Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[VHFcontesting\]\s+Add\s+1\.2GHz\s+SSB\s+or\s+FM\s+\-\s+Opinion\?\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[VHFcontesting\]\s+Add\s+1\.2GHz\s+SSB\s+or\s+FM\s+\-\s+Opinion\?\s*$/: 4 ]

Total 4 documents matching your query.

1. [VHFcontesting] Add 1.2GHz SSB or FM - Opinion? (score: 1): Author: timcoad@excite.com (Tim Coad); Date: Thu Jun 19 16:44:46 2003; Hi guys, sorry no comments about rule changes... I am hoping to add another band for the next contest. Looks like for the same money I can either buy a DEM 1296-144 transverter or a FM 1.2GHz FM Mobi; /archives//html/VHFcontesting/2003-06/msg02228.html (7,817 bytes)
2. [VHFcontesting] Add 1.2GHz SSB or FM - Opinion? (score: 1): Author: MJGarcia@fresno.ca.gov (Garcia, Michael); Date: Thu Jun 19 16:44:46 2003; FM is better than nothing. I live over the hill from you. Most of the rovers that come through the Central Valley have 1.2 SSB and FM. Actually a majority have 902 and up including a few 10 gig'ers.; /archives//html/VHFcontesting/2003-06/msg02232.html (8,706 bytes)
3. [VHFcontesting] Add 1.2GHz SSB or FM - Opinion? (score: 1): Author: kharker@cs.utexas.edu (Kenneth E. Harker); Date: Thu Jun 19 16:44:46 2003; I think we can discuss more than one topic on this reflector at a time. -- -- Kenneth E. Harker "Vox Clamantis in Deserto" kharker@cs.utexas.edu University of Texas at Austin Amateur Radio Callsign:; /archives//html/VHFcontesting/2003-06/msg02233.html (7,781 bytes)
4. [VHFcontesting] Add 1.2GHz SSB or FM - Opinion? (score: 1): Author: k8cc@comcast.net (David A. Pruett); Date: Thu Jun 19 16:44:47 2003; Amen! It would be a heck of a lot easier if people would take the time to make the Subject: field relevant rather than simply hitting the "reply" button. K8CC; /archives//html/VHFcontesting/2003-06/msg02238.html (7,597 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 4
Page: [1]