"jim" wrote in message
...
Landshark wrote:
"jim" wrote in message
...

Steveo wrote:

"KE5MBX" wrote:


At what power level is damage
likely, and to what componets?



And how thick should the led shield around me be?


just make sure your tinfoil hat is properly grounded.


Give him a few of those **** water rolling rocks and that's a possibility. :P

Landshark
someone has a hardon against Latrobes finest...

They have some sort of brew that's fine???????

These are a LOT better brews:

http://www.avbc.com/beers/amber.html

http://www.sierranevada.com/beers/paleale.html

http://www.ratebeer.com/brewers/the-...ke-tahoe/2563/

http://www.tiedhouse.com/beers/orig.html

http://www.gordonbiersch.com/brewery/beer/index.html

Shall I go on?????????????????? LOL!!!!!!!!

Landshark

On Feb 12, 7:33 pm, jim wrote:
Steveo wrote:
"KE5MBX" wrote:

At what power level is damage
likely, and to what componets?

And how thick should the led shield around me be?

just make sure your tinfoil hat is properly grounded.

no, the original poster is correct, sort of, although very mixed up.

I believe he heard about the rf debvices that the police use to stop
cars, but either he or his friend(s) got it mixed up somehow.

On 12 Feb 2007 15:17:37 -0800, "KE5MBX" wrote
in . com:

Hi,
What's all this business I hear people talking about blasting people's
car stereos or killing cars altogether with high-power RF? I run 2m,
10m, and 11m in my jeep and I'd like to sort out the fact from the
legend and find out what kind of power I can use without risking
damage to my jeep or cars around me. At what power level is front-end
overload to a nearby radio likely? At what power level is damage
likely, and to what componets?


Ok, this is a bit long:

Most of the newer instrument clusters (circa '90 and later) are really
sensitive to both static -and- RF, and are -not- shielded. Some engine
computers are also sensitive to RF (screws with the high-impedance
signal from the oxygen sensor). Even some anti-lock brake modules can
be disrupted by a strong signal.

Begin rant:

The SAE sure had its head up its ass when they allowed junk like that
to be made. Very few of these systems (if any) were ever recalled
because it is almost impossible to prove liability in any case of
failure due to RF. And the US Supreme Court ruled recently that a few
"accidental" deaths are an acceptable risk in corporate business
practices, releasing auto makers from liability for unsafe vehicles
provided that the problem is fixed after being discovered. Therefore,
new auto systems are tested for safety by the consumers who buy new
vehicles -- a system is proven "safe" if it doesn't cause any
financial liability (i.e, injuries and/or fatalities directly
attributable to the faulty system). One would hope that there is some
sort of saftey process that needs to be done -before- a new auto
system is implemented, like what the FDA does with drugs. But there
isn't. And to think that people would rather whine about a little
tobacco smoke.....

End rant.

So how much power is too much power? There's no definitive answer. I
have seen brake failure with as little as 60 watts on VHF-hi (a Ford).
Remembering that the auto makers are mostly responsible for any such
problems, you will just have to use your best judgment. Follow the
rules that say to use the least amount of power, and to use good
engineering practices.

Frank Gilliland wrote:
snipper
I
have seen brake failure with as little as 60 watts on VHF-hi (a Ford).

Really? That's whacked. How the hell did you see it?

--
http://NewsReader.Com/

On 13 Feb 2007 01:47:56 GMT, Steveo wrote in
:

Frank Gilliland wrote:
snipper
I
have seen brake failure with as little as 60 watts on VHF-hi (a Ford).

Really? That's whacked. How the hell did you see it?


Happened when I was working at a 2-way shop in Oregon. Since the auto
makers dumped the responsibility of RF compatibility onto the radio
makers, the procedure (as described in the manuals) for installing a
commercial radio into -any- vehicle requires that it be driven and
keyed up with the brakes applied. One failed the test.

Frank Gilliland wrote:
On 13 Feb 2007 01:47:56 GMT, Steveo wrote in
:

Frank Gilliland wrote:
snipper
I
have seen brake failure with as little as 60 watts on VHF-hi (a Ford).

Really? That's whacked. How the hell did you see it?

Happened when I was working at a 2-way shop in Oregon. Since the auto
makers dumped the responsibility of RF compatibility onto the radio
makers, the procedure (as described in the manuals) for installing a
commercial radio into -any- vehicle requires that it be driven and
keyed up with the brakes applied. One failed the test.

Was there fluid in the master cylinder on that one? In other words, could
it have been the brakes were bad to begin with? How many were tested?

--
http://NewsReader.Com/

Steveo wrote:
Frank Gilliland wrote:
One failed the test.

Was there fluid in the master cylinder on that one?

Errr only Fords' are susceptible to RF brake killings? g

--
http://NewsReader.Com/

"Steveo" wrote...
Frank Gilliland wrote:
snipper
I
have seen brake failure with as little as 60 watts on VHF-hi (a Ford).

Really? That's whacked. How the hell did you see it?

He was the one testing the theory out as the car passed by :~)

A few years back, here in the UK, there was a story on the news about how our
police had problems with their radio equipment killing the engines on their
cars.
That would have made a great scene for a comedy cop film. Speaking of comedy
cop films, the film "Hot Fuzz" looks good. It has the writers and some of the
actors from "Shaun Of The Dead", along with some other big Brit actors.


Regards,

Peter.
http://www.citizensband.radiouk.com/

KE5MBX wrote:
Hi,
What's all this business I hear people talking about blasting people's
car stereos or killing cars altogether with high-power RF? I run 2m,
10m, and 11m in my jeep and I'd like to sort out the fact from the
legend and find out what kind of power I can use without risking
damage to my jeep or cars around me. At what power level is front-end
overload to a nearby radio likely? At what power level is damage
likely, and to what componets?

I am currently using only 50 watts on a 5/8 wave (2m), 25w on a 1/4
wave (10m), legal 4w on a 1/4 wave (11m)

Thanks,
Nelson KE5MBX


I've used a 667 on 11 in my Jeep. It did not like the intense voltage
swings caused by being on sideband. My headlights would get dim and
real bright, so I moved to a smaller box before I blew up my ECM.

I've had no problems with a few hundred watts on 11 meters, 50 watts
on 2 meters and 35 watts on 440. Antennas are left rear for 11 (and 10),
left front for 2 meters and right front for 440. Someday, I'll add
one on the right rear for 6 meters if I ever get a 6 meter radio.
Since I never listen to commercial FM (too many commercials), the
FM antenna is connected to the scanner.

I'll be populating 28.365 on February 23, 24 & 25. It seems the popular
meeting place on 10 meters will be 1 MHz higher then where we've all
spent so many years. (28.365/375/385/395)

On the 24th, I go to the paperwork upgrade session and go straight to the top.

On Feb 14, 3:52 am, Scott in Baltimore
wrote:

I've had no problems with a few hundred watts on 11 meters, 50 watts
on 2 meters and 35 watts on 440.

Just what the ham radio world needs, another cber who thinks it is
perfectly OK to operate at illegal power levels.