I used to use a 220 machine when at my vacation spot but that machine's been 
down for 2 years now so I guess I won't be using that much anymore. From 
home, I never used it hardly.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jeff Kenyon" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2006 1:00 PM
Subject: Re: e-skip


> Well, I don't know how well the F6 does on 220, and that should tell you
> all how quiet that band is here.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, 19 Jul 2006, Russ Kiehne wrote:
>
>> Back in the 80's, 220 was very active here in the San Francisco bay area.
>> Before they made the 220 band changes, the 223.62 repeater was very 
>> active.
>> I also owned a shack master and used 220 as the control frequency.
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Jeff Kenyon" <[log in to unmask]>
>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>> Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2006 9:24 AM
>> Subject: Re: e-skip
>>
>>
>> > Well, I'm glad that 220 is getting some interest.  I never would have
>> > thought that was possible.  What drew up interest on 220?
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Wed, 19 Jul 2006, Russ Kiehne wrote:
>> >
>> >> Yes, there's some activity.  One of the repeaters is linked to 
>> >> echolink.
>> >> There's a system on 220 called the condore connection.  It's a number 
>> >> of
>> >> 220
>> >> repeaters linked together.
>> >>
>> >> ----- Original Message -----
>> >> From: "Jeff Kenyon" <[log in to unmask]>
>> >> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>> >> Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2006 9:08 AM
>> >> Subject: Re: e-skip
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> >I didn't think much of the 220 band, is it active in your area?  It 
>> >> >sure
>> >> > isn't here, though we have some stuff on 220.  When I got the radio 
>> >> > I
>> >> > didn't
>> >> > know what I was in for in terms of coverage and the fact that it had 
>> >> > a
>> >> > whole
>> >> > other receiver!
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>