I cannot think of any service other than RC which is not obligated to identify the source of transmissions. That pretty much leaves you with using the standard frequencies as spelled out by the band plan. The FCC is not difficult when it comes to waivers for experiments, but they do expect some planning and documentation. Most of us Hams take violations of our privileges personal while at the same time recruiting new Hams with the zeal of a missionary! John Ferrell 6241 Phillippi Rd Julian NC 27283 Phone: (336)685-9606 johnferrell@earthlink.net Dixie Competition Products NSRCA 479 AMA 4190 W8CCW "My Competition is Not My Enemy" ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nate Duehr" To: Sent: Saturday, August 30, 2003 12:49 PM Subject: Re: [OT]: RC (Radio Control) Receiver Project > stanton54 wrote: > > Well I'm working on this right now (not so much since school > > started... sigh...) so I sure hope i haven't missed anything ;) > > > > AFAIK the ARRL has absolutely no authority; they are not part of the > > government. The FCC alone can *tell* you what you can/can't do. The band > > plan is just a suggestion to help keep things nice and tidy. The FCC > > does have limits on what signals you can use on which bands, but they > > aren't nearly as detailed; the part about R/C does not mention a > frequency. > > > > I've got nothing against the band plan, it's a good idea, but for > > something unusual like a UAV it breaks down somewhat. > > > No it doesn't. > > There's plenty of experimental spectrum in the bandplans for all the > Amateur bands. You obviously haven't studied them at all. There are > also limitations in place by the FCC for power output for telecommand > (1W). See 97.215. There are also FCC limitations on what types of > emissions can be done in which portions of the bands. See 97.305. > > Just go do something dumb like interfere with a coordinated repeater > system and see how far the "bandplan isn't law" argument gets you when > the FCC comes knocking. > > There are plenty of documented cases of interference where the FCC > Enforcement Bureau has sided with the user who's following the bandplan > and fined or revoked the license of the Amateur who wasn't, depending on > the perceived severity of the violation. (Intentional interference is, > of course, considered worse than unintentional. But claiming no > knowledge of whatever other users of the band area you are using is not > a defense.) > > Just use the bandplans. Someday you may volunteer for a frequency > coordination council and find out that people who have no respect for > the bandplans, typically also garner no respect from their fellow hams > who follow them. It's poor engineering practice, even. > > -- > Nate Duehr, nate@natetech.com - WY0X > > -- > http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic: > [PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads > -- http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic: [PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads