Could you support making the No-code license one year non-renewable?
 

"Tom Ring" wrote in message
.. .
Dee Flint wrote:


That last statement is a fallacy. The digital modes are wiped out by
conditions that will still permit CW to be used. Even SSB can sometimes
be used when conditions wipe out the digital. I have repeatedly said and
now I
snip
Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Wrong. There are digital modes that handle every distortion type that
exists. You just have to pick the correct one.

tom
K0TAR

Name them. I've not found any one mode that can handle all conditions of
distortion. However, I have found from time to time that distortion can be
severe enough at times to wipe out all digital modes even if you try to
switch from mode to mode. Occasionally it can wipe out CW.

I repeat: EVERY MODE HAS ITS ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES. To deny that is
foolish.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Could you support making the No-code license one year non-renewable?
 

Tom Ring wrote:

Dee Flint wrote:


That last statement is a fallacy. The digital modes are wiped out by
conditions that will still permit CW to be used. Even SSB can
sometimes be used when conditions wipe out the digital. I have
repeatedly said and now I

snip

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE


Wrong. There are digital modes that handle every distortion type that
exists. You just have to pick the correct one.

tom
K0TAR

And one of the simplest ones that works pretty much every time CW does
is Hellschreiber.

tom
K0TAR

Could you support making the No-code license one year non-renewable?
 

"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
...
Dee Flint wrote:
The digital modes are wiped out by conditions that will still permit CW
to be used.

CW is wiped out by conditions that will still permit
PACTOR II to be used, e.g. I cannot hear any signals
at all on an apparently dead band and a friend in
Germany pops up on the screen.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Everyone keeps ignoring that I maintain that: EVERY MODE HAS ITS ADVANTAGES
AND DISADVANTAGES. I keep repeating this but no one cares to acknowledge
such a plain and simple fact. Why is that? Are you all so set on bashing
what you don't like? Are you all so set on trying to prove that your
favorite mode, whatever it may be, is the best?

Unless Pactor II has recently been put into the public domain, it requires
buying proprietary hardware to run it instead of using a simple inexpensive
sound card interface with commonly available software. Most hams are not
thrilled with the idea of proprietary hardware and data modes.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Could you support making the No-code license one year non-renewable?
 

"Tom Ring" wrote in message
.. .
Tom Ring wrote:

Dee Flint wrote:


That last statement is a fallacy. The digital modes are wiped out by
conditions that will still permit CW to be used. Even SSB can sometimes
be used when conditions wipe out the digital. I have repeatedly said
and now I

snip

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE


Wrong. There are digital modes that handle every distortion type that
exists. You just have to pick the correct one.

tom
K0TAR

And one of the simplest ones that works pretty much every time CW does is
Hellschreiber.

tom
K0TAR

"Pretty much" is not the same as "always". You are hedging your statement.
Either it does or it doesn't.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Could you support making the No-code license one year non-renewable?
 

Dee Flint wrote:
I repeat: EVERY MODE HAS ITS ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES. To deny that is
foolish.

Every brand of vehicle has its advantages and disadvantages
but I don't see the government forcing anyone to buy a
Chevrolet. What is wrong with a free market of modes?
Nobody is forcing anyone not to use CW.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Could you support making the No-code license one year non-renewable?
 

Dee Flint wrote:


Name them. I've not found any one mode that can handle all conditions of
distortion. However, I have found from time to time that distortion can be
severe enough at times to wipe out all digital modes even if you try to
switch from mode to mode. Occasionally it can wipe out CW.

I repeat: EVERY MODE HAS ITS ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES. To deny that is
foolish.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE


I didn't mean to imply that there is a single mode that will handle all
types of distortion, just that there are specific modes available that
handle each type. And somethimes absolutely no digital mode or CW can
get through, but that circumstance happens less often as time goes on,
the exception being CW's cacpbilities aren't changing.

Your shouted statement is correct.

tom
K0TAR

Could you support making the No-code license one year non-renewable?
 

Cecil Moore wrote:
wrote:
I support licensing for life.

Do you have something against dead people?
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

You have a ghoul friend, Cecil? :-)

Could you support making the No-code license one year non-renewable?
 

"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
...
Dee Flint wrote:
I repeat: EVERY MODE HAS ITS ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES. To deny that
is foolish.

Every brand of vehicle has its advantages and disadvantages
but I don't see the government forcing anyone to buy a
Chevrolet. What is wrong with a free market of modes?
Nobody is forcing anyone not to use CW.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

That analogy doesn't work at all.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Could you support making the No-code license one year non-renewable?
 

Dee Flint wrote:

"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
...

Dee Flint wrote:

I repeat: EVERY MODE HAS ITS ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES. To deny that
is foolish.

Every brand of vehicle has its advantages and disadvantages
but I don't see the government forcing anyone to buy a
Chevrolet. What is wrong with a free market of modes?
Nobody is forcing anyone not to use CW.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com


That analogy doesn't work at all.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE



Why not? Picking what you want to use isn't okay? You don't want
alternatives to CW. Or alternatives to digital? Or , for that matter,
alternatives to voice modes.

So for you choice is bad?

tom
K0TAR

Could you support making the No-code license one year non-renewable?
 

Dee Flint wrote:
"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
Every brand of vehicle has its advantages and disadvantages
but I don't see the government forcing anyone to buy a
Chevrolet. What is wrong with a free market of modes?
Nobody is forcing anyone not to use CW.

That analogy doesn't work at all.

I should have said "4WD" instead of "Chevrolet".
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Could you support making the No-code license one year non-renewable?
 

"Tom Ring" wrote in message
.. .
Dee Flint wrote:

"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
...

Dee Flint wrote:

I repeat: EVERY MODE HAS ITS ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES. To deny
that is foolish.

Every brand of vehicle has its advantages and disadvantages
but I don't see the government forcing anyone to buy a
Chevrolet. What is wrong with a free market of modes?
Nobody is forcing anyone not to use CW.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com


That analogy doesn't work at all.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Why not? Picking what you want to use isn't okay? You don't want
alternatives to CW. Or alternatives to digital? Or , for that matter,
alternatives to voice modes.

So for you choice is bad?

tom
K0TAR

Different brands of cars are not dissimilar enough to compare to different
types of modes so the analogy doesn't work. The different brands of cars
(Chevy, Ford, Chrysler, etc) are more like comparing a Bencher paddle to an
MFJ paddle to a Kent paddle, etc. If you use CW, you pick your own type of
paddle. If you drive, you pick your own type of car.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Could you support making the No-code license one year non-renewable?
 

"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
. ..
Dee Flint wrote:
"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
Every brand of vehicle has its advantages and disadvantages
but I don't see the government forcing anyone to buy a
Chevrolet. What is wrong with a free market of modes?
Nobody is forcing anyone not to use CW.

That analogy doesn't work at all.

I should have said "4WD" instead of "Chevrolet".
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

That doesn't work either. That comparison would be like comparing a
straight key to an electronic keyer.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Could you support making the No-code license one year non-renewable?
 

funkbastler wrote:
On Sat, 09 Sep 2006 22:19:21 GMT, Slow Code wrote:



There is no arguing that. KB9RQZ is living proof.


Well, I don't know KB9RQZ - but I'll say thay he's entitled to have
and express his opinions, same as you and I, whether you or I agree
with him or not.

Y'all try to stay away from the ad hominem stuff now - it never convinces
anybody of anything. Just ****es 'em off.

There's nothing "ad hominem" about comments directed towards
Morkie the Moron, KB9RQZ. His CV of idiocity is volumous.

Steve, K4YZ

Could you support making the No-code license one year non-renewable?
 

Dee Flint wrote:
"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
I should have said "4WD" instead of "Chevrolet".

That doesn't work either. That comparison would be like comparing a
straight key to an electronic keyer.

It works perfectly. A 4WD could save your life when
it would be lost in a 2WD. So why shouldn't the
government mandate ownership of 4WD's only?
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Could you support making the No-code license one year non-renewable?
 

"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
.. .
Dee Flint wrote:
"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
I should have said "4WD" instead of "Chevrolet".

That doesn't work either. That comparison would be like comparing a
straight key to an electronic keyer.

It works perfectly. A 4WD could save your life when
it would be lost in a 2WD. So why shouldn't the
government mandate ownership of 4WD's only?
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Still doesn't work since the FCC doesn't mandate use of CW.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Could you support making the No-code license one year non-renewable?
 

Dee Flint wrote:
Still doesn't work since the FCC doesn't mandate use of CW.

But it does mandate ownership of CW. Think about it.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Could you support making the No-code license one year non-renewable?
 

Cecil Moore wrote:
Dee Flint wrote:
Still doesn't work since the FCC doesn't mandate use of CW.

But it does mandate ownership of CW. Think about it.

Should have been: But it does mandate ownership of
a CW modem.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Could you support making the No-code license one year non-renewable?
 

"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
.. .
Dee Flint wrote:
Still doesn't work since the FCC doesn't mandate use of CW.

But it does mandate ownership of CW. Think about it.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Not if you're not into amateur radio.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Could you support making the No-code license one year non-renewable?
 

Dee Flint wrote:

"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
.. .

Dee Flint wrote:

Still doesn't work since the FCC doesn't mandate use of CW.

But it does mandate ownership of CW. Think about it.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com


Not if you're not into amateur radio.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE



Dee

Keep beating that horse. It may be dead, but I'm sure that with your
enthusiastic efforts it will be on its feet in no time.

tom
K0TAR

Could you support making the No-code license one year non-renewable?
 

"Barry OGrady" wrote in message
...
Code has been eliminated completely as a requirement for amateur radio
since 2 years ago, and its not coming back. I have a full call with no
code.

Barry

While that is true in your country, it is not yet true here. The
international conference simply left it up to each individual country as to
whether or not to require it.

Dee, N8UZE

Could you support making the No-code license one year non-renewable?
 

Dee Flint wrote:
"Barry OGrady" wrote in message
...
Code has been eliminated completely as a requirement for amateur radio
since 2 years ago, and its not coming back. I have a full call with no
code.

Barry

While that is true in your country, it is not yet true here. The
international conference simply left it up to each individual country as to
whether or not to require it.
the conference ended the intertional requireent Dee as the FCC has
started the paperwork with stated intent of doing the same here

Could you support making the No-code license one year non-renewable?
 

"Barry OGrady" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 10 Sep 2006 08:26:28 -0400, "Dee Flint"
wrote:

"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
y.net...
funkbastler wrote:
No, but it darned sure wouldn't hurt to make sure they could drive
something with a standard transmission.

Would you have 1000 people learn to drive a standard
transmission even though only one person out of those
1000 people benefits from it? The cost/benefit ratio
is extremely high.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Someone skilled in driving a vehicle with a manual transmission and
actually
using it can reap a number of performance benefits. These include
improved
gas mileage, better passing performance, better performance in hilly
terrain, etc. If people were required to learn how to drive vehicles with
manual transmissions, more of them might actually choose to drive such
vehicles.

Here most cars run on petrol rather than gas still.

Dee, N8UZE

Barry
=====
Home page
http://members.iinet.net.au/~barry.og

In American English, "gas" is short for gasoline. Gasoline is the same as
petrol. The term petrol is generally not used here.