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
Show All Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Jeff Kenyon <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Blind-Hams For blind ham radio operators <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 31 Oct 2005 08:45:57 -0500
Content-Type:
TEXT/PLAIN
Parts/Attachments:
TEXT/PLAIN (38 lines)
When they expanded the AM band in 1995 and 96 were they planning for this,
and what was the thought then when it became expanded?





On Sun, 30 Oct 2005, Louis Kim Kline wrote:

> As wide as those pkiddos are, the expansion part of the band would give
> them room enough for about two channels.
>
> 73, de Lou K2LKK
>
>
>
> At 06:00 PM 10/30/2005 -0700, you wrote:
> >Funny how things change.  I moved to Denver 33 years ago.  I have been a
> >talk show junky since I was 18 years young.  I'm now creeping up on 54 years
> >of age.  Anyhow, Denver had absolutely no conservitive talk shows on 33
> >years ago.  Now we have air America represented, on a Clear channel owned
> >station I might add, and at least one other small station that is mostly
> >libral.  The Clear Channel stations running mostly conservitive shows are
> >two main local stations, although they own a total of 8 stations in the
> >Denver listening market I have been told.  I don't understand why the
> >digital stuff isn't put in the upper band and everything from 535 to 1610 is
> >left to the standard am broadcasts.
> >
> >Phil.
> >K0NX
>
> Louis Kim Kline
> A.R.S. K2LKK
> Home e-mail:  [log in to unmask]
> Work e-mail:  [log in to unmask]
> Work Telephone:  (585) 697-5753
>

ATOM RSS1 RSS2