License question for hams with SSB - Page 2 - SailNet Community
 11Likes
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #11 of 34 Old 01-31-2016
Mermaid Hunter
 
SVAuspicious's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: on the boat - Chesapeake
Posts: 5,687
Thanks: 0
Thanked 275 Times in 246 Posts
Rep Power: 14
 
Re: License question for hams with SSB

Quote:
Originally Posted by cshrimpt View Post
So if I wanted to use an SSB radio to keep in contact with an onshore location, i.e., home, I would need to use the amateur frequencies and both ends would need someone with a General class license present (to use the frequencies with good DX).
Weeelllll. You don't need to, but getting a marine shore station license just for staying in touch would be hard. From a practical point of view an Amateur Radio license at each end is going to be a lot easier.

On your side, other than some minor regulatory matters there is nothing in the ham exams you should not know anyway to be a self-sufficient cruiser. In addition, many of the maritime-related ham nets (Maritime Mobile Service Net for example) can hook you up with a phone patch to connect you to people at home who don't have a ham radio license.

sail fast and eat well, dave S/V Auspicious

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

beware "cut and paste" sailors


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
SVAuspicious is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #12 of 34 Old 01-31-2016
The most female moderator
 
Donna_F's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: SE Pennsylvania
Posts: 5,886
Thanks: 147
Thanked 301 Times in 272 Posts
Rep Power: 10
 
Dock
Re: License question for hams with SSB

Quote:
Originally Posted by cshrimpt View Post
...

So if I wanted to use an SSB radio to keep in contact with an onshore location, i.e., home, I would need to use the amateur frequencies and both ends would need someone with a General class license present ...

CS
Exactly why I'm bribing my young niece to get her Extra Class license. She took the first step and has her Technician license. Neither of my U.S.-purchased, land-based HF radios will transmit over marine frequencies.

If you're planning on sailing outside the U.S.you'll want an Extra license to use the amateur bands with full reciprocity in most other countries.
SVAuspicious likes this.

Donna


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Catalina 30 TRBS
Rock Hall, MD
KB3ZCB

If you're helping someone and expecting something in return, you're doing business not kindness.
Donna_F is online now  
post #13 of 34 Old 02-01-2016
Beyond The Pale
 
Erindipity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 300
Thanks: 3
Thanked 29 Times in 23 Posts
Rep Power: 6
 
Re: License question for hams with SSB

The problem with being concise, is the assumption that the same words mean the same things between speaker and listener. I chose not to be overly technical because the original questions were general in nature. Where terms are ambiguous, I gave general definitions. Maybe I should simply have written a book...
Somebody here, who I won't identify, chose to tear me apart on quibbles. Too bad that their quibbles are questionable...

••••••••••••
-...Certain RF Frequency _Ranges_...
"Since we are dealing with vocabulary (and I love vocabulary) ranges of frequencies are called bands. Thus "the ham bands," "the marine bands," "the air bands," etc."
••••••••••••
That was a doozy. The original wording in the the first documentation _was_ Ranges. Mainly everything above 200 Meters, near the top of what is _currently_ known as the "AM Broadcast Band". That limit got pushed up over time. Harmonically related "Ham Bands" came about much later than Marconi and his fixed frequency Commercial Stations, and no longer apply anyway; harmonically related RFI is no longer much of an issue in HF.



••••••••••••
-The FCC keeps a loose eye on who uses what and where. They issue a "Type Acceptance" for a Transmitter or Transceiver that acknowledges that the Gear operates Legally on permitted frequencies, and that will not bother others too much off-frequency. The Reception parts aren't "Type Accepted" because simple Listening, with certain obscure exceptions, doesn't require Licensing.
"No."

"In most countries receiving is legal anywhere. In the US there are limitations on receiving cell phone communications. In the UK there are taxes on certain radio reception. In other countries there are outright proscriptions."
•••••••••••
Yes, dammit. _Read_ what I said, especially that bit about "...with certain obscure exceptions...". Intercepting Cell Phone Communications _is_ obscure. I was giving historical context. There were reasons _why_ things are the way they are. Understanding those reasons makes understanding the underlying Regulations easier. As for what happens in other Countries... I will quote myself:
-•Learn and abide by the applicable FCC Regulations, and when in Foreign Waters, learn those Regulations as well.


