Delivered-To: daveyxm@virginmedia.com Received: by 10.50.237.98 with SMTP id vb2csp99715igc; Wed, 29 Jan 2014 07:19:10 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.194.57.239 with SMTP id l15mr2174717wjq.40.1391008749028; Wed, 29 Jan 2014 07:19:09 -0800 (PST) Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com. [195.171.43.25]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id ct4si1625446wib.2.2014.01.29.07.19.08 for ; Wed, 29 Jan 2014 07:19:09 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 195.171.43.25 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org) client-ip=195.171.43.25; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: 195.171.43.25 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org) smtp.mail=owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1W8WDw-0002Iv-4o for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Wed, 29 Jan 2014 14:34:40 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1W8WDv-0002Il-ML for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 29 Jan 2014 14:34:39 +0000 Received: from relay2.uni-heidelberg.de ([129.206.210.211]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1W8WDu-0002z0-4C for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 29 Jan 2014 14:34:38 +0000 Received: from freitag.iup.uni-heidelberg.de (freitag.iup.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.29.204]) by relay2.uni-heidelberg.de (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id s0TEYIur012516 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Wed, 29 Jan 2014 15:34:19 +0100 Received: from [129.206.22.206] (pc206.iup.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.22.206]) by freitag.iup.uni-heidelberg.de (8.12.11.20060308/8.11.2) with ESMTP id s0TEYIJ9010947 for ; Wed, 29 Jan 2014 15:34:18 +0100 Message-ID: <52E91165.7090302@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2014 15:34:13 +0100 From: =?UTF-8?B?U3RlZmFuIFNjaMOkZmVy?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; de; rv:1.9.1.8) Gecko/20100227 Thunderbird/3.0.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: <52E7C438.7050205@psk31.plus.com>, <1390936735.43137.YahooMailNeo@web171404.mail.ir2.yahoo.com> <52E90D89.7020209@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> <52E910F6.7060002@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> In-Reply-To: <52E910F6.7060002@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by relay2.uni-heidelberg.de id s0TEYIur012516 X-Spam-Score: -2.8 (--) 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: PPS: ...or is there any addition to the regulation that an antenna system must be resonated to the fundamental frequency of the transmitter? Am 29.01.2014 15:32, schrieb Stefan Schäfer: > PS: There is no power limitation in that VLF range below 8.3 kHz, it > is not even amateur radio by definition so we do not act as radio > amateurs. Actually everyone can transmit in that range, at least in DL > or other countries where no NoV is needed. > > So actually, i can radiate several 10 mW ERP at 12 kHz as long as i am > TXing at 4 kHz fundamental frequency, because i do not cause > interferences? :-)) Isn't that nice? :-) > > 73, Stefan > > > > Am 29.01.2014 15:17, schrieb Stefan Schäfer: >> Ooooh, this is very intersting! :-) >> >> Does it mean that i can do VLF experiments at e.g. 18 kHz by >> generating a VERY distorted 6 kHz signal? The groundwave is at 6 kHz, >> i.e. below 8.3 kHz and i can assume that the 18 kHz harmonic will not >> cause interferences to any services operating there!! :-) >> Horray!! :-) >> When using a resonant antenna, resonated to 18 kHz, i can even >> optimise the power losses of the transmitter. >> >> According to >> https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/19882028/VLF/fig_02_25a.png we >> should try 12 kHz, eheheeem, i mean 4 kHz, wehere propagation should >> be best :-) >> >> 73, Stefan/DK7FC >> >> >> >> >> Am 28.01.2014 22:18, schrieb LZ: >>> Dave, >>> >>> You wrote: >>>> ... In other words NO signal must escape that is higher than that >>>> 8.3 kHz limit -That is it!! -end of!! Dave >>> No, wrong. >>> Right: "In other words NO *interfering* signal must escape that is >>> higher than that 8.3 kHz limit..." >>> >>> Laura >>> >>> Gesandt von mein PettiFogPhone >>> [...] Content analysis details: (-2.8 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -2.3 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, medium trust [129.206.210.211 listed in list.dnswl.org] -0.5 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain X-Scan-Signature: 3f8d74a8c70dd416d0a3a1dbcb9bb89f Subject: Re: LF: Below 8.3kHz in the UK freuency allocations Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none 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 PPS: ...or is there any addition to the regulation that an antenna=20 system must be resonated to the fundamental frequency of the transmitter? Am 29.01.2014 15:32, schrieb Stefan Sch=C3=A4fer: > PS: There is no power limitation in that VLF range below 8.3 kHz, it=20 > is not even amateur radio by definition so we do not act as radio=20 > amateurs. Actually everyone can transmit in that range, at least in DL=20 > or other countries where no NoV is needed. > > So actually, i can radiate several 10 mW ERP at 12 kHz as long as i am=20 > TXing at 4 kHz fundamental frequency, because i do not cause=20 > interferences? :-)) Isn't that nice? :-) > > 73, Stefan > > > > Am 29.01.2014 15:17, schrieb Stefan Sch=C3=A4fer: >> Ooooh, this is very intersting! :-) >> >> Does it mean that i can do VLF experiments at e.g. 18 kHz by=20 >> generating a VERY distorted 6 kHz signal? The groundwave is at 6 kHz,=20 >> i.e. below 8.3 kHz and i can assume that the 18 kHz harmonic will not=20 >> cause interferences to any services operating there!! :-) >> Horray!! :-) >> When using a resonant antenna, resonated to 18 kHz, i can even=20 >> optimise the power losses of the transmitter. >> >> According to=20 >> https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/19882028/VLF/fig_02_25a.png we=20 >> should try 12 kHz, eheheeem, i mean 4 kHz, wehere propagation should=20 >> be best :-) >> >> 73, Stefan/DK7FC >> >> >> >> >> Am 28.01.2014 22:18, schrieb LZ: >>> Dave, >>> >>> You wrote: >>>> ... In other words NO signal must escape that is higher than that=20 >>>> 8.3 kHz limit -That is it!! -end of!! Dave >>> No, wrong. >>> Right: "In other words NO *interfering* signal must escape that is=20 >>> higher than that 8.3 kHz limit..." >>> >>> Laura >>> >>> Gesandt von mein PettiFogPhone >>>