If it is a problem I will do what I can. Hopefully we will be in
warmer climates for prime radioing and it will probably be a few years
before they get this far.
I don't expect them to do much of anything. There violation of the
rules is no more acceptable than your plasma tv issue.
Mike W0MU
On 3/21/2014 7:50 PM, Dale J. wrote:
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
|