Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-mp02.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id 7FE96380000C0; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 13:45:02 -0500 (EST) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1TvuRY-0005hy-1d for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 18:44:04 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1TvuRX-0005hp-Ff for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 18:44:03 +0000 Received: from out1.ip06ir2.opaltelecom.net ([62.24.128.242]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1TvuRV-0004xC-PS for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 18:44:02 +0000 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AhEFADQ1+FBOk8aN/2dsb2JhbABEpkYDl1sXc4IZBQEBBQgBAQNJAiwBAQMFAgEDBA0EAQEKJRQBBBoGFggGEwoBAgIBAYd2AxO6eYwIgQIBBoQnA4gshVGYWIJ1gWYBHw X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,486,1355097600"; d="scan'208,217";a="562864364" Received: from host-78-147-198-141.as13285.net (HELO xphd97xgq27nyf) ([78.147.198.141]) by out1.ip06ir2.opaltelecom.net with SMTP; 17 Jan 2013 18:43:40 +0000 Message-ID: <005b01cdf4e2$8e667d00$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> From: "mal hamilton" To: References: <4B52EADB3E8E4CC594F35CF05BD07140@IBM7FFA209F07C> Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 18:43:34 -0000 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: 2.5 (++) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "relay1.thorcom.net", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: Chris A conversation on the 5 Mhz band did imply that a limit of 500 Hz max bandwidth mode on 472 Khz was discussed at the negotations but not implemented because it was thought unlikely that anyone would want to exceed this limit. This turns out not to be the case and I would not be surprised if this 500 Hz limit was not introduced at a later date. This is the jist of the discussion but it appears that they knew something about what was going on. Keep your ear tuned to the 5 Mhz frequencies about what is going on both on that band and 472 de G3KEV [...] Content analysis details: (2.5 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message 2.5 AXB_XMAILER_MIMEOLE_OL_024C2 AXB_XMAILER_MIMEOLE_OL_024C2 X-Scan-Signature: 318d3d373f5ffaa82e0969bd1985b258 Subject: LF: Re: RadCom February 2013 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0058_01CDF4E2.8DF40C20" 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: G x-aol-sid: 3039ac1dc14650f846ad4750 X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0058_01CDF4E2.8DF40C20 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Chris A conversation on the 5 Mhz band did imply that a limit of 500 Hz max = bandwidth mode on 472 Khz was discussed at the negotations but not = implemented because it was thought unlikely that anyone would want to = exceed this limit. This turns out not to be the case and I would not be = surprised if this 500 Hz limit was not introduced at a later date. This is the jist of the discussion but it appears that they knew = something about what was going on. Keep your ear tuned to the 5 Mhz frequencies about what is going on both = on that band and 472=20 de G3KEV =20 ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Chris=20 To: RSGB LF Group=20 Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2013 5:00 PM Subject: LF: RadCom February 2013 I was surprised to see on page 9 of the latest RSGB RadCom under '2013 = Band Plans', a statement re the 472 - 479kHz band:- "Activity is limited = to modes with 500Hz bandwidth or less". The implication here is that = this is what Ofcom has specified, especially as in the sentence before = it refers to the Notice of Variation. As such, the statement is quite = misleading and untrue. Who at the RSGB has decided on this new rule? Why does the RSGB feel = the need to impose such a rule? It looks like they are dictating to the = membership, rather than representing them. Frankly a bit of a cheek. I note later in 'LF' by Dave, G3YXM, on page 55, the correct statement = is made, referring to the only change in the licence conditions being = the power limitation. Come back Pete (FMT)! All is forgiven!! Vy 73, Chris, G4AYT. ------=_NextPart_000_0058_01CDF4E2.8DF40C20 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Chris
A conversation on the 5  Mhz band did imply = that a=20 limit of 500 Hz max bandwidth mode on 472 Khz  was discussed at the = negotations but not implemented because it was thought unlikely that = anyone=20 would want to exceed this limit. This turns out not to be the case and I = would=20 not be surprised if this 500 Hz limit was not introduced at a later = date.
This is the jist of the discussion but it = appears that=20 they knew something about what was going on.
Keep your ear tuned to the 5 Mhz frequencies = about what is=20 going on both on that band and 472 
de G3KEV
  
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Chris
Sent: Thursday, January 17, = 2013 5:00=20 PM
Subject: LF: RadCom February = 2013

I was surprised to see on page 9 = of the=20 latest RSGB RadCom under '2013 Band Plans', a statement re the = 472 -=20 479kHz band:- "Activity is limited to modes with 500Hz bandwidth or = less". The=20 implication here is that this is what Ofcom has specified, especially = as in=20 the sentence before it refers to the Notice of Variation. As such, the = statement is quite misleading and=20 untrue.
Who at the RSGB has decided on this = new rule? Why=20 does the RSGB feel the need to impose such a rule? It looks like they = are=20 dictating to the membership, rather than representing them. Frankly a = bit of a=20 cheek.
I note later in 'LF' by Dave, G3YXM, = on page 55,=20 the correct statement is made, referring to the only = change=20 in the licence conditions being the power limitation.
Come back Pete (FMT)! All is=20 forgiven!!
Vy 73,
Chris,=20 G4AYT.
------=_NextPart_000_0058_01CDF4E2.8DF40C20--