| |
CX2SA > SATDIG 16.04.09 01:41l 1075 Lines 36065 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : 25694-CX2SA
Read: GUEST
Subj: AMSAT-BB-digest V4 178
Path: IZ3LSV<IK2XDE<DB0RES<DK0WUE<7M3TJZ<HG8LXL<CX2SA
Sent: 090415/2333Z @:CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA #:25694 [Minas] FBB7.00e $:25694-CX2SA
From: CX2SA@CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA
To : SATDIG@WW
Send AMSAT-BB mailing list submissions to
amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
amsat-bb-request@xxxxx.xxx
You can reach the person managing the list at
amsat-bb-owner@xxxxx.xxx
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of AMSAT-BB digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: FCC 70cm Proposal (Graham Shirville)
2. Re: [Mw] Slightly OT: Mobile Installations (Eric Fort)
3. Re: FCC 70cm Proposal (Graham Shirville)
4. Re: FCC 70cm Proposal (David Barber)
5. Re: [Mw] Slightly OT: Mobile Installations (Bruce Bostwick)
6. AMSAT/TAPR Banquet (Martha)
7. Re: [amsat-florida] Re: FCC 70cm Proposal (Louis McFadin)
8. Re: [amsat-florida] Re: FCC 70cm Proposal (Graham Shirville)
9. FAO: Don Haynes - (Dave Aitch)
10. Re: AMSAT/TAPR Banquet (morsesat@xxxxxxxxx.xxxx
11. Automobile Noise (BobsImsai8800@xxx.xxxx
12. EggBeater (Steve Bluemel)
13. Re: EggBeater (Rick - WA4NVM)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 08:38:46 +0100
From: "Graham Shirville" <g.shirville@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: FCC 70cm Proposal
To: "Keith N4ZQ" <n4zq@xxxxxxx.xxx>, <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>,
<amsat-florida@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <5EBFE4F4799D42A19742B4CB0C1C6327@xxxxxxx.xxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
Hi All,
>From another group I read that the maximum power radiated outside the body
will be around -30 to -40dBm, so not much chance of these systems being a
problem to us.
But of course if they expect "protection" from our signals....
73
Graham
----- Original Message -----
From: "Keith N4ZQ" <n4zq@xxxxxxx.xxx>
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>; <amsat-florida@xxxxx.xxx>
Sent: Monday, April 13, 2009 11:18 PM
Subject: [amsat-bb] FCC 70cm Proposal
> This is interesting.... N4ZQ
>
>
>
> FCC Proposes to Allocate 20 MHz of Spectrum in 413-456 MHz Band For
> Implanted Neuromuscular Devices
>
> The FCC has released a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM - ET Docket
> 09-36) seeking comment on a proposal to allocate 20 MHz of spectrum in
> the 413-457 MHz band for use by wireless medical devices that could be
> implanted into the human body and used to restore sensation and
> mobility to paralyzed limbs and organs. The devices would act as a
> wireless medical micro-power network (MMN) within the patient. Among
> the conditions that could be treatable using MMNs include polio, ALS
> (Lou Gehrig's disease), cerebral palsy, and spinal cord injuries.
>
> The 400 MHz band is targeted because it is optimal for RF propagation
> through body tissue. The devices would require at least 5 MHz of
> bandwidth to function and would operate on a low power, secondary non-
> interference basis. Twenty MHz of spectrum in four band segments are
> proposed so that the device would have four options in case one band
> segment was already in use in a given area. The NPRM seeks comment on
> the feasibility of four different band segments:
>
> * 413-419 MHz
>
> * 426-432 MHz
>
> * 438-444 MHz
>
> * 451-457 MHz
>
> Comment is also sought on:
>
> * Potential for interference between MMNs and incumbent users
>
> * Service rules (licensed or unlicensed, definitions, permissible
> communications, eligibility, etc.)
>
> * Technical rules (power limitations, bandwidth, frequency stability,
> channelization, antenna locations, etc.)
>
> The text of the News Release is available at:
> http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-289482A1.doc
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> Learning Centers - Click Here.
