Oh dear Mal!
I'm afraid I must, therefore, admit to being a British citizen living in
the country of my birth and consequently subject to ITS laws and
regulations. I also have to accept that in practical terms there is a
political influence at work in the legislature of any country with a
legal or regulatory system.
As to my own LF achievements, my greatest occured many years ago
(approx. 50) when I used a little glass encapsulated device together
with a toilet roll centre and some wire salvaged from an old transformer
and a couple of bits from an old radio to generate enough volts across
an old government-surplus headset to receive something called "The Light
Programme" from the BBC. I didn't even know about something called LF or
MF. At the age of approximately 11 years that feeling of achievement was
so mind-blowing that nothing I have done in radio ever since has ever
surpassed it so I now take a lot of impressing and multiple DXCC on
every frequency from DC to Light just doesn't cut it anymore as an end
in itself.
You see that achievement all those years ago was born out of ignorance
- I no longer have that excuse!
On Mon, 2010-01-11 at 16:39 +0000, mal hamilton wrote:
> That was a political decision, the GPO, BBC and others were afraid a mere
> radio amateur might get ahead of them at the time. The same criteria did not
> apply in other countries like the USA and others worldwide.
> G3KEV
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "g4gvw" <[email protected]>
> To: <[email protected]>
> Sent: Monday, January 11, 2010 3:16 PM
> Subject: Re: LF: WSPR, QRSS, CW...
>
>
> > This discussion seems a bit pointless and is not getting anyone
> > anywhere. After all, the original AA (Artificial Aerial) licences from
> > which the modern licence (and by default its ethos) derives was intended
> > to allow the experimenter to generate Rf with a prohibition on any
> > effective radiation.
> > One might also consider the definition of "message" - the presence or
> > otherwise of a carrier of whatever duration or amplitude might be
> > considered a "message"!
> > If you really want to be pedantic, were I not to be an amateur radio
> > licence holder, would I be permitted to listen to those stations who
> > have notices of variation etc. From where I'm sitting I cannot determine
> > whether or not they are "authorised" from the point of view of a
> > listener under the regulations.
> > My licence does not appear to require me to transmit anything at any
> > time. It simply (or with complications) sets out terms and conditions to
> > which I am expected to adhere when I do radiate RF.
> > I am getting very concerned that somewhere "out there" is a strange and
> > mythical figure called "The Perfect Radio Amateur".
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, 2010-01-11 at 12:36 +0000, David Pratt wrote:
> > > In a recent message, John P-G <[email protected]> wrote ...
> > > >
> > > >Where is the requirement to pass any message whatsoever?
> > >
> > > Clause 1(1)(a) of the Terms, conditions and limitations of your Licence:
> > >
> > > The Licensee shall ensure that the Radio Equipment is only used:
> > > for the purpose of self-training in radio communication, including
> > > conducting technical investigations....
> > >
> > > The SRP does not replace the Amateur Radio Licence; it is merely an
> > > addition to it.
> > >
> > > To me, radio communication means passing messages.
> > >
> > > 73
> > >
> > > David G4DMP
> > >
> > --
> > 73 es gd dx de pat g4gvw
> > qth nr felixstowe uk
> > (east coast, county of suffolk)
> >
> >
>
>
--
73 es gd dx de pat g4gvw
qth nr felixstowe uk
(east coast, county of suffolk)
|
