CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] CQ 160m SSB contest

To: "'Joe'" <nss@mwt.net>, <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] CQ 160m SSB contest
From: "Rick Lindquist, WW1ME" <ww1me@roadrunner.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2013 09:50:26 -0500
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
Belated comment, I know. Just reviewing the unopened backlog on this
reflector. Petitions to create mode-specific subbands for 160 (one would
have restricted SSB operation to above 1843) have been FCC turned away by
the FCC.

73, Rick, WW1ME

-----Original Message-----
From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Joe
Sent: Monday, February 25, 2013 9:38 AM
To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] CQ 160m SSB contest


On 2/25/2013 6:09 AM, Roger Parsons wrote:
  Of course the FCC will never limit US phone operation to above 1840.


Why Not?  It's not like they did not impose operating restrictions in the
past.

"A large part of the U.S. 160 meter band was allocated on a primary basis to
the LORAN <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LORAN> radio-navigation system that
began operating in and around the 160 meter band in 1942. 
Amateurs were relegated to secondary, non-interfering status, with severe
regional power limitations and restricted day/night operations on just a few
narrow segments of the band."

Joe WB9SBD
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • Re: [CQ-Contest] CQ 160m SSB contest, Rick Lindquist, WW1ME <=