Dee Flint wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

Cmdr Buzz Corey wrote:
Mike Coslo wrote:

I think the idea is that person 1 transmits to the end of his
block,
then person 2 transmits to the end of their block. And so on and so on.
Be just like the olde days when the "relay" meant something in ARRL.
They will need every one of those "millions" of FRS radio owners.

When a kid did you ever play the party game 'pass it on'? You know where
you whisper something in someone's ear, they then pass it on to the next
person, then the next, then the next, ect. By the time it gets to the
last person it isn't anything like the orginal message. You don't need
that when you are trying to get critical information to a destination.

So the "Relay" in ARRL is a useless construct?

Wunnerful in theory, useless in practice?

No it simply means that without a structured format, message training, means
of checking the message (such as word count), etc that the system breaks
down. The formal message handling systems have these. The FRS system does
not.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

So not only can't hams work in a weak signal environment, but we would
also lose the ability to format messages while monitoring FRS?