'Radar Jammer [OT]( was Cellphone Blocking.)'
> It seems to me that the FCC is using some mighty "fuzzy" (in the
> sense!) logic in their arguments in this document!
> For one thing, they never seem to address why Rocky Mountain's
> that the device doesn't radiate RF between 9kHz and 3GHz is wrong,
> just say that it is wrong.
I think the confusion is in the area of how it is generating and
emitting a signal. The key to this is the mixer and associated resonant
metal work. Although the device doesn't contain an externally powered
oscillator as a source of energy it does contain the mixer which can use
incoming RF energy as its power source to generate a signal which the
waveguide/antenna then re-radiates.
> Also, They seem to turn the consultant's words upsidedown. Rocky
> says that their device doesn't generate or radiate any energy. The
> consultant seems to agree,by saying that the only RF component is a
> diode, so it can't radiate any energy on its own, it needs an external
> source. The FCC then says that the consultant's statement actually
> with them and contradicts Rocky Mountain, with no logical statement
They do explain why. The mixer, waveguide, matching device and antenna
are all RF components.
Rocky Mountain had claimed that there were NO RF components in their
product. Their consultant modified this by identifying the parts listed,
which is in agreement with what the FCC were saying.
The Rocky Mountain consultant tested the device without any incoming RF
This more than a little disingenuous since the whole point of the device
(and presumably the thrust of the sales pitch) is that it is intended to
operate on the radiated signal of a speed trap.
It's rather like concluding that a CB radio isn't a transmitting device
because you haven't connected it to any power supply.
What the components concerned do is draw power from an incoming signal
and use this power to excite the cavity containing the mixer diode etc.,
forming what is in effect a radiating oscillator.
It is obviously fatuous for the manufacturers to suggest that the thing
is incapable of emitting a signal because that is exactly what the thing
is supposed to do. If it didn't then presumably Rocky Mountain would be
prosecuted under some consumer protection law for selling the modern
equivalent of snake oil.
No, much as it pains to admit it, I have to say the FCC seem to have it
right in this case.
More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2000
, 2001 only
- New search...