Sorry, no java browser

w6dek

435 HOME

435 Site Map

What's New

435 DVR Archives

435 Movie Archives

435 Photo Archives

435 Live Stream

435 Recordings

435 Web Wars

435 Friends

435 Rebuttal

435 Web Ring

435 Voice Over IP

435 News Group

Web Directory
(Add Your URL Here)

More Resources
(Preferred Partners)

Quickly calculate the length of any dipole here

Sign my Dreambook!

E-mail w6dek

My Rebuttal to other Editorials, Rants, and mindless Ham Radio babble. A collection of views and opinions regarding 435 and amateur radio in general from w6dek and other hams. Also news items regarding the 147.435Mhz Repeater.

kb6iat

Want to respond to my rants? Sign my Dreambook!

December 2004

There is nothing to rebut

435

Screw the ARRL

and their latest proposal to once again, dumb down the hobby.

Read the ARRL proposal in pdf format

Read my letter to the Commission

This one gets it's own page

435 repeater

145.460Mhz (old rant, nobody cares)

Well it seems the new TASMA Regime is the same as the old one. The injustice on the 145.460 pair continues. How can the TASMA Technical Committee approve a move for the 5.46 machine to a high level location? The answer: Because it belongs to the "good ol' boys" now and not and NOT Angos Winke. The TASMA web page always stated that no high level repeaters would EVER be coordinated on this pair by agreement with Mexico. This had been posted on the TASMA Web Page for several years. This was the "excuse" that was used to deny coordination to Winke when he was located in Hollywood Hills. Since Hollingsworth could not do anything about Winke because technically, he was NOT interfering with any "coordinated Repeaters" (TASMA has no authority to coordinate a repeater in Mexico), a devious scheme was devised to coordinate a "low level" repeater on the 145.460 pair in the Inland Empire. Since this "low level" repeater could not possibly interfere with a repeater in Tijuana, the coordination was granted by the good ol' boys at TASMA. Enter the W6IAR Repeater Club. Now the complaints begin from W6IER that Winke's machine is interfering with them. This was the tool Hollingsworth needed to order Winke's repeater off the air. Obviously there was no problem coordinating W6IER since there repeater antenna was on a roof top in the flatlands of Fontana. But now they are granted a test coordination on Sunset Ridge? The Technical Committee claims that there is no objection from the Tijuana group. YEAH RIGHT! I wonder if Mauricio Castro even knows yet. I can't wait until the tropo comes in this summer. Maybe someone can answer this question for me. If an interference issue exists on 145.440 between AD6XK on Sunset Ridge, and Miguel and his repeater on Palomar Mountain, how can one NOT exist with W6IER on Sunset Ridge and the Baja Machine on 145.560? Is the propagation that much different 20 khz higher on 145.460? What a crock of friggin BS. I heard that Joe Macera resigned his position in the W6IER repeater organization. What a suprise. Think about this one people. The whole thing stinks. I have one more question for Andy Ormonde. Where are the documents you promised me? You conveniently forgot them both times I have seen you. That's ok. I never believed they existed in the first place. Interestingly enough, the TASMA web page has now been changed and makes no mention of the 156.460 pair in the section pertaining to the agreement with Mexico. Here is the way it reads now:

By agreement with Mexico, 146.82 and 146.91 MHZ are operated
on a shared basis with limited range Southern California operations and 146.97
& 147.33 MHz are "Clear frequency" for their exclusive use. A multiple
coordination accessibility system is available between Baja, TASMA, & NARC
to avoid duplication of coordination requests for systems whose intended coverage
overlaps two or more geographic coordination areas
.

No mention of 145.460Mhz any more. Hardly another suprise. Conveniently omitted to allow a test coordination on Sunset Ridge. I'm embarrassed to admit that I'm a member of this organization.
W6DEK

editorial

435
rebuttal