Hmm Brain responding to a post i haven't seen yet

b.b. wrote:
K4YZ wrote:
an_old_friend wrote:
Dee Flint wrote:
"an_old_friend" wrote in message
ups.com...

In reading the newsgroup lately I get the impression that the the
relitvely new 60 band does NOT premit Morse Encoded CW in at least
some region of the band.

Is my impression corect.

The 60 meter band is USB voice only. NO form of digital or other non-voice
is allowed.

Thanks for the info

interesting that a band rquiring code testing forbids code use

That "band" is shared with non-Amateur users both federal and
civil.

Yes I realize that so?


Don't they know the code? I thought the original reason to learn Morse
Code was because other users could understand and communicate i.e., get
off my frequency, with amateurs.

Also, (is this guy REALLY this stupid...?!?!) the "60 meter band"
DOES fall below 30Mhz, Markie.

Actually, you are. He is the one who stated, "interesting that a band
rquiring code testing forbids code use." Morse Code testing is for
"below 30MHz."

well said

The FCC could of course have allowed it to techs and frankly they
should have

FYI...Since you've been in a time warp (and obviously enjoy making
a fool out of yourself rather than use a search engine to do some
research),

You're the one who made the mistake then attacked Mark over it. Makes
you the idiot.

the United States STILL requires that an Amateur licensee to
have passed Element 1 to operate below 30Mhz.

No it does not it requires them to be tested on bands assigned to the
general and extra bands


Must be why he said, "interesting that a band rquiring code testing
forbids code use." Too bad you missed it.

Read the regs and be enlightened...Or is reading "not in
vogue"...?!?!

Steve, K4YZ

Read the post and be enlightened, instead of going off on yet another
Robeson rant.

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


Dee Flint wrote:
"an_old_friend" wrote in message
roups.com...


K4YZ wrote:

Good thing you didn't ask about power limitations...he would've
had to use a REAL technical term...ERP...That would ahve REALLY
confused you!

you still can't seem to spell have today Stevie what is it?

the reason I did not ask is of course I did not need to know, I also
assumed it was 1.5 KW like the rest of the ARS, but then since i am not
using the freqs it doesn't matter

But the rest of the ARS is not 1.5kw. The 30m band is limited to 200
wats
max. All operators are limited to the old novice power output in the
old
novice portions of 15m, 40m, and 80m.

Your point? power was never the issue

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE


I believe that the point was being made that you appear virtually clueless
about legal operations permitted in the amateur bands. What started out as
a whine about CW rapidly changed when it became apparent that you also seem
ignorant of power limitations in varous other amateur bands.

For what it is worth, there are other limitations that may come into play if
you are a licensed amateur in close proximity to a radio telescope (the
Aricibo site in Puerto Rico is but one where other limitations may apply).


73 from Rochester, NY
Jim AA2QA

Jim Hampton wrote:
"an_old_friend" wrote in message
oups.com...


Dee Flint wrote:
"an_old_friend" wrote in message
roups.com...


K4YZ wrote:

Good thing you didn't ask about power limitations...he would've
had to use a REAL technical term...ERP...That would ahve REALLY
confused you!

you still can't seem to spell have today Stevie what is it?

the reason I did not ask is of course I did not need to know, I also
assumed it was 1.5 KW like the rest of the ARS, but then since i am not
using the freqs it doesn't matter

But the rest of the ARS is not 1.5kw. The 30m band is limited to 200
wats
max. All operators are limited to the old novice power output in the
old
novice portions of 15m, 40m, and 80m.

Your point? power was never the issue

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE



Break

I believe that the point was being made that you appear virtually clueless
about legal operations permitted in the amateur bands. What started out as
a whine about CW rapidly changed when it became apparent that you also seem
ignorant of power limitations in varous other amateur bands.

Why should I care at this point what limtis apply at HF

Ignorant perhaps caring what they are on hf absolutely

What happened is a smart ass decide to show off and not bother
answering the real question was cw permited.



For what it is worth, there are other limitations that may come into play if
you are a licensed amateur in close proximity to a radio telescope (the
Aricibo site in Puerto Rico is but one where other limitations may apply).

yea I know that too your point

I see you are just trying to show you know better. as I said I don't
realy care about power limits at HF at this time,

Why should I care



73 from Rochester, NY
Jim AA2QA

I did answer your question, and I did so quite precisely. As a
licensed amateur, what part of "2K8J3E" don't you understand?

It's an FCC specification that essentially says "USB carrying
voice of frequencies 300 to 3KHz". Also the FCC specifies
a SSB channel frequency by the frequency in the center of
the transmitted RF spectra. Audio at 300Hz corresponds
to frequency "X-(2700/2)", 3KHz to "X+(2700/2)" where "X"
is the center of the channel. "X" would be 1650Hz higher than
the traditional ham radio method of specifying a USB frequency
(hams specify the frequency of the suppressed carrier). Aside
from 60M, the FCC doesn't specify how we are to specify our
frequencies; they just say "Here's your permitted bands for
SSB, keep all of your RF inside them". 60M is special in
that the FCC wanted hams to blend seamlessly with other existing
users (meaning that those other users could easily listen and talk
(say in emergencies) to us on their existing channelized equipment.
And we got these five specific channels because the other users
don't use them that much compared to other channels.

an_old_friend wrote:
K4YZ wrote:
an_old_friend wrote:
K=D8HB wrote:
"an_old_friend" wrote

In reading the newsgroup lately I get the impression that the the
relitvely new 60 band does NOT premit Morse Encoded CW in at lea=
st
some region of the band.

Is my impression corect.


There is no 60M "band". US amateurs are allocated 5 discreet 2K8J3=
E channels

Auf Anglish Bitte?

Why?

so it can be understood

I understood him fine the first time...OF course I KNOW a bit
about Amateur rules and regulations, the focus of this forum byt the
way, so it was a "no brainer".

You can't do English any better than you could Serbo-Croatian.

there is a lie, I Do English much better

No. You don't.

He answered your question exactly.

no he did not answer it the question was about CW

He absolutely answered your question. Precisely. Accurately.
Civilly.

I'd guess for your answer that Morse encoded Cw isn't allowed but you=
I
guess answering a question si too much for you

He did answer your question. Precisely.

no he did not answer it the question was about CW

He absolutely answered your question. Precisely. Accurately.
Civilly.

Perhaps your "higher standards" you refered to in another thread
aren't so high, eh?...

any standard is higher than standard of proof for yourself, even your
standard of proof for others

Well...You spelled all of the words correctly....Now if they were
just organized into a coherent sentence...

centered on 5332 kHz, 5348 kHz, 5368 kHz, 5373 kHz and 5405 kHz.

Geeze, Markie...He gave you the specific mode AND frequencies
authorized.

in gibberish

"Gibberish" to an idiot, perhaps.

Seems it's perfectly clear in Part 97.

So is this going to be another "rights" issue for you? Is the FCC
going to have to write a "Radio Rules for Dummies" book just for idiots
like you?

And then you don't even have the good courtesy to thank him.

I rarely thank people when they are being discourtesous

Then why didn't you thank Hans for giving you the information you
requested?

He gave you the EXACT frequencies and modes authorized on 60
meters and did so without a single abrasive, discourtesous adjective or
suggestion.

Good thing you didn't ask about power limitations...he would've
had to use a REAL technical term...ERP...That would ahve REALLY
confused you!

you still can't seem to spell have today Stevie what is it?

the reason I did not ask is of course I did not need to know...(SNIP)

So you just embarked on this mission to provide yet another
opportunity for us to make fun of you? Was it GOOD for you...?!?!

(UNSNIP)...I also
assumed it was 1.5 KW like the rest of the ARS, but then since i am not
using the freqs it doesn't matter

(1) If you're not "using the freqs", why the inquiry in the first
place, and

(2) There you go assuming again.

Look at all the embarrassment you could have saved yourself if you
had just put "Part 97" into the search engine and read it for yourself.

And if you had problems with the emission designators, well,
that's on line and public information too.

Just like your address is.

Steve, K4YZ

K4YZ wrote:
an_old_friend wrote:
K4YZ wrote:
an_old_friend wrote:
K=D8HB wrote:
"an_old_friend" wrote

In reading the newsgroup lately I get the impression that the t=
he
relitvely new 60 band does NOT premit Morse Encoded CW in at l=
east
some region of the band.

Is my impression corect.


There is no 60M "band". US amateurs are allocated 5 discreet 2K8=
J3E channels

Auf Anglish Bitte?

Why?

so it can be understood

I understood him fine the first time...OF course I KNOW a bit
about Amateur rules and regulations, the focus of this forum byt the
way, so it was a "no brainer".

