[By Subject] [By Date] [By Sender [By Thread]
Previous In Time

Next in Time

From: johncunliffe@astec.com
Subject: Re[4]: My Spread Spectrum Letter to FCC
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 1996 15:21:53 -0800
Well, Robert the only thing that I can do for you now is to go and get the type and make of phone used so that you can buy one and do all those measurements and keep the group here advised.

The fact is, the box said SS on it and it has had no problems operating during the time I had a 10w 902.450 beacon running at my house. It is also correct that 902 is not workable from here because of this Phone. Do you think I or any other ham on this reflector cares about how high the chip rate is if anyone is operating this or a similar SS device next to his or her location? ? The fact is, I can not operate 902 as long as this phone, a device that claims to be SS, is operated within abt 200 yards from my location at the low power level of a Part 15 device. Imagine 100w.....on two meters or 432 where people have quite some large antenna systems.

The following is my opinion only:

I would think, that using SS on the low VHF/UHF bands will drive many active operators of and the bands will be even less used as they are now.This will eventually result in that the bands will finally be given to the little LEOS and other interested groups. This whole SS business for the low VHF/UHF bands looks a lot like some businesses are paying/ enticing (of course you can use company equipment to do your testing) some hams to do the coexistence study for them. Would that be a surprise? No real coordinated testing done, everyone is claiming that there are no problems and swoop there are the LEOS sharing the band with us. Everyone with a little smarts can imagine what will happen next.


``______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________

> Come to my house and see what happens when the guy 4 houses
> down switches on his 900Mhz cordless phone. He bought that
> because of interference to the old 49 Mhz phone. And yes it is
> SS.

Is this a "real" SS system? I do know that I have read about a number of devices claiming to be SS that are not really spread nor do they have a high chip rate. Realize, I'm not saying that SS could not cause this. But what I would like to really know is how *real* SS would affect all existing users. <> cut to save bandwith


------ Submissions: vhf@w6yx.stanford.edu Subscription/removal requests: vhf-request@w6yx.stanford.edu Human list administrator: vhf-approval@w6yx.stanford.edu