[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] - [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index]

RE: ISM interference on 2401 MHz

At 10:45 PM 3/26/02 -0500, RMckni8527@aol.com wrote:
>The general tone implied by this message probably won't accomplish the
>results you desire.  A lot of "old farts" will remember a phrase "in a spirit
>of friendly cooperation".  Taking the stance that you're right and your
>neighbor is wrong, and spewing quotes from the regulations to back you up, IS
>the way to start and perpetuate your "war".

I don't know where you got the idea I was taking ANY stance, or how you got 
the impression I was perpetuating a war.  Go back and read the posts.  I 
never offered any solution to any problem, perceived or real; in fact my 
post was informational.

>By flying off the handle and
>submitting an interference report to the FCC before attempting to resolve the
>situation at the lowest lever possible will only cause bad feelings among
>your neighbors.  The FCC will be reluctant to expend time on a single source
>of cordless telephone interference, as it's certainly not intentional, it's
>INCIDENTAL to the use of a Part 15 device.  Now if your neighbor has schemed
>up some sort of wicked plot to knock you off the air, I say go ahead and take
>this approach.

I could comment about your accusatory "tone," but I won't.  Again, my posts 
were informational.  If there is widespread interference to licensed 
operations in a band by part 15 devices, THEN the FCC should be notified.

>And what of this suggestion to deliberately create a beacon to fool these
>devices into moving away from your satellite freq?  Isn't that deliberately
>causing harmful interference?

Again, I did not promulgate the idea.  But for what it's worth, a beacon 
could be established that properly IDed and carried coherence, which would 
not be considered harmful interference.

73, Mike kf4fdj

Via the amsat-bb mailing list at AMSAT.ORG courtesy of AMSAT-NA.
To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe amsat-bb" to Majordomo@amsat.org