A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Soaring
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

"Do It Yourself" airborne proximity warning device



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #91  
Old August 28th 19, 04:35 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Dan Daly[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 718
Default "Do It Yourself" airborne proximity warning device

On Wednesday, August 28, 2019 at 8:59:02 AM UTC-4, wrote:
On Tuesday, August 27, 2019 at 5:43:55 PM UTC-5, Dan Daly wrote:
You can download the FCC and IC testing report for the PowerFLARM CORE/Brick, pictures, etc. at https://apps.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/repor...id=ZKUGC625162

They are thorough.


Thanks for the link. Now I know what the inside of a Flarm looks like.

I wonder why they didn't test with both antennas active. If I read the test report correctly, their radiated power (33mW) is way lower than the inteference limit (1W), so it seems like it would have passed easily.

There was another limit around 60mW for something?


The 1W limit is designed for devices on the ground. Since your large Line of Sight range at altitude makes it much more likely that you will interfere with someone else - so they reduce the power - your reach is much greater.. We 'see' PowerFLARM CORE/Bricks at about 120 km with radiated power of 0..018W on our OGN system. If you boost the power, and there are a lot of gliders/towplanes fitted (we have around 40 in my area, increasing by the day), the chances of mutual interference increases. And, the Industrial, Scientific, and Medical (ISM) 902-928 MHz band is pretty busy.

Here's the LXNAV report link https://apps.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/repor...d=2ASPHLXNAVAM
Looks like it radiates 0.07W...

  #92  
Old August 28th 19, 05:15 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Darryl Ramm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,403
Default "Do It Yourself" airborne proximity warning device


That is not my reading of this. CFR 47 15.103 gives an exemption to "digital devices" under *this part*. Here *this part* is not the section covering intentional radiators. It's talking about digital devices (computers, controllers, etc.). Not sure of the purpose but I'll bet some manufactures lobbyists were behind that one.

The obvious sign this is all needed is that FLARM and now LXNav have spent serious time and money obtaining FCC certification for their products. To sell what? ~1k total units in the USA? Neither company is run by dummies.


On Wednesday, August 28, 2019 at 5:16:48 AM UTC-7, Jonathan Foster wrote:
On Tuesday, August 27, 2019 at 4:11:57 PM UTC-6, Darryl Ramm wrote:
On Tuesday, August 27, 2019 at 2:31:18 PM UTC-7, Jonathan Foster wrote:
On Tuesday, August 27, 2019 at 2:58:24 PM UTC-6, Darryl Ramm wrote:
On Tuesday, August 27, 2019 at 12:41:35 PM UTC-7, Jonathan Foster wrote:
On Monday, August 26, 2019 at 8:20:55 PM UTC-6, 2G wrote:
On Monday, August 26, 2019 at 7:48:03 AM UTC-7, 6PK wrote:
On Tuesday, February 12, 2019 at 11:52:12 PM UTC-8, Linar Yusupov wrote:
вторник, 30 октября 2018 г., 11:35:04 UTC+3 пользователь Linar Yusupov написал:
Will this device work with iGlide on IOS?

AirConnect compatible Wi-Fi connection service is active in the firmware's source code since October 9th.
Known to work good with SkyDemon, Air Nav Pro.
You could let us know if it works with iGlide too.

AirConnect compatible Wi-Fi connection service is a part of most recent firmware update.

Release notes:
https://github.com/lyusupov/SoftRF/releases/tag/1.0-rc6

I'm on the fence to add Flarm or something like this thread is all about to my glider in the upcoming off season. Any news or comment how this system is working presently would be appreciated.

You only need to ask these people ONE question: have you received (or even applied for) FCC approval?

If they can't answer this question affirmatively, don't walk, run from them.

Tom

Tom, not trying to start an argument, but I am wondering why you have made this conclusion. I am under the assumption that Flarm uses unlicensed spectrum to transmit.

We are a nation of laws, and regulations. And they are even written down and findable with Google. https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/47/part-15

Replying to any RAS topic always has this risk. Darryl, it is trite to simply say google the law, it another thing to actually interpret the law.. That is exactly why I asked how Tom came to his conclusion. I would love to hear your interpretation and have a respectful conversation about it.


Please read the regs. The answer to your question should be pretty obvious, and actually having read stuff will help you have a more useful informed discussion.

