TELECOM Digest OnLine - Sorted: Re: New Long Range Cordless Phones

Re: New Long Range Cordless Phones

Marcus Didius Falco (falco_marcus_didius@yahoo.co.uk)
Wed, 23 Mar 2005 21:40:27 -0500

Michael Quinn <quinnm@bah.com> commented on this topic:

> Dave,

> I'm pretty sure these are illegal in the US&P(ossessions).

They are illegal in the US and many other countries. They are in use
in mining, logging, and oil drilling in rural parts of Canada and by
the oil industry in the middle east and elsewhere.

> One of the issues was interference with Air Traffic Control
> communications systems, as I recall. Someone on the list may be
> able to cite chapter and verse from US Code, or FCC regs. I may have
> saved a Navy Department spectrum management brief on the subject; if
> so, I'll forward off net.

> Regards,

> Mike

> From: Dave <newsgroups@dave!!!christense!!n.o!!!r!!!g>
> Subject: New Long Range Cordless Phones?
> Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 18:46:17 -0900

> I saw a link earlier for this on Slash Dot. Its a cordless phone that
> supposedly works 100km from the base station (under ideal conditions).

> http://www.goodbyelongdistance.com/catalog/item/1441280/975984.htm

Not 100 Km. I think they claim 50 Km, which is 30 miles. And there's
another with a claimed range of 5.5 miles (9 KM)

Try one of these URLs:

http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/rciautomation/p32.htm
http://www.sellcom.com/main.htm
https://www.provantage.com/

> Other then the obvious potential for grief from the FCC, anyone else
> have any thoughts?

> I found a link to the Navy brief of which I was thinking, from about
> three years ago.

> Mike

> http://www.see.asso.fr/ICTSR1Newsletter/No007/LONG%20DISTANCES%20Garmisch.pdf

> From: Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com>
> Subject: Re: New Long Range Cordless Phones?
> Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 15:27:58 -0600
> Organization: Wizard Information

> It was a dark and stormy night when Dave
> <newsgroups@dave!!!christense!!n.o!!!r!!!g> wrote:

>> a cordless phone that supposedly works 100km from the base station
>> (under ideal conditions).

>> http://www.goodbyelongdistance.com/catalog/item/1441280/975984.htm

>> Other then the obvious potential for grief from the FCC, anyone else
>> have any thoughts?

> It is true that highly directional antennas (which none of those
> pictured in the ad are) can provide ranges such as they describe.
> Think satellite dishes and clear line-of-sight paths (or even better,
> put one side in orbit). But highly directional antennas are not going
> to let you "walk or drive around for a radius of around 30 miles"
> without stopping to carefully align *both* antennas every time you
> want to use the phone. With the antennas shown, even 30 miles over
> unimpeded water seems like it would be pushing it.

> They offer only manufacturer's warranty (and it's not even clear what
> country the vendor is in). I don't know what Samsung model that is,
> but I'd bet that Samsung doesn't specify performance anything like
> that described. Don't do it without a full money-back guarantee.

Now if you search around you will find things like linear amplifiers
for cell phones. These could be probably be used by cordless phones in
in the 900 MHz band. Not legally, of course, but that doesn't stop
them from being offered on the internet. Google can often find stuff
like this, but Ask Sam has been getting a lot of publicity lately.

Post Followup Article Use your browser's quoting feature to quote article into reply
Go to Next message: Michael Quinn: "Re: New Long Range Cordless Phones?"
Go to Previous message: Robert Bonomi: "Re: GSM-900"
May be in reply to: Michael Quinn: "New Long Range Cordless Phones"
Next in thread: Tony P.: "Re: New Long Range Cordless Phones"
TELECOM Digest: Home Page