Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Topband\:\s+WA0RCR\s+Questioned\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Topband\:\s+WA0RCR\s+Questioned\s*$/: 4 ]

Total 4 documents matching your query.

1. Topband: WA0RCR Questioned (score: 1): Author: W5USM@aol.com; Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 16:38:24 EST; February 24, 2004 Mr. Vernon C. Jackson 2109 Ebert Lane Wentzville, MO 63385-4607 RE: Amateur license WA0RCR Dear Mr. Jackson: We note that you operate the "Gateway 160 Meter Net" on 1.860 MHz. That; /archives//html/Topband/2004-03/msg00138.html (7,128 bytes)
2. Re: Topband: WA0RCR Questioned (score: 1): Author: "Rick Karlquist" <richard@karlquist.com>; Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 18:13:45 -0800 (PST); I can just barely copy this "broadcast" from my QTH on the West coast, using a beverage. How well do other west coast'ers copy it? I use it as a beacon to test receive antennas. IMHO, the frequency o; /archives//html/Topband/2004-03/msg00143.html (8,751 bytes)
3. Re: Topband: WA0RCR Questioned (score: 1): Author: "Ford Peterson" <ford@cmgate.com>; Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 08:34:58 -0600; 1.9MHz? How about 1.997MHz? This nuisance 'broadcast,' which is likely illegal anyway, is full scale in MN. Since there is no "communicating" going on, then it should move out of the meaningful port; /archives//html/Topband/2004-03/msg00153.html (7,343 bytes)
4. Re: Topband: WA0RCR Questioned (score: 1): Author: "Kenneth J. Fattmann" <na0y@centurytel.net>; Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 12:36:46 -0600; I live about ten (10) airline miles from WAØRCR and he splatters over the 50 Khz here at my QTH. Really a nuisance here in St. Peters. MO. Ken NAØY illegal anyway, is full scale in MN.; /archives//html/Topband/2004-03/msg00159.html (8,656 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 4
Page: [1]