"Chuck Harris" wrote in message
...
Scott Dorsey wrote:
Earl Needham wrote:

What I don't understand is why ANY ham would ever use UPS after what
they did to the 220 MHz band a few years ago.


Good point. And the MOST tragic part of it is that after they took the
bandwidth, they decided not to use it.
--scott


Of course, UPS only asked for the bandwidth. It was the FCC
and congress that gave them what they asked for. What UPS wanted
to do was perfectly valid, and a good idea too. If there is any
blame to pass out, it rightfully belongs to the FCC and congress.

Is there anyone who hasn't ultimately benefited from the ability
to track their packages? UPS forged the way, but all shippers
now provide the capability. It just happened that the existing
cell phone infrastructure was a more practical way of providing the
tracking service than was building an entirely new infrastructure
on 220MHz... something that, in hindsight, the FCC should have
realized.

-Chuck

The FCC is Reactive not Proactive. The latter would require thought.

--

Clif Holland KA5IPF
www.avvid.com

On Sun, 30 Oct 2005 16:26:51 GMT, Clif Holland wrote:

The FCC is Reactive not Proactive. The latter would require thought.

The latter requires commitment on the part of very high level
management, all political appointees who do not understand what
the agency does in the field nor why resources (personnel and
equipment) should be expended on it.

I say that as a long-retired FCC field enforcement manager who is
not charmed by what the agency has become lately.

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

From a Clearing in the Silicon Forest
Beaverton (Washington County) Oregon

Not picking on the "grunts" but the upper level would be hard pressed to
find the bathroom.

--

Clif Holland KA5IPF
www.avvid.com


"Phil Kane" wrote in message
ast.net...
On Sun, 30 Oct 2005 16:26:51 GMT, Clif Holland wrote:

The FCC is Reactive not Proactive. The latter would require thought.

The latter requires commitment on the part of very high level
management, all political appointees who do not understand what
the agency does in the field nor why resources (personnel and
equipment) should be expended on it.

I say that as a long-retired FCC field enforcement manager who is
not charmed by what the agency has become lately.

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

From a Clearing in the Silicon Forest
Beaverton (Washington County) Oregon

Phil Kane wrote:


I say that as a long-retired FCC field enforcement manager who is
not charmed by what the agency has become lately.


Hmmm....I probably have a notice here somewhere with your autograph

Does the FCC still go after Novices with 40m harmonics falling out of
band on 10 meters or has the freeband CB QRM covered up all of the
violations?

Just kidding. Well, no...not really.

-Bill ex-WN4SXX