A Few Questions For Mr. Fry....

[Bongwater]

Mr. Fry,

I read your posts with curiosity and your amazing charts documenting the precise legally permissible range for Part 15 transmitters down to the nanometer are just marvelous. It is an truly amazing amount of dedication and work you put into these and keeping these little Part 15 radio Sea Monkeys on this board in their place.

With that said, what the hell is going on HERE?

(From the New York City board)

http://boards.radio-info.com/smf/index.php?topic=193946.0

My point with this is these pirates are ABSOLUTELY GETTING AWAY WITH EVERYTHING. And THEN some. Including full blown commercial advertising on their own web page

Do you really think that anyone on this particular board would even THINK of getting away with what Jamminz Radio is doing?

Who do you perceive as the BIGGER threat?

Here we are, being sweatted over the tiniest nanowatt, yet you fail to use your resources, charts and stern warnings to address a REAL problem that almost every radio listener in New York City knows about. But you will use everything you have to direly warn of the consequences to little Part 15 hobby transmitters with almost no listenable range whatsoever and little to no knowledge of from most people beyond this very board?.

How do you explain a pirate being allowed to run this way (they've been on for several years 24/7), and yet a tiny Part 15 hobbyist is somehow the subject of your deepest concern?

Sorry for the inevitable pun, but aren't there bigger fish, Mr. Fry?

NOBODY here on this board is so bold and ruthless as to even THINK of getting away with what Jamminz is doing. Everybody here sees personally that they are already operating well WITHIN the technical limits of Part 15. Or at least they will always make every effort, above and beyond, to do so. Your charts and graphs are a fine resource to that end

Jamminz does not. But somehow, you presume it is always US that need the technical reality check.

Jamminz however is a big fat middle finger to all of it. It doesn't help they make they rest of us look bad, but it's downright frustrating that someone like this is pulling this crap and you seem to passively ignore it.

They don't care at all what they are doing. Their equipment alone could send you straight into shock just LOOKING at it, compared to the little C. Cranes, Rangemasters or I.A.M/Talking House things most people here use.....

Yet somehow, WE are the ones who have to walk the line......

And did I mention they've been on the air for YEARS? Yet nobody at the FCC mailed them anything. Nobody from the FCC has knocked on their door. Or sent a SWAT team. Or anything else WE worry about already.

We feel VERY nervous about that. Jamminz does not obviously......

I don't get it. What gives?

 

[rfry]

How do you explain a pirate being allowed to run this way (they've been on for several years 24/7), and yet a tiny Part 15 hobbyist is somehow the subject of your deepest concern? ... I don't get it. What gives?

My posts on this subject are not made with the expectation of "policing" unlicensed operators. They will do whatever they want to do.

Some people may want to operate in compliance with Part 15. However the advice about "Part 15" systems that often is posted on various Part 15 and community/microbroadcasting Internet boards can lead to the use of transmitter powers and antenna configurations that won't result in compliance with Part 15.

Followers of such beliefs can find themselves subject to FCC NOUOs, as is shown by reading the list of them published by the Enforcement Bureau of the FCC. Some of those NOUOs have been issued to operators using FM transmitter setups with radiated powers of less than 35 milliwatts.

FCC action can result from the use of relatively low power, and even FCC-certified transmitters with far less power than used by some "pirate" operators -- and that should be of interest to anyone wanting to avoid FCC attention.

My comments and charts describe the performance to be expected from unlicensed systems that are compliant with Part 15, and the hardware and operating configurations that are likely to produce them.

However people wish to use that information is up to them.

 

[druidhillsradio]

Some of those NOUOs have been issued to operators using FM transmitter setups with radiated powers of less than 35 milliwatts.

I think that's the point Bongwater is making Rich. The FCC is sweating out 35 milliwatts FM and a crappy AM radio range only listenable in a car radio because a transmitter is mounted on a tower, rather than shutting down stations running hundreds of watts many times on a co-channel.

