[160m] Re: Topband: 160 Meters and ARRL

Thu, 22 Jan 2004 06:56:48 -0600

http://www.qsl.net/aarc/P4A.PDF

160 meters ends at 1850 in Aruba it makes for a narrow slice to work SSB in
between 1840 to 1850....
would almost require split operation at times

W5aj  (p40p)

http://www.qsl.net/w5aj/p40p.htm

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Joe Craig" <[email protected]>
To: "Tom Rauch" <[email protected]>
Cc: <[email protected]>; "160m QTH" <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2004 6:07 AM
Subject: [160m] Re: Topband: 160 Meters and ARRL

Tom and group.

I'm concerned about what is going on up here too.  See:

http://www.rac.ca/opsinfo/160mband.htm

and the exception in Note 4.

Joe VO1NA

On Wed, 21 Jan 2004, Tom Rauch wrote:

> Unless I'm missing something, the ARRL once again spit in the face of 160
> operators.
>
> Despite a majority support for a narrow mode segment on 160 in the recent
RM
> petition, the ARRL asked for re-farming of other bands and true to form
> ignored 160. At least that is what E-Ham reports in an ARRL release.
>
> http://www.eham.net/articles/7475
>
> Why the ARRL constantly ignores 160 is beyond me. In the 70's, Prose
Walker
> told W2EQS and myself in written correspondence that 160 could be fully
> returned to amateurs if there was any push at all. Needless to say there
> wasn't any effort.
>
> I wonder what it takes to get the attention of the people in an Ivory
Tower?
> Will they ever show any concern for 160 meters?
>
> 73 Tom
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Topband mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband
>
_______________________________________________
160m mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/160m