Hear No RF Evil – See No RF Evil

To make the LBA booth more accessible to our customers, we have moved from Booth# N516 in the North Hall to Booth# SU3327 on the upper level of the South Hall. Come see us!

Through collaboration between Artech House publishers and the IEEE Communications Society, a free web tutorial has been made available to wireless engineers.

The tutorial will address a number of autonomous and intelligent techniques which can be applied to emerging high bandwidth systems to realize spectrum and network efficiency. It will address smart and effective design, including embedding intelligence and adaptivity features in radios, while maintaining a friendly user interface.

In order to achieve real 4G targets, further concentration will be on multi-antenna techniques, cognitive radios, advanced spectrum management, and cognitive radio techniques will be discussed.

The tutorial will be presented by Dr. Nicola Marchetti and Dr. Muhammad Imadur Rahman. The program includes several hours of instruction in three presentations. The tutorial may be accessed at http://ww2.comsoc.org/form/tutorial-registration-FutureGigabitSystems

LBA provides a range of services for wireless carriers. These include RF hazard compliance, intermodulation & interference resolution, AM detuning, and AM colocation. LBA also provides advanced RF test equipment.

In response to the last blog posting, a San Diego Amateur radio operator kindly forwarded to the Curmudgeon the enclosed photograph and some of his observations of the monster residential ham antenna that set off the furor with the city government.  The enclosed photo shows the situation on the ground there.  For identification, this antenna is a MonstIR Yagi ($5K, not including supporting mast or installation costs), which can be remotely tuned to resonance from 40 through 6 meters (7 through 50 MHz).

The antenna is installed at a prestige home in the pricey Mount Soledad section of the neighborhood of La Jolla.  The residence is essentially sitting at the bottom of a small, natural valley, surrounded by low hills on three sides (the three that lie in the general direction of North America and Europe)!  It is not an optimum geographical location from which to operate a contest-grade ham station.

In the photograph the antenna is depicted in its “storage” position.  The motorized winch on that mast will crank the aluminum rods up to a level of about 85 feet above grade.  Not surprisingly, that takes the Yagi right up to eye level for people looking west out the windows of the row of houses above and behind his!  And that leaves those home-owners quite understandably howling that their multi-million dollar hill-top view of La Jolla beaches and the Pacific has been greatly compromised by an installation over which they have no control and from which they get no benefit.  If the Curmudgeon lived up there on “Got-Rocks Heights,” he too would be right in the middle of the howling mob as well!

If the ham in question transmits to the east with any (competitive) amount of RF power and the antenna is at its full extended height, the people in the homes above will be irradiated with his station’s reactive near-field emissions.  The Curmudgeon has done RFE exposure evaluations and he understands that the FCC-mandated non-occupational emissions limits for the homeowners will still not be exceeded even with this setup.  Thus the health of the neighbors will probably not be at put at risk by the operations of the station.  But why should they have any exposure at all from the elevated, proximate antenna?

(Visit the LBA Products Index & Gallery)

This “VOA-wannabe” Amateur station should have been built out in the back-country and then operated via Internet remote control.  That would have been rational, and the ham technology for doing this kind of thing is well established.  Instead, a seemingly willful Amateur licensee installed this monstrosity at his home.  And, perhaps $250,000 in legal fees and court costs later, all the 3,700 City of San Diego Amateurs will find out whether he gets to keep it.  And also whether they get to keep their own, generally far more modest Amateur Yagis.

It’s enough to gag a maggot!

“Let’s keep SAN DIEGO safe for RF!”

The Old RF Curmudgeon

The Curmudgeon has received word about and has done a little investigating on an evolving issue.  It’s the sort of thing that has to make you scratch your head and wonder just exactly where we have taken ourselves.  It’s the kind of matter that causes you to feel a bit queasy inside.

We’re back for the moment in the world of Amateur radio (disclaimer: the Curmudgeon is a licensee in the Amateur Radio Service).  And we are located in the City of San Diego, California, which is home to about 3,700 ARS licensees.  Its enlightened city government has, essentially on its own initiative, written a draft zoning ordinance that would forbid the construction of all new ARS (only) antennas taller than a height of 30 feet AGL.  Period!  Well — almost period.  An enterprising ham would still have the right to file an application for a property development permit for a proposed new, 30+ foot, non-conforming antenna structure; it’s the same permit issued for construction of shopping malls and golf courses.  And it requires an $8,000 application fee, etc., etc.

Hams, of course, are the traditional telecommunications “first responders,” on the air with ad-hoc equipment lash-ups and with both prior-established and spontaneous nets operating during and after natural or man-made disasters.  This is just when everyone else is trying to assess the damage to communications systems, to make repairs, and to re-start service.  The hams were there after Katrina, and they are on duty today after the Haitian earthquake.  No one doubts their sincerity or their usefulness.  Local governments in the San Diego area have even included established Amateur communications systems into their disaster planning.  And well they should: the region lies in an earthquake zone, is prone to spectacular back country brush fires, and is even open to large storms and the subsequent flooding and mudslides during recurrent El Nino weather events.

Note also that this proposed ordinance applies specifically and solely to ARS licensees.  It does not mention commercial two-way radio, cellular base stations, broadcasters, short-wave radio listeners, over-the-air TV viewers, CBers, or even owners of home weather stations.  These other folks can build as tall as they want, contingent only on filing for and receiving structural building permits.  No, San Diego is vindictively punishing just its hams.

So what has caused San Diego city government to declare war on its own citizens?  Most likely it was something that, in the Curmudgeon’s opinion, was a tremendously stupid mistake.  A local ham, fueled with far more money and ambition than common sense, proposed, somehow was issued building permits for, and built a huge antenna installation at his home.  Unfortunately, that home is located in about the most “exclusive” (read: expensive) neighborhood in the city, and the installation is grossly oversized for the lot on which it resides and for the neighborhood in which it is located.  It does damage to the aesthetics of the neighborhood.  A structure that size should have been built in a rural area, not in the city.

While hams do need tall antenna structures, prudence and common sense would dictate some voluntary limits as to sizes and heights for those in primarily residential areas.  (For non-ham readers, the taller the tower is, the more radiation-efficient are high-frequency [“short wave”] antennas mounted atop it, and also the greater the line-of-sight to the horizon for VHF/UHF antennas.)  Very tall towers, in the Curmudgeon’s opinion, do not belong in city residential neighborhoods.  But ARS towers of lesser height, properly constructed, do.  And so also says the FCC, both houses of the U.S. Congress, and the State of California.  San Diego, obviously, thinks otherwise.

Meanwhile, “back in the hood” the ham steadfastly refused to admit that he had created a problem, and his neighbors launched into orbit when “the monster” began climbing toward the stars.  Unfortunately the neighbors, being members of the higher economic classes, had little difficulty gaining the ears of city governmental officials or of obtaining skilled legal counsel to press their points.  And city government responded to their outcry by drafting the proposed ordinance.

The local hams, of course, have no intention of just standing on the sidelines and watching this travesty unfold. They have organized, have brought experienced professional help into the battle, and have been joined by the American Radio Relay League (ARRL, Amateur radio’s national organization) and its legal counsel.  Together they are lobbying the city government and the various departments that have their hands in the drafting of the ordinance.  It would not be prudent to disclose the hams’ plans in print, however, but the effort is well underway.

The typical outcome from such a clash of interests should be some sort of compromise on the part of the contending parties, i.e., “You can legally build your tower up to XX feet above ground with just a building permit, but if you want to go any higher you will need to file more detailed environmental plans and to obtain a special permit.”  Most of the ham population believes that XX ought to be somewhere between 65 and 80 feet, not the city-proposed and essentially stifling 30 feet.  Those Amateur-proposed figures are not randomly drawn from a hat; there are good and sufficient engineering reasons underlying them.

But there are no signs of a compromise developing.  Sources have told the Curmudgeon that the city is interested only in passing the ordinance as currently written.  They will not consider engineering arguments, and they seem not particularly interested in the views of even their own and other local agencies’ disaster preparedness staffs.  So it appears that the homeowners could win the day, but any new ordinance will certainly be headed immediately into litigation.

