RFI
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [RFI] ARRL Board of Directors resolution related to FCC enforcement

To: rfi@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [RFI] ARRL Board of Directors resolution related to FCC enforcement of radio-interference issues
From: "Roger (K8RI)" <k8ri@rogerhalstead.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2015 21:54:49 -0400
List-post: <rfi@contesting.com">mailto:rfi@contesting.com>
Your prediction is quite timely and accurate:  They are back.

http://www.insidegnss.com/node/4437

Like a virus or some relatives, they never seem to be gone for long.
Their return does not bode well for ham RFI problems when a high profile company whose product has been shown to cause dangerous interference, returns from bankruptcy to do it again because Billions of dollars are at stake.. If they can fight GPS and flight safety, how does our fate fighting RFI look? They are not addressing solving the problem it appears they are proactively fighting for the potential Billions of dollars they would gain from the unfair advantage the inexpensive spectrum would give them over existing companies that are playing by the rules.

As before, LightSquared blames others for their problems. They trying to require those being interfered fix the problem rather than the one doing the interfering. Depending on how this is settled could spell trouble for the ham community. As this has some very powerful people behind it, People who are well connected. I find it worrisome that we appear to almost be back to square one with the GPS interference issue. Remember, the FCC was originally behind the LightSquared proposal. This spectrum was created specifically to work with very weak signals as are the aircraft receivers where weight, physical size, and cost are paramount.. It also has the appearance that the implementation of high speed broadband is being sought at the expense of safety with the entire, established system, including users of that system, being expected to bear the costs rather than the interloper.

It's basically the same as telling us, that if someone interferes with us, we have to pay for the fix and that no spectrum is safe if there's a buck to be made so it will remain a fight to keep what we have and be glad the ARRL has had enough clout and connections to preserve and at times, even expand the spectrum to which we have access. Let's hope it remains that way.


Roger (K8RI)


On 8/4/2015 9:01 AM, CR wrote:
On 8/3/2015 11:13 PM, Roger (K8RI) wrote:

That it went away quietly with no fanfare raises questions. You almost have to go to the pilot groups to find out the real details. "LightSquared ground based transmitters to interfere with GPS" as search criteria did produce results, but much of the drama is no longer there, although I did not follow all of the links. The "Left Seat" blog should provide some interesting background.

In these instances Industry was anything but proactive. There will always be companies like LightSquared pushing the limits.
There was actually quite a lot of fanfare, which included its bankruptcy. If I've posted correctly the links below are from 2012 to July 2015, top to bottom, and the new LightSquared may yet arise from its own asshes (sp intentional).



"IMO": One side effect may eventually be the imposition of receiver performance standards.

http://www.csmonitor.com/Technology/Horizons/2012/0223/Lightsquared-what-happened-what-s-next-and-why-it-matters
http://www.cnet.com/news/lightsquared-blew-it-and-heres-why/
http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/lightsquared-could-get-fcc-approval-use-spectrum-year-end-witness-says/2014-03-20
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LightSquared
http://www.fiercewireless.com/tags/lightsquared

Cortland Richmond
KA5S
_______________________________________________
RFI mailing list
RFI@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rfi



---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
http://www.avast.com


_______________________________________________
RFI mailing list
RFI@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rfi

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>