Absolutely correct. I’d go as far as to suggest that the least applicable - if
even the most accurate method of measuring that sort of thing is the tightly
controlled laboratory environment because by definition, it is exactly not a
real world situation.
One of the parts of the script that I cut out for time, was that I was in no
way measuring amplitude, only the existence of an interfering signal at my
location. And on the most likely bands, 160 and 80, which were blessed that day
by rather low noise for summertime, I don’t see any interference from the Power
supply at all.
-73 de Mike N3LI -
> On Aug 7, 2016, at 6:24 PM, Cortland Richmond <ka5s@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>
> Since reception depends on uncontrollable parameters of propagation, antenna
> system and receiver performance, adjacent-channel rejection, etc., there are
> NO quantified definitions of harmful interference -- and Part 15 doesn't
> guarantee there won't BE any harmful interference.
_______________________________________________
RFI mailing list
RFI@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rfi
|