Re: [TOEC] IMD i SSB-sändare

[TCL]

Ja vi får väl hoppas att amatörerna inte splattrat utanför banden också! Det räcker gott med det inombands-QRM vi redan har! :-)

73
Bengt

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Peter Sundberg" <sm2cew at telia.com>
To: "TCL" <tcl at swipnet.se>
Cc: <toec at contesting.com>
Sent: Saturday, September 13, 2003 7:17 PM
Subject: Re: [TOEC] IMD i SSB-sändare


> Jag kan inte tro att det är "splatter" som stör radioastronomer, snarare
> lär det väl vara våra starka sändare som orsakar problem i deras breda
> mottagare (20 MHz BW eller mer) eller så överstyrs deras preampar. Dom har
> sällan filter på ingången i dessa utan preampen har gain från vhf till
> uhf/shf och tämligen medioker IP3.
> 
> Jag ser själv hur min EME-mottagare på 432 störs av gamla NMT
> mobiltelefoner en bra bit uppåt i frekvens, men det är ju inte splatter
> utan preampen grejar det helt enkelt inte.
> 
> Nåväl, med allt detta sagt så skall vi naturligtvis inte dra slutsatsen att
> folk inte splattrar, det var bara kopplingen till radioastronomer som lät
> lite krystad.
> 
> 73/Peter SM2CEW
> 
> 
> 
> At 15:46 2003-09-13 , you wrote:
> >
> >> Förr kunde man ju komma undan med att köra CW contests istället
> >> men nu för tiden med riggar som har rysliga nyckelknäppar är
> >> ju det lika olidligt, istället för splatter så har man knäppar
> >> över hela bandet.
> >> Var i hela friden är vi på väg?
> >> 
> >> /EKM
> >
> >
> >Ja det kan man undra. 
> >
> >På World Radio Conference WRC2003 var frågan uppe till diskussion.
> Tydligen trycker radioastronomerna på och vill ha tuffare krav och
> regleringar även för radioamatörerna. Om vi splattrar för mycket får vi
> dåligt rykte..?  Se nedan
> >
> >73
> >Bengt SM7EQL
> >
> >
> >
> >5.3 Agenda Item 1.8 - Issues Related to Unwanted Emissions 
> >There were two aspects of this agenda item of interest to the IARU.
> >
> >The first relates to spurious emissions, that is, signals produced by a
> transmitter at some frequency outside the allocated band (often harmonics),
> which may interfere with other receivers. There are international
> regulations setting limits on such spurious emissions, and the levels for
> amateur transmitters are clearly defined. We are interested in ensuring
> that these limits are not tightened to the point where home constructed
> amateur equipment could not meet them. The very sensitive receivers used by
> radio astronomers and remote sensing satellites are susceptible to spurious
> emissions, and users of those services are continually trying to update the
> limits to provide additional protection. This topic was not a major issue
> for us at this conference. 
> >
> >A second problem is concerned with what amateurs call "splatter". In other
> words, a poorly designed or operated amateur transmitter can cause
> interference to other amateurs using a nearby frequency.
> >To date, there have been no international regulations governing the level
> of such splatter, although the radio astronomers and passive sensor people
> have been trying hard to see such regulations put into effect. 
> >
> >The threat to amateurs occurs when one of our bands is immediately
> adjacent to a passive sensor band, and amateurs operating near the band
> edge might cause problems. 
> >With support from the Canadian delegation, we were able to ensure that
> none of the amateur bands were mentioned in any new regulatory constraints
> approved at the conference. There are however, two 2007 agenda items
> related to ongoing studies of such band pairs, and these should be
> monitored in the ITU-R
> >
> >Referens IARU WRC report http://www.iaru-r1.org/wrc-4.html
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >TOEC mailing list
> >TOEC at contesting.com
> >http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/toec
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> TOEC mailing list
> TOEC at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/toec