But Dave, Are you willing to allow your government/power supplier to add 10% to your bill *every* month to accomplish this? At my location, that would add, on average, $50.00 a month, that is *$600*a
Filtering devices are rarely a necessary solution if equipment is designed and built not to radiate or conduct noise! It's simply a matter of good engineering practice with that as a design objective
Joe, Am I willing to pay more for a clean RF environment, yes! I would happily pay $600/year for a clean RF spectrum. The problem is filtering devices stop very little, no matter what the quality whe
You already pay tons of taxes for your government, which is supposed to serve you - not the other way around - to deal with this mess. And if you believe that giving them $600. will solve the problem
Hi Dave (KD4E), Respectfully, I must disagree with you in almost all cases here. Let me explain why. I am aware of this, I pay taxes. However, your expectations are not happening, and we are not a la
Agreed. Keep in mind that Amateur Radio is not was it used to be. It is not longer considers an emergency service. Most people are surprised it still exists or comment the Hams they know are grumpy o
Hi Mike, I miss the old days! I got my first job in Electronics because I had a ham ticket. It convinced the CE I could get a 1st Phone, and he was right. As you said, it no longer matters... Alas, t
Airlines are now making a fuss about 5G at airports interfering with their instrument landing systems. Perhaps their leverage to force that conversation is our opening to address the larger problem -
That's a frequency allocation issue -- they're operating in/around the same frequencies, and the instrumentation was not designed to reject it. It's sort of like listening to AM radio with a crystal
But you (and I) are but .001%, or less, of the population. I really doubt many non-hams would welcome another needless (to them) 'tax' added to what they are burdened with already! How about any radi
I would be for that, but FCC would just squander the additional funds to something other than RFI/EMC. Dave - WØLEV -- *Dave - WØLEV* *Just Let Darwin Work* __________________________________________
Bingo! I would be for that, but FCC would just squander the additional funds to something other than RFI/EMC. Dave - WØLEV But you (and I) are but .001%, or less, of the population. I really doubt ma
Hi Joe, Again, respectfully, you keep moving the question from would I pay $600.00 a year to have a clean RF environment, to something other than a clean RF environment for my paying a fee... These a
Hi Dave.... My point was simply that to most people. EMI/RFI has little to no meaning. To tax all for something that, to the majority of people, would have no affect or meaning, was questionable. I h
The broken process to which you refer is the entire present FCC. Another process would have to be put in place entirely independent of the present FCC. Given that, yes, I would be willing to pay a bi
Hi Joe, With regards to the FCC, for the most part I agree with you. I think there are pockets of folks within the FCC that actually still want to assist in making things better, but for the most par
The FCC, as with many other parts of government that protected We the People, when their funding was gutted 40 years ago in the name of "small government," and those cuts were repeated several times
Still, that's no excuse for a bunch of overpaid lawyers who know absolutely nothing about RF. Do away with them and let it be the free-for-all they allowed. Dave - WØLEV -- *Dave - WØLEV* *Just Let D
Delete key, delete key, oh there it is. Happy New Year all! 73, Steve W1SRD Dave - WØLEV On 12/31/2021 3:34 PM, David Eckhardt wrote: Regulations in place and unenforced are useless - FCC. The FCC, a
Replace a lawyer with two engineers and the world will better and you'll have even smaller government. 73, Gordon Beattie, W2TTT 201.314.6964 W2TTT@ATT.NET Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/ghei