Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Topband\:\s+SDR\s+and\s+the\s+use\s+of\s+\"AUXILIARY\s+CHANNELS\"\s+for\s+DX\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Topband\:\s+SDR\s+and\s+the\s+use\s+of\s+\"AUXILIARY\s+CHANNELS\"\s+for\s+DX\s*$/: 3 ]

Total 3 documents matching your query.

1. Topband: SDR and the use of "AUXILIARY CHANNELS" for DX (score: 1): Author: <mac@py2cw.net>; Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2010 12:53:07 -0200; On the "SDR" issue, I agree with Ian. The "problem" could come from ANY receiver delivering it's audio to the Web. And a cheater, using SDR could easily also "put his signals" at the DX places throug; /archives//html/Topband/2010-01/msg00073.html (7,549 bytes)
2. Re: Topband: SDR and the use of "AUXILIARY CHANNELS" for DX (score: 1): Author: mstangelo@comcast.net; Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2010 16:30:39 +0000 (UTC); Greetings, I agree. I've been following this thread. the problem is not with SDR technology but with the operators. I enjoy the challenge of operating HF (and 160 MF) because I can communicate with s; /archives//html/Topband/2010-01/msg00075.html (9,633 bytes)
3. Topband: SDR and the use of "AUXILIARY CHANNELS" for DX (score: 1): Author: "Mac py2cw" <mac@py2cw.net>; Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2010 15:21:23 -0200; Remote controlled Stations and the SDR abuse issue The use of low distance AUXILIARY CHANNELS like the ones for Remote Control os Radios, in my oppinion, does not interfere with the Amateur Radio Pri; /archives//html/Topband/2010-01/msg00076.html (8,769 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 3
Page: [1]