{ "numMessagesInTopic": 2, "nextInTime": 699, "senderId": "JQkHBxLpXoCQMr_1wdcv6xwBqzIBqJzEdLTygSmPoUVRPMYpO8Ah4NQS0tZK3y9L7w2d_7Da8KOzTaOme7okmsPVTj3YXoCdoySFI59w", "systemMessage": false, "subject": "Re: [Pro-97] Moving up from a Pro-60", "from": ""Rob Saunders" <rsaunders95621@...>", "authorName": "Rob Saunders", "msgSnippet": "Hmmm, what freqs do you have for Blue Angels? Check out www.caronvikre.com ... From: Jim To: Sent: Sunday, June", "msgId": 698, "profile": "califzeph", "topicId": 697, "spamInfo": { "reason": "12", "isSpam": false }, "replyTo": "LIST", "userId": 192002332, "messageBody": "
----- Original Message -----
\nFrom: "Jim" <chief_jim@...>
\nTo: <Pro-97@yahoogroups.com>
\nSent: Sunday, June 26, 2005 6:04 AM
\nSubject: [Pro-97] Moving up from a Pro-60
\n
\n
\n> Was first introduced to the Pro-97 at the Rhode Island ANG airshow
\n> last weekend. I was having no luck with the new Blue Angels
\n> frequencies. The fellow with the Pro-97 showed me how fast it
\n> captures transmissions. Impressed.
\n>
\n> However before I actually go out and get one I need to ask whether it
\n> truly is the preferred unit for my needs. My priority use is
\n> civil-air and mil-air at airshows. Would other models or even brands
\n> be better suited for this purpose?
\n>
\n> Thanks.
\n>
\n>
\n>
\n>
\n>
\n> Yahoo! Groups Links
\n>
\n>
\n>
\n>
\n>
\n>
\n>