Finger (123.4) and Fingers (123.45)

Status
Not open for further replies.
bobmrg said:
"mountain out of a molehill here" FCC regulations must be adhered to, just like FAA regulations. Pilots do not get to pick and choose which regulations they are subject to. The "fingers" frequencies are assigned for test purposes and other authorized uses. They are not authorized for aeronautical stations. I wholeheartedly support weirdjim in his efforts to identify and report violators.
Click to expand...

While I agree in theory, in practice I am a pragmatist. And in this situation, you/he/we are NEVER going to get everybody to stop using 123.45 as a chat line. It's just not going to happen - it's too ingrained in our minds, and it's too easy to remember, and even if you can't, there's the cute little "fingers" mnemonic to remind you.

While I sympathize, Realistically, if the interference is affecting testing that badly, I'd put some thought into an alternate solution. What that solution is, I have no idea since I'm not involved in any of these particular tests, but it could be a different frequency, a different type of radio (and frequency allocation), another way of signally start and stop, signal flares and smoke signals, whatever. But some kind of new technique might be more effective.
 
RussR said:
While I agree in theory, in practice I am a pragmatist. And in this situation, you/he/we are NEVER going to get everybody to stop using 123.45 as a chat line. It's just not going to happen - it's too ingrained in our minds, and it's too easy to remember, and even if you can't, there's the cute little "fingers" mnemonic to remind you.

While I sympathize, Realistically, if the interference is affecting testing that badly, I'd put some thought into an alternate solution. What that solution is, I have no idea since I'm not involved in any of these particular tests, but it could be a different frequency, a different type of radio (and frequency allocation), another way of signally start and stop, signal flares and smoke signals, whatever. But some kind of new technique might be more effective.
Click to expand...
Go back and read the OP....he spent a great deal of time and money for the FAA/FTC to authorize his use of the frequencies. It's not always easy nor cost-effective, sometimes not even possible, to use alternate testing methods/equipment after a substancial investment.
 
The FCC is a complaint-driven organization. Everything is the wild west until a legitimate user of the band complains.
 
murphey said:
Go back and read the OP....he spent a great deal of time and money for the FAA/FTC to authorize his use of the frequencies. It's not always easy nor cost-effective, sometimes not even possible, to use alternate testing methods/equipment after a substancial investment.
Click to expand...

I am aware of that. But those are sunk costs. They're already spent, and so are irrelevant to the solution. I'm not saying I know what his solution is, but I did say that some thought should be put into figuring out another way to accomplish the mission. There may be other options that aren't appealing if the radio frequencies are open and available. But if they're not, like it seems they aren't, some other solution might be better than losing testing days and dollars due to yahoos on the wrong frequency.
 
weirdjim said:
Let me be blunt. With the implementation of ADSB, I can pretty well get ATC to give me your N-Number and I can simply turn it over to both the FAA and the FCC for enforcement.

Thanks for your consideration.
Click to expand...

Jim, your rant makes you look bad.

As a "test engineer" I'll let you in on a secret. ADSB will pick up all the AC in your area when you're on the ground. Splurge and spend $79 on Foreflight and you'll have the N number without harassing ATC. Secret #2, you can log into the FAA website with that newly acquired N number not from ATC to look up the owner:confused::confused::confused::eek::eek::eek:
 
danhagan said:
Jim, your rant makes you look bad.

As a "test engineer" I'll let you in on a secret. ADSB will pick up all the AC in your area when you're on the ground. Splurge and spend $79 on Foreflight and you'll have the N number without harassing ATC. Secret #2, you can log into the FAA website with that newly acquired N number not from ATC to look up the owner:confused::confused::confused::eek::eek::eek:
Click to expand...

Regarding vhf aircraft frequencies, it will be pretty difficult to prove any specific aircraft are at fault unless you have an audio recording of the event where they use their N number for ID. An airplane close by means nothing for the most part since we are talking " line of sight ". An aircraft 50 miles out at altitude will sound as strong as an aircraft 5 miles out most of the time. It is common to hear aircraft over 100 miles out on a nice weekend for vfr.
 
RussR said:
I am aware of that. But those are sunk costs. They're already spent, and so are irrelevant to the solution. I'm not saying I know what his solution is, but I did say that some thought should be put into figuring out another way to accomplish the mission. There may be other options that aren't appealing if the radio frequencies are open and available. But if they're not, like it seems they aren't, some other solution might be better than losing testing days and dollars due to yahoos on the wrong frequency.
Click to expand...

It also has to do with the fact that his business is avionics. He's pretty much stuck testing on the properly allocated aviation bands that the FCC assigned him. The radio is not ancillary to the test, it is part of the test.
 
danhagan said:
Jim, your rant makes you look bad.

As a "test engineer" I'll let you in on a secret. ADSB will pick up all the AC in your area when you're on the ground. Splurge and spend $79 on Foreflight and you'll have the N number without harassing ATC. Secret #2, you can log into the FAA website with that newly acquired N number not from ATC to look up the owner:confused::confused::confused::eek::eek::eek:
Click to expand...
You need a gps antenna for that. ;)
 
I think many pilots assume that there are aviation frequencies on which C.B.-like chatting is allowed. There are not. Even the designated air-to-air frequencies are for operational communication. Pilots are looking for a frequency to have non-operational conversations on and none have been allocated.

In addition to the flight testing use of 123.45 domestically, 123.45 is the designated air-to-air frequency for oceanic operations on which we exchange weather, turbulence, and deviation reports, position report relays, and other operational information. On oceanic routes within range of domestic airspace (i.e. WATRS airspace) we often pickup non-compliant air-to-air transmissions.
 
How many times on a pretty vfr day have we all had to listen to long conversations on 122.8 ?
 
Doug Reid said:
It is common to hear aircraft over 100 miles out on a nice weekend for vfr.
Click to expand...

  1. I was pointing out to the avionics tester that he can sit in his plane engine off and master avionics on (if its equipped), whip out FF on IPAD and see traffic without bothering ATC ...

Salty said:
You need a gps antenna for that. ;)
Click to expand...

If he's testing equipment and losing $1000's as he stated, he probably has access to one;)
 
danhagan said:
If he's testing equipment and losing $1000's as he stated, he probably has access to one;)
Click to expand...
He actually doesn't need a GPS for that. That's the joke.
 
I'm sure if Jim had another way to get his test data other than using 123.45 MHz he would be doing it. For all we know he's trying to get a new transceiver approved and needs actual operational data. With all the hoops, red tape, etc. we all know the FAA makes manufactures go through why is anyone doubting him? I would be upset too if I had a test fail or invalidates because someone was yacking on a freq they shouldn't be.

As far as the motivation for venting frustrations and/or issuing warnings here, I can think of a few possible reasons...
 
Salty said:
He actually doesn't need a GPS for that. That's the joke.
Click to expand...

I thought he needed a source for the ADSB ... better than waiting for something else equipped to get near you so your Scout will kick in:rolleyes:
 
Hmmm, maybe Jim should accidently set his equipment to another frequency.
 
You all have been asking about calculations of losses. A really sharp technician can command something on the order of $50 an hour, a good pilot about the same, and I'll be damned if 50 years an engineer if I'm going to work for nothing. So, it takes two teams at each end (pilot-tech at one and engineer-tech at the other) to read the instruments and call out data points to record. Yes, you can do it digitally, but somebody has to be pushing the buttons. The airplane I'm going to put at $100 an hour by the time you factor in the fact that it has to be instrumented not only for the normal flight regimen, but to assimilate the data as well. Let's presume that it needs 4 to 5 hours of engineer/technician time to get the right instruments aboard, powered up, sensors attached and hooked up.

The antenna pattern range is very tightly controlled by the FCC. There are specifications for how high the grass can be, the distance to vegetation like trees, and of course, rental fees paid to the land owner (in this case the county). Insurance to the county for the use of the range. Six months of testing, testing, testing before the FCC will certify your site.

So the big day comes when you are going to run your test. We need to do azimuth as well as elevation testing. The antenna is mounted on a very high 20' or so mast to avoid ground effects (a rather expensive task to build a self-standing nonconductive mast, and if it is wood, there is a specification for water content of the wood). And the conditions for the airborne test site specify maximum radiated power from both the aircraft as well as the antenna under test. And of course, you can't use the same frequency for data and voice, so you have to have both 123.4 and 123.45 simultaneously.

The aircraft transmitter also has to be run down in power, so when we set the airplane up, we had to use power attenuators on the transceivers (ever bought a 10 watt 10 dB attenuator?) to bring the level down.

Launch. Send the aircraft exactly X miles out in a perfectly circular ring and have them fly a 360° pattern at the lowest legal altitude. First circle is to see if there are any deep (10 dB) nulls that a 5° data point grid won't catch. Then another circle with the tech calling out signal strength every 5° of circle. Then up a thousand feet. Lather, rinse, repeat. All the way up to about 10,000' AGL. But at 5000' AGL Billy Bob and Uncle Joe come on with an analysis of the waitresss' knob situation for half an hour or so. Your data link is broken. The conscientious engineer starts from ground up and does the whole thing over. And over. And over on a nice clear spring or summer day with either different BillyBobs or some airliner at FL350 that doesn't understand that the rules for out over the ocean do NOT apply within the continental United States. And THAT interference can go on for half an hour or more.

Do the math yourself.

And then start figuring out instead of an antenna how you do this for something as complex and difficult to measure as a com or nav radio.

Thanks,

Jim

Jim
 
PaulS said:
Hmmm, maybe Jim should accidently set his equipment to another frequency.
Click to expand...

Let me see if I got this straight. Jim is supposed to break the law that puts bread on his table because you choose to break the law for the hell of it?

Did I get that right?

Jim
 
weirdjim said:
You all have been asking about calculations of losses.

...

And then start figuring out instead of an antenna how you do this for something as complex and difficult to measure as a com or nav radio.
Click to expand...

Nice explanation - thanks. I am concerned that it might be more cost effective to work on getting the other frequency assignment or maybe local outreach also. Maybe you are doing those things as well. It just seems like most of the abusers are likely not on PoA.
 
Last edited:
One thing I forgot to mention ... 0 AGL here is 3000' MSL, so my antennas or other items of test are starting at 3000' MSL. I can quite easily hear SFO, RNO, FAT on the ground, so anybody from about Merced to the Oregon state line, Pacific Ocean to halfway into Nevada is a problem. I don't think I should be forced to move my labs that have been here for 40 years for pilots that couldn't give a hairy rat's @$$ if they were interfering with a perfectly legal operation with their illegal operation.

Jim
 
Last edited:
PeterNSteinmetz said:
Not saying you’re wrong to report or excusing others, but just as a practical matter, given the historical popularity of fingers as a chat frequency, I do wonder if it might be more cost effective in terms of use of your time to petition the FAA for a different frequency assignment(s) ?
Click to expand...

The FAA does not assign the frequencies. The FCC does, and quite frankly, they couldn't care less about how to re-assign frequencies. They did their work, they broke the band up into what they saw as reasonable, and if you think the FAA doesn't care about "petitions", you ought to work with the FCC for a while.
 
weirdjim said:
The FAA does not assign the frequencies. The FCC does, and quite frankly, they couldn't care less about how to re-assign frequencies. They did their work, they broke the band up into what they saw as reasonable, and if you think the FAA doesn't care about "petitions", you ought to work with the FCC for a while.
Click to expand...


Here’s another idea. Could you set up another company and do a separate petition for another frequency? Or would they just mix that?

Completely different approach. Do you know your Senators or local Representatives and have donated to their campaign?
 
Last edited:
PeterNSteinmetz said:
Here’s another idea. Could you set up another company and do a separate petition for another frequency? Or would they just mix that?
What is the hell is WRONG with you? I'm supposed to get a new company name that has been mine for 45 years, set up local, state, and federal accounts, change all my stationery, and become another entity because a few jackasses that can't read and comply with Federal law?

Completely different approach. Do you know your Senators or local Representatives and have donated to their campaign?
Yes, I spent 8 years elected on my County Board. I know them all by first name. I would not THINK to involve them in a ruse that subverts Federal law for those that choose not to observe it for an illegal purpose. Quite frankly there is too much of this going on at a much higher level than mine right now at the national level.

Jim
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
weirdjim said:
What the hell is WRONG with you?
Click to expand...

I think your rude response here to some suggestions illustrates why people may have little sympathy or desire to help with your plight.

Frankly that attitude was sort of present as an undertone in your first post - which is why I suggest you received some mildly hostile responses.
 
Last edited:
PeterNSteinmetz said:
Frankly that attitude was sort of present as an undertone in your first post
Click to expand...
Curious. So if a person follows all the rules and requirements mandated to him for years, yet others who do not follow the rules and requirements mandated to them for years, and that original person cops an attitude (rude) about those other individuals, how do you quantify his wish not to be nice about it or accept having to change his ways for no plausible reason? And in a similar discussion, how is this discussion any different than your stance on "coercive lock downs due to COVID" any different?
 
Bell206 said:
Curious. So if a person follows all the rules and requirements mandated to him for years, yet others who do not follow the rules and requirements mandated to them for years, and that original person cops an attitude (rude) about those other individuals, how do you quantify his wish not to be nice about it or accept having to change his ways for no plausible reason? And in a similar discussion, how is this discussion any different than your stance on "coercive lock downs due to COVID" any different?
Click to expand...

Reasonable question. Here he is illustrating a rude attitude and calling names toward those who are seeking to make positive suggestions to try and help him. I think that is rather a different situation from perhaps having a bad attitude toward those who are breaking the rules or those who are insulting a speaker in a discussion.

For the record, as I had expressed several times in my posts above, I think he certainly is justified in being annoyed and wanting to report these people. I just don't think that is likely to get him much of anywhere given the long standing use of fingers for chats. It seems like it was a bad idea of the FCC to assign that as a test frequency and he has definitely gotten the raw end of that deal.

But effectively yelling at and accusing people who are trying to make suggestions to help is unlikely to either get you anywhere or make you look good in front of others who might want to help. (This is particularly true when it is clear from the post that you did not bother to actually consider the suggestions and instead reacted in a defensive way to a misperception of those suggestions.)
 
Last edited:
PeterNSteinmetz said:
But effectively yelling at and accusing people who are trying to make suggestions to help is unlikely to either get you anywhere or make you look good in front of others who might want to help.
Click to expand...

People who don't have a clue (like you) who come on here offering solutions that aren't even close to viable because you have no CLUE what the problem is. You just inject noise into a conversation and don't understand why what you have said has been said a dozen times in the prior posts because you obviously haven't read them. Please, do your research before you post an opinion.

Jim
 
weirdjim said:
People who don't have a clue (like you) who come on here offering solutions that aren't even close to viable because you have no CLUE what the problem is.
Click to expand...

More personal attacks. A very rude, belligerent and bad attitude. I'm sure that helps sales a lot. I will certainly be avoiding any purchases from RST Engineering and will make the same recommendation to others.

Please ignore me if you don't like what I have to politely say. At least I am polite -- unlike the OP here.
 
I'm out of here. I've heard enough intelligent conversation about the problem and ten times enough stupid conversation about the problem. I was sort of hoping we could start an intelligent conversation about the problem but it has disintegrated into the usual name-calling after about three days.

