Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#22
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Dave Heil wrote in message ...
N2EY wrote: In article , Dave Heil writes: The license is the least of it. Setting up a station and actually operating it, without government or corporate backing is the bigger challenge these days. His "big time" operations always had government or corporate backing. His ONLY operating has always been dependent upon the STATION license or other federal grant or approval. That grant has always specified the mode and power. Lennie has never had the discretion of choosing the mode, time, power or application other thanwhat the grant allowed. Poor Bill Cross. I don't think Bill suffers from Len's copious output. He likely glosses over when his eyes glaze over. I imagine a person in Mr Cross' position can seperate the bull from the bullstuff. His protestations to the contrary, Lennie's own "replies" are pretty much "kill the messenger" kinda stuff. - FCC got about 2500 comments on 98-143, the last big restructuring. Back in the mid-1960s, FCC got over 6000 comments on "incentive licensing", most of them from individuals, even though there was no ECFS back then and all commentary was plain old words-on-paper. Did Leonard comment on incentive licensing? I don't know. His recall of that regulatory proceeding is quite innaccurate. His declared interest in amateur radio would have taken him back to that era. I "have an interest" in learning Japanese. I know about a half-dozen words in that language. I'm "interested" in learning to weld. I know three people with welders. Don't forget "My best friend is an Army buddy who is a Ham..." - ARRL lobbied to increase the code test speed from 10 to 12.5 wpm in 1936. That was the last time ARRL lobbied for an increase in code test speeds. Indeed, the 1963 ARRL incentive licensing proposal called for no increase in code test speeds (full privileges would have been allowed to Advanceds under that plan) and ARRL *opposed* the FCC idea of a new 16 wpm test for "Amateur First Class" which FCC wanted in 1965. So the mythical "Church of St. Hiram" isn't at all as Len has attempted to portray it? If you mean the ARRL, its policy and operations are quite different than what Len portrays. I do mean the ARRL. I share your view. Tritto on the ditto. 73 Steve, K4YZ |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
ARRL Propose New License Class & Code-Free HF Access | Antenna | |||
ARRL Walks Away From Bandwidth Restrictions | Dx | |||
ARRL Walks Away From Bandwidth Restrictions | General | |||
ARRL Walks Away From Bandwidth Restrictions | Dx |