X-GM-THRID: 1235171136308031264 X-Gmail-Labels: rsgb lf Delivered-To: daveyxm@gmail.com Received: by 10.35.22.5 with SMTP id z5cs397556pyi; Mon, 30 Apr 2007 09:36:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.66.221.19 with SMTP id t19mr5513231ugg.1177950989103; Mon, 30 Apr 2007 09:36:29 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [193.82.116.20]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id u6si7174306uge.2007.04.30.09.36.26; Mon, 30 Apr 2007 09:36:29 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 193.82.116.20 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1HiYpZ-0004pW-6O for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Mon, 30 Apr 2007 17:34:29 +0100 Received: from [83.244.159.144] (helo=relay3.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1HiYpY-0004pN-LQ for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 30 Apr 2007 17:34:28 +0100 Received: from imo-m26.mx.aol.com ([64.12.137.7]) by relay3.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1HiYpX-0000Yr-Nm for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 30 Apr 2007 17:34:28 +0100 Received: from ColePe@aol.com by imo-m26.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v38_r9.2.) id l.d29.8dd57cf (41809) for ; Mon, 30 Apr 2007 12:34:18 -0400 (EDT) From: ColePe@aol.com Message-ID: Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2007 12:34:18 EDT To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: 9.0 SE for Windows sub 5022 X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.6 (/) X-Spam-Report: autolearn=disabled,HTML_MESSAGE=0.001,NO_REAL_NAME=0.55 Subject: LF: Re: 500KHz NOV Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="-----------------------------1177950858" X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.9 required=5.0 tests=HTML_40_50, HTML_FONTCOLOR_UNKNOWN,HTML_MESSAGE,NO_REAL_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 Status: O X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 3033 -------------------------------1177950858 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi All, a rather belated thank you to the people who responded to my e-mail below. A simple answer has been sent off so now it is a matter of waiting. 73, Peter G3JFS In a message dated 28/04/2007 07:45:16 Greenwich Standard Time, ColePe writes: Hullo All, In my application for an NOV I indicated that erp would be assessed using the table published by Alan G3NYK and measuring the aerial current. I have received the following request from OFCOM: "Thank you for your recent application for a Special Research Permit to operate in the bands 501 -504kHz. Your application is currently being processed pending authorisation. Whilst this is in motion I would just like to request further information. i) Could you please provide a statement on how you propose to control your transmissions to within the maximum limit of <-10dBW ii) Also please provide a plan view of the aerial system along with complete details of wire lengths and heights. Also giving relationships to boundary fences, neighbouring buildings etc I appreciate that this was not an explicit requirement in the original application however we do still need this information." The site plan is no problem, just a hassle, though the RSGB guidelines indicated it was not necessary because of the distance between my aerial and boundaries/neighbours. To avoid more delay any suggestions as to how best to respond? Also as a matter of interest what sort of figures are current users getting in the way of efficiency, aerial current and transmitter power output to achieve 100mW erp? I shall be using a 120 ft end fed wire, 30 ft high on a steeply sloping site surrounded on three sides by very tall trees over very poor (RF) ground. 73 Peter G3JFS -------------------------------1177950858 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi All,
 
a rather belated thank you to the people who responded to my e-mail=20 below.  A simple answer has been sent off so now it is=20 a matter of waiting.
 
73, Peter G3JFS
 
 
In a message dated 28/04/2007 07:45:16 Greenwich Standard Time, ColePe=20 writes:
Hullo All,
 
In my application for an NOV I indicated that erp would be assessed u= sing=20 the table published by Alan G3NYK and measuring the aerial current. I have= =20 received the following request from OFCOM:
 

"Thank you for your recent=20 application for a Special Research Permit to operate in the bands 501 -504= kHz.=20 Your application is currently being processed pending=20 authorisation.

Whilst this i= s in=20 motion I would just like=20= to=20 request further information.

  &n= bsp;    i)      = ;            &nb= sp;=20 Could you plea= se=20 provide a statement on how you propose to control your transmissions to wi= thin=20 the maximum limit of <-10dBW

ii)      = ;            =20 Also please pr= ovide=20 a plan view of the aerial system along with complete details of wire lengt= hs=20 and heights. Also giving relationships to boundary fences, neighbouring=20 buildings etc

I appreciate t= hat=20 this was not an explicit requirement in the original application however w= e do=20 still need this information."

The site plan=20= is no=20 problem, just a hassle, though the RSGB guidelines indicated it was not=20 necessary because of the distance between my aerial and=20 boundaries/neighbours.

To avoid more=20= delay=20 any suggestions as to how best to respond?  Also as a matter of inter= est=20 what sort of figures are current users getting in the way of efficien= cy,=20 aerial current and transmitter power output to achieve 100mW erp?  I=20 shall be using a 120 ft end fed wire, 30 ft high on a steeply sloping site= =20 surrounded on three sides by very tall trees over very poor (RF)=20 ground.

73 Peter=20 G3JFS

 
-------------------------------1177950858--