[RMVHF] Possible solution

[James Duffey]

On Aug 4, 2008, at 6:38 PM, Nate Duehr wrote:
>
> Eric, Duffey, other rovers...?  You guys like the idea?

> What are the disadvantages?


I like the idea.

Here in NM, there usually isn't a lot of activity so that the calling  
frequency serves as a good watering hole for rovers.

I realize that is a geocentric view though, and going to 144.220  
pointing the beam north for CO would help a lot I suspect.

The only disadvantage would be to take time out from other bands when  
they are going strong, but then I guess one doesn't need to drum up  
contacts on 144.220 if other means are working.

I have a lot of rigs in the car already, and am adding one more for  
220 MHz. Ok 222 MHz. Adding another for HF liaison seems like a major  
deal to me. It is hard enough to keep track of all those microphones  
as it is. That is my next project. But someone mentioned using 60 M  
channels for liaison and that does seem a perfect use of that band. I  
knew there had to be one. - Duffey

--
KK6MC
James Duffey
Cedar Crest NM