 

[rfry]

I think that's the point Bongwater is making Rich. The FCC is sweating out 35 milliwatts FM and a crappy AM radio range etc

There are plenty of cases of inconsistent law enforcement, and not just in unlicensed broadcasting.

Suggest that such concerns be directed to the FCC or whatever government entities/officials set those policies and practices, and can improve them.

 

[RPowers]

Suggest that such concerns be directed to the FCC or whatever government entities/officials set those policies and practices, and can improve them.

Uh-huh... Just let the FCC deal with them, but any concerns in reference to minuscule power Part15 broadcasters should be directed to you... - or not - either way you'll rear up and proceed to stomp on it.
In other words you could really care less about the regulations and legalities; you just like attacking the little guys.

Your obviously avoiding Bongwaters point..

 

[rfry]

Uh-huh... Just let the FCC deal with them, but any concerns in reference to minuscule power Part15 broadcasters should be directed to you... - or not - either way you'll rear up and proceed to stomp on it.

Please note that my posts are written for people who want to comply with the physical realities permitted by Part 15 -- not for those who don't, but claim to be doing so.

 

[RPowers]

Please note that my posts are written for people who want to comply with the physical realities permitted by Part 15 -- not for those who don't, but claim to be doing so.

Perhaps that is your true objective. Maybe your just misunderstood. I don't know. But the fact is your viewpoints concerning Part15 usually come across as persistently negative, and subtly abusive.
Almost as if you are determined to establish a concrete conviction that the ability to serve a local community in a legal manner with Part15 broadcasting is an impossibility.

On several occasions a complete newbie arrives on a Part15 forum, and for the very first time sticks his toe in to test the part15 waters, and almost instantly you surface like a crocodile to bite off his toe.
By all appearances, as if it were your personal objective to shoot them down before they even have a chance to see what potential opportunities there might be.

You indicate that your motives are not to attack, but only to inform. Well, I tell you what Rich.. It sure doesn't look that way.

Why don't you yourself install a part15 transmitter yourself and do some experimentation beyond just calculations and theory, and make it an objective to determine the best way to make the most of it in actuality. The convey whatever discoveries you observe to helping out?
It's my understanding that you have never ever even once tried.

You remind me of my mother always telling my dad the proper way to drive, but she rarely dared to get behind the wheel herself, because she felt uneasy actually driving the car.

 

[rfry]

Why don't you yourself install a part15 transmitter yourself and do some experimentation beyond just calculations and theory, and make it an objective to determine the best way to make the most of it in actuality.

The physical sciences apply to the performance of r-f systems of all power levels and all antenna configurations. There is no particular need for anyone to install a "Part 15" system just to determine by experiment what can be shown by scientific analysis.

 

[Bongwater]

I didn't start this to attack you personally Mr. Fry. I'm just curious about the double standard......

The Part 15 people on this board, as I said before, go above and beyond to see that their equipment and range is up to snuff with Part 15 compliance. True, there are pitfalls in anything, but I don't see the Part 15 broadcasters as any particular problem. Nobody else does.

It's not even something that widespread when you take into account how many there actually are.

You have to actually LOOK for a Part 15 station the way you would look for a lost gerbil.

Jamminz just pops up and just about anyone can pick it up in New York City. On an already legally occupied frequency in the SAME vicinity as this pirate.

The Part 15 broadcasters here would NEVER deliberately sink THAT low. Nor would any Part 15 broadcaster here tolerate it.

Nobody here has any delusions of local radio domination or ratings killing popularity with a transmitter that you can barely hear 100 feet from it - if even that much.

There are high school kids who play around with Belkin iPod transmitters using mods they find on YouTube. That's a group that can USE your warnings.

But Mr. Fry, you're only preaching to the choir here.

We understand there's limits. And we respect it.

Look at all the cheap 20-500 watt HLLY transmitters flooding in China that anyone can buy on eBay for dirt cheap, made by a manufacturer in China, tested ONLY to CHINA'S standards (which aren't particularly high to begin with.) They have no FCC certification (and any claim from them otherwise whatsoever is bulls--t. We can all see through that much.)