Major subassembly sold separately like a TTgo board qualifies as an intentional radiator under those regulations. If not that then the whole assembly will (possibly both need approval, well beyond a ras discussion). Since it's an intentional radiator you need FCC certification and not the less stringent Supplier Declaration of Conformity. Still testing can be done by a third party FCC approved lab, including many overseas/in Asia etc. The FCC has a whole web site on how to do this. https://www.fcc.gov/general/equipmen...ion-procedures.

A trap for new players is the regulations prohibit *marketing* in the USA. Not just actual sale. What pre-marketing is allowed is fairly clearly described. Yes the FCC has prosecuted for that.

My interpretation: Putting together instructions for DIY stuff and suggesting folks in the USA purchase certain components... that are not FCC approved... Well freedom of speech and all, and caveat emptor, but I'd be putting disclaimers/warnings on stuff.

And see the 47 CFR 15.23 home built carve out in the regs... but that does *not* provide an exclusion to kit manufacturers.

Actually marketing or selling a kit including an "intentional radiator" components within the USA that do not meet FCC requirements. Ah definitely not a good idea.

Lots of testing and engineering labs and consultants know this stuff backwards. Manufacturers just pick one, cough up the money, and deal with the pain of getting products thorough testing. Actual engineering requirements, like spurious radiated signal levels, in the USA can be a challenge to meet.

Not a lawyer. Never shipped an FCC certified device--would never be so crazy. Dealt with unintentional radiator, lab testing, approvals, etc. Long ago background in RF engineering/research.


Darryl thanks for sharing your knowledge about this to those of us that aren't as well versed. I would hope that is what the spirit of RAS is all about.

Question, does 15.103 of CFR47 provide any loophole to giving this a try? Especially the exemption concerning, "A digital device utilized exclusively in any transportation vehicle including motor vehicles and aircraft.".

PS I am just curious and I am not going to try it, (I don't have the time anyhow) opensource hardware is fascinating to me. Also, I have a powerflarm that I am super happy with.


  #93  
Old August 28th 19, 05:25 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Darryl Ramm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,403
Default "Do It Yourself" airborne proximity warning device


Oops I need more caffeine. *this part* would indeed cover everything. But the problem is the "digital devices"... that term of art is not an "intentional radiator", what we are dealing with here.


On Wednesday, August 28, 2019 at 9:15:56 AM UTC-7, Darryl Ramm wrote:
That is not my reading of this. CFR 47 15.103 gives an exemption to "digital devices" under *this part*. Here *this part* is not the section covering intentional radiators. It's talking about digital devices (computers, controllers, etc.). Not sure of the purpose but I'll bet some manufactures lobbyists were behind that one.

The obvious sign this is all needed is that FLARM and now LXNav have spent serious time and money obtaining FCC certification for their products. To sell what? ~1k total units in the USA? Neither company is run by dummies.


On Wednesday, August 28, 2019 at 5:16:48 AM UTC-7, Jonathan Foster wrote:
On Tuesday, August 27, 2019 at 4:11:57 PM UTC-6, Darryl Ramm wrote:
On Tuesday, August 27, 2019 at 2:31:18 PM UTC-7, Jonathan Foster wrote:
On Tuesday, August 27, 2019 at 2:58:24 PM UTC-6, Darryl Ramm wrote:
On Tuesday, August 27, 2019 at 12:41:35 PM UTC-7, Jonathan Foster wrote:
On Monday, August 26, 2019 at 8:20:55 PM UTC-6, 2G wrote:
On Monday, August 26, 2019 at 7:48:03 AM UTC-7, 6PK wrote:
On Tuesday, February 12, 2019 at 11:52:12 PM UTC-8, Linar Yusupov wrote:
вторник, 30 октября 2018 г., 11:35:04 UTC+3 пользователь Linar Yusupov написал:
Will this device work with iGlide on IOS?

AirConnect compatible Wi-Fi connection service is active in the firmware's source code since October 9th.
Known to work good with SkyDemon, Air Nav Pro.
You could let us know if it works with iGlide too.

AirConnect compatible Wi-Fi connection service is a part of most recent firmware update.

Release notes:
https://github.com/lyusupov/SoftRF/releases/tag/1.0-rc6

I'm on the fence to add Flarm or something like this thread is all about to my glider in the upcoming off season. Any news or comment how this system is working presently would be appreciated.

You only need to ask these people ONE question: have you received (or even applied for) FCC approval?

If they can't answer this question affirmatively, don't walk, run from them.

