You can now help support WorldwideDX when you shop on Amazon at no additional cost to you! Simply follow this Shop on Amazon link first and a portion of any purchase is sent to WorldwideDX to help with site costs.
The Feb 2025 Radioddity Giveaway Results are In! Click Here to see who won!

Reply to thread

Message

"Hams are supposed to measure this? They can't even look up the rules properly."

I can certainly see where that measurement may not be all that 'exact', but it's certainly measurable by anyone with a half way decent receiver. As for "can't even look up the rules properly", if you'd change that to "don't bother looking up the rules properly", I'd be willing to agree with you. Sort of a difference there, wouldn't you say?

Signal bandwidths for particular modes is also fairly easy to find. The way in which they are stated may have changed, but the 'widths' haven't. Wouldn't figure I'd have missed something as significant as that, really don't think I did. Or if they have changed, please show me/tell me where. Can't find them in the current edition of Part 97? Have you tried taking a step or two back from the current edition? If it hasn't been specifically stated as changed, I have to think that thy haven't been. That's how the rest of it works.
- 'Doc

<blockquote data-quote="W5LZ" data-source="post: 181948" data-attributes="member: 129">&quot;Hams are supposed to measure this? They can&#039;t even look up the rules properly.&quot;I can certainly see where that measurement may not be all that &#039;exact&#039;, but it&#039;s certainly measurable by anyone with a half way decent receiver.&nbsp; As for &quot;can&#039;t even look up the rules properly&quot;, if you&#039;d change that to &quot;don&#039;t bother looking up the rules properly&quot;, I&#039;d be willing to agree with you.&nbsp; Sort of a difference there, wouldn&#039;t you say?Signal bandwidths for particular modes is also fairly easy to find.&nbsp; The way in which they are stated may have changed, but the &#039;widths&#039; haven&#039;t.&nbsp; Wouldn&#039;t figure I&#039;d have missed something as significant as that, really don&#039;t think I did.&nbsp; Or if they have changed, please show me/tell me where.&nbsp; Can&#039;t find them in the current edition of Part 97?&nbsp; Have you tried taking a step or two back from the current edition?&nbsp; If it hasn&#039;t been specifically stated as changed, I have to think that thy haven&#039;t been.&nbsp; That&#039;s how the rest of it works.&nbsp;- &#039;Doc</blockquote>

[QUOTE="W5LZ, post: 181948, member: 129"] "Hams are supposed to measure this? They can't even look up the rules properly." I can certainly see where that measurement may not be all that 'exact', but it's certainly measurable by anyone with a half way decent receiver. As for "can't even look up the rules properly", if you'd change that to "don't bother looking up the rules properly", I'd be willing to agree with you. Sort of a difference there, wouldn't you say? Signal bandwidths for particular modes is also fairly easy to find. The way in which they are stated may have changed, but the 'widths' haven't. Wouldn't figure I'd have missed something as significant as that, really don't think I did. Or if they have changed, please show me/tell me where. Can't find them in the current edition of Part 97? Have you tried taking a step or two back from the current edition? If it hasn't been specifically stated as changed, I have to think that thy haven't been. That's how the rest of it works. - 'Doc [/QUOTE]

Top Bottom