Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-ma04.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id 8A53F380000A7; Fri, 15 Jun 2012 11:10:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1SfY8y-0003HD-9r for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Fri, 15 Jun 2012 16:09:00 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1SfY8x-0003H4-KO for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 15 Jun 2012 16:08:59 +0100 Received: from out1.ip03ir2.opaltelecom.net ([62.24.128.239]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1SfY8u-0006og-Lt for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 15 Jun 2012 16:08:58 +0100 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AkkFAL9P209cHYeJ/2dsb2JhbABFgkWiMJBdgQiCEwUBAQUIAQEDICEIAiELAQEDBQIBAxEEAQEBCRcOFAEEGAIGDAoIBg8EAQkBAgIBAQELBIdcAw8HsDoDiViKVGIbhXYDjUORBYFbhH6CYA X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.77,417,1336345200"; d="scan'208,217";a="389832268" Received: from host-92-29-135-137.as13285.net (HELO xphd97xgq27nyf) ([92.29.135.137]) by out1.ip03ir2.opaltelecom.net with SMTP; 15 Jun 2012 16:08:39 +0100 Message-ID: <003f01cd4b08$bc30f8c0$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> From: "mal hamilton" To: Cc: "rsgb" References: <4FDB4937.5414.64D2FC4@mike.dennison.ntlworld.com>, <7E7DFBB4D102A04DB5ADC88D66628A4A0FAADC2B@ICTS-S-MBX5.luna.kuleuven.be> Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2012 15:08:34 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "relay1.thorcom.net", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: You are forgetting about the USER. It depends where they are flying at the time, they might well be closer to an amateur transmission than the NDB and the amateur could be blocking the frequency. They are not just local approach nav aids. They are often picked up a few hundred miles away and used for cross checking and used more often than you think. g3kev [...] Content analysis details: (0.0 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [62.24.128.239 listed in list.dnswl.org] 0.0 FSL_XM_419 Old OE version in X-Mailer only seen in 419 spam -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message 0.0 FSL_UA FSL_UA 0.0 AXB_XMAILER_MIMEOLE_OL_024C2 AXB_XMAILER_MIMEOLE_OL_024C2 X-Scan-Signature: 95c202c4948d9b6d0896e68e12fe8e98 Subject: LF: Re: [rsgb_lf_group] Re: Band Planning for 472 Khz Band ? Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_003C_01CD4B08.BBC824D0" X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=HTML_60_70,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=2.63 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: rs_out_1@blacksheep.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No; SAEximRunCond expanded to false x-aol-global-disposition: G X-AOL-SCOLL-SCORE: 1:2:472259104:93952408 X-AOL-SCOLL-URL_COUNT: 8 x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d600c4fdb50487090 X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_003C_01CD4B08.BBC824D0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable You are forgetting about the USER. It depends where they are flying at = the time, they might well be closer to an amateur transmission than the = NDB and the amateur could be blocking the frequency. They are not just local approach nav aids. They are often picked up a = few hundred miles away and used for cross checking and used more often = than you think.=20 g3kev ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Rik Strobbe=20 To: rsgb_lf_group@yahoogroups.co.uk=20 Sent: Friday, June 15, 2012 2:46 PM Subject: RE: [rsgb_lf_group] Re: Band Planning for 472 Khz Band ? =20 I agree with Mike: it's going to be a local problem.=20 Typical NDB service ranges are 50-100km and they run similar power = (50-500W) than we do.=20 It is very unlikely that we will ever cause any harm to an NDB that's = 500km and more away. So nothing to worry about in the UK, Belgium, Netherlands, = Westen-Germany, ... More east it may be wise to stay away from NDB's that are close. 73, Rik ON7YD - OR7T -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ----- Van: rsgb_lf_group@yahoogroups.co.uk [rsgb_lf_group@yahoogroups.co.uk] = namens graham787 [g0nbd@hotmail.com] Verzonden: vrijdag 15 juni 2012 16:38 Aan: rsgb_lf_group@yahoogroups.co.uk Onderwerp: [rsgb_lf_group] Re: Band Planning for 472 Khz Band ? =20 This is going to be a nightmare, more like a downhill slalom course = than a band allocation=20 Has anyone a graphic of the band and beacon allocations what shows = where the gaps are ? G.. --- In rsgb_lf_group@yahoogroups.co.uk, "Mike Dennison" = wrote: > > Guard bands for all 27 listed NDBs would present a problem as the = MCW=20 > receivers would be at least 2.5kHz wide. Fortunately, any=20 > interference from amateurs is likely to be extremely local. Our = small=20 > signal working is likely to suffer more QRM =3Dfrom=3D the NDBs than = to=20 > them. >=20 > Mike, G3XDV > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D >=20 > > Twenty-seven NDBs have been logged in Europe between 472-479kHz. > > Twelve of those have been logged from the UK. > > The NDB database on the Classaxe web site would provide detailed > > information on frequencies which should be avoided. It should be = borne > > in mind that the NDBs use A2 mode with a mix of approx 400Hz and > > 1020Hz modulation, so there are a good number of specific slots to = be > > wary of. > >=20 > > http://www.classaxe.com/dx/ndb/reu/ > >=20 > > Perhaps some consideration should be given to setting up some form = of > > guard bands/frequencies in order to avoid any problems with NDBs? > >=20 > > 73s Tracey G5VU > __._,_.___ Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post | Start a new = topic=20 Messages in this topic (12)=20 Recent Activity: a.. New Members 4=20 Visit Your Group=20 Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest =95 Unsubscribe =95 Terms of Use. =20 __,_._,___ ------=_NextPart_000_003C_01CD4B08.BBC824D0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
 
 
You are forgetting about the USER. It depends = where they=20 are flying at the time, they might well be closer to an amateur = transmission=20 than the NDB and the amateur could be blocking the = frequency.
They are not just local approach nav aids. They = are=20 often picked up a few hundred miles away and used for = cross=20 checking and used more often than you think. 
g3kev
 
 
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Rik Strobbe
To: rsgb_lf_group@yahoogroups= .co.uk=20
Sent: Friday, June 15, 2012 = 2:46 PM
Subject: RE: [rsgb_lf_group] = Re: Band=20 Planning for 472 Khz Band ?

  =

I agree with Mike: it's=  going=20 to be a local problem.

Typical NDB = service=20 ranges are 50-100km and they = run similar=20 power (50-500W) than we do.

It is very unlikely tha= t=20 we will = ever cause any harm=20 to an NDB that's 500km = and=20 more away.

So nothing=20 to worry about in the UK, Belgium, = Netherlands, Westen-Germany, ...

More east it may be<= /A> wise=20 = to stay away from NDB's&n= bsp;that=20 are close.

 

73, Rik  ON7YD - = OR7T

 

Van: rsgb_lf_group@yahoogroups.co.uk=20 [rsgb_lf_group@yahoogroups.co.uk] namens graham787=20 [g0nbd@hotmail.com]
Verzonden: vrijdag 15 juni 2012=20 16:38
Aan: = rsgb_lf_group@yahoogroups.co.uk
Onderwerp:=20 [rsgb_lf_group] Re: Band Planning for 472 Khz Band = ?

 =20

This is going to be a nightmare, more like a downhill slalom course = than a=20 band allocation

Has anyone a graphic of the band and beacon=20 allocations what shows where the gaps are ?

G..

--- In = rsgb_lf_group@yahoogroups.co.uk, "Mike Dennison"=20 <mike.dennison@...> wrote:
>
> Guard bands for all = 27 listed=20 NDBs would present a problem as the MCW
> receivers would be at = least=20 2.5kHz wide. Fortunately, any
> interference from amateurs is = likely to=20 be extremely local. Our small
> signal working is likely to = suffer more=20 QRM =3Dfrom=3D the NDBs than to
> them.
>
> Mike,=20 G3XDV
> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>
> > = Twenty-seven NDBs have been=20 logged in Europe between 472-479kHz.
> > Twelve of those have = been=20 logged from the UK.
> > The NDB database on the Classaxe web = site=20 would provide detailed
> > information on frequencies which = should be=20 avoided. It should be borne
> > in mind that the NDBs use A2 = mode=20 with a mix of approx 400Hz and
> > 1020Hz modulation, so = there are a=20 good number of specific slots to be
> > wary of.
> > =
> > http://www.classaxe.com/dx/ndb/reu/
> > =
>=20 > Perhaps some consideration should be given to setting up some = form=20 of
> > guard bands/frequencies in order to avoid any problems = with=20 NDBs?
> >
> > 73s Tracey = G5VU
>

__._,_.___
Reply=20 to sender | Rep= ly=20 to group | Reply=20 via web post | Start=20 a new topic
Messages=20 in this topic (12) =
Recent=20 Activity:=20 New=20 Members 4
Visit=20 Your Group
=20
Switch to: Text-Only,=20 Daily=20 Digest =95 Unsubscribe=20 =95 Terms of = Use
.

__,_._,___
------=_NextPart_000_003C_01CD4B08.BBC824D0--