Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[VHFcontesting\]\s+222\s+or\s+1296\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[VHFcontesting\]\s+222\s+or\s+1296\s*$/: 3 ]

Total 3 documents matching your query.

1. [VHFcontesting] 222 or 1296 (score: 1): Author: "Les Rayburn" <les@highnoonfilm.com>; Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2010 02:12:55 -0600; My experience is limited, having only participated in half a dozen or so VHF Contests, but I'd opt for the 222 MHz band. It's a quiet band, whose range often equals or seems to exceed that of 2 Meter; /archives//html/VHFcontesting/2010-01/msg00068.html (8,258 bytes)
2. Re: [VHFcontesting] 222 or 1296 (score: 1): Author: "John Santillo" <u1004467@warwick.net>; Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2010 16:37:32 -0500; way under-utilized. It is much quieter than 2M so the noise floor is very low. It also has similar propagation properties with 2M. More emphasis should be put into 222 by all VHF contesters and gene; /archives//html/VHFcontesting/2010-01/msg00073.html (9,334 bytes)
3. Re: [VHFcontesting] 222 or 1296 (score: 1): Author: jcplatt1@mmm.com; Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2010 10:45:27 -0600; The good news is that you cannot go wrong either way - 222 or 1296. However, having to pick only one, I would give the slight nod to 222 because: * You can work aurora nearly as well as you can on 2m; /archives//html/VHFcontesting/2010-01/msg00078.html (7,958 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 3
Page: [1]