The term "amateur" is often applied to people who have obtained a
license to use radio equipment for communications. Is this term
inclusive of those who don't obtain a license but use receivers for
various uses?

I have been looking into design of receivers in the LF to ELF frequency
ranges. Is this part of "amateur" radio?

--

Rick C

"rickman" wrote in message
...
The term "amateur" is often applied to people who have obtained a license
to use radio equipment for communications. Is this term inclusive of
those who don't obtain a license but use receivers for various uses?
I have been looking into design of receivers in the LF to ELF frequency
ranges. Is this part of "amateur" radio?

How appropriate that you should confuse, "license" with, "licence"!

gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 wrote:

"rickman" wrote in message
...
The term "amateur" is often applied to people who have obtained a license
to use radio equipment for communications. Is this term inclusive of
those who don't obtain a license but use receivers for various uses?
I have been looking into design of receivers in the LF to ELF frequency
ranges. Is this part of "amateur" radio?

How appropriate that you should confuse, "license" with, "licence"!

This is an international group. Trying to make an issue out of
different national spelling conventions is a bit silly.

--

Roger Hayter

On Wed, 29 Jun 2016 10:11:21 +0100, Roger Hayter wrote:
gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 wrote:
"rickman" wrote:

The term "amateur" is often applied to people who have obtained a license
to use radio equipment for communications. Is this term inclusive of
those who don't obtain a license but use receivers for various uses?
I have been looking into design of receivers in the LF to ELF frequency
ranges. Is this part of "amateur" radio?

How appropriate that you should confuse, "license" with, "licence"!

This is an international group. Trying to make an issue out of
different national spelling conventions is a bit silly.

.... and just about Gareth's only "contribution".

In article , says...

The term "amateur" is often applied to people who have obtained a
license to use radio equipment for communications. Is this term
inclusive of those who don't obtain a license but use receivers for
various uses?

I have been looking into design of receivers in the LF to ELF frequency
ranges. Is this part of "amateur" radio?


Mainly no to both.

However there are a few Amateur Radio operators that are using some LF
to communicate with.

On 6/29/2016 5:11 AM, Roger Hayter wrote:
gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 wrote:

"rickman" wrote in message
...
The term "amateur" is often applied to people who have obtained a license
to use radio equipment for communications. Is this term inclusive of
those who don't obtain a license but use receivers for various uses?
I have been looking into design of receivers in the LF to ELF frequency
ranges. Is this part of "amateur" radio?

How appropriate that you should confuse, "license" with, "licence"!

This is an international group. Trying to make an issue out of
different national spelling conventions is a bit silly.

We are all better off ignoring pointless posts. I seem to recall that
you are one of those who have trouble remembering not to feed the troll.
No?

--

Rick C

On Tue, 28 Jun 2016 23:41:21 -0400, rickman wrote:

The term "amateur" is often applied to people who have obtained a
license to use radio equipment for communications. Is this term
inclusive of those who don't obtain a license but use receivers for
various uses?

I believe the term was used to describe anyone that indulges in RF but
does NOT charge for their efforts. The FCC wanted to distinguish
between commerical (for profit) services, and amateur (not for profit)
services.

For reception only, the term was "SWL" or short wave listener. I
guess that also applies to only listening on just about any frequency
from ELF to satellite communications.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shortwave_listening
No license required to just listen.

I have been looking into design of receivers in the LF to ELF frequency
ranges. Is this part of "amateur" radio?

Mostly yet. However, some bands do not require a license and operate
under FCC Part 15:
http://www.lwca.org
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LowFER
http://www.arrl.org/lf-low-frequency
https://hackaday.io/project/6882-lowfer-transmitter-for-your-arduino
etc...



--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On 6/29/2016 10:59 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jun 2016 23:41:21 -0400, rickman wrote:

The term "amateur" is often applied to people who have obtained a
license to use radio equipment for communications. Is this term
inclusive of those who don't obtain a license but use receivers for
various uses?

I believe the term was used to describe anyone that indulges in RF but
does NOT charge for their efforts. The FCC wanted to distinguish
between commerical (for profit) services, and amateur (not for profit)
services.

For reception only, the term was "SWL" or short wave listener. I
guess that also applies to only listening on just about any frequency
from ELF to satellite communications.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shortwave_listening
No license required to just listen.

I have been looking into design of receivers in the LF to ELF frequency
ranges. Is this part of "amateur" radio?

Mostly yet. However, some bands do not require a license and operate
under FCC Part 15:
http://www.lwca.org
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LowFER
http://www.arrl.org/lf-low-frequency
https://hackaday.io/project/6882-lowfer-transmitter-for-your-arduino
etc...

Very interesting. I see a difference between the ARRL article and the
Hackaday page. ARRL says the power limit on the US 1750 meter "free
band" is 1 W into the "transmitter's final stage" while the Hackaday
page says the limit is 1 W into the "feedline" and antenna system.

--

Rick C

"rickman" wrote in message
...
On 6/29/2016 5:11 AM, Roger Hayter wrote:
This is an international group. Trying to make an issue out of
different national spelling conventions is a bit silly.

We are all better off ignoring pointless posts. I seem to recall that you
are one of those who have trouble remembering not to feed the troll. No?

Oddly enough, both of the above are now in my KF because of their
*REPEATED* behaviour of trolling with personal abusive remarks.

On Wed, 29 Jun 2016 11:29:12 -0400, rickman wrote:

Mostly yet.

That should be "yes". In a hurry today (like all other days).

However, some bands do not require a license and operate
under FCC Part 15:
http://www.lwca.org
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LowFER
http://www.arrl.org/lf-low-frequency
https://hackaday.io/project/6882-lowfer-transmitter-for-your-arduino
etc...

Very interesting. I see a difference between the ARRL article and the
Hackaday page. ARRL says the power limit on the US 1750 meter "free
band" is 1 W into the "transmitter's final stage" while the Hackaday
page says the limit is 1 W into the "feedline" and antenna system.

This might help:
http://www.lwca.org/sitepage/part15/index-what.htm
http://lwca.org/library/reference/
Note that it's a bit out of date. Adjust the links for 2016.
You want part 15.217 (Operation in the band 160-190 kHz.)
http://www.ka7oei.com/ct_lowfer_archive.html

I see that kind of stuff quite a bit in the FCC rules-n-regs. They
sometimes fail to specify WHERE the transmit power is to be measured.
Is it at the input to the xmitter, output of the xmitter or at the end
of a lossy feed line. What does one do if the system is not 50 ohms?
I don't have an answer and since the FCC never will admit to making a
mistake, it's unlikely to be fixed. Should you ask for clarification,
you'll probably get an answer from the FCC which you don't want to
hear. Been there, many times. My best advice is do your best with
what you have, don't try to play FCC attorney, and muddle onward into
the unknown.

Gone...

--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558