Return-Path: Received: from mtain-df12.r1000.mx.aol.com (mtain-df12.r1000.mx.aol.com [172.29.64.224]) by air-me02.mail.aol.com (v129.4) with ESMTP id MAILINME023-8ba64cc3643a391; Sat, 23 Oct 2010 18:39:54 -0400 Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-df12.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id A48B2380000B2; Sat, 23 Oct 2010 18:39:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1P9mjN-0002Fl-Cd for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Sat, 23 Oct 2010 23:38:29 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1P9mjM-0002Fc-Vc for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 23 Oct 2010 23:38:28 +0100 Received: from smtp5.freeserve.com ([193.252.22.151] helo=smtp6.freeserve.com) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1P9mjK-0004Lk-CC for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 23 Oct 2010 23:38:28 +0100 Received: from me-wanadoo.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mwinf3524.me.freeserve.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 366011C00085 for ; Sun, 24 Oct 2010 00:38:20 +0200 (CEST) Received: from me-wanadoo.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mwinf3524.me.freeserve.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 27B1D1C00086 for ; Sun, 24 Oct 2010 00:38:20 +0200 (CEST) Received: from AGB (unknown [91.109.20.5]) by mwinf3524.me.freeserve.com (SMTP Server) with SMTP id DE9071C00085 for ; Sun, 24 Oct 2010 00:38:19 +0200 (CEST) X-ME-UUID: 20101023223819911.DE9071C00085@mwinf3524.me.freeserve.com Message-ID: From: "Graham" To: References: <006b01cb72fe$23473540$4001a8c0@lark> In-Reply-To: <006b01cb72fe$23473540$4001a8c0@lark> Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2010 23:38:19 +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 101023-1, 23/10/2010), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/) X-Spam-Report: autolearn=disabled,MAILTO_TO_SPAM_ADDR=0.276 Subject: Re: LF: 8.97kHz NoV received today Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.2 required=5.0 tests=MAILTO_TO_SPAM_ADDR, 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: 3039ac1d40e04cc3643829a7 X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none True , but compared to the spread spectrum nonsense from over the water , ofcom seems to be quiet sane ! (always knew there was something fishy about 'ross') During the GB4FPR 500 nov , I has no problems dealing with Mr RW and that was part of a 3 way split .. G,, -------------------------------------------------- From: "Alan Melia" Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2010 10:32 PM To: "RSGB LF Gp" Subject: Re: LF: 8.97kHz NoV received today > > In theory, if you communicate, yes! They reserve the right to make the > decision to approve, and laser comms are under their "regulation" > > Alan > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: > Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2010 9:09 AM > Subject: RE: LF: 8.97kHz NoV received today > > >> So you need permission to switch on a light??? >> >> 73 >> >> Victor >> >> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- >> Van: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org >> [mailto:owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org]Namens Alan Melia >> Verzonden: vrijdag 22 oktober 2010 22:14 >> Aan: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org >> Onderwerp: Re: LF: 8.97kHz NoV received today >> >> >> No a good idea Jacek Ofcoms regulatory powers do not end at 9kHz. They > have >> powers over radiation at any frequency. >> Alan G3NYK >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Jacek Lipkowski" >> To: >> Sent: Friday, October 22, 2010 8:45 PM >> Subject: Re: LF: 8.97kHz NoV received today >> >> >> > On Fri, 22 Oct 2010, Roger Lapthorn wrote: >> > >> > > *Frequencies allowed:* 8.7kHz - 9.1kHz >> > >> > i wonder what would happen if you applied specifically for 8.0-8.990kHz >> > (no frequency >9kHz). is expanding the frequency range above 9kHz a > trick >> > by OFCOM, so that they can show that they have juristiction? >> > >> > VY 73 >> > >> > Jacek / SQ5BPF >> > >> > >> >> >> > > >