[Mich VHF UHF Society] [Packrats] 222 MHz FT8 - Inquiring 9s Wanna Knw

[paul newcombe]

222.074 would be logical to me.
better to keep it all all together in the logical order that it already is.
There is far too little activity on 222 to be bothered about interference. Hell most of us would just be happy to see a signal on 222.

Paul N2EME
________________________________
From: packrats-bounces at mailman.qth.net <packrats-bounces at mailman.qth.net> on behalf of Bart Jahnke <bjahnke at gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, March 23, 2018 8:43 AM
To: VHF Reflector
Cc: newsvhf at mailman.qth.net; FLWSS DIGEST; packrats at mailman.qth.net; badgercontesters at mailman.qth.net; pnwvhfs at googlegroups.com List; mivus at mivus.org
Subject: [Packrats] 222 MHz FT8 - Inquiring 9s Wanna Knw

All,

A question has been raised as to what frequency might be a good watering hole for 222 MHz FT8?  Anyone have a frequency they are using?

If not, maybe 222.180 and 432.180 MHz might be suggestions as we enter this new propagation year.

Maybe same for MSK/FSK144.  Perhaps 222.140 and 432.140 MHz, or?

Talk it up!

73 Bart W9JJ
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mivus.org/pipermail/mivus_mivus.org/attachments/20180323/19ec2cac/attachment.htm>