[aprssig] "Emergency!" test convention?
KC2MMi kc2mmi at verizon.netWed Jul 21 14:47:14 UTC 2004
- Previous message: [aprssig] "Emergency!" test convention?
- Next message: [aprssig] "Emergency!" test convention?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Danny, I think you misunderstand me. The purpose of a quiet period for emergency testing is very real and specific, and as far as I remember, Part 97 does not establish any such quiet zone. I've just searched it and didn't find anything there. I'm not proposing redundancy, I'm asking if this issue has already been addressed and your reference to Part97 seems only to confirm that it has not. Consider, if you are monitoring a system to receive an emergency transmission....Would you want to get alerted every time someone wanted to deploy a new system and test it? Redundancy? Hardly. It only needs one sentence, i.e. "A period of...shall be established for...and Mic-E "emergency!" transmissions in this period shall be considered tests to be ignored." [The internet is running out of vowels, please cut-n-paste and don't quote wholesale messages.<G>]
- Previous message: [aprssig] "Emergency!" test convention?
- Next message: [aprssig] "Emergency!" test convention?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the aprssig mailing list
