Good point on RADAR fragility.
We need to keep asking for more spectrum where we are the priority without
government users above us, but we will only get that in higher, non-foliage
penetrating spectrum. AKA things the cellular guys don't want.
-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
- Original Message -
From: Marlon Schafer (509.982.2181) o...@odessaoffice.com
To: sc...@brevardwireless.com, WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2014 12:29:53 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] USAF Request - Read this is you want to keep
using5630-5800 Mhz
Yeah, it’s unfortunately part of the risk we take to use an otherwise free
band.
It’s important enough now though that they really need to come up with a large
chunk of protected space for us.
The really stupid part of all of this? If the RADAR systems are that fragile,
what good are they really going to be for anyone in today’s world?
marlon
From: Scott Carullo
Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2014 10:31 AM
To: Jack Unger ; wireless@wispa.org
Subject: Re: [WISPA] USAF Request - Read this is you want to keep
using5630-5800 Mhz
Update Last week we (along with other RF users in the community) were
invited to the AFB to meet the folks that run the radar there and to see the
spectrum analyzer screens. During this meeting, it was discussed that what the
AF was trying to accomplish was to remove all users within 60Km from using
5630-5800Mhz. It was discussed that this seemed to be a doomed request because
of the sheer number of users in the spectrum within such a large geographical
area. How would they remove all users from this spectrum, even within several
miles of the radar... lots of hotels, condos, businesses etc... literally
thousands of them. I'm not sure if they are going after the low hanging
identifiable fruit or if they really plan on going door to door... They said
things were sort of in a holding pattern with the FCC because they were
contacted by a WISPA rep and others and there were some discussions going on
above our pay grade locally.
Well, here we are today. I guess the outcome of those meetings was that we need
to stop using the spectrum identified. Here is the email sent from the FCC
field officer to the local range folks that was forwarded to me:
===
FROM: FCC Agent
TO: CONNOLLEY, SCOTT D GS-13 USAF AFSPC 45 SCS/SCOT
Subject: Meeting to discuss Interference to Radar at Patrick AFB
Scott, I've reviewed your report concerning radio interference to a C-Band (5
GHz) tracking
radar at Patrick AFB. I understand that you have contacted several of the
Wireless Internet
Service Providers (WISP's) in the area to advise them of the problem and have
been met with
some resistance to assist you.
I would like to have a meeting with you and the WISP's to discuss this problem
and open up a
discussion as to what steps can be taken to find a solution.
WISP's operate under Part 15 of the FCC Rules and may not cause harmful
interference.
47 C.F.R. § 15.5 General conditions of operation.
(a) Persons operating intentional or unintentional radiators shall not be
deemed to have any
vested or recognizable right to continued use of any given frequency by virtue
of prior
registration or certification of equipment, or, for power line carrier systems,
on the basis
of prior notification of use pursuant to §90.35(g) of this chapter.
(b) Operation of an intentional, unintentional, or incidental radiator is
subject to the
conditions that no harmful interference is caused and that interference must be
accepted that
may be caused by the operation of an authorized radio station, by another
intentional or
unintentional radiator, by industrial, scientific and medical (ISM) equipment,
or by an
incidental radiator.
(c) The operator of a radio frequency device shall be required to cease
operating the device
upon notification by a Commission representative that the device is causing
harmful
interference. Operation shall not resume until the condition causing the
harmful interference
has been corrected.
(d) Intentional radiators that produce Class B emissions (damped wave) are
prohibited.
I propose that we have our first meeting on Wednesday, 6/18/14, at Patrick AFB.
Thanks,
Don Roberson
Sr. Agent
Tampa Office
Enforcement Bureau
FCC
Office: 813-348-1741 ext 105
===
So, its that easy? Local AF guy makes a request whether reasonable or not, and
thats the way it is? I understand moving off the 5765Mhz and having guard space
on either side maybe 20Mhz, but they want the whole band to stop being used
whether its even in the radar LOS or not, which is an unreasonable request,
IMO. This meeting of the minds will apparently happen this coming Wednesday
here locally. Anyone have anything to add, other than good luck?
Scott Carullo
Technical Operations
