Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+A\s+US\s+Petition\s+to\s+remove\s+CW\s+only\s+subbands\s*$/: 9 ]

Total 9 documents matching your query.

1. [CQ-Contest] A US Petition to remove CW only subbands (score: 1)
Author: GC <greg@k9ig.com>
Date: Wed, 11 May 2016 22:17:53 +0000 (UTC)
I just saw this today.  This could make CW contests interesting in the US. "Petition for Rule Making (RM-11769), filed on May 2. Arguing that retaining the current regime of legacy CW subbands has pr
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2016-05/msg00056.html (8,345 bytes)

2. Re: [CQ-Contest] A US Petition to remove CW only subbands (score: 1)
Author: Radio K0HB <kzerohb@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 12 May 2016 03:44:15 +0000
There are only 2 band segments which are exclusively CW. Neither is on HF. _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.co
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2016-05/msg00057.html (9,705 bytes)

3. Re: [CQ-Contest] A US Petition to remove CW only subbands (score: 1)
Author: Chuck Dietz <w5prchuck@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 12 May 2016 07:37:55 -0500
I think the CW only portions of the band were welcomed in the "Old Days" of AM phone. There were huge numbers of US stations on AM causing a huge cacophony of strong carriers and, if they were not li
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2016-05/msg00060.html (10,888 bytes)

4. Re: [CQ-Contest] A US Petition to remove CW only subbands (score: 1)
Author: "Keith Dutson" <kdutson@sbcglobal.net>
Date: Thu, 12 May 2016 09:42:56 -0500
When I tune around mobile on 20 meters for CW during a weekday, there is seldom anything below 14.050. On the weekends, it is a different ballgame. Maybe it would be good for phone contests to allow
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2016-05/msg00061.html (12,126 bytes)

5. Re: [CQ-Contest] A US Petition to remove CW only subbands (score: 1)
Author: Wes Jennings <wjennings2011@hotmail.com>
Date: Fri, 13 May 2016 14:36:44 +0000
I would rather see a petition to remove the SSB portions of the bands and make them all CW only Wes WL7F ________________________________________ From: CQ-Contest <cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com>
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2016-05/msg00063.html (12,091 bytes)

6. Re: [CQ-Contest] A US Petition to remove CW only subbands (score: 1)
Author: Matthew Stevens <matthew@mrstevens.net>
Date: Fri, 13 May 2016 16:47:33 -0400
Am I missing something? Where are these "CW only subbands?" (other than the bottom of 6m and 2m?) - Matthew KK4FEM _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@c
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2016-05/msg00064.html (12,119 bytes)

7. Re: [CQ-Contest] A US Petition to remove CW only subbands (score: 1)
Author: Charles Harpole <hs0zcw@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 14 May 2016 05:30:54 +0700
This proposal is coming late because at the time when mandatory CW testing stopped there were very good automatic CW decoders coming available. The prediction of the death of CW due to no need to lea
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2016-05/msg00066.html (14,874 bytes)

8. Re: [CQ-Contest] A US Petition to remove CW only subbands (score: 1)
Author: Michael Adams <mda@n1en.org>
Date: Sat, 14 May 2016 00:29:06 +0000
In a followup filing, he explains that opening up the bottom of 2m and 6m to digital...er, "symbol communications" would somehow stimulate the use of those bands. Oh, and the narrative of the proposa
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2016-05/msg00072.html (10,054 bytes)

9. Re: [CQ-Contest] A US Petition to remove CW only subbands (score: 1)
Author: Matthew Stevens <matthew@mrstevens.net>
Date: Fri, 13 May 2016 21:54:21 -0400
So, right, adding 100 kHz will really motivate all the people who don't already use the other 3.9 MHz. I read land legal descriptions and deeds every day for my job, and I got bogged down trying to d
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2016-05/msg00074.html (11,688 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu