[MRCA] PRC-74 Active Duty 1995
mkdorney at aol.com
mkdorney at aol.com
Fri Mar 23 10:55:00 EDT 2018
You can't do real coms ops with only one or two operators. Sounds like somebody needs to put a boot up the butt of the "Maxwell Mafia"
Mark
WW2RDO
In a message dated 3/23/2018 10:41:44 AM Eastern Standard Time, jeepp at comcast.net writes:
Looks like we were not the Lone Rangers. In probably 2000-2003, we had two MD Congressmen approach CAP leadership about the communications issues. The stonewalling from the Maxwell Mafia was breathtaking. They never got anything worthwhile, most of which was drivel directed/blamed at the NTIA Red Book. So, we did what we had to do to try and get the mission done. It was humerous when AFRes evaluators would comment about never having seen certain equipment, before, and our tap-dance explaining. But, we always got top marks in the comms area. The bitter irony is that, given the possibilities of the allocations and operational modes CAP was authorized, so much could have been done that was not. I don't even listen anymore. Its now for others. In 1959, NATCAP had about 12 radio amateurs. Last year, we were down to 4, this year I, maybe 2, active hams left in the Wing.
Jeep K3HVG
Sent from my Verizon 4G LTE smartphone
-------- Original message --------
From: mkdorney at aol.com
Date: 3/23/18 10:05 (GMT-05:00)
To: jeepp at comcast.net
Cc: scottjohnson1 at cox.net, kb2vtl at gmail.com, mrca at mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [MRCA] PRC-74 Active Duty 1995
I thought that local CAP squadrons in reality might operate outside the realm of the ignorant bean counters, especially when the alternative is an inability to operate at all. It's one thing when radio equipment is supplied and maintained by the government - then you use that equipment almost exclusively ( by the way, we weren't totally exclusive even when I was on active duty in the Army. Our radios were supplemented by our privately owned CB radios when their use would not effect security and the mission called for their use. We didn't ask permission to do that, either). But it's a totally different ball game if volunteers have to supply their own gear. You have to use what is available via the volunteers, who will use what works best for them, and to hell with those who exist echelons above reality. And there's no way for CAP to test or certify? Oh yeah, CAP volunteers are going to spend a whole lot more of their own hard earned paychecks on overpriced radio gear because some radio geek in Washington DC told them to. Believe that, and there's some oceanfront property in Missouri that I like to sell you.
Mark D.
WW2RDO
" In matters of style, swim with the current. In matters of principle, stand like a rock." - Thomas Jefferson
Sent from AOL Desktop
.
In a message dated 3/23/2018 7:49:35 AM Eastern Standard Time,
jeepp at comcast.net writes:
Well, let me let the cat peek out of the bag. Many do, in fact, use other than NTIA compliant gear. By that, I mean gear that operates benignly in the affected spectrum. Frequency, bandwidth, harmonics, et al are totally compliant, however. CAP has no capability to test and measure, much less certify equipment, although they have a "list". NTIA disavows any such lists. At any rate, There have been incredibly few, complaints filed from a user or adjacent user over the past 30 years. Now, we did have a jammer or two come up. Bottom line, and paraphrasing one of Geo. Patton's comments..."Well, they have their schedules, and I have mine.
K3HVG
Sent from my Verizon 4G LTE smartphone
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/mrca/attachments/20180323/92f9cf7f/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the MRCA
mailing list