"Dan/W4NTI" wrote in message ...
"Bert Craig" wrote in message
. net...
"Robert Casey" wrote in message
...


This is actually not such a bad idea. I've always supported dropping
the
155.3 mi. limit on CB and the idea of allowing hams to reduce their
power
and elmer CBers on channels 36 through 40 USB on the finer point of
DXing. I
think it'd be a great recruitment tool, just MHO.



We could do that now, *IF* we use type accepted (or whatever they call
it nowadays) CB radios
instead of our ham transcievers, and not exceed the distance limit.

'Zactly! I currently run a slightly older Uniden Grant XL, type certified
and 100% legal.

But
I think the CBers
might see us as invaders on their turf, like we see them when invading
10m. It might be better
to be low key,

I usually keep it subtle and have always had pretty good results. NOTE:
Those who bootleg on 10m (Or any other ham band.) are neither included in
this discussion nor welcomed on either band. I'll drop a dime on them in a
NY minute! (...and have done so in the past.)

maybe have the ARRL buy ads in CB magizines that say

IMHO, the ARRL blew a golden opportunity for a win-win situation in 2000
when it comment against RM-9807. I don't think the ARRL's is very much
appreciated among CB circles, HOWEVER, true CB "hobbyists" (Sorry, Phil.)
DO
respect ARO's and are usually quite receptive.

something like "if
you get a general or extra ham license, you can DX on many different
bands using more
power (legally) even when the sunspots are out of season. 'You already
love radio, see
how much more fun you can have with a ham license'." Of course one
would have to
wordsmith it right to attract serious and disiplined operators and not
the kids and "lids".
Without making ham radio look condensending or putting CBers down.

Funny story...well, kinda. I walked into the corner 7-Eleven and prepared
to
get my dailly fix of Java when a chap nodded in my direction and asked
"you
a ham?" It occured to me that he had seen my AR license plates and since
we
were the only two in the store, it was equally easy for me to notice the
Wilson 1000 atop his vehicle. I nodded toward his car and asked him
"what'cha runnin'?" Well, I could tell right away it wasn't kosher because
you could cut the immediate cloud of nerousness with a knife. "Relax, I've
been where you are and I can help you get to where you wanna be." Crash,
down came the wall of apprehension. He was using one of those zillion
channel Ranger rigs. I explained that if he'd let me, I could show him how
to use that legally. Subtly massaged the enforcement angle into the
conversation too. I lived three blocks away so I permanently lent him
my
Gordo Tech study guide and a copy of my ARRL code CD's. Told him the code
test was nothing to sweat and if he any problems just give me a holler.
Well, the next time he "hollered," he had two CSCE's in hand and a new
Tech"+" was waiting for a call. Now that he's tasted more bandwidth, he
doesn't want to risk losing those priviledges on any illegal 11-meter
frequencies anymore. I personally don't care what his motivations are to
fly
straight are, I'm just glad that he is. Sure, I could've immediately
beaten
him up re. his rig or lectured him on what CB was originally intended
for...but what would it have gained? CB gained a legal op, and he gained a
whole new world of radio. For all I know, he might very well be an Extra
by
now. I do know it felt good. :-)

I'm
not that
good a writer, but I think that it could be done well.

I think you just did a great job.

--
73 de Bert
WA2SI



I used to do the same thing with the customers I had in my CB shop a few
years back. Got a LOT of converts that way.

Kewl beans, it doesn't always work but when it does...it sure feels
good.

But it was tough sometimes when they came in and asked me why the Swerrrrrrs
were so high on their whup, when it was mounted with straps to the metal
cab of the truck.

That wasn't the tough part for me. It's the ones with the really bad
attitudes who wear me out. At a certain point, you end up deciding who
is worth the effort and who to ditch.

Dan/W4NTI

73 de Bert
WA2SI

"Dan/W4NTI" wrote in message ...
"Robert Casey" wrote in message
...


