[BC] Changing channels

[Mike McCarthy]

Well...many stations still (unwisely) use tube rigs...

I won't argue <that> rule needs to be updated.  None the less, there are 
many international treaties which intermix with/in the AM rules.  So 
changing them is not as simple as one might think.

MM

At 07:28 AM 2/24/2006 -0600, Bailey, Scott wrote
>Willie,
>   When you still see them use terms, like plate voltage, etc.....I don't
>and you don't have a tube rig anymore.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: broadcast-bounces at radiolists.net
>[mailto:broadcast-bounces at radiolists.net] On Behalf Of WFIFeng at aol.com
>Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 7:14 AM
>To: broadcast at radiolists.net
>Subject: Re: [BC] Changing channels
>
>In a message dated 02/24/2006 07:58:02 AM Eastern Standard Time,
>SBailey at nespower.com writes:
>
> > This comment is
> >  coming I guess from my heart, sort of unrelated, but the FCC needs to
> >  revisit all of Part 73, AM rules. Lots of them (in my opinion) are
>very
> >  outdated! Why are we following rules written in 1934!
> >
>
>Probably because the Laws of Physics haven't changed. No matter what
>iBorg
>says. <ggg>
>
>Willie...
>
>_______________________________________________
>This is the BROADCAST mailing list
>To send to the list, email: broadcast at radiolists.net
>For sub changes, archives and info on this other lists:
>http://www.radiolists.net/
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>This is the BROADCAST mailing list
>To send to the list, email: broadcast at radiolists.net
>For sub changes, archives and info on this other lists: 
>http://www.radiolists.net/