OK, So does that mean it is fine to set up a station right on the mutual
frontier of an adjoining country to one who disallows operation within
their own frontiers? RF is funny stuff - it tends to leak through such
barriers <:?
On Wed, 2012-02-15 at 23:14 +0000, GW0EZY (Terry) wrote:
> Andy is absolutely right. Most of the countries that objected to this
> allocation are the “usual suspects” often not permitting any amateur
> radio and certainly objecting to any increase in allocations to the
> amateur service as a matter of principle. A similar footnote in the
> International Radio Regulations (agreed in 2007) exists for the 136
> kHz band:
>
>
>
> 5.67 Additional allocation: in Mongolia, Kyrgyzstan and Turkmenistan,
> the band 130-148.5 kHz is
>
> also allocated to the radionavigation service on a secondary basis.
> Within and between these countries
>
> this service shall have an equal right to operate. (WRC-07)
>
>
>
> 5.67A Stations in the amateur service using frequencies in the band
> 135.7-137.8 kHz shall not exceed a
>
> maximum radiated power of 1 W (e.i.r.p.) and shall not cause harmful
> interference to stations of the
>
> radionavigation service operating in countries listed in No. 5.67.
> (WRC-07)
>
>
>
> 5.67B The use of the band 135.7-137.8 kHz in Algeria, Egypt, Iran
> (Islamic Republic of), Iraq, Libyan
>
> Arab Jamahiriya, Lebanon, Syrian Arab Republic, Sudan and Tunisia is
> limited to the fixed and maritime
>
> mobile services. The amateur service shall not be used in the
> above-mentioned countries in the band
>
> 135.7-137.8 kHz, and this should be taken into account by the
> countries authorizing such use. (WRC-07)
>
>
>
> It was extremely unusual and completely unnecessary to have such a
> “non-allocation” footnote in the RR. These countries are unlikely to
> have sufficient monitoring capability to prepare a detailed
> interference submission to the ITU. Also, the relevant assignments
> must be registered with the ITU to claim protection.
>
>
>
> Each Head of Delegation at a WRC signs the Final Acts but this is
> simply an undertaking that there is no major reservation and the
> country concerned “promises” not to do anything that would jeopardise
> the operation of this International Treaty. However, each country is
> supposed to formally ratify the Final Acts at some future date – in
> some cases this can take forever as some countries simply do not have
> the national legislation in place to achieve it. Even developed
> countries take some time e.g. Australia ratified the WRC 2003 Final
> Acts in 2006 – only a year before the next WRC!
>
>
>
> The CEPT (includes Western Europe as well as Eastern Europe including
> Russia and CIS) makes joint proposals to each WRC. All EU countries
> are supposed to formally support these positions. Non EU countries
> usually do (e.g. Norway, Switzerland) but Russia and CIS usually also
> make their own proposals which can oppose CEPT. There were 42 CEPT
> countries supporting the CEPT proposal for this agenda item (only
> Russia and some CIS did not). All EU countries supported. The CEPT
> proposed 472-480 kHz at 5w e.i.r.p., so a result of 472-479 kHz was a
> good compromise!
>
>
>
> Once the WRC has completed and Final Acts signed, the CEPT Electronics
> Communication Committee (ECC) will incorporate the WRC results into
> the current recommendations for European harmonised frequency use
> which all EU countries normally adopt into their national frequency
> allocation tables. This can take time! For UK amateurs, Ofcom is
> rather busy organising the massive amount of frequency use associated
> with the Olympic games in London this summer. We might have to wait.
> Although I was pleasantly surprised to get my 5 MHz permit issued
> within 5 days just after New Year 2012. The 5 MHz use is of course
> also on a non-interference basis and has far more international
> interference potential but seems to work without problem.
>
>
>
> 73 Terry
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> From:[email protected]
> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Andy Talbot
> Sent: 15 February 2012 21:45
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: LF: Re: WRC-12 Approves the New 472-479 kHz Amateur Radio
> Allocation
>
>
>
>
> But what is interference?
>
>
> If none is reported, none is caused.
>
>
>
>
>
> And who is going to report interference to a service no one uses
>
>
>
>
>
> 'Andy
>
>
> www.g4jnt.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 15 February 2012 21:40, Clemens Paul <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Greetings all,
>
> I wonder what "secondary user on non-interference basis" means in
> practice.
> As we know most NDBs are AM modulated with about 1kHz.
> Now it would be interesting to know what selectivity/bandwidth DF
> receivers
> for NDBs in aeroplanes might have.
> Imagine they have 1kHz or even 2kHz (quite possible).
> For non interfering such a receiver one would have to stay well
> without that
> BW.
> Hence with a few NDBs spread between 422 and 479kHz there would
> virtually remain no usable frequency for us amateurs if we wanted to
> make
> 100% sure not to interfere any aeroplanes' beacon reception.
>
> 73
> Clemens
> DL4RAJ
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
--
73 es gd dx de Pat G4GVW, Nr Felixstowe, East Coast, UK
|
