Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23456 invoked from network); 5 Apr 2000 08:39:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by grants.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 5 Apr 2000 08:39:14 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12cl9r-0002ZI-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Wed, 05 Apr 2000 09:27:27 +0100 Received: from fm215.facility.pipex.com ([194.131.104.225]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12cl9p-0002ZC-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 05 Apr 2000 09:27:25 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from isis (useri612.uk.uudial.com [194.69.106.222]) by fm215.facility.pipex.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA05104 for ; Wed, 5 Apr 2000 09:26:23 +0100 (BST) X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20000405083148.009f1670@mail.pncl.co.uk> X-Sender: blanch@mail.pncl.co.uk (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2000 09:02:04 +0100 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org From: "Walter Blanchard" Subject: Re: LF: Decca Masts In-reply-to: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: At 20:27 04/04/00 G0MRF wrote: >However, I'm a little concerned about the prospect of two dozen individuals >phoning the RA trying to get various NOV's for higher power / changes in main >station address to avoid /P etc. It may appear a tad unprofessional. >Does the "DMG" have any suggestions about how this can be co-ordinated so >that we collectively retain the respect of the licensing authority? e.g. >Single call and NOV per site etc. >Guidance required please. >What are the NOV's mentioned above? This is exactly what the DMG is trying to avoid. If anyone wants to operate from these sites under his own licence using his own kit and his own callsign then he can do so without further ado using /P. The only problem would be staying within the 1w erp limit, but efficiency figures for all these antennas have been established over a long period, are available and could be extrapolated to 136 to give maximum input power. 8 watts in would be near enough for most of them so this gives a chance to those not having kilowatt amplifiers. The ability to radiate a known 1w might throw up some interesting results and comparisons. We shall see if we can get a special event station call transportable between sites. Higher power is something else. Some people are keen to radiate as much as possible to see if they can cross the pond on the basis if they can't do it with say 100w then 1w certainly won't, at least at this time of year and sunspot cycle. If they can, they'll have a better idea when to try with 1w. Unfortunately I doubt if we will be able to retain use of a station into the next winter. Of course even if they made it it wouldn't rank for any awards anyway. And even if you don't transmit at all, just looking at what's needed to make a really efficient LF transmitting setup can teach you a lot, as we have already found! The NOV's we're looking at are for higher power and extension of 73 kHz operating period. There may not be much chance of either but we'll see. Walter G3JKV.