[Icom] Summary of 60 Meter Performance of IC-765 (long)

[George, W5YR]

Bill, I don't know if by quoting part of my posting on this topic, you are
fussing at me personally or just letting off steam, but remember none of
this was my idea!  <:}

All I was trying to do is to use my examination of my faithful old 765 as a
means for communicating the extent of the problems that face us in trying to
use the 60 meter band, especially with older equipment that has neither the
dial calibration accuracy nor the frequency stability required under the
rules that have been laid upon us.

I personally have no intention right now of ever operating 60 meters. But, I
know that I *can* and I now have an appreciation of how careful I must be
with that 765 if I should ever decide to put it on 60.

Perhaps between my posting illustrating the problems and your posting of
your rather frank opinions, we have together given the lads and lassies a
few things to ponder . . .

73/72, George
Amateur Radio W5YR -  the Yellow Rose of Texas
Fairview, TX 30 mi NE of Dallas in Collin county EM13QE
"In the 57th year and it just keeps getting better!"
<mailto:w5yr@att.net>





----- Original Message -----
From: <ACI6@aol.com>
To: <icom@mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2003 11:06 PM
Subject: Re: [Icom] Summary of 60 Meter Performance of IC-765 (long)


> In a message dated 6/4/03 5:06:49 PM Central Daylight Time, w5yr@att.net
> writes:
>
> > Between now and July 3 midnight local time, let's all spend a little
time
> >  measuring our rig's transmit bandwidth and do whatever it takes at the
> audio
> >  end to ensure that we do not inadvertently slip outside the channel.
>
> Look, I know we can probably make this channel business work. I'm just not
> sure it will be worth the trouble it will take to obtain and maintain a
signal
> that is sufficiently narrow, centered and squeaky clean.
>
> Whaddya say we tell the FCC to kiss off on this channel crap until they
can
> come up with something that is more suitable to Amateur operation and
practice?
> I know the old "use or lose it" song well (how many of you have been on
222?)
> but what are the risks associated with "misuse"? Might that be used
against
> us in the future?
>
> Be sure to drop a line to the NTIA to thank them for their part in
creating
> this mine field for US Hams. Depending on who is checking what, this could
well
> wind up being the RF version of a speed trap!
>
> I mean think about it - No CW, only USB and with a bandwidth limitation on
> discrete channels. You almost couldn't dream up a more restrictive
scenario
> given normal Amateur operating practices. And, what's going to happen to
the Ham
> who violates the upper, or lower, end of a channel by 100 Hz?
>
> I can see it now, certificates for those with the most 60M OO 'contacts' .
. .
>
> And, before you say it, I will: If you can't stand the heat . . . Reread
my
> second paragraph.
>
> Regards,
>
> Bill
> ----
> Your Moderator: Dick Flanagan W6OLD, icom-owner@mailman.qth.net
> Icom Users Net: Sundays, 1700Z, 14.315 MHz
> Icom FAQ: http://www.qsl.net/icom/