This is actually not such a bad idea. I've always supported dropping the
155.3 mi. limit on CB and the idea of allowing hams to reduce their power
and elmer CBers on channels 36 through 40 USB on the finer point of
DXing. I
think it'd be a great recruitment tool, just MHO.



We could do that now, *IF* we use type accepted (or whatever they call
it nowadays) CB radios
instead of our ham transcievers, and not exceed the distance limit. But
I think the CBers
might see us as invaders on their turf, like we see them when invading
10m. It might be better
to be low key, maybe have the ARRL buy ads in CB magizines that say
something like "if
you get a general or extra ham license, you can DX on many different
bands using more
power (legally) even when the sunspots are out of season. 'You already
love radio, see
how much more fun you can have with a ham license'." Of course one
would have to
wordsmith it right to attract serious and disiplined operators and not
the kids and "lids".
Without making ham radio look condensending or putting CBers down. I'm
not that
good a writer, but I think that it could be done well.


If all you CBers with a ham license want to go back and play in the pig pen.
Then go ahead.

No thanks, Dan. I avoid the pig pen, but I still do occasionally chit
chat on CB ch. 38 LSB and 40 USB...and no swine present. As a matter
of fact, I worked a guy on ch. 38 LSB earlier this evening who ended
up asking me to QSY to 28.440 MHz. I happily complied. ;-)

Don't even think anyone that is a real ham cares what goes
on there.

Very much false.

Let alone wants to operate there.

See above.

If you don't like that. Tough...thats the fact jack.

Doesn't bother me one iota as it's very far from factual.

Dan/W4NTI

73 de Bert
WA2SI

"Dan/W4NTI" wrote in message ...
"Bert Craig" wrote in message
...

Nah, you'll get all kinds of excuses wrt how unwieldy and expensive VHF
gear
would've been back in 1958. But you know what...the manufacturers would've
worked that ou and historically ALWAYS have. That really wasn't the FCC's
job, it was, and still is, the job of the manufacturers.

Your arguement dont doesn't hold water Bert. There was a CB band on UHF back then.
It was in the 400 mhz range FM and was called Class A.

Dan/W4NTI

I remember it, Dan. Now dig a little further and research when that
band came into being and why it was subsequently reassigned. Then tell
me a little more about "my arguement." ;-)

73 de Bert
WA2SI

"Brian Kelly" wrote in message
m...
"Bert Craig" wrote in message
.net...
"Brian Kelly" wrote in message
om...
(WA8ULX) wrote in message
...
Do Hams get 11 Meters Back, as soon as all the CBers upgrade to
there
Free
Handout Ham Licenses?


We didn't "lose" 11M, we just had use CB reddios radios

It's "reddios" on 11M and radios on 12M and elsewhere. "When in Rome
do as the Romans do."

Sorry, Brian. Within the circles that I operate, It's "radios." (On both 11m
and the ham bands. YMMV.) FYI, folks here are QSX when they're monitoring
the frequency. I rarely hear the annoying "I'm QRT and on the side" anymore,
thank goodness. :-)

w3rv

--
73 de Bert
WA2SI

Kim W5TIT wrote:

Anyone who would forsake any communication venue
just doesn't have a clue for the value of that venue...

Kim W5TIT


Does that include CW?

I feel the same way about CB, Bert. There are ways to avoid the trash, and
that is on USB or LSB. Anyone who would forsake any communication venue
just doesn't have a clue for the value of that venue...


You would be outnumbered here by the number of dual-operators. I hear
CB'ers on ham and hams on CB every day of the week. And that's just
on sideband. I don't do AM anymore. Haven't for over 5 years.

Last night's net got overrun by noise, and we all went to the repeater.

On 5 Aug 2003 21:09:24 -0700, Bert Craig wrote:

Your arguement dont doesn't hold water Bert. There was a CB band on UHF back then.
It was in the 400 mhz range FM and was called Class A.

I remember it, Dan. Now dig a little further and research when that
band came into being and why it was subsequently reassigned. Then tell
me a little more about "my arguement." ;-)

It still exists - it's called GMRS.

