Return to KLUBNL.PL main page
| To: | [email protected] |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: LF: Minimum content of a valid QRSS/DFCW QSO? |
| From: | Stefan Schäfer <[email protected]> |
| Date: | Tue, 30 Mar 2010 10:50:07 +0200 |
| In-reply-to: | <[email protected]> |
| References: | <[email protected]>, <38A51B74B884D74083D7950AD0DD85E82A1BB6@File-Server-HST.hst.e-technik.tu-darmstadt.de> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> |
| Reply-to: | [email protected] |
| Sender: | [email protected] |
| User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; de; rv:1.9.1.8) Gecko/20100227 Thunderbird/3.0.3 |
Hi Johan,You are right but first i think (and hope) there will come up other TX stations. Otherwise it would make no sense to discuss whats necessary for a 2 way QSO ;-) And 137kHz also started with the first transmitting station, HI ;-)One day, we can look back to our first VLF mails (that interested not only a few but many stns), starting in Februar 2010 with a smile and see what we have reached since that time, just like on LF :-) 73, Stefan/DK7FC Yes, of course. It important to remember that 9kHz is still "the lonely dreamer's band". Pile-ups and other "traffic jams" are still quite rare (!) so the risk of misreading a callsign is minimal. There are about three million licenced radio amateurs on the regulated ham bands. On 9kHz there is currently one (Stefan), and he has the privilege to choose his own callsign, operating procedures etc. without breaking any law. 73 Johan SM6LKM |
| Previous by Date: | Re: LF: RE: Re: PF per Meter dependant on wire size?, Stefan Schäfer |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: LF: RE: Re: PF per Meter dependant on wire size?, Rik Strobbe |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: LF: Minimum content of a valid QRSS/DFCW QSO?, Horst Stöcker |
| Next by Thread: | Re: LF: Minimum content of a valid QRSS/DFCW QSO?, Stefan Schäfer |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |