Delivered-To: daveyxm@virginmedia.com Received: by 10.50.237.98 with SMTP id vb2csp359845igc; Tue, 11 Feb 2014 06:24:11 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.194.57.239 with SMTP id l15mr10743225wjq.40.1392128650384; Tue, 11 Feb 2014 06:24:10 -0800 (PST) Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com. [195.171.43.25]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id f20si8888723wic.51.2014.02.11.06.24.09 for ; Tue, 11 Feb 2014 06:24:10 -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; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com; dmarc=pass (p=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=gmail.com Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1WDDiH-0008Gn-7t for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Tue, 11 Feb 2014 13:49:25 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1WDDiG-0008Ge-Jb for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 11 Feb 2014 13:49:24 +0000 Received: from mail-qc0-f178.google.com ([209.85.216.178]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1WDDiD-0003SP-Cl for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 11 Feb 2014 13:49:23 +0000 Received: by mail-qc0-f178.google.com with SMTP id m20so12769520qcx.23 for ; Tue, 11 Feb 2014 05:49:19 -0800 (PST) X-DKIM-Result: Domain=gmail.com Result=Good and Known Domain DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=J8qwNc3IBTZJlx+3EmODRSRZPX6dDtG2xhKi3e/waxo=; b=I96k2WP4kYSNr4JfyuUsnO++6B29yFFE8pjBr+TzrEytEsh2mHhWf25RZXmS5ny4SV 5dG3kM2QaaTfJAOOAbv3wa0bi1KUrutS/x/SXWjyNy5ix+ng6o9sxNKuGtmDKOfIEhXS p+HkpMiDvDe+raDiDA9qFmtfNiQHwM9P31Vz9PZsddLFMrT0lNG4iiUKY7t04H2sTztc J+I7znYpehm35eHGWKfQQanqDSTICH8NzsRc5dOUmP5HcqMVrjnpZ5db4V3iFuQRxOFv e+74UJdkxP6L32oWi7B6kFiXFGNnI6OfEaFOPDnNOhTk72G3gqfsRQtQPjCSSCj72T39 yucA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.224.89.4 with SMTP id c4mr57769314qam.64.1392126559175; Tue, 11 Feb 2014 05:49:19 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.96.199.195 with HTTP; Tue, 11 Feb 2014 05:49:19 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2014 08:49:19 -0500 Message-ID: From: Warren Ziegler To: rsgb_lf_group X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) 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: Roger, I am not sure of the relationship U.K. amateurs have with OFCOM, but I found that here in the U.S. it is better NOT to ask. If you ask a bureaucrat they will naturally fall into CYA mode and give you the most restrictive and conservative interpretation of the rules. Remember, it is easier to ask for forgiveness than it is to ask for permission! [...] Content analysis details: (-0.7 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.7 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, low trust [209.85.216.178 listed in list.dnswl.org] 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (wd2xgj[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 0.0 HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_32 BODY: HTML: images with 2800-3200 bytes of words 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: d63ea50e288c5ecb9bd7a86eeabe94f2 Subject: Re: LF: Fwd: Questions about 73kHz and sub 8.3kHz Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c3d0fc0aced804f221b96c 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_FONTCOLOR_UNSAFE,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 --001a11c3d0fc0aced804f221b96c Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Roger, I am not sure of the relationship U.K. amateurs have with OFCOM, but I found that here in the U.S. it is better NOT to ask. If you ask a bureaucrat they will naturally fall into CYA mode and give you the most restrictive and conservative interpretation of the rules. Remember, it is easier to ask for forgiveness than it is to ask for permission! 73 Warren On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 6:00 AM, Roger Lapthorn wrote: > Still awaiting OFCOM responses after about 8 working days since first > email sent. Will post reply here, assuming they ever manage one. I am not > hopeful. > > 73s > Roger G3XBM > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Roger Lapthorn > Date: 10 February 2014 13:46 > Subject: Questions about 73kHz and sub 8.3kHz > To: licensingcentre@ofcom.org.uk > > > *Early last week I emailed OFCOM but I have still not received responses:* > > My questions were: > > Am I correct in assuming that radio amateurs may legally experiment in the > old 73kHz band as long as output power is less than 72dBuA/m at 10m? This > is the limit for licence-exempt inductive devices. > > Also, please can you confirm that no licence is needed to operate *below*8.3kHz (assuming no harmful interference to services above 8.3kHz). This > part of the spectrum is unallocated. > > Thanks > Roger Lapthorn > > -- > http://g3xbm-qrp.blogspot.com/ > http://www.g3xbm.co.uk > https://sites.google.com/site/sub9khz/ > http://qss2.blogspot.com/ > http://www.youtube.com/user/g3xbm > -- 73 Warren K2ORS WD2XGJ WD2XSH/23 WE2XEB/2 WE2XGR/1 --001a11c3d0fc0aced804f221b96c Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Roger,
=A0 =A0 =A0I am not sure of the relationship U.= K. amateurs have with OFCOM, but I found that= here in the U.S. it is better NOT to ask. If you ask a bureaucrat they wil= l naturally fall into CYA mode and give you t= he most restrictive and conservative interpretation of the rules. Remember,= it is easier to ask for forgiveness than it is to ask for permission!

73 Warren




On Tue, Feb 11, 2= 014 at 6:00 AM, Roger Lapthorn <rogerlapthorn@gmail.com> wrote:
Still awaiti= ng OFCOM responses after about 8 working days since first email sent.=A0 Wi= ll post reply here, assuming they ever manage one. I am not hopeful.

73s
Roger G3XBM



---------- Forwa= rded message ----------
From: Roger Laptho= rn <rogerlapthorn@gmail.com>
Date: 10 February 2014 13:46
Subject: Questions about 73kHz and sub 8.3k= Hz
To: licensingcentre@ofcom.org.uk


Ea= rly last week I emailed OFCOM but I have still not received responses:<= /b>

My questions were:

Am I correct in assuming that radi= o amateurs may legally experiment in the old 73kHz band as long as output power is less than 72dBuA/m at=20 10m? This is the limit for licence-exempt inductive devices.

Also, please can you confirm that no licence is needed to op= erate below 8.3kHz (assuming no harmful interference to services abo= ve 8.3kHz). This part of the spectrum is unallocated.

Thanks
Roger Lapthorn



--
73 Warren K2= ORS
=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 WD2XGJ
=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 = =A0 =A0 WD2XSH/23
=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 WE2XEB/2
=A0 =A0 = =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 WE2XGR/1

=A0
--001a11c3d0fc0aced804f221b96c--