BLIND-HAMS Archives

For blind ham radio operators

BLIND-HAMS@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG
Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Content-Type:
text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original
Date:
Wed, 2 Feb 2011 15:13:48 -0500
Reply-To:
For blind ham radio operators <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
Re: Repeater Offsets on 2 Meters
MIME-Version:
1.0
Message-ID:
<A03F61D192D74FABB1FA926E37B566C7@harvey0b9e4842>
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
7bit
Sender:
For blind ham radio operators <[log in to unmask]>
From:
Harvey Heagy <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (19 lines) 
If I said that I didn't mean to.  I meant to say 147.000.  But like you, I 
have encountered a 147.0600 repeater that had a negative offset.
Harvey
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "colin McDonald" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2011 4:08 PM
Subject: Re: Repeater Offsets on 2 Meters


> is the cut off 147, or 147.07?
> I ask because every repeater I've seen with a frequency of 147.06 has a
> negative offset.  But many argue that this is an artifact of older
> equipment.
> I always thought the cut off was 147 too, but harvey said 147.07, which
> actually makes more sence.
> 73
> Colin,

ATOM RSS1 RSS2