Yet some well-meaning people elsewhere just buy them unawares. They think 20 watts is perfectly legal because somebody who probably never owned one of these things him/herself told them so. They often don't even understand the concept of listenable audio modulation. To say nothing of airable content.

And then there are those who just don't care at all.

We do care. We honestly respect your technical knowledge. But we just resent being talked to like children. It's like being told by dad about the evils of smoking while at the same time, your sister walks in with a carton of Camels and quickly heads upstairs out of sight from dad. Especially when we see the irony of your stern words on this board - however well intentioned, and the FAR more flagrant and in-your-face actions of flaming pirates happening all around us.

That is all.

 

[rfry]

I didn't start this to attack you personally Mr. Fry.

Thank you for that.

I'm just curious about the double standard...

Kindly observe that the only standards I ever have used in my posts on this subject are given in FCC Part 15, applying to the compliance required of legal, unlicensed operators using the AM and FM broadcast bands.

Some operators may want to comply with them exactly, some may want to hope/believe that they comply with them (sort of) and will evade detection, and some may decide to operate whatever system they wish as though Part 15 did not apply to them.

My posts and graphics have shown what can be expected for the performance of AM and FM systems in functional compliance with Part 15.

As I have stated here previously -- people are free to choose whatever unlicensed system configurations they wish to install and operate, with whatever risk applies.

That decision is up to them.

 

[Bongwater]

I didn't start this to attack you personally Mr. Fry.

Thank you for that.

I'm just curious about the double standard...

Kindly observe that the only standards I ever have used in my posts on this subject are given in FCC Part 15, applying to the compliance required of legal, unlicensed operators using the AM and FM broadcast bands.

Some operators may want to comply with them exactly, some may want to hope/believe that they comply with them (sort of) and will evade detection, and some may decide to operate whatever system they wish as though Part 15 did not apply to them.

My posts and graphics have shown what can be expected for the performance of AM and FM systems in functional compliance with Part 15.

As I have stated here previously -- people are free to choose whatever unlicensed system configurations they wish to install and operate, with whatever risk applies.

That decision is up to them.

And with all due respect Mr. Fry, I understand this. But honestly, this is what has frustrated me (as well as many others on this board) the most is you usually use high end scientific technical jargon to convey the finer points of what is acceptable in Part 15 broadcasting and what is not.

Most folks who simply want to start a Part 15 station do not fully understand this. And you can't exactly blame them.

We WANT to stay within the limits. And we appreciate your advice to that end. But I think what we could all use is a better real-world illustration of that.

Even Bill Nye does this.

Science is hard, yet necessary. But I think it might be the real-world illustration part you might be missing out on.......

 

[druidhillsradio]

Well first let me state, BINGO for Mr. Fry. He has just illustrated the problem with math and science in the United States. I'll wager that when Mr. Fry went to high school as I did, we had with books with formulas and explanations as to how things were supposed to work according to the laws of physics, but we used experiments to prove or disprove.

Sorry Rich, I would have more respect for your charts if you said, “you know and I was surprised to find this, or my computer modeling validated NEC..." or whatever program you use, because of my low power set-up here at the house, rather than discounting the opinions of others.

Computer modeling is certainly a valuable tool, but there is nothing like real-world experience, to validate or in-validate. Today’s high school students see pictures on a PowerPoint, read books, watch video, but they do not actually touch. So in reality, they have no real-world experience.

Love, John

 

[rfry]

...Computer modeling is certainly a valuable tool, but there is nothing like real-world experience, to validate or in-validate....

Note that real-world experience can produce a very wide range of results, based on the education, ability and motivation of the experimenter to understand and control the system under test and the environment in which it operates, and to take accurate measurements of the performance of that system (let alone underwriting the costs of doing so - whether the results are right or wrong).

Paper 4 at http://rfry.org/Software & Misc Papers.htm is a "benchmark" document published in 1937, with the results of a careful, real-world, scientific study that the FCC uses to this day to evaluate the groundwave field intensities of licensed AM broadcast stations.

Of interest here is that modern-day computer programs such as NEC support the measured results for these systems that were experimentally determined in the 1930s.

In fact, computer-based NEC analyses are now accepted by the FCC in the design and licensing of the arrays used by directional AM broadcast stations.

 

[druidhillsradio]

In fact, computer-based NEC analyses are now accepted by the FCC in the design and licensing of the arrays used by directional AM broadcast stations.

Also, Cell Phone as I have a friend who is an engineer with one of the major cell providers.

 

[murphmac]

I absolutely agree. It 's ridiculous! There are so many high powered pirates it the New
York area that are actually interfering with major legitimate stations. Don't you feel that pointing you finger at the nanowattcasters is absurd???? Please get a life!!!!

 

[rfry]

Don't you feel that pointing you finger at the nanowattcasters is absurd?

Please re-read my posts in this thread.

All of my posts and graphics are based on the physical realities of Part 15 -- not on the tolerance hoped for by unlicensed operators, thread-readers and even for the FCC when those realities are exceeded, no matter to what degree that may be.

Such a tolerance is a judgment call that I leave to others.

Power units of nanowatts, microwatts, milliwatts, watts, kilowatts etc are unimportant. What is important to unlicensed, US operators wanting to avoid FCC citations is that they understand and operate systems that are functionally compliant with Part 15.

Explaining that according to the laws of physics has been the goal of the posts I have made on this topic.

If such operators don't think that Part 15 is important enough for them to fully understand and follow, and proceed to operate whatever hardware configuration(s) they wish, then that will be done at whatever (FCC) risk applies.

This is just common sense.

 

[Tom Wells]

It must now be almost exactly 20 years from that week in July when I received a N.A.L. for operation
on 7.415 mhz.. At the time I was unpleasantly shocked with the speed and efficiency of the FCC.
It seems they are on a different speed setting now, but have time to find small operators
if they want to. Why such high profile, high power pirates are not stopped is mysterious....

There are some things theat can easily imagined, envisioned, measured, etc., by "most" people.

The concept of a gallon of milk, a pint of milk, or a truckload of milk is easily grasped.

RF behavior is not like that.

Every real world pt 15 installation is different and results will vary even with best efforts to
make two identical.

The AM pt 15 requirements with rigid definitions of lengths and input power are only arbitrary choices
that result in a certain field being created.

The rules as stated provide measurable guidlines that DO define a certain acceptable range in results.

The same thing happens/happened when a police officer decides that any particular car is easily, obviously
and deservingly over the speed limit.

Suggesting that Mr Fry start a pt 15 to get some experience is a major disconnect in terms of understanding.

He has provided enough information that those who really care can examine their own results (range) and decide if their
signal seems to be approximately within what it permissable.

What is rubbing some wrong is the old fashioned engineer position.
It's a button-down shirt thing, old school, slide-rule, crew-cut, almost military duty attitude that was present
in all the old engineers. I was taught by guys exactly like this.
I have to be that person at work when a press stops.
When it's running, it produces about 20 million dollars worth of product per year.
When it stops, it produces nothing and the 5-6 (highly paid) operators are waiting to get rolling again.
I can't wish or not wish anything back into operation. I have to debug it and correct the problem.
The difficult thing is explaining what is broken to non technical management.....well, to be honest, there ARE no
people in management with any technical background.

I often have to try to describe the problem so they'll be able to understand "how much broken" we are.
And or why I should countinue to work on it, phone for help, or why we're down till parts can arrive.
It doesn't matter how much they'd like to get that job out the door, or how important it is.
The "problem" doesn't care, it simply exists.

It comes down to something like explaining to
your child that you could afford to buy her an ice cream cone, but you can't afford to
buy ice cream for the 5 others children who happen to be in a group you are chaperoning.


When the measured experience so often supports the theoretical, you can engineer something and even predict results.


"Too good to be true" needs to be examined unless money is no object.

Part 15 regulations do not care. but they do exist, and I'd like to thank Rich for very helpful info over the years.

 

[radioboy]

It appears the REAL question is, "Why is the FCC selective in which Part 15 operators they choose
to go after?" It does seem strange that they target some tiny operators and ignore the blatant offenders.

 

[pianoplayer88key]

Hmm... I really don't have adequate equipment to measure the range of my signal, if I was to get one on the air. (Yes, I do have a 40+-year-old Stoddart vacuum tube field strength meter (NM-20B IIRC), but something's wrong with it and I haven't figured out how to troubleshoot it.) My Tecsun PL-380 and PL-606, while they do have a "dBu" meter, aren't really all that accurate or linear, especially when its front end is overloaded.

Chances are I don't even have a way to measure the input power to the final stage of a transmitter I build from parts I scrounge up.

I just know that if I was to build a part 15 AM station (which I'm looking at as a hobby, not income), I just want to serve my immediate local area with a good enough signal that if people like the content, they would listen. That local area may consist of my immediate local elementary school district (households that would be within range of attending the branch adjacent to my house), and the "good" signal would be sufficient to completely block out co-channel nighttime chatter on a graveyard at the edge of that range no matter how your receive antenna is set up. (Ground conductivity in my immediate area according to the map is 8 mS/m, but for purposes of calculating necessary near-field to produce the desired far-field, I prefer to assume it's much worse, like 0.001 mS/m for example.)

Due to proximity to the transmitter on my property (house may be about 150 feet or so from the site), I'm willing to put up with extreme overload on my PL-606 on the fundamental and lower few harmonics. (If I want to try to DX my local 50kW AM station 7.3 miles away about 700-900 kHz down the dial, I'll just take my transmitter off the air to make that possible.) If I have to put up with "98 dBu" overload below 15 MHz and listen to a harmonic around 20 to 21 MHz (which itself might be indicating upwards of 90 to 94 dBu) to get a clear, distortion-free signal in my own house, that's fine with me.

I also would like the option of battery power, in case I decide to take this on remotes. I'd prefer to power it with an AAA NiMH slow-discharge cell or two. However, I could be willing to accept it totally depleting a hybrid car battery within 4 to 6 hours (such that it wouldn't even register on a multimeter, let alone power a wristwatch or light a LED) if necessary to serve the immediate local area with a sufficient signal to block out any interference (including lightning strikes close enough so the flash and thunder are perceived as simultaneous).

Also I've recently been interested in finding a relatively inexpensive continuous-tuning (drift-free/stable though) transmitter for immediate local use in radio testing / experimenting. With that one, I'd like to be able to tune continuously from about 150kHz to 22 MHz and 64 to 108 MHz, minimum. I don't want the signal to be detected on good equipment with full-wavelength antennas more than about 40 feet away (so as to avoid interfering with other services off the property), but at the same time I want it to be strong enough to totally overload/block/desense any radio (no matter how robust its front end is) within about 3 to 4 inches or so. (For example, my Tecsuns would be indicating 98 dBu across the entire range they tune, no matter what single frequency that transmitter is set to.)
The current equipment I'm using, my dad's Eico model 710 grid dip meter (with an oscillator), only covers about 400 kHz to 250 MHz, drifts all over the place and is extremely difficult to fine tune (it's a vacuum tube model), is AC powered, and doesn't have an audio input jack or a way to modulate the signal. Also while its far field signal is well within the range I want to restrict it to, the close-in signal isn't nearly strong enough. (For example, I can't set it to around 400 Mhz and overload my PL-606 enough to completely blank out reception of a 2.7 kW FM on 89.5 MHz whose tower I can see about 4.4 miles away.)

Is anything like those two scenarios even REMOTELY possible to achieve?

 

[rfry]

... The current equipment I'm using...drifts all over the place and is extremely difficult to fine tune... Also while its far field signal is well within the range I want to restrict it to, the close-in signal isn't nearly strong enough.

For a given r-f radiator, the intensities of the E&H far fields are related to the intensities of the E&H near fields close to the radiator.

One set of fields cannot be changed independently of the other set.