>
http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2241/fc/BLSrjpYXVv0gKYPqCr8IkCaCq5KAFAR
A3MaWnAKwpstVyhQi63dVmuM3Jz6/
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
> Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 01:07:09 -0700
From: Eric Fort <eric.fort@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: [Mw] Slightly OT: Mobile Installations
To: AJ9N@xxx.xxxx AMSAT BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID:
<2ad2af430904150107o71303bc4oee8716f262c21638@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 9:33 AM, <AJ9N@xxx.xxx> wrote:
> I own a 2007 Toyota Highlander Hybrid and a 2008 Toyota Prius. Love both
> hybrids. So far I have not installed a radio in either car but I have
> used
> an HT using the 12V socket with no apparent problem. Here are some web
> sites that might help.
>
> _http://wa8lmf.net/mobile/prius/index.htm_
>
So does the fact (as reported in the link above) that the car itself is S9+
at least on certain bands mean that you must quit driving it to comply with
part 15 requirements? Ooh, come to think of it this seems like a keen way
to get these manufactures to clean up the rest of the car's emissions...
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 09:28:48 +0100
From: "Graham Shirville" <g.shirville@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: FCC 70cm Proposal
To: "Graham Shirville" <g.shirville@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>, "Keith N4ZQ"
<n4zq@xxxxxxx.xxx>, <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>, <amsat-florida@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <C12CB217ED4B4691AD7DEF73D8462748@xxxxxxx.xxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=response
A further check with an expert gives me this response:
"No protection at all - at least in Europe. Short Range Devices must not
cause interference and must suffer any interference they receive. Ofcom
don't like that, but it's in the Short range Device Directive. Not that
Ofcom pay any attention to it if they can avoid doing so. Even Part 95 MICS
devcies in the US get no protection, and that applies every where else,
too."
so perhaps we can relax?
cheers
Graham
----- Original Message -----
From: "Graham Shirville" <g.shirville@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
To: "Keith N4ZQ" <n4zq@xxxxxxx.xxx>; <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>;
<amsat-florida@xxxxx.xxx>
Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2009 8:38 AM
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] FCC 70cm Proposal
> Hi All,
>
> From another group I read that the maximum power radiated outside the body
> will be around -30 to -40dBm, so not much chance of these systems being a
> problem to us.
>
> But of course if they expect "protection" from our signals....
>
> 73
>
> Graham
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Keith N4ZQ" <n4zq@xxxxxxx.xxx>
> To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>; <amsat-florida@xxxxx.xxx>
> Sent: Monday, April 13, 2009 11:18 PM
> Subject: [amsat-bb] FCC 70cm Proposal
>
>
>> This is interesting.... N4ZQ
>>
>>
>>
>> FCC Proposes to Allocate 20 MHz of Spectrum in 413-456 MHz Band For
>> Implanted Neuromuscular Devices
>>
>> The FCC has released a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM - ET Docket
>> 09-36) seeking comment on a proposal to allocate 20 MHz of spectrum in
>> the 413-457 MHz band for use by wireless medical devices that could be
>> implanted into the human body and used to restore sensation and
>> mobility to paralyzed limbs and organs. The devices would act as a
>> wireless medical micro-power network (MMN) within the patient. Among
>> the conditions that could be treatable using MMNs include polio, ALS
>> (Lou Gehrig's disease), cerebral palsy, and spinal cord injuries.
>>
>> The 400 MHz band is targeted because it is optimal for RF propagation
>> through body tissue. The devices would require at least 5 MHz of
>> bandwidth to function and would operate on a low power, secondary non-
>> interference basis. Twenty MHz of spectrum in four band segments are
>> proposed so that the device would have four options in case one band
>> segment was already in use in a given area. The NPRM seeks comment on
>> the feasibility of four different band segments:
>>
>> * 413-419 MHz
>>
>> * 426-432 MHz
>>
>> * 438-444 MHz
>>
>> * 451-457 MHz
>>
>> Comment is also sought on:
>>
>> * Potential for interference between MMNs and incumbent users
>>
>> * Service rules (licensed or unlicensed, definitions, permissible
>> communications, eligibility, etc.)
>>
>> * Technical rules (power limitations, bandwidth, frequency stability,
>> channelization, antenna locations, etc.)
>>
>> The text of the News Release is available at:
>> http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-289482A1.doc
>>
>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> Learning Centers - Click Here.
