|
|
|
2326
|
eHam Forums / Antenna Restrictions / This Restriction Takes The Cake
|
on: December 07, 2003, 01:16:16 PM
|
|
Sorry, the restriction on TV antennas (and also applies to direct broadcast satellite TV antennas) is preempted by Federal regulations and unenforceable. As far as other outside antennas, gotcha!
As to radio stations, if you have an attic antenna and a valid Amateur license, they can go pound sand. The FCC and ONLY the FCC have the statutory rights to license and regulate radio transmissions.
Dennis - KG4RUL
|
|
|
|
|
2328
|
eHam Forums / Antenna Restrictions / MY tower
|
on: November 27, 2003, 02:34:52 PM
|
|
It all depends on local zoning, and CC&Rs, if any. Blanket statements, such as you quoted, do not cover all contingencies.
Dennis - KG4RUL
|
|
|
|
|
2330
|
eHam Forums / Computers And Software / TS-2000
|
on: November 13, 2003, 01:50:05 PM
|
|
I am currently working on a DOS based control program for the TS2000. The first phase is a "exerciser" program which I am using to debug my code modules for accessing each avilable CAT command.
When these modules are done, I will combine them under a DOS, Text based user interface to create the finished control program. Ths finished program will provide all the capabilities of the Kenwood control program along with memory control capabilities.
The user interface will work with both a keyboard only and a mouse/keyboard. The interface is being designed for CGA capabilites to make it viable for low end DOS PCs and laptops. I will also test it using MS WIN98 SE running as an MSDOS machine from bootup (not a DOS window).
I will make this available as freeware. Further announcements of availibility will be forthcoming.
Program development is being done in Turbo Pascal 7.0, Async Professional library for serial communications, and TurboJock for Objects for the user interface.
Dennis - KG4RUL
|
|
|
|
|
2331
|
eHam Forums / Antenna Restrictions / Undisclosed CC&Rs
|
on: November 06, 2003, 03:31:08 PM
|
|
K4NR Writes:
================= Dennis,
The REALTOR and broker have a primary responsibility to his or her principal. If you had a "buyers agent", he or she should be watching out for your best interest. If that did not happen, you hired the wrong agent.
I do alot of work with hams and I go out of my way to go to the courthouses and pull documents to check for CC&Rs for my clients. I have copies of the various city / county regulations and I know of a local ham lawyer who is always willing to help out.
Don't knock all of us just because you hired the wrong person.
===============
Because "I" hired the WRONG person!!! When I hire a person who has "Realtor" after his or her name, I expect that person is in fact a competent professional! What would you suggest buyers try, interviewing Realtors with a rubber hose until they find an honest one? This is another example of "self policing" turning out to be BS, while State regulators seem to be totally indifferent to user complaints
As far as bad Realtors: when we bought a condo in San Diego, I directly asked the Realtor if the developer had any current legal actions against him, she looked me in the face and FLAT LIED!!! She didn't qualify the statement in any way, she just said NO! She in truth, had two previous clients who were currently suing him for the VERY SAME things that were later found deficient in our building.
Developers and Realtors are like an Evil Cabal. I trust them as far as I can throw them!
Sorry for the rant, but, that is the way I feel
Dennis - KG4RUL With apologies to none.
|
|
|
|
|
2332
|
eHam Forums / Antenna Restrictions / Undisclosed CC&Rs
|
on: October 31, 2003, 09:00:27 AM
|
|
If there is one Lawyer or "Real Estate Professional" left on this planet, there is ONE TOO MANY! I am ready to move Realtors and Lawyers to a tied, top position on my list of "Least Liked & Respected People", just above Used Car Salesmen.
When we close on our house, I was out of town on business and had to leave my Wife with power-of-attorney for the transaction. At the closing, she was presented with a copy of the CC&Rs that was at least fifth generation and all but unreadable.
Additionally, she was given a plat for the lot that indicated two easements. Prior to that point, all copies of the plat had NO INDICATION of these items. IN FACT, upon closer examination, you could discern that they had been removed with whiteout and re-copied.
Our legally required attorney said that he was only there to protect the State in the transaction. The Title company and Realtor couldn't have cared less, they were only there to collect there fees.
Had I been there, we would have walked.
The next house I buy, it will be in a state where Lawyers are not legally required and, I will be my own Realtor. Hopefully, I can trust myself.
Dennis - KG4RUL
|
|
|
|
|
2333
|
eHam Forums / Digital / packet to internet gateway...
|
on: October 02, 2003, 08:36:29 AM
|
|
You did say "surf the web" in your initial post.
Even if your are accessing your home TCP/IP network, the rules still apply: No commercial content, no objectionable content, etc.
Even if you could control that aspect, you still have to deal with the potential for unauthorized access to your home system.
BTW: Encryption is specifically forbidden by FCC Regs. so, you could not protect info that way.
Burning your info onto a CDROM seems like the best approach for you.
Dennis - KG4RUL
|
|
|
|
|
2334
|
eHam Forums / Antenna Restrictions / The other side of the fence...
|
on: September 26, 2003, 10:26:57 AM
|
|
You seem to have touched most bases but, here are a few other angles to be considered:
1) Ask for proof of the sponsoring organization's non-profit status. Insist that the variance be conditional on maintaining that status. Also, if the usage becomes non-conforming, a specific time frame for abatement must be specified.
2) Another engineering aspect to be considered is, RF exposure calculations. Who is going to do them and certify them?
3) Is the tower going to be conforming with regards to aircraft safety? The application should include statements that all applicable FCC regulations have been met.
4) DEMAND that this installation be certified by a licensed Engineer! This is NOT a tree house that he is building (though in some areas, they require the services of an architect to be erected but, that is another story).
5) INSIST that the property line setbacks be maintained!
6) Since he has begun construction WITHOUT necessary permits, will the City be admonishing and, preferably, be fining him?
Good Luck!
Dennis - KG4RUL
|
|
|
|
|
2339
|
eHam Forums / Antenna Restrictions / Operation within 1 block of Hospital??
|
on: September 13, 2003, 11:50:51 AM
|
|
There are hospitals, often being some of the highest buildings in an area, that have a literal forest of antennas, of all types and frequencies. Some even have HF antennas. I don't believe that antennas a block away are going to be any more significant than those.
Dennis - KG4RUL
|
|
|
|
|
2340
|
eHam Forums / APRS / Compaq Ipaq - Bluetooth - Alinco DR-135TP
|
on: September 05, 2003, 02:37:12 PM
|
|
It would seem to be feasible to connect a Bluetooth RS232 port device to a TNC equipped mobile rig and send commands/date from your BT enabled Compaq. The communications between the Bluetooth devices is 2.4GHz and essentially unlicensed but, it is above 220Mhz so it should make the FCC happy. If the TNC is sending your call at the proper intervals as part of the packet/APRS data stream, the ID requirements are met. I would say to give it a try and report the results back to this thread.
Dennis
|
|
|
|
|
Loading...
|