Thus a city government which has huge current deficits in its own operating and its employees’ pension budgets, which oversees crumbling roads, water and sewer lines, and which has ever-shrinking Public Safety department staffs, will squander its limited funds in litigating against a group of volunteers who provide actual, cash-valued services and equipment to the city.  These contributions are estimated as annual city staff labor savings of $2.5 million and “in-lieu” one-time communications equipment savings of $6 million.

This thing is an outrage! And it could set a horrible precedent for other myopic cities and towns to follow as well.  But it certainly will unleash some local politician, running for re-election, to boast: “Our city libraries may be open only half the number of hours they once were, and if you have an emergency our fire department will get to your house whenever they can fit it in, but, by George, there aren’t going to be any 35 foot-high ham antennas in your neighborhood!”

And, by the way, whatever did happen to the people’s right to use the spectrum that they collectively own?

What do you think?

“Let’s keep SAN DIEGO safe for RF!”

The Old RF Curmudgeon

The Coast Guard says LORAN-C isn’t necessary for maritime navigation and the Department of Homeland Security says it’s not needed as a backup for GPS, so will shut down most of its system 0n 8 February 2010. That leaves pilots and other users very concerned about the lack of a land-based redundancy for GPS. Loran C is also widely used for a lab and telecom system precision timing reference. That doesn’t seem to concern Homeland Security which calls it “an antiquated system no longer required by the armed forces, the transportation sector or the nation’s security interests.” Further, it claims that LORAN-C is only used by “a small percentage of the population,” and that those users “will have to shift to GPS or other systems.” “LORAN-C is no longer a prudent use of taxpayer funds and is not allowed under the 2010 DHS Appropriation Act,” according to the Coast Guard. The official USCG notice states:

*** Special Notice Regarding LORAN Closure: *** In accordance with the DHS Appropriations Act, the U.S. Coast Guard will terminate the transmission of all U.S. LORAN-C signals effective 2000Z 08 Feb 2010. At that time, the U.S. LORAN-C signal will be unusable and permanently discontinued. This termination does not affect U.S. participation in the Russian American or Canadian LORAN-C chains. U.S. participation in these chains will continue temporarily in accordance with international agreements. You may read more and download pertinent documents via our LORAN-C page.

The Loran C closures do not affect other navigation, positioning, and information systems such as NAVTEX and DGPS. LBA provides shore transmitting antennas and systems for these services.

For more information, contact Jerry Brown, jbrown@lbagroup.com or 252-757-0279

There’s so much heat on in the spectrum and broadband areas today, LBA asked the Curmudgeon to expand a bit on his last posting’s spectrum musings.

In the last blog post we identified the looming potential problem of total consumption of the radio frequency spectrum.   If we want to head this off, we need to begin with some guidance about how we should rationally allocate and use the spectrum  — for what sorts of things should it be used, for what other sorts of activities should it not be used?  What should we be doing with it today and what should we not be doing?  And the emphasis is on….

We will start with a living chap who, although not particularly well known as such, may be one of the most significant telecommunications visionaries that this country has produced.  The curious thing is that he is not an engineer or a scientist; he was trained as an architect.   His name is Nicholas Negroponte.  (Yes, you have heard that family name previously: older brother John Negroponte was a US ambassador to the United Nations).  Today, Nicholas is one of the guiding forces behind the “One Laptop per Child” movement which seeks to provide a $100 (maximum cost) functioning laptop computer to each school child in Third World nations.

Nicholas has held a number of significant assignments, but the one that will interest us here is his serving as a founder and the first Director of MIT’s Media Laboratory, back in the 1980s and 1990s.  The Media Lab was (and still is) a place where many new and revolutionary ideas about the mass media and telecommunications were/are proposed, debated, and in some cases reduced to practice.  A book by Stuart Brand with the name “The Media Lab” documents much of the early history of the place, and although now dated it is still worth a reading.  You may find surprising the percentage of the Lab’s predictions from those early days of communications and computing that have now come into commonplace use.

Among many other novel ideas flowing from Negroponte and the Media Lab, he proposed a fundamental communications concept which, to the Curmudgeon’s way of thinking, is simply brilliant in its simplicity and universality.  In just a few words it lays out the basic guidance for the rational uses to which the radio frequency spectrum ought to be put.  By rights it should be known as Negroponte’s Law, although the Curmudgeon is not certain that this identification has been designated.  But it has been called the Negroponte Switch (switch as in “change-over,” not switch as in “make and break circuit element”).

At the fundamental, bedrock level, as paraphrased here, Negroponte teaches:

Telecommunications services which are FIXED in nature (i.e., where the receiver is at a stationary location) should preferentially be transmitted by wired circuits; telecommunications services which are MOBILE in nature need to be transmitted by wireless circuits (i.e., by radio).

What an elegant idea!  It’s one of those simple little concepts for which it might be said, “anyone could have thought of it!”  And nobody except Negroponte actually did.

It says that, in a world of limited spectral resources, let’s use the radio spectrum for transmission only where and when we need it, and avoid using it where other choices are available.  That principle is, truly, the Ursprung of spectrum conservation!

So, as Negroponte did, let’s apply it toward rationalizing today’s telecommunications world and, noting some caveats along the way (for there are some valid practical exceptions that need to be made), let’s see how well we’ve done at meeting the target.

Let’s begin with broadcasting, but we’ll have to be a bit more specific: we’ll treat aural and video broadcasting separately, and leave text broadcasting for a later time.  Video broadcasting — it is a fixed or a mobile service?  Viewers generally sit in rooms in front of stationary receivers.  And the Negroponte Law choice for television?  To a huge extent, it’s a fixed service, so it goes to the wires for transmission!  We don’t need to tie up huge chunks of radio spectrum with basic television distribution; there’s enough wire line capacity in most places to handle that chore.  In fact, the only reason that television broadcasting has spectrum allocations is an historical one: after World War II, when television broadcasting was first authorized, the use of the radio spectrum was the ONLY way in which it could be easily and cheaply mass-distributed!  That’s no longer the case.

Now for the exceptions.  There are some rural, sparsely-populated areas of the country where it is economically infeasible to “hang cable.”  These may still need RF distribution, either from local translators or by limited satellite service.  And there is some developing interest in broadcasting to cellular telephones, although the acceptance of this by the public is not yet really known.  But this is a special, bandwidth-limited television signal.  Consequently some bandwidth-limited frequency allocations may be needed for “cellular television.”  Overall, though, the traditional over-the-air broadcast television distribution system needs to be “sunsetted” and eventually removed from the radio frequency spectrum!  To what purposes the liberated spectral resources might be allocated is quite a different matter, one which will be considered later.

Aural broadcasting: Most people listen to broadcast radio primarily while driving automobiles or using public transit services, or on small portable receivers while doing other things such as jogging, gardening, or working around their homes.  Radio certainly is a mobile service and it should keep its access to the radio frequency spectrum.  But there is also some true fixed broadcast usage:  “Internet radio” is expanding.  It consists of both live and previously-broadcast program streams from on-air broadcasters and also the independent audio streams from Internet-only program distributors.  As is the bulk of all Internet traffic, Internet radio is primarily distributed by wire transmission.  Since, in a general sense, wire line transmission is not capacity constrained as is the RF spectrum, the Internet can host a very large number of “radio” stations without jeopardizing a national resource.  Thus it is a “good” place for the expansion of aural broadcasting, although there will always be a need for radio frequency transmission as well.

One additional caveat: per the discussion in an earlier blog posting, the United States has parallel broadcast radio services, on “AM” and “FM” bands.  There is no longer a need for both services, and one of them should relinquish its spectral allocation (a mandate which is easy for a telecommunications theorist to deliver, but there are practical accommodations that will need to be implemented as well.)  VHF FM radio, especially as it gradually transitions into full digital broadcasting, has the clear technological lead.  It also has the majority of the listeners, and it has the capacity of absorbing much of the current content of AM radio as well.  Thus, AM radio should be “sunsetted,” and its spectrum refarmed.

Print space is short, and we will continue the Negroponte’s Law examination of other radio spectrum users in subsequent posts.  For now, though, once you see how the game is played, you might want to try it by yourself.

