nivek@rover.ri.cmu.edu (Kevin Dowling) (06/03/89)
>I am interested in transmitting a TV RF signal over a distance of at least >2000 feet. I realize I will probably need some kind of FCC license. Does >the FCC grant licenses to send a TV signal of that strength? What is the >size, cost, weight, and wattage that I am looking at to send 2000 feet? >Has anybody out there (such as robotics types) tackled the same problem? The FCC has Experimental Radio Station Licenses. We (Robotics Insitute, CMU) have a license for our mobile robot work that cover 2 2Watt UHF channels, a 1 Watt 2GHz microwave channel and 2 duplex 30Watt radio channels. This kind of power is more than sufficient for a half mile or more. Pittsburgh's terrain is rougher than most so with less hilly areas you should get pretty good distances. You might call your local FCC field office to get the info you need to get such a license. nivek Aka : Kevin Dowling Bell: (412) 268-8830 Arpa: nivek@rover.ri.cmu.edu Mail: Robotics Institute Carnegie Mellon University Pgh, PA 15213-3890 Projects: Mars Rover, Mobile Robot design and construction. --
flloyd%crank@Sun.COM (Fred Lloyd) (06/03/89)
In article <5109@pt.cs.cmu.edu> nivek@rover.ri.cmu.edu (Kevin Dowling) writes: >>I am interested in transmitting a TV RF signal over a distance of at least >>2000 feet. I realize I will probably need some kind of FCC license. Does >>the FCC grant licenses to send a TV signal of that strength? What is the >>size, cost, weight, and wattage that I am looking at to send 2000 feet? > >The FCC has Experimental Radio Station Licenses. >We (Robotics Insitute, CMU) have a license for our mobile robot >work that cover 2 2Watt UHF channels, a 1 Watt 2GHz microwave channel and >2 duplex 30Watt radio channels. This kind of power is more than sufficient for >a half mile or more. Pittsburgh's terrain is rougher than most so with >less hilly areas you should get pretty good distances. > >You might call your local FCC field office to get the info you need >to get such a license. > I neglected to mention in my tongue-in-cheek posting yesterday about using a VCR that a far better strategy would be to go ahead and obtain an Amateur radio operator's licence. The posting about using a VCR was meant jokingly and my apologies to anyone who might have thought of actually trying it. The FCC would likely take legal action against anyone who would attempt such a manouver. Amateur TV (ATV) is a rapidly growing area which is open to all holders of Amateur licences. These days, a novice licence is particularly easy to obtain and it carries with it a number of benefits (voice and data privlidges) which could be of particular use to someone engaging in robotics and other forms of remote control and data telemetry. These uses, however, must be strictly for non-commercial purposes. In addition, with higher licence classes, you could even boost the output power enough to be seen (and heard) for many miles. Overall, an amateur licence is far more flexible than an Experimential Radio Station Licence in that you have a much broader range of frequencies, power outputs and transmission modes from which to choose, and, the licence is not limited to a specific operating site. You could, for example, take your experiment across the country and legally set up and operate without having to request for a waiver from the FCC. Just ask around and you'll probably be surprised at the number of people who would be willing to help you get your licence. All it takes is a simple 30 question test on elementary electrical principles and the ability to recognize a short, 5 word-per-minute Morse code message. Licences are good for 10 years and are indefinitly renewable. Check it out! It's easy, fun and rewarding. -fred KJ6RK -------------------------------------------------------------------- | Fred Lloyd KJ6RK PP-SEL flloyd@sun.com | | Sun Microsystems, Inc. ...sun!flloyd | | Mountian View, CA | | (415) 336-6322 | | Disclaimer: If it ain't broke, don't fix it! | --------------------------------------------------------------------
Ploni.Almoni@mailcom.FIDONET.ORG (Ploni Almoni) (06/03/89)
Kevin - the Experimental Radio Service is for those who are conducting experiments into the nature of radio wave propagation, etc. But unfortunately the fine folks at the Office of Engineering Technology at the Commish' will issue a license to anyone for anything that they can't get a regular license for, and my cousin the FCC inspector says that that makes it a nightmare for the working troops -- imagine a license to breed a horse with a giraffe! Cousin Charlie is not always right but he is NEVER wrong! Peace. -=Ploni=- -- Via apple!mailcom, Fido 1:204/444
nagle@well.UUCP (John Nagle) (06/07/89)
In article <4045.24890FCE@mailcom.FIDONET.ORG> Ploni.Almoni@mailcom.FIDONET.ORG (Ploni Almoni) writes: >Kevin - the Experimental Radio Service is for those who are conducting >experiments into the nature of radio wave propagation, etc. That's too narrow a description. See 47 CFR 5.3(c) for the correct definition. John Nagle
Ploni.Almoni@mailcom.FIDONET.ORG (Ploni Almoni) (06/13/89)
John - re our discussion on Experimental Radio Service --
Cousin Charlie the radio inspector sez:
" 47 CFR 5.3 is a definition:
(c) Experimental Radio Service. A service in which Radio waves
are employed for purposes of experimentation in the radio art or
for purposes of providing essential communications for research
projects which could not be conducted without the benefit of such
communications.
