Return-Path: Received: (qmail 93185 invoked from network); 29 Nov 2004 17:04:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ptb-spamcore01.plus.net) (192.168.71.1) by ptb-mailstore02.plus.net with SMTP; 29 Nov 2004 17:04:10 -0000 Received: from mailnull by ptb-spamcore01.plus.net with spamcore-l-b (Exim 4.32; FreeBSD) id 1CYpFV-000MX5-UP for dave@picks.force9.co.uk; Mon, 29 Nov 2004 17:23:42 +0000 Received: from [192.168.67.1] (helo=ptb-mxcore01.plus.net) by ptb-spamcore01.plus.net with esmtp (Exim 4.32; FreeBSD) id 1CYpFV-000MWy-Ko for dave@picks.force9.co.uk; Mon, 29 Nov 2004 17:23:41 +0000 Received: from post.thorcom.com ([193.82.116.20]) by ptb-mxcore01.plus.net with esmtp (Exim 4.30; FreeBSD) id 1CYowb-000N6t-0T for dave@picks.force9.co.uk; Mon, 29 Nov 2004 17:04:09 +0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1CYowG-0006kR-6t for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Mon, 29 Nov 2004 17:03:48 +0000 Received: from [193.82.116.30] (helo=relay.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1CYowF-0006kI-SP for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 29 Nov 2004 17:03:47 +0000 Received: from imo-m18.mx.aol.com ([64.12.138.208]) by relay.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.41) id 1CYowA-0007OS-H9 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 29 Nov 2004 17:03:47 +0000 Received: from WarmSpgs@aol.com by imo-m18.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v37_r3.8.) id l.102.5527a8fc (18555) for ; Mon, 29 Nov 2004 12:03:30 -0500 (EST) From: WarmSpgs@aol.com Message-ID: <102.5527a8fc.2edcb062@aol.com> Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 12:03:30 EST To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: 9.0 for Windows sub 5033 X-SPF-Result: relay.thorcom.net: domain of aol.com designates 64.12.138.208 as permitted sender X-Spam-Score: 1.1 (+) X-Spam-Report: autolearn=no,HTML_30_40=0.809,HTML_MESSAGE=0.001,NO_REAL_NAME=0.285 Subject: Re: LF: Linear modes Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.1 required=5.0 tests=HTML_30_40,HTML_MESSAGE, NO_REAL_NAME autolearn=no version=2.63 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: rs_out_1@blacksheep.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No; SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-Spam-Filtered: by PlusNet SpamCORE (v3.00) Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit

>>> The 500 khz band if it becomes available to radio amateurs has traditionally
been a CW band. >>>

And RTTY. And other digital modes.

Of course, it's also MF rather than LF, where a transmitting antenna of a given size is eight times more efficient than at 2200m, and where there's only about a third the QRN. Yes, I suppose under those conditions, "normal CW" might be adequate.