Re: CellAntenna CEO makes his case on jamming

k5ric — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 17:18:36 -0000

What is wrong with improving safety in Correctional faculties? As long as it does not interfere with other communications networks and cellular service outside the faculties I see no problem. The facility should be able to control all communications within its boundaries to provide better safety for its visitors, inmates and staff. I do not feel such systems should be allowed outside of a Correctional faculty, but in this one case I can see a definite purpose. I feel that this should be proven to work as indicated and also that each and every system should be licensed by the FCC. The equipment should also be required to be FCC type accepted before it can be used in the US. There should be extreme penalties for anyone who uses jammers for any other purpose.

The statement that the FCC does not allow non-licensed services to interfere with licensed services is incorrect as proven by the FCC’s stance on Broadband Power Line (BPL) but this is another recent event where the FCC is guided by politics and market policy not good engineering policy.

Re: 2009's list of don'ts

k5ric — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 03:30:30 -0000

The FCC used to make decisions based on good engineering as well as other factors, but the last few years they have stopped that policy, they simply ignore engineering and in some cases the laws of physics and base their decisions more on politics and market based inputs. They need to get back to looking at what are good engineering practices first before they take a new direction in policy.

As far as Public Safety networks, we need to see that all our eggs are not in the same basket. Or better said the same network infrastructure is used for all our needs. We need a mix between systems so that during a major disaster event we are able to maintain some communications capabilities when parts of our networks fail.

Disqus - Latest Comments for k5ric

Re: CellAntenna CEO makes his case on jamming

Re: 2009's list of don'ts