A couple of comments / thoughts: For actual interference into your receivers, you should be able to easily test this by fading your path(s) to threshold. If you can’t make it all the way to threshold, you undoubtedly have interference. This is commonly called a fade test and should be done as a matter of routine on every path during installation. Some licensees do these fade tests on every path on a yearly or regular basis, just to ensure that nothing is infringing on their designed fade margins. Doing the test during installation is the only way to accurately verify that your coordinator did a good job of properly engineering around all other licensed and previously coordinated proposals and that they protected your path’s full fade margin. Of course, fade tests are not practical when dealing with prior coordination proposals since the test couldn’t be run until the other proposal is licensed and operating - too late to do anything about it.
The protection service offered by a couple of the major coordinators removes 99% of actual interference cases that are created primarily due to shoddy work by the coordinator of the new proposal. Your example below of having to reduce power 10 dB due to a “complaint from a major carrier” is a prime example of sub-standard work by the coordinator. The coordinator is supposed to run a rigorous analysis BEFORE they ever issue a coordination notice, but obviously they missed this 10 dB case into another user - this begs the question of what else did they miss? If the process is done correctly, and a proper upfront analysis has been done, there should be no surprises and constant changes in frequencies, power levels, etc. There are some inexperienced coordinators out there that seem to think it’s okay to use the coordination process to “shotgun” proposals out on notice and keep changing them based on who complains. The big problem with this is that 60% of the licensed paths aren’t covered under a professional protection service, so major interference cases have been missed. I have even found major cases (some over 20 dB) between two proposals done by the same coordinator - luckily these were pointed out before they got licensed. So, beware of any coordinator that has to change things over-and-over again to get your path “cleared”. If a power reduction is necessary, they should be discussing this with you upfront, if not, you are not getting your money’s worth from this coordinator and you should definitely look elsewhere. The protection service is a bargain when you factor in how many new paths are proposed and the peace of mind it gives you, knowing that your paths and their fade margins will be fully protected. DISCLAIMER I was one of the three founders of Comsearch in 1977 and just recently retired (Oct 2017). I am not currently affiliated with any coordinator or company and the thoughts and opinions expressed herein are mine alone! Tim Hardy —————————————————————— So half out 11ghz is through the hottie at intellipathe the orth half is through commscope. With commscope you get a free year of "protection". Sure, we get our monthly readouts on the commscope thing. But how do I KNOW theyre doing their due diligence? I havent gotten one " ALERT:theyre poking your bear" email. We just got a ne license that we had to dump 10db on over a complaint from a major carrier VERY far away. How do I test that my gear is actually protected, since I realistically cant complain after the fact? Eventually wed have to protect all our shots, and pay for it. This complaint seemed to have happened even before a PCN, the solution of the 10 db even faster. (not complaining at all on that, I just now that the few PCNs I have time to map, I wouldnt have had a response this quick, let alone resolution) All I have in this are questions, all answers or ideas are welcome. Is this just an issue that we arent "carrier" enough to have dedicated staff to complain or what?
