CW problems with arabs and ex-USSR
 

On 1 Jul 2003 14:31:19 GMT, Alun Palmer wrote:

We oughta have a pool on how long it takes The Congress and FCC to get
through the various levels of rubberstamping. My wild guess is no more
than a year from today.

I would think about the same, but surely we should each guess a particular
date, and the winner should be whoever is closest.

Put me down for March 15, 2004.

"Beware the Ides of March."

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

In article , "Phil Kane"
writes:

On 1 Jul 2003 14:31:19 GMT, Alun Palmer wrote:

We oughta have a pool on how long it takes The Congress and FCC to get
through the various levels of rubberstamping. My wild guess is no more
than a year from today.

I would think about the same, but surely we should each guess a particular
date, and the winner should be whoever is closest.

Put me down for March 15, 2004.

"Beware the Ides of March."

HAW!

I'll take April 15, 2004.

Alun?

73 de Jim, N2EY

"Alun Palmer" wrote in message
...

Anyway, CW testing is all over bar the shouting. The unanimously agreed
language, now passed through all the commitee levels, makes it optional.
It just has to be nodded through at the plenary session. This allows those
countries mentioned, plus Germany to retain CW testing without it seeming
that it no longer relates to ITU rules, whilst also allowing every other
country to dump CW teasting.

Actually, the German radio administration support the deletion
of ITU rule S25.5. They are record that they will not continue
the domestic requirement.

It is the German IARU society that supports code exams.

Larry kc8epo

"Phil Kane" wrote in
.net:

On 1 Jul 2003 14:31:19 GMT, Alun Palmer wrote:

We oughta have a pool on how long it takes The Congress and FCC to
get through the various levels of rubberstamping. My wild guess is no
more than a year from today.

I would think about the same, but surely we should each guess a
particular date, and the winner should be whoever is closest.

Put me down for March 15, 2004.

"Beware the Ides of March."

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane



I'll say May 1, 2004. Any more takers?

"Phil Kane" wrote in message
.net...
On 1 Jul 2003 14:31:19 GMT, Alun Palmer wrote:

We oughta have a pool on how long it takes The Congress and FCC to get
through the various levels of rubberstamping. My wild guess is no more
than a year from today.

I would think about the same, but surely we should each guess a
particular
date, and the winner should be whoever is closest.

Put me down for March 15, 2004.

"Beware the Ides of March."
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

Put me down for December 31, 2003.

"Clean desk rule"
Larry KC8EPO

Oh, what the hey! Put me down for September 13, 2003.

--
73 de Bert
WA2SI

"lk" wrote in message
...
"Phil Kane" wrote in message
.net...
On 1 Jul 2003 14:31:19 GMT, Alun Palmer wrote:

We oughta have a pool on how long it takes The Congress and FCC to
get
through the various levels of rubberstamping. My wild guess is no
more
than a year from today.

I would think about the same, but surely we should each guess a
particular
date, and the winner should be whoever is closest.

Put me down for March 15, 2004.

"Beware the Ides of March."
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

Put me down for December 31, 2003.

"Clean desk rule"
Larry KC8EPO

On Sat, 5 Jul 2003 08:26:24 -0400, Bill Sohl wrote:

Word has it that the UK will drop it within a month or so.

Does the UK have to take the new treaty before Lord So-and-so who
takes it into committee and then to the House of Lords for a debate
followed by a vote and thence to the Queen to make it binding on the
UK or can the Director-General of the RA do that at the stroke of a
(ball-point quill) pen?

I'm sure in Somalia it gets done whenever Warlord Biggshott says so.

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

"Phil Kane" wrote in
.net:

On Sat, 5 Jul 2003 08:26:24 -0400, Bill Sohl wrote:

Word has it that the UK will drop it within a month or so.

Does the UK have to take the new treaty before Lord So-and-so who
takes it into committee and then to the House of Lords for a debate
followed by a vote and thence to the Queen to make it binding on the
UK or can the Director-General of the RA do that at the stroke of a
(ball-point quill) pen?

I'm sure in Somalia it gets done whenever Warlord Biggshott says so.

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane




They have to have a consultation period, but the RA 'cheated' by
publishing the consultation document before the WRC!

On 7 Jul 2003 05:10:02 GMT, Alun Palmer wrote:

Does the UK have to take the new treaty before Lord So-and-so who
takes it into committee and then to the House of Lords for a debate
followed by a vote and thence to the Queen to make it binding on the
UK or can the Director-General of the RA do that at the stroke of a
(ball-point quill) pen?

They have to have a consultation period, but the RA 'cheated' by
publishing the consultation document before the WRC!

In my sporadic dealings with them in the mid-1960s I was always
impressed by how the GPO (predecessor to the RA) could cut corners
where the FCC couldn't - or wouldn't .....

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane