Topband
[Top] [All Lists]

TopBand: Subands on 160

To: <topband@contesting.com>
Subject: TopBand: Subands on 160
From: dennisgp@muscanet.com (dennis g. peterson)
Date: Fri, 23 May 1997 06:21:00 -0500
I hate to take up bandwidth but this question has been bothering me

for some time now.   That is:

Why is it that the EAST COAST operators and stations seem to be the 

only operators and area that does not want to support the much needed

subdivision of 160 into cw only and ssb only areas?

It wouldn't have anything to do with their hold onto European 

Propagation  and the fact that in contests they are the first to get

the big runs for multiplier totals would it?  I've asked this question
before but never was able to get an Honest answer  or reasoning.   Could
someone please let all of us know WHY YOU DON'T FEEL A
subdivision is needed OTHER THAN NOT WANTING TO OIL a squeaky wheel.   That
statement is absurb and doesn't hold much weight towards validity of
reasoning.   N7CKDennis

--
FAQ on WWW:               http://www.contesting.com/topband.html
Submissions:              topband@contesting.com
Administrative requests:  topband-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems:                 owner-topband@contesting.com

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>