Riley Hollingsworth speaks...
 

I think anyone over-looking the bigger picture has to suspect that HF
will, rather quickly, be taken from amateurs. The abundance of techs is
being created to drop the percentage of hams using HF. At some point I
suspect a "move" will be made on these all important HF bands and they
will be removed from amateur service.

I suspect that techs account for about 50% of activity on the bands
now--when that reaches 66%, and certainly 75%, I think HF will be
pulled...

Here is Hollingsworth on his "vision(s)", some may interpret it
differently:
http://www.wr6wr.com/newSite/article...longbeach.html

John

I doubt it HF is all but useless to the FCC they want peiecs of VHF etc
John Smith wrote:
I think anyone over-looking the bigger picture has to suspect that HF
will, rather quickly, be taken from amateurs. The abundance of techs is
being created to drop the percentage of hams using HF. At some point I
suspect a "move" will be made on these all important HF bands and they
will be removed from amateur service.

I suspect that techs account for about 50% of activity on the bands
now--when that reaches 66%, and certainly 75%, I think HF will be
pulled...

Here is Hollingsworth on his "vision(s)", some may interpret it
differently:
http://www.wr6wr.com/newSite/article...longbeach.html

John

"John Smith" wrote in message
...

Here is Hollingsworth on his "vision(s)", some may interpret it
differently:

John



The only "vision" Hollingsworth has is a lavish tax payer
finance retirement.

Lloyd:

I don't doubt that everything you do is as simple as it looks, I don't
think you are devious, cunning or stealthy--however, don't be fool
enough to think everyone else the same--you will make one grave error...

Yanno, my life is a conspiracy, and it is my family, my friends and me
against the world.

In my job, we have trade secrets and act in the companies best
interests--we don't disclose these interests or our long range
plans--however, you can bet that we do NOT feel obligated to look out
for others best interests--that is their responsibility...

.... perhaps you are just one simple guy--but you make a grave error if
you think that applies to all others... now, go back to sleep--don't
worry, be happy--others will take care of things for you...

John

"Lloyd" wrote in message
...

"John Smith" wrote in message
...

Here is Hollingsworth on his "vision(s)", some may interpret it
differently:

John



The only "vision" Hollingsworth has is a lavish tax payer
finance retirement.

old friend:

Well, I am a bit suspicious if my gov't is not worried about people here
firing up a rig and sending encoded text and documents to other
countries.

And, it has been my experience that if you are willing to give up rights
there will be no end to those taking them away.

However, I'd love to see that VHF rig you fire up to chat with the
Antarctica or the aussies on a reg basis with the sun spot cycle...
well, there is always moon bounce and the internet...

John

"an_old_friend" wrote in message
oups.com...

I doubt it HF is all but useless to the FCC they want peiecs of VHF
etc
John Smith wrote:
I think anyone over-looking the bigger picture has to suspect that HF
will, rather quickly, be taken from amateurs. The abundance of techs
is
being created to drop the percentage of hams using HF. At some point
I
suspect a "move" will be made on these all important HF bands and
they
will be removed from amateur service.

I suspect that techs account for about 50% of activity on the bands
now--when that reaches 66%, and certainly 75%, I think HF will be
pulled...

Here is Hollingsworth on his "vision(s)", some may interpret it
differently:
http://www.wr6wr.com/newSite/article...longbeach.html

John

Taking HF away from the ARS is not going to stop that or even affect it

it s howver VHF and UHF that comercail interest are interested in they
don't seem to want hf with its interesting varriations
John Smith wrote:
old friend:

Well, I am a bit suspicious if my gov't is not worried about people here
firing up a rig and sending encoded text and documents to other
countries.

And, it has been my experience that if you are willing to give up rights
there will be no end to those taking them away.

Which has wht to do with the topic

However, I'd love to see that VHF rig you fire up to chat with the
Antarctica or the aussies on a reg basis with the sun spot cycle...
well, there is always moon bounce and the internet...

John

"an_old_friend" wrote in message
oups.com...

I doubt it HF is all but useless to the FCC they want peiecs of VHF
etc
John Smith wrote:
I think anyone over-looking the bigger picture has to suspect that HF
will, rather quickly, be taken from amateurs. The abundance of techs
is
being created to drop the percentage of hams using HF. At some point
I
suspect a "move" will be made on these all important HF bands and
they
will be removed from amateur service.

I suspect that techs account for about 50% of activity on the bands
now--when that reaches 66%, and certainly 75%, I think HF will be
pulled...

Here is Hollingsworth on his "vision(s)", some may interpret it
differently:
http://www.wr6wr.com/newSite/article...longbeach.html

John

Our opinions differ, we shall now watch the future for the real
answer...

John

"an_old_friend" wrote in message
oups.com...

Taking HF away from the ARS is not going to stop that or even affect
it

it s howver VHF and UHF that comercail interest are interested in they
don't seem to want hf with its interesting varriations
John Smith wrote:
old friend:

Well, I am a bit suspicious if my gov't is not worried about people
here
firing up a rig and sending encoded text and documents to other
countries.

And, it has been my experience that if you are willing to give up
rights
there will be no end to those taking them away.

