Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-mb02.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id DD9AE380000AD; Fri, 4 Jan 2013 06:08:37 -0500 (EST) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1Tr57t-0001mz-TM for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Fri, 04 Jan 2013 11:07:49 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1Tr57t-0001mq-75 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 04 Jan 2013 11:07:49 +0000 Received: from nm2-vm0.bt.bullet.mail.ukl.yahoo.com ([217.146.182.242]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1Tr57r-0007ui-1C for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 04 Jan 2013 11:07:48 +0000 Received: from [217.146.183.198] by nm2.bt.bullet.mail.ukl.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 04 Jan 2013 11:07:26 -0000 Received: from [217.146.183.121] by tm4.bt.bullet.mail.ukl.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 04 Jan 2013 11:07:26 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by smtp826.mail.ukl.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 04 Jan 2013 11:07:26 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=btinternet.com; s=s1024; t=1357297646; bh=6kAf6tezC8IZC67fKh4TCLHUNniYXb5WyGxSjvlWnSQ=; h=X-Yahoo-Newman-Id:X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:X-YMail-OSG:X-Yahoo-SMTP:Received:From:To:Subject:Date:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:Message-Id:Mime-Version:Reply-To:User-Agent:X-Antivirus:X-Antivirus-Status; b=QNPaENlVqdT/w1qG1jwK8GBVvF8ZA5pi2TgFRWeDk9X6V7scz4hESl39PGP+goz9WkR/z/TaGPu6EMxUg1KHxGvHQWz0+FMJZWNoyKfAlKJybNYAbLI7Yf/Boq3U1FyKw1VE7hwHim46p6c3YZHVbGcl46jz/nYhVi/dBBwLgSg= X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 203239.63229.bm@smtp826.mail.ukl.yahoo.com X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-YMail-OSG: QWoxV.0VM1krDXzTNtOXVHxB3RYdtTpCC2vibehtxh8_Amw dKeDm2xotWtXmgfhtXqaeQu7HpVCbPQX3PcbtTm2nCgqPr2q6Vp33j1Y8jG7 z6n8snWLOefGHcEP8KgbXJt7elrPKZamWpzfkKey5f9YnleZh9eS.iNdw.ea Pd6sO_H4edBu0kGlBZyxRBzwKct7oWxtDqscMXANJmULtAJJw1Q.p9nXlT0Z a6opfQBlVdHgwDF3mQ94VR48OhJBuKnSnJ6Azmky0q0xGWbfrns1ssBNUFyd L5y.1v5zMhj54J1hblcGXr8pMunLNAy1ff91D8Lo0.95oXQisJg5Pdnltjbo oIcobC33PYDj1na5e3MxRT51ivpFUAO8qgWIz4sfnjkSt8iXGTD6ftovAyLJ 0pKW4Z72189HmWcIrQAzxHHL7INjzO1kbauEy5hW2VeH8rkx.19tjb6sI5hq AHrN4a.QnMrEMuroRo0sGxWzrgPYDBAKm3m8JYJVgn1v1ubYmvGrtiiegTcU - X-Yahoo-SMTP: MKdsdU6swBAxH2g8PCcASiNCWoOpVZv7QWF1s1O18Nys Received: from [127.0.0.1] (m5fra@86.141.137.109 with login) by smtp826.mail.ukl.yahoo.com with SMTP; 04 Jan 2013 03:07:25 -0800 PST From: "M5FRA - Colin" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2013 11:07:20 +0000 In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: eM_Client/4.0.15145.0 X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 130103-1, 03/01/2013), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) 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: I am sorry but I did not express myself very clearly in the last couple of posts and there were lots of typos. I will attempt to explain why I am opposed to digital voice/SSB on 630m. The main reason is that although it is technically possible it is impractical as it will take up a disproportionate amount of bandwidth which will effectively deny other people the space to operate. [...] Content analysis details: (0.0 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [217.146.182.242 listed in list.dnswl.org] 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message 0.0 T_DKIM_INVALID DKIM-Signature header exists but is not valid X-Scan-Signature: 5e5054f2584d2dfc79d80db9613b908f Subject: Re[3]: LF: 477 A local SSB chat band ? Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------=_MBBEDC288E-C147-49C5-A839-1AA5E5C385F5" X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.1 required=5.0 tests=HTML_90_100,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-SCOLL-AUTHENTICATION: mtain-mb02.r1000.mx.aol.com ; domain : btinternet.com DKIM : fail x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d601650e6b835278e X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none --------=_MBBEDC288E-C147-49C5-A839-1AA5E5C385F5 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=utf-8 I am sorry but I did not express myself very clearly in the last couple=20 of posts and there were lots of typos. I will attempt to explain why I=20 am opposed to digital voice/SSB on 630m. The main reason is that although it is technically possible it is=20 impractical as it will take up a disproportionate amount of bandwidth=20 which will effectively deny other people the space to operate. The idea that it could be daylight hours only, VOX only etc etc as a=20 gentlemen=E2=80=99s agreement is wildly optimistic in light of the abuse= of the=20 other gentlemen=E2=80=99s agreements called bandplans.=20 I also feel strongly that we are on the bands as a privilege and not a=20 right. I know for sure that there is a lot of abuse of license=20 conditions and have heard ops openly admit to running 1kw+ in order to=20 work DX or to =E2=80=98level the playing field=E2=80=99 in contests. That= sort of abuse=20 will only do us harm and although some argue that Ofcom are not=20 interested in such things let me assure you that they are.=20 The new 630m band is allocated on a secondary basis to aeronautical=20 mobile users. There are still NDBs within the band and some countries=20 impose restriction or deny access to 630m altogether because of the=20 shared use. It will only take somebody to either accidentally or=20 deliberately QRM to an aeronautical user for us to lose the band or=20 face more restrictions. I can see the headlines now! Finally, and I will not post here again on this subject, I am not anti=20 SSB, anti contests, anti much else, but do believe we need a=20 responsible attitude to how we use the bands. We should not be=20 constantly pushing for change to suit our own interests or deliberately=20 flouting the law, in the long term that will only lead to loss of=20 privilege not more access.=20 And to answer an aggressive direct email which suggested I **** off and=20 play somewhere else, yes I do operate digital modes and have done for=20 40+ years starting with a Creed 7B. I also use SSB, CW, QRP and QRO and=20 even microwaves. Colin - G8FRA/M5FRA m5fra.org.uk --------=_MBBEDC288E-C147-49C5-A839-1AA5E5C385F5 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8

