FCC and Interference

Status
Not open for further replies.

KevinC

Moderator
Super Moderator
Joined
Jan 7, 2001
Messages
4,922
Location
Somewhere other than home :(
I can personally speak for the florescent light issue mentioned...they wreak havoc from DC to daylight, for hundreds of feet. So I would say no, they aren't taking this too far.
 

N9NRA

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jun 3, 2008
Messages
850
I would hafta agree here, with this one note, it really depends on just WHO is being interfered with. If it`s a commericial or public safty system (think PD/FD or business user/system here) then yeah, the FCC does take it real seriously. OTOH if it`s a system/user like Amateur, FRS, GMRS or even CB then no, they don`t usually take it seriously. I know it stinks to say that, and probably hurts to hear it, but sadly it`s the truth. Now that said i do know of cases where an amateur made a complaint and got results (meaning the interference was resolved and fixed), however this is kinda more the exception than the rule in that case. N9NRA
 

CapStar362

Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2004
Messages
564
Location
Oakwood GA, USA!
so because a game system which is supposed to be CERTIFIED by FCC standards " supposedly" causes interference.... the FCC can seize the console? they better be buying me a new one with copying ALL my data over from the "bad" console to my new one


"Similar letters in 2012 went to several operators of videogame consoles. "This unresolved problem," the letters typically warn, "could result in a monetary forfeiture." "

sorry i dont sit with that.... FCC makes sure the manufacturers comply with their rules, but then can TAKE something that a non-knowing consumer buys... from them ?


please tell me im reading that wrong.....

im all for public safety and life saving systems policies enforcing interference.... but comon... this is just a OP government getting greedier and greedier by the minute
 

lotsofradios

Completely Banned for the Greater Good
Banned
Joined
Feb 2, 2013
Messages
119
Location
Ormond Beach FL
I would hafta agree here, with this one note, it really depends on just WHO is being interfered with. If it`s a commericial or public safty system (think PD/FD or business user/system here) then yeah, the FCC does take it real seriously. OTOH if it`s a system/user like Amateur, FRS, GMRS or even CB then no, they don`t usually take it seriously. I know it stinks to say that, and probably hurts to hear it, but sadly it`s the truth. Now that said i do know of cases where an amateur made a complaint and got results (meaning the interference was resolved and fixed), however this is kinda more the exception than the rule in that case. N9NRA
I have both Florida Power & Light and the Tampa FCC field office on speed dial. Both have been very responsive to my RFI issues. Being close to the ocean we get much RFI due to salt-air effecting power equipment, FPL has always bent over backwards to help.

One time when having FPL's RFI investigator out, while 99% of my calls were FPL issues, this 1 was not. FPL determined it was coming from 'consumer electronics' inside someones house. FPL gave me a digitized audio recording and told me to send it to the FCC. I did and a few days later an agent from the FCC called me, we talked for a few minutes, then he said he'll be out in a few days to look at the problem. He drove from Tampa to Ormond Beach (about 120 miles), found the issue and informed the homeowner to correct the problem. The source of the RFI was about 2 blocks away. That problem was quickly resolved and never happened again. Turned out homeowner had installed a new programmable thermostat that was generating RFI.

We as taxpayers fund the FCC, I expect what I pay for. RFI investigations are part of that regardless of who is being interfered with.
 

mmckenna

I ♥ Ø
Joined
Jul 27, 2005
Messages
11,025
Location
SNCZCA01DS0
"Similar letters in 2012 went to several operators of videogame consoles. "This unresolved problem," the letters typically warn, "could result in a monetary forfeiture." "

sorry i dont sit with that.... FCC makes sure the manufacturers comply with their rules, but then can TAKE something that a non-knowing consumer buys... from them ?


please tell me im reading that wrong.....
Well, sort of…

The FCC does not actually test the stuff themselves. They have "authorized" testing firms that get accredited for doing the testing. Supposedly they are kept track of, and there is some sort of enforcement, but based on some of the crap I've see in the last few years, it doesn't seem like this system really works as well as it could.
Also, the type acceptance (usually part 15 for "unintentional radiators") involves the test firm testing a prototype of the device. If it passes, the rest of the devices are just mass produced based on the prototype. It's not uncommon for minor changes to get made in electronics equipment, and the type acceptance to not need redoing. This can result in issues like noted above.

It's a flaw of the system. It should be up to the product manufacturer to fix these issues, but in the interim, interference needs to be stopped, even if it inconveniences a consumer.
 

KevinC

Moderator
Super Moderator
Joined
Jan 7, 2001
Messages
4,922
Location
Somewhere other than home :(
I can personally speak for the florescent light issue mentioned...they wreak havoc from DC to daylight, for hundreds of feet. So I would say no, they aren't taking this too far.
Yes, I'm quoting myself. :lol:

Just want to add that tracking down interference is my "thing". In the past 15 years I've locating over 300 sources of harmful interference. When I first started the big thing was flashing antenna displays (Google it if you don't know what they were), then it slowly turned to spurious cordless phones, then wireless video baby monitors.

The list of devices I can think of real quick (other than the above) are...

Wirelss inventory systems
The ever popular long since not used Nextel BDA's
WILSON BDA'S...AAARRRGGGHHH!!!
Amplified "rabbit ears"
Cheapo TV distribution amps
Neon signs
AVL systems (can't think of the name, but it operated in the 900 MHz)
Now illegal 700MHz wireless mics.
Analog TV station on ch 67, after they were supposed to have abandoned this channel and gone digital (this was probably my longest distance source, over 100 miles away)
Spurious 950 MHz STL

It always amazed me when I tracked it down to a residence how many people would let me in to pinpoint it. I would NEVER let a stranger in my house, maybe I look trustworthy.

A lot of times they would let me keep whatever it was so I have an odd collection of electronics I can't use.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top