[VHFcontesting] Re: 902 vs 903

Fri May 16 00:01:10 EDT 2003

The way I always heard it was 903 east of the Mississippi,  and 902 west.
Most of us in this part of the country (right ON the Mississippi hihi) have
both. We switch back and forth depending on who we're talking to.  Sometimes
we switch from one to the other for more practical purposes like cordless
telephone interference.

Bob K2DRH EN41vr - about a mile east of the Mississippi River

----- Original Message -----
From: <vhfcontesting-request at contesting.com>
To: <vhfcontesting at contesting.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2003 11:01 AM
Subject: VHFcontesting Digest, Vol 5, Issue 24

> Send VHFcontesting mailing list submissions to
> vhfcontesting at contesting.com
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> vhfcontesting-request at contesting.com
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> vhfcontesting-owner at contesting.com
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of VHFcontesting digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Re: 902 vs 903 (Bill Olson)
>    2. Re: 902 vs 903 (Lee Scott - AA1YN)
>    3. 902-903 (Bill Olson)
>    4. Re: 902 vs 903 (Zack Widup)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 17:06:19 +0000
> From: "Bill Olson" <callbill at hotmail.com>
> To: thenorbys at attbi.com, vhfcontesting at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [VHFcontesting] 902 vs 903
> Message-ID: <Sea2-F16H8YSLTYVSkJ0002b3fc at hotmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Precedence: list
> Message: 1
>
> Kevin, Gosh it's so long ago and my mind isn't as sharp as it used to be.
I
> think we (in the US) LOST the 902-903MHz portion of the band. The
Canadians
> still have 902 so that's why the 144-902 combo still exists and it's
> perfectly useable at 903 when the IF is tuned to 145. There used to be
> "some" stations back in the "old days" that couldn't go above 144.4 (for
> instance) with their IF rig (I know that seems pretty far fetched with the
> proliferation of multimode 144-148 rigs these days - but it's true). That
> fact coupled with the desire to have "instant bandswitching" (not having
to
> change band switch on IF rig when going from 903 - 1296 - 2303, etc) made
> the 144-903 desireable to some.
>
> These days the 144-902 (144-903) setup is probably the best. That way if
you
> want to sell the rig to a VE station, he doesn't have to buy a new crystal
> if he wants to operate at 902.. (hah!)
>
> hope you are now as confused as I am!
>
> bill, k1DY Maine
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
> http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 13:57:42 -0400
> From: Lee Scott - AA1YN <aa1yn at aa1yn.com>
> To: vhfcontesting at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [VHFcontesting] 902 vs 903
> Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20030514135730.0219f088 at pop3.norton.antivirus>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Precedence: list
> Message: 2
>
> Hi Bill,
>
> The 902 to 903 portion of the band is in fact part of the Amateur band and
> is designated by the ARRL band plan as Narrow-bandwidth, weak-signal
> communications. It is a good question why we use the 903 instead of 902.
I
> think it has to do with the fact that a lot of 900MHz hand held telephones
> are operating in that portion of the band. Since I have (not working at
the
> moment) a DSP-10 for the IF rig, it made it simple for me to set up the
> DSP-10 to display 903.nnn on the frequency while in fact I was working
with
> a 902 to 144 transverter even though the DSP-10 was putting out 145.nnn
> MHz.  I was really surprised as to the telephone activity I could hear on
902.
>
> Lee Scott - AA1YN
> Home of the VHF & Up Register http://www.aa1yn.com/vhf
> Hooksett, NH
> FN43gc52
>
> At 05:06 PM 5/14/2003 +0000, you wrote:
> >Kevin, Gosh it's so long ago and my mind isn't as sharp as it used to be.
> >I think we (in the US) LOST the 902-903MHz portion of the band. The
> >Canadians still have 902 so that's why the 144-902 combo still exists and
> >it's perfectly useable at 903 when the IF is tuned to 145. There used to
> >be "some" stations back in the "old days" that couldn't go above 144.4
> >(for instance) with their IF rig (I know that seems pretty far fetched
> >with the proliferation of multimode 144-148 rigs these days - but it's
> >true). That fact coupled with the desire to have "instant bandswitching"
> >(not having to change band switch on IF rig when going from 903 - 1296 -
> >2303, etc) made the 144-903 desireable to some.
> >
> >These days the 144-902 (144-903) setup is probably the best. That way if
> >you want to sell the rig to a VE station, he doesn't have to buy a new
> >crystal if he wants to operate at 902.. (hah!)
> >
> >hope you are now as confused as I am!
> >
> >bill, k1DY Maine
> >
> >_________________________________________________________________
> >STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
> >http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >VHFcontesting mailing list
> >VHFcontesting at contesting.com
> >http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 18:04:04 +0000
> From: "Bill Olson" <callbill at hotmail.com>
> To: vhfcontesting at contesting.com
> Subject: [VHFcontesting] 902-903
> Message-ID: <Sea2-F53RPZYvJ42jFE00024867 at hotmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Precedence: list
> Message: 3
>
> OK OK, I stand corrected. 902 IS a US amateur allocation. I DO however
> remember losing 902 at one point. Did they give it back? or heck maybe it
> was the Canadians that lost it so we moved up so we would still be able to
> work them. Can anyone help me out here?
>
> Anyway the other stuff I said is still valid. A lot of guys didn't like to
> have to switch the rig to 145 when QSTing so they recrystaled to put 903
at
> 144 (too much CQing, or running a 903 sked on 902 by MISTAKE!!)
>
> bill, K1DY
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8.
> http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 13:13:16 -0500 (CDT)
> From: Zack Widup <w9sz at prairienet.org>
> To: vhfcontesting at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [VHFcontesting] 902 vs 903
> Message-ID:
<Pine.GSO.4.10.10305141257470.29815-100000 at bluestem.prairienet.org>
> In-Reply-To: <Sea2-F16H8YSLTYVSkJ0002b3fc at hotmail.com>
> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Precedence: list
> Message: 4
>
>
> AFAIK we still have 902 in the USA.  But for some reason parts of the
> country use 902 and parts use 903.  The 903 frequency seems to be popular
> here in the Midwest.
>
> Bill, it was 10 years ago (Dayton 1993) that I bought a 1296 transverter
> board from you when you owned Down East Microwave.  It still serves me
> well!
>
> 73, Zack W9SZ
>
>
> On Wed, 14 May 2003, Bill Olson wrote:
>
> > Kevin, Gosh it's so long ago and my mind isn't as sharp as it used to
be. I
> > think we (in the US) LOST the 902-903MHz portion of the band. The
Canadians
> > still have 902 so that's why the 144-902 combo still exists and it's
> > perfectly useable at 903 when the IF is tuned to 145. There used to be
> > "some" stations back in the "old days" that couldn't go above 144.4 (for
> > instance) with their IF rig (I know that seems pretty far fetched with
the
> > proliferation of multimode 144-148 rigs these days - but it's true).
That
> > fact coupled with the desire to have "instant bandswitching" (not having
to
> > change band switch on IF rig when going from 903 - 1296 - 2303, etc)
made
> > the 144-903 desireable to some.
> >
> > These days the 144-902 (144-903) setup is probably the best. That way if
you
> > want to sell the rig to a VE station, he doesn't have to buy a new
crystal
> > if he wants to operate at 902.. (hah!)
> >
> > hope you are now as confused as I am!
> >
> > bill, k1DY Maine
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> VHFcontesting mailing list
> VHFcontesting at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
>
>
> End of VHFcontesting Digest, Vol 5, Issue 24
> ********************************************
>