Bonnie,
Why and how is the 70cm band going away in the greater San
Francisco area of California?
73.
Rhett KB4HG
On Jun 3, 2007, at 1:35 PM, expeditionradio wrote:
I support efforts for new 100kHz bandwidth digital on 6 meters.
It's about time hams do something interesting and new
I'm wondering if this is related to the interference issue with the military
PAVE PAWS radar system by a number of 70 cm. repeaters.
Dave
AF6AS
-Original Message-
From: Rhett Isley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subj: Re: [digitalradio] Re: 6 meters digital
Date: Mon Jun 4, 2007 9:22 am
Size:
bruce mallon wrote:
Bonnie
NO ONE IS AFTER 6 METERS
Seriously...you think not? Open it to commercial/industrial/law enforcement
under shat is it Part 90? and see how fast and how many Motorola sells 100 watt
radios to businesses and law enforcement.
Perhaps not in NYC...but in the SW
ITS NOT what is going on is the government has radar
on that band and HAMS are not supposed to interfere
with it. They have a problem with that radar. NOW if
70cm goes away it will go back to the GOVERNMENT.
SAME OLD LIES .. no one is out to get it and the
government has 1st dibs anyway.
If
I work for the Sheriff office radio shop and we got
RID of all low band in the 1970s
Thoes who were here 35 years ago tell me SKIP KILLED
our officers radios and when the band was open they
resorted to using THE PHONE
NO AGENCY IN CENTRAL FL is on low band anymore even
the highway patrol has
I have sometimes wondered why it is that some bands are not used as much
as one might expect, especially considering the very much larger ham
population, at least here in the U.S., from when I was first licensed in
1963. As a Novice I worked a few stations but did not find CW to be all
that
Good points Rick.
At this time 10 is doing well.
Take a look at this map.
http://propnet.findu.com/catch.cgi?last=1
You are 100% correct Rick. There have been many, including myself who have
encouraged the League to seek input from its members.
Some was started when the League started its little surveys on the web and now
expanding by asking for technical input.
So let's put on our thinking caps and tell
Before leaping to conclusions like a data transfer mode that would
be able to provide at a minimum between 4000 and 5000 characters per
minute throughput at SNRs or less than -5 dB, I strongly suggest
first reaching agreement on the use cases that such a protocol would
support.
The ARRL's
At 03:58 PM 5/31/2007, you (Rodney) wrote:
I have an HF rig, but rarely get on HF because of my wife and
neighbors. But after reading the past few threads, I'm GLAD that I
DON'T get on HF! Sounds as if it's gotten to be nothing more than a
low frequency CB band!!
Whatever happened to common
Yep.
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Dave Sparks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm wondering if this is related to the interference issue with the
military PAVE PAWS radar system by a number of 70 cm. repeaters.
Dave
AF6AS
-Original Message-
From: Rhett Isley [EMAIL
11 matches
Mail list logo