Which has wht to do with the topic

However, I'd love to see that VHF rig you fire up to chat with the
Antarctica or the aussies on a reg basis with the sun spot cycle...
well, there is always moon bounce and the internet...

John

"an_old_friend" wrote in message
oups.com...

I doubt it HF is all but useless to the FCC they want peiecs of VHF
etc
John Smith wrote:
I think anyone over-looking the bigger picture has to suspect that
HF
will, rather quickly, be taken from amateurs. The abundance of
techs
is
being created to drop the percentage of hams using HF. At some
point
I
suspect a "move" will be made on these all important HF bands and
they
will be removed from amateur service.

I suspect that techs account for about 50% of activity on the
bands
now--when that reaches 66%, and certainly 75%, I think HF will be
pulled...

Here is Hollingsworth on his "vision(s)", some may interpret it
differently:
http://www.wr6wr.com/newSite/article...longbeach.html

John

Although several years ago, Riley's comments are worth a look:

"This Amateur Radio service is serious business."

Not once in the speech is the word "hobby" used.


"...I know that when a natural disaster hits, they're [cell towers]
the first ones to go down. And the few that are remaining are jammed
and you can't get access. The people who are going to be taking care
of the real communications are sitting right here in this room. It's
the Amateur Radio service. And in the first few days, or the first few
hours of these multi-jurisdictional incidents, it's the amateurs who
keep things going."

"There was a big newspaper chain that had a reporter with headphones on
listening to the hurricane emergency net. That made us nervous. The
last thing we wanted was some bad publicity for the Amateur Radio
service anywhere."

"Our people that go to these ITU meetings will tell us that it's
often a personal embarassment to them when these countries play back
tapes of what they hear on 75 and 20 Meters in the American amateur
bands."

On the American 'phone subbands. Not CW/data subbands...

"It puts them in a very difficult position when they have to defend
examples of conduct that other countries hear."

Should be "'nuff said".....

73 de Jim, N2EY

If you are going to mouth off, stop top posting, and use the
correct headers.

73,

Lloyd


"John Smith" wrote in message
...
Lloyd:

I don't doubt that everything you do is as simple as it looks, I don't
think you are devious, cunning or stealthy--however, don't be fool enough
to think everyone else the same--you will make one grave error...

Yanno, my life is a conspiracy, and it is my family, my friends and me
against the world.

In my job, we have trade secrets and act in the companies best
interests--we don't disclose these interests or our long range
plans--however, you can bet that we do NOT feel obligated to look out for
others best interests--that is their responsibility...

... perhaps you are just one simple guy--but you make a grave error if you
think that applies to all others... now, go back to sleep--don't worry,
be happy--others will take care of things for you...

John

"Lloyd" wrote in message
...

"John Smith" wrote in message
...

Here is Hollingsworth on his "vision(s)", some may interpret it
differently:

John



The only "vision" Hollingsworth has is a lavish tax payer
finance retirement.

The HF bands are, many times, international in scope. This story is not
about the FCC, it is about international agreements.

What is said in the story is true; many 3rd world countries would love 80
meters as it would provide cheap communications (they don't have to pay to
build all the infrastructure of a telephone system to cover their country).
If the world community decides that 80/75 meters is to no longer be an
amateur allocations, the FCC will have nothing to say about it.

If you look at cell phones, you might get an idea of the extent of the
problem. In developed countries, cell phones have become big business. In
the U.S., every teenager "needs" one. It takes a lot of cell phone towers
to provide service, not to mention ever increasing needs of frequencies.

I believe that when I was first licensed (in 1962) amateurs could use any
frequency above 30 GHz. There was little gear that could function at all at
that frequency and dx records could be measured in yards or a few miles.
Nowadays, there are some amateur bands intermingled with other segments
going up to 300 GHz, at which point amateurs can use anything above 300 GHz.
300 GHz in far infra-red light!

Somehow, communications devices are going to have to become more efficient
at using available frequencies (amateurs included). Even assuming they do
(and they have become more band-width friendly), there will be pressure on
all users to use it (effectively) or loose it.

As to the FCC, they can easily reassign users at VHF and above as it doesn't
carry world-wide. Those segments are also in jeopardy by big business.
Note that the Supreme Court ruled that local governments can exercise their
right to take property (with compensation to the owners) and sell it to
someone else.

Big business and the Republicans rule.

Next time be careful of who you vote for.



73 from Rochester, NY
Jim AA2QA


"an_old_friend" wrote in message
oups.com...

I doubt it HF is all but useless to the FCC they want peiecs of VHF etc
John Smith wrote:
I think anyone over-looking the bigger picture has to suspect that HF
will, rather quickly, be taken from amateurs. The abundance of techs is
being created to drop the percentage of hams using HF. At some point I
suspect a "move" will be made on these all important HF bands and they
will be removed from amateur service.

I suspect that techs account for about 50% of activity on the bands
now--when that reaches 66%, and certainly 75%, I think HF will be
pulled...

Here is Hollingsworth on his "vision(s)", some may interpret it
differently:

http://www.wr6wr.com/newSite/article...longbeach.html

John