-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Dave Guimont wrote: | John, the operation of FM voice satellites is a travesty for ham radio...
That's your opinion. State it as such.
| It is pretty obvious NO COMMUNICATION exists on AO51, | all of their communication is on here. Why do they bother to turn | the radio on???
I'm approaching 100 QSOs on FM sats and can average about 3-4 per pass. I don't understand what the communication issues you are having. I practice courteous communication and evangelize to others to do the same.
| Many of us attended AMSAT a lot conventions in an attempt to | discourage throwing that money "down the tubes" on FM voice, to no | avail. Someone had an "ax to grind", and several of the existing | "powers that be" in AMSAT-NA told me to "mind my own business". They | were obviously the "ax grinders".
<rant>Yes. Let's toss our money on sats that only a select few people with special equipment (e.g. stuff that a new Ham would not have access to) that ought to show those plebian FM operators.</rant>
Your complaint is that the FM sats are in over-used and that SSB satellites are less crowded. Such a statement points to the fact that more money should be focused on FM sats rather the SSB as it would "reach" the most people.
| FM voice on the amateur satellites is about equal to the same degree | of difficulty as a cell phone operation!
With the amount of people posting on here (and some lurking) that having difficulty getting "on" AO-51, that statement is ludicrous.
| No wonder our membership is deteriorating.
Perhaps the solution is *MORE* FM sats, rather then less. The more FM birds in orbit the less people per bird. Or perhaps the reason membership is deteriorating are the attitudes give to us lowly FM operators.
- -- Ben Jackson - N1WBV - New Bedford, MA bbj <at> innismir.net - http://www.innismir.net/