> A billion dollar corporation is going to stand silent while the FCC either
> forces their product to be
> removed or re-engineered at great expense?
Surprisingly, the answer to that question is often "yes." Here are just a few
examples:
Years back, a company called Phonex made wireless modem jacks that operated on
3.53 MHz. They were carrier-current devices like BPL, only just on a single
frequency. When complaints surfaced, ARRL contacted them, as did other hams,
and within 6 weeks, Phonex re-engineered its product to operate on a different
frequency.
AT&T had purchased them by the tens of thousands, to use as part of its cable
system. It tried to resolve the problems on a case-by-case basis, but it
ultimately did a system-wide recall, in some areas having to find the devices
one at a time.
Years before BPL became a big issue, both HomePlug and the Home Phone
Networking Alliance worked with ARRL to identify that the use of the ham bands
was going to cause RFI problems, and both technologies revised its developing
standards to avoid the use of Amateur spectrum. While not quite a re-design, at
that point, billion-dollar companies proactively did new engineering at the
standards level. As the BPL saga unfolded, although the FCC and a few BPL
companies took a hard line, others worked with ARRL to make design changes for
the 2nd generation BPL products, with the ultimate end being that the ITU-R
international laws avoided the use of the ham bands for BPL.
The automotive industry also has been very pro-active about avoiding EMI
problems involving Amateur Radio, developing standards for the installation of
on-board transmitters.
ARRL has approached Mitsubishi, which is engineering fixes for the
pulse-controlled motor system used in its HVAC systems.
The cable-TV industry in general has been very proactive about EMC and leakage
issues. AT&T is also working to redesign and correct emissions and ingress
problems with its VDSL systems. The VDSL industry worked with ARRL years ago
to have standards that do not use the amateur bands, although not every
manufacturer is following them.
We have a whole case history of manufacturers stepping up and doing the right
thing about interference.
73, Ed Hare, W1RFI
ARRL Laboratory Manager
225 Main St.
Newington, CT 06111
Tel: (860) 594-0318
Fax: (860) 594-0259
Email: W1RFI@arrl.org
Member: IEEE Connecticut Section
Member: IEEE EMC Society, Board of Directors
Member: IEEE EMC Society Standards Development and Education Committee
Member: University of Hartford Industry Advisory Committee
Primary representative: ANSI ASC C63 EMC Committee, Vice Chair Subcommittee 5
(Immunity)
Member: QRP Amateur Radio Club International, Board of Directors
-----Original Message-----
From: RFI [mailto:rfi-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of qrv@kd4e.com
Sent: Saturday, August 01, 2015 11:22 AM
To: rfi@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [RFI] ARRL Board of Directors resolution related to FCC
enforcement of radio-interference issues
I'm not saying we should not expect government agencies to do the jobs we pay
them to do - but where there's a history of wrong priorities (and sometimes
worse) the wrong answer is more funding.
We trust agencies to do right, yes?
Well, there's been no evidence in modern history of a Federal agency making
decisions based on something other than an even-handed fact-based evaluation -
free of external partisan meddling?
Our executive branch is free of selfish crony-capitalist lobbying?
Really?
A billion dollar corporation is going to stand silent while the FCC either
forces their product to be removed or re-engineered at great expense?
In the automotive industry the recall process is driven by fear of litigation
and public anger when people are injured - little threat of either exists in
RFI cases.
Years ago in a masters of public administration program one course was titled
"Bureaucracy". The book was huge.
When I was about half way through I said to the prof "Things can't be that bad
- nothing would ever get done."
Then I worked for the government for a couple of years and discovered that it
was much worse.
Juat sayin' ... David KD4E
> The FCC can and does have teeth any time it chooses. It has issued
> fines again and again in support of whatever agenda exists
>
> What partisan politics reason would the FCC have for not taking action
> on high-powered lighting controllers operating at 58 dB above the
> limits, handed to them on a silver platter?
--
*David* KD4E
ARES-EC Bulloch County, Nevils, Georgia USA
Safe & Secure Search Engine: duckduckgo.com
Android for Hams: groups.yahoo.com/group/hamdroid Creative Tech:
groups.yahoo.com/group/ham-macguyver
Raspi Alternative: groups.yahoo.com/group/beagleboneblack/
Restored to design-spec at Heaven's gate 1Cor15:22
_______________________________________________
RFI mailing list
RFI@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rfi
_______________________________________________
RFI mailing list
RFI@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rfi
|