Definitely 222! At least in my area, there are more
QSO-points possible. In the Sept contest, I had 252
QSO points vs 219 on 1296. I think 1296 is more
fun, but 222 never ceases to amaze me.
Even with a measly 8-el, I was listening last nite for the
K8TQK net on 222.15, & instead worked WA1MKE/9
in EN70...more than 700Km DX...from the rover!
222 has some magic propagation compared to other bands.
Often there are very high QSB peaks on distant signals,
where there seems to be less on 144. I think the
wavelength is more conducive to some ducting
phenomenon, which seems to occur frequently.
You can see my humble opinions on this & other topics
related to roving at http://members.fcc.net/wseab/strat.htm
If money & space are no object, go for the lower
10 bands thru 3cm!
Don't forget that tonite is the 432 spsrint!
GL es 73,
Bill W3IY/R
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Geiger" <johngeig@yahoo.com>
To: <vhf@w6yx.stanford.edu>; <wsvhf@mailman.qth.net>;
<vhfcontesting@contesting.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 2:09 PM
Subject: [WSVHF] Adding another band
> I am interested in receiving comments on the following
> for my own interest, as well as for a possible VHF
> club newsletter item.
>
> If you were currently active on the "Big 3" VHF/UHF
> bands (6, 2, 70cm) running 100 watts on each band with
> moderate sized antennas-13 elements on 2 and 16
> elements on 432, what band would you add next:
>
> 1. If you were limited to $500-$600 for equipment and
> antennas
> 2. If money and space were no object.
>
> Or, would you be better off using the money to improve
> your existing setup and just staying on 6, 2 and 432?
>
> 73s John NE0P
>
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo!
> http://sbc.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> WSVHF mailing list
> WSVHF@mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/wsvhf
|