•••••••••••
-There are no Transceivers that are "Type Accepted" for both Marine and Ham usage in the US.
"This is disingenuous. There are marine MF/HF SSB(/CW/FSK/AM) type accepted radios that can be "opened" for use on the ham bands without subverting the type acceptance on the marine bands. The Icom IC-M802 is a good example."
••••••••••
This is _not_ disingenuous and again, taken out of Context. You are _not_ permitted to "open" up for Ham use. An FCC Licensed Technician _is_ permitted, as I implied elsewhere, but the process is more involved than snipping a Diode. To maintain "Type Acceptance", the Technician must _prove_ that the original specifications aren't degraded; his professional reputation depends on it. And this makes it Expensive. It is cheaper to buy a used Ham transceiver.
I really like ICOM gear; I have three of their Transceivers. The M802 is a ducky Rig, for Marine Frequency usage. For Ham Band usage, it's a turtle, limited in ability. I just don't get this "one box" attitude; these Rigs are now smaller than a Toaster. Have both. Horses for courses.


•••••••••••
-An Operator's Permit is required to use it. Only one Permit is required; anybody on board can share it.
"Also not strictly true. The RP license is not shared. The presumption is that the license holder is supervising operation. This is exactly analogous to the situation with supervised use of an Amateur Radio station."
•••••••••••
Yup, strictly true. A good example is Ham Radio Clubs, where newbies are allowed to Operate under Direct Supervision. In Commercial Operations, say on the Marine Frequencies, (There are other Operations on other Frequencies...), there needs to be a Station License, and an Operator's Permit. The two are distinct, for a reason. Note that the Operator's Permit can cover an unlimited number of Installations, at an unlimited number of locations. Direct Supervision is _not_ required here. (I once held an Operator's Permit for a few dozen Transceivers; my main responsibilities were making sure that the Installations were done correctly, and that Maintenance was done on a regular basis, and that the paperwork was in order. I was not required to be a Nanny.)


•••••••••••
"Your historical perspective on Marconi is a bit off the mark. Selectivity at the time was a real issue (it didn't exist) and the wideband characteristics of spark gap transmitters (remember everything was CW (Morse Code) at the time) were extreme."
•••••••••••
Whoooo boy...
CW didn't stand for Morse Code, (Which wasn't Morse's Code anyway...), but for "Continuous Wave". With CW, you don't hear buzz-bi-buzz-buzz, but perhaps boop-bip-boop-boop. Most, but not all of the early Spark stations... buzzed. Quite good Selectivity existed pre-WWI, but the hash created by Spark Stations made it _relatively_ unimportant. Moderate Selectivity in a TRF Receiver sufficed. In any event, hundreds of Stations could operate at the same time in the range of frequencies then available, and experimental Voice Broadcasts by "Doc" Herrold started in 1912, using a variation of the Poulsen Arc _CW_ Transmitter, which was "Clean".
What made thousands, and then tens of thousands, simultaneous communications possible was Fleming's _Electron_ Valve, and the incredibly rapid advances in the new field of _Electronics_ that followed.


That is quite enough for now. As Fortune Cookie says: "Those who don't learn from History are doomed to repeat it, in Summer School."

The OP has since chimed in again, and they are actually paying attention.

¬Erindipity
CVAT likes this.
Erindipity is offline  
 
post #14 of 34 Old 02-01-2016
Beyond The Pale
 
Erindipity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 300
Thanks: 3
Thanked 29 Times in 23 Posts
Rep Power: 6
 
Re: License question for hams with SSB

Quote:
Originally Posted by cshrimpt View Post
Thanks, this is how I thought it worked. I was confused by a frequency chart that seemed to imply the marine bands were included in the amateur bands. I see this is not the case.

