Return to KLUBNL.PL main page

rsgb_lf_group
[Top] [All Lists]
<prev [Date] next>
[Advanced]
 <prev [Thread] next>

Re: LF: Below 8.3kHz in the UK freuency allocations

from [Roger Lapthorn] [Permanent Link][Original]
To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: LF: Below 8.3kHz in the UK freuency allocations
From: Roger Lapthorn <[email protected]>
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2014 22:39:00 +0000
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 [email protected]) smtp.mail=[email protected]; dkim=pass [email protected]; dmarc=pass (p=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=gmail.com
Delivered-to: [email protected]
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:references:from:content-type:in-reply-to:message-id:date:to :content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=kSzNwEAMRkCsGwKpkL4tbwqAs1O735VkouBSJh30WVQ=; b=Uk8PaeRmTH2R7Nstw9ylDdAvm3ZwXuSaYcP3epRyd1Tg3zcEwMmprsrcSX4ltFfsn0 rZ6h+/Yie1ZFoCU2Xwa60deLaP2uURE8HixmO1AJ6TObO/mo+nUmYyLRju15xEze9D/g t6xggqNNK5OX5pUy12wB8CBeHLsQstx8kvRyrNjrun3wl7AzSSjbtnEBwYtwAYZCY5yQ ZzrwG/0Cxtp8lHJsr3QLyyCyWtIdvi26plSEeABYffu/FD6gcW/OVvsoCfyffKc8/4AY vnmtCcxwuiVzz2OWrgc13gGsyTDAF+ZgTtgNHW18xHM16uu7ztnpQEGgVWHI8sNhB81r 2/HQ==
In-reply-to: <FC462CAA3B714890A38DE853F41EB905@Black>
References: <CAHAQVWNBD=VQ5DiaC1Ac8yn1k+11f+ugzMcoOtp82dZ1iaW8gA@mail.gmail.com> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <trinity-40b68802-01c0-4f4b-9dfb-3e4e2f388e7e-1390943886815@3capp-gmx-bs07> <CAHAQVWN6uFPnWrJOsWH+Hz=WtE8e4Udqj+OWr522TykCTDzgyQ@mail.gmail.com> <FC462CAA3B714890A38DE853F41EB905@Black>
Reply-to: [email protected]
Sender: [email protected]
Because I assume above 8.3kHz I need an NoV or licence, unless exempt through some other loophole.

73s
Roger G3XBM

On 28 Jan 2014, at 21:43, "Markus Vester" <[email protected]> wrote:

Laura, Roger,
 
but then, why not transmit on 8.9 kHz? Or 30 kHz, or any other unused frequency? The ERP we can achieve on (V)LF will anyhow be so weak that no one will notice it, unless he's really looking for it.
 
73, Markus
 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 10:34 PM
Subject: Re: Re: LF: Below 8.3kHz in the UK freuency allocations

Ýes, I agree with Laura. The former, Dave, is not achievable in the real world.

As long as no undue interference (an OFCOM phrase, well used)  to official services is caused, everyone is happy. In reality it is easy to suppress signals above 8.3kHz down a very long way.

73s
Roger G3XBM


On 28 January 2014 21:18, LZ <[email protected]> wrote:
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




--
[More with this subject...]
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Previous by Date:  Re: Re: LF: Below 8.3kHz in the UK freuency allocations, Markus Vester
Next by Date:  LF: PA3BHT EI8JK 600m OPERA 1143 km 21:00:11, Graham
Previous by Thread:  Re: Re: LF: Below 8.3kHz in the UK freuency allocations, Markus Vester
Next by Thread:  Re: LF: Below 8.3kHz in the UK freuency allocations, Stefan Schäfer
Indexes:  [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]