LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #8   Report Post  
Old July 21st 03, 08:03 AM
Steve Robeson, K4CAP
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"K0HB" wrote in message news:ed9e3d3ed0c3403349a2a6882a98d900.128005@myga te.mailgate.org...
"Joe Collins" wrote in message


....what will happen to the exclusive CW allocations....


Except in the USA, most amateurs do not labor under "sub-bands" based on
mode. As an example Canadian amateur have no such restrictions. It's a
source of continuing wonder to me that the FCC continues to arbitrarily
slice and dice the bands based on mode, license class, power levels, and
similar artificial constructs of their imagination.


I imagine that the "class" restrictions will fade soon.

As for mode restrictions, see my comment on Dee's post...Perhaps
if we consider these as "wideband" and "narrowband" allocations it
would be more palatable to all (or at least more)?

73, de Hans, K0HB

PS: There are no "exclusive CW allocations" below 50MHz.


73

Steve, K4YZ
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
If you value SW or HAM radio.... yea right Antenna 60 June 12th 04 05:15 PM
FUD ALERT !!!!! (was With CW gone, can the CW allocations be far behind?) Carl R. Stevenson General 17 July 31st 03 11:11 PM
With CW gone, can the CW allocations be far behind? Dee D. Flint General 18 July 25th 03 01:13 AM
With CW gone, can the CW allocations be far behind? Dee D. Flint Policy 1 July 21st 03 08:01 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:44 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 RadioBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Radio"

 

Copyright © 2017