[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] - [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index]

Re: RE: [Fwd: ARLB035 FCC declines to grant amateur LF

on 5/19/03 9:56 AM, Scott Townley wrote:

> Certainly having Amateur be primary doesn't hurt the Satellite operator, for
> exactly the reasons you state.  If the FCC were inclined to slice thinly,
> however, an AO-40 operator couldn't complain to the FCC about cordless phone
> interference...but an ATV or other terrestrial user could.

Ah yes, but as you stated, receiving a satellite signal doesn't make one
automatically fall into the Amateur Satellite Service now does it.  One
could argue that the cordless phone is causing undesired interference which
it is not supposed to do according to part 15.

To me, the issue in terms of which service you operate under is more of an
interference issue related to transmissions.  We certainly don't really have
to worry about satellite signals interfering with part 15 devices.  We would
have to be careful if we uplink on 2.4 to the satellite though.  Still,
perhaps the FCC rationale is that if we are uplinking to satellite, our
antennas are generally pointed skyward and quite directional and less likely
to interfere terrestrially anyhow than a terrestrial signal.

Anyhow, this classifying the Amateur Satellite Service is a separate service
from the Amateur service is very confusing and I've never been able to
understand why it's done in the first place.  And it certainly doesn't make
a lot of logical sense why different rules and priorities apply between the



Jon Ogden
NA9D (ex: KE9NA)

Citizen of the People's Democratic Republik of Illinois

Life Member: ARRL, NRA
Member:  AMSAT, DXCC

http://www.qsl.net/na9d   <- Updated on 1/22/03!!!

"A life lived in fear is a life half lived."

Sent via amsat-bb@amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
Not an AMSAT member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe amsat-bb" to Majordomo@amsat.org