I agree 100% what we need band together and be on the same page, we need to get the FCC and the NAB to listen to our proposals. I just wish, that any websites that support part 15 would see eye to eye and band together and agree with each other and not come across that my site is better than your site rant.
As in the case of ME versus H.B., as I have said to him via email, if Bill would be a man and meet me halfway, there is a possibility he and I could apologize to each other and the feud will end. He has to see the difference of me calling Ray F. Burns a bully versus him calling me a pirate. Looking up the two names in a dictionary, obviously a pirate has a more negative background than a bully. I would rather have been called a bully than the name I actually was called.
Time will tell who is the better man here. Bill has to get it through his head, I never operated a transmitter that violated FCC rules. If anyone wants to assume I operated on 87.9MHz with my Ramsey FM100, guess again, the BA1404 chip in the Ramsey FM100 can NOT tune below 88.1MHz! That was the ONLY FM transmitter I owned and operated.
Any who, united we stand, divided we fall. Time has come for all low powered radio sites to band together and call for a rule change that we can all agree on. There are many options that will work out for the best for everyone who has this hobby as a personal interest.
Bruce.
I agree 100% what we need is to band together and be on the same page, we need to get the FCC and the NAB to listen to our proposals. I just wish, that any websites that support part 15 would see eye to eye and band together and agree with each other and not come across that my site is better than your site rant.
As in the case of ME versus H.B., as I have said to him via email, if Bill would be a man and meet me halfway, there is a possibility he and I could apologize to each other and the feud will end. He has to see the difference of me calling Ray F. Burns a bully versus him calling me a pirate. Looking up the two names in a dictionary, obviously a pirate has a more negative background than a bully. I would rather have been called a bully than the name I actually was called.
Time will tell who is the better man here. Bill has to get it through his head, I never operated a transmitter that violated FCC rules. If anyone wants to assume I operated on 87.9MHz with my Ramsey FM100, guess again, the BA1404 chip in the Ramsey FM100 can NOT tune below 88.1MHz! That was the ONLY FM transmitter I ever owned and operated.
Admitting I ordered a 30 watt FCC part 73 certified transmitter and sending it back without taking it out of the shipping create does not make me a law breaker. Operating it without a license would have been however, but you can't use what has not been removed from the shipping box and sending it back should have been seen as my willing to comply not disobey.
Any who, united we stand, divided we fall. Time has come for all low powered radio sites to band together and call for a rule change that we can all agree on. There are many options that will work out for the best for everyone who has this hobby as a personal interest.
This site has been acting funny today, after posting it displays a page error every time, even though the posts posted.
Bruce.
not sure if this post will get through but i have already emailed Radio8z on it. when posting an original posting it doesn't post at all, i tried a OP and got nothing.
Ok replies post in spite of the error, OP's don't post.
Even thecso called PIRATES should come to tearms with a range reasonable. I say no more than a mile or two. With that range you can neighborhood cast and if you live near highly populated areas allows you to help others discover or re discover artists the big boys cant air. It teaches communication skills as people also get a feel of Radio. Im sure not everyone would an FM tx reaching 1/4 to 1 mile. But the few that do in areas where there are blank frequencys should not be denied. Im sure some NAB members had some experience with Micro broadcasting. It would even be a great teaching tool in schools. I read about a high school where a student built an FM transmitter and the entire student body was involved.
Yes, let's look at AM broadcasting as an example. If you're allowed to cover two miles legally on AM, I have not seen many AM pirates getting NOUO's. Many NOUO's are FM related. Let's look at the possible reasons for that.
1. AM is allowed to cover a broader area.
2. FM is very limited to basically your own house.
If AM is allowed a larger coverage area and there are very few to none NOUO's for AM, then perhaps the FCC should recognize that trend and raise the limits on FM.
Not all FM related NOUO's show a possible RF power output in excess of 300uV @ 3 meters, or 10 watts TPO. Some are simply a slight bit over the limit. So let's say if the limit allowed a wattage of 1 watt at the final output stage, there would certainly be a considerable lesser amount of FM band NOUO's wouldn't you say?
Now I know there are nay sayers that will claim, look at the speed limits, the higher you raise the limits to avoid having illegal speeders and yet they still drive over that limit as well.
My answer to that is there are still a large number of drivers who would have been speeding if the old limit was still in effect, but didn't because they drove below the new limit.
Bruce.
Even though I agree the FM allowable signal strength is too restrictive and I wish you all the best in trying to get it changed, I don't believe in changing a law just because everyone disobeys it. You gave speeding as an example.....but you can't raise the limit to whatever everyone's doing or want's to do. As for lobbying for 1 watt power to be legal, you could use New Zealand as a reference but it would be more realistic to stick to field strength rather than power. You are much more likely to get the field strength raised and give Canada as an example and petition for 1000 or 1500uV/M@3 meters rather than a power of 1 watt,which probably is not ever going to happen.
Mark
All day today attempts to enter posts have been met with an Error window.
Some of the posts manage to appear anyway, others don't.
FIX IT PLEASE.
THANK YOU.
My new Transmitter which is FCC complient at low power is -48Dbm. Now -48Dbm = 0.000015848931925 milliwatts. Pretty mild. Your not even looking at 1 milliwatt. Now I can see why so many go over the field strength. You have to really have some sensitive equipment to measure down to 0.000015848931925 milliwatts. I thought the low was 100 mW but looking at the specs on the box it clearly says -48Dbm which is set to low power out of the box. So these complient transmitters are all around -48Dbm. Now I went to a site with a Dbm to Milliwatt converter and found that 0 Dbm is 1 milliwatt. Wow that really sheds light on the amount of power or lack of power it takes to meet the complience on a rubber duck antenna. 28 Dbm would be 630.95734448 mW. It would be a little more than a half watt and yet would allow a person to have some decent range on FM. It would be easy to deal with and measure. If your over 28 Dbm your illegal. Reason I picked 28 is that its just under 30 Dbm and manageable as far as getting a reading of around 500mW. A half watt should be 100% legal to run. I'm not sure what the dbm would be for 1,000 uV/M @ 3 meters. It might be -48DbmX4 and if so still would be around 1 mW. The reason most folks don't try and go over on AM is because 1 to 2 miles is enough for most folks. I think the same could be said for most reasonable hobby FM Micro Broadcasters. Hope I shed some light with my reasearch. -48Dbm is what you need to shoot for if you are super worried about field strengh and if so use a rubber duck with that amount of power -48 Dbm.
I agree with you mark, this is why I brought the subject up, to open one's mind and provide possible options to share with the rest of the group. See I agreed with you.
Let's keep it going guys and gals this is where change begins to happen.
Bruce.
How does a public neighborhood differ from a non-public neighborhood? 🙂
Private neighborhoods don't allow antennas.
Public neighborhoods are losing their privacy.
Act as normal as possible, they are watching.
Mark, I realize using maximum speed limits as an example compared to maximum allowed RF may not have offered a good example of what I was trying to say.
I looked at your answer and I agree that the maximum allowed field strength limit is what should be raised not the RF power output at the final stage.
Right now, that limit is too constrictive and as in my original example, I stated that most NOUO's were for FM stations as compared to AM stations. A few NOUO's, but not all of course, show the violator was slightly above that 250uV per meter @ 3 meters. Say 280uV per meter @ 3 meters for example, an inspector could find that to be high enough to issue an NOUO. I am sure that a station transmitting at that field strength has very little chance of having a great number of listeners unless they are located in a very large multi-family apartment building. My point is they got an NOUO because the limits allowed are too low and not very hard to exceed. Even an FCC part 15 certified transmitter can exceed that limit, it's not just those Chinese transmitters we're talking about.
Not every person who got a visit from the FCC intended to operate an illegal station. This would be the case of an out of work DJ, or even one that is still employed, creating his very own personal radio station in his home. He may know how to do studio related stuff, but often their technical background is very limited. This person would buy, install and operate their transmitter as best as their knowledge would allow them to. One may not realize that their selection of a broadcast antenna could cause their transmitter to operate slightly above what is allowed for that band and not be aware of it until they get a visit. Broadcast school does not teach future 'on air' personalities how to run the technical side of a radio station, such as the transmitter's operation and antenna tuning. They would have to rely on what information they can acquire from those that should know more about this stuff. Sometimes that information is hard to understand for the average person and if that information was published by an individual who himself is guilty of illegal operation, that unsuspecting reader may follow that advice.
As we speak about AM & FM broadcast hobbyists wanting legal higher field strengths, I begin to wonder if a requirement would be imposed by the FCC in exchange for such. That requirement would be that each part 15 radio station is required to have in place and fully operational is those two different EAS systems and tests of those systems has to be conducted on a regular basis such as LPFM and other class broadcast stations have to do.
Those EAS systems are VERY expensive! And to be compliant, you have to have both systems installed, so that's about $6000.00 in equipment purchases right there!
How many part 15 operators would be willing to shell out that kind of money for a small time hobby?
Bruce.
(Quoting MrBruce) ... A few NOUO's, but not all of course, show the violator was slightly above that 250uV per meter @ 3 meters. Say 280uV per meter @ 3 meters for example, an inspector could find that to be high enough to issue an NOUO. ...
Is the quote above supported by one or more FCC NOUOs, or is it just conjecture/supposition?
If that quote is even closely supported by just one FM NOUO issued by the FCC Enforcement Bureau, please provide the FCC EB link leading to it.
Many thanks.