[600MRG] QST Article (Alan Cooper)

[Alan Cooper]

Re: QST Article (Alan Cooper)

 

Dyslexic reigns supreme, or they did not get that article proof and credible
sources checked before printing I guess..

Seems like a reprint and republish would be in order. A lot of people take
the QST publication as a credible source 

of information that affects all operators. It's kind of sad to see something
like this happen. (not that I want another

high pressure job like that).

 

Alan

 

Sent from my laptop

--------------------

 

 

 

Part 15? Try part 97

            

 

            Sent from my iPad

      _____________________________

From: Chris - KC0TKS <kc0tks at cmsdigital.net>

Sent: Monday, November 13, 2017 4:09 PM

Subject: Re: [600MRG] QST Article

To:  <600mrg at w7ekb.com>

 

 

My copy of Tile 47 CFR part 15? is obviously corrupted. it incorrectly
states that Part 15 stations "may not cause interference and must accept
interference from other sources. It also prohibits the operation of devices
once the operator is notified by the FCC that the device is causing
interference"

 

Someone made a huge mistake and got everything backwards.

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Message: 1

Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2017 15:37:32 -0500

From: John Andrews <w1tag at charter.net>

To: "Discussion of the Lowfer (US, European, & UK) and MedFer

      bands"      <lowfer at mailman.qth.net>, "600mrg at w7ekb.com"
<600mrg at w7ekb.com>

Subject: [600MRG] QST Article

Message-ID: <386ae712-8bde-194b-eff6-26be593082b6 at charter.net>

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed

 

In December, 2017 QST, page 68, there is an article on the opening of the
630 and 2200 meter bands in the U.S. I would like to correct a few things
related to my Amateur and previous Experimental operation on those bands.

 

1. I was never a participant in the ARRL 630 Meter Experiment. I obtained my
WD2XES (2200m) license directly in 2004, and was part of the group for
K2ORS' WE2XGR (630m) license later.

 

2. UTC issued a denial for 2200m operation at my Holden, MA QTH. They
subsequently "approved" operation on 630m.

 

3. Within comments about PLC operation, the writer made it look like I had
received a PLC-related complaint. Not so! The complaint I referenced was
about a neighbor's outdoor security camera that had been wired with Cat 3
cable. Nothing to do with PLC's.

 

I'm continuing to work on my 2200m PLC situation, which is a little
complicated, and these efforts will not be helped by an article in a
national publication with misleading information about interference. 

That will be the last interview I give to that particular organization.

 

And before anyone asks, I'm keeping the PLC details under my hat, not
wishing to fuel any security angst at UTC.

 

John, W1TAG

 

 

 

____________________________________________________________
We Say GoodBye To Sally Fields
iflperfecttouch.com
http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL3241/5a0cc21b110c421915ccst01duc