<?xml version="1.0" ?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
<channel>
  <atom:link rel="search"
    href="http://www.nnseek.com/nnseek_com_os_descr.xml"
    type="application/opensearchdescription+xml"
    title="Search in newsgroups" />
  <title>Search result for without interferance</title>
  <link>http://www.nnseek.com/without-interferance_s.html</link>
  <description>Search results for without interferance</description>
  <lastBuildDate>Sat, 20 Sep 2008 09:00:22 PDT</lastBuildDate>
  

  <item>
    <title><![CDATA[Re: Mobile phone interference]]></title>
    <guid>http://www.nnseek