Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Subject: operator's licence vs. station licence
From: PAMNO (N2EY) Date: 10/19/2004 4:42 AM Central Standard Time Message-id: (Until 1949, mobile operation was not allowed below 25 MHz...(SNIP) Considering that you almost needed a seperate trailer to carry the gear, this was hardly an impediment! ...(UNSNIP).. and for a time in the 1930s, portable operation required a special "Z" or "ZZ" license with four letters after the number. W6AM got callsign "W6ZZAM" for portable use.) I wonder who came up with that idea? 73 Steve, K4YZ |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Subject: operator's licence vs. station licence
From: (N2EY) Date: 10/19/2004 4:04 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: (Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ... Subject: operator's licence vs. station licence From: PAMNO (N2EY) Date: 10/19/2004 4:42 AM Central Standard Time Message-id: (Until 1949, mobile operation was not allowed below 25 MHz...(SNIP) Considering that you almost needed a seperate trailer to carry the gear, this was hardly an impediment! Not really. Look at an ARC-5 receiver, and how much could be packed into a small space using mid-1930s technology. Hams could, and did, build very compact equipment without "miniature" parts. ...(UNSNIP).. and for a time in the 1930s, portable operation required a special "Z" or "ZZ" license with four letters after the number. W6AM got callsign "W6ZZAM" for portable use.) I wonder who came up with that idea? The govt. was very cautious in those days about such things. Spies and all that. Ya thik a spy would apply for a license in ANY radio service, Jim? Steve, K4YZ |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Subject: operator's licence vs. station licence
From: (Steve Robeson K4CAP) Date: 10/19/2004 8:08 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: Subject: operator's licence vs. station licence From: (N2EY) Date: 10/19/2004 4:04 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: (Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ... Subject: operator's licence vs. station licence From: PAMNO (N2EY) Date: 10/19/2004 4:42 AM Central Standard Time Message-id: (Until 1949, mobile operation was not allowed below 25 MHz...(SNIP) Considering that you almost needed a seperate trailer to carry the gear, this was hardly an impediment! Not really. Look at an ARC-5 receiver, and how much could be packed into a small space using mid-1930s technology. Hams could, and did, build very compact equipment without "miniature" parts. Hmmmmmm. For some reason the response I put here didn't "take". "I was being facetious, Jim". There we go! 73 Steve, K4YZ |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Ya think a spy would apply for a license in ANY radio service, Jim? Depending on the situation, a ham license could be a good "cover story" for a spy with transmitting equipment. The FCC did shut down all ham bands during WW2... |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Subject: operator's licence vs. station licence
From: Robert Casey Date: 10/20/2004 12:19 AM Central Standard Time Message-id: Ya think a spy would apply for a license in ANY radio service, Jim? Depending on the situation, a ham license could be a good "cover story" for a spy with transmitting equipment. The FCC did shut down all ham bands during WW2... But then that "cover story" only provides the government with a "head's up" as to where the radio equipment is, Robert...Still doesn't make sense. Brief transmissions from low power, mobile (portable) facilities makes more sense. 73 Steve, K4YZ |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
In article , Robert Casey
writes: Ya think a spy would apply for a license in ANY radio service, Jim? Depending on the situation, a ham license could be a good "cover story" for a spy with transmitting equipment. The FCC did shut down all ham bands during WW2... During WW1, too. In fact, during WW1, all amateur radio equipment had to be disabled - receiving as well as transmitting. In 1940, more than a year before Pearl Harbor, all US hams were required to either take a loyalty oath or turn in their licenses. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
In article , PAMNO
(N2EY) writes: During WW1, too. In fact, during WW1, all amateur radio equipment had to be disabled - receiving as well as transmitting. Right...you were there... In 1940, more than a year before Pearl Harbor, all US hams were required to either take a loyalty oath or turn in their licenses. Right...you did, too...right? I took an oath on entering the U.S. Army on 13 Mar 52...to defend the Constitution of the United States of America...with my life if needs be. That is how I served my country, the USA, for the next 8 years. You "served your country" in "other ways." Right? What other "ways?" By becoming a professional newsgroupie? "Ramming Speed! Full speed ahead, bow-on to that berg!" Tsk. Someone put a bow hitch in your Bowditch. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
PAMNO (N2EY) wrote in message ...
