Robert Casey wrote in message ...
Herb wrote:

Your confusing that with a FAA project. Check your
"sources" more closely. And how can you build anything on
land that the FCC no longer has? The FAA has constructed
remote air control facilities on some of the old FCC monitoring
station sites, and this is how you are getting so confused.
FAA is NOT FCC, now you get it?



If true, it doesn't mean that the FAA doesn't let the FCC borrow their
equipment
from time to time.

It's been explained elsewhere in detail. The FCC usta need serious
real estate for their old monster rhombic antenna farms. They also
needed office & lab spaces for the operators and administrative staffs
at their monitoring stations. Technology has marched on. The rhombics
have been replaced by much newer and far more compact types of
high-performance antennas which has in turn has freed up most of the
former FCC real estate for other gummint users like the FAA.

The current realities are (1) There are no more FCC monitoring station
onsite staffs and labs in most cases, those have been replaced by
high-speed digital gummint networks. (2)It appears that, based on
highly knowledgeable other's inputs on the topic, that the FCC
monitoring equipment space requirements have been boiled down to
something akin to a rack of radios and computers in a gummint spec
Sears back yard tool shed and maybe a tower or two. How many acres
does THAT take??

The fact that the FAA now shares some chunks of real estate with the
FAA means squat, has nothing to do with nothing.

What the hell, for all we actually know the Social Security
Administration has moved one of their field offices into the former
FCC monitoring station buildings and the EPA has planted an unmanned
networked air sampling monitoring station on the roofs. That would be
typical of the way the feds have managed their real estate holdings
going back to post-colonial days.

w3rv