You can't do English any better than you could Serbo-Croatian.

there is a lie, I Do English much better

No. You don't.

Bull**** another Stevie boy lie. I know nothing of SerboCroatian , I
know something of english therefore I know English much better


He answered your question exactly.

no he did not answer it the question was about CW

He absolutely answered your question. Precisely. Accurately.
Civilly.

no he answered it vaguely incompletely and arrogantly


I'd guess for your answer that Morse encoded Cw isn't allowed but y=
ou I
guess answering a question si too much for you

He did answer your question. Precisely.

no he did not answer it the question was about CW

He absolutely answered your question. Precisely. Accurately.
Civilly.

no he answered it vaguely incompletely and arrogantly

you realy like cuting and pasting I can do it to Stevie boy


Perhaps your "higher standards" you refered to in another thread
aren't so high, eh?...

any standard is higher than standard of proof for yourself, even your
standard of proof for others

Well...You spelled all of the words correctly....Now if they were
just organized into a coherent sentence...

it is perfectly coherent and in exactly proper for spoken english,
which the from i use online as I have said before, again and again


And of course it is true Any standard of proof is higher than yours for
yourself


centered on 5332 kHz, 5348 kHz, 5368 kHz, 5373 kHz and 5405 kHz.

Geeze, Markie...He gave you the specific mode AND frequencies
authorized.

in gibberish

"Gibberish" to an idiot, perhaps.

I suspectwith some effort i could PHDs to whom it be gibberish


Seems it's perfectly clear in Part 97.

So is this going to be another "rights" issue for you? Is the FCC
going to have to write a "Radio Rules for Dummies" book just for idiots
like you?

GIGO

Must you rant and rave so much


And then you don't even have the good courtesy to thank him.

I rarely thank people when they are being discourtesous

Then why didn't you thank Hans for giving you the information you
requested?

Because he didn't


He gave you the EXACT frequencies and modes authorized on 60
meters and did so without a single abrasive, discourtesous adjective or
suggestion.

he did not answer the question he rudely choose to answer a different
question

No one asked for freqs no asked about any mode beside CW


Good thing you didn't ask about power limitations...he would've
had to use a REAL technical term...ERP...That would ahve REALLY
confused you!

you still can't seem to spell have today Stevie what is it?

the reason I did not ask is of course I did not need to know...(SNIP)

So you just embarked on this mission to provide yet another
opportunity for us to make fun of you? Was it GOOD for you...?!?!

I did not and do not need to know what power levels are ok on 60 M I am
not allowed to transmit there

I don't ask for unneeded data


(UNSNIP)...I also
assumed it was 1.5 KW like the rest of the ARS, but then since i am not
using the freqs it doesn't matter

(1) If you're not "using the freqs", why the inquiry in the first
place, and

To determine if I was correctly following folks when it seemed that CW
has forbidden on a band that requires a CW test for use

I care about CW testing surely you have noticed


(2) There you go assuming again.

Look at all the embarrassment you could have saved yourself if you
had just put "Part 97" into the search engine and read it for yourself.

Bull****

A simple yes no instaed of reading through mind numbing legalese


And if you had problems with the emission designators, well,
that's on line and public information too.
=20
Just like your address is.
=20
Steve, K4YZ

) Look at all the embarrassment you could have saved yourself if you
)had just put "Part 97" into the search engine and read it for
yourself.

What embarrsihment are you refering to?

"an_old_friend" wrote

) Look at all the embarrassment you could have saved yourself if you
)had just put "Part 97" into the search engine and read it for
yourself.

What embarrsihment are you refering to?

Nobody refer(r)ed to any ambarrsihment.

73, de Hans, K0HB

an_old_friend wrote:
K4YZ wrote:

You can't do English any better than you could Serbo-Croatian.

there is a lie, I Do English much better

No. You don't.

Bull**** another Stevie boy lie. I know nothing of SerboCroatian , I
know something of english therefore I know English much better

Then prove it.

He answered your question exactly.

no he did not answer it the question was about CW

He absolutely answered your question. Precisely. Accurately.
Civilly.

no he answered it vaguely incompletely and arrogantly

Then you are without question or consideration an absolute liar.

He gave you the specific frequencies allowed and the mode allowed
on them. Simply saying "single side band" is not completely accurate.