I am sorry but I did not express= myself very clearly in the last couple of posts and there were lots of = typos. I will attempt to explain why I am opposed to digital voice/SSB on= 630m.

 

The main reason is that although= it is technically possible it is impractical as it will take up a dispropo= rtionate amount of bandwidth which will effectively deny other people the= space to operate.

 

The idea that it could be dayligh= t hours only, VOX only etc etc as a gentlemen=E2=80=99s agreement is= wildly optimistic in light of the abuse of the other gentlemen=E2=80=99= s agreements called bandplans.

 

I also feel strongly that we are= on the bands as a privilege and not a right. I know for sure that there= is a lot of abuse of license conditions and have heard ops openly admit= to running 1kw+ in order to work DX or to =E2=80=98level the playing field= =E2=80=99 in contests. That sort of abuse will only do us harm and although= some argue that Ofcom are not interested in such things let me assure you= that they are.

 

The new 630m band is allocated= on a secondary basis to aeronautical mobile users. There are still NDBs= within the band and some countries impose restriction or deny access to= 630m altogether because of the shared use. It will only take somebody to= either accidentally or deliberately QRM to an aeronautical user for us = to lose the band or face more restrictions. I can see the headlines now!

 

Finally, and I will not post here= again on this subject, I am not anti SSB, anti contests, anti much else,= but do believe we need a responsible attitude to how we use the bands. = We should not be constantly pushing for change to suit our own interests= or deliberately flouting the law, in the long term that will only lead = to loss of privilege not more access.

 

And to answer an aggressive = direct email which suggested I **** off and play somewhere else, yes I do= operate digital modes and have done for 40+ years starting with a Creed= 7B. I also use SSB, CW, QRP and QRO and even microwaves.

 

Colin - G8FRA/M5FRA
 
--------=_MBBEDC288E-C147-49C5-A839-1AA5E5C385F5--