Tom

Tom, not trying to start an argument, but I am wondering why you have made this conclusion. I am under the assumption that Flarm uses unlicensed spectrum to transmit.

We are a nation of laws, and regulations. And they are even written down and findable with Google. https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/47/part-15

Replying to any RAS topic always has this risk. Darryl, it is trite to simply say google the law, it another thing to actually interpret the law. That is exactly why I asked how Tom came to his conclusion. I would love to hear your interpretation and have a respectful conversation about it.

Please read the regs. The answer to your question should be pretty obvious, and actually having read stuff will help you have a more useful informed discussion.

Major subassembly sold separately like a TTgo board qualifies as an intentional radiator under those regulations. If not that then the whole assembly will (possibly both need approval, well beyond a ras discussion). Since it's an intentional radiator you need FCC certification and not the less stringent Supplier Declaration of Conformity. Still testing can be done by a third party FCC approved lab, including many overseas/in Asia etc. The FCC has a whole web site on how to do this. https://www.fcc.gov/general/equipmen...ion-procedures.

A trap for new players is the regulations prohibit *marketing* in the USA. Not just actual sale. What pre-marketing is allowed is fairly clearly described. Yes the FCC has prosecuted for that.

My interpretation: Putting together instructions for DIY stuff and suggesting folks in the USA purchase certain components... that are not FCC approved... Well freedom of speech and all, and caveat emptor, but I'd be putting disclaimers/warnings on stuff.

And see the 47 CFR 15.23 home built carve out in the regs... but that does *not* provide an exclusion to kit manufacturers.

Actually marketing or selling a kit including an "intentional radiator" components within the USA that do not meet FCC requirements. Ah definitely not a good idea.

Lots of testing and engineering labs and consultants know this stuff backwards. Manufacturers just pick one, cough up the money, and deal with the pain of getting products thorough testing. Actual engineering requirements, like spurious radiated signal levels, in the USA can be a challenge to meet.

Not a lawyer. Never shipped an FCC certified device--would never be so crazy. Dealt with unintentional radiator, lab testing, approvals, etc. Long ago background in RF engineering/research.


Darryl thanks for sharing your knowledge about this to those of us that aren't as well versed. I would hope that is what the spirit of RAS is all about.

Question, does 15.103 of CFR47 provide any loophole to giving this a try? Especially the exemption concerning, "A digital device utilized exclusively in any transportation vehicle including motor vehicles and aircraft.".

PS I am just curious and I am not going to try it, (I don't have the time anyhow) opensource hardware is fascinating to me. Also, I have a powerflarm that I am super happy with.


  #94  
Old August 28th 19, 05:26 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Dan Daly[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 718
Default "Do It Yourself" airborne proximity warning device

On Wednesday, August 28, 2019 at 12:15:56 PM UTC-4, Darryl Ramm wrote:
That is not my reading of this. CFR 47 15.103 gives an exemption to "digital devices" under *this part*. Here *this part* is not the section covering intentional radiators. It's talking about digital devices (computers, controllers, etc.). Not sure of the purpose but I'll bet some manufactures lobbyists were behind that one.

The obvious sign this is all needed is that FLARM and now LXNav have spent serious time and money obtaining FCC certification for their products. To sell what? ~1k total units in the USA? Neither company is run by dummies.


On Wednesday, August 28, 2019 at 5:16:48 AM UTC-7, Jonathan Foster wrote:
On Tuesday, August 27, 2019 at 4:11:57 PM UTC-6, Darryl Ramm wrote:
On Tuesday, August 27, 2019 at 2:31:18 PM UTC-7, Jonathan Foster wrote:
On Tuesday, August 27, 2019 at 2:58:24 PM UTC-6, Darryl Ramm wrote:
On Tuesday, August 27, 2019 at 12:41:35 PM UTC-7, Jonathan Foster wrote:
On Monday, August 26, 2019 at 8:20:55 PM UTC-6, 2G wrote:
On Monday, August 26, 2019 at 7:48:03 AM UTC-7, 6PK wrote:
On Tuesday, February 12, 2019 at 11:52:12 PM UTC-8, Linar Yusupov wrote:
вторник, 30 октября 2018 г., 11:35:04 UTC+3 пользователь Linar Yusupov написал:
Will this device work with iGlide on IOS?

AirConnect compatible Wi-Fi connection service is active in the firmware's source code since October 9th.
Known to work good with SkyDemon, Air Nav Pro.
You could let us know if it works with iGlide too.

