Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*TopBand\:\s+Band\s+Plan\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*TopBand\:\s+Band\s+Plan\s*$/: 13 ]

Total 13 documents matching your query.

1. Topband: Band plan (score: 1): Author: k9ot@mhtc.net (Paul DeWitte K9OT); Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2002 19:25:55 -0600; As a low power entry in the 160m contests that I enter I look at your band plan this way. You want the dx to listen up. Well have you ever been on a frequency for hours and all of a sudden a whole pi; /archives//html/Topband/2002-02/msg00188.html (6,925 bytes)
2. Topband: Band Plan (score: 1): Author: kb9cry@attbi.com (kb9cry@attbi.com); Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 20:44:48 +0000; As a newcomer to Topband, but not to Amateur Radio, I agree with those that suggest that the only way to separate the wide and narrow sigs is by a band plan ruling by the FCC. I know that I can not (; /archives//html/Topband/2002-02/msg00240.html (6,916 bytes)
3. TopBand: Band Plan (score: 1): Author: midnight@accessnv.com (Robert A. Kile); Date: Sat, 05 Apr 1997 20:19:48 -0800; Guys, I agree with Sam. The band plan is not broken. The system is broken. Do you realize the FCC has recently given away over 300 MHZ to totally unlicensed operation in the 2 and 5 Ghz microwave reg; /archives//html/Topband/1997-04/msg00035.html (7,693 bytes)
4. TopBand: Band Plan (score: 1): Author: w0mu@sprynet.com (Mike Fatchett); Date: Sat, 5 Apr 1997 21:45:50 -0700; Could you define this 1%? Is it 1% of all Amateurs? 1% of all the Amateurs Using 160M? 1% of active Amateurs? What does the FCC giving away 300Mhz of Microwave frequencies have to do with this threa; /archives//html/Topband/1997-04/msg00036.html (7,421 bytes)
5. TopBand: Band Plan (score: 1): Author: midnight@accessnv.com (Robert A. Kile); Date: Sat, 05 Apr 1997 21:39:31 -0800; Mike, Contesters and Dx'ers make up about 1% of the Amateur population. Hey, I enjoy both activities myself. Gee, I'm sorry. I just feel that LEO's, WRC97, and general wholesale of frequency spectrum; /archives//html/Topband/1997-04/msg00037.html (8,052 bytes)
6. TopBand: Band Plan (score: 1): Author: n0dh@comtch.iea.com (N7EX-Dave); Date: Sun, 06 Apr 1997 07:27:52 +0100; So whats your point? Dave N7EX -- FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/topband.html Submissions: topband@contesting.com Administrative requests: topband-REQUEST@contesting.com Problems: owner-topban; /archives//html/Topband/1997-04/msg00038.html (7,672 bytes)
7. TopBand: Band plan (score: 1): Author: jhenders@zianet.com (Jim Henderson); Date: Sun, 6 Apr 1997 09:48:32 -0600; Esteemed Reflectees; Re the band plan discussion: 1) Wouldnt the % debate be more accurate if we consider what % test/DX types are of ACTIVE HF amateurs, not the simple total? And who derives these s; /archives//html/Topband/1997-04/msg00039.html (7,700 bytes)
8. TopBand: Band plan (score: 1): Author: RBates854@aol.com (RBates854@aol.com); Date: Sun, 6 Apr 1997 16:16:18 -0400 (EDT); An FCC mandated bandplan, thats all we need more government regulation. The FCC neither has the budget nor the personnel to handle the problems they have now let alone policing a 160 m bandplan. Who'; /archives//html/Topband/1997-04/msg00040.html (7,502 bytes)
9. TopBand: Band plan (score: 1): Author: btippett@CTC.Net (Bill Tippett); Date: Sun, 06 Apr 1997 21:09:27 -0500 (EST); Gentlemen: The last several posts on this topic are degenerating. Let's cool it! Everyone had their chance to respond to the survey and we don't now need a lot of public griping, flames, etc. I shoul; /archives//html/Topband/1997-04/msg00042.html (7,556 bytes)
10. TopBand: Band plan (score: 1): Author: midnight@accessnv.com (Robert A. Kile); Date: Sun, 06 Apr 1997 21:42:56 -0700; Bill, I fail to see what is degenerating about recent comments except that they seem to multiply the amount of commercial junk e-mail spams to my address. This reflector was premised on Top-Band acti; /archives//html/Topband/1997-04/msg00044.html (9,597 bytes)
11. TopBand: Band plan (score: 1): Author: w8jitom@worldnet.att.net (Tom Rauch (W8JI)); Date: Mon, 07 Apr 1997 08:26:09 -0400; Hi Bob, Your response is a carbon copy of the response the ARRL gave me in the 70's when I petetioned to have 160 divided into CW and phone areas. The ARRL's excuses were identical to yours, even tho; /archives//html/Topband/1997-04/msg00045.html (8,932 bytes)
12. TopBand: Band Plan (score: 1): Author: jwortham@goodnet.com (Jim Wortham); Date: Sat, 08 Mar 1997 16:42:13 -0700; Hi Folks, After seeing many of the comments regarding band plan proposals, FCC, ARRL, or other opportunities to regulate our actions I want to add a comment. Although I am a relative newcomer to this; /archives//html/Topband/1997-03/msg00061.html (7,729 bytes)
13. Topband: Band Plan (score: 1): Author: "jh-mty@sbcglobal.net" <jh-mty@sbcglobal.net>; Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2011 15:45:25 -0800 (PST); According to IARU, our Japanese friends aren''t "DX" on 160 and get to miss out on their own DX in the "window" unless the DX listens down below 1.825....not a fan of the "Plan," de W6UQZ I agree wi; /archives//html/Topband/2011-12/msg00235.html (9,794 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 13
Page: [1]