>>
http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2241/fc/BLSrjpYXVv0gKYPqCr8IkCaCq5KAFAR
A3MaWnAKwpstVyhQi63dVmuM3Jz6/
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite
>> program!
>> Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 09:46:51 +0100
From: "David Barber" <david.barber@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.xx.xx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: FCC 70cm Proposal
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <2307484853CF4678A3C3BD106B787392@xxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
It does raise an interesting point in that if we have 'humans' walking
around with such things embedded in them and we inadvertently and
unknowingly cause harm by interfering with these devices what will be the
outcome?
In the extreme case where severe harm or even death is the result would the
operator of the transmitter be held responsible?
David
G8OQW
-----Original Message-----
From: amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxx [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxxx On
Behalf Of Graham Shirville
Sent: 15 April 2009 09:29
To: Graham Shirville; Keith N4ZQ; amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxxx
amsat-florida@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: FCC 70cm Proposal
A further check with an expert gives me this response:
"No protection at all - at least in Europe. Short Range Devices must not
cause interference and must suffer any interference they receive. Ofcom
don't like that, but it's in the Short range Device Directive. Not that
Ofcom pay any attention to it if they can avoid doing so. Even Part 95 MICS
devcies in the US get no protection, and that applies every where else,
too."
so perhaps we can relax?
cheers
Graham
----- Original Message -----
From: "Graham Shirville" <g.shirville@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
To: "Keith N4ZQ" <n4zq@xxxxxxx.xxx>; <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>;
<amsat-florida@xxxxx.xxx>
Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2009 8:38 AM
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] FCC 70cm Proposal
> Hi All,
>
> From another group I read that the maximum power radiated outside the body
> will be around -30 to -40dBm, so not much chance of these systems being a
> problem to us.
>
> But of course if they expect "protection" from our signals....
>
> 73
>
> Graham
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Keith N4ZQ" <n4zq@xxxxxxx.xxx>
> To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>; <amsat-florida@xxxxx.xxx>
> Sent: Monday, April 13, 2009 11:18 PM
> Subject: [amsat-bb] FCC 70cm Proposal
>
>
>> This is interesting.... N4ZQ
>>
>>
>>
>> FCC Proposes to Allocate 20 MHz of Spectrum in 413-456 MHz Band For
>> Implanted Neuromuscular Devices
>>
>> The FCC has released a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM - ET Docket
>> 09-36) seeking comment on a proposal to allocate 20 MHz of spectrum in
>> the 413-457 MHz band for use by wireless medical devices that could be
>> implanted into the human body and used to restore sensation and
>> mobility to paralyzed limbs and organs. The devices would act as a
>> wireless medical micro-power network (MMN) within the patient. Among
>> the conditions that could be treatable using MMNs include polio, ALS
>> (Lou Gehrig's disease), cerebral palsy, and spinal cord injuries.
>>
>> The 400 MHz band is targeted because it is optimal for RF propagation
>> through body tissue. The devices would require at least 5 MHz of
>> bandwidth to function and would operate on a low power, secondary non-
>> interference basis. Twenty MHz of spectrum in four band segments are
>> proposed so that the device would have four options in case one band
>> segment was already in use in a given area. The NPRM seeks comment on
>> the feasibility of four different band segments:
>>
>> * 413-419 MHz
>>
>> * 426-432 MHz
>>
>> * 438-444 MHz
>>
>> * 451-457 MHz
>>
>> Comment is also sought on:
>>
>> * Potential for interference between MMNs and incumbent users
>>
>> * Service rules (licensed or unlicensed, definitions, permissible
>> communications, eligibility, etc.)
>>
>> * Technical rules (power limitations, bandwidth, frequency stability,
>> channelization, antenna locations, etc.)
>>
>> The text of the News Release is available at:
>> http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-289482A1.doc
>>
>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> Learning Centers - Click Here.
>>
http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2241/fc/BLSrjpYXVv0gKYPqCr8IkCaCq5KAF
ARA3MaWnAKwpstVyhQi63dVmuM3Jz6/
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite
>> program!
>> Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>
_______________________________________________
Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 06:33:56 -0500
From: Bruce Bostwick <lihan161051@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: [Mw] Slightly OT: Mobile Installations
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <40144C60-A1F6-48C5-A3DE-8B875E93A9A0@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
It's not safe to talk and drive, for the most part, you're right. But
some of us sometimes like to *listen* and drive, and pull over to talk
if need be. :)
(Had way too much fun on 10 meters during the peak of the last solar
cycle, both on FM repeaters and modest mobile SSB DX.)
Even if we're not talking, cars that make SSB or even AM unusable
while driving aren't appealing. And the first generation production-
scale EV's probably *aren't* going to be much fun on HF SSB or AM .. :p
On Apr 14, 2009, at 10:59 PM, Edward Cole wrote:
> A VHF-FM radios is much different "critter" as far as noise
> resistance. Noise is mainly AM and is why all commercial mobile
> two-way radios are FM. I suspect that one might be able to add
> ferrites and bypass caps to suppress electrical motor noise
> (maybe). If the gas engine in the hybrid is at fault there are good
> products to suppress ignition and alternator noise.
>
> The electric car industry will have to deal with this, but the first
> models out will likely not be HF freindly. Best one could hope for
> is reasonable use on VHF-SSB. Any less will leave you running
> VHF-FM. That will be OK for satellite use since I suppose one does
> not usually operate while driving. FM-Leos might be fine for that,
> though its not really safe to talk-n-drive ;-)
>
> ED - KL7UW
>
> At 08:33 AM 4/14/2009, AJ9N@xxx.xxx wrote:
>> I own a 2007 Toyota Highlander Hybrid and a 2008 Toyota Prius. Love
>> both hybrids. So far I have not installed a radio in either car but
>> I have used an HT using the 12V socket with no apparent
>> problem. Here are some web sites that might help.
>>
>>
<http://wa8lmf.net/mobile/prius/index.htm>http://wa8lmf.net/mobile/prius/index
.htm
>>
>> http://www.k0bg.com/hybrid.html the main page is listed below.
>>
>> <http://www.k0bg.com/>http://www.k0bg.com/ really cool home page
>> for a bunch of mobile stuff.
>>
>> I am leaning towards just installing a VHF/UHF dual bander in my
>> hybrids so I might not have much of a noise issue. But HF is
>> another story.
>>
>> I also went into the Toyota web site to look at their manuals. You
>> can buy a 1 day subscription and download as much as you want. They
>> were not the most helpful for installing radios but there are some
>> interesting things to know. Toyota has something called TIS
>> (Technical Information System). Go to:
>>
<https://techinfo.toyota.com/techInfoPortal/appmanager/t3/ti?_nfpb=true&_pageL
abel=ti_home_page&SMENC=ISO-8859-1&SMLOCALE=US-
EN&SMAUTHREASON=0&SMAGENTNAME=%24SM%24mT%252bGLraBu9CwUVnZg4mEDzB2kysT90hgbwsW
gdZzNOc%253d&TARGET=%24SM%24https%3A%2F%2Ftechinfo.toyota.com%2F
>>
>https://techinfo.toyota.com/techInfoPortal/appmanager/t3/ti?_nfpb=true&_pageL
abel=ti_home_page&SMENC=ISO-8859-1&SMLOCALE=US-
EN&SMAUTHREASON=0&SMAGENTNAME=%24SM%24mT%252bGLraBu9CwUVnZg4mEDzB2kysT90hgbwsW
gdZzNOc%253d&TARGET=%24SM%24https%3A%2F%2Ftechinfo.toyota.com%2F
>>
>> I too am interested in what others are finding.
>>
>> 73,
>> Charlie Sufana AJ9N
>>
>> In a message dated 4/14/2009 1:34:31 A.M. Central Daylight Time,
>> kl7uw@xxxxxxxxx.xxx writes:
>> At 05:22 PM 4/13/2009, Jim Sanford wrote:
>>> All:
>>> The other day, somebody decided he needed to get thru an
>>> intersection
>>> ahead of me . . . . so, in search of a replacement chariot to
>>> support
>>> the mobile equipment. Considering:
>>>
>>> Toyota Highlander hybrid
>>> Saturn VUE Hybrid
>>>
>>> Have read the Consumer Reports rap on all.
