Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22039 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 11:10:13 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from unknown (HELO murphys-inbound.services.quay.plus.net) (212.159.14.225) by excalibur.plus.net with SMTP; 4 Sep 2001 11:10:13 -0000 X-Priority: 3 Received: (qmail 13923 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 11:09:04 -0000 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by murphys with SMTP; 4 Sep 2001 11:09:04 -0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.16 #2) id 15eDz1-0008UK-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Tue, 04 Sep 2001 12:03:07 +0100 Received: from gateg.kw.bbc.co.uk ([132.185.132.16]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.16 #2) id 15eDyz-0008UF-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 04 Sep 2001 12:03:06 +0100 Received: from sunf0.rd.bbc.co.uk (ddmailgate.rd.bbc.co.uk [132.185.128.104]) by gateg.kw.bbc.co.uk (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f84B2LE06533 for ; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 12:02:21 +0100 (BST) Received: from pc523 by sunf0.rd.bbc.co.uk; Tue, 4 Sep 01 12:01:47 BST Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20010904120145.024ceda0@pop3> X-Sender: simonlh@pop3 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Tue, 04 Sep 2001 12:01:45 +0100 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org From: "Simon Lloyd-Hughes" Subject: Re: LF: Re: Carriers / TV QRM In-reply-to: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Can I suggest that you get in contact with the RSGB EMC Committee. ( try their web site at RSGB.org.uk) There has been much information about interference from television switch mode supplies in the EMC column in Radcom over the years. It maybe that your's does not conform to the current standards. In most cases only batch testing is done. Is it a feature of the set? Do you think this would be of interest to the wider audience? Likewise do you have a solution? At 19:03 30/08/01 EDT, you wrote: >In a message dated 8/30/01 7:56:00 PM GMT Daylight Time, >mike@boxernet.demon.co.uk writes: > ><< My problem is, what do I replace it with. Has anyone recently installed a > modern TV that does not cause QRM on 136 ? It would seem like "self > mutilation" (Selbst-Verstuemmelung) to retain this equipment, particularly > at present here in the UK with the awful junk generally being offered to us > on tv. > Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated ! >> > > >I have a Sony and a Panasonic 'portable'. Both of these are clear on 136k. > >David G0MRF > >