In article , Robert Casey writes: Ya think a spy would apply for a license in ANY radio service, Jim? Depending on the situation, a ham license could be a good "cover story" for a spy with transmitting equipment. The FCC did shut down all ham bands during WW2... During WW1, too. In fact, during WW1, all amateur radio equipment had to be disabled - receiving as well as transmitting. In 1940, more than a year before Pearl Harbor, all US hams were required to either take a loyalty oath or turn in their licenses. 73 de Jim, N2EY ------------- ------------- From: N2EY ) Subject: Excellent ARRL proposal View this article only Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.policy Date: 2004-01-25 12:31:04 PST In article , (Brian Kelly) writes: (N2EY) wrote in message ... In article , (Brian Kelly) writes: go thru to get on the air. There were neighborhood radio clubs which didn't allow full voting memberships to Novices and Techs . . . And in the mid-60s there were still some who did similar things. Indeed, there were Advanceds who looked down on Generals, Generals who looked down on Conditionals, Conditionals who looked down on Techs, and Techs who looked down on Novices. Etc. And it wasn't just kids vs. adults, either. Yessir, It's 2004 and it's **still** out there. Guy was up late last year for the vote on approving his membership application into The Group (the 43rd & Kingsessing "Group" we're both familair with yes?) You mean the one where the attendance sheet looks like the DXCC Honor Roll? and somebody asked "what license class does he have?" His sponser: "Uhhh . . Advanced." Then he ducked. Immediate 180dBA noise level from the Back Benchers, "what the hell is this guy's problem?" Well, what IS his problem? That group is heavily focused on DX and contesting - particularly DX contesting. They're "a bit competitive".... Anything less than an Extra is a big competitive disadvantage in DX contesting. Like not being able to work split. So why doesn't the guy get one? Even if he only works 'phone, all he need do is pass element 4. And he's had almost 4 years. No, wait, that's not a good reason. Those writtens are really tough. More than 4 years ago, (Jan 19, 2000, to be exact) a certain verbose nonham here said he was going for Extra "right out of the box". But no ham license of any class yet. And this nonham says he's a "radio PROFESSIONAL".... Maybe he should apply to The Group. I'd like to attend that meeting.... Then as now, they were few - but noisy. Maybe it was different where you were, Dan. It's all just cycles Dan and the 1968 maneuver was not the first cycle by any means and welcome to the current cycle. There will be others. Circle Game. Dit-dit! 73 de Jim, N2EY |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Subject: operator's licence vs. station licence
From: (William) Date: 10/20/2004 6:58 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: (N2EY) wrote in message ... In article , Robert Casey writes: Ya think a spy would apply for a license in ANY radio service, Jim? Depending on the situation, a ham license could be a good "cover story" for a spy with transmitting equipment. The FCC did shut down all ham bands during WW2... During WW1, too. In fact, during WW1, all amateur radio equipment had to be disabled - receiving as well as transmitting. In 1940, more than a year before Pearl Harbor, all US hams were required to either take a loyalty oath or turn in their licenses. 73 de Jim, N2EY ------------- ------------- From: N2EY ) Subject: Excellent ARRL proposal View this article only Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.policy Date: 2004-01-25 12:31:04 PST In article , (Brian Kelly) writes: (N2EY) wrote in message ... In article , (Brian Kelly) writes: go thru to get on the air. There were neighborhood radio clubs which didn't allow full voting memberships to Novices and Techs . . . And in the mid-60s there were still some who did similar things. Indeed, there were Advanceds who looked down on Generals, Generals who looked down on Conditionals, Conditionals who looked down on Techs, and Techs who looked down on Novices. Etc. And it wasn't just kids vs. adults, either. Yessir, It's 2004 and it's **still** out there. Guy was up late last year for the vote on approving his membership application into The Group (the 43rd & Kingsessing "Group" we're both familair with yes?) You mean the one where the attendance sheet looks like the DXCC Honor Roll? and somebody asked "what license class does he have?" His sponser: "Uhhh . . Advanced." Then he ducked. Immediate 180dBA noise level from the Back Benchers, "what the hell is this guy's problem?" Well, what IS his problem? That group is heavily focused on DX and contesting - particularly DX contesting. They're "a bit competitive".... Anything less than an Extra is a big competitive disadvantage in DX contesting. Like not being able to work split. So why doesn't the guy get one? Even if he only works 'phone, all he need do is pass element 4. And he's had almost 4 years. No, wait, that's not a good reason. Those writtens are really tough. More than 4 years ago, (Jan 19, 2000, to be exact) a certain verbose nonham here said he was going for Extra "right out of the box". But no ham license of any class yet. And this nonham says he's a "radio PROFESSIONAL".... Maybe he should apply to The Group. I'd like to attend that meeting.... Then as now, they were few - but noisy. Maybe it was different where you were, Dan. It's all just cycles Dan and the 1968 maneuver was not the first cycle by any means and welcome to the current cycle. There will be others. Circle Game. Dit-dit! 73 de Jim, N2EY I just KNOW there was a reason you posted the SAME post under two different threads, but I'll be darned if I know what it is. And I'm trying to figure out how some club meeting int the 1960's has anything to do with what's going on today. Some generic club, with generic members, making generic comments that may or may not be germane. Whew. Steve, K4YZ |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
RILEY SAYS K1MAN BROADCASTS ARE LEGAL | Policy | |||
FCC Amateur Radio Enforcement Letters for the Period Ending May 1, 2004 | General | |||
Ohio/Penn DX Bulletin #617 | Dx | |||
Ohio/Penn DX Bulletin #617 | Dx | |||
Ohio/Penn DX Bulletin #617 | General |