Mail Archive Search: <+from:dbowker@mail.sjv.net>

Results:

References: [ +from:dbowker@mail.sjv.net: 28 ]

Total 28 documents matching your query.

21. Topband: 1820 kHz Intruder (score: 1): Author: "Dave Bowker" <dbowker@mail.sjv.net>; Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2005 18:28:28 -0500; 220° ± 10° as read on an LF shielded loop of known accuracy/calibration. It is predominantly a sky wave signal and getting a good null on it is not possible with a loop @ this QTH, so; /archives//html/Topband/2005-12/msg00114.html (7,166 bytes)
22. Topband: MR-11305 and RM-11306 Available for Commnent (score: 1): Author: "Dave Bowker" <dbowker@mail.sjv.net>; Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 13:51:19 -0500; Two Proposals for Rule Making relative to [spectrum regulation/deregulation] are now available for comment on the FCC EFCS web site. RM-11305 was filed on behalf of the "Communications Think Tank" gr; /archives//html/Topband/2006-01/msg00112.html (7,985 bytes)
23. Topband: RM 11305/11306 (score: 1): Author: "Dave Bowker" <dbowker@mail.sjv.net>; Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 09:58:03 -0500; The only concern I have with RM-11306 is with the 160M portion of the proposed plan. It does not allocate a narrow bandwidth segment (200 Hz), but rather it allocates the entire band a 3.5 kHz BW. Th; /archives//html/Topband/2006-01/msg00125.html (7,041 bytes)
24. Topband: RM-11306 [IS} a World-Wide Problem (score: 1): Author: "Dave Bowker" <dbowker@mail.sjv.net>; Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 16:27:22 -0500; Fellow TopBanders, The effects of the 160M portion of RM-11306 is NOT "just an American/FCC/USA/ARRL" issue. If RM-11306 is implemented, as proposed and without changes to incorporate a 160M narrow b; /archives//html/Topband/2006-01/msg00132.html (7,369 bytes)
25. Topband: RM-11306 Comment Period Ending (score: 1): Author: "Dave Bowker" <dbowker@mail.sjv.net>; Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 13:47:15 -0500; The period for posting comments to RM-11306 ends 06 February. To date 452 comments have been made, of which [ONLY 15] comments have addressed the 160M disparity, two of which were posted by non-US 16; /archives//html/Topband/2006-01/msg00423.html (6,418 bytes)
26. Topband: ARRL's RM 10306 'Reply to Comments' (score: 1): Author: "Dave Bowker" <dbowker@mail.sjv.net>; Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 16:42:16 -0500; Read them for yourself @ http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6518329398 . The ARRL [IMHO] appears poised to RAM THIS DOWN OUR THROATS, regardless of commente; /archives//html/Topband/2006-02/msg00191.html (6,881 bytes)
27. Topband: 5A7A On TopBand Today (score: 1): Author: "Dave Bowker" <dbowker@mail.sjv.net>; Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2006 17:07:47 -0500; 5A7A was a very solid S3, two S-units above my noise level, at my Sun Set (2057Z) today. At same time they were S9+20 on 40M and S9+10 on 80M and virtually no QSB on all three bands. The ops are supe; /archives//html/Topband/2006-11/msg00116.html (6,392 bytes)
28. Topband: YI9KT on TopBand (score: 1): Author: "Dave Bowker" <dbowker@mail.sjv.net>; Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2007 21:30:20 -0500; Richard, YI9KT, was heard here (339) in N. Maine, and trying to hear USA ... he seems to be plagued with noise on TopBand. Incidentally, I worked him mid-afternoon local (2048Z) on 80M and he was, at; /archives//html/Topband/2007-01/msg00104.html (6,834 bytes)

Current List: 21 - 28
Page: [1] [2]