AirConnect compatible Wi-Fi connection service is a part of most recent firmware update.

Release notes:
https://github.com/lyusupov/SoftRF/releases/tag/1.0-rc6

I'm on the fence to add Flarm or something like this thread is all about to my glider in the upcoming off season. Any news or comment how this system is working presently would be appreciated.

You only need to ask these people ONE question: have you received (or even applied for) FCC approval?

If they can't answer this question affirmatively, don't walk, run from them.

Tom

Tom, not trying to start an argument, but I am wondering why you have made this conclusion. I am under the assumption that Flarm uses unlicensed spectrum to transmit.

We are a nation of laws, and regulations. And they are even written down and findable with Google. https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/47/part-15

Replying to any RAS topic always has this risk. Darryl, it is trite to simply say google the law, it another thing to actually interpret the law. That is exactly why I asked how Tom came to his conclusion. I would love to hear your interpretation and have a respectful conversation about it.

Please read the regs. The answer to your question should be pretty obvious, and actually having read stuff will help you have a more useful informed discussion.

Major subassembly sold separately like a TTgo board qualifies as an intentional radiator under those regulations. If not that then the whole assembly will (possibly both need approval, well beyond a ras discussion). Since it's an intentional radiator you need FCC certification and not the less stringent Supplier Declaration of Conformity. Still testing can be done by a third party FCC approved lab, including many overseas/in Asia etc. The FCC has a whole web site on how to do this. https://www.fcc.gov/general/equipmen...ion-procedures.

A trap for new players is the regulations prohibit *marketing* in the USA. Not just actual sale. What pre-marketing is allowed is fairly clearly described. Yes the FCC has prosecuted for that.

My interpretation: Putting together instructions for DIY stuff and suggesting folks in the USA purchase certain components... that are not FCC approved... Well freedom of speech and all, and caveat emptor, but I'd be putting disclaimers/warnings on stuff.

And see the 47 CFR 15.23 home built carve out in the regs... but that does *not* provide an exclusion to kit manufacturers.

Actually marketing or selling a kit including an "intentional radiator" components within the USA that do not meet FCC requirements. Ah definitely not a good idea.

Lots of testing and engineering labs and consultants know this stuff backwards. Manufacturers just pick one, cough up the money, and deal with the pain of getting products thorough testing. Actual engineering requirements, like spurious radiated signal levels, in the USA can be a challenge to meet.

Not a lawyer. Never shipped an FCC certified device--would never be so crazy. Dealt with unintentional radiator, lab testing, approvals, etc. Long ago background in RF engineering/research.


Darryl thanks for sharing your knowledge about this to those of us that aren't as well versed. I would hope that is what the spirit of RAS is all about.

Question, does 15.103 of CFR47 provide any loophole to giving this a try? Especially the exemption concerning, "A digital device utilized exclusively in any transportation vehicle including motor vehicles and aircraft.".

PS I am just curious and I am not going to try it, (I don't have the time anyhow) opensource hardware is fascinating to me. Also, I have a powerflarm that I am super happy with.


Fines:
Installation, operation, or possession of any radio apparatus without a spectrum licence or, when used for broadcasting, without a broadcasting certificate:
Individual, first and repeat:
$25,000 $50,000
Corporations, first and repeat violations
$10M $15M
  #95  
Old August 28th 19, 05:29 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Dan Daly[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 718
Default "Do It Yourself" airborne proximity warning device

On Wednesday, August 28, 2019 at 12:26:50 PM UTC-4, Dan Daly wrote:
On Wednesday, August 28, 2019 at 12:15:56 PM UTC-4, Darryl Ramm wrote:
That is not my reading of this. CFR 47 15.103 gives an exemption to "digital devices" under *this part*. Here *this part* is not the section covering intentional radiators. It's talking about digital devices (computers, controllers, etc.). Not sure of the purpose but I'll bet some manufactures lobbyists were behind that one.

The obvious sign this is all needed is that FLARM and now LXNav have spent serious time and money obtaining FCC certification for their products. To sell what? ~1k total units in the USA? Neither company is run by dummies.


On Wednesday, August 28, 2019 at 5:16:48 AM UTC-7, Jonathan Foster wrote:
On Tuesday, August 27, 2019 at 4:11:57 PM UTC-6, Darryl Ramm wrote:
On Tuesday, August 27, 2019 at 2:31:18 PM UTC-7, Jonathan Foster wrote:
On Tuesday, August 27, 2019 at 2:58:24 PM UTC-6, Darryl Ramm wrote:
On Tuesday, August 27, 2019 at 12:41:35 PM UTC-7, Jonathan Foster wrote:
On Monday, August 26, 2019 at 8:20:55 PM UTC-6, 2G wrote:
On Monday, August 26, 2019 at 7:48:03 AM UTC-7, 6PK wrote:
On Tuesday, February 12, 2019 at 11:52:12 PM UTC-8, Linar Yusupov wrote:
вторник, 30 октября 2018 г., 11:35:04 UTC+3 пользователь Linar Yusupov написал:
Will this device work with iGlide on IOS?

AirConnect compatible Wi-Fi connection service is active in the firmware's source code since October 9th.
Known to work good with SkyDemon, Air Nav Pro.
You could let us know if it works with iGlide too.

AirConnect compatible Wi-Fi connection service is a part of most recent firmware update.

Release notes:
https://github.com/lyusupov/SoftRF/releases/tag/1.0-rc6

I'm on the fence to add Flarm or something like this thread is all about to my glider in the upcoming off season. Any news or comment how this system is working presently would be appreciated.

You only need to ask these people ONE question: have you received (or even applied for) FCC approval?

If they can't answer this question affirmatively, don't walk, run from them.

Tom

Tom, not trying to start an argument, but I am wondering why you have made this conclusion. I am under the assumption that Flarm uses unlicensed spectrum to transmit.

We are a nation of laws, and regulations. And they are even written down and findable with Google. https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/47/part-15

Replying to any RAS topic always has this risk. Darryl, it is trite to simply say google the law, it another thing to actually interpret the law. That is exactly why I asked how Tom came to his conclusion. I would love to hear your interpretation and have a respectful conversation about it..

Please read the regs. The answer to your question should be pretty obvious, and actually having read stuff will help you have a more useful informed discussion.

Major subassembly sold separately like a TTgo board qualifies as an intentional radiator under those regulations. If not that then the whole assembly will (possibly both need approval, well beyond a ras discussion). Since it's an intentional radiator you need FCC certification and not the less stringent Supplier Declaration of Conformity. Still testing can be done by a third party FCC approved lab, including many overseas/in Asia etc. The FCC has a whole web site on how to do this. https://www.fcc.gov/general/equipmen...ion-procedures.

A trap for new players is the regulations prohibit *marketing* in the USA. Not just actual sale. What pre-marketing is allowed is fairly clearly described. Yes the FCC has prosecuted for that.

My interpretation: Putting together instructions for DIY stuff and suggesting folks in the USA purchase certain components... that are not FCC approved... Well freedom of speech and all, and caveat emptor, but I'd be putting disclaimers/warnings on stuff.

And see the 47 CFR 15.23 home built carve out in the regs... but that does *not* provide an exclusion to kit manufacturers.

Actually marketing or selling a kit including an "intentional radiator" components within the USA that do not meet FCC requirements. Ah definitely not a good idea.

Lots of testing and engineering labs and consultants know this stuff backwards. Manufacturers just pick one, cough up the money, and deal with the pain of getting products thorough testing. Actual engineering requirements, like spurious radiated signal levels, in the USA can be a challenge to meet.

Not a lawyer. Never shipped an FCC certified device--would never be so crazy. Dealt with unintentional radiator, lab testing, approvals, etc. Long ago background in RF engineering/research.

Darryl thanks for sharing your knowledge about this to those of us that aren't as well versed. I would hope that is what the spirit of RAS is all about.

Question, does 15.103 of CFR47 provide any loophole to giving this a try? Especially the exemption concerning, "A digital device utilized exclusively in any transportation vehicle including motor vehicles and aircraft."..

PS I am just curious and I am not going to try it, (I don't have the time anyhow) opensource hardware is fascinating to me. Also, I have a powerflarm that I am super happy with.


Fines:
Installation, operation, or possession of any radio apparatus without a spectrum licence or, when used for broadcasting, without a broadcasting certificate:
Individual, first and repeat:
$25,000 $50,000
Corporations, first and repeat violations
$10M $15M


That's Administrative Monetary Penalty in Canada. Clear why FLARM Technology and LXNAV went to the bother. They do talk about levels, and the fines are much less for "localized effects".
  #96  
Old August 28th 19, 07:08 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Jonathan Foster
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 27
Default "Do It Yourself" airborne proximity warning device

On Wednesday, August 28, 2019 at 10:25:06 AM UTC-6, Darryl Ramm wrote:
Oops I need more caffeine. *this part* would indeed cover everything. But the problem is the "digital devices"... that term of art is not an "intentional radiator", what we are dealing with here.


On Wednesday, August 28, 2019 at 9:15:56 AM UTC-7, Darryl Ramm wrote:
That is not my reading of this. CFR 47 15.103 gives an exemption to "digital devices" under *this part*. Here *this part* is not the section covering intentional radiators. It's talking about digital devices (computers, controllers, etc.). Not sure of the purpose but I'll bet some manufactures lobbyists were behind that one.

The obvious sign this is all needed is that FLARM and now LXNav have spent serious time and money obtaining FCC certification for their products. To sell what? ~1k total units in the USA? Neither company is run by dummies.


On Wednesday, August 28, 2019 at 5:16:48 AM UTC-7, Jonathan Foster wrote:
On Tuesday, August 27, 2019 at 4:11:57 PM UTC-6, Darryl Ramm wrote:
On Tuesday, August 27, 2019 at 2:31:18 PM UTC-7, Jonathan Foster wrote:
On Tuesday, August 27, 2019 at 2:58:24 PM UTC-6, Darryl Ramm wrote:
On Tuesday, August 27, 2019 at 12:41:35 PM UTC-7, Jonathan Foster wrote:
On Monday, August 26, 2019 at 8:20:55 PM UTC-6, 2G wrote:
On Monday, August 26, 2019 at 7:48:03 AM UTC-7, 6PK wrote:
On Tuesday, February 12, 2019 at 11:52:12 PM UTC-8, Linar Yusupov wrote:
вторник, 30 октября 2018 г., 11:35:04 UTC+3 пользователь Linar Yusupov написал:
Will this device work with iGlide on IOS?

AirConnect compatible Wi-Fi connection service is active in the firmware's source code since October 9th.
Known to work good with SkyDemon, Air Nav Pro.
You could let us know if it works with iGlide too.

AirConnect compatible Wi-Fi connection service is a part of most recent firmware update.

Release notes:
https://github.com/lyusupov/SoftRF/releases/tag/1.0-rc6

I'm on the fence to add Flarm or something like this thread is all about to my glider in the upcoming off season. Any news or comment how this system is working presently would be appreciated.

You only need to ask these people ONE question: have you received (or even applied for) FCC approval?

If they can't answer this question affirmatively, don't walk, run from them.

Tom

Tom, not trying to start an argument, but I am wondering why you have made this conclusion. I am under the assumption that Flarm uses unlicensed spectrum to transmit.

We are a nation of laws, and regulations. And they are even written down and findable with Google. https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/47/part-15

Replying to any RAS topic always has this risk. Darryl, it is trite to simply say google the law, it another thing to actually interpret the law. That is exactly why I asked how Tom came to his conclusion. I would love to hear your interpretation and have a respectful conversation about it..

Please read the regs. The answer to your question should be pretty obvious, and actually having read stuff will help you have a more useful informed discussion.

Major subassembly sold separately like a TTgo board qualifies as an intentional radiator under those regulations. If not that then the whole assembly will (possibly both need approval, well beyond a ras discussion). Since it's an intentional radiator you need FCC certification and not the less stringent Supplier Declaration of Conformity. Still testing can be done by a third party FCC approved lab, including many overseas/in Asia etc. The FCC has a whole web site on how to do this. https://www.fcc.gov/general/equipmen...ion-procedures.

A trap for new players is the regulations prohibit *marketing* in the USA. Not just actual sale. What pre-marketing is allowed is fairly clearly described. Yes the FCC has prosecuted for that.

My interpretation: Putting together instructions for DIY stuff and suggesting folks in the USA purchase certain components... that are not FCC approved... Well freedom of speech and all, and caveat emptor, but I'd be putting disclaimers/warnings on stuff.

And see the 47 CFR 15.23 home built carve out in the regs... but that does *not* provide an exclusion to kit manufacturers.

Actually marketing or selling a kit including an "intentional radiator" components within the USA that do not meet FCC requirements. Ah definitely not a good idea.

Lots of testing and engineering labs and consultants know this stuff backwards. Manufacturers just pick one, cough up the money, and deal with the pain of getting products thorough testing. Actual engineering requirements, like spurious radiated signal levels, in the USA can be a challenge to meet.

