Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-mc04.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id 20B6538000093; Fri, 4 Jan 2013 05:32:52 -0500 (EST) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1Tr4Z9-0001bg-6D for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Fri, 04 Jan 2013 10:31:55 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1Tr4Z8-0001bX-Lz for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 04 Jan 2013 10:31:54 +0000 Received: from mail-ia0-f173.google.com ([209.85.210.173]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1Tr4Z6-0007mU-FP for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 04 Jan 2013 10:31:53 +0000 Received: by mail-ia0-f173.google.com with SMTP id w21so13688514iac.18 for ; Fri, 04 Jan 2013 02:31:30 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-originating-ip:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=xkOSBUln7D3+xseGvW3je7nyY807r51lHA8sROCWOlQ=; b=hUADMVSxYobqZ4RKtShpYG1i3a81AMWy1/crGYoMzvEgEe39Hnc0K7PW6uYSFCoh4O ssIaBTZksUtxzHBUJxglvq0KYb/Gq7bQfo7ncJzJSYryetCATrHHyYU4YR/PicZngY9r QRWny7cQ4Jt49eikUA1+en/Jj9emGPhkPuCWdiOEMAiykyTIs+/ldPzw+HYCsL8kjb9d P1SQ0xf9dZPcgMj6Y16N7ltWChd52hW4iGIX5Dy5gf4IxwbqveQbrFFJ/2HSPwoH62EB Y+IPFvKt0oB/U3BCcNhhufIGDxeY0MVoFBEGeqHrRpZd8dxjX9PMnTNfEL1ATTno/qwV l+FA== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.50.157.162 with SMTP id wn2mr44530861igb.27.1357295490257; Fri, 04 Jan 2013 02:31:30 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.50.154.102 with HTTP; Fri, 4 Jan 2013 02:31:30 -0800 (PST) X-Originating-IP: [80.195.207.132] In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2013 10:31:30 +0000 Message-ID: From: DAVE PICK To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkxzCwUZBK6HRgAwsvbko0ZmrNPkEPt7qclESR9tZyaarLypuAKUV9FF9tuyHRzWPy5DFeU X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) 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: Chaps Based on experience on 136 where SSB was tried, it's unlikely to cause any problem to other modes running as the meagre 5W is dissipated over a much larger bandwidth the energy on any one frequency is small. Anyone who is S9+ on SSB at a distance is not running 5W EIRP! [...] Content analysis details: (-0.7 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.7 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, low trust [209.85.210.173 listed in list.dnswl.org] -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message X-Scan-Signature: 84016abdd353c82964b6d256164a353f Subject: Re: LF: 477 A local SSB chat band ? Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=e89a8f23570d8d538a04d273fb0d X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.6 required=5.0 tests=HTML_20_30, HTML_FONTCOLOR_UNSAFE,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-sid: 3039ac1d604c50e6afd411c9 X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none --e89a8f23570d8d538a04d273fb0d Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Chaps Based on experience on 136 where SSB was tried, it's unlikely to cause any problem to other modes running as the meagre 5W is dissipated over a much larger bandwidth the energy on any one frequency is small. Anyone who is S9+ on SSB at a distance is not running 5W EIRP! Dave G3YXM On 4 January 2013 08:49, Chris wrote: > ** > Hi Colin, > Not too sure what you're getting at. We all have our individual interests. > I hope you're not suggesting the new band should only be used by obsessive > DX CW only enthusiasts? > Chris, G4AYT. > > ----- Original Message ----- > *From:* M5FRA - Colin > *To:* rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org > *Sent:* Friday, January 04, 2013 8:24 AM > *Subject:* Re: LF: 477 A local SSB chat band ? > > Just a thought.....when it gets totally washed out with SSB all 24 hours > how are you going to clean it out? People in general dont follow > gentlemen's agreements they were not party too.....and "it doesnt say I > cant in the licence". > I fear that, though what you suggest would work, it might encourage > mayhem. > > I agree with Alan. What is wrong with top band for local chats? Or the > acres of unused space on 2m or 70cms? To consider using any form of SSB on > 630m just because it might be technically feasible if sheer lunacy. IMHO it > would kill the band for other modes and the potential for QRM to other > users will be high. As an ex G8 who learned Morse in spite of a chronic > medical condition I would say just get on a do it. The rewards are well > worth the effort. Or maybe effort is a dirty word? > > Colin - G8FRA/M5FRA > > m5fra.org.uk > > --e89a8f23570d8d538a04d273fb0d Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Chaps

Based on experience on 136 where SSB was tried, it's unlik= ely to cause any problem to other modes running as the meagre 5W is dissipa= ted over a much larger bandwidth the energy on any one frequency is small.<= br> Anyone who is S9+ on SSB at a distance is not running 5W EIRP!

Dave = G3YXM=A0

On 4 January 2013 08:49, Chris = <c.ashby435@btinternet.com> wrote:
Hi Colin,
Not too sure what you're getting at. We all h= ave=20 our individual interests. I hope you're not suggesting the new band sho= uld only=20 be used by=A0obsessive DX CW only enthusiasts?
Chris, G4AYT.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, January 04, 2013 8:24= =20 AM
Subject: Re: LF: 477 A local SSB ch= at=20 band ?

Just a thought.....when it gets totally washed out with SSB all 24=20 hours how are you going to clean it out? People in general dont follow=20 gentlemen's agreements they were not party too.....and "it doesn= t say I cant=20 in the licence".
I fear that, though what you= =20 suggest would work, it might encourage mayhem.

I agree with Alan. What is wrong with top band for local chats? Or t= he=20 acres of unused space on 2m or=A070cms? To consider using any form of SSB= =20 on 630m just because it might be technically feasible if sheer lunacy. IM= HO it=20 would kill the band for other modes and the potential for QRM to other us= ers=20 will be high.=A0=A0As an ex G8 who learned Morse in spite of a chronic=20 medical condition I would say just get on a do it. The rewards are well w= orth=20 the effort. Or maybe effort is a dirty word?
=A0
Colin - G8FRA/M5FRA
=A0


--e89a8f23570d8d538a04d273fb0d--