Bill Sohl wrote:

Assuming your hypothetical...
IF the non-phone segment is being underused, then
the CW users will likly lose bandwidth. BUT, if the non-phone
segment is just as crowded with users, then there's
no valid argument for phone expansion. The burden
will be on the users of non-phone modes.


And right there you have it!

- Mike KB3EIA -

"Dan/W4NTI" wrote:

"Dwight Stewart" wrote

Kim, I don't know what is going on with your newsgroup
messages. (snip)

I had my witches coven put a curse on her.


Something has sure happened. After I posted that message, I ran into three
or four other messages posted by Kim that resulted in the same error message
(all posted after the message I replied to). Very odd.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/

"Kim W5TIT" wrote:

"Dwight Stewart" wrote

Kim, I don't know what is going on with
your newsgroup messages. (snip)


There, how's that?


Well, I was able to read it. However, it has only been a little over an
hour since you posted it. I'm going to mark the message as unread and try it
again tomorrow to see if it is still on the server. I'll let you know what
happens.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/

In article , Jack Hamilton
writes:


(Len Over 21) wrote:

In article ,

(Larry Roll K3LT) writes:

I think I'm pretty safe in saying that it was the code testing requirement
that caused hams to learn the code -- not any innate love or appreciation
for the mode.

NO! Say it isn't so, mighty morseman!

"Morse code gets through when everything else does." - B.B.

Hasn't that been disproved?

It hasn't been disproved to me, but then again, I have a lot of experience
using BOTH Morse/CW and a variety of digital modes, so I have seen for
myself that the saying "Morse gets through when everything else fails"
is apparently true. I have had many operating sessions when PSK-31
signals became useless, while I was still able to communicate in CW.
In fact, a lot of times, I've been able to identify PSK-31 signals only when
the CW ID came on after the station stopped sending! However, anyone
with an Anti-Morse/CW agenda will not be convinced of that.

73 de Larry, K3LT

In article , Radio Amateur KC2HMZ
writes:

"Radio Amateur KC2HMZ" wrote in message
. ..

Kim - excellent post, I'm impressed.


I'd rather you not be impressed, but thanks!

You're entirely welcome. To explain my comment...so much of your
participation in this NG seems to be wasted on sniping at Larry and
Dick, that I was pleasantly surprised to read that particular post, in
which you made a number of good points about emergency communications,
even if you couldn't resist the occasional shot at the aforementioned
two targets of opportunity. ;-)

You know what, John? Kim's posts would be a whole lot better if she
could resist the temptation to "take shots" at "targets of opportunity."
And, with all due respect, so could yours.

73 de Larry, K3LT

In article , "Kim W5TIT"
writes:

Kim:

All I can say is, I'm not suprised by your typically ungracious remark.
Apparently my effort was in vain, but that's my fault -- I should have
known better!

73 de Larry, K3LT


Would you like me to post some examples of where you have not kept your
posts related to ham radio? Actually, you can look it up yourself.

Kim W5TIT

Kim:

I know what I've posted, both in the past and in the present. I have
repeatedly posted replies to your own posts in which I have attempted to
deal with you as an equal, as an adult. I have most recently attempted
to stifle a disrespectful remark made at your expense, and you have
seen fit to react to it in an ungracious and disparaging manner. You
obviously have no intention of ever emerging from your inane, childish,
immature mode of thought, and continue to persist in personal attacks
against those of us who are best able to challenge you, since you know
you aren't up to the task of debating us on our level.

Ordinarily, I would ask you to reflect on this and consider a reply, but
I have been repeatedly shown that that is too much to ask of you. I have
tried to treat you with respect, but if I do not receive equal consideration,
all that will happen is that you will continue to make a fool of yourself,
and I will continue to be the one pointing to the errors of your ways.

73 de Larry, K3LT

How many New Age No-Code Extras do you think you can "sell" on the
concept of learning the Morse code, just on the basis of it's operational
characteristics or the fact that it's "fun" to do?

(major snippage)

Larry:

"Fun" is merely a perspective.... other people find, for example, football
fun. Personally I can't stand football. As far as morse code as a skill,
that is a different debate. Fun is merely in the eye of the beholder.


--
Ryan, KC8PMX
FF1-FF2-MFR-(pending NREMT-B!)
--. --- -.. ... .- -. --. . .-.. ... .- .-. . ..-. .. .-. . ..-.
... --. .... - . .-. ...

I would have to agree with that statement in its basic form.

I would also add and feel pretty safe in saying that some of those people
that were required to learn the code, some may have learned it as a
requirement for the license set forth and might care for it, and some might
have turned out loving it like yourself.



--
Ryan, KC8PMX
FF1-FF2-MFR-(pending NREMT-B!)
--. --- -.. ... .- -. --. . .-.. ... .- .-. . ..-. .. .-. . ..-.
... --. .... - . .-. ...

I think I'm pretty safe in saying that it was the code testing requirement
that caused hams to learn the code -- not any innate love or appreciation
for the mode.

73 de Larry, K3LT

Now let's look at that phrase "pool of trained radio operators" Dee. The
vagueness of that can create some issues, such as what type of training???

Being able to handle message traffic, would be an extremely important detail
in training IMHO. How many people can formulate a formal messagegram??
Even though I am one of those low-life codefree techs, I still can.



--
Ryan, KC8PMX
FF1-FF2-MFR-(pending NREMT-B!)
--. --- -.. ... .- -. --. . .-.. ... .- .-. . ..-. .. .-. . ..-.
... --. .... - . .-. ...
Except that ham radio is not mission critical for most of us. If
conditions are poor on HF SSB, I can just QSY to a repeater, or read a
book or watch TV, for that matter.

One reason that we are able to justify ourselves to the government is that
part of our mission as hams is to be a "pool of trained radio operators."
So since I want ham radio to continue to be allowed, I consider it mission
critical to be familiar with the various modes whether or not I like them.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Well, a generator with at least 20-30 gallons of gas would be a good start.
Storage of that much gas may be a different issue though. I wonder if there
are any generators for the general residential public out there that could
run on propane?? One could use one of those 500 gallon "pigs" and have that
last a loooonnnnggggg time.

A different direction could also be using, like mentioned below, car/truck
power! I have dual batteries in my pickup truck and a hi-amp alternator,
and have (2) 750+ watt DC-AC inverters mounted under the hood. As long as
the truck can idle on a full gas tank, I have quite a bit of both DC and AC
power from that vehicle.



--
Ryan, KC8PMX
FF1-FF2-MFR-(pending NREMT-B!)
--. --- -.. ... .- -. --. . .-.. ... .- .-. . ..-. .. .-. . ..-.
... --. .... - . .-. ...
Well, how about a car battery installed in a car, which, with several
gallons of gas in the tank,
running to keep the battery charged. One could accept donations of more
gas siponed from
other volunteer cars if necessary..... The car could act as the shack
if the weather's lousy.