how-to block ads
|
TODDRICK
join:2001-08-27
Milwaukee, WI
| RE: Interferance to Ham Radio Operators
Hello again, I really should have directed my earlier post to several people instead of singling out Moonpuppy. The Gerritson commentary is the only part really directed at him. The rest should have been directed at BigMac777.
RF Engineer is correct, the FCC will and does enforce our rules and regulations. If someone is operating and causing intentional interference or refuses to clean up a dirty signal they deserve to be hung out to dry. In the instance of unintentional interference from a properly installed and operated station, I recall the FCC siding with the Ham (would have to search the ARRL website to find articles). I don't think I can remember reading that the FCC imposed 'quiet hours' on someone with a properly operated station (I have only had my ticket for 22 years but was interested and was a SWL for 20 years before that) much less pulling their ticket. Most of the enforcement activity I remember has been unlicensed or otherwise illegal operation, RFI remediation aimed at electric power companies or electric fence owners and retests for those with suspicious exams/upgrades.
Hope this clarifies a bit, was pressed for time before and wasn't composing well.
73 Todd N9DRY | |
moonpuppy
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD
 ·Verizon Online DSL
| said by TODDRICK  :Hello again, I really should have directed my earlier post to several people instead of singling out Moonpuppy. The Gerritson commentary is the only part really directed at him. The rest should have been directed at BigMac777. RF Engineer is correct, the FCC will and does enforce our rules and regulations. If someone is operating and causing intentional interference or refuses to clean up a dirty signal they deserve to be hung out to dry. In the instance of unintentional interference from a properly installed and operated station, I recall the FCC siding with the Ham (would have to search the ARRL website to find articles). I don't think I can remember reading that the FCC imposed 'quiet hours' on someone with a properly operated station (I have only had my ticket for 22 years but was interested and was a SWL for 20 years before that) much less pulling their ticket. Most of the enforcement activity I remember has been unlicensed or otherwise illegal operation, RFI remediation aimed at electric power companies or electric fence owners and retests for those with suspicious exams/upgrades. Hope this clarifies a bit, was pressed for time before and wasn't composing well. 73 Todd N9DRY The reason the FCC sides with the HAM is because of Part 97 and Part 15.
HAMS, as a group, are required to adhere to guidelines that make us responsible for our stations and how they operate. We have to watch where we transmit (frequency wise), how we transmit (what modes, power levels, etc.) and how we communicate (no "10" codes, secret codes, foul language, etc.)
We do our best, for the most part, to live within the spectrum we are gievn and not to cause issues with neighbors. (I wonder if BIGMAC777 has a CBer and not a HAM across the alleyway? Good luck with him if he is a CBer.  )
Consumer electronics have to follow Part 15. However, with more and more people wanting cheaper and cheaper electronics, costs do get cut and so do corners.
BTW, I know a group of guys that are on VERY good terms with Riley Hollinsworth.
73's de KA3UQQ | |
|
