Re: LF: WSPR, QRSS, CW...

[g4gvw <g4gvw@aol.com>]

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 <gm4slv@sighthound.demon.co.uk> 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)