Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > uk.net.news.management > #17432
| From | "NY" <me@privacy.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | uk.net.news.management, uk.d-i-y, uk.radio.amateur, uk.local.glasgow |
| Subject | Re: Ping Ian Jackson 160m |
| Date | 2019-08-19 19:27 +0100 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <qjepnp$73l$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | (4 earlier) <qjem2d$fee$1@dont-email.me> <qjemd5$hom$1@dont-email.me> <gs06neFtsdeU6@mid.individual.net> <qjeos0$1mf$1@dont-email.me> <gs07k5Fu3ctU2@mid.individual.net> |
Cross-posted to 4 groups.
"Stephen Cole" <usenet@stephenthomascole.com> wrote in message news:gs07k5Fu3ctU2@mid.individual.net... >>>>>>>>> Ian, you jokingly mentioned the problem with 70cms was it was >>>>>>>>> 159.3m >>>>>>>>> too short and that got me thinking about 160m. I've never had a >>>>>>>>> 160m >>>>>>>>> QSO in 29 years of activity. I've never been motivated to try the >>>>>>>>> band. So what makes 160m something of interest to you after you've >>>>>>>>> been active for 60 years or so? As a matter of interest, why do radio amateurs still refer to wavelength, when broadcast radio changed to referring to frequency in the 1970s-80s? I realise that c = f lambda, so one is related to the other by a factor of c. Do modern ham radios with synthesised tuning and digital displays actually display it as a wavelength in metres/centimetres, or do they display frequencies in kHz/MHz, but colloquially referred to as "in the 70 cm / 160 m band" as an approximation.
Back to uk.net.news.management | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: Ping Ian Jackson 160m Stephen Cole <usenet@stephenthomascole.com> - 2019-08-19 18:05 +0000
Re: Ping Ian Jackson 160m "Jim GM4DHJ ..." <kinvig.netta@ntlworld.com> - 2019-08-19 19:13 +0100
Re: Ping Ian Jackson 160m Stephen Cole <usenet@stephenthomascole.com> - 2019-08-19 18:20 +0000
Re: Ping Ian Jackson 160m "Jim GM4DHJ ..." <kinvig.netta@ntlworld.com> - 2019-08-19 19:25 +0100
Re: Ping Ian Jackson 160m Rambo <Rambo@thisaintreal.org> - 2019-08-19 19:52 +0100
Re: Ping Ian Jackson 160m "NY" <me@privacy.invalid> - 2019-08-19 19:27 +0100
Re: Ping Ian Jackson 160m "Jim GM4DHJ ..." <kinvig.netta@ntlworld.com> - 2019-08-19 19:29 +0100
Re: Ping Ian Jackson 160m "NY" <me@privacy.invalid> - 2019-08-19 21:20 +0100
Re: Ping Ian Jackson 160m "Jim GM4DHJ ..." <kinvig.netta@ntlworld.com> - 2019-08-19 21:27 +0100
Re: Ping Ian Jackson 160m Roger Breedle <rb@rmb.invalid> - 2019-08-19 19:37 +0100
Re: Ping Ian Jackson 160m Stephen Cole <usenet@stephenthomascole.com> - 2019-08-19 18:43 +0000
Re: Ping Ian Jackson 160m Jim <jim@jim.jim.jim.invalid> - 2019-08-19 19:54 +0100
Re: Ping Ian Jackson 160m Ian Jackson <ianREMOVETHISjackson@g3ohx.co.uk> - 2019-08-19 20:17 +0100
Re: Ping Ian Jackson 160m brian <nospam@b-howie.co.uk> - 2019-08-20 07:31 +0100
Re: Ping Ian Jackson 160m Stephen Cole <usenet@stephenthomascole.com> - 2019-08-20 06:41 +0000
Re: Ping Ian Jackson 160m The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2019-08-19 20:49 +0100
Re: Ping Ian Jackson 160m "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2019-08-20 11:07 +1000
Re: Lonely Psychopathic Senile Ozzie Troll Alert! Peeler <trolltrap@valid.invalid> - 2019-08-20 10:30 +0200
Re: Ping Ian Jackson 160m Rambo <Rambo@thisaintreal.org> - 2019-08-19 19:55 +0100
Re: Ping Ian Jackson 160m Stephen Cole <usenet@stephenthomascole.com> - 2019-08-19 19:13 +0000
csiph-web