Re: Yes or no?
Von: Yeti (yeti@ayrshore.com) [Profil]
Datum: 05.07.2009 19:46
Message-ID: <h2qou4$2s3$2@news.eternal-september.org>
Newsgroup: uk.radio.amateur
Datum: 05.07.2009 19:46
Message-ID: <h2qou4$2s3$2@news.eternal-september.org>
Newsgroup: uk.radio.amateur
Steve Terry wrote: > "Yeti" <yeti@ayrshore.com> wrote in message > news:h2qn68$g61$4@news.eternal-september.org... >> Steve Terry wrote: >> >>> Whereas a CBer can be a operator using unmodified radios >>> for local use as they were designed for. >> If they were designed for local use, they shouldn't have been on HF! >> >> The Government here managed to screw up twice in one go - 27MHz was too >> low to be 'local' and 934MHz was too high to work (almost anywhere!). >> >> > Phillips and other manufactures supported around 225 to 240 MHz FM > > That's where CB should have been, but the MOD didn't want to give up > the smallest amount of what they saw as UHF airband > > Steve Terry > > I agree. 220MHz would have been ideal. High enough to give 25kHz channels, with little interference (RX or TX), and low enough for the radios not to cost a fortune.[ Auf dieses Posting antworten ]
Antworten
- Ian Jackson (05.07.2009 20:19)
- Joanna (06.07.2009 00:19)
- Yeti (06.07.2009 00:42)
- Ian Jackson (06.07.2009 09:34)
- Conor (06.07.2009 12:35)
- Walt Davidson (06.07.2009 13:43)
- Joanna (06.07.2009 16:51)
- Poster (06.07.2009 17:41)
- Joanna (06.07.2009 17:45)
- Jim GM4DHJ/M (06.07.2009 20:29)
- Yeti (06.07.2009 20:53)
