Return-Path: Received: from mtain-mi06.r1000.mx.aol.com (mtain-mi06.r1000.mail.aol.com [172.21.131.164]) by air-dc06.mail.aol.com (v129.4) with ESMTP id MAILINDC064-86a44be32f70155; Thu, 06 May 2010 17:06:56 -0400 Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [193.82.116.20]) by mtain-mi06.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id C7B7C38000081; Thu, 6 May 2010 17:06:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1OA8GU-0007Hc-2L for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Thu, 06 May 2010 22:05:50 +0100 Received: from [83.244.159.144] (helo=relay3.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1OA8GS-0007Gt-OK for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 06 May 2010 22:05:48 +0100 Received: from smtp5.freeserve.com ([193.252.22.151] helo=smtp6.freeserve.com) by relay3.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1OA8GR-0003cM-Lh for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 06 May 2010 22:05:48 +0100 Received: from me-wanadoo.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mwinf3522.me.freeserve.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 02CB21C00084 for ; Thu, 6 May 2010 23:05:42 +0200 (CEST) Received: from me-wanadoo.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mwinf3522.me.freeserve.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id E9AAD1C00092 for ; Thu, 6 May 2010 23:05:41 +0200 (CEST) Received: from AGB (unknown [91.110.73.61]) by mwinf3522.me.freeserve.com (SMTP Server) with SMTP id 60C5E1C00084 for ; Thu, 6 May 2010 23:05:41 +0200 (CEST) X-ME-UUID: 20100506210541396.60C5E1C00084@mwinf3522.me.freeserve.com Message-ID: <7B15761D07B741E09502289D2337F312@AGB> From: "Graham" To: References: In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 6 May 2010 22:05:40 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Importance: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 14.0.8089.726 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V14.0.8089.726 X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 100506-1, 06/05/2010), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: autolearn=disabled,HTML_MESSAGE=0.001 Subject: Re: LF: bandwidth ? Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0260_01CAED68.443BC570" X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.7 required=5.0 tests=HTML_40_50,HTML_FONTCOLOR_BLUE, HTML_MESSAGE,MISSING_OUTLOOK_NAME 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-sid: 3039400cdece4be32f6e4a9c X-AOL-IP: 193.82.116.20 ------=_NextPart_000_0260_01CAED68.443BC570 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1254" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Thanks Rik, See the post - re New Mode , Jose has undertaken to code a 100= Hz qso mode based on the existing ros systems , not as fast as= psk , but will comply with the 100 Hz band restrictions and offe= r enhanced phase and s/n performance ... may be 125 hz could of be= en used , but with the on going 'flap' , it was better to simply= reduce the bw to the allowed limit ! (but not simply for Jose= .. needs quite a lot of re-work on the code)=20 Hopefully it will ready to test in a week or so=20 73- G ..=20 =20 From: Rik Strobbe=20 Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2010 6:32 PM To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=20 Subject: LF: bandwidth ? Graham, next question: how to define bandwidth (-3dB, -30dB, ... edge frequenc= ies) ?=20 As I couldn't find a definition in our national ruling I had a look at= "higher levels". The only thing I found was in the IARU-Region 1 HF managers handbook: 1.153 occupied bandwidth: The width of a frequency band such that, bel= ow the lower and above the upper frequency limits, the mean powers emi= tted are each equal to a specified percentage =FD/2 of the total mean= power of a given emission. Unless otherwise specified in an ITU-R Rec= ommendation for the appropriate class of emission, the value of =FD/2= should be taken as 0.5%. Taking this definition it depend on the power distribution of the sign= al. That makes sense, but is very hard to measure. 73, Rik ON7YD ----------------------------------------------------------------------= ---------- Van: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org [owner-rsgb_lf_group@blackshee= p.org] namens Graham [g8fzk@g8fzk.fsnet.co.uk] Verzonden: donderdag 6 mei 2010 15:08 Aan: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Onderwerp: Re: LF: 500 Permit emission=92s bandwidth? EU and Global ?? Thank you , Rik, >From that , its possible that the other permits are similar=20 Ok Tnx - G .=20 From: Rik Strobbe=20 Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2010 1:19 PM To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=20 Subject: RE: LF: 500 Permit emission=92s bandwidth? EU and Global ?? Graham, the document that gives us access to 500kHz says 100Hz bandwidth, but= does not say how many dB's the signal has to be attenuated at these= limits. 73, Rik ON7YD - OR7T ----------------------------------------------------------------------= ---------- Van: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org [owner-rsgb_lf_group@blackshee= p.org] namens Graham [g8fzk@g8fzk.fsnet.co.uk] Verzonden: donderdag 6 mei 2010 13:30 Aan: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Onderwerp: Re: LF: 500 Permit emission=92s bandwidth? EU and Global ?? Ok Many thanks' for the reply's >From that .... next is :- >From the data, I assume that 100 Hz is the common limiting factor= for a narrow band data transmission that could be used by all = who 'wanted' to use it ?..(noted on the cw keying speed ~ BW) So if a value of 100 Hz is specified, what is the 'presumed' rol= l-off of the power in the said bands ?, assuming that the original= concept was based on CW operation , which by definition 'has to' ge= nerate sidebands , there must be an assumed tolerance ? Q would the deployment of a system that could defined as 125= hz bandwidth ie 100 Hz with +/- 12.5 Hz overspill , cause a te= chnical breach of the regulations or be viewed as occupying th= e 'allocated' bandwidth for a telegraphy transmission ? ,=20 Taking that spectral measurements in the 10 Hz region are perhaps= starting to test even the best equipment, the area is perhaps= a little empiric ? I use the word telegraphy, purposely to view/observe the situation= interims of the licence conditions and not on the basis of 'mode= ' which like Liverpool and Everton have there own sub cultures but= are still football teams .. Thanks =20 Graham G0NBD From: Graham=20 Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2010 10:39 PM To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=20 Subject: LF: 500 Permit emission=92s bandwidth? EU and Global ?? 500 Permit emission=92s bandwidth? Can any one indicated what is the permitted =91telegraphy=92 bandw= idth of the various =91new=92 500KHz licences or special permits= issued round the EU and now the rest of the Globe ?=20 I have the impression that 100 Hz is the maximum =91telegraphy=92 tran= smission bandwidth, in some cases, eg , Belgium at 100 Hz . Others ap= pear to be some what wider or not defined ?.=20 Norway is CW only ? what is the Dutch allocation ? Southern Irelan= d ? ... etc=20 Are Beacons defined by mode or bandwidth ? Tnx =96 Graham G0NBD (I use the word =91telegraphy=92 as defined by the ITU R V.662-3 ,= please no reference to key clicks ! ) ------=_NextPart_000_0260_01CAED68.443BC570 Content-Type: text/html; charset="windows-1254" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Thanks Rik,
 