" The research projects referred to were originally intended to be
research into the propagation of radio waves or the effects of such
on physical or chemical processes, etc. It was NOT intended to mean
provision of communications for someone doing some other kind of
research not involving the nature of radio waves. In other words, the
radio waves were the object of the research, not a tool or means of
instrumentation. Otherwise it could be construed to mean, for
instance, provision of two-way communications for someone doing
research into the most efficient method of dispatching pizza delivery
vans, or garbage trucks, or both in the same vehicle.
" In real life, new and novel ways to use radio communications
properly fall under a *Developmental* authorization in an existing
radio service rather than an authorization in the Experimental Radio
Service. Specific examples from the recent past were the provision of
vehicle location systems and mobile digital data, developmental
authorizations in the various land mobile radio services in years gone
by. Ditto for cellular radiotelephones in the Common Carrier Radio
Service.
But, alas, there arose a new breed in Washington who knew not what
good regulatory practice was, would not listen to their elders and
betters, and therefore would release Experimental Radio authorizations
for any and all purposes, even when they shouldn't. And it makes it
much harder for the working radio inspector, who is the front-line
interface between the radio user and pure chaos, because the folks
involved were prone to grant anything to anyone without adequate
reason, leading to huge screwups in real life.
"And as for remote TV and data transfer for robotics, the Business
Radio Service has plenty of capability in the microwave regions.
Educational institutions are eligible in that service. One should
tailor one's project to live within them or do without.
"Just like driving a car on the highway - how would YOU feel if
soemone somehow got the OK to speed, make unsafe lane changes, etc.
and you had to obey all the regular laws."
Cousin Charlie should know - he's been out there a LONG time!
-=Ploni=-
--
Via apple!mailcom, Fido 1:204/444nagle@well.UUCP (John Nagle) (06/19/89)
In article <4060.24964BE3@mailcom.FIDONET.ORG> Ploni.Almoni@mailcom.FIDONET.ORG (Ploni Almoni) writes: >John - re our discussion on Experimental Radio Service -- > >Cousin Charlie the radio inspector sez: > Whatever "Cousin Charlie", whoever he is, says, the FCC at present seems to follow the regulations as written in 47 CFR 5. I encountered no difficulty obtaining an experimental licence. Note, though, that I hold a very limited authorization; 1W, mobile but only within a 5 mile radius of a fixed point, and in a band (1.2GhZ) used for both ham and radar applications. Frequency coordination was performed to protect other services (primarily DoD radar) and the FCC found no conflicts. So they are happy. The FCC issues only a few experimental licences per month, but they do issue them. John Nagle
Ploni.Almoni@f444.n204.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Ploni Almoni) (07/09/89)
>> John - re our discussion on Experimental Radio Service -- >> >> Cousin Charlie the radio inspector sez: >> > Whatever "Cousin Charlie", whoever he is, says, the FCC at present > seems to follow the regulations as written in 47 CFR 5. I encountered > no difficulty ... Cousin Charlie is a very long-term engineer/manager/spectrum professional who has spent several decades on the Commission's staff and he is looking over my shoulder as I write this. So I'll let him speak for himself: " Your statement confirmed my prior charge that the folks at OET will give anyone a license to do anything that they want whether it is good spectrum engineering or not. I feel sorry that you, as an honest "need-er" of spectrum, gets put in the middle of an ongoing dispute. They have lately gone too far, and may yet get their comeuppance." "Consider yourself fortunate that you are profiting from others' foolishness." Believe me, John, the tales that Charlie tells can raise the hairs on your neck. Sometimes I'm glad that I'm just a plain ol' street cop. -=Ploni=- -- ------------------------------------------------------------- FidoNet: 1:161/445 UUCP: sun!apple!bmug!<User.Name> INTERNET: bmug!<User.Name>@apple.COM or <User.Name>@bmug.fidonet.org USNAIL: BMUG, 1442A Walnut St. #62, Berkeley, CA 94709-1496 ------------------------------------------------------------- BMUG ARPANET ADDRESSES: Newsletter submissions: pub@bmug.fidonet.org Membership or business: biz@bmug.fidonet.org Information: info@bmug.fidonet.org Help Line Questions: help@bmug.fidonet.org
Ploni.Almoni@mailcom.FIDONET.ORG (Ploni Almoni) (07/09/89)
>> John - re our discussion on Experimental Radio Service -- >> >> Cousin Charlie the radio inspector sez: >> > Whatever "Cousin Charlie", whoever he is, says, the FCC at present > seems to follow the regulations as written in 47 CFR 5. I encountered > no difficulty ... Cousin Charlie is a very long-term engineer/manager/spectrum professional who has spent several decades on the Commission's staff and he is looking over my shoulder as I write this. So I'll let him speak for himself: " Your statement confirmed my prior charge that the folks at OET will give anyone a license to do anything that they want whether it is good spectrum engineering or not. I feel sorry that you, as an honest "need-er" of spectrum, gets put in the middle of an ongoing dispute. They have lately gone too far, and may yet get their comeuppance." "Consider yourself fortunate that you are profiting from others' foolishness." Believe me, John, the tales that Charlie tells can raise the hairs on your neck. Sometimes I'm glad that I'm just a plain ol' street cop. -=Ploni=- -- Via apple!mailcom, Fido 1:204/444