Post by Deleted on Oct 14, 2015 2:35:12 GMT
From Thread on Part15(dot)us June 12, 2014 Title: What's Going On - Posted by Carl Blare
FM Manifesto - June 14, 2014 - Carl Blare - Post # 3
The Part 15ers who want to use their FM permission become very befuddled about how to meet the rules, since they require a field intensity measurement so microscopic that one member says it can't be detected because it'll be "in the noise."
Maybe I'm getting confused with the 15.209 rule for AM, but my uncertainty kind of makes the point I'm making...
Plain people are allowed to operate transmitters under the FCC rules without having a diploma from radio technical school, but the FCC requires compliance infinitely beyond the comprehension of even the most popular man.
Given the dilemma posed by the FCC rules for FM, I believe there's only one thing to do.
We should build the FM station of our dreams and wait until the FCC provides the service of coming along and making a field intensity reading. If they tell us to close shop we must remember to thank them for letting us know what we do not know on our own.
FCC "Manifesto" for Unlicensed Use of the FM Broadcast Band - June 14, 2014 - Rich _ Post # 4
The Part 15ers who want to use their FM permission become very befuddled about how to meet the rules, since they require a field intensity measurement so microscopic that one member says it can't be detected because it'll be "in the noise." Maybe I'm getting confused with the 15.209 rule for AM, but my uncertainty kind of makes the point I'm making...
Plain people are allowed to operate transmitters under the FCC rules without having a diploma from radio technical school, but the FCC requires compliance infinitely beyond the comprehension of even the most popular man.
Would such befuddlement be minimized or maybe eliminated by researching and buying an FM transmitter that had been provably FCC-certified to meet ยง15.239, and by installing/operating it without increasing its output power setting as shipped, and/or modifying the antenna supplied with it?
REMARKS BY CARL BLARE 15/10/13
Here is the first part of my FM Manifesto directed toward the FM Initiative to improve Part 15 service under 15.239.
The comment by Rich is included because it represents the advice given prior to Tim in Bovey's finding that certification is not necessarily a guarantee of compliance for the end user.
I employed that earlier advice, believing my use of a certified transmitter was a guarantee of compliance, but we have learned otherwise.
To compensate for Tim's expose Rich has shape-shifted his advice by adding the caveat that the "end-user is ultimately responsible for compliance." Of course this has always been true, but the earlier advice was given as if it was reliable.
FM Manifesto - June 14, 2014 - Carl Blare - Post # 3
The Part 15ers who want to use their FM permission become very befuddled about how to meet the rules, since they require a field intensity measurement so microscopic that one member says it can't be detected because it'll be "in the noise."
Maybe I'm getting confused with the 15.209 rule for AM, but my uncertainty kind of makes the point I'm making...
Plain people are allowed to operate transmitters under the FCC rules without having a diploma from radio technical school, but the FCC requires compliance infinitely beyond the comprehension of even the most popular man.
Given the dilemma posed by the FCC rules for FM, I believe there's only one thing to do.
We should build the FM station of our dreams and wait until the FCC provides the service of coming along and making a field intensity reading. If they tell us to close shop we must remember to thank them for letting us know what we do not know on our own.
FCC "Manifesto" for Unlicensed Use of the FM Broadcast Band - June 14, 2014 - Rich _ Post # 4
The Part 15ers who want to use their FM permission become very befuddled about how to meet the rules, since they require a field intensity measurement so microscopic that one member says it can't be detected because it'll be "in the noise." Maybe I'm getting confused with the 15.209 rule for AM, but my uncertainty kind of makes the point I'm making...
Plain people are allowed to operate transmitters under the FCC rules without having a diploma from radio technical school, but the FCC requires compliance infinitely beyond the comprehension of even the most popular man.
Would such befuddlement be minimized or maybe eliminated by researching and buying an FM transmitter that had been provably FCC-certified to meet ยง15.239, and by installing/operating it without increasing its output power setting as shipped, and/or modifying the antenna supplied with it?
REMARKS BY CARL BLARE 15/10/13
Here is the first part of my FM Manifesto directed toward the FM Initiative to improve Part 15 service under 15.239.
The comment by Rich is included because it represents the advice given prior to Tim in Bovey's finding that certification is not necessarily a guarantee of compliance for the end user.
I employed that earlier advice, believing my use of a certified transmitter was a guarantee of compliance, but we have learned otherwise.
To compensate for Tim's expose Rich has shape-shifted his advice by adding the caveat that the "end-user is ultimately responsible for compliance." Of course this has always been true, but the earlier advice was given as if it was reliable.