Return-Path: Received: from mtain-mi05.r1000.mx.aol.com (mtain-mi05.r1000.mail.aol.com [172.21.131.163]) by air-da05.mail.aol.com (v127_r1.1) with ESMTP id MAILINDA054-86654b88f450156; Sat, 27 Feb 2010 05:30:40 -0500 Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [193.82.116.20]) by mtain-mi05.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id 31B0C380000ED; Sat, 27 Feb 2010 05:30:38 -0500 (EST) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1NlJvT-0006bf-4Y for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Sat, 27 Feb 2010 10:29:35 +0000 Received: from [193.82.116.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1NlJvS-0006bW-5g for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 27 Feb 2010 10:29:34 +0000 Received: from cavuit01.kulnet.kuleuven.be ([134.58.240.43]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1NlJvP-00040Q-Jc for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 27 Feb 2010 10:29:34 +0000 Received: from smtps02.kuleuven.be (smtpshost02.kulnet.kuleuven.be [134.58.240.75]) by cavuit01.kulnet.kuleuven.be (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1AFC27B8047 for ; Sat, 27 Feb 2010 11:29:18 +0100 (CET) Received: from ICTS-S-HUB-N3.luna.kuleuven.be (icts-s-hub-n3.luna.kuleuven.be [10.112.9.13]) by smtps02.kuleuven.be (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0516FF3863 for ; Sat, 27 Feb 2010 11:29:18 +0100 (CET) Received: from ICTS-S-EXC2-CA.luna.kuleuven.be ([10.112.11.13]) by ICTS-S-HUB-N3.luna.kuleuven.be ([10.112.9.13]) with mapi; Sat, 27 Feb 2010 11:29:18 +0100 X-Kuleuven: This mail passed the K.U.Leuven mailcluster From: Rik Strobbe To: "rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org" Date: Sat, 27 Feb 2010 11:24:24 +0100 Thread-Topic: LF: Fwd: Special Permits for Amateur Radio Operation below 9kHz? Thread-Index: Acq3kt36Atj9nJv0QUOc2lr864cDYwABCooW Message-ID: References: <57a24ca71002261728s1be02142h83d7b0d8931e540@mail.gmail.com>,<377207.23110.qm@web28105.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <377207.23110.qm@web28105.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Accept-Language: nl-NL, nl-BE Content-Language: nl-BE X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: nl-NL, nl-BE MIME-Version: 1.0 X-KULeuven-Information: Katholieke Universiteit Leuven X-KULeuven-Scanned: Found to be clean X-KULeuven-Envelope-From: rik.strobbe@fys.kuleuven.be X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/) X-Spam-Report: autolearn=disabled,HTML_MESSAGE=0.001,HTML_TAG_EXIST_TBODY=0.126 Subject: RE: LF: Fwd: Special Permits for Amateur Radio Operation below 9kHz? Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_BF4A524700075746A6467658DFC7102C1286AD4075ICTSSEXC2CAlu_" 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_30_40,HTML_MESSAGE, HTML_TAG_EXISTS_TBODY,TO_ADDRESS_EQ_REAL 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: 3039400cdecd4b88f44e2808 X-AOL-IP: 193.82.116.20 X-Mailer: Unknown (No Version) --_000_BF4A524700075746A6467658DFC7102C1286AD4075ICTSSEXC2CAlu_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Warren , Pete, when back in the mid 90's the initial request for a longwave amateur segme= nt (what later turned out to be 137kHz) was discussed, one of the big tele= com "bobo's" stated that they saw no harm that amateurs would transmit the= re with max. 1 W EIRP as with that power one wouldn't be able to get any= further than the other end of the town. It turned out a bit different, unless you see the world as one big town ;-= ) 73, Rik ON7YD ________________________________ Van: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org [owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.or= g] namens M0FMT [m0fmt@yahoo.co.uk] Verzonden: zaterdag 27 februari 2010 10:43 Aan: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Onderwerp: Re: LF: Fwd: Special Permits for Amateur Radio Operation below= 9kHz? Hi Warren and thanks Your comments are well noted along with the good healthy dose of cynicism,= I like that .... hee hee! 73 es GL petefmt --- On Sat, 27/2/10, Warren Ziegler wrote: From: Warren Ziegler Subject: Re: LF: Fwd: Special Permits for Amateur Radio Operation below 9k= Hz? To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date: Saturday, 27 February, 2010, 1:28 Hi Pete, Yes I guess I engaged in a bit of hyperbole when I suggested tha= t 9kHz won't cross the garden wall, but not by much. If you reckon that the world record is 10km for an amateur and that was to= receive a very faint ARGO trace then for a signal to be audible it must= be considerably closer. You comment on politics reminds of the old joke: Q. Do you know the difference between capitalism and communism? A. In capitalism its dog eat dog; in communism its the other way 'round= ! -- 73 Warren K2ORS WD2XGJ WD2XSH/23 WE2XEB/2 WE2XGR/1 On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 3:46 PM, M0FMT > wrote: Hi Warren Well I can tell you right now that the garden wall is not the limit by any= means unless you live on John Wayne's Ranch. Your New President is trying to create jobs over there? He wants to take= a leaf out of our book we've been doing it for years... joking aside.....= .. I am not expecting DX but to have a communication path that covers the= local LF Amateur community on VLF would be rather Cool I think. From ther= e it may be a long road that I for one may not travel but at the moment th= ere is enough enthusiasm locally to try out a few ideas many have come fro= m this debate on the LF reflector. The near field signal is quite readable= at about 1/2 km from a very low power TX using a whip on RX during a quic= k wiz up the road in the car. Must key this thing my ears are ringing with= this continuous beat note running all the time. 73 es GL petefmt -------------------------------------------------- From: "Warren Ziegler" > Sent: Thursday, February 25, 2010 9:31 PM To: > Subject: Re: LF: Fwd: Special Permits for Amateur Radio Operation below 9k= Hz? Asking Ofcom for a license or Nov to generate a signal that will not extend past your own garden seems like a lot of trouble for nothing.... -- 73 Warren K2ORS WD2XGJ WD2XSH/23 WE2XEB/2 WE2XGR/1 On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 3:28 PM, Jacek Lipkowski > wrote: On Thu, 25 Feb 2010, Roger Lapthorn wrote: People may be interested in the reply from Rod Wilkinson at OFCOM received today. I asked him what OFCOM's view would be. [...] They state that ITU Radio Regs indicate that there is no allocation for frequencies below 9 kHz. However in the UK, a licence would be required as there is no lower frequency limit for wireless telegraphy under the WT Act 2006. [...] there is already a very big commercial user of the elf and vlf spectrum, they inject very big power into ground dipoles. emissions from one contine= nt can be heard on another. and they do this without any license from the rad= io authorities. the only regulation they need regards maximum field strengths (and this is usually the realm of some environmental protection authority and not the radio authority). the operating frequency varies, but is usual= ly 50Hz, 60Hz, 16.6Hz etc :) sometimes when dealing with the goverment, the best practice is not to ask at all :) even if they agree with you there will always be a "but you will need a license for that" clause. if you have to ask, ask them if it is their duty to regulate potential electromagnetic wave transmission from instalations operating on 50Hz (or any other frequency in the 0-9kHz region, that is not ITU regulated). you would probably get an entirely different answer :) VY 73 Jacek / SQ5BPF ps. the answer that you got from OFCOM is actually very nice --_000_BF4A524700075746A6467658DFC7102C1286AD4075ICTSSEXC2CAlu_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Warren= , Pete,
 
when back in the mid 90'= s the initial request for a longwave amateur segment (what later turned ou= t to be 137kHz) was discussed, one of the big telecom "bobo's" stated that they saw no= harm that amateurs would transmit there with max. 1 W EIRP as with that= power one wouldn't be able to get any further than the other end of= the town.
It turned out a bit differ= ent, unless you see the world as one big town ;-)
 
73, Rik  ON7YD=
Van: owner-rsgb_l= f_group@blacksheep.org [owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org] namens M0FMT= [m0fmt@yahoo.co.uk]
Verzonden: zaterdag 27 februari 2010 10:43
Aan: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Onderwerp: Re: LF: Fwd: Special Permits for Amateur Radio Operation= below 9kHz?

Hi= Warren and thanks
 
Yo= ur comments are well noted along with the good healthy dose of cynici= sm, I like that
..= .. hee hee!
 
73= es GL petefmt


--- On Sat, 27/2/10, Warren Ziegler <wd2xgj@gmail.com>= wrote:

From: Warren Ziegler <wd2xgj@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: LF: Fwd: Special Permits for Amateur Radio Operation below 9k= Hz?
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Date: Saturday, 27 February, 2010, 1:28

Hi Pete,

          Yes I guess I engaged in a bi= t of hyperbole when I suggested that 9kHz won't cross the garden wall, but= not by much.
If you reckon that the world record is 10km for an amateur and that= was to receive a very faint ARGO trace then for a signal to be audible it= must be considerably closer.
       
         You comment on politics reminds of= the old joke: 
Q.  Do you know the difference between capitalism and communism?=
A.  In capitalism its dog eat dog; in communism its the other wa= y 'round !

-- 
73 Warren K2ORS
               WD2XGJ 
               WD2XSH/23
               WE2XEB/2
               WE2XGR/1

  

On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 3:46 PM, M0FMT <m0fmt@yahoo.co.uk&= gt; wrote:

Hi Warren
 
Well I can tell you right now that the garden wall is not the limit= by any means unless you live on John Wayne's Ranch.
Your New President is trying to create jobs over there? He wants to take= a leaf out of our book we've been doing it for years... joking aside.....= .. I am not expecting DX but to have a communication path that covers the= local LF Amateur community on VLF would be rather Cool I think. From there it may be a long road that I for one&n= bsp;may not travel but at the moment there is enough enthusiasm locally to= try out a few ideas many have come from this debate on the LF reflector.= The near field signal is quite readable at about 1/2 km from a very low power TX using a whip on RX during= a quick wiz up the road in the car. Must key this thing my ears are ringi= ng with this continuous beat note running all the time.
 
73 es GL petefmt

--------------------------------------------------
From: "Warren Ziegler" <wd2xg= j@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 25, 2010 9:31 PM
To: <rsgb_lf_group@bla= cksheep.org>
Subject: Re: LF: Fwd: Special Permits for Amateur Radio Operation below 9k= Hz?


Asking Ofcom for a license or Nov to generate a signal that will not
extend past your own garden seems like a lot of trouble for
nothing....

--
73 Warren K2ORS
              WD2XGJ
              WD2XSH/23
              WE2XEB/2
              WE2XGR/1


On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 3:28 PM, Jacek Lipkowski <sq5bpf@lipkowski.org> wrote:
On Thu, 25 Feb 2010, Roger Lapthorn wrote:

People may be interested in the reply from Rod Wilkinson at OFCOM received=
today. I asked him what OFCOM's view would be.

[...]

They state that ITU Radio Regs indicate that there is no allocation for frequencies below 9 kHz. However in the UK, a licence would be required as=
there is no lower frequency limit for wireless telegraphy under the WT Act=
2006. [...]

there is already a very big commercial user of the elf and vlf spectrum, they inject very big power into ground dipoles. emissions from one contine= nt
can be heard on another. and they do this without any license from the rad= io
authorities. the only regulation they need regards maximum field strengths=
(and this is usually the realm of some environmental protection authority<= br> and not the radio authority). the operating frequency varies, but is usual= ly
50Hz, 60Hz, 16.6Hz etc :)

sometimes when dealing with the goverment, the best practice is not to ask=
at all :) even if they agree with you there will always be a "but you= will
need a license for that" clause.

if you have to ask, ask them if it is their duty to regulate potential
electromagnetic wave transmission from instalations operating on 50Hz (or<= br> any other frequency in the 0-9kHz region, that is not ITU regulated). you<= br> would probably get an entirely different answer :)

VY 73

Jacek / SQ5BPF

ps. the answer that you got from OFCOM is actually very nice






--_000_BF4A524700075746A6467658DFC7102C1286AD4075ICTSSEXC2CAlu_--