|
Post by End80 on Jan 17, 2017 15:43:13 GMT
From pages 666 to 683 of the above link..
Page 666: Notice of proposed Rulemaking to amend Part 15 Rules to redefine and clarify rules governing restricted radiation devices and low power comm. devices. .. The current technical limit on such devices is no longer adequate...
Page 671: [15.113 refers to the now numbered 15.219 ] ..These provisions were intended to make it feasible for a radio enthusiast to construct and operate a low power radio, since it is reasonable to assume the average hobbyist or experimenter would not have the capability of making field strength measurements. It has come to our attention, that manufacturers are taking advantage of the alternative provisions to market devices, which because of greater efficiency of the new technology, actually operate with radiated signals in excess of permitted by section 15.111 [now 15.209]. ince the interference potential of a device is directly related to the field strength of the radiated field and not the power fed into the antenna, and since a device which is widely marketed to the general public has a much greater potential for causing interference than a device built by an individual for his own use, we are proposing to restrict the alternative provisions to home built devices.."
It goes on to specify in later pages that manufactured devices under the alternate provisions of the now .219 may not to exceed that of .209 - So that would have resulted in no Rangemasters, Procasters, or other improved range transmitters... nor .219 manufactured kits like the SStran
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 17, 2017 15:47:00 GMT
An Ongoing Conversation
End80 speaks: "But the FCC would surely not just simply create such as an unlicensed option, there would certainly be licensing requirements involved for such operations."
I know you're right about that End80, but it's so frustrating that we can't (legitimately) use blank spaces that are going unused on the dial to provide a service we intuitively know would increase the general cultural wealth of the neighborhood. If we had to jump through this many hoops to obtain clearance to walk on a public sidewalk most people would figure out how to swing through trees as a way of avoiding sidewalks, and that's the position we are forced into with part 15. We are limited to one tree branch.
We dream about having the liberty to use what is there, but the fire department (figuratively) hoses us down and the mayor sends notice "Dreaming outside the part 15 rules is prohibited by laws we make up because our desk is big and we have your tax money to spend preventing you."
It may not be detectable but this matter has brought on a certain amount of insanity which will improve after a good breakfast.
|
|
|
Post by End80 on Jan 17, 2017 15:56:46 GMT
Your damn right it's frustrating. But it is what it is. That's why I personally don't care if some one dares to pirate, that doesn't really offend me in the least. My entire point is that the apparent associating of pirate operations to part 15 just doesn't belong, and doing so is detrimental to the legal hobby broadcasting community.
|
|
|
Post by Druid Hills Radio on Jan 17, 2017 16:14:59 GMT
Your damn right it's frustrating. But it is what it is. That's why I personally don't care if some one dares to pirate, that doesn't really offend me in the least.
DHR added: "A local itinerant broadcast engineer told me once that he could care less about pirate activity as long as the pirate did not interfere with any stations he maintained. And if they did, the hammer would come down."
|
|
|
Post by End80 on Jan 17, 2017 16:47:13 GMT
An Ongoing Conversation... but it's so frustrating that we can't (legitimately) use blank spaces that are going unused on the dial to provide a service we intuitively know would increase the general cultural wealth of the neighborhood.. Umm.. We can legitimately do that Carl.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 17, 2017 19:43:06 GMT
What It Might Be
Could be this is a stand-your-ground vs. stand-my-ground back-and-forth between conservatives and one progressive?
Conservatives are set on keeping things the way they are while a progressive struggles to improve something.
Example:
Conservative- Part 15 is the established limit. Either accept it or go somewhere else.
Progressive- Some of the Part 15 Rules are needlessly limiting and improvements could be made, let's talk about it.
What we end up with is a stand-off, nothing's going to change because of this following principle written by the philosopher Chauncey L. FitzKilpatsky --
The deceased comprise the largest population of ultra-conservatives for whom nothing can possibly change. Living conservatives play dead with much the same result.
When conservatives don't block the way too badly the progressives are sometimes able to move evolution forward by an inch or so.
|
|
|
Post by End80 on Jan 17, 2017 20:49:35 GMT
What It Might BeExample: Conservative- Part 15 is the established limit. Either accept it or go somewhere else.Progressive- Some of the Part 15 Rules are needlessly limiting and improvements could be made, let's talk about it. GOOD GREIF!! It's interference! Part 15 consist solely of methods intended to combat interference! It's limiting because that is it entire purpose of being in existence. The rules may seem needlessly limiting to our stations, but our stations are not it's purpose. So the only way to improve it is via perfected installations and great ground conductivity within the loophole of .219, or by going outside Part 15.. either by pirating or by going to licensed methods.
