Subject: [NEXTEL-1] RE: 800 MHz interference - Public Safety's 'Silent Danger]

From: Marcelrf <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2004 16:45:38 -0500

-------- Original Message --------
   From: "Art Snapper" <[email-masked]>
Subject:  RE: 800 MHz interference - Public Safety's 'Silent Danger

The FCC acted irresponsibly, and we have been paying for it ever
since!  Art Snapper NK8X
[email-masked]

     ----- Original Message -----
     From: Sean O'Hara
     Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2004 3:56 PM
     Subject:  RE: 800 MHz interference - Public Safety's 'Silent
     Danger

      Jason, It is just not that easy, and the main reason is that
     Interference is NOT well defined.  What if some PS radio's are
     prone to intermod? Is the Commercial folks responsible for
     receiver generated intermod?  We never has these kinds of near
     far issues before - but you can bet that we will and it will
     continue to get worse. Do you think that that the prospect of
     sporadic fines will make an effective enough market case to
     warrant making massive changes to Commercial infrastructures?
     As with all business, it is cheaper to wait until damage is
     done then fix the problem.  For that matter, after-the-fact
     fines do not help in instances where the first sign of
     interference is the one that leads to loss of life or
     property.  It is better to be proactive. What we are proposing
     will partition technologies and designs into different pieces
     of spectrum.  They are so very many reasons to do this.  It
     may be painful, but if we do not do it, then the problems will
     perpetuate and grow.  This is not a time for band aids and
     reactionary solutions. And please, no matter how you feel
     about this one issue, keep your APCO card.  Just express your
     opinion to the officers, and be willing to hear their side of
     the story also. Regards, Sean ----- Original Message -----

          From: coralgables680
          Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2004 3:07 PM
          Subject: RE: 800 MHz interference - Public Safety's
          'Silent Danger
           Sean,
          If commercial carriers were held responsible
          (getting fined) for
          causing interference, what do you want to bet we
          wouldn't have these
          problems?  I'm getting this wierd and, frightening
          sense here that
          APCO honestly believes it's not possible for
          commerce to operate
          without causing interference.

          Doesn't anyone from APCO remember 800 MHz before
          iDEN?  Did we have
          these problems with GEMARC, LTR and, Smartnet
          Systems that were
          dispatching cabbies, tow trucks and, septic tanker
          suckers?   No we
          didn't.  Why is everyone assuming this how business
          gets done?
          Regards,
          Jason Swift
          Once again...  On his own... Not speaking on anyone
          else's behalf...

          For that, my respect for them, especially Vincent
          Stile, has grown
          tremendously.  I am proud to carry my membership
          card.
          Regards,
          Sean
          PS: By the way, note the article that Jason has
          mentioned below.
          Under the Balanced approach once the problem was
          identified it is
          fixed.  What if it takes the death of a first
          responder for the
          problem to be identified (before it gets fixed)?
          Under the Consensus
          approach it would be fixed BEFORE IT BECAME A
          PROBLEM