What do you think?

“Let’s keep the universe safe for RF!”

The Old RF Curmudgeon

Lawrence Behr

Lawrence Behr, founder of LBA Group, was interviewed in the November / December 2009 issue of NC Magazine.  LBA Group earned position number 2,780 on the 2009 Inc. 5000, Inc’s annual ranking of the fastest-growing private companies in America.

In the interview, Behr said, “We were founded in 1963, and we have been quite adaptable over that period of time.  As a small business, we have to drive toward the opportunities.  We live in niches, and ours is a flexible one.”

He noted that his company has shifted from specialties in radio and TV to cellular technologies and even to mapping projects, following the opportunities that emerged as technologies changed.  Today, the company has shifted to more of a service and marketing company than a manufacturing company.

“The industry is a mixed bag,” he said.  “There’s capital investment, but the negative side is that the economy has been such that competitors are making deals that offer low or no profit margins, and we’ve had to lower our prices to compete.”

LBA asks the Old RF Curmudgeon to put on his magic glasses and look through the swirling mists of spectrum policy. In this several part (he’s still looking) series the Curmudgeon will share with us the fantastic visions of spectrum usage and policy that he tunes in. Look with him carefully, as the spectrum path is yet untrodden, and unknown monsters abound along it!

Here’s a nice little nightmare to contemplate: The time is twenty years in the future from today. A fortuitous combination of developing technologies — ASICs (Application Specific Integrated Circuits), ultrahigh capacity batteries, highly advanced data compression transmission methods, and a new generation of MEMS (Micro ElectroMechanical Systems) — have all matured to the point where an unprecedented and much-needed medical monitoring system is now both technologically and economically feasible. The development effort is complete and the monitor is ready for service in humans.

The system is a real-time, continuous, wireless, medical “vital function” monitor and controller, surgically implanted directly into the body. It is intended for use on patients with previously-identified, potentially life-threatening medical problems that could strike at any time. Until this point such patients might have remained hospitalized or might have been transferred to convalescent institutions. Now, with remote, wireless 7/24 monitoring by computers at a central medical facility, they are again free to go about their daily lives in their own communities. The computer monitors will detect, even before the patient does, that a physiological problem is developing. Under tight physician control, they can also remotely initiate a limited range of emergency in vivo therapeutic actions in the patient. Having patients’ instantaneous GPS position reports always available, the medical facility can rapidly dispatch a mobile medical team to transport the patient back to the hospital if and when major problems are detected.

The cost savings, in terms of avoided patient-days in hospital, are impressive. The decrease in patient mortality is significant. The medical profession is very enthusiastic. Medicare, which provides the medical insurance coverage for the majority of candidate patients, is delighted! And the patients are happy — they are living a full life at home with family and friends, not stuck in an institution for endless boring days.

But there’s still one seemingly insurmountable problem facing the new system. At this future time there is no available dedicated radio spectrum on which it can be operated! Obviously such a critical radio system cannot tolerate interference, and thus it cannot share already-occupied radio channels. But no unused radio spectrum remains in this future world, save in a few remote, rural areas of the country; the spectrum has been completely consumed! Thus there is a strong possibility that the new system can never go into service. And neither can some other new and beneficial technology developments then just coming out of the labs, which applications also depend critically on unhindered wireless data transmission for their effectiveness. But where have the radio channels that we then *really* need gone?

That’s easy to answer. Remember back to the heady days of the last decade of the 20th and first decade of the 21st centuries, the days when telecommunications and computer technology was exploding? One after another, new wireless communications systems came on line that promised the business community as minority users and the retail public as the majority adopters ever more convenience, ever increasing “freedom,” and ever more connectivity? Then-current wireless applications remained in place, holding their spectrum allocations. The newly developed wireless applications, many of which in their earlier forms had used land line-based communications circuits, flooded onto the air behind the existing ones. And the country reveled in a radio frequency spectrum “bubble!”

Consumers were delighted with the new wireless developments, for they had just discovered a new “need” that they hadn’t previously recognized, and they saw that the new “need” could now be filled. “We need to be in ‘forever’ contact with our world, we need permanent personal connectivity, we NEED continuous, anywhere-anytime ‘broadband-to-the-belly-button service.’ And we demand it! Millions of us demand it!”

Industry was delighted. “Here are giant new markets to be filled! We can make huge ROIs right now, make our ‘bottom line’ in the next quarterly shareholders’ report look great, and all that we need to accomplish this is to grab some chunks of spectrum for our new products to use. Sure there are some capital costs for doing this, but these will be swept away in the ocean of revenue that will be flowing into us!”

The FCC was delighted too. “We can make some hefty chunks of change by auctioning off big blocks of spectrum, grab some press attention by posturing as a government agency that is turning a profit without having to tax, and make our Congressional sponsors look good to the public too! But — best of all — once we unload the spectrum we’ll no longer have to provide costly enforcement for it! We’ll be finished with that messy, distasteful business of sending our engineers into the field to keep the law in Dodge City. It will no longer be the people’s spectrum, so we won’t need to worry about it!”

Back in those halcyon days, the only group that wasn’t happy were the few remaining “spectrum conservationists” (including the Curmudgeon). They instinctively knew that once Yellowstone National Park was sold off to the giant housing-project developers, come what may it wouldn’t be Yellowstone any longer. It would be, for at least many decades to follow, “Levittstone Park.”

Similarly, once the spectrum is auctioned off, it no longer belongs to the public. Residing in private hands and with significant capital investments having been made to obtain it, this spectrum can never be “refarmed” and re-used for new technologies. If it has been purchased exclusively for data transmission by “wireless widgets” companies, it will forever be used for that purpose or for some linear commercial successor to “widget technology.” That spectrum is just not coming back into the reserve bank. The industry that bought it can’t afford to “return” it, and the public anyway won’t relinquish their smothering wireless telecommunications “cocoon” that is so ferociously addictive.

Thus it’s not going to be available for emerging wireless Services based on future new technology. And especially the small, vital, non-commercial spectrum users will be bid right out of the market; only the well-capitalized corporations will hold access to the radio frequency spectrum.

Only at that future time, as the hypothetical new medical monitoring system struggles to come on-line, will we as a nation have discovered that “we have squandered our birthright for a mess of pottage!” Of course, then we will cry “we could have….. should have….. would have…..” But, back in the early decades, we didn’t! And thus, as Stan Laurel would say ….”Here’s another foine mess you’ve gotten us into, Ollie!”

Personally, the Curmudgeon is really going to regret our collective failure. Twenty years from now, he’s going to be at just the age where he could have really benefitted from that new medical monitoring system!

So in a series of future blog postings, the Curmudgeon will explore what can and should be done to preserve our precious natural resource, the radio frequency spectrum. For the present, however, “this nightmare is concluded. You may now awaken and move about the cabin!”

What do you think?

“Let’s keep the universe safe for RF!”

Given the amazing success of this year’s World Moon Bounce Day, we are about to announce the date for the 2010 event and wish to not step on any toes regarding other events scheduling. We are looking to precede the Apollo 13 mission and thus a date in late March or early April. We have our eyes on one particular weekend that gives us the best opportunity for the coverage that we are after, but now is the time to raise your hand to let us know of any conflicts.

Although this was a totally amateur radio event in 2009, we are looking at commercial operators who maybe willing to work with us to do commercial tweets via the moon this year. We are even looking at bouncing a TV signal off the moon.

Please get back to me. Feel free to circulate this message to other boards.

Here are a couple of videos from the 2009 event to get you appetite going:

University of Tasmania 26m dish: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AHGXp4Afr4g

Swiss TV report: http://www.youtube.com/v/BUVoiEJd86s

Did you know that the Uni or Tasmania (Australia) and Dwingeloo (Neterlands) dishes did EME on 3mWatts of power during the event

Regards, Robert Brand
Global Events Manager for Echoes of Apollo

robert.brand@echoesofapollo.com
Many of our blog readers are amateur radio operators. This post was repeated from the Linked In Satellite Group for your information and feedback to the author. For the latest Satellite TV test equipment, check out http://www.lbagroup.com/technology/testcablesat.php  – LB, K4JRZ

LBA Technology now offer fully authorized factory calibration for the Tomco TE-1000 RF Impedance Analyzer in Greenville, NC (USA). For more information, please contact Marcian Bouchard at mbouchard@lbagroup.com

LBA asks the Old RF Curmudgeon “Now that the remaining analog TV nightlight stations have gone dark and the DTV transition fireworks are pretty much over, what is the success, or lack thereof, of the enterprise.  This event is important because it was a major field test of whether the general population can be successfully moved from old to new technology in a scheduled and relatively short time frame.”

To the Curmudgeon, we seem to have failed the transition test.  Although we did “pretty much” get the job done, we failed hugely in adequately preparing the public to understand and to deal smoothly and easily with the transition.  And while there is plenty of blame to go around, the Curmudgeon believes that the bulk of it belongs squarely with the FCC.

Here the FCC’s failure is not limited to the well-known “converter box coupon” foul-up.  That’s a substantial matter, but it’s not as fundamental as the Commission’s major failure to properly educate the public for the technology change, a failure of the “Katrina” class magnitude on the FCC measurement scale.  And it’s more than just lack of a “basic knowledge and understanding” program, it’s also an almost total failure to supply the public with useful and needed information.

What should the missing FCC educational program have been?  The Curmudgeon can envision it, as he spent a portion of his career as an educator.

To the *broadcasters*, the missing FCC program should have included the following elements:

1.  Understand well, Mr. Broadcaster, that in the ATSC era you will in all probability have less ERP, together with the simultaneous requirement for higher receiver signal strengths than existed during analog days.  Prepare yourself and your viewers for the consequences!

2.  Understand that today’s OTA viewers have sloppy receive antenna systems, mostly indoors, or if outdoors, probably corroded and underperforming from their being exposed to the atmosphere for several decades.  You have to help educate the consumers that they will need to check performance and plan upgrades.

3.  Understand the critical difference in building penetration between VHF high-band and UHF signals!  This is simple physics, but the GMs don’t know it.  They have to approve the final digital RF channel assignment.

4.  Give up on the traditional idea of “branding:” “We’re NBC-Channel 4, and we need to remain ‘Channel 4′ for our viewers!”  “NBC” is your brand, not “Channel 4.”  Channel 4 signals won’t exist any longer, “Channel 4.1″ has no physical meaning, and you’re going to be Channel 36!

5.  And don’t trot out the tired argument, “We need to keep some sort of analog going for our viewers who are too poor or too ignorant to follow us to digital, but who still need access to emergency information.”  Any technology transition loses some stragglers; that’s inevitable.  And the left-behinds will still have abundant access to another wonderful means of receiving emergency information: it’s called “radio!”

The FCC completely failed to address the fundamental problem that consumers have, which is that they no longer have any practical notion about how RF works and what it takes to make it work!  That wasn’t true fifty years ago, when there was little cable service and indoor antennas were almost unknown.  Then consumers “knew” that it took a VHF roof-top antenna to get a picture and they relatively easily worked through that issue.  Today even that modicum of basic knowledge has been lost; one young sales gal at a major television retailer honestly didn’t know whether a particular TV model could even accept an outdoor antenna!

To the consumers, the FCC education program should have included the following elements:

1.  Understand that some broadcasters will change (RF) transmitting channels in transitioning from analog to digital, and that many broadcasters will be transmitting with less power on digital.  If you are an OTA viewer, you will almost certainly need to upgrade your receiving antenna to accommodate the channel and power changes, regardless of whether you are using an ATSC receiver or a converter box.

2.  If you are using an indoor antenna, you may very well need to install an outdoor antenna in its place to ensure satisfactory reception.  Installing an outdoor antenna (either yourself or via a contractor) is not a major thing; it’s less troublesome, for example, than launching the space shuttle.

3.  In order to get the right kind of antenna for your needs, we the FCC (should) have published on our Web site a table of the TV broadcasters serving your community, their *actual* digital RF channels, and the approximate geographical location of their transmitters.  Note whether any of your broadcasters will remain in the Channels 2 – 6 block, and determine how many are within the Channels 7 – 13 (“VHF”) and 14 – 51 (“UHF”) blocks.  Then buy and install the appropriate antenna for your local needs.  NOTE:  THE FCC NEVER PUBLISHED THIS CONSUMER-CRITICAL INFORMATION!

To the FCC:

This matter of retaining the old analog channel numbers in the current broadcast PSIP is highly counterproductive and actually increases consumer confusion.  The US public can indeed process a “change” in their local stations’ transmitting channel numbers; they’ve done it already in using cable and satellite distribution systems!

In the Curmudgeon’s area, one station actually did change its PSIP ID on transition day to indicate its new RF channel…..and the Commission promptly ordered them to reset their PSIP back to the former analog channel!  On a different local channel, the PSIP still identifies the station’s former analog channel (as “XY.1″) despite this station’s having relocated its digital signal elsewhere.  But then a second station, which is actually now using the “XY” RF channel for its digital signal, has a test signal up bearing the PSIP “RF -XY.9.” Two different signals bearing the same PSIP ID!  Very confusing.

This situation is sheer stupidity, and there is no need whatsoever for secrecy in the RF channel assignments!  Dear FCC, after all the other transition mess is finally settled, set a “date certain” for every broadcaster simultaneously to switch its PSIP to its actual digital RF channel, and let’s have an end to this mess!  Give the broadcasters lots of time to publicize the RF channel identification switch, and be certain to remind everyone to “scan the channels the next morning, just one more time.”

FCC, trust the consumer with the information necessary for him to succeed.  “Education is expensive….but ignorance is even more expensive!”  And please FCC, let’s not go down this path again!

What do you think?

“Let’s keep the universe safe for RF”

The Old RF Curmudgeon

LBA asks the Old RF Curmudgeon how “being wired-in continuously” on hand held RF devices is affecting the (still) finite RF spectrum.

The Curmudgeon believes that, without necessary and sufficient prior consideration, the US is starting down a technological path which may well prove to be unfortunate, festooned with many unforeseen consequences. One wishes that some rational consideration would have been given prior to starting the journey, but with most of today’s consumer technology being driven almost entirely by free-market enterprise, “whatever can be done…..will be done” as long as a buck can be made.

The Curmudgeon is normally a big proponent of the use of the electromagnetic spectrum (i.e., radio) to do tasks that can’t easily be accomplished in other ways or, in some instances, couldn’t be accomplished in any other way. But not in this present case. There are too many liabilities waiting to arise.

He is speaking here of the on-going, uncritical mass public adoption of one- and two-way consumer-portable wireless devices, of which the iPhone is probably the signature icon. This does NOT include such specialized items as wireless medical monitors, industrial bar-code readers, mobile GPS navigators, and RFID tags. These special purpose wireless devices, along with many other similar items, have practical virtues and carry far less risk than does the new class of consumer-targeted devices.

These radio-based portable (i.e., routinely-carried-on-the-consumer) devices are intended to accomplish many contemporary telecommunications functions that previously were the province of stationary systems. Some of these new acceptances, most notably cellular telephones, have advanced to the point such that the devices are already in nearly universal usage. Others are just appearing on the scene: wireless Internet access, portable television receivers, text-messengers.

Now the Curmudgeon is not a technological Luddite; he well understands the engineering behind, and owns and uses many different pieces of electronic communications systems (in the broadest sense). But The Curmudgeon is both philosophically and practically opposed to the mass consumption of the radiofrequency spectrum by consumer-portable devices, and in some cases strongly opposed. Since nobody seems to want to present the case against them, he will herein present at least some of it.

1. Most importantly, the granting of “instant access directly to the person” through these devices — on what can easily become a continuous 7/24 basis—removes the possibility of maintaining an individual’s psychological “private space.” With these new devices in use there is no longer any “time out,” any chance to stop, to process information already received, to consider possibilities, to plan next-steps. The world becomes real-time, continuous, and without end. The distinction between “work time” and “leisure time” evaporates. Addictions (i.e., “can’t turn it off!”) begin, along with frustration as the individual begins to realize that the ceaseless incoming “data flood” can never be fully processed or mastered.

Most of the communications functions that are about to be adopted were handled previously by fixed, wired devices (i.e., corded telephones, desktop computers, in-home radio and television receivers) or, at most, in very limited ways by simple portable and mobile devices (car broadcast radios). One usually had to take very specific actions to use these, and if (s)he were away from the locations of the fixed devices, their use was deferred to a later time, almost always with very few negative consequences.

All this is about to vanish in less than an eye blink on the time scale of human evolution. The problem is…..the human brain evolves very slowly; it has no precedents or existing adaptations for the state of “being wired-in continuously.” The brain is probably is just now coming to grips with the previous generation of communications devices, and even for these there had been few earlier neural analogs when they were introduced. What is the brain to do with this massive new assault on a person’s private space? What unforeseen problems in human behavior lie ahead? Why weren’t these possibilities considered before we rushed ahead with even more technology “just because we can do it?”

2. The practical liability of the possession/use of these fully-portable devices is that they divert attention from a user’s local environment. If that environment happens to be a metropolitan street intersection, a busy highway, or even a farm tractor/combine, such diversion carries real risks. Significant injury to an individual can occur in just hundreds of milliseconds — sufficient time to avoid danger if one is attentive, or to suffer consequences if one is not.

Certainly not all portable devices are equally attention-diversive. Barcode readers, medical monitors, RFID readers carry almost no risk at all. One-way audio devices, such as broadcast radios, are probably only marginally risky. Slightly more risky would be some visual devices, such as mobile GPS receivers. Here, at least, the individual can choose his (occasional) viewing instants. More risky are the audio two-way devices, such as cell phones, that require little visual attention but do require mental participation in a conversation. At the highest risk level, in my opinion, are the two-way visual devices such as mobile television and text messaging, which foster both visual diversion and mental involvement. Some real thought should be given to consequences before these are made available to the general public.

3. Massive adoption of what are, in essence, portable broadband wireless digital stations inevitably requires massive use of the (still) finite RF spectrum. While new technologies generally lead to more efficient usage of each Hertz, there are “Tragedy of the Commons” limitations awaiting the complete consumption of the spectrum. What is to be done in the decades to come, as new (and perhaps compelling) wireless applications are developed, only to be shelved because of unavailability of usable spectrum? Should we not “save” today against tomorrow’s needs? Let’s use the RF spectrum for tasks that cannot be done any other way, and use our (nearly infinite bandwidth) wire line networks for those that can operate quite well without radio.

4. These portable wireless devices inevitably foster a feeling of “self-aggrandizement” on the part of their users, telling all that “I can make my presence, my skills, my expertise available anywhere, and at any time. I am thus an important person!” The Curmudgeon, however, believes differently. He is not a Public Safety officer, an emergency room physician, or a Supreme Court justice sitting on a convict’s appeal of a capital execution. There is nothing that he can do for another person *in real time* that carries any important consequences. Everything that he is able to do will not suffer from the delay of a few minutes or a few hours, or in some cases even a few days. There is almost always time to stop, to think, and to consider before action commences.

This is not to deny that there are times when real-time communications are absolutely required, and these portable devices can do that task well. But the Curmudgeon very much contends that the numbers of such occasions are not nearly as large as the number of instances when subscribers use their portable devices to make themselves feel self-important, for tasks that don’t even remotely require such real-time usage. Perhaps the difference between real need and self-aggrandizement usage amounts to orders of magnitude.

So the questions remain: What are the real costs, and the real consequences, of the mass adoption of these wireless, always-on-the-consumer communications devices? Is the Curmudgeon really the first to ask these questions?

What do you think?
“Let’s keep the universe safe for RF”

The Old RF Curmudgeon

If you haven’t discovered Linked In yet, click on over to it and sign up! You’ll find serious members from radio, TV, CATV, satellite and a host of connected industries. You are almost certain to find some of your colleagues already there and ready to network with you. This is way better than Facebook and “consumer” networking sites. You’ll find thousands of professional interest groups – SBE, SCTE, iNARTE and more. LBA sponsors Schomandl – Kathrein Test Users Group,  Radio-TV Broadcasting Transmission, and RF Environment Safety (RFES) groups. Get your Linked In membership (it’s totally free) and join our groups.

LBA asks: What do you think of the future of AM broadcasting as you see it today?

This one is emotional, of course.  After all, AM radio is one of the very oldest uses of the radio spectrum (beginning ~1919), as evidenced in part by the Medium Frequency band on which it began and still operates.  There isn’t much other remaining on-air activity that predates it on the spectrum, perhaps just the Maritime Service, a few Public Coastal stations (overseas telegrams), and the Amateurs.  AM broadcasting is one of Mother Spectrum’s first children, and it will be sad to see it go.

But it should go.  It’s been operating essentially unchanged through a turbulent period in the advance of technology and telecommunications, and it just doesn’t fit well any longer.  As a medium it can’t compete effectively, its audience is growing smaller, the economics are poor, and in the long run it’s probably best just to close it down, with appreciation and admiration, and to move forward.  The Curmudgeon will try to make that case.

By FCC mandate, for decades now the U.S. has been supplied with dual band AM-FM consumer radios.  Everyone in the US has access to the broadcast FM band; everyone appreciates the inherent quality advantage that FM (stereo) possesses.  AM’s declining market share and limited variety of programming amply indicate that fact.

There was once a time when broadcast AM radio signals reached far across the sparsely-populated countryside, bringing news and entertainment to isolated rural communities.  The existence of a dozen or so “clear channel” nighttime AM station assignments in those days ensured that everyplace in America could be “connected” to the major population centers in a way never before possible.

But not anymore.  The clear channel AM station assignments have long since passed into history.  Just about every burgh now has its own FM station, or can receive service from a nearby city.  Satellite radio can rain signals down onto almost every location in the continental US, bringing more programming and diversity on one carrier than exists on the entire AM broadcast band.  The Internet can provide world-wide radio programming in dizzying abundance.

So what is the current state of AM?  Let’s look at the engineering side first.  There have been no major improvements in the basic transmission system for perhaps seventy-five years.  Its old technical limitations still remain: restricted audio frequency bandwidth, no inherent noise immunity for reception, and an engineering nightmare in spectrum management because of the nighttime ionospheric propagation.  The VHF broadcast FM band has none of these.

And there’s not much hope for future AM improvement either.  Well, there is AM HD transmission (i.e., IBOC).  True, it does help close some of the performance gap with FM.  But IBOC, as it is currently practiced, really requires 20 kHz (occupied bandwidth) channels; just look at a spectrum analyzer to see for yourself.  So, if you want to “rescue” the AM band with IBOC, then plan to re-engineer the entire band on a 20 kHz channel raster.

From an economic viewpoint, AM cannot compete with FM in musical programming, which comprises the majority of the radio broadcast arena.  All AM programming now provides (typically) is news/sports/talk.  And all of these formats certainly would fit into FM just as well.  There really is nothing in AM programming that is unique any longer. Amos and Andy, along with the great networks, are now long gone.

It’s come to this: we just don’t need AM broadcasting any longer!  We can move forward quite well with terrestrial FM/satellite/Internet radio.  So, with many a tear bouncing off his desktop, the Curmudgeon says: Let’s just “sunset” it!  Let’s pick a date, perhaps fifteen to twenty years in the future, on which, with great nostalgia and fanfare, we will just turn it off.  The same way we should handle the future cessation of terrestrial television broadcasting.

And many of the same planning points will apply to the sunseting of AM radio as apply to terrestrial television.  The present broadcasters should receive accelerated depreciation tax credits for their transmission plants and the value of their licenses.  They also can expect handsome windfalls from the eventual sale of their transmitter sites, around which communities have grown.  These are now very valuable parcels of land!

But what about continuance of their programming, post sunseting?  Aha, technology to the rescue!  Their programming, the news/sports/talk channels, will fit quite nicely on the HD-2, HD-3 channels, etc., of city-of-license VHF-FM stations.  In fact, at least one major metropolitan all-news AM station has already begun simulcasting its entire main program stream on the HD-2 channel of a company-owned FM station in the same city.  Indeed, everything worth saving can be fit into FM HD.

Finally, once we will have “liberated” over one Megahertz of Medium Frequency spectrum, what in the world can we then do with it?  That question took some thinking on the part of the Old Curmudgeon, but at least one clear answer did finally emerge. 

With the wide land coverage area inherent in MF transmission, the “AM Megahertz” would be ideal for a broadband regional data distribution service for the Public Safety community!  What a wonderful asset it might become: the ability to push maps, photographs, drawings, and text messages out simultaneously to first responders everywhere, engaged in major disasters and emergencies!  And to do so in a way that no VHF/UHF/microwave system could do.  That alone is worth “the price of admission.”  Re-using the band for this purpose is almost “poetic:” after all, Public Safety one-way voice dispatch began, in the 1930s and 1940s, with the use of AM transmitters on channels just above the top end of the conventional AM broadcast band!

So let’s bid a sad farewell to AM broadcasting, with all the echoes of its past greatness.  We love you, we’ll remember you, but we’re moving forward now.

What do you think?

“Let’s keep the universe safe for RF”

The Old RF Curmudgeon

At the production test facilities of a major circuit fabricator, it was dance time – all the time!

This company fabricated garage door openers by the thousands, and put them through their paces on a neat row of test positions. The problem was, one tester would open his “door”, and his neighbor’s “door” would go down! A fun time, but terrible for production rates.

The problem was that the production test fixtures were hot with RF from the door opener transmitters on a common frequency, so were interacting with each other.

The frustrated quality control chief presented the problem to LBA Technology EMC engineers who were able to design a custom EMFaraCage™ that fit the existing test fixtures. Using an internal antenna probe, testing showed complete isolation of the test positions.

After LBA provided custom EMFaraCages™ for all the test fixtures, the dance of the garage door openers came to a stop!

EMFaraCages™ have solved problems of RF interference in some of the most unlikely places from lab animal cages to nuclear enrichment facilities to cell phone testers. LBA is anxious to tackle your RF shielding or isolation problem.

Ham radio commemorative QSO party, learn more here.

The MSK-200 TV Signal Analyzer combines the best of everything in measurement capabilities.  With the demands of the broadcast industry and new beginnings and unknowns with the DTV conversion, the MSK-200 is equipped to handle challenges today and tomorrow.  The MSK-200 comes out of the box with the ability to demodulate all DVB signals whether terrestrial, cable or satellite.  It analyzes both analog and digital signals and demodulates every standard.

I might add that the MSK-200 is a product of the renowned German technology firm Kathrein Werke, and is widely adopted in much of the world. LBA Technology is now exclusively bringing this Kathrein Schomandl excellence to DTV users in the Western Hemisphere.

Today, broadcasters demand functionality in a piece of test equipment across the board whether making spectrum, constellation, or transport stream analyses.  Traditionally, separate pieces of equipment were required to generate the desired results for each measurement type which is cumbersome, expensive and required professional operation driving up overhead costs on personnel and equipment.  Not anymore.  The MSK-200 is a full spectrum analyzer, constellation analyzer, transport stream monitor, picture quality analyzer, MER/BER analyzer, memory oscilloscope and desktop PC all in one at an affordable price.   Compared to its arch nemeses FSH3-TV and the ETL-TV by Rhode and Schwarz, the MSK-200 is ready to go out of the box, without the need of extra options to achieve needed measurements.  The FSH3-TV and ETL-TV would have to add on several expensive options to match the functionality of the MSK, and they cost more.  The MSK-200 comes included with a hard case which will run you about $1000.00 with Rhode and Schwarz.  Also the Rhode and Schwarz units do not have a full desktop computer with browser for office tasks.

For example, the FSH3-TV comes standard with DVB-T analysis.  If you need DVB-C, ATSC, 8VSB, you need to add an option.  If you need a preamp, you need another option, if you need QAM analysis, add an option.  Get my drift.  These are challenging times for broadcasters and now even more during this economic downtime, why limit their use and require costly additions.  Peace of mind can come in knowing everything is included in one and you are ready to go, and the MSK will not leave you wishing you had added that extra input or measurement option.

Another very unique feature of the MSK-200 the Rhode and Schwarz units do not have, is the DisEqC control of multiple antennas and LNB’s.   With 22KHz, Tone Burst, DiSEqC 2.0, and UFO Micro, the MSK-200 is separated in its own class.  The DiSEqC 2.0 allows for switching between 4 satellite sources and bi-directional communications.
The MSK-200 also has a 10.4” TFT Color Infrared touch screen and user friendly operation anyone can use right out of the box that will accommodate both left and right handed users.  In addition, in case users get stuck, a unique “HELP” function guides users easily.  It uses actual images of each button and a browser type layout with step by step instructions to give both verbiage and a visual representation shortening the learning curve and making it seem like surfing the web.  The neat thing about the “HELP” feature is that regardless what you are doing with the MSK, the “HELP” feature will display results for whatever operation the unit is conducting at that time which always determines the “stuck” point, or simply find what you want assistance with by scrolling through like your internet browser.  Ultimately, the MSK-200 will reduce overall equipment costs and precious personnel costs.

The MSK-200 also totes a Real Time Color Constellation Analyzer up to 400 mbps where the FSH-3TV is only at about 200.  The difference is the ability to spot every carrier, with color representation, where some may otherwise be missed.

While there are similarities with the MSK and Rhode units, there are differences as well.  It is these differences that set the MSK apart.

In addition to measurement option differences, the MSK-200 comes complete with every connection available.  It has 2 USB ports, Ethernet, PCMCIA, RF input, ASI in out (2BNC), Transport Current parallel ( 2 SUB-D ), PS2 input, RS-232 Mini Din 9-pin.

Use the PCMCIA slot to add your choice of WiFi, WiMAX, or cellular wireless data connectivity. With the on board browser, your MSK-200 integrates with your web or intranet based technical files anywhere, and troubleshooting collaboration with your other technical resources across the company or the world is instantaneous!

I’m Paulo Fernandes, your MSK-200 contact at LBA Technology Test Equipment Group. I would love to carry this conversation onward to your application! Please email me, or call me at 252-757-0279.

LBA now offers users the convenience of USB and Ethernet access to systems under test in its popular EMFaracage® electromagnetic shielded chambers. Fiber optic signal isolation requires no compromise to the faraday cage isolation, or to the data stream.

The picture shows an FC-10 lab top RF shielded chamber equipped with a wide bandwidth fiber appliance. Note the tubular waveguide which permits the egress of multiple fiberglass cables without isolation impact to above 6 GHz. A high isolation filtered AC power utility is also provided for operation of the internal fiber components, as well as to power the device under test and associated RF test equipment. The unit shown is convection cooled, but forced air cooling is an option, as is a glass viewport.

To learn more about LBA EMFaracages® and other RF electromagnetic shielding systems contact Paulo Fernandes at 252-757-0279 or via email.

In a breakthrough action, the Federal Communications Commission today authorized digital television stations to use DTS technology. Read more here.

The Schomandl/Kathrein MSK-200 Digital Transport Stream Analyzer has been generating lots of interest in the HDTV community. But there is another exciting capability of the MSK-200 – it also handles satellite applications!

The MSK-200 is an Analog and Digital analyzer covering 5 MHZ – 3GHz making satellite applications simple without compromising measurement capabilities.  The MSK-200 has a refresh rate of 5 sweeps per second and LNB Multimeter making dish alignment a breeze.   Also the MSK-200 features DiSEqC switching technology to handle multiple LNB’s.  The MSK provides functions such as signal to noise and Hum measurements, data logging and networking with its built in computer with browser, low resolution bandwidths for monitoring small carriers, channel selection in frequency entry, channel entry, and user lists, MER and much more.  The MSK-200 is a versatile device due to its size making portability possible even in the brightest conditions, allowing for remote control, and being loaded with bench-top measurement features.

As Account Executive for LBA’s Test Equipment Group, I’ll be glad to discuss your satellite system test needs. Just contact me, Paulo Fernandes, at email link or 252-757-0279.

Exciting things are happening for LBA Technology test equipment solutions customers!

German RF equipment manufacturer Kathrein and subsidiary Schomandl will exclusively distribute its radio frequency test equipment, including devices for digital TV, radio, wireless, CATV, satellite and laboratory use, through the RF systems expertise of LBA Technology, throughout the western hemisphere.

Read more here!

Radio frequency test equipment now offered by LBA includes instruments for digital TV, radio, wireless, CATV, satellite and laboratory use. The supply of this equipment in the Americas through LBA is fully supported by the entire Kathrein – Schomandl team!

Read more here!

The 2008 annual PCIA Wireless Show is now in progress. If you are in the Southern Florida area, please stop by and visit our booth #705, located at the Westin Diplomat Resort and Spa in Hollywood, FL and visit with our President of Lawrence Behr Associates, Inc., Mr. Silver Miller. Learn, first-hand the latest developments in AM colocation, RF safety management, and AM protection.

LBA asks: So many of those in our industry are amateur radio operators, including staff at LBA, that we asked the Old RF Curmudgeon to come out of his den and give us a read on the health of ham radio today.

The Amateur Radio Service has an almost unduplicated position for a recreational activity/leisure time pursuit because of its historically tight coupling to the wireless telecommunications, broadcasting, and military communications industries.  Few other hobbies have supplied such a sizeable number of both motivated and trained workers and of useful technological improvements to their associated commercial industries.

There was once a time in the industry when it would have been routinely assumed that an applicant for a technical job was a licensed Amateur and had a station on-air.  No longer is that true, of course.   But, whether or not most people in the industry explicitly recognize it, the health and survival of the Amateur service is still very important for the industry – if for no other reason, because Amateur radio is one of the few remaining services where an individual can still develop practical, hands-on, trial-and-error RF experience on his own!  And since such practical RF experience is becoming scarce in today’s raging digital flood, that’s not a small concern.

In the Curmudgeon’s view the health of the Amateur Service today is only average.  Not robust but just “so-so,” a kind of flabby middle-age.  And that is ironic, for the level of RF technology available to the Service has improved tremendously in the fifty years since the Curmudgeon earned his first license.  But during these decades the sociology associated with the Service has degraded considerably.  That degradation extends to licensees’ on-air behavior, to their motivation and interest to learn and to experiment, and to their willingness just to “lend a hand” to benefit others, whether in helping new initiates to qualify for licenses or in public service activities.

Today’s Amateur Service is not your grandfather’s hamming.  “Yep, Bubb, it really was more fun back then!”  Too many of today’s active hams are too disinclined to pick up a soldering iron, too egocentric in their on-air operating practices, too focused on artificially-produced competitiveness when cooperation would work equally as well.  The character of the Service has degraded over the decades, perhaps tracking that of the larger American culture, and the obvious question is “Why?”

The Curmudgeon ascribes the sociology problem to two causes, one natural and one man-made.  The natural cause is the ageing-out of the senior ham population and with that the demise of some semblance of historical understanding, experience, and quality in the ranks.  That of course is unstoppable.  The man-made cause is something that the Curmudgeon now has to admit that he erred in initially favoring.  That was the restructuring of the FCC license exam process as manifested by the establishment a few years ago of the “No Code” Amateur Radio licenses (i.e., no requirement to demonstrate ability to send/receive the International Morse Code, plus other unrelated changes).

Prior to the advent of restructuring, earning an Amateur license probably required more than the amount of work and dedication that would have been proportional to the reward, and thus the arduous licensing requirements overly restricted the entrance of new participants.  Now the qualifications for the restructured Amateur licenses are probably set too low, and this has resulted in the influx of telecommunications consumers and casual hobbyists in quantities that threaten to seriously change the nature of the Service. 

To be fair, the elimination of the code proficiency requirement itself was inevitable; it was a change that occurred in the same time period when Morse Code was also being dropped as an authorized emissions mode for other (commercial) radio services.  By itself “No Code” is probably not sufficient to account for all the degradation.  Rather, the Curmudgeon believes that the open publication of the license exam question pool, with its “just cram for the exam” ethic, and the concurrent rise of commercial “Amateur exam quick study courses” of various kinds has created much of the damage. 

Just consider the advertisements for the nascent “FCC Amateur exam preparation industry.”  In one case an entrepreneur advertises that an individual can go from zero telecommunications knowledge to passing the (entry level) Technician Class exam in a one-weekend “camp!”  In another case an individual possessing the entrance grade license reported that he successfully passed the (highest level) Extra Class exam after just twelve hours of study using an on-line (for profit) Web site.  There are testimonials also from individuals who claimed to have passed all three current levels of license exams from scratch in the course of only two months, using the various exam preparation services!  These rapid time scales and minimal work loads were unknown in the Service prior to restructuring. 

But perhaps the most telling example of the lowered level of the current exams involves an English ham…a chap who is a graduate engineer and a long-time holder of the highest level UK ham license.  Recently he attended a UK national ham convention where he unexpectedly discovered that the US Amateur license exams were being given.  With no preparatory studying whatsoever, never having ever read the FCC’s Part 97 Rules, and acting strictly on impulse, he instantly decided to take the US exams.  Ninety minutes later he departed with a new US Amateur Extra Class license!  A “special case,” of course, but what does it say about the quality of the current exams?

The Curmudgeon asks, “Where is the growth of skills and knowledge that comes with invested time, experience, and dedication to the Service, producing as a natural consequence the ever-increasing ability to pass the exams?  Where are the proven benefits from this new license structure to the Amateur Service?  To the industry?  Isn’t this just more instant gratification for the ‘I want it….and NOW!’ crowd?”  And so the culture and quality of the Service shift and continue to move over time. 

Overall, this is a serious problem, and there aren’t any quick and easy solutions.  Much of any reform that may occur will have to come from within the Amateur Service itself.  But there is a definite role for the industry in the pursuit of this reform: recognizing, encouraging, supporting, and demanding the improvement of the Amateur Service!  Not solely as a pro bono initiative; it’s really in the self-interest of the industry too!

What do you think?

“Let’s keep the universe safe for RF!”

The Old RF Curmudgeon

LBA asks: There has been a lot of activity recently among FM broadcasters, what with adding IBOC digital, more transmitting power and station upgrades for better coverage. Knowing your “RF sensitivity”, where is all this going for our spectrum?

One day not too long ago I happened to have my spectrum analyzer connected to the outside discone broadband antenna.  Out of curiosity I scanned the entire first GigaHertz of the RF spectrum, curious to see who had the strongest RF signal into my house.  It turned out to be a pair of FM broadcasters.  So I then focused in on the FM broadcast band spectrum.

I quickly discovered two FMs who jointly held the top signals.   I measured received signal levels from each station of -16 dBm.  These two are the strongest measured off-premises signals at my residence between 0 and 1,000 MHz, and probably in the entire RF spectrum.   When that signal level is developed across a 75 ohm receiver input, it produces more than 43,000 microvolts! 

Few, if any, non-broadcast broadband receiver front ends are going to handle a signal of that magnitude without folding into compression.  It’s no wonder that my sensitive monitoring receivers on outdoor antennas curled up and died whenever they were tuned to within a few tens of Mhz of the FM broadcast band.  That grossly excessive received signal level is really needed only for receiving broadcasts on electric toothbrushes! 

I then went to the FCC Media Bureau database to determine just what transmission conditions these two stations were authorized.  And I discovered, after some data analysis, that great changes had recently occurred in the FM authorizations in my market. 

First, both of these “top signal stations” are now authorized 50 kW ERP.  Both are atop the same six hundred foot tower whose primary use is as an AM (ND) antenna.  The tower is located on flat land, line of sight to my driveway, three miles due south, and in the middle of a long-established residential area.  But there is no rational purpose in using this great a power level in my area, since VHF signals are always blocked by existing terrain before they can decrease to the noise level at far distances.

The primary FM had always been a twin of the co-sited AM, but it appeared that the FM had recently received a power increase authorization.  The second FM had been first established at an mountaintop broadcast site but had moved down to the ground and in doing so picked up about another 10-13 dB in authorized ERP.

Two more established FMs had moved their locations to another pair of AM towers, these only four miles distant from my house, and also had been granted 50 kW ERP each.  So the game became clear to me:  relocate to a tower on the ground, receive big ERP increases, and be able to sell air time to your clients on the basis that they are buying onto a “dominating 50 kW signal!”

Also, almost all of the other local FMs had separately moved to the premiere established broadcast hill and all picked up additional ERP; the average now from that hill (about ten miles away from my house and also line of sight) is about 30 kW.

But one dirty little secret remains.  The local FM NCEs don’t have that gross power level.  They kick out with an average 2 kW ERP.  AND NO LISTENERS EVER COMPLAIN THAT THE NCEs  “CAN’T BE HEARD!”

So the commercial broadcasters are all pumped up with “superpower” ERP authorizations, and non-broadcast VHF receivers all over the region are being squished.  And for what?  What’s the point?  Where’s the ecological regard for “Mother RF Spectrum?”

We have lots of RF power in the region producing bone-crusher signals that go nowhere.  Lots of primary electrical power being consumed for transmitters and A/Cs in a region noted for continuing power insufficiency.  Lots of imported oil, domestic coal and natural gas being burned to generate lots of electricity.  Lots of carbon dioxide and nitrogen oxides spewing into the atmosphere.  But just what do we get for all this waste?  The Curmudgeon can’t see the point in it.

Media Bureau, do you have any idea what you are doing?

The “fix” to my receiver desensitization problem was fairly easy, even if it came at my own expense.   A commercial FM band-stop filter, working ahead of a broadband distribution amplifier and the multiple monitoring receivers, solved the problem.  The filter has a minimum of 22 dB attenuation from 88 to 108 MHz, and a notch of 45 dB at one of the -16 dBm carriers.  My monitoring receivers can handle FM band signals in the range of -40 to -50 dBm without folding.  I can hear VHF aircraft band once again!  The receiver blanketing is essentially gone!

For many years I unquestioningly believed that “bigger outdoor antennas were better antennas.”  Finally I measured actual received signal levels.  And I discovered that the real problem was far too much RF in the air over my residence, not too little!

“Let’s keep the universe safe for RF!”

          The Old RF Curmudgeon

LBA Technology has restructured its operations to include a new Test Equipment Group. The new group will take responsibility for existing test products manufactured or sold by LBA. It is also in the process of activating major new third party test equipment distribution agreements under the Group.

According to Jerry Brown, President of LBA Technology, “Our rapidly expanding test equipment business has gone beyond our traditional business core. We think it makes a lot of sense to divide it into a Test Equipment Group and an RF Systems Group for best service to our customers and vendors”.

The new Test Equipment Group will include state of the art antenna testers, digital TV signal analyzers, personal RF safety monitors, EMF shielded laboratory enclosures and related components. Product lines will include TOMCO, Jennings, and COMET. The Group will focus on exclusive distribution of top line international manufacturers in the North and South American markets.

LBA has pioneered solutions that permit cellular, PCS and 4-G providers to use AM broadcast towers as antenna platforms. The CoLoCoil™ is one of the LBA proprietary AM colocation solutions widely used by major carriers. The CoLoCoil™ safely separates AM and wireless operations, and isolates both directional and non-directional AM towers from impacts of the wireless carrier coax installation.

AM towers frequently have been located in the heart of densely populated areas for years. Often these towers require little or no rezoning to accommodate wireless antennas! Read more about RF zoning strategies in our Wireless University.

Installation of the CoLoCoil™ solution can be seamlessly planned and supervised by LBA, including all AM station coordination and FCC details.

Pictured above is LBA account executive Cathy Scott at our plant with a dual CoLoCoil™ system recently shipped to Indiana. This system will isolate 12 coaxial lines onto a single AM tower. The system will be installed on a 5000 watt directional AM tower by Bechtel Telecommunications for AT&T Wireless. LBA will provide on-site supervision and testing.

When wireless antennas must be installed on a tower near AM antennas, LBA can provide Detuning Systems that make the wireless tower compatible with the AM antenna.
 

*** If you are new to The Old Curmudgeon series, read the previous blog for a brief introduction.***

LBA asks - “Well, RF Curmudgeon, what do you say to this RF interference and spectrum pollution from the nifty LED devices popping up everywhere? Why I can’t drive through an intersection without LED traffic lights blanking out my FM! And don’t get me started about the LED billboards! Maybe my memory fails (it’s been so long) but didn’t the FCC enforce spectrum purity when we were kids?”

As to your LED transmitter observation, I have only a UHF two-way radio in my car, so I haven’t noticed the “LED effect” on VHF high band.  We have plenty of LED traffic lights in my area, so that part of the equation is in place.  And don’t forget about all those red LEDs in automobile tail lights now.  I haven’t noticed anything from the LEDs directly on FM broadcast channels either, including IBOC stations, but that’s more a reflection of our having such strong broadcast signals in my area of the country.

In answer to your other observation, yes, the FCC doesn’t give a twiddly-damn about the RF spectrum or its purity.  I think that this trend started well over a decade ago, and it is fueled by two deeply-held policy positions within the Commission.  First, they badly want to get out of the regulatory enforcement business.  They don’t get any major brownie points or funding from Congress for running the Field Enforcement Bureau (or whatever it’s called now), spectrum enforcement is a bottomless pit for them, and it’s a never-ending chore.  They would rather auction the spectrum off and tell the happy purchaser, “You look after the cleanliness of *your* bands!  We’re outta here!” 

The second is the deeply-held regulatory notion that “cellular transmission” with its concurrent frequency re-use is the highest and best use of the spectrum.  If you do cellular, you don’t have to worry too much about the ambient noise level as the transmitters are always fairly proximate to the users.  The cellular regulatory model is at work not only in public land mobile, but also in private land mobile (where it’s very difficult to get new PLMRS licenses for wide-area mountaintop or major tower stations, and if you do get one about the most station you can then run is “walkie talkie” power levels.  And in broadcasting (LPFMs and LPTVs, which also conveniently use up all available channel slots).  And in unlicensed consumer Part 15 wireless LANs.  “Et cetera, et cetera, et cetera,” as the King of Siam would say.

Don’t know whether you caught it at the time, but a few years ago the Commission floated an NPRM which proposed to *allow* interference sources onto licensed channels (in this case, microwave), using a concept known as the defined “Interference Temperature!”  The idea was that “smart radios” in the interference generator source would “know” when the source had gone one bridge too far and would then shut itself down.  Lacking that degree of equipment capability by the interferers, the licensee of the channel could always monitor and scream when the measured “interference temperature” rose past established limits. 

The industry quickly shot that *^@(&^ idea down!

So, driven by these two philosophical points, the Commission now says, “Please proceed to trash the spectrum with lots of unlicensed low power devices, singing power lines, chirping power meters, high speed digital logic with femtosecond switching times (I exaggerate, but not by much!), screeching LEDs.  We don’t care, and we don’t enforce the law here in Dodge City any longer!”

As soon as some clever businessman figures out a use for the 4 degrees Kelvin cosmic microwave background radiation, it too will be quickly licensed and eventually auctioned off. 

You and I, being old timers in this art and science, understand the invaluable resource that the RF spectrum represents and we respect it and we do what we can to maintain it in good working shape.  The Commission, especially in later years, has been directed and run by lawyers, economists, and politicians who don’t know the physics behind electromagnetic transmission, have none of the “vision thing” for the future non-economic uses for which quiet spectrum could be employed, and consider the spectrum mostly as an exploitable economic good.  What would you expect?

Adding to this outrage, there is too much transference of communications today from wired to wireless modes.  Most people don’t really need “Web service to the belly-button!”  Now my eleven year-old granddaughters are getting their own cell phones.  Give me a (&#%$@& break!

Many, many services could be well and cheaply provided by wire, if we just had a broadband Universal Fiber Network in this country.  But that’s yet another Commission failure in the “vision thing.”  The Asians and perhaps the Europeans will “clean our clocks” on this failure alone.

So, sayonara RF spectrum, my dear old love!  I will always remember you as you were in those long-ago days when you were still young, fresh, and beautiful.

“Let’s keep the universe safe for RF!”

The Old RF Curmudgeon