wrote:
Andrew VK3BFA wrote:


And tell him to buy a text book on - well, just about anything except
self-promotion - he doesnt seem to know very much. Probably why hes a
consultant. Is he an accountant?

Nope, my brother is a geophysicist. I'm the electronics person.

The Eternal Squire

Then what is he doing consulting? - has his academic discipline got
ANYTHING to do with the subject?

And you, sir, have been told, repeatedly, by ex military comms people
(amongst others) thats its just a plain downright, stupid, time
wasting, idiotic, non feasible "idea".

Does it need to be spelt out any clearer than that?

What dont you understand?

Andrew VK3BFA.

Andrew VK3BFA wrote:
And you, sir, have been told, repeatedly, by ex military comms people
(amongst others) thats its just a plain downright, stupid, time
wasting, idiotic, non feasible "idea".

Does it need to be spelt out any clearer than that?

What dont you understand?

Seriously, hams have long been responsible for taking time wasting
idiotic non feasible "ideas" and VERY occasionally turning them into
serious modes of communications.

I agree that in this particular case the original idea has several
enormous flaws. But with some of the modifications suggested here I
think there may be something of some value in some emergency
circumstances.

Certainly the professionals who set up digitally trunked comm systems
have a less than stellar track record at actual success ( do NOT
confuse with "contractual success") and I have a large chip on my
shoulder regarding ALL the billions of dollars that they've wasted at
taxpayer expense. Not to mention the distortions they've caused to
frequency allocations that actually WERE previously useful.

And you would be SERIOUSLY surprised at some of the far stupider flawed
ideas that are being funded by government agencies.

Tim.