|[AMRadio] Is the novelty of the "new" 40mbandwearing|
k4kyv at charter.net
Thu Apr 23 23:10:46 EDT 2009
> I agree. Just get on and talk to as many as will respond. Our frequencies
> are still in jeopardy.
> Allen KA1KIX
That is undoubtedly true at VHF, UHF and microwave, but I don't think
commercial and government interests are knocking themselves out fighting
over HF allocations.
That's exactly the reason broadcasters vacated 7.1-7.2. Point-to-point
fixed and mobile users above 7.3 didn't have enough use for those
frequencies, so they were given to the broadcasters, freeing up the ham band
from the SWBC QRM.
No doubt, the same holds true for 60m. But just as we were about to get a
new ham band, the tragic unforeseen events happened and immediately someone
shouted "9-11" (sound familiar?), and suddenly those frequencies were of
prime importance for national security reasons, and we were given that
pitiful excuse for a ham band that we ended up with.
I recall before the final FCC decision, it was a foregone conclusion that we
would be getting a new band, and the big debate going on in ham radio
circles was whether the band should have mode sub-bands, or be like 160,
with no sub-bands whether licence class or emission mode.
This message was typed using the DVORAK keyboard layout.
More information about the AMRadio mailing list
This page last updated 18 Oct 2017.