FW: [GreenKeys] Re: Net Control?

Mon, 3 May 2004 00:03:23 -0500

Hi Jerry,

The suggestion was made earlier that a net control station would provide
an accurate standard for frequency, transmit bulletins on some regular
schedule.  I believe the idea was also to provide a source of RTTY copy
for those who were not hams.  The bulletins would provide that when
there was not normal chatter on the frequency.  On the autostart
channels I operated on, there was always a defacto net control station.
Irv, W6FFC in most cases.

Anyone would be free to use the frequency to chat any time they wanted.
The whole idea behind this is to get as much RTTY back on the air as
possible. 

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of JerryL
Sent: Sunday, May 02, 2004 10:29 PM
To: Greenkeys
Subject: [GreenKeys] Re: Net Control?

Why would you think 'we' need a net control?  All we need is a common
frequency on which we can all monitor and copy whats going on.  There
wasn't any net control on any of the old autostart frequencies.  Worked
just fine.. If someone had something to say, they just came on the air
when the frequency was clear and transmitted....

Jerry -n6jp-

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Roy Norris" <[email protected]>
To: "Greenkeys" <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, May 02, 2004 9:12 PM
Subject: [GreenKeys] Proposed Autostart Net Frequencies

>
> If I end up doing the net control duties, I can go with either of the
> frequencies.  However, if we use 7.083 or some other 40 meter
frequency,
> I can put a 1500 watt output station on the air 24/7 which should
reach
> anywhere in the US under most propagation conditions on 40 meters.
That
> might be preferable to 200 watts on 10 megahertz, particularly for
those
> stations that don't have an optimum receiving antenna.

_______________________________________________
GreenKeys mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/greenkeys