Not a lawyer. Never shipped an FCC certified device--would never be so crazy. Dealt with unintentional radiator, lab testing, approvals, etc. Long ago background in RF engineering/research.

Darryl thanks for sharing your knowledge about this to those of us that aren't as well versed. I would hope that is what the spirit of RAS is all about.

Question, does 15.103 of CFR47 provide any loophole to giving this a try? Especially the exemption concerning, "A digital device utilized exclusively in any transportation vehicle including motor vehicles and aircraft."..

PS I am just curious and I am not going to try it, (I don't have the time anyhow) opensource hardware is fascinating to me. Also, I have a powerflarm that I am super happy with.


I totally get why lxnav and flarm went through the trouble of getting certified. If I was a corporation trying to protect my assets, I would too. Reading the regulations and trying my best to interpret their meaning and spirit, I think a hobbyist could tinker with this without legal issues. Having said that I still think there are some grey issues that could throw a monkey wrench in it.

If I didn't have a powerflarm already would I give a try? Maybe, but probably not.

Side note, I found this guide to the fcc and opensource hardware that is interesting.

https://www.sparkfun.com/tutorials/398
  #97  
Old September 1st 19, 06:28 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
2G
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,439
Default "Do It Yourself" airborne proximity warning device

On Tuesday, August 27, 2019 at 12:41:35 PM UTC-7, Jonathan Foster wrote:
On Monday, August 26, 2019 at 8:20:55 PM UTC-6, 2G wrote:
On Monday, August 26, 2019 at 7:48:03 AM UTC-7, 6PK wrote:
On Tuesday, February 12, 2019 at 11:52:12 PM UTC-8, Linar Yusupov wrote:
вторник, 30 октября 2018 г., 11:35:04 UTC+3 пользователь Linar Yusupov написал:
Will this device work with iGlide on IOS?

AirConnect compatible Wi-Fi connection service is active in the firmware's source code since October 9th.
Known to work good with SkyDemon, Air Nav Pro.
You could let us know if it works with iGlide too.

AirConnect compatible Wi-Fi connection service is a part of most recent firmware update.

Release notes:
https://github.com/lyusupov/SoftRF/releases/tag/1.0-rc6

I'm on the fence to add Flarm or something like this thread is all about to my glider in the upcoming off season. Any news or comment how this system is working presently would be appreciated.


You only need to ask these people ONE question: have you received (or even applied for) FCC approval?

If they can't answer this question affirmatively, don't walk, run from them.

Tom


Tom, not trying to start an argument, but I am wondering why you have made this conclusion. I am under the assumption that Flarm uses unlicensed spectrum to transmit.


Jonathan,

Well, then, you would be WRONG! FCC approval is mandatory for many very good reasons: unlicensed operators can be (perhaps inadvertently) interfering with other services, including vital aircraft and emergency services.
  #98  
Old September 1st 19, 07:51 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Darryl Ramm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,403
Default "Do It Yourself" airborne proximity warning device

On Saturday, August 31, 2019 at 10:28:56 PM UTC-7, 2G wrote:
On Tuesday, August 27, 2019 at 12:41:35 PM UTC-7, Jonathan Foster wrote:
On Monday, August 26, 2019 at 8:20:55 PM UTC-6, 2G wrote:
On Monday, August 26, 2019 at 7:48:03 AM UTC-7, 6PK wrote:
On Tuesday, February 12, 2019 at 11:52:12 PM UTC-8, Linar Yusupov wrote:
вторник, 30 октября 2018 г., 11:35:04 UTC+3 пользователь Linar Yusupov написал:
Will this device work with iGlide on IOS?

AirConnect compatible Wi-Fi connection service is active in the firmware's source code since October 9th.
Known to work good with SkyDemon, Air Nav Pro.
You could let us know if it works with iGlide too.

AirConnect compatible Wi-Fi connection service is a part of most recent firmware update.

Release notes:
https://github.com/lyusupov/SoftRF/releases/tag/1.0-rc6

I'm on the fence to add Flarm or something like this thread is all about to my glider in the upcoming off season. Any news or comment how this system is working presently would be appreciated.

You only need to ask these people ONE question: have you received (or even applied for) FCC approval?

If they can't answer this question affirmatively, don't walk, run from them.

Tom


Tom, not trying to start an argument, but I am wondering why you have made this conclusion. I am under the assumption that Flarm uses unlicensed spectrum to transmit.


Jonathan,

Well, then, you would be WRONG! FCC approval is mandatory for many very good reasons: unlicensed operators can be (perhaps inadvertently) interfering with other services, including vital aircraft and emergency services.


What "unlicensed operators"? There is no *operator license* required to operate on ISM frequencies.

This thread is talking about a self-built hobby project, I'm lost as to what you are talking about. Even the question you started with seems absurd -- "You only need to ask these people ONE question: have you received (or even applied for) FCC approval? " Who are "the people" who are supposed to ask FCC for approval? And for what exact approval?

You think FCC approval is needed for non-USA persons outside the USA to publish/share thoughts, ideas, designs, software source code? For USA persons to be able to access those items? What sort of police state do you think we live in?

I posted links to the 47 CFR 15. Even gave a simple summary. So again, there is a obvious carve out in the for home-built projects. 47 CFR 15.23. Did you read that? Covers intentional radiators. And if that home built project interfere with vital services the cure/penalty is... you stop using them.

If you think the TTgo devices being separately sold in the USA and used in these projects don't have any required FCC approval, then... knock yourself out and file a complaint with the FCC.

But even if those components are not properly certified that does not seem a legal issue for the purchaser. If a home-built project using those components causes interference, again it seems the regulatory cure is you stop using it.

Somebody marketing or selling a finished device, or construction kit with electronics components hardware... different concerns, that is not what is being discussed here.

(And to be clear, I have no interest in building anything described here. I have a workbench covered in ADS-B receiver projects and other toys as is. I am more than happy with PowerFLARM devices and have zero interest in taking risks hacking collision avoidance systems--I think Dave Nadler already raised valid concerns about that.)





  #99  
Old September 1st 19, 05:31 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Linar Yusupov
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 18
Default "Do It Yourself" airborne proximity warning device


Folks,

you are breaking spears while trying to decide if this foreign DIY open source and hardware project (targeted to global worldwide audience) is applicable for North America and it's specific local regulations...

Why wouldn't you break spears as hard as you do here when discussing applicability of another DIY project - Stratux ( http://stratux.me ) ?
Both kits and complete product are commercially available for sale in North America.

I am curious to know:
1) does Stratux device have FCC ID ?
2) does this particular commercial Stratux radio has FCC ID:

https://www.amazon.com/Stratux-UATRa.../dp/B07JNSHCLQ ?

3) how this commercial "intentional radiator" (TI CC1310 RF IC based) comply with FCC, provided that it is in use for transmitting weather on 915 MHz ISM band:

http://canada.stratux.me/ ?




  #100  
Old September 1st 19, 07:02 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Dan Marotta
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,601
Default "Do It Yourself" airborne proximity warning device

Does Stratux transmit?* I don't think so.

On 9/1/2019 10:31 AM, Linar Yusupov wrote:
Folks,

you are breaking spears while trying to decide if this foreign DIY open source and hardware project (targeted to global worldwide audience) is applicable for North America and it's specific local regulations...

Why wouldn't you break spears as hard as you do here when discussing applicability of another DIY project - Stratux ( http://stratux.me ) ?
Both kits and complete product are commercially available for sale in North America.

I am curious to know:
1) does Stratux device have FCC ID ?
2) does this particular commercial Stratux radio has FCC ID:

https://www.amazon.com/Stratux-UATRa.../dp/B07JNSHCLQ ?

3) how this commercial "intentional radiator" (TI CC1310 RF IC based) comply with FCC, provided that it is in use for transmitting weather on 915 MHz ISM band:

http://canada.stratux.me/ ?





--
Dan, 5J
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
"View Limiting Device" recommendations please [email protected] Instrument Flight Rules 27 February 4th 08 03:25 AM
Monday 073007 in Oshkosh - Going Home [01/10] - "Departing Oshkosh - Airborne Inaging DC3C.jpg" yEnc (0/1) Just Plane Noise[_2_] Aviation Photos 0 August 2nd 07 04:39 AM
Monday 073007 in Oshkosh - Going Home [01/10] - "Departing Oshkosh - Airborne Inaging DC3C.jpg" yEnc (1/1) Just Plane Noise[_2_] Aviation Photos 0 August 2nd 07 04:39 AM
New traffic warning device Loran Products 26 February 18th 04 01:14 AM
Plane with no stall warning device? Roy Smith General Aviation 23 February 17th 04 04:23 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:10 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.