Jimmie D wrote:

That explains why it didnt work so well as a RX VFO.I needed about 13db I
may try again with a little amp.



I wonder if the vacuum tube dip meters
aren't the most powerful signal sources
we typically use to explore antenna
characteristics, especially when the
coil is tightly coupled.

73,
Chuck

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"Jimmie D" writes:

That explains why it didnt work so well as a RX VFO.I needed about 13db I
may try again with a little amp.

If you listen to the signal, it's quite unstable. So probably not very
useful as a VFO.

A network analyzers is not marketed as an antenna analyzer, or even an
intentional radiator for that matter. I have a signal generator, an
amplifier and an antenna in my lab but it does not mean I can sweep the
entire LF to UHF bands at any wattage.

Then you need to get a better signal generator.


I meant "does not mean I can legally sweep the entire LF to UHF bands"


I was just looking through Part 18 and it really is unclear to me,
however
one thing was clear to me, ISM devices are prohibited for use in certain
bands. One of which is search and rescue. So now how can I test my ELT
antenna installation on my aircraft if I'm violating FCC rules?

You test it during the time window when testing ELT's is allowed.


This does not apply to the newer 406 ELT's that are currently being sold,
and which are monitored by very sensitive LEO, MEO and GEO satellites. A
band that is also recognized and protected by the ITU.

"Ralph Mowery" wrote in message
...
Thomas you can start around here in the Part 15 rules.


[Code of Federal Regulations]
[Title 47, Volume 1, Parts 0 to 19]
[Revised as of October 1, 2000]
From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access
[CITE: 47CFR15.3]

[Page 676-679]

TITLE 47--TELECOMMUNICATION

CHAPTER I--FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

PART 15--RADIO FREQUENCY DEVICES--Table of Contents

Subpart A--General

Sec. 15.3 Definitions.


(dd) Test equipment is defined as equipment that is intended
primarily for purposes of performing measurements or scientific
investigations. Such equipment includes, but is not limited to, field
strength meters, spectrum analyzers, and modulation monitors.


Thanks Ralph,

I have the CRF in front of me and can see where test equipment is defined.
However, I can seem to find where it says that test equipment is exempt from
any sort of intentional radiation at any power levels.

Do you know where?

Thomas

And for the nitpickers, yes if you hooked one to an antenna and left
it turned on for days, someone might start caring.


Hi Jim,

I'm not necessarily worried about interfering, disrupting or jamming other
receivers in the area, a fast sweeping 3 or 7 dbm CW would not likely
interfere. I am worried about what is legal and what is not legal.
Regulatory bodies such as the FCC/ITU do not use statements or issue
licenses under terms 'it's not likely to' or 'its not much of a concern',
they prefer to issue specific modulation types and field strengths.

Thomas

I have the CRF in front of me and can see where test equipment is defined.
However, I can seem to find where it says that test equipment is exempt
from any sort of intentional radiation at any power levels.

"I can't seem to find"...that is...

On Thu, 23 Aug 2007 16:46:04 GMT, "Thomas Magma"
wrote:

I am worried about what is legal and what is not legal.

Hi Thomas,

Then sifting legal advice from ad-hoc postings is a poor remedy for
worry.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

On Thu, 23 Aug 2007 16:46:04 GMT, "Thomas Magma"
wrote:

I am worried about what is legal and what is not legal.


If worried, write the FCC for clarification

Lots of folks here are guessing --- IMHO

Lamont

We have had regulation of RF emissions since 1912... I have been an
active ham for 45 years... I have read most of the back issues of QST
over the years, clear back to the start.... I keep up (mostly) with
regulatory and enforcement actions that affect hams....
Never, ever, have I run across an action by the FCC against a ham for
using a piece of test gear that radiates low power signals...
When that does happen perhaps it will be time to discuss it...

denny / k8do

In message , The Shadow
writes


On Thu, 23 Aug 2007 16:46:04 GMT, "Thomas Magma"
wrote:

I am worried about what is legal and what is not legal.


If worried, write the FCC for clarification

Lots of folks here are guessing --- IMHO

Lamont

Asking for clarification is absolutely the last thing you want to do.
Have you never heard of 'Let sleeping dogs lie'? Most authorities (at
least in the UK) have a policy of "If in doubt, say no". Alternatively,
the response may come from some junior employee who has no idea what you
are talking about, and in case he/she is wrong, will simply give an
unconsidered "No" as a 'safe' answer.
--
Ian