So if I wanted to use an SSB radio to keep in contact with an onshore location, i.e., home, I would need to use the amateur frequencies and both ends would need someone with a General class license present (to use the frequencies with good DX).

I would also need a rig that was dedicated to non-marine bands since a marine SSB isn't legal to transmit on amateur HF even if it had that capability.

Is that correct?

Thanks,

CS
You are very welcome.
The nuances are actually clearly defined, but in obscure language.

"So if I wanted to use an SSB radio to keep in contact with an onshore location, i.e., home, I would need to use the amateur frequencies and both ends would need someone with a General class license present (to use the frequencies with good DX)."

"Keeping In Touch" using Ham HF is permitted, and even encouraged on the Ham Bands. It's part of the original Public Service intent, and many Hams will bend over backwards to assist. There is no need for landlubbers to spend time in a danky Shack; Phone Patches are allowed. Having a Licensed Ham at either end does tend to make things go easier.

Frequencies with "good DX" actually can vary on a second by second basis. This area is Totally Cool, and fits in with the underlying Experimental intent. (I'm interested in the old techniques of Diversity Transmitting and Receiving. (And don't call me "Hedley"...))

But there are limits. Asking your Stockbroker for the latest Market trends is not permitted on the Ham Bands. Use the Commercial Marine SSB Frequencies, Cellular, or Satellite communications for that. The Commercial and Marine Services were set up with Profit in mind. This is something that I absolutely have no argument with, and the modern encroachment of CB style chit-chat there... this is something that I will have nothing to do with.



"I would also need a rig that was dedicated to non-marine bands since a marine SSB isn't legal to transmit on amateur HF even if it had that capability."
This is a huge Gray Area. It is entirely possible and expensive to have one Rig do all. Why bother? Get the two cheaper and dedicated Rigs. They won't take up too much room.

To put it in starkest terms:
Your Business Life belongs on the Commercial Bands. Pay the Freight.
Your Real Life perhaps dwells amongst the Hams.

Seventy Three and Eighty Eight;


¬Erindipity
CVAT likes this.
Erindipity is offline  
post #15 of 34 Old 02-01-2016
Senior Member
 
aa3jy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,433
Thanks: 3
Thanked 109 Times in 101 Posts
Rep Power: 14
 
What's your ham call Erindipidy?
aa3jy is offline  
post #16 of 34 Old 02-01-2016
Mermaid Hunter
 
SVAuspicious's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: on the boat - Chesapeake
Posts: 5,687
Thanks: 0
Thanked 275 Times in 246 Posts
Rep Power: 14
 
Re: License question for hams with SSB

Quote:
Originally Posted by Erindipity View Post
Somebody here, who I won't identify, chose to tear me apart on quibbles. Too bad that their quibbles are questionable...
Well I'm sorry to have offended you. Since you repeated many of the points I had previously made with some new inaccuracy I felt it was appropriate to weigh back in again. I didn't feel I was tearing you apart at all, in fact there were a number of your points that I explicitly supported.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Erindipity View Post
••••••••••••
-...Certain RF Frequency _Ranges_...
"Since we are dealing with vocabulary (and I love vocabulary) ranges of frequencies are called bands. Thus "the ham bands," "the marine bands," "the air bands," etc."
••••••••••••
That was a doozy. The original wording in the the first documentation _was_ Ranges. Mainly everything above 200 Meters, near the top of what is _currently_ known as the "AM Broadcast Band". That limit got pushed up over time. Harmonically related "Ham Bands" came about much later than Marconi and his fixed frequency Commercial Stations, and no longer apply anyway; harmonically related RFI is no longer much of an issue in HF.
I would be grateful for a footnote or other reference on the official use of "Ranges" as other than a convenience. Perhaps the terminology was edited in my reference documents which date back only to 1932.

