007 Mail this to a friend!
My friend, there are millions of Polish, Czeck and Jewish people that would disagree.
 
Pave Paws Report from Pacificon Forum:  
by K1DA on November 2, 2007 Mail this to a friend!
K7JI: Know a few REMF types myself, might you be one of them? Ever hump a PRC?
 
Pave Paws Report from Pacificon Forum:  
by K1DA on November 2, 2007 Mail this to a friend!
G3RZP: are you suggesting that Chamberlin DIDN't
believe in "peace in our time" after all??? Seems like a rewrite of history to me.
 
Pave Paws Report from Pacificon Forum:  
by K1DA on November 2, 2007 Mail this to a friend!
BTW K7JI AKA N7ITF says here you were born in 1955, little late for the 'nam, what might your MOS have been?
 
RE: Pave Paws Report from Pacificon Forum:  
by W9WHE-II on November 2, 2007 Mail this to a friend!
Was K7IJ born in 1955? & served in Nam?
Hummm....now that's interesting.
 
RE: Pave Paws Report from Pacificon Forum:  
by K7IJ on November 2, 2007 Mail this to a friend!
by K1DA on November 2, 2007

"BTW K7JI AKA N7ITF says here you were born in 1955, little late for the 'nam, what might your MOS have been?"

Yikes, just what this troubled world needs - another dyslexia riddled red neck.

K7IJ



 
Email Subscription
You are not subscribed to discussions on this article.

Subscribe!
My Subscriptions
Subscriptions Help

Other News Articles
Radio Lovers from Across the World go to Hamvention in Greene County:
Demo Showcases Diwata 2's Capabilities, Value in Times of Disasters:
Ham Fest Friendships, Traditions Continue:
Ham Radio Operator Sports 'Hairtenna':
AmateurLogic 130 is Here: