Return-Path: Received: from mtain-dh12.r1000.mx.aol.com (mtain-dh12.r1000.mx.aol.com [172.29.65.32]) by air-mb02.mail.aol.com (v129.4) with ESMTP id MAILINMB023-a1914c06d9037e; Wed, 02 Jun 2010 18:19:47 -0400 Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [193.82.116.20]) by mtain-dh12.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id 8BADE38000235; Wed, 2 Jun 2010 18:19:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1OJwGM-0008FD-Ax for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Wed, 02 Jun 2010 23:18:14 +0100 Received: from [193.82.116.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1OJwGL-0008F4-HR for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 02 Jun 2010 23:18:13 +0100 Received: from out1.ip03ir2.opaltelecom.net ([62.24.128.239]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1OJwGI-00089M-Tt for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 02 Jun 2010 23:18:13 +0100 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AkkGAMJ1BkxcEYr3/2dsb2JhbACOZQODJIwaccEehRYE X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.53,349,1272841200"; d="scan'208,217";a="307396116" Received: from unknown (HELO xphd97xgq27nyf) ([92.17.138.247]) by out1.ip03ir2.opaltelecom.net with SMTP; 02 Jun 2010 23:18:04 +0100 Message-ID: <000b01cb02a1$77e99ca0$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> From: "mal hamilton" To: References: Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2010 23:18:03 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: autolearn=disabled,HTML_MESSAGE=0.001 Subject: LF: Re: Sub-9kHz NoV progress Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0008_01CB02A9.D9701140" 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_30_40,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: S x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d41204c06d901117d X-AOL-IP: 193.82.116.20 ------=_NextPart_000_0008_01CB02A9.D9701140 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Roger=20 Like I said to Dr Who, hit the big switch, the met office probably wou= ld'nt know the difference between your thunder and the other kind !! Some say a NOV is not necessary on this QRG. Ask them about a rock con= cert where the audio is transmitted for miles, whereas radio amateurs= in most cases so far have only managed a few hundred metres in the sa= me frequency range. Acoustic or electromagnetic ether disturbance is virtually the same th= ing. Does the thunder generator licensee have a NOV? Another point, a thunder storm and associated lightening can be heard/= seen for miles by ear why does the met office need an electormagnetic= detector. This is a humorous observation. g3kev ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Roger Lapthorn=20 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=20 Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2010 10:15 PM Subject: LF: Sub-9kHz NoV progress This evening I chased Rod Wilkinson at OFCOM about my sub-9kHz NoV= application submitted in March. The last time I contacted him in May= he said the matter was still waiting on a response from the Met Offic= e and that it had been discussed at an RSGB liaison meeting. I hope the Met Office can predict the weather quicker or it's back= to seaweed when the austerity cuts arrive. Actually this isn't a bad= idea....... 73s Roger G3XBM --=20 http://g3xbm-qrp.blogspot.com/ http://www.g3xbm.co.uk http://www.youtube.com/user/g3xbm G3XBM GQRP 1678 ISWL G11088 ------=_NextPart_000_0008_01CB02A9.D9701140 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Roger
Like I said to Dr Who, hit the big sw= itch, the=20 met office probably would'nt know the difference between your thunder= and the=20 other kind !!
Some say a NOV is not necessary on th= is QRG. Ask=20 them about a rock concert where the audio is transmitted for miles, wh= ereas=20 radio amateurs in most cases so far have only managed a few hundred me= tres in=20 the same frequency range.
Acoustic or electromagnetic ether dis= turbance is=20 virtually the same thing.  Does the thunder generator l= icensee=20 have a NOV?
Another point, a thunder storm and as= sociated=20 lightening can be heard/seen for miles by ear why does the met office= need an=20 electormagnetic detector.
This is a humorous observation.
g3kev
 
 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 201= 0 10:15=20 PM
Subject: LF: Sub-9kHz NoV pro= gress

This evening I chased Rod Wilkinson at OFCOM about my= sub-9kHz=20 NoV application submitted in March. The last time I contacted him in= May he=20 said the matter was still waiting on a response from the Met Office= and that=20 it had been discussed at an RSGB liaison meeting.

I hope the= Met Office=20 can predict the weather quicker or it's back to seaweed when the aus= terity=20 cuts arrive. Actually this isn't a bad idea.......

73s
Rog= er=20 G3XBM


--
http://g3xbm-qrp.blogspot.com/
http://www.g3xbm.co.uk
http://www.youtube.com/user/g3xbm
G3XBM=20    GQRP 1678      ISWL=20 G11088
------=_NextPart_000_0008_01CB02A9.D9701140--