Mike,
In your case will you be knocking on the light rail office door and complain?
They will laugh at you, so much for complaining.
I doubt the FCC will help either, it's much larger than the FCC, it's a serving
the greater need situation. Money talks and you are just a fly speck in the
big picture.
Dale, k9vuj
On 21, Mar 2014, at 19:24, W0MU Mike Fatchett <w0mu@w0mu.com> wrote:
> You think you have problems? I can only imagine the noise the is going to be
> created by the light rail that they intend to extend past my house. As it is
> now, I can drive next to the existing line with my mobile rig and the noise
> generated is awful.
>
> What are my chances of getting this noise fixed? I am sure the gov't will
> claim their needs outweigh mine and will have some imminent domain argument
> or some other answer. I wonder if the FCC will get involved?
>
> Mike W0MU
>
> On 3/21/2014 6:17 PM, Dale J. wrote:
>> Jim,
>>
>> Thanks for your reasoned response. I agree.
>>
>> I too have the noise canx devices, more than one here and they do help to a
>> point. I've contacted the local noise source and we have good relationship,
>> we're on good terms, but so far the problem has not been fixed. I suspect
>> that either I buy a new TV for them or the TV that is in use will eventually
>> fail, but there will always be more after that one goes away. I think the
>> days of operating in somewhat noise free cities are a thing of the past. It
>> will be a never ending knocking at doors requesting next door neighbors to
>> turn off their devices etc, but I'm not up to doing that. Maybe it's time
>> to just write off this radio hobby and take up chasing butterflies or
>> photography something. Very distressing after all these decades of radio
>> interests, since before 1960.
>>
>> Dale, k9vuj
>>
>>
>> On 21, Mar 2014, at 18:08, Jim Kennedy <kennedyjp@cableone.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Folks, , this certainly is an interesting thread but its time for a
>>> reality
>>> check. The offending broadband emitting consumer devices are not going away
>>> anytime in the near future. The FCC is so far behind the power curve
>>> regarding Part 15 devices that I don’t see it getting resolved anytime soon.
>>> That’s not to say that we as hams should give up trying to bring pressure on
>>> the FCC to do something to curtail the importing or manufacturing of all
>>> this junk.
>>>
>>> I live in a typical residential area and am faced with all kinds of noise
>>> being generated by these types of devices, just like you guys. When and If
>>> I can identify the source of the problem I approach the owner of the
>>> offending device and try to work out a resolution. Sometimes it is
>>> successful and other times its not. That’s just the stark truth of the
>>> matter. But the bottom line is that if you want to get the noise issue
>>> resolved its going to take action from you. Go find it, identify it and
>>> take action to get it resolved if possible. No amount of banter about
>>> whether the FCC is doing its job or not is going to get rid of the noise.
>>> It takes action on your part that includes diplomacy, technical ability.
>>> and common sense.
>>>
>>> I have invested in a ANC4- Noise Canceller and in most cases will mitigate
>>> the noise to a level where I can at least operate. I find it's been
>>> affective on power line and most broadband kinds of noises. It does require
>>> a sense antenna that can hear the noise that the receiver is hearing in
>>> order to null it out. It may be a thought to consider.
>>>
>>> Jim
>>> W7OUU
>>>
>>> -----Original Message----- From: CR
>>> Sent: Friday, March 21, 2014 19:45
>>> To: rfi@contesting.com
>>> Subject: Re: [RFI] ARRL to FCC...
>>>
>>>
>>> When we're cheated by a merchant who sells noncompliant equipment, we
>>> have to act ourselves to recover the cost of replacing non-compliant
>>> equiment or bringing it into compliance wit FCC Rules.
>>>
>>> The FCC can and does penalize those who unlawfully use, import,
>>> advertise or sell non-compliant apparatus or equipment.
>>>
>>> What it can't do, because Congress won't fund it, is go around looking
>>> for interference-producing equipment in use. It must rely on complaints
>>> - and it is as we know predisposed to ignore them if acting would anger
>>> Congress. Look at BPL!
>>>
>>>
>>> Cortland KA5S
>>>
>>>
>>> From FCC Part 15
>>>
>>> 15.1
>>> (b) The operation of an intentional or unintentional radiator that is
>>> not in accordance with the regulations in this
>>> part must be licensed pursuant to the provisions of section 301 of the
>>> Communications Act of 1934, as amended, unless otherwise exempted from
>>> the licensingrequirements elsewhere in this chapter.
>>>
>>> (c) Unless specifically exempted, the operation or marketing of an
>>> intentional or unintentional radiator that is
>>> not in compliance with the administrative and technical provisions in
>>> this part, including prior Commission authorization or verification, as
>>> appropriate, is prohibited under section 302 of the Communications Act
>>> of 1934, as
>>> amended, and subpart I of part 2 of this chapter. The equipment
>>> authorization and verification procedures are detailed in subpart J of
>>> part 2 of this chapter.
>>>
>>> From Part 2 Subpart I:
>>>
>>> §2.803 Marketing of radio frequency products prior to equipment
>>> authorization.
>>>
>>> (a) Marketing, as used in this section, includes sale or lease, or
>>> offering for sale or lease, including advertising for sale or lease, or
>>> importation, shipment, or distribution for the purpose of selling or
>>> leasing or offering for sale or lease.
>>>
>>> (b) General rule. No person may market a radio frequency device unless:
>>>
>>> (1) For devices subject to authorization under certification, the device
>>> has been authorized in accordance with the rules in subpart J of this
>>> chapter and is properly identified and labeled as required by §2.925 and
>>> other relevant sections in this chapter; or
>>>
>>> (2) For devices subject to authorization under verification or
>>> Declaration of Conformity in accordance with the rules in subpart J of
>>> this chapter, the device complies with all applicable technical,
>>> labeling, identification and administrative requirements; or
>>>
>>> (3) For devices that do not require a grant of equipment authorization
>>> under subpart J of this chapter but must comply with the specified
>>> technical standards prior to use, the device complies with all
>>> applicable, technical, labeling, identification and administrative
>>> requirements.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 3/21/2014 1:20 PM, Kelly Johnson wrote:
>>>> What I
>>>> don't understand is why the FCC isn't willing/able to put the burden of
>>>> fixing it or replacing it on the manufacturer and/or importer. Why do they
>>>> put the burden on the consumer?
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
_______________________________________________
RFI mailing list
RFI@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rfi
|