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

To:	"[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Subject:	Re: Re: LF: Below 8.3kHz in the UK freuency allocations
From:	Roger Lapthorn <[email protected]>
Date:	Tue, 28 Jan 2014 21:34:07 +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=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=C8B6tM43MFKgs0Cp8ujovaZsYaEl1H4qMzgRs+n2X9U=; b=gdHE7erQJvCGs+BP18SUnmqe8GOXQLrBztVCElaGf9xjMWW3RBdPfCeDRBprGbYFr3 59goZoHMwISMIcY2B1CSFJ9upk/U2yeszqJ6EjcvrrHd6ZkrhpwqbID1ACrpCbM2YNpe vHrNz8afZwvOd/xbmSObz4i2OLhoMg82CA7XzkBDVQfSAMVYvwwQU0tNBahB5NiRPeyc OpNoZ+gEEs8JQ9ZYiGrbNNrvZOoPwKKRg8/jCn43X84QX4Nsw7dk1kaQYoLJQU8tvqlq uRi07fvwV3zeA/IKjy62xcYd9Anr3C5Xnq4Xwctsby3fih0znnBd3FxfRw6H7jBBoaiU ny6g==
In-reply-to:	<trinity-40b68802-01c0-4f4b-9dfb-3e4e2f388e7e-1390943886815@3capp-gmx-bs07>
References:	<CAHAQVWNBD=VQ5DiaC1Ac8yn1k+11f+ugzMcoOtp82dZ1iaW8gA@mail.gmail.com> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <trinity-40b68802-01c0-4f4b-9dfb-3e4e2f388e7e-1390943886815@3capp-gmx-bs07>
Reply-to:	[email protected]
Sender:	[email protected]

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

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

<Prev in Thread]	Current Thread	[Next in Thread>
LF: Below 8.3kHz in the UK freuency allocations, Roger Lapthorn Re: LF: Below 8.3kHz in the UK freuency allocations, g3zjo Re: LF: Below 8.3kHz in the UK freuency allocations, David Hine Re: LF: Below 8.3kHz in the UK freuency allocations, PA1SDB, Peter RE: LF: Below 8.3kHz in the UK freuency allocations, Terry GW0EZY [rsgb_lf_group] Re: LF: Below 8.3kHz in the UK freuency allocations, Roger Lapthorn Re: LF: Below 8.3kHz in the UK freuency allocations, David Hine Aw: Re: LF: Below 8.3kHz in the UK freuency allocations, LZ Re: Re: LF: Below 8.3kHz in the UK freuency allocations, Roger Lapthorn <= Re: Re: LF: Below 8.3kHz in the UK freuency allocations, Markus Vester Re: LF: Below 8.3kHz in the UK freuency allocations, Roger Lapthorn Re: LF: Below 8.3kHz in the UK freuency allocations, Stefan Schäfer Re: LF: Below 8.3kHz in the UK freuency allocations, Stefan Schäfer Re: LF: Below 8.3kHz in the UK freuency allocations, Stefan Schäfer VLF: 8.97/3 kHz test transmissions, Stefan Schäfer Message not available Re: VLF: 8.97/3 kHz test transmissions, jcraig LF: Re: Below 8.3kHz in the UK freuency allocations, Chris

Previous by Date:	Re: LF: Re: I am my own boss, Alan Melia
Next by Date:	Re: Re: LF: Below 8.3kHz in the UK freuency allocations, Markus Vester
Previous by Thread:	Aw: Re: LF: Below 8.3kHz in the UK freuency allocations, LZ
Next by Thread:	Re: Re: LF: Below 8.3kHz in the UK freuency allocations, Markus Vester
Indexes:	[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]