[CW] FCC's response to fraudulent CW license

[David J. Ring, Jr.]

You're right about what would happen in that case - but that isn't where I 
meant to direct the spot light!

The fact is that for the first time ever - CW is illegal on DoD 
frequencies - this includes MARS.  Many hams are MARS members.  Even MARS 
repeaters on VHF are prohibited from using modulated morse code as 
identifiers.

But should an operator on a government ship using government frequencies not 
be able to communicate using SSB, he couldn't just go to CW and send "use 
channel X" as done many times before.

That is also the problem - but less of one.

The focus in what I wish to say is that CW is OFFICIALLY prohibited on these 
frequencies.

This isn't hogwash but the fact that it was done was in my opinion, stupid.

73

David N1EA

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "K0HB" <k-zero-hb at earthlink.net>
To: "David J. Ring, Jr." <n1ea at arrl.net>; <CW at mailman.qth.net>
Cc: <brasspounders at yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, August 08, 2005 8:24 AM
Subject: Re: [CW] FCC's response to fraudulent CW license


> Evidence?  Elimination and illegality of CW on any US Department of
Defense
> frequency.
>
> What's that? -
>
> Illegality.
>
> If you send CW - you can be prosecuted.
>
> Wake up hams!

Hogwash, David.  High grade hogwash.

First off, hams aren't going to be sending >anything< on DoD QRGs.

Second off, DoD circuit operators (for example a Navy radioman) don't chose
"on the fly" which mode to use on a circuit.  Each circuit has a specific
use (NTDS, S/S, PriTac, TG Common, etc) and an appropriate mode.  The
operator wouldn't chose to use CW on an NTDS circuit, but if he did, the
skipper would "prosecute" him for incompetence, not for violating some
mythical "no CW" legality.

73, de Hans, K0HB





-- 
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.338 / Virus Database: 267.10.1/64 - Release Date: 8/4/2005