| |
VK2ZRG > WIFI 05.05.05 13:02l 32 Lines 828 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : 1290_VK2ZRG
Read: DG5YM GUEST DK5RAS DO6NP
Subj: Re: RE packet vs WiFi
Path: DB0FHN<DB0FOR<DB0SIF<DB0EA<DB0RES<DK0WUE<SP7MGD<VK7AX<VK2BNR<VK2TGB<
VK2IO<VK2WI
Sent: 050505/1009Z @:VK2WI.#SYD.NSW.AUS.OC #:1208 [SYDNEY] FBB7 $:1290_VK2ZRG
From: VK2ZRG@VK2WI.#SYD.NSW.AUS.OC
To : WIFI@WW
VK2ZRG/TPK 1.83d Msg #:1290 Date:05-05-05 Time:11:12Z
>R:050505/0805z @:OE7XLR.#OE7.AUT.EU [TCP/IP Node/BBS Innsbruck] obcm1.04
Wolf OE7FTJ wrote
>But whats about the bandwidth? 20MHz as a ham application ...?
>
>de Wolf, oe7ftj
>
Hello Wolf and readers,
What's the problem with 20 MHz bandwidth? The 13 cm band allocation in
Australia is 50 MHz wide, (2400 to 2450) and I believe that it's similar
in the USA. WI-FI is faily low power...around 50 or 100 milliwatts and
also spread spectrum, as far as I know.
How much ham activity is there on 13 cm in your area Wolf? Ever heard
of the saying use it or lose it?
73s from Ralph VK2ZRG@VK2WI.#SYD.NSW.AUS.OC
/ack
Taglines Version 1.00, by Colin Coker G4FCN
C Program run, C Program Crash...ReWrite in Pascal!
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
