Search String: Display: Description: Sort:


References: [ 79 ]

Total 79 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] Reminder - Deadline for Comments on Broadband Over Powerline NOI (score: 1)
Author: "Michael Tope" <>
Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2003 05:44:19 -0700
Fellow Reflectorites: Just a quick reminder that the deadline for filing comments in response to the FCC's Notice of Inquiry on Broadband over Powerline (BPL) is this coming MONDAY JULY 7, 2003. If y
/archives//html/RFI/2003-07/msg00000.html (9,227 bytes)

2. Re: [RFI] BPL reply comments (score: 1)
Author: "Michael Tope" <>
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2003 01:10:37 -0700
Chris, et al, please check out my reply to Current Technologies original comments (much of their reply comments reiterate the b&llsh%t in their original comments). I did my best to counter their braz
/archives//html/RFI/2003-08/msg00141.html (6,898 bytes)

3. Re: [RFI] BPL reply comments (score: 1)
Author: "Michael Tope" <>
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2003 09:32:17 -0700
I am not an expert on part 15 regulations, Rick, but it is clearly stated in the text of the regulations that meeting the absolute emission limits is not sufficient for compliance if the device still
/archives//html/RFI/2003-08/msg00144.html (10,556 bytes)

4. Re: [RFI] BPL reply comments (score: 1)
Author: "Michael Tope" <>
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2003 11:30:37 -0700
No, not really, Cortland. I just copied what Lee, W6EM did. He is a registered professional engineer who works in the electric utility industry. Read his comments if you get a chance, they are very v
/archives//html/RFI/2003-08/msg00147.html (9,373 bytes)

5. Re: [RFI] BPL reply comments (score: 1)
Author: "Michael Tope" <>
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 07:38:30 -0700
I am curious, Ed. Is it correct that BPL is classified by the FCC as an unintentional emitter? I seem to recall reading somewhere in part 15 that PLC systems are considered unintentional emitters, bu
/archives//html/RFI/2003-08/msg00149.html (16,228 bytes)

6. Re: [RFI] Computer speaker RFI (score: 1)
Author: "Michael Tope" <>
Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2003 11:12:44 -0700
Rob, Make sure what your battling isn't a ground loop between your computer and your rig. I have +12V rig here (Ten-Tec), and its chassis potential seems to bounce a little with modulation due to the
/archives//html/RFI/2003-09/msg00001.html (9,143 bytes)

7. Re: [RFI] Formal RFI complaint to the FCC (score: 1)
Author: "Michael Tope" <>
Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 21:15:16 -0800
That's good news, Ed. It means that the RFI isn't necessarily inherent in the technology like it is with BPL. Plasma displays seem to be here to stay, so its nice to know that you can actually build
/archives//html/RFI/2003-11/msg00023.html (8,725 bytes)

8. Re: [RFI] shielding question (score: 1)
Author: "Michael Tope" <>
Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2003 08:30:04 -0800
Interesting discussion. During the experiments how was the connection to chassis made at the source end ? Was it through the drain wire or was the foil somehow terminated to the source chassis? And h
/archives//html/RFI/2003-12/msg00067.html (10,356 bytes)

9. Re: [RFI] Paying for information (score: 1)
Author: "Michael Tope" <>
Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2003 18:09:36 -0800
Do university engineering libraries commonly carry AES publications? If so, I may be able to get a copy of the paper in question. BTW, is the $10 AES charges for duplication and mailing costs, or is
/archives//html/RFI/2003-12/msg00086.html (8,902 bytes)

10. Re: [RFI] I wish this guy had interviewed Ed Hare also... (score: 1)
Author: "Michael Tope" <>
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 08:47:43 -0800
Here is my favorite quote, Jason: and Rockville, >Md., areas, can't find interference caused by its system, said Jay Birnbaum, the company's >vice president and general counsel. Current Technologies
/archives//html/RFI/2004-01/msg00017.html (9,088 bytes)

11. Re: [RFI] I wish this guy had interviewed Ed Hare also... (score: 1)
Author: "Michael Tope" <>
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 09:32:37 -0800
Hi Dave, My understanding of the Home Plug standard was that it notched the ham bands by 30dB (after prodding by ARRL), so there may actually be some truth to the first part of the citation. In any c
/archives//html/RFI/2004-01/msg00020.html (9,472 bytes)

12. [RFI] Re: Topband: Local Noise Environment (score: 1)
Author: "Michael Tope" <>
Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2004 10:27:29 -0800
Pete, In addition to recording it, you also might try looking at it with Digipan or some other program which has a waterfall display to see if the noise is pure white or if it perhaps has some fine
/archives//html/RFI/2004-02/msg00094.html (7,496 bytes)

13. Re: [RFI] Local noise (score: 1)
Author: "Michael Tope" <>
Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2004 17:19:36 -0800
I'd give Pete, When I looked at your recording with digipan, I could see a fairly strong line in the waterfall at 120 Hz. Can you make the same recording with the antenna disconnected from the FT1K-
/archives//html/RFI/2004-02/msg00097.html (7,442 bytes)

14. [RFI] Re: Topband: Local noise environment (score: 1)
Author: "Michael Tope" <>
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2004 22:06:18 -0800
and Doug, What is it about those capacitors banks that generates so much noise? In principle I would think that a capacitor wouldn't generate any extra noise unless there was some arcing going on in
/archives//html/RFI/2004-02/msg00111.html (8,513 bytes)

15. Re: [RFI] KW Amp on second floor (score: 1)
Author: "Michael Tope" <>
Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 09:23:45 -0800
or NOT Speaking from experience, where you get into trouble is with overhead coax lines and control cables that people sometimes use in second story installations. At one of the clubs I operate from,
/archives//html/RFI/2004-03/msg00061.html (9,149 bytes)

16. Re: [RFI] BPL & Digital BC (AM) Radio (score: 1)
Author: "Michael Tope" <>
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 00:59:34 -0800
Not any more than existing analog AM transmissions. In either case, BPL modems will high pass filter their RF inputs starting around 1.7 to 2 MHz, so it is unlikely they will be affected by AM broad
/archives//html/RFI/2004-03/msg00115.html (7,702 bytes)

17. Re: [RFI] WSJ-BPL (score: 1)
Author: "Michael Tope" <>
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2004 20:16:31 -0800
see everything for this very reason. Aside from the added range that might be possible from "hot" BPL equipment, 2.4 and 5.8 GHz WI-FI systems (including home wireless LANs) have the same problem, b
/archives//html/RFI/2004-03/msg00181.html (7,826 bytes)

18. [RFI] Antenna Suggestions for 160 Noise Sniffing? (score: 1)
Author: "Michael Tope" <>
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2004 18:18:20 -0800
I have some off-property noise sources on 160 meters. Probably computer monitors or switching power supplies. I was thinking of picking up one of those little Yaesu FT-817ND battery operated DC to li
/archives//html/RFI/2004-04/msg00008.html (6,866 bytes)

19. Re: [RFI] PLCA Response to WSJ Article (score: 1)
Author: "Michael Tope" <>
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2004 12:01:23 -0700
Does anyone know what he means by a "low power frequency"? The fact that he toutes the low-duty cycle (e.g. not always on) nature of the system in the context of arguing for lack of BPL interfererenc
/archives//html/RFI/2004-04/msg00039.html (10,233 bytes)

20. Re: [CQ-Contest] FCC's NPRM on BPL (score: 1)
Author: "Michael Tope" <>
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2004 19:32:18 -0700
Before you comment, I strongly urge everyone to read David Sumner's recent suggestions for filing "Thoughtful, Considered" comments in response to the FCC NPRM on BPL. From the ARRL website: http://w
/archives//html/RFI/2004-04/msg00094.html (8,920 bytes)

This search system is powered by Namazu