My reference to the harmonic relationship of pre-WARC ham bands was historical context for the tremendous freedom that hams have for construction and experimentation. I agree with you that harmonically related RFI is rarely an issue.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Erindipity View Post
••••••••••••
-The FCC keeps a loose eye on who uses what and where. They issue a "Type Acceptance" for a Transmitter or Transceiver that acknowledges that the Gear operates Legally on permitted frequencies, and that will not bother others too much off-frequency. The Reception parts aren't "Type Accepted" because simple Listening, with certain obscure exceptions, doesn't require Licensing.
"No."

"In most countries receiving is legal anywhere. In the US there are limitations on receiving cell phone communications. In the UK there are taxes on certain radio reception. In other countries there are outright proscriptions."
•••••••••••
Yes, dammit. _Read_ what I said, especially that bit about "...with certain obscure exceptions...". Intercepting Cell Phone Communications _is_ obscure. I was giving historical context. There were reasons _why_ things are the way they are. Understanding those reasons makes understanding the underlying Regulations easier. As for what happens in other Countries... I will quote myself:
-•Learn and abide by the applicable FCC Regulations, and when in Foreign Waters, learn those Regulations as well.
Ignoring the transition from Type Acceptance to Certification or a Declaration of Conformity (hardly a quibble but I didn't poke a stick at that) I was attempting to make several points that I clearly failed to make. First the rules vary from country to country which is important to a community that while dominated by Americans is quite international and which has members who sail in many places.

I suggest that the proscription on receiving cell phone transmissions is hardly obscure (although breaking that law has been difficult and expensive since the demise of AMPS). Now the National Radio Quiet Zone is obscure. *grin*

I was also taking exception to your statement that there is no certification of receivers and pointed to the labeling on many electronic devices including radio receivers, television sets, computers, microwave ovens (technically transmitters) and more.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Erindipity View Post
•••••••••••
-There are no Transceivers that are "Type Accepted" for both Marine and Ham usage in the US.
"This is disingenuous. There are marine MF/HF SSB(/CW/FSK/AM) type accepted radios that can be "opened" for use on the ham bands without subverting the type acceptance on the marine bands. The Icom IC-M802 is a good example."
••••••••••
This is _not_ disingenuous and again, taken out of Context. You are _not_ permitted to "open" up for Ham use. An FCC Licensed Technician _is_ permitted, as I implied elsewhere, but the process is more involved than snipping a Diode. To maintain "Type Acceptance", the Technician must _prove_ that the original specifications aren't degraded; his professional reputation depends on it. And this makes it Expensive. It is cheaper to buy a used Ham transceiver.
I really like ICOM gear; I have three of their Transceivers. The M802 is a ducky Rig, for Marine Frequency usage. For Ham Band usage, it's a turtle, limited in ability. I just don't get this "one box" attitude; these Rigs are now smaller than a Toaster. Have both. Horses for courses.
With the advent of microprocessor controlled radios sold internationally with somewhat different functionality the "snip a diode" approach or--in the case of newer radios like the M802--front panel control greatly eased the standard of proof that operation to specification in the certified service was not affected by a modification. I can't lay my hands on the FCC position paper on the subject at the moment so we'll have to agree to disagree on the matter until I can put a footnote on the reference.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Erindipity View Post
•••••••••••
-An Operator's Permit is required to use it. Only one Permit is required; anybody on board can share it.
"Also not strictly true. The RP license is not shared. The presumption is that the license holder is supervising operation. This is exactly analogous to the situation with supervised use of an Amateur Radio station."
•••••••••••
Yup, strictly true. A good example is Ham Radio Clubs, where newbies are allowed to Operate under Direct Supervision. In Commercial Operations, say on the Marine Frequencies, (There are other Operations on other Frequencies...), there needs to be a Station License, and an Operator's Permit. The two are distinct, for a reason. Note that the Operator's Permit can cover an unlimited number of Installations, at an unlimited number of locations. Direct Supervision is _not_ required here. (I once held an Operator's Permit for a few dozen Transceivers; my main responsibilities were making sure that the Installations were done correctly, and that Maintenance was done on a regular basis, and that the paperwork was in order. I was not required to be a Nanny.)
I infer your cited experience was in broadcast. I don't believe that applies in the marine service. The restricted radio operators permit (RP) is supposed to be held by a present operator. It is certainly not shared, it is entirely the authority for the licensee. Now that doesn't mean that other people can't use the radio. They can, just as they can in the amateur radio service, when supervised. I will also strongly agree that the application of a license with no exam is silly but there are many silly laws and regulations. They are what they are.

