Here are some YouTube videos of an actual raid on a pirate station in Santa Cruz in 2007. I don't think this happens very often.
The raid videos linked above are different from what happened to The Crow, seeing the Schutz Staffel do their work is ugly anytime anywhere, but then, what did happen to The Crow?
It didn't resemble an inspection. It has the ear marks of a hoist.
And why is it that so many have faith that the FCC measurements claimed against low power operators are true and correct. Do agents make errors? Do they sometimes falsify charges like all other enforcement agencies are known to do?
And right after refusing to speculate some have speculated that The Crow might not be telling the whole story.
There's an arcane principle that I recall from grade school, "the accused is innocent until proven guilty". Is that speculation?
I'd like to know under what circumstances an NOUO, supposedly a public document, can be suppressed and not be put online (if that is what indeed happens).
Do I think that there's more to this story than what was posted here? Yes, I stated that right from the beginning. That point of view is supported by different information (not necessarily contradictory) being posted in different Forums.
Am I willing to speculate any further? No, not until more information is available.
Am I concerned with what happened? Yes, with the information that we have with this case, plus Gerry Gaule's (never sure of that spelling), it appears that even if a transmitter is Part 15 certified (and installed legally), it can still be seized/given over/taken/whatever take you want on what happened. And that's not a good thing.
It should be the manufacturer that is questioned and investigated, not the user of a certified (and correctly installed) piece of equipment. If the equipment does not meet the FCC guidelines, then rescind the certification, pull it off the market, whatever. Don't take it out on the poor user, who in most cases is attempting to operate legally (that's the only reason that you would purchase a certified transmitter in the first place).
THAT'S why I continue to attempt to figure out what really happened in both the cases being discussed, sometimes confusingly intertwined, here.
Mighty1650's experience with inspection and seizure of equipment is a horrendous precedent by the FCC. Apparently, it is an option to do this rather than issue a publicly documented NOUO. That is NOT the right thing to do! By not publishing this action, the FCC is going under the radar and opening the possibility/probability of being able to take arbitrary action without the repercussions of public scrutiny. That amounts to abuse of authority.
We view this as a new development, but we don't know how many other inspection/seizures were done in the past because the FCC chooses not to publish these actions. We only know about this one particular case because mighty1650 was generous enough to share the information. How many other similar actions were taken that we don't know about?
If the FCC thinks the inspection/seizure route is a convenient shortcut to the standard NOUO route, then they are sadly mistaken. They will eventually get big backfire.
It's 5 AM and I just took a radio into the bathroom to enjoy the program now being streamed on KDX Worldround Radio on the internet, but I was unable to get reception on the radio. Why? Oh, that's right, it's because KDX shuts off its AM radio service at odd hours to avoid univited company at the door.
Then I logged in and read PhilB's comment about the possible "big backfire" that could result from the inappropriate seizure he so well describes and which has cast the present shadow across the hobby. My first thought is this.
If Part 15 hobbyists are treated like radio pirates; if there is no recognition given to the difference between legal and illegal operation, then we have no reason to fiddle with the dainty rules we have so carefully administered. We can make up our own rules. The "backfire" arrives in the form of more radio piracy, not less.
I am not advocating civil disobedience in the form of deliberate disregard for the rules, but in a perverse way the FCC may be the disobedient party fostering the piracy they wish to snuff.
It is outright foolish on the part of the federal government to scapegoat a small minority group for the ills of the AM NAB cartell in their sorry plight.
Using marine tactics on civilians is ugsome.
While I'm not from Missouri (the "Show Me" state), I do wonder about the events that led up to this reported raid in Texas. The only official FCC information I've read about such raids state that they took place after an unlicensed operator had been given many written warnings (NOUOs) and possibly even been assessed a fine, but disregarded all of that and continued to operate.
Not at all to imply that this happened in this situation.
But wouldn't it be preferable to accurately learn all of the FCC's actions and their results leading up to this reported event, before deciding to post negatively about the FCC?
Indeed it would be ideal to accurately learn all of the FCC's actions and results leading up to The Crow's take down.
How do we go about doing this?
i'm convinced there is more going on here than we are being told in the case of mighty1650. Gerry, i just don't know what to speculate about that (without knowing if he was infact using an unmodded standard TH) and will have to wait for Bill & Dan to complete the investigation. given that i will try to speculate what could cause a reading of 1.8mV @ 175m.
as i stated earlier it will all soon come out and we will have the agent(s) side of things as Radio Systems / Dan is in contact with the FCC about these situations.
It's just a wait game.
below is speculation (calling rich / Ermi / niel to verify or correct my assumptions)
Gerry was, (so far as we been told), using a standard TH-V with it's wire antenna. if that is the case regardless of any field readings that inspector got should have passed inspection under 15.219 unless there were appearances of modification or tampering with the unit in question. a reading of 1.8mV @ 175m is (in my opinion) possible if there is capacitive coupling between the 3m monopole and unshielded AC wiring in the building and the building is of wood construction. in short the AC wiring could act like a very large capacitively coupled shunt fed cage monopole and could get some interaction with other nearby buildings AC wiring creating a large directional array. is this scenario likely? possibly, possibly not, but stranger things have happened. at these wavelengths funny things happen that we can't easily predict with a slide rule and protractor this is why the FCC still requires proof of performance measurements of AM arrays because anything can interact with an AM monopole and throw off it's pattern. the same goes (probably even more so) for these extremely electrically short monopoles. any nearby metal can reradiate or interact with the antenna system and there is nothing a user can do about it. if the FCC came across a stock un modified TH with a valid FCC certification installed per the manual then said installation should pass. that is my take on things. 1.3mV @ 175m is what a good ground mounted monopole over a grounbd plane can produce so 1.8mV is not that far off if the scenario i laid out here did indeed happen in gerry's situation. the FCC also requires (under 15.207) condicted limits on the hot and neutral lines for intentional radiators getting their power from the public utiltiy AC grid. as such an inspecting agent should not conisder the AC grid as part of the ground lead under 15.219. these are limits not total isolation making my scenario posed here that much more likely. fact is the FCC OET lab passed the TH system (manual, ATU, and TH) and barring (as i stated previosuly) appearance of modifcation the agent in gerry's case should have accepted the certification and gave gerry a pass. it does not matter all this will come out in due course. we may even find out that Gerry did in fact modify his TH and that there was outward appearance of modification, who knows, just another bit of speculation on my part, point is till Bill, Dan, RS complete their investigation it is all that speculation
make note: i concentrated on Gerry's case because from all outward appearances Gerry's case (if he was in fact using an unmodded standard TH) should have passed and it will be likely that Gerry can return to the air (if he was in fact using an unmodded TH) after all this is completed. mighty1650 on the other hand has admitted to pirating on FM which led to the original inspection and confiscation. that pirate activity on FM tainting his entire operation in my opinion and is likely what led to total confiscation of all his transmitting gear.
this is my take on these situations but the truth will eventually come out.
hopefully sooner rather than later but all we can do is wait it will take however long it takes.
i have sat back and neglected to comment till now but felt i needed to comment and stress this is all speculation and is only two incidents out of thousands with one having the taint of pirate fm activity.
if you are an TH owner (and concerned about these recent events) and wish to be updated but do not wish to be a member of HB.net than i suggest contacting RS Global and politely and calmly stating your concerns and ask that you be updated as info becomes available.
otherwise lets keep all the speculation to a minimum please till RS/Dan complete their investigation. no good can come of speculation.
I personally want to hear the Agent(s) involved side of these two cases before passing judgement on (and condemning) the agent(s) involved.
this thread on Portland Radio Guide was brought to my attention about the Gaule situation. http://feedback.pdxradio.com/topic/new-station-in-vancouver
as i stated many times. there is more going on than we have been told. read the whole thread top to bottom and draw your own conclusions.
Another example of so-called radio 'experts' ruminating on Part 15, when it's obvious they really don't know very much about it, and certainly haven't done anything with it. Armchair 'experts' at best.
Crow, you're making the FCC out to be this big bad agency, when what you're not telling the other folks on this board, is that your DAD requested that they take all the equipment with them. Why else would all your streaming sites be "suspended"? The FCC has no jurisdiction over that. Please quit making this into a bigger deal than it is. They found ONE transmitter that was not type-accepted. And crow's dad made them take the rest of his transmitters with them. Grow up. I'm going back to radio-discussions board.
The Crow posted:
"Man if that was just an inspection... I'd truly hate to know what an actual raid is."
This is a very important statement, because it tells us that the agent failed to make clear that this was a routine "inspection", if that's what it was.
Jumping to the comments made in the Texas section at Radio Discussions, persons who were broadcasters and HAMS began discussing The Crow 99.9 FM in McKinney prior to the FCC visit, and at least two of them admitted checking out The Crow's signal by driving around his neighborhood. Then the FCC came to The Crow's door.
Then later in that same thread these broadcaster/HAMS had "inside information", saying "No NOUO will be published." The only way they could know that is if they were in communication with official sources, which of course would be true if they had instigated the whole event.
Nice of you to visit us radi0chik. We are all interested in this situation as it affects us as a group.
As new details become available it helps us to understand what has transpired.
By the way, we don't hear from many females involved with this hobby so it's nice to meet you.
Hello Melissa, radi0chik.
I had not seen your post when I put "Follow the Signs and Symbols."
I must ask, how do you happen to know the intimate details of The Crow's take down situation?
I looked over on radio discussions and I don't see you, unless you are radi0avenger.
Come back please?