Return-Path: Received: from mtain-mi08.r1000.mx.aol.com (mtain-mi08.r1000.mail.aol.com [172.21.131.166]) by air-dc02.mail.aol.com (v129.4) with ESMTP id MAILINDC023-864e4be32cc825c; Thu, 06 May 2010 16:55:36 -0400 Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [193.82.116.20]) by mtain-mi08.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id 8D1133800009B; Thu, 6 May 2010 16:55:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1OA855-00068P-2d for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Thu, 06 May 2010 21:54:03 +0100 Received: from [193.82.116.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1OA854-00068G-D0 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 06 May 2010 21:54:02 +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 1OA852-0001Rw-B8 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 06 May 2010 21:54:02 +0100 Received: from me-wanadoo.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mwinf3522.me.freeserve.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 26EDC1C0008F for ; Thu, 6 May 2010 22:53:54 +0200 (CEST) Received: from me-wanadoo.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mwinf3522.me.freeserve.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 19DEF1C00092 for ; Thu, 6 May 2010 22:53:54 +0200 (CEST) Received: from AGB (unknown [91.110.73.61]) by mwinf3522.me.freeserve.com (SMTP Server) with SMTP id 773A81C0008F for ; Thu, 6 May 2010 22:53:53 +0200 (CEST) X-ME-UUID: 20100506205353488.773A81C0008F@mwinf3522.me.freeserve.com Message-ID: From: "Graham" To: References: ,<6C0A9ACBA77A40D6A17362F114DC0A7D@AGB> <9130A62372744A43926AEC8BFC0BBA37@AGB> In-Reply-To: <9130A62372744A43926AEC8BFC0BBA37@AGB> Date: Thu, 6 May 2010 21:53:52 +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: 1.9 (+) X-Spam-Report: autolearn=disabled,HTML_MESSAGE=0.001,PLING_QUERY=0.326,SUBJECT_ENCODED_TWICE=1.543 Subject: LF: =?Windows-1252?Q?500_Permit_emission=92s_bandwidth=3F__New__Data__Mode__-?= =?Windows-1252?Q?_soon_!?= Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0241_01CAED66.9E404660" X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.8 required=5.0 tests=HTML_40_50,HTML_MESSAGE, MISSING_OUTLOOK_NAME,PLING_QUERY 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: 3039400cded04be32cc655ac X-AOL-IP: 193.82.116.20 ------=_NextPart_000_0241_01CAED66.9E404660 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Thanks to all who replied to the request for Bandwidth informat= ion. After the recent ROS EME and 500/1 500/8 data tests , I have= been in conversation with Jose over the bandwidth constrictions= part of the MF permits , as we are 'all' aware there are other co= ntentions expressed elsewhere , however , I think in response to the= tests conducted via this reflector, and a series of emails over= the possibility of a faster version of the eme narrow mode, Jo= se has indicted that he will prepare a narrow data mode , simila= r to the existing ros systems , but with a bandwidth of 100 Hz= and a enhanced data rate to a 'qso' mode to quote :-=20 ''I think i have the solution. I could do a mode of 100 HZ at 6.25 bau= d. Speed it would be about 150 characters/minute, half of PSK31, and= 8.5dB better than PSK31.'' I hope this mode will be useful to the holders of permits allocatin= g 100 Hz , we have already the comments from JIm and Andy over th= e issues of the legality of the system , so hopefully once the ba= ndwidth constriction's are met , this my pave the way for data = operations on 500 and possibly 137 ? , as the system will be sing= le carrier, phase continuous thus may be amplified by class e/d am= plifiers and will be resistant to phase distortion , which from th= e previous ZL2AFP sounder tests ( http://groups.google.com/group/uk= 500khz/web/zl2afp-psk-sounder ) explains the poor performance of psk= on 500.=20 Tnx Graham G0NBD From: Graham=20 Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2010 2:08 PM To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=20 Subject: 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_0241_01CAED66.9E404660 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Thanks to  all  who = replied to=20 the  request  for  Bandwidth  information.<= /DIV>
 
After the  recent  ROS = ;  =20 EME and  500/1  500/8  data tests , I have been in=20 conversation  with  Jose  over the  bandwidth cons= trictions=20 part of the  MF permits , as we are 'all' aware there  are&n= bsp;=20 other  contentions expressed elsewhere , however , I think= in response=20 to  the tests  conducted via this  reflector, and a ser= ies =20 of  emails over  the  possibility of a  faste= r =20 version of the  eme narrow mode,   Jose has = indicted=20 that he will  prepare  a  narrow  data  mode= , similar=20 to the  existing ros  systems , but with a  bandwidth&n= bsp;=20 of  100  Hz and a enhanced data  rate to a  '= qso' mode=20   to  quote :-
 
''I think i have the solution. I could do a mode of 100 HZ at 6.2= 5 baud.=20 Speed it would be about 150 characters/minute, half of PSK31, and 8.5d= B better=20 than PSK31.''
 
I hope this  mode will  be= useful to=20 the  holders of permits allocating 100 Hz , we have  already= the =20 comments  from  JIm and Andy  over the  issues of= the=20 legality of the  system , so  hopefully  once the = =20 bandwidth  constriction's are met , this my  pave the = way =20 for  data  operations on 500  and  possibly 137 ?&= nbsp;, as=20 the  system will  be single  carrier, phase  conti= nuous thus=20 may  be amplified by class  e/d amplifiers and will  be= resistant=20 to  phase  distortion , which  from the  previous&= nbsp;=20 ZL2AFP sounder tests  ( http://groups.google.com/group/uk500khz/web/zl2afp-psk-sounder )=20 explains the  poor  performance of psk on 500.
 
Tnx Graham
 
G0NBD
 
 
 
 

Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2010 2:08 PM
Subject: Re: LF: 500 Permit emission=92s bandwidth? EU and= Global=20 ??

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_0241_01CAED66.9E404660--