3 ms·

"Nobody expected at the time we'd be blasting high-power omnidirectional signals everywhere at 4 GHz - outside a few specialized uses, it's a terrible band..."

"Nobody expected at the time we'd be blasting high-power omnidirectional signals everywhere at 4 GHz - outside a few specialized uses, it's a terrible band..." As I've point out in my post, why on earth wasn't all this sorted out before 5G was allocated the frequencies. It seems to me that the the powers behind mobile services have railroaded themselves into these frequencies and that the FCC etc. haven't had the gumption to sort it out beforehand.

wongarsu 5y ago
If 5G deployments broadcast too close to the frequency assigned to radio altimeters then that's something the FCC should have sorted out, but it appears more like the radio altimeters just have bad filters that let too much outside their assigned frequency through. That makes it a problem of the FAA. The FCC isn't responsible for policing bad receivers.
- josefx 5y ago
  > That makes it a problem of the FAA. The FCC isn't responsible for policing bad receivers. Ah, yes. The best thing you can have is tribal mentality in your government departments. Where instead of cooperating to sort problems out you just say "fuck everyone else" and press onward.
  - hilbert42 5y ago
    See my post above (once, I was on several pre-WARC/WRC advisory committees).
- hilbert42 5y ago
  "That makes it a problem of the FAA. The FCC isn't responsible for policing bad receivers." What do you mean by 'bad' receivers? Spectrum management, irrespective of country, sets the parameters of every radiocommunication service by notional equipment standards - here that would be the typical intermodulation figures for radar receivers, inter alia. The FCC and ITU through WARC/WRC - World Radiocommunication Conferences would have been aware of notional equipment standards for radar altimeters at the time the spectrum was allocated (equipment must comply with the standard or it be deemed out of spec - non compliant). Note: adjacent services must consider interference to their adjacent services, etc. The standards associated with any service can only be deemed old or 'changed' at WRC conferences specifically to avoid the situation we now have here. The real question is 'who fucked up' - i.e.: did not abide by WRC rules (the international treaty/agreement obligations). Remember, here international rules are paramount BECAUSE aircraft licensed in other countries that land on US territory also have to meet the same international standards for their radar altimeters as those of the US fleet - it has nothing to do with receivers being 'bad'). FYI: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Radiocommunication_Conference https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Radiocommunication_Con.... Note: the ITU deems that the FCC IS responsible for radio regulations within the USA.

wongarsu 5y ago

If 5G deployments broadcast too close to the frequency assigned to radio altimeters then that's something the FCC should have sorted out, but it appears more like the radio altimeters just have bad filters that let too much outside their assigned frequency through. That makes it a problem of the FAA. The FCC isn't responsible for policing bad receivers.

josefx 5y ago
> That makes it a problem of the FAA. The FCC isn't responsible for policing bad receivers. Ah, yes. The best thing you can have is tribal mentality in your government departments. Where instead of cooperating to sort problems out you just say "fuck everyone else" and press onward.
- hilbert42 5y ago
  See my post above (once, I was on several pre-WARC/WRC advisory committees).
hilbert42 5y ago
"That makes it a problem of the FAA. The FCC isn't responsible for policing bad receivers." What do you mean by 'bad' receivers? Spectrum management, irrespective of country, sets the parameters of every radiocommunication service by notional equipment standards - here that would be the typical intermodulation figures for radar receivers, inter alia. The FCC and ITU through WARC/WRC - World Radiocommunication Conferences would have been aware of notional equipment standards for radar altimeters at the time the spectrum was allocated (equipment must comply with the standard or it be deemed out of spec - non compliant). Note: adjacent services must consider interference to their adjacent services, etc. The standards associated with any service can only be deemed old or 'changed' at WRC conferences specifically to avoid the situation we now have here. The real question is 'who fucked up' - i.e.: did not abide by WRC rules (the international treaty/agreement obligations). Remember, here international rules are paramount BECAUSE aircraft licensed in other countries that land on US territory also have to meet the same international standards for their radar altimeters as those of the US fleet - it has nothing to do with receivers being 'bad'). FYI: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Radiocommunication_Conference https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Radiocommunication_Con.... Note: the ITU deems that the FCC IS responsible for radio regulations within the USA.