Home › Forums › temp › FCC regulation or fiction? › Rich posted previously, “my
Total posts : 45366
Rich posted previously, “my comments are based on physical reality”.
Later, Rich also posted, “Part 15 has nothing to do with … program content…”
I’m glad you brought up what the Part 15 rules pertain to, Rich, because Part 15 rules also contain virtually no statements to do with physical reality, i.e., the laws of physics. Nowhere in those rules does it state, for example, that you are not allowed to have an elevated mount, a radiating ground, or a radiating feedline (some of Rich’s favorite topics). Instead, the rules (at least the section that most Part 15 broadcasters adhere to) consist of words describing what a compliant Part 15 station would LOOK like – antenna length, input power to the final stage, etc.
And as the rules are just descriptive words, they are subject to interpretation. I stated previously that FCC inspectors used to allow short ground wires connected to an elevated metal mast structure (the latter forming the ground). Later (post 2007 according to Ermi), they no longer allowed that. Did physical reality or the laws of physics change in 2007? No, but their interpretation of what a ground is did.
And just look at the case of the Talking House transmitter, which is FCC certified for use with their ATU. The rules state that a transmitter is allowed 100mw input to the final stage. They also state that the feedline+antenna+ground wire length can be a maximum of 10 feet in length. Now, the FCC ultimately interpreted these descriptive words to mean, in this one particular case, that the ATU is the final stage of the transmiting system, allowing that ATU to be mounted externally, outdoors, and the coax connecting it to the transmitter NOT considered part of the feedline.
So, I’m sure Rich, that there are those that are interested in your discussions of physical reality, even, sometimes, me. But NOT as they apply to the rules. Because then you’re applying YOUR interpretation to those rules, and frankly, I couldn’t give a toss about YOUR interpretation. The only interpretations that matter are those of an FCC inspector.