Previous Politech message: "Will radar detectors be regulated out of existence?" http://www.politechbot.com/p-03544.html
--- Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 23:32:17 -0400 From: Alan Dixon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> These guys are blowing this out of proportion. The "bottom line" below is ludicrous. This pending FCC proposal (ET Docket 01-278 [FCC 01-290]) seeks only to regulate radar detectors manufactured in the future. Existing detectors would remain exempt from certification. In fact, having radar detectors certificated in the future could possibly give manufacturers and consumers some leverage in court when fighting state and local bans on these devices. Certification would provide clear evidence that such bans would definitely be contrary to federal objectives. Also, many, though not all, state-of-the-art radar detectors have substantially reduced IF emissions to avoid detection by VG-2Ó devices. (At least two alternative methods are used for this purpose, as well.) A couple of questions remain. One, it is difficult to believe that a pay-at-the-pump system can be defeated by a mere open carrier or swept carrier. These VSAT systems obviously carry modulated data. Additionally, for these retailers not to use some sort of encrypted key code to authenticate customers would be really stupid engineering. So would failing to include any data correction scheme, at least FEC. Please! Additionally, unless the terrestrial VSAT antenna was mounted directly over a gas pump in question, the radar detector IF emissions at issue would likely be well outside of the satellite's beam aperture. Hence, no interference. Two, I presume that "direct-to-home" wireless Internet access in the Ka band are licensed services. If they would turn out to be Part 15 services though, they would not be permitted to interfere with radar detectors. In any event, it is unlikely that such transmitters, which are line-of-sight and above ground level, would interfere with radar detectors any more than do premise security systems, already. In addition, direct-to-home transmitters must not interfere with licensed-by-rule police radar (47 CFR §90.103). Oh. Incidentally, in FCC nomenclature, an endorsement is a condition of added privileges on a licensee's authorization. Therefore, I presume that what we meant to say is that ChevronTexaco Corporation has filed supporting comments with the FCC on new regulation that would apply to radar detectors. Radar detectors may well be regulated out of existence? No. Not "may well be". They will remain alive and well, and future manufacturing will most likely continue, with minor adjustments. A new round of FCC regulation on radar detectors? Again, no. Not a whole "round" of regulation. Clearly, we are looking at a single rule change. Kind regards, Alan Dixon Contributing Editor - Popular Communications Retired Senior Telecommunications Engineer Former Member - TIA TR-45 AHAG Standards Committee, wireless security and encryption Former Republican candidate for appointment to the Federal Communications Commission (1996) <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>[EMAIL PROTECTED] Above, USA copyright 2002, A. Dixon, Melbourne, FL. Okay to distribute with this notice included. --- Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 22:47:22 -0500 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: Doug Bedell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: FC: Will radar detectors be regulated out of existence? In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Declan -- I just wrote a story about radar detectors for the Dallas Morning News. During my research, I questioned several experts about this very point. According to them, only Cobra RF emissions were problematic. Supposedly Cobra models using 12.2 GHz were the only radar detectors actually doing any interference. According to the people at radartest.com, Cobra modified its configurations to eliminate the problem, and everyone's happy. I'd like to know if that's not the case. Best wishes, -=drb Copyright 2002 Warren Publishing, Inc. SATELLITE WEEK February 18, 2002, Monday SECTION: THIS WEEK'S NEWS LENGTH: 977 words HEADLINE: SIA ASKS FCC TO TAKE SWIFT ACTION AGAINST RADAR DETECTORS BODY: Satellite Industry Assn. (SIA), in Feb. 13 letter to FCC, asked agency to "take swift action" to limit harmful interference it said radar detectors cause to many Very Small Aperture Terminal (VSAT) satellite networks. Devices are operating in manner inconsistent with FCC rules and are imposing unacceptable financial burden on VSAT operators, SIA Pres. Richard Dalbello said: "This situation is intolerable." Radar detectors are emitting power levels that are greatly in excess of norms established by FCC for unlicenced devices, SIA said. It said radar detector in automobile passing by or parked near VSAT terminal or other satellite earth station could "easily break the satellite communications link." Many SIA companies have independently identified devices as cause of interference, Dalbello said. Problem has been around since early 1990s, he said, but it gradually has gotten worse. Radar detectors have begun to encroach more seriously on VSAT bands since they changed their operational frequencies to adapt to changes in police radar guns, he said. (RADAR) said its members would voluntarily limit radar detector Radio Assn. Defending Airwave Rights emissions over VSAT receive band at 11.7-12.2 GHz to Class B levels -- levels Commission has set for most unintentional radiators. RADAR said limitations would be applicable to units that were imported or domestically manufactured on or after June 1, 2003, making it unnecessary for Commission to establish rules to protect VSAT systems. Attorney Mitchell Lazarus, who represents RADAR, said members are "unilaterally and voluntarily" committed to complying with Class B levels "no matter what the FCC does." Once RADAR members are in compliance with Class B rules, controversy should end, Lazarus said: "We would be putting no more noise into their band than hundreds of other devices, like PCs or palm pilots." Radar detectors are unregulated because they're classified as unintentional radiators and FCC rules exempt receivers that tune only above 960 MHz. [...] ***********Doug Bedell************ "Seconds ahead when minutes count." 972-857-6460 ... fax 972-857-6461 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------------------------------------------------------------- POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice. To subscribe to Politech: http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/ Declan McCullagh's photographs are at http://www.mccullagh.org/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Like Politech? Make a donation here: http://www.politechbot.com/donate/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------