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

On Tue, 05 Aug 2003 16:40:13 GMT, Bert Craig wrote:

Enforcement? Where's the beef?! Oh, it went to pay for that $400 hammer or
that $1,200 barracks toilet bowl.

Well, it's time to drag out Project Accounting 101 again. As I
posted elsewhere (with apologies to the CPAs and EAs if I used
incorrect terminology as to the accountimne methods in the
example):

The scoffers fail to remember (or understand) that the "$500
hammer" came about by allocation of contract overhead by line
item rather than by proportional item cost....

Follow the bouncing ball for a machine and a hammer needed to
maintain it:

Machine catalog cost = $ 10,000.00
Hammer catalog cost = $ 10.00
Total cost of material = $ 10,010.00
10% Contract overhead = $ 1,001.00
Total contract cost = $ 11,011.00

By Proportional Item Cost allocation method, overhead is allocated
proportionally:

Machine cost = $ 10,000 + 10% = $ 11.000
Hammer cost = $ 10 + 10% = 11
Total cost = $ 11,011

By Line Item allocation method, the total overhead is divided by
the number of line items, in this case 2:

Machine cost = $ 10,000 + $ 500.50 = $ 10,500.50
Hammer cost = $ 10 + $ 500.50 = $ 510.50
Total cost = $ 11,011.00

Note the "$ 500 hammer" in the example above !!

Same hammer, same contract cost, no extra charge for the asinine
comments by The Congress and The Press and The Critics.

As to where the enforcement money went, the nickle-nursers in The
Congress never appropriated it, and even if they would have, the past
three agency chairmen - the folks who have the power to allot the
funds inside the agency - had neither regard for nor understanding of
the need for field enforcement.

And that takes care of that.......

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

"Bert Craig" wrote in message
m...
"Dan/W4NTI" wrote in message
...
"Bert Craig" wrote in message
...

Nah, you'll get all kinds of excuses wrt how unwieldy and expensive
VHF
gear
would've been back in 1958. But you know what...the manufacturers
would've
worked that ou and historically ALWAYS have. That really wasn't the
FCC's
job, it was, and still is, the job of the manufacturers.

Your arguement dont doesn't hold water Bert. There was a CB band on
UHF back then.
It was in the 400 mhz range FM and was called Class A.

Dan/W4NTI

I remember it, Dan. Now dig a little further and research when that
band came into being and why it was subsequently reassigned. Then tell
me a little more about "my arguement." ;-)

73 de Bert
WA2SI

As I remember, and Im not going to bother 'researching'. Class A CB was
available when Class D CB was initiated. That was the late 50s.

Dan/W4NTI

"Kim W5TIT" wrote in message
...
"Bert Craig" wrote in message
om...
"Dan/W4NTI" wrote in message
...

If all you CBers with a ham license want to go back and play in the
pig
pen.
Then go ahead.

No thanks, Dan. I avoid the pig pen, but I still do occasionally chit
chat on CB ch. 38 LSB and 40 USB...and no swine present. As a matter
of fact, I worked a guy on ch. 38 LSB earlier this evening who ended
up asking me to QSY to 28.440 MHz. I happily complied. ;-)

Don't even think anyone that is a real ham cares what goes
on there.

Very much false.

Let alone wants to operate there.

See above.

If you don't like that. Tough...thats the fact jack.

Doesn't bother me one iota as it's very far from factual.

Dan/W4NTI

73 de Bert
WA2SI


I feel the same way about CB, Bert. There are ways to avoid the trash,
and
that is on USB or LSB. Anyone who would forsake any communication venue
just doesn't have a clue for the value of that venue...

Kim W5TIT



There is no value to CB. Whenever something good is tried the idiots trash
it. Jam it, play music and tones all over it.

When I heard that while working on a CB radio, I just turned the RF gain
down and went on.

Unfortunatly now I hear the exact same tactics on ham radio. Gee I wonder
where that came from ???

Dan/W4NTI