FG>   Actually, `band' in this context is a range 
FG> of frequencies that can mena
  >anything the user wants it to mean. I've seen 
  >advertising that (without
  >attempting to identify the users of said bands) 
  >described scanners as
  >something like; `Covers 25-50 mhz, 50-54, 54-88, 88-108,
  >108-136, 136-144, 144-148, 148-174, 174-225, 225-
  >400, 400-450, 450-470,
  >470-512, for a total of 13 bands!!'
 CH> The bands you describe are frequencies that have 
 CH> been specifically set 
 CH> aside for certain and specific radio services by the FCC.  Your 
 CH> assumption that "band" can mean anything the user wants it to mean 
 CH> ignores the fact that these "bands" have been formally established and
 CH> given upper and lower limits.
 
   I know. But I still contend that scanner manufacturers often list every 
distinct `band' they can (and the word can still be used to describe any 
range of frequencies between any two limits wether they involve official 
allocations or not) in order to make their products sound impressive.
 
   Frank
   KA2WQA
 
--- Maximus 2.01wb
---------------