If nothing else.. there's currently more discussion going on in this forum than the others lately, even though it's borderline nuts.
|
|
|
Post by End80 on Jan 17, 2017 20:59:36 GMT
Keep in mind that every modification of the Part 15 rules that the FCC ever made, or proposed to make in relation to our unlicensed transmitters has been to limit it even further, and they are not too keen on .219 as it is. So any hopes they will change it to our benefit is not a progressive attitude, it's unrealistic.
There are a some successful Part 15 stations who have managed to make .219 just fine for their community, that is progressive evidence.
|
|
|
Post by End80 on Jan 17, 2017 21:07:45 GMT
Dammit.. You made me burn my burrito..
|
|
|
Post by End80 on Jan 17, 2017 21:21:00 GMT
Ahhh, but there is a wildcard I forgot about. I was just reminded via a newsletter from Radio World in my inbox.. Trump Team Embraces FCC Remake Blueprint There will be changes at the agency. The question is going to be how many. www.radioworld.com/business-and-law/0009/trump-team-embraces-fcc-remake-blueprint/338975So I guess you never know.. A madman in the Whitehouse who doesn't like big business media.. With a little luck I might end up having to eat my words.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 17, 2017 21:34:46 GMT
Hope Springs a Turtle
End80 understands: "If nothing else.. there's currently more discussion going on in this forum than the others lately, even though it's borderline nuts."
I am very proud of that.
Here, I think, is the single thing we disagree about: "It's interference! Part 15 consist solely of methods intended to combat interference! It's limiting because that is it entire purpose of being in existence."
I submit that the expression INTENTIONAL RADIATOR distinguishes our Part 15 stations from "interference". The only time when we become interference is when we in fact interfere with a licensed broadcast service. If we don't produce such interference, there isn't any.
That should clear things up for awhile.
|
|
|
Post by End80 on Jan 17, 2017 22:15:47 GMT
Well yes Carl, I agree 'intentional radiator' distinguishes or stations, but that doesn't change the fact of what Part 15 actually is. The indication appears to be that the rules need to be changed so we can better achieve our goals, but that is not a concern of the rules, in fact it's just the opposite.
|
|
|
Post by mighty1650 on Jan 17, 2017 23:03:53 GMT
Dammit.. You made me burn my burrito.. LOL! I have no idea why I found this so damn hilarious. Part 15 is and was meant to be restrictive, technology outgrew the rules and gave us what we have today. We lost the ground leads by bringing it up and to the FCC's attention, with AM Revitalization on the priority list I would suspect more restrictions would be the end result.
|
|
|
Post by End80 on Jan 18, 2017 0:06:43 GMT
Dammit.. You made me burn my burrito.. LOL! I have no idea why I found this so damn hilarious. Part 15 is and was meant to be restrictive, technology outgrew the rules and gave us what we have today. We lost the ground leads by bringing it up and to the FCC's attention, with AM Revitalization on the priority list I would suspect more restrictions would be the end result. I had put a burrito on my George Forman grill and closed the lid as it only takes less than two minutes to cook it.. but then Carls comment distracted me and I had to respond.. by the time I got back to the burrito is was burnt. I ate it anyway. Crunchy.
I always thought the ground lead fiasco about 10 years ago was the reason we lost it too, that's certainly what it felt like, but that's not actually true.. The ground lead was not originally included in the 3 meter rule, but they had rewrote that rule it in 1975 (FCC 74-1221) to include the ground lead because people were doing the same thing we were ten years ago! So it actually been that way for the last 40 years..
True, if the issue had not been pushed back into the limelight, we probably could have gotten away with it a little longer, but really it was just a matter of time before someone got popped.
On a side note.. While I was looking up docket 74-1221, something interesting caught my eye.. See 15.2 "Special Temporary Authority" section below.. It sounds to me like it's saying you can apply for permission to operate above the Part 15 limits as a means of determining if such an operation would be worthy of being in the public interest, and those results could lead to creation of a new rule. Am I interpreting that correctly?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 18, 2017 0:20:09 GMT
Guessing for Guidance
Mighty 1650 suspects: "I would suspect more restrictions would be the end result."
Mighty would GUESS that more restrictions might result because we're bringing attention to ourselves by talking about the rules.
One guess is as good as another and I GUESS that AM Revitalization is only a slogan in advance of a collapse of the old medium.
If Mighty is a psychic or a prophet I guess I'll have egg on my face.
|
|