----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Manuel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, August 14, 2004 1:02 PM
Subject: [Boatanchors] broadcast transmitters
>
> Hi all!
> My employer is wanting to sell three old broadcast transmitters, a nearly
> impossible task. One is a 250 watt RCA from 1949, another is a Gates 1 KW
> transmitter using 833s, and the third is a huge Gates 5 KW from the early
> sixties. The 5 KW is on 1460, the 1 KW on 900, and the 250 watter is on
> 1240 kHz.
> My employer said "Surely some radio station would want one of these for a
> backup transmitter." I said, only a station in some poor South American
> country. Museums do not want them, so amateur use is the only possibility
> I see.
> The RCA probably weighs 1000 pounds, the 1 KW Gates twice that, and the 5
> KW probably 3000. Shipping is impossible.
> These transmitters are located in East Kentucky. If anyone would like to
> make an offer on one of these, please email me directly.
> 73,
> Paul K4PDM
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Aug 15 20:05:59 2004
Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Delivered-To: [email protected]
Received: from ms-smtp-01-eri0.texas.rr.com (ms-smtp-01.texas.rr.com
[24.93.47.40]) by mailman.qth.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59294859DA3
for <[email protected]>; Sun, 15 Aug 2004 20:05:57 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from w5omr.shacknet.nu (cs24160155-203.satx.rr.com [24.160.155.203])
by ms-smtp-01-eri0.texas.rr.com (8.12.10/8.12.7) with ESMTP id
i7G01XQ1012860
for <[email protected]>; Sun, 15 Aug 2004 19:01:33 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from jeff (jeff.hamhome.net [192.168.0.2])
by w5omr.shacknet.nu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with SMTP id i7G01kE7015025
for <[email protected]>; Sun, 15 Aug 2004 19:01:47 -0500
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "Geoff/W5OMR" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Discussion of AM Radio" <[email protected]>
References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [AMRadio] (no subject)
Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 19:01:30 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441
X-RAVMilter-Version: 8.4.4(snapshot 20030410) (w5omr)
X-Virus-Scanned: Symantec AntiVirus Scan Engine
X-BeenThere: [email protected]
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.4
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Discussion of AM Radio <[email protected]>
List-Id: Discussion of AM Radio <amradio.mailman.qth.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio>,
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
List-Archive: <http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/private/amradio>
List-Post: <mailto:[email protected]>
List-Help: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
List-Subscribe: <http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio>,
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 00:05:59 -0000
How does the group feel about the ARRL proposed 9 KHZ AM bandwidth
limit? You can read the proposal at
<http://www.arrl.org/announce/bandwidth.html>http://www.arrl.org/announce/bandwi
dth.html
I didn't see that.
I did see:
Here are some points about the ARRL proposals that may be worth emphasizing:
a.. Double-sideband AM operation is preserved unchanged,
b.. but without opening the phone bands to digital and other
c.. modes of the same bandwidth.
73 = Best Regards,
-Geoff/W5OMR
