[Noisebridge-discuss] Radio: FCC rejection letter

Norman Bradley pryankster at gmail.com
Fri Dec 20 18:06:42 UTC 2013


Getting an AM or Shortwave station license is considerably more 
difficult. In addition compared to FM the antennas would need to be 
huge. For AM we would also run into the same problem as FM, frequency 
crowding.

A Shortwave receiver has some real possibilities and all you need is a 
wire on the roof.

An Amateur station would be fun if we could get past the problems of, no 
swearing near the mic, no music accidentally going out over the air, and 
unlike other things in the space the equipment needs to be securely 
locked up when not in use. A SDR transceiver hidden away with secure 
internet would be nice as well as being IRLP and Echolink nodes.

I'd be happy to help with any of these but it is time for someone else 
to lead.

You are entitled to your own opinion.
You are NOT entitled to your own facts.

Norman

On 12/20/2013 9:01 AM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> Hm, so..
>
> What about running a legit ham radio station on shortwave and doing
> some DIY shortwave receiver projects?
>
> It shouldn't be that difficult to design a two or three transistor
> shortwave receiver for use in SF.
>
> It'd likely make a great intro into radio project too.
>
>
> -a
>
> On 20 December 2013 08:56, Noisebridge Radio <noisebridgeradio at gmail.com> wrote:
>> When I filed I was afraid that that the physical distance might be a
>> problem. I filed for channel 215 (90.9 MHz). In the Bay Area there just
>> isn't much / anything available. The best candidate frequency 102.5 had 8
>> different organizations file for it in San Francisco alone. In many ways the
>> FCC rules haven't kept up with technology. The reason for the distance /
>> adjacent channel rules have to do with selectivity and signal rejection. Due
>> to the nature of FM radio if you have 2 transmitters on the same frequency
>> (generally) a radio will only pick up the most powerful signal and you won't
>> hear the weaker one at all.
>>
>> It was an interesting experiment.
>>
>> I believe that Hilaire is working on an internet radio project so all is not
>> lost.
>>
>> PS. Is there a place to store paper records at Noisebridge. I can keep them
>> however as time goes by they may get misplaced or forgotten and if anybody
>> deals with the FCC for any reason in the future they may be necessary. It
>> would better if they were stored up there.
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 5:56 PM, Tom Lowenthal <me at tomlowenthal.com> wrote:
>>> Hello hammies (or whatever). The FCC thinks we're too close to other radio
>>> stations. Here's their letter.
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>>> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
>>> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
>> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>



More information about the Noisebridge-discuss mailing list