Hi All,
I am new to the list. My call is
W6RGH and I live in Livermore, California. I have always wondered what
kind of rf interference airplanes incounter when they fly over high powered
TV and radio transmitters on take -off and landing. I'm surethe planes are
designed to handle this high rf flux.
73, Carl
t 09:59 PM 01/15/2002, you wrote:
>It is a very controvercial topic with varrying opinions. In my way of
>thinking RF is RF, and if we want to be really strict about it, and outlaw
>simple monitoring on a plain, then we should outlaw the millions of other
>things that cause interference, and that generate a hell of a lot more RF
>such as the items I brought up. I knew one instalation that was not a
>plain simple tape recorder was outlawed because the motor generated
>rF. In case you are wondering that is the National Radio Astronomy
>Observitory in West Virginia. I shouldn't say they were outlawed
>altogether, but near the various radio teliscopes a lot of things are not
>allowed.
>
>
>
>
>
>On Tue, 15 Jan 2002, charles dickens wrote:
>
> > no problum yes i no that question. so keep smiling this is a good
> descusion=
> > it's good to no from others exspearianses.
> >
> > *********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********
> >
> > On 1/15/02 at 7:44 PM JEFFREY MICHAEL KENYON wrote:
> >
> > >Okay okay, just some ideas. I didn't mean for this thread to get way out
> > >of hand. I don't use it all the time and not when taking off or
> > >landing. I'm going by what I was asked on n exam. Here is my question
> > >that I had.
> > >When can you use your station aboard a commercial air craft? Answer "oOly
> > >qith the pilot's permision." All I wonderedwas what luck have you all had
> > >with it.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >On Tue, 15 Jan 2002, Steve wrote:
> > >
> > >> This thread is amazing! As some have already said, the rules are
> > >> promulgated for the safety of the flying public on commercial airliners.
> > >> I've used an HT on a private plane, but I wouldn't think of doing it on=
> > an
> > >> airliner.
> > >>
> > >> Jeffrey, your comment below is astounding. First, if you had your=
> > scanner
> > >> hidden in a backpack, it is likely that the flight attendants wouldn't=
> > have
> > >> seen it because it was concealed. Secondly, isn't it more helpful for=
> > the
> > >> flight personnel to have reliable avionic functionality than for you to=
> > know
> > >> where you are flying by listening to a NOAA WX broadcast?
> > >>
> > >> ----- Original Message -----
> > >> From: "JEFFREY MICHAEL KENYON" <[log in to unmask]>
> > >> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> > >> Sent: Monday, January 14, 2002 5:05 PM
> > >> Subject: Re: using 2-meters a board an air craft
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Well, think about this closer, that is reasonable as they have things to
> > >> attend to when they are taking off and landing. Last March I sat right
> > >> in the first seat in the cabbin, and i had my scanner and little Grundig
> > >> radio on FM and nobody said a word, but I was using it in side a back=
> > pack
> > >> wiht et head phones. As they said earlier NOAA Weather really helps you
> > >> determine where you are giong over.
> > >>
> >
|