I'd guess for your answer that Morse encoded Cw isn't allowed but you I
guess answering a question si too much for you

He did answer your question. Precisely.

no he did not answer it the question was about CW

He absolutely answered your question. Precisely. Accurately.
Civilly.

no he answered it vaguely incompletely and arrogantly

Then you are without question or consideration an absolute liar.

He gave you the specific frequencies allowed and the mode allowed
on them. Simply saying "single side band" is not completely accurate.

you realy like cuting and pasting I can do it to Stevie boy

Nope.

You really like repeating the same lie over and over.

My answer to the assertion is the same answer.

Perhaps your "higher standards" you refered to in another thread
aren't so high, eh?...

any standard is higher than standard of proof for yourself, even your
standard of proof for others

Well...You spelled all of the words correctly....Now if they were
just organized into a coherent sentence...

it is perfectly coherent and in exactly proper for spoken english,
which the from i use online as I have said before, again and again

No. It's not.

And of course it is true Any standard of proof is higher than yours for
yourself

Still senseless.

centered on 5332 kHz, 5348 kHz, 5368 kHz, 5373 kHz and 5405 kHz.

Geeze, Markie...He gave you the specific mode AND frequencies
authorized.

in gibberish

"Gibberish" to an idiot, perhaps.

I suspectwith some effort i could PHDs to whom it be gibberish

See what I mean...an idiot!

Seems it's perfectly clear in Part 97.

So is this going to be another "rights" issue for you? Is the FCC
going to have to write a "Radio Rules for Dummies" book just for idiots
like you?

GIGO

Must you rant and rave so much

You're the ranter and raver here, Mark.

You asked a question requiring specific information.

That question was answered, but then you insulted and demeaned the
person who provided it just becasue YOU are a feeble minded idiot.

GIGO doesn't apply. You were given the right information. You
simply were (and remain)too stupid to understand it.

And then you don't even have the good courtesy to thank him.

I rarely thank people when they are being discourtesous

Then why didn't you thank Hans for giving you the information you
requested?

Because he didn't

Then you are without question or consideration an absolute liar.

He gave you the specific frequencies allowed and the mode allowed
on them. Simply saying "single side band" is not completely accurate.

He gave you the EXACT frequencies and modes authorized on 60
meters and did so without a single abrasive, discourtesous adjective or
suggestion.

he did not answer the question he rudely choose to answer a different
question

Then you are without question or consideration an absolute liar.

He gave you the specific frequencies allowed and the mode allowed
on them. Simply saying "single side band" is not completely accurate.

No one asked for freqs no asked about any mode beside CW

Just admit you were too stupid to understand and to narrowminded
to take a second to process what was given you.

You reacted the way ALL spolied brats do.

So you just embarked on this mission to provide yet another
opportunity for us to make fun of you? Was it GOOD for you...?!?!

I did not and do not need to know what power levels are ok on 60 M I am
not allowed to transmit there

I don't ask for unneeded data

Good.

Because you obviously were too stupid to understand the data you
DID ask for.

(UNSNIP)...I also
assumed it was 1.5 KW like the rest of the ARS, but then since i am not
using the freqs it doesn't matter

(1) If you're not "using the freqs", why the inquiry in the first
place, and

To determine if I was correctly following folks when it seemed that CW
has forbidden on a band that requires a CW test for use

FCC regulations require Morse Code competency for ANY Amateur
operating on ANY frequency below 30Mhz.

I care about CW testing surely you have noticed

No...You care about getting as much as you can with as little
effort expended.

You proved that years ago.

(2) There you go assuming again.

Look at all the embarrassment you could have saved yourself if you
had just put "Part 97" into the search engine and read it for yourself.

Bull####

A simple yes no instaed of reading through mind numbing legalese

It was only mind numbing to you...Mind numbing because you were
either too stupid or too ignorant to understand it.

I say "stupid or ignorant" because you immeidately made a fool out
of yourself over the answer instead of doing two minutes worth of
research.

Nothing we didn't expect.

Steve, K4YZ

K=D8HB wrote:
"an_old_friend" wrote

) Look at all the embarrassment you could have saved yourself if you
)had just put "Part 97" into the search engine and read it for
yourself.

What embarrsihment are you refering to?

Nobody refer(r)ed to any ambarrsihment.
=20
73, de Hans, K0HB

Stevie did