LF: Re: Re: Re: RE: The leT/A of the law

Return to KLUBNL.PL main page

rsgb_lf_group

[Top] [All Lists]

LF: Re: Re: Re: RE: The leT/A of the law

from [Hugh]

[Permanent Link][Original]

To:	[email protected]
Subject:	LF: Re: Re: Re: RE: The leT/A of the law
From:	"Hugh" <[email protected]>
Date:	Sun, 16 Mar 2003 08:28:43 -0000
References:	<[email protected]> <003201c2ea71$3706ed00$20c5e150@hughspc> <001f01c2eb0d$9bd93200$045bfea9@RSGB613192>
Reply-to:	[email protected]
Sender:	<[email protected]>

Andy,
I am terribly sorry, I confused you with somebody else.
There are no scurrilous fibs and the fantasy is all in my head.

I agree with what you say about the scientific purposes of the
transmissions, and that is really the point I was trying to make - that the
"regulations" need to be brought into line with what we are doing. This was
done to allow packet radio, and APRS so why not QRSS on LF (or any other
frequency for that matter ?)

73
Hugh M0WYE

[More with this subject...]

<Prev in Thread]	Current Thread	[Next in Thread>
LF: RE: The leT/A of the law, Andy talbot LF: Re: Fools and wise men, mike.dennison LF: Re: RE: The leT/A of the law, Ian Kyle LF: Re: RE: The leT/A of the law, Hugh LF: Re: Re: RE: The leT/A of the law, Andy talbot LF: Re: Re: Re: RE: The leT/A of the law, Hugh <=

Previous by Date:	LF: Re. DX working, Vernall
Next by Date:	LF: UA9OC last night, Dave Pick
Previous by Thread:	LF: Re: Re: RE: The leT/A of the law, Andy talbot
Next by Thread:	LF: re UA9OC ...??, Alan Melia
Indexes:	[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]