>>>
>>> QUESTION: Does anybody have any experience or guidance regarding:
>>> -- problems installing HF/VHF/UHF radios in either vehicle
>>> -- problems with noise FROM the hybrid equipment
>>>
>>> I remember that some years ago, all the Japanese manufacturers would
>>> void your warranty if you installed two-way radio equipment. That
>>> appears to be no longer true, as long as "properly
>>> installed" (defined
>>> as adequately fused).
>>>
>>> All experiences welcome.
>>>
>>> Thanks for bandwidth.
>>>
>>> 73,
>>> Jim
>>> wb4gcs@xxxxx.xxx
>>
>> Jim,
>>
>> Excellent question, considering the number of hybrid cars (and
>> all-electric cars soon to be offered in 2010). I wonder if the
>> electric motors have brushes and if they are RFI bypassed? I do not
>> have any info to provide, but certainly interested in what you find
>> out. I am watching the Chrystler Electric Town & Country van to be
>> offered in 2010 with 40-mpg performance. It runs with electric
>> motors 100% and has gasoline generator for extended distance driving.
>>
>> 73, Ed - KL7UW
--... ...-- -.. . -. ..... ...- -...
Bruce Bostwick N5VB
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 11:03:14 -0400
From: Martha <martha@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] AMSAT/TAPR Banquet
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxxx Board of Directors <bod@xxxxx.xxx>,
officers@xxxxx.xxxxxxxxxx@xxxx.xxx
Message-ID:
<956751cf0904150803h4dcc371u92bb813b6869b659@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
People - The Dayton AMSAT/TAPR banquet is just about 1 month away. Our
Guest Speaker is Richard Garriott, W5KWQ. If you have not registered, go to
the AMSAT website and look on the left hand side. There will be a box that
says Dayton Hamvention. Click on that and it will lead you to the banquet
registration. You MUST be pre- registered to attend. You cannot register at
Dayton.
--
73- Martha- AMSAT Manager
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 11:51:48 -0400
From: Louis McFadin <w5did@xxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: [amsat-florida] Re: FCC 70cm Proposal
To: Graham Shirville <g.shirville@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Cc: amsat-florida@xxxxx.xxxx amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <D8524E46-BB71-49EA-9657-04F1D2AC9D72@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
I don't believe relaxing is a good idea. Constant vigilance by all is
the mantra to have. I am worried about getting sued for causing
someone to have some reaction to my 70CM signal I send up to AO51 or
other satellite or talking to the local repeater. Someone who I have
no knowledge of.
We should ask them to stay away from the 70 cm ham band. 400Mhz is OK
as long as they can accept signals from 420 + without harm.
I would think something that has health consequences would receive a
lot of careful safety analysis before being made operational.
On Apr 15, 2009, at 4:28 AM, Graham Shirville wrote:
> A further check with an expert gives me this response:
>
> "No protection at all - at least in Europe. Short Range Devices must
> not
> cause interference and must suffer any interference they receive.
> Ofcom
> don't like that, but it's in the Short range Device Directive. Not
> that
> Ofcom pay any attention to it if they can avoid doing so. Even Part
> 95 MICS
> devcies in the US get no protection, and that applies every where
> else,
> too."
>
> so perhaps we can relax?
>
> cheers
>
> Graham
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Graham Shirville" <g.shirville@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
> To: "Keith N4ZQ" <n4zq@xxxxxxx.xxx>; <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>;
> <amsat-florida@xxxxx.xxx>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2009 8:38 AM
> Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] FCC 70cm Proposal
>
>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> From another group I read that the maximum power radiated outside
>> the body
>> will be around -30 to -40dBm, so not much chance of these systems
>> being a
>> problem to us.
>>
>> But of course if they expect "protection" from our signals....
>>
>> 73
>>
>> Graham
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Keith N4ZQ" <n4zq@xxxxxxx.xxx>
>> To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>; <amsat-florida@xxxxx.xxx>
>> Sent: Monday, April 13, 2009 11:18 PM
>> Subject: [amsat-bb] FCC 70cm Proposal
>>
>>
>>> This is interesting.... N4ZQ
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> FCC Proposes to Allocate 20 MHz of Spectrum in 413-456 MHz Band For
>>> Implanted Neuromuscular Devices
>>>
>>> The FCC has released a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM - ET
>>> Docket
>>> 09-36) seeking comment on a proposal to allocate 20 MHz of
>>> spectrum in
>>> the 413-457 MHz band for use by wireless medical devices that
>>> could be
>>> implanted into the human body and used to restore sensation and
>>> mobility to paralyzed limbs and organs. The devices would act as a
>>> wireless medical micro-power network (MMN) within the patient.
>>> Among
>>> the conditions that could be treatable using MMNs include polio, ALS
>>> (Lou Gehrig's disease), cerebral palsy, and spinal cord injuries.
>>>
>>> The 400 MHz band is targeted because it is optimal for RF
>>> propagation
>>> through body tissue. The devices would require at least 5 MHz of
>>> bandwidth to function and would operate on a low power, secondary
>>> non-
>>> interference basis. Twenty MHz of spectrum in four band segments
>>> are
>>> proposed so that the device would have four options in case one band
>>> segment was already in use in a given area. The NPRM seeks comment
>>> on
>>> the feasibility of four different band segments:
>>>
>>> * 413-419 MHz
>>>
>>> * 426-432 MHz
>>>
>>> * 438-444 MHz
>>>
>>> * 451-457 MHz
>>>
>>> Comment is also sought on:
>>>
>>> * Potential for interference between MMNs and incumbent users
>>>
>>> * Service rules (licensed or unlicensed, definitions, permissible
>>> communications, eligibility, etc.)
>>>
>>> * Technical rules (power limitations, bandwidth, frequency
>>> stability,
>>> channelization, antenna locations, etc.)
>>>
>>> The text of the News Release is available at:
>>> http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-289482A1.doc
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>> Learning Centers - Click Here.
>>>
http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2241/fc/BLSrjpYXVv0gKYPqCr8IkCaCq5KAFAR
A3MaWnAKwpstVyhQi63dVmuM3Jz6/
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. Opinions expressed are those of the
>>> author.
>>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite
>>> program!
>>> Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Via the AMSAT-Florida mailing list courtesy of AMSAT-NA
> AMSAT-Florida@xxxxx.xxx
> http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-florida
Lou McFadin
W5DID
w5did@xxx.xxx
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 17:27:42 +0100
From: "Graham Shirville" <g.shirville@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: [amsat-florida] Re: FCC 70cm Proposal
To: "Louis McFadin" <w5did@xxx.xxx>
Cc: amsat-florida@xxxxx.xxxx amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <D9C3D1548F5B4B9B99D081B23DB22345@xxxxxxx.xxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=response
Hi Lou,
Yes I agree we should never relax!
Thanks for reminding me of the fact:)
73
Graham
----- Original Message -----
From: "Louis McFadin" <w5did@xxx.xxx>
To: "Graham Shirville" <g.shirville@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Cc: "Keith N4ZQ" <n4zq@xxxxxxx.xxx>; <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>;
<amsat-florida@xxxxx.xxx>
Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2009 4:51 PM
Subject: Re: [amsat-florida] Re: [amsat-bb] FCC 70cm Proposal
>I don't believe relaxing is a good idea. Constant vigilance by all is the
>mantra to have. I am worried about getting sued for causing someone to
>have some reaction to my 70CM signal I send up to AO51 or other satellite
>or talking to the local repeater. Someone who I have no knowledge of.
> We should ask them to stay away from the 70 cm ham band. 400Mhz is OK as
> long as they can accept signals from 420 + without harm.
>
> I would think something that has health consequences would receive a lot
> of careful safety analysis before being made operational.
>
> On Apr 15, 2009, at 4:28 AM, Graham Shirville wrote:
>
>> A further check with an expert gives me this response:
>>
>> "No protection at all - at least in Europe. Short Range Devices must not
>> cause interference and must suffer any interference they receive. Ofcom
>> don't like that, but it's in the Short range Device Directive. Not that
>> Ofcom pay any attention to it if they can avoid doing so. Even Part 95
>> MICS
>> devcies in the US get no protection, and that applies every where else,
>> too."
>>
>> so perhaps we can relax?
>>
>> cheers
>>
>> Graham
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Graham Shirville" <g.shirville@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
>> To: "Keith N4ZQ" <n4zq@xxxxxxx.xxx>; <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>;
>> <amsat-florida@xxxxx.xxx>
>> Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2009 8:38 AM
>> Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] FCC 70cm Proposal
>>
>>
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> From another group I read that the maximum power radiated outside the
>>> body
>>> will be around -30 to -40dBm, so not much chance of these systems being
>>> a
>>> problem to us.
>>>
>>> But of course if they expect "protection" from our signals....
>>>
>>> 73
>>>
>>> Graham
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Keith N4ZQ" <n4zq@xxxxxxx.xxx>
>>> To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>; <amsat-florida@xxxxx.xxx>
>>> Sent: Monday, April 13, 2009 11:18 PM
>>> Subject: [amsat-bb] FCC 70cm Proposal
>>>
>>>
>>>> This is interesting.... N4ZQ
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> FCC Proposes to Allocate 20 MHz of Spectrum in 413-456 MHz Band For
>>>> Implanted Neuromuscular Devices
>>>>
>>>> The FCC has released a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM - ET Docket
>>>> 09-36) seeking comment on a proposal to allocate 20 MHz of spectrum in
>>>> the 413-457 MHz band for use by wireless medical devices that could be
>>>> implanted into the human body and used to restore sensation and
>>>> mobility to paralyzed limbs and organs. The devices would act as a
>>>> wireless medical micro-power network (MMN) within the patient. Among
>>>> the conditions that could be treatable using MMNs include polio, ALS
>>>> (Lou Gehrig's disease), cerebral palsy, and spinal cord injuries.
>>>>
>>>> The 400 MHz band is targeted because it is optimal for RF propagation
>>>> through body tissue. The devices would require at least 5 MHz of
>>>> bandwidth to function and would operate on a low power, secondary non-
>>>> interference basis. Twenty MHz of spectrum in four band segments are
>>>> proposed so that the device would have four options in case one band
>>>> segment was already in use in a given area. The NPRM seeks comment on
>>>> the feasibility of four different band segments:
>>>>
>>>> * 413-419 MHz
>>>>
>>>> * 426-432 MHz
>>>>
>>>> * 438-444 MHz
>>>>
>>>> * 451-457 MHz
>>>>
>>>> Comment is also sought on:
>>>>
>>>> * Potential for interference between MMNs and incumbent users
>>>>
>>>> * Service rules (licensed or unlicensed, definitions, permissible
>>>> communications, eligibility, etc.)
>>>>
>>>> * Technical rules (power limitations, bandwidth, frequency stability,
>>>> channelization, antenna locations, etc.)
>>>>
>>>> The text of the News Release is available at:
>>>> http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-289482A1.doc
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>>> Learning Centers - Click Here.
>>>>
http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2241/fc/BLSrjpYXVv0gKYPqCr8IkCaCq5KAFAR
A3MaWnAKwpstVyhQi63dVmuM3Jz6/
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. Opinions expressed are those of the
>>>> author.
>>>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite
>>>> program!
>>>> Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Via the AMSAT-Florida mailing list courtesy of AMSAT-NA
>> AMSAT-Florida@xxxxx.xxx
>> http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-florida
>
>
>
> Lou McFadin
> W5DID
> w5did@xxx.xxx
>
>
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 17:34:41 +0100
From: "Dave Aitch" <dave@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] FAO: Don Haynes -
To: "'amsat-bb'" <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <001201c9bde8$145077d0$3cf16770$@xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Hi Don, did you receive my mail about the polarphaser ?
Cheers, Dave.
------------------------------
Message: 10
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 16:42:12 +0000 (GMT)
From: morsesat@xxxxxxxxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: AMSAT/TAPR Banquet
To: Martha <martha@xxxxx.xxx>
Cc: Board of Directors <bod@xxxxx.xxx>, amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxxx
officers@xxxxx.xxxxxxxxxx@xxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <e66ec08b21433.49e60e64@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Martha,
I will add this to the ANS this week. Hopefully everyone will take the hint
and register ASAP.
See you there.
Dee, NB2F
----- Original Message -----
From: Martha
Date: Wednesday, April 15, 2009 11:04 am
Subject: [amsat-bb] AMSAT/TAPR Banquet
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxxx Board of Directors , officers@xxxxx.xxxx
n7hpr@xxxx.xxx
> People - The Dayton AMSAT/TAPR banquet is just about 1 month
> away. Our
> Guest Speaker is Richard Garriott, W5KWQ. If you have not
> registered, go to
> the AMSAT website and look on the left hand side. There will be
> a box that
> says Dayton Hamvention. Click on that and it will lead you to
> the banquet
> registration. You MUST be pre- registered to attend. You cannot
> register at
> Dayton.
>
> --
> 73- Martha- AMSAT Manager
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. Opinions expressed are those of the
> author.Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur
> satellite program!
> Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>
------------------------------
Message: 11
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 12:57:46 EDT
From: BobsImsai8800@xxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] Automobile Noise
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <c85.4a863eb2.37176c0a@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Hi all -- some facts I have learned about automobile noise after 40 years
in the profession.
DEALER FIX: While dealing with many different professional
communications users, I found that the automobile industry usually has a kit
to fix most
RF and electrical noises that are generated by the auto and with problems
that the auto has with RF interference getting into the circuits.
REASON -- It is cheaper to provide the equipment to fix the autos that
have a problem due to installed communications equipment, than to install the
fix on millions and millions of autos that don't need it.
SOLUTION -- I always told the customer to check with the dealer to find the
proper fix -- it usually took a manager and up the chain to a district
manager for a fix. And now we have Google and the Internet, which makes
finding these fixes easier.
Of course the new Hybrids have a whole new set of problems and solutions.
Side note -- the diesel and the 2007 trip to Dayton: One would think a
diesel is very quite - no ignition and no electric fan on the radiator.
Wrong -- the electric injector pump on the 1997 Ford F350 had 20 over S-9
noise
when we put the radio in it. My F150 with a V6 gas engine has no noise,
but it was S-9 noise when just parked next to the diesel. Google RF noise on
the Ford diesel -- there are some solutions.
Bob,
K5GNA
**************Great deals on Dell?s most popular laptops ? Starting at
$479
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1220631252x1201390195/aol?redir=http:
%2F%2Fad.doubleclick.net%2Fclk%3B213968550%3B35701427%3Bh)
------------------------------
Message: 12
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 10:08:19 -0700
From: Steve Bluemel <stevebluemel@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] EggBeater
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID:
<393db9380904151008q70adfec6s724f3a49291d3eff@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Well, Im sorry to say that my Egg Beater experiment has yet to yield any
good results. I have attempted passes on IIS, AO-51, and SO-50 and not heard
a single contact. Im a trying some reconfiguring and will keep at it. I will
post pictures of my progress soon and would appreciate any observations you
might have.
I'll tell you, the Pre-amp thread could not have been more timely. I just
ordered one from ARR. If im lucky....and im always lucky, this will make
some difference.
In the mean time, I will listen for you all with the Elk and HT!
Cheers!
Steve KI6OQU
------------------------------
Message: 13
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 12:36:45 -0500
From: "Rick - WA4NVM" <wa4nvm@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: EggBeater
To: "Steve Bluemel" <stevebluemel@xxxxx.xxx>, <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <3778884165054C99A29AD20808C8D46A@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
Steve,
Good luck with your testing. The ISS and A0-51 haven't been on for you
to try with your setup. Try S0-50 and A0-27 at this time.
Look for you on the birds,
Rick- WA4NVM
> Well, Im sorry to say that my Egg Beater experiment has yet to yield any
> good results. I have attempted passes on IIS, AO-51, and SO-50 and not
> heard
> a single contact. Im a trying some reconfiguring and will keep at it. I
> will
> post pictures of my progress soon and would appreciate any observations
> you
> might have.
>
> I'll tell you, the Pre-amp thread could not have been more timely. I just
> ordered one from ARR. If im lucky....and im always lucky, this will make
> some difference.
>
> In the mean time, I will listen for you all with the Elk and HT!
>
> Cheers!
>
> Steve KI6OQU
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
> Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Sent via amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
Not an AMSAT member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
End of AMSAT-BB Digest, Vol 4, Issue 178
****************************************
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
