RFI
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [RFI] VDSL (very-high-bit-rate digital subscriber line)

To: <rfi@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [RFI] VDSL (very-high-bit-rate digital subscriber line)
From: "WW3S" <ww3s@zoominternet.net>
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2014 19:18:00 -0400
List-post: <rfi@contesting.com">mailto:rfi@contesting.com>
I have a 3L Steppir on a 50ft tower with a hazer.....as soon as I put the 
antenna up, I had interference complaints from the neighbor....never mind the 
fact I didnt have a transmitter connected....due to high winds, at times I 
crank the antenna down, to abt 18ft.......I can operate all day and night with 
that antenna cranked down (it’s aimed right at my neighbors satellite dish) and 
never get a complaint, but crank the antenna up, and the phone rings, “are you 
on the air, my tv is breakingup” (and no, I’m not on the air when that 
happens)....

> On 4/23/2014 5:39:34 PM, Rob Atkinson (ranchorobbo@gmail.com) wrote:
> > All well and good working with ARRL and neighbors but hams need to
> grow spines and quit tucking their tails between their legs and
> capitulating to neighbors who due to irrational psychology, seem to
> think watching TV or some other appliance use is a birthright, but ham
> radio is just an optional play-time activity with some toys.
> 
> This comes out for example with antennas, and the deplorable use of
> hidden "stealth" antennas to appease neighbors, as if the ham is in
> the Resistance in WW2 or is engaged in some illegal activity, or has a
> spy station.   It is exceedingly disappointing that the use of these
> antennas is promoted in ham magazines such as CQ and QST, complete
> with glowing reports of satisfied owners, as if these are excellent
> and satisfactory antennas in the fullest sense.  If I were counsel
> representing plaintiffs against a ham, all I would need to do is round
> up dozens of these articles and present them to a jury and I'd easily
> win.  I am absolutely nonplussed every time QST or CQ hands
> municipalities yet another article to use against us.  Every one of
> those articles should carry a prominent disclaimer to the effect that
> these antennas are most unsatisfactory and are only presented to be
>
_______________________________________________
RFI mailing list
RFI@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rfi
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>