See  the  post -  re&n= bsp; New Mode=20 , Jose has  undertaken to  code a  100 Hz qso  mod= e based on=20 the  existing ros systems  , not  as  fast as psk= , but=20 will  comply  with the  100 Hz  band  restric= tions and=20 offer  enhanced  phase and s/n  performance ... may be&= nbsp; 125=20 hz could of been  used , but with the  on going 'flap' , it= was=20 better  to  simply  reduce the  bw to  the al= lowed=20 limit !  (but not  simply  for  Jose .. needs quit= e a =20 lot of  re-work on the  code)
 
Hopefully  it will  ready&n= bsp; to test=20 in a week or so
 
73- G ..
 
 

Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2010 6:32 PM
Subject: LF: bandwidth ?

Graham,
 
next question: how to define bandwid= th (-3dB,=20 -30dB, ... edge frequencies) ?
As I could= n't find a=20 definition in our national ruling I had a look at "higher levels".
The only thing I found was= in the=20 IARU-Region 1 HF managers handbook:

 

1.153=20 occupied bandwidth: The width of a frequency band such that, be= low the lower and above=20 the upper frequency limits, the mean= powers=20 emitted are each equal to a specified percentage =FD/2 of the total mean power of a given = emission. Unless otherwise specified in an ITU-R=20 Recommendation for the appropriate cl= ass of=20 emission= , the value of =FD/2 should be taken as=20 0.5%.

 

Taking this definition it dep= end on the=20 power distribution of the signal. That makes sense, but is very hard= to=20 measure.

 

73, Rik =20 ON7YD

 
Van:=20 owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org [owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org= ] namens=20 Graham [g8fzk@g8fzk.fsnet.co.uk]
Verzonden: donderdag 6 mei= 2010=20 15:08
Aan: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Onderwerp:= Re: LF:=20 500 Permit emission=92s bandwidth? EU and Global ??

Thank you  , Rik,
 
From that  , its possible that&n= bsp; the =20 other  permits are  similar
 
Ok Tnx - G .

Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2010 1:19 PM
Subject: RE: LF: 500 Permit emission=92s bandwidth? EU and= Global=20 ??

Graham,
 
the document that gives us access to= 500kHz says=20 100Hz bandwidth, but does not say how many dB's the signal has to be= attenuated=20 at these limits.
 
73, Rik  ON7YD - OR7T
&nb= sp;
Van: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksh= eep.org=20 [owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org] namens Graham=20 [g8fzk@g8fzk.fsnet.co.uk]
Verzonden: donderdag 6 mei 2010=20 13:30
Aan: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Onderwerp:=20 Re: LF: 500 Permit emission=92s bandwidth? EU and Global ??
=
Ok Many  thanks'  for the&n= bsp;=20 reply's
 
From that .... next is :-
 
From the  data, I assume th= at =20 100  Hz is the  common  limiting factor for a  nar= row =20 band  data transmission  that  could be used by all&nbs= p; who=20 'wanted'  to  use it  ?..(noted on the  cw keying&= nbsp;=20 speed  ~ BW)
 
So if a  value of  100 Hz= is =20 specified, what  is the  'presumed'  roll-off of the po= wer in the=20 said bands ?, assuming that  the  original  concep= t was=20 based on CW operation , which by  definition 'has to' generate=20 sidebands , there must be an assumed  tolerance ?
 
Q  would the deployment  of= a =20 system that  could   defined as   125 hz bandwidth=  =20 ie 100 Hz with   +/-  12.5 Hz  overspill , cause&n= bsp;=20 a  technical  breach  of the  regulations  or=  =20 be  viewed as  occupying  the  'allocated' bandwid= th =20 for a  telegraphy transmission ? ,
 
Taking that  spectral measuremen= ts in=20 the  10  Hz  region are  perhaps  starting=20 to  test  even the  best equipment, the  area=   is=20 perhaps a  little  empiric ?
 
I use the  word  telegraphy= , purposely to=20 view/observe the  situation interims of the  licence = =20 conditions and not on the  basis  of  'mode' which= =20 like  Liverpool  and Everton have there  own sub cultur= es=20  but are still  football  teams ..
 
Thanks 
 
Graham
G0NBD
 
 
 
 

From: Graham
Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2010 10:39 PM
Subject: LF: 500 Permit emission=92s bandwidth? EU and Glo= bal=20 ??

= 500 Permit=20 emission=92s bandwidth?

 

= Can any one=20 indicated  what is the  permitted= =20  =91telegraphy=92  bandwidth=  =20 of the various =91new=92 500KHz  licences =20 or  special  permits issued= round=20 the  EU and now the  rest of the =20 Globe ?

 

= I have the=20 impression that 100 Hz is the maximum =91telegraphy=92 transmission ba= ndwidth, in=20 some cases, eg , Belgium at 100=20 Hz .  Others appear to be some what wider or not def= ined ?.=20

 

= Norway  is CW only  ? what is= the  Dutch =20 allocation ? Southern Ireland ? ... etc

 

= Are =20 Beacons defined by  mode or =20 bandwidth  ?

 

= Tnx =96=20 Graham

= G0NBD

 

= (I use=20 the  word  =91telegraphy=92 as def= ined by=20 the  ITU R V.662-3 ,  please no =20 reference to key clicks !=20 )









------=_NextPart_000_0260_01CAED68.443BC570--