I will also agree that in practice the presence of the RP holder is not something that is likely to be enforced against a recreational boater. You will note however that in the Merchant Service (to which marine radio service law and regulations apply) all deck officers have an RP. There is a similar requirement in the aeronautical service.

I chose to get an RP for my wife for Valentine's Day one year. She wasn't amused. Fortunately there were flowers and chocolate as well.

I will say that I have never despite a great many entries and exits to a wide range of countries and a lot of operating been asked to see any radio license. I know people look up my ham license on QRZ.com but that is not enforcement related. I suspect that the chances of getting a speeding ticket for driving 2 mph over the speed limit are higher than an enforcement action (outside amateur radio service which is quite self regulating) for not having radio licenses for recreational boating in order.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Erindipity View Post
•••••••••••
"Your historical perspective on Marconi is a bit off the mark. Selectivity at the time was a real issue (it didn't exist) and the wideband characteristics of spark gap transmitters (remember everything was CW (Morse Code) at the time) were extreme."
•••••••••••
Whoooo boy...
CW didn't stand for Morse Code, (Which wasn't Morse's Code anyway...), but for "Continuous Wave". With CW, you don't hear buzz-bi-buzz-buzz, but perhaps boop-bip-boop-boop. Most, but not all of the early Spark stations... buzzed. Quite good Selectivity existed pre-WWI, but the hash created by Spark Stations made it _relatively_ unimportant. Moderate Selectivity in a TRF Receiver sufficed. In any event, hundreds of Stations could operate at the same time in the range of frequencies then available, and experimental Voice Broadcasts by "Doc" Herrold started in 1912, using a variation of the Poulsen Arc _CW_ Transmitter, which was "Clean".
What made thousands, and then tens of thousands, simultaneous communications possible was Fleming's _Electron_ Valve, and the incredibly rapid advances in the new field of _Electronics_ that followed.
Of course CW isn't Morse Code. I was taking a short cut for those in the cheap seats. *grin* Equating them is like the inappropriate equating of the term "SSB" for marine MF/HF bands, even when using CW or FSK on those bands. "Please fax this manifest to the home office on the SSB." Ha!

I suspect however that you have a better grip on some of the historical details of radio than I. I detect some usage patterns that make me think of RTTY using Model 33 teletypes (I had one but I was 15) and perhaps a license history that includes license exams that required drawing circuits (did that) and short essays (heard about that).

I don't think we are actually that far apart. Ultimately we both intend to help others, and I believe we both want to have our facts straight. We all take shortcuts in communication and which are "okay" and which are "wrong" is a judgment call.

I ask you to take on faith that I bear no personal animus and am only motivated to get good information out to the cruising community. I know I have a tendency to be pedantic. Ask me what time it is and before I tell you how to build a watch I will talk about mining the ore and machining an appropriate timing crystal.

Once again I meant no offense and apologize for that taken.

Now if you would like to open a summer school we could work together on that. *grin*
boz86 likes this.

sail fast and eat well, dave S/V Auspicious

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

beware "cut and paste" sailors


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
SVAuspicious is offline  
post #17 of 34 Old 02-01-2016
Beyond The Pale
 
Erindipity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 300
Thanks: 3
Thanked 29 Times in 23 Posts
Rep Power: 6
 
Re: License question for hams with SSB

Quote:
Originally Posted by aa3jy View Post
What's your ham call Erindipidy?

In my Youth, I operated as WB6VXS. That License has since been reassigned, long ago.
I'm just getting back in again. Things have changed since the era of used Heathkit SB101's, and EICO 753's...

This doesn't mean that I was out of touch for all of that time, as far as concerning the Evolved Technology... I spent three decades working on that Evolution- It was part of my Jobs.
I know more about using RCA/Eimac 4648s and Varian Ku Band Klystrons in Accelerator Service, than is reasonable for a sane person to be concerned with.
Now, it is simply again- A Hobby.


If I wanted to post my current Callsign, I wouldn't go by "Erindipity" here.
Sorry, no offense meant... but why do you ask?

¬Erindipity
Erindipity is offline  
post #18 of 34 Old 02-01-2016
Senior Member
 
aa3jy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,433
Thanks: 3
Thanked 109 Times in 101 Posts
Rep Power: 14
 
Give me a shout on 20 meters sometime...
aa3jy is offline  
post #19 of 34 Old 02-04-2016
Mermaid Hunter
 
SVAuspicious's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: on the boat - Chesapeake
Posts: 5,687
Thanks: 0
Thanked 275 Times in 246 Posts
Rep Power: 14
 
Re: License question for hams with SSB

Quote:
Originally Posted by SVAuspicious View Post
The restricted radio operators permit (RP) is supposed to be held by a present operator. It is certainly not shared, it is entirely the authority for the licensee. Now that doesn't mean that other people can't use the radio. They can, just as they can in the amateur radio service, when supervised. I will also strongly agree that the application of a license with no exam is silly but there are many silly laws and regulations. They are what they are.
I came across substantiation for my statement in Part 80 of the FCC Rules:

Quote:
“WHO NEEDS A RESTRICTED RADIOTELEPHONE OPERATOR PERMIT? At least one person holding a Restricted Radiotelephone Operator Permit is required aboard stations in the maritime and aviation services when: 1) Making international flights, voyages, or communications; 2) using frequencies under 30 MHz; 3) using a satellite ship earth station, or 4) operating a vessel subject to the Bridge to Bridge Act (including domestic operation).”
Please note the requirement for a licensed person to be *aboard* in the maritime and aviation services. This is different than in broadcast and land mobile services.

I'm still keeping my eyes peeled for the FCC position paper on what constitutes a modification that subverts certification or a declaration of conformance. I have a copy somewhere.

sail fast and eat well, dave S/V Auspicious

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

beware "cut and paste" sailors


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
SVAuspicious is offline  
post #20 of 34 Old 02-04-2016
Member
 
valis's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 52
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Rep Power: 16
 
Re: License question for hams with SSB

Quote:
Originally Posted by SVAuspicious View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by brokesailor
A little off subject since the original post has been answered. If I want to request a weather map (i.e. 24 hr surface forecast) from Saildocs, which is free, using Sailmail via SSB offshore do I have to become a member of Sailmail, i.e. pay the $250.?
Yes.

The Saildocs service is free. You can reach it through Winlink (free for licensed hams), Sailmail ($250US/yr), Cruisemail (about the same), and others as well as the Internet using cell phones or WiFi or cable, etc.
To clarify, no, you don't need to become a member of Sailmail to use Saildocs. As SVAuspicious said, you can access Saildocs in many ways, and the service is free.

Paul Elliott
S/V VALIS - PSC 44 #16 - Friday Harbor, Washington

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
valis is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

By choosing to post the reply above you agree to the rules you agreed to when joining Sailnet.
Click Here to view those rules.

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the SailNet Community forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
Please note: After entering 3 characters a list of Usernames already in use will appear and the list will disappear once a valid Username is entered.


User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in











Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
SSB License brokesailor Seamanship & Navigation 33 01-18-2012 10:26 AM
Captain's License Question KindOfBlue General Discussion (sailing related) 1 07-07-2010 04:22 PM
SSB license question 2Gringos General Discussion (sailing related) 16 04-13-2010 05:36 PM
OUPV Masters License question db27513 General Discussion (sailing related) 8 02-16-2010 07:58 PM
calling all hams: SiTex receiver question chrislab Gear & Maintenance 1 03-03-2004 06:37 PM

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome