[32697] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: Operations: where are you going to sit?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (John Fraizer)
Thu Dec 7 01:29:04 2000
Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2000 01:17:41 -0500 (EST)
From: John Fraizer <nanog@EnterZone.Net>
To: Mark Radabaugh <mark@amplex.net>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <OJEIKHIHKAKFFKDPLLLLAEGODMAA.mark@amplex.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0012070111160.17993-100000@Overkill.EnterZone.Net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Wed, 6 Dec 2000, Mark Radabaugh wrote:
>
>
> > For what it is worth, I believe that the use of cellphones in airplanes
> > is prohibited by the FCC, not by the FAA. That is, the use of cellphones
> > in airplanes (in flight) adversely affects the cellphone system. A
> > cellphone at a high altitude is visible in numerous cells, with conflicts
> > with the assumption that a cellphone will be heard (more or less) only
> > in one cell.
> >
> > Now, about the use of other radio receivers and transmitters in airplanes...
> >
>
> And for what it's worth -- they don't work above ~3000 feet. I assume this is
> due to the design of the cell site antenna. Not that I ever tried it in a
> private plane or anything...
>
> Mark Radabaugh
> (419)833-3635
> mark@amplex.net
>
>
>
>
They work very well above 3000ft as long as you and the cell site that
sees you are in agreement.
This brings to mind something from WAY back. When I got out of the Marine
Corps, I flew home to VA. When we hit pattern elevation, I used my ICOM
2M geer (previously cleared with the Airline) to bring up the auto-patch
and telephone my parents to tell them I was en-route to VA. My HT was
using a whopping 500mw of power. Granted, I was probably being heard (on
my TX freq) US wide, but, I happened to know a "control" freq that also
was used as an input freq to the WB4SQC (149.29MHz) repeater in Johnson
City, TN and as such, I wasn't worried about causing problems.
---
John Fraizer
EnterZone, Inc