For those of you worried about how I will track by ADSB, be calmed. I was on the design team for the ADSB and I really think I know how to use it, even though I need to tell you that I am also somewhat of an expert on azimuth tracking of an aircraft transmitter using old-fashioned loop antenna for azimuth. Not a problem. Cross the ADSB by the beam and guess what?

Thanks,

Jim
 
PeterNSteinmetz said:
I will certainly be avoiding any purchases from RST Engineering and will make the same recommendation to others.
Click to expand...

Sonny, this is RST's 46th year in business with well over 10,000 satisfied customers who keep coming back for more.

Please, make your recommendations as you see fit.
 
weirdjim said:
I'm out of here. ... I was sort of hoping we could start an intelligent conversation about the problem but it has disintegrated into the usual name-calling after about three days.
Click to expand...

IIRC, you were the one who started the name calling.

Cross the ADSB by the beam and guess what?
Click to expand...

I am shaking in my boots.
 
PeterNSteinmetz said:
This is particularly true when it is clear from the post that you did not bother to actually consider the suggestions
Click to expand...
Not quite. I read the suggestions. Regardless how Jim "interacts" with people on PoA, simply suggesting he needs to change his ways from established rules and regulations to appease those who violate those same rules and regulations shows a similar misperception on how those rules work. Just as you push your views on lock downs over similar governmental rules, yet not as bluntly. ;)
 
I'd do the tests late at night or real early in the morning. Everyone knows zipper heads don't like to get up early in the morning. Time to think outside of the box here, having a coronary because people can't follow the rules won't solve anything.
 
PeterNSteinmetz said:
IIRC, you were the one who started the name calling.



I am shaking in my boots.
Click to expand...

I'd cut him some slack Peter, I can see his point, this is obviously important to him, his livelihood and people are messing it up for him. Off hours is probably the best way to handle this, but who knows if that's possible.
 
Bell206 said:
Not quite. I read the suggestions. Regardless how Jim "interacts" with people on PoA, simply suggesting he needs to change his ways from established rules and regulations to appease those who violate those same rules and regulations shows a similar misperception on how those rules work.
Click to expand...

Well, let's consider those suggestions in more detail shall we and perhaps you can enlighten me on how they involve a mis-perception of the governmental rules. I am not an expert by any means on FAA or FCC avionics regulations.

Suggestion 1. Setup another company and apply for a new frequency. Unlike what Jim said, this could be as simple as setting up a small LLC to officially perform the testing for the other company. As I noted, this might not work and be kicked out. But perhaps every legitimate company has a right to apply and receive an assignment -- I actually don't know but it seems plausible that a government bureaucracy might treat it that way.

Suggestion 2. Contact your Senator or Representative. This would be at a Federal level, which Jim apparently did not consider. They will often do small favors for constituents, such as having a staffer call the FCC and ask if a frequency re-assignment might be possible. Maybe that won't work, I really don't know, but again seems plausible.

In any case, even if these suggestions are naive, I see no reason to be rude and attack people about it, particularly on public fora where we aren't interacting personally. I think that has always been my position and I try assiduously to avoid doing so.
 
PaulS said:
I'd do the tests late at night or real early in the morning. Everyone knows zipper heads don't like to get up early in the morning. Time to think outside of the box here, having a coronary because people can't follow the rules won't solve anything.
Click to expand...

Those are good ideas and thinking outside the box might help him. But it appears that @weirdjim is too determined to blow his stack and be angry, because he is entitled to use those frequencies per regulation, to bother to consider alternatives.
 
PaulS said:
I'd cut him some slack Peter,
Click to expand...

In general, you know, I try to do that and provide people with some little reminders that there is no reason to be rude. But it sort of appears this may be a personality trait because it keeps coming back and he has not apologized for his obvious uncalled for rudeness. And was sort of present in the thread from a few years back as well.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top