[RFI] Re: rfi-digest V1 #70

James L. Keyes James L. Keyes" <jkeyes@mtnhome.com
Fri, 22 May 1998 09:14:30 -0500

Speaking as a "rules guy" [i.e. having digested government regs all my
life], I would have to say that the FCC has no interest in what goes
into a dummy load. Although they are handy devices for measuring and
testing, the proof is in the performance on the air. That's where
enforcement actions are started and where we must concentrate our
Jim Keyes, WA1TQG/5
Consulting Engineer in the Ozarks
rfi-digest wrote:
> rfi-digest           Thursday, May 21 1998     Volume 01 : Number 070
> Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 20:34:40 -0700
> From: Bob Wanderer <aa0cy@nwrain.com>
> Subject: RE: [RFI] Spurious signal levels
> When I had a spurious problem on 14 MHz back in the late 70's, I
> called the FCC (Laurel, Md. Lab) to find out whether the
> measurement was into a
> dummy load or into the antenna itself (as the levels were
> different and into the dummy load less than the limits discussed below).
> They couldn't answer. I eventually was able to solve the problem (brought
> SWR from 3:1 to 1.7:1 by modifying the angle of the radials on the trapped
> 1/4-wave vertical). I lost a bit of respoect for the Commission's technical
> representatives. Anyway, what's the answer?
> 73, Bob AA0CY

Submissions:              rfi@contesting.com
Administrative requests:  rfi-REQUEST@contesting.com
WWW:                      http://www.contesting.com/rfi-faq.html
Questions:                owner-rfi@contesting.com