Article View: alt.cellular.attws
Article #340Re: Consumer Reports: iPhone 4 - Not recommended
From: Jeff Liebermann
Date: Sun, 18 Jul 2010 18:21
Date: Sun, 18 Jul 2010 18:21
61 lines
4666 bytes
4666 bytes
On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 10:31:05 -0700, JC Dill <jcdill.lists@gmail.com> wrote: >Jeff Liebermann wrote: > >>> You recall wrong. Circa 1992-1994 you could buy a 3 watt bag phone. >>> I'm told that circa 1990 you could buy a 5 watt bag phone. >> >> My memory isn't perfect, but I don't recall any 5 watt bag phones. >> There would have been considerable advertising value to offering the >> most "powerful" phone. > >My recollection of the conversation I had at the time, was that when >car/bag phones were first offered in the late 1980s/early 1990s, some >were 3 watt, some were 5 watt. The 5 watt ones ate batteries and >weren't as popular with most users for that reason, then the industry >(or the government) decided that the phones should be capped at 3 watts >and the 5 watt models were discontinued. I was told that there were >long-haul truckers who used the 5 watt phones to get coverage in rural >areas where 3 watt phones couldn't reach the distant towers. By the >time I was shopping (circa 1992), I was told the 5 watt phones had been >discontinued for some time (more than 1 year) and if I wanted one I >would have to try to find it on the second-hand market (pre-craigslist). > >jc I think you might be mixing technologies. During the 1980's, long haul truckers were using IMTS phones (and CB). That's because the range of an IMTS base station was 20-50 miles or more and located to cover the highways. Also cellular had huge gaps in rural coverage. The down side was that the channels were few and crowded. There may have been some small 5 watt radios, but most were 25 watts. The Motorola Pulsar III IMTS control head looked exactly like the later bag phone handset. See photo near the bottom of: <http://www.wb6nvh.com/Carphone.htm> Pac Hell stopped providing IMTS service in 1995, but smaller rural RCC's (radio common carriers) continues to operate through about 2005. Checking the FCC rules at: <http://www.hallikainen.com/FccRules/2010/22/913/> it proclaims: The ERP of mobile transmitters and auxiliary test transmitters must not exceed 7 Watts. ERP (or EIRP) is "effective radiated power" which includes the gain of the antenna. The traditional AMPS mobile antenna has about 4dBi gain or 2.5 times the xmitter power output equals the EIRP. 7 watts / 2.5 = 2.8 watts which is where the 3 watt limit came from. It might have been possible to legally sell a 5 watt mobile phone, but could only be supplied with a small 1/4 wave vertical monopole antenna. Going back as far as possible to 1997: <http://louise.hallikainen.org/FCC/FccRules/1997/22/913/> This rule has not changed. -- Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<43f646hn1o0ufvkkjrorc3112qjmu6atfd@4ax.com>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!g2news1.google.com!news2.google.com!Xl.tags.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.supernews.com!news.supernews.com.POSTED!not-for-mailReferences:
<Xns9DB610031F9CCnoonehomecom@74.209.131.13> <i1m8iq$q7u$1@news.eternal-september.org> <2gd246h1dm904pbp9mm4a6hse2hk6hqfmp@4ax.com> <Xns9DB8EB62D8FF7noonehomecom@74.209.131.13> <180720100001450673%nospam@nospam.invalid> <dbw0o.19896$lS1.7928@newsfe12.iad> <180720100149520637%nospam@nospam.invalid> <i1u8ij$7h1$3@speranza.aioe.org> <a99646p2u3qfbi9jgtq45qk65a4ucnihpl@4ax.com> <i1vdom$uqf$1@speranza.aioe.org>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Thread: 110038,d8a6e883f28322e7 X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Thread: fa874,d8a6e883f28322e7 X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Attributes: gidd668eef4dc,gidaa617e85ca,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!g2news1.google.com!news2.google.com!Xl.tags.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.supernews.com!news.supernews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 18 Jul 2010 13:21:13 -0500 From: Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> Newsgroups: alt.cellular.attws,ba.internet Subject: Re: Consumer Reports: iPhone 4 - Not recommended Date: Sun, 18 Jul 2010 11:21:13 -0700 Message-ID: <43f646hn1o0ufvkkjrorc3112qjmu6atfd@4ax.com> References: <Xns9DB610031F9CCnoonehomecom@74.209.131.13> <i1m8iq$q7u$1@news.eternal-september.org> <2gd246h1dm904pbp9mm4a6hse2hk6hqfmp@4ax.com> <Xns9DB8EB62D8FF7noonehomecom@74.209.131.13> <180720100001450673%nospam@nospam.invalid> <dbw0o.19896$lS1.7928@newsfe12.iad> <180720100149520637%nospam@nospam.invalid> <i1u8ij$7h1$3@speranza.aioe.org> <a99646p2u3qfbi9jgtq45qk65a4ucnihpl@4ax.com> <i1vdom$uqf$1@speranza.aioe.org> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 5.00/32.1171 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 61 X-Trace: sv3-WmUzswUyzOMkNxFYQvSUDmtMrPZPFFSHdV/aIPxBJdsZA9vWU8MRamnnHlpnXmjpx5eqXVrVu9M1aTm!3EGAbvHhjruqe1/Nf8oUniDtQJFoiKwsuES3UBiS3YcjXde3ZJiiFPVv00ebhEsyAag544e64ySZ!SfWBTg== X-Complaints-To: www.supernews.com/docs/abuse.html X-DMCA-Complaints-To: www.supernews.com/docs/dmca.html X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly X-Postfilter: 1.3.40