went to Facebook and couldn't find this part 15 forum being discussed here.
Mark
Okay first off, to the forum membership and Neil, sorry if my defending this site got the topic off topic or upset anyone.
@ Mark I believe the Facebook page is called "Part 15 AM and FM Radio" Hopefully that is not seen as promoting the page, I am simply answering another member's question.
As I originally said, some people's participation there is indeed questionable regarding legal part 15 rules. Just remember this, the FCC can see anything they want, there is no hidding from them. Those who choose to post information on the web in regards to pirate radio operations will get caught. Specially if they post that they are running an illegal station in the USA. The group being closed does not stop the FCC from seeing the posts there.
Being a member there does not automatically make you an illegal law breaking participant, you are responsible for the legal operation of your own station if you reside in the USA or under US federal laws. As long as your noise is clean, you have nothing to worry about.
Our libraries have tons of books on information that could be called questionable subjects, but they exist for informational purposes.
Going any further would only loose the scope of this topic, but the point is, there are books out there explaining how to make bombs, it's what you do with that information that makes all the difference.
Same with groups that are related to part 15 transmitters, information is unlimited and so are the possibilties, it's what we do with that information that makes the real difference.
Bruce.
150 uVm isn't that what the C. Crane FM Transmitter puts out? I remember it was just over 100 uV/m at the out of box power level. I just wonder what would happen if someone were to set up a sort of antenna distribution system around the apartment complex which ¼ mile square and as long as the field strength outside the property line is 150 uV/m or less you could have a clear signal all around the complex for FM. Or just make sure your transmitter is in the middle of the square ¼ mile area so you don't exceed the 150 uV/m at property boundry. Now again this is a gray area and if you do this you may be in violation of FCC rules part 15 section 239. So do this at your own risk. This discussion is for education purposes only. Neither part15 dot us or its participants necessarily agree with any of my posting of this subject. Hence your warning is clear.
From 1972:
We were doing "broadcasting," first on
AM, which didn't work well, because we
didn't know how to make it work.
We went to FM.
We didn't know the rules. Our 27 MHz
Part 15 walkie talkies were 100 mW DC
into the final. We thought that was the
limit for the FM BCB Part 15. Some of us
thought one could transmit ANYWHERE (!)
in the RF spectrum
- if it was less than 100 mW in.
But knowing that - we went higher
anyway. Our FM transmitter was
a 2N5223 transistor that was a
free running oscillator. We pushed
it to 20 volts in at 20 mA. About
400 mW in. I don't know what came
out the other end.
We were in high school. We didn't know.
That didn't make it right, however. And we
eventually found out the correct rules and
stopped. We did not want to endanger our
enterances into ham radio. Suddenly I was
running 75 watts input THERE. The FCC regs
all came together at that point.
If this doesn't fit, you guys can just take
it out.
With all respect and best wishes,
Brooce, the WLP, DOGRADIO, and
Micro (etc.) Part 15 stations.
All I can say is that you can't progress if you're standing still.
If the FCC has “spies” that monitor this board then now those spies know about the Facebook group and the FCC can take whatever action they would take against someone on this board bragging about running 1W into a dipole.
stvcmty Said:
If the FCC has “spies” that monitor this board then now those spies know about the Facebook group and the FCC can take whatever action they would take against someone on this board bragging about running 1W into a dipole.
MrBruce Said:
stvcmty You are most likely right, I don't think for one minute that the FCC is stupid or ignorant about what is going on out there and is most likely aware of that page long before it was mentioned here.
I do feel sorry for those who venture into part 15 for the first time and unknowingly follow in the footsteps of a intentional law breaker.
Knowledge is the best tool we have, but you have to admit, the rules are at times, very vague and hard for the average Joe to understand.
That fault lies with the FCC it's self. Years ago I bought an FM91 wireless microphone from radio shack, it came with a sheet of paper with what I believe was part 15, perhaps it was part 95, I can't remember now, it was back in 1977. Anyways, the rules printed on that piece of paper were like reading the King James Bible's Old Testament, with subpart this and subpart that, I was lost reading it.
Nothing has changed since then. The rules are very confusing and misleading. I think they need to be re-written in common every day english so the average Joe (and myself) can understand them clearly.
Bruce.
Tim said: "A few weeks ago I joined a Part 15 radio group on Facebook. Some nice, intelligent people there."
I said: I guess you were refering to me? LOL!
I don't know if the old rule of 100 UV /m at the boundary line of the property is still legal for FM. The poster of that article didn't give the source or where it can be easily found in the FCC rules. could it be found in the section where it talks about carrier current? it seems to me I remember something about radiation from the walls of a building on campus. again I have not found the source to that. if someone can guide us to those reference points please do so.
Thelegacy posted: I don't know if the old rule of 100 UV /m at the boundary line of the property is still legal for FM. etc.
If it was, then wouldn't the FCC have issued at least a few of their many Part 15 FM NOUOs for non-compliance with that premise or rule?
Instead those NOUOs are all based on non-compliance with FCC §15.239 for exceeding the maximum field 3 meters from the transmit antenna, rather than 3 meters beyond the boundary lines of someone's definition of a campus.
we used to have 50uV/m @ 30m from antenna prior to 89 and 15.221 (or whatever rule number they had prior to 89 for 221) covered FM as well as AM after the 89 rules revision that provision was dropped due to NAB lobbying pressure.
so much for congress and the FCC working for the good of the american people money talks and the rests walks!!!!
in short we the people got screwed and the big money people got what they wanted at the expense of we the people!!!
this is exactly why america is in the trouble its in right now.
Beliefs about such old rules may have historical interest if those rules ever existed, but proof that they did has not been provided here, so far.
i've been looking for the pre 89 rules for a while now and the only thing i found is something from the 50's and the 70's iirc.
i may be off on F/S but they did have 221 style campus rules for fm pre 89. that i do remember correctly.
i remember it being touted by LPB prominately in their literature.
kc8gpd posted: ... i may be off on F/S but they did have 221 style campus rules for fm pre 89. that i do remember correctly. etc
Remembering is fine as long as the basis for doing so was/is accurate, and still can be proven.
In any case, claiming so in a website post is not much of a benefit to those wanting to learn about, and comply with present-day FCC §15.239 -- which is the _only_ FCC rule now applying to legal, unlicensed systems using the 88.1 to 107.9 MHz FM broadcast band.
In any case, claiming so in a website post is not much of a benefit to those wanting to learn about, and comply with present-day FCC §15.239 -- which is the _only_ FCC rule now applying to legal, unlicensed systems using the 88.1 to 107.9 MHz FM broadcast band.
Yes it is, if someone is trying to track information down.