[Lowfer] "State of the Art" Medfer Antenna

[Bill Ashlock]

Thanks John.

> Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2011 20:12:01 -0500
> From: w1tag at charter.net
> To: lowfer at mailman.qth.net
> Subject: Re: [Lowfer] "State of the Art" Medfer Antenna
> 
> Bill,
> 
> The "Medfer" issue is a little different than the "Lowfer" one. Any 
> number of people have set up small broadcasting operations and covered 
> neighborhoods in cities by bending the "Medfer" rules. Because such 
> things can sometimes draw flies, the FCC has inspected some of them. So, 
> there is a definite track record in that category, and in every case, 
> the rules have been strictly interpreted, according to all reports.
> 
> But, as always, I doubt very much that non-broadcasting operations would 
> be likely to attract <<any>> attention.
> 
> This topic has been beaten to death too many times in the past. Can we 
> possibly just let it be?
> 
> John Andrews, W1TAG
> 
> On 12/7/2011 7:32 PM, Bill Ashlock wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Todd,
> >
> > I looked into some of the Part15.us site info and find nothing specific to the antenna restrictions you identified below. Can you point to any restrictions covered on these sites to make my search less time consuming?
> >
> > Part 15 regulations for the antenna are exactly the same for the Lowfer and Medfer bands with the exception of the max  total antenna length. 15 Meters for Lowfer and 3 Meters for Medfer. I do not agree that a counterpoise is not permitted as I believe it can be considered to be the "ground". In fact one of the U-tube videos shows an installation on a rooftop that has a ground system that pretty much qualifies as a counterpoise ground. Other U-tube videos show top hats that I believe you feel are not allowed. I have been involved with Lowfer and Medfer operations for over 12 years and have never heard of an "FCC inspector".
> >
> > Please clarify for all of us.
> >
> > Bill
> >
> >> From: ToddRoberts2001 at aol.com
> >> Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2011 22:12:19 -0500
> >> To: lowfer at mailman.qth.net
> >> Subject: Re: [Lowfer] "State of the Art" Medfer Antenna
> >>
> >> In a message dated 12/6/2011 7:44:59 P.M.  Eastern Standard Time,
> >> ashlockw at hotmail.com writes:
> >> Todd,
> >>
> >> I think that  a good many of us are interested in where you obtained the
> >> below information. It  most certainly differs from my understanding of what is
> >>   allowed.
> >>
> >> Bill
> >>
> >> Hi Bill, most of the info on part 15 AM broadcast  band antennas and
> >> grounds
> >> I have came from several LPAM websites like  Part15.us and Radio Brandy
> >> and from several part 15 transmitter  manufacturers like SSTran and
> >> Rangemaster.
> >>
> >> They mostly agree that to  comply with FCC rules part 15.219 the
> >> transmitter should be mounted on or  close to the ground, the antenna
> >> is usually a copper pipe about 1/2 to 1 inch  in diameter with no tophat
> >> and the ground lead should be no more than a few  inches in length.
> >>
> >> I made a mistake on the antenna length - I forgot that  the rules now say
> >> the
> >> total length of the antenna, transmission line and  ground lead should be no
> >> longer than 3 meters, not ten feet! I believe 3  meters works out to around
> >> 9 1/2 feet.
> >>
> >> Any ground system that is above  ground would be considered by an FCC
> >> inspector
> >> to be a radiating ground. So  the transmitter should not be mounted high
> >> above ground on a pole or with  elevated radials as they would be
> >> considered a
> >> radiating ground.
> >>
> >> Ultimately though it is the FCC inspector that would make the final
> >> decision,
> >> but any 3 meter antenna with a top hat or "T" type antenna would be
> >> considered longer
> >> than 3 meters and would not pass inspection. Likewise any  elevated ground
> >> radial system
> >> up in the air would be considered a radiating  ground and would not pass
> >> inspection or a transmitter mounted high above  ground on a pole.
> >>
> >> The websites I mentioned have case histories where part  15 setups failed
> >> FCC inspections
> >> and the reasons for failing.
> >>
> >> 73 -  Todd WD4NGG
> >>
> >> ______________________________________________________________
> >> Lowfer mailing list
> >> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/lowfer
> >> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> >> Post: mailto:Lowfer at mailman.qth.net
> >>
> >> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> >> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> >   		 	   		
> > ______________________________________________________________
> > Lowfer mailing list
> > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/lowfer
> > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> > Post: mailto:Lowfer at mailman.qth.net
> >
> > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > No virus found in this incoming message.
> > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> > Version: 8.5.454 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/4064 - Release Date: 12/06/11 22:40:00
> >
> ______________________________________________________________
> Lowfer mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/lowfer
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Lowfer at mailman.qth.net
> 
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html