[amsat-bb] Re: FLTSATCOM Hacked

[Eric Fort]

What I was referring to is the ability to set aside a few communications
channels on a temporary basis that would be relatively immune to
interference and kept clear for use by those who needed the resource such as
a net serving an affected area.  I hope I wasn't misunderstood from that.  I
was in no way suggesting that any spectrum be reallocated away from the
amateur radio service, only that a means may be considered for certain
channels to be protected from interference using technical means for a
limited duration while those participating in the sanctioned activity needed
the resource for the benefit of the republic as a whole.  Is such a system
capability such a bad idea?

Eric
AF6EP

On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 5:40 AM, Jack K. <kd1pe.1 at gmail.com> wrote:

> I ditto those statements entirely... Also would any frequency be taken from
> other hams (most likely) or would an additional frequency spectrum be
> allocated... Frankly Elitist suggestions like this make me think of Big
> Brother... Do you really want to make hams go through more of the BS the
> posting daily on how and what you can do on the amateur bands?
>
> DE KD1PE
>
>
>
>
>
> Eric...the "instant" things start "being reserved" for a group of
> amateurs...for any reason other then by regulatory action...we have started
> down a very slippery slope that has no real end.
>
> The FCC can and does "set aside" frequencies in serious emergencies for
> special communications and then they end it...the frequencies belong to The
> Republic.  To be blunt..the way AMSAT has mishandled the amateur satellite
> acquisition system since the ramp up to AO40 would in fact tell me that they
> shouldnt be trusted with just about anything much less who gets on the bird.
>
> Robert WB5MZO amsat life member
>
>
>