From: WarmSpgs@aol.com
Message-ID: <6a.2388de7.26390b31@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 23:17:05 EDT
Subject: Re: LF: Re: Transatlantic  beacon tests
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Sender: <majordom@post.thorcom.com>

I have only the greatest respect for Peter and his views, and I certainly 
don't want to begin any new and unproductive controversies on the reflector, 
nor to dredge up any old ones.

However, it seems to me that Andy's thoughts on a possible narrowband 
receiver design are very much in the amateur spirit.  The "tech" involved is 
not very high.  Certainly, not as high as that involved in most modern 
commercial receivers.  Nor would the applicable DOS software be any more 
elaborate than, nor require as sophisticated a computer system as, Spectran.  
The only significant difference is that Andy's approach requires a lot more 
individual initiative, rather than reliance on commercially manufactured gear.

Just as I would not consider the use of manufactured transceivers or even 
pre-existing antenna sites as "un-amateur," I'm sure Peter did not mean to 
imply that a homebrew approach such as this was outside the amateur realm.

It may well be that we'll have to try a number of different approaches 
simultaneously to achieve the Transatlantic dream.  As long as any of these 
approaches have a realistic chance of succeeding (meaning, they're not 
appreciably contrary to established knowledge of this portion of the radio 
spectrum) I hope one or more groups will try each of them.

73,
John  KD4IDY