- 1. Re: [RTTY] [Bulk] ROS policeman on 14101 (score: 1)
- Author: Bill <bmarx@bellsouth.net>
- Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2012 15:40:55 -0400
- No spectrum is reserved for any group. In my opinion 14101 is too close to the beacon frequency to operate there. Bill Marx W2CQ _______________________________________________ RTTY mailing list RTTY
- /archives//html/RTTY/2012-03/msg00089.html (9,732 bytes)
- 2. Re: [RTTY] [Bulk] ROS policeman on 14101 (score: 1)
- Author: Hank Garretson <w6sx@arrl.net>
- Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2012 12:48:57 -0700
- No spectrum is reserved for any group. In my opinion 14101 is too close Tongue in cheek. So, is the beacon frequency supposed to be reserved? 73, Hank, W6SX Mammoth Lakes, California Elevation 8083 f
- /archives//html/RTTY/2012-03/msg00090.html (7,643 bytes)
- 3. Re: [RTTY] [Bulk] ROS policeman on 14101 (score: 1)
- Author: Bill <bmarx@bellsouth.net>
- Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2012 16:02:45 -0400
- No of course it is not, but serves a purpose and rarely interferes with qso's. If you can even hear the CW most of the time hi...however I give it room. Bill Marx W2CQ _______________________________
- /archives//html/RTTY/2012-03/msg00092.html (9,317 bytes)
- 4. Re: [RTTY] [Bulk] ROS policeman on 14101 (score: 1)
- Author: Bill Turner <dezrat1242@yahoo.com>
- Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2012 13:22:59 -0700
- ORIGINAL MESSAGE: REPLY: Yes, it really should be reserved. The beacons are in operation 24/7, whether they are audible at a particular QTH or not. You could be interfering with someone who CAN hear
- /archives//html/RTTY/2012-03/msg00095.html (8,715 bytes)
- 5. Re: [RTTY] [Bulk] ROS policeman on 14101 (score: 1)
- Author: "Gary AL9A" <al9a@mtaonline.net>
- Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2012 14:05:40 -0800
- Per the information at http://www.ncdxf.org/beacon/beaconinterference.html the beacon folks are asking for a clear frequency from 14099.5 to 14100.5. They do recognize that someone trying to monitor
- /archives//html/RTTY/2012-03/msg00108.html (10,242 bytes)
- 6. Re: [RTTY] [Bulk] ROS policeman on 14101 (score: 1)
- Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <lists@subich.com>
- Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2012 19:47:48 -0400
- They're still being bloody pigs to expect an exclusive 1 KHz wide guard band in the middle of the RTTY segment of the band. If they don't want interference from RTTY move the stupid beacons down to 1
- /archives//html/RTTY/2012-03/msg00111.html (12,475 bytes)
- 7. Re: [RTTY] [Bulk] ROS policeman on 14101 (score: 1)
- Author: "Ron Kolarik" <rkolarik@neb.rr.com>
- Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2012 18:58:56 -0500
- Problem is some people run software to copy the beacons to track propagation. I normally avoid 14.100 +/- and the JT area at 14076, the JT can be weak and you don't know it's there if you're not runn
- /archives//html/RTTY/2012-03/msg00113.html (11,215 bytes)
- 8. Re: [RTTY] [Bulk] ROS policeman on 14101 (score: 1)
- Author: "Jeff Blaine" <keepwalking188@yahoo.com>
- Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2012 19:16:09 -0500
- Right on the money, Gary. 73/jeff/ac0c www.ac0c.com alpha-charlie-zero-charlie Per the information at http://www.ncdxf.org/beacon/beaconinterference.html the beacon folks are asking for a clear frequ
- /archives//html/RTTY/2012-03/msg00114.html (11,402 bytes)
- 9. Re: [RTTY] [Bulk] ROS policeman on 14101 (score: 1)
- Author: Bill Turner <dezrat1242@yahoo.com>
- Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2012 19:50:08 -0700
- ORIGINAL MESSAGE: REPLY: In my experience those multi-tone modes make very poor jammers. Plain old RTTY, especially with dual peak filters, is almost completely immune. Let us hope they never find ou
- /archives//html/RTTY/2012-03/msg00117.html (9,966 bytes)
- 10. Re: [RTTY] [Bulk] ROS policeman on 14101 (score: 1)
- Author: "Rick Ruhl" <ricker@w4pcsoftware.com>
- Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2012 23:08:10 -0400
- I though 14.100 was for beacons? Silly me ;) ORIGINAL MESSAGE: REPLY: In my experience those multi-tone modes make very poor jammers. Plain old RTTY, especially with dual peak filters, is almost comp
- /archives//html/RTTY/2012-03/msg00135.html (11,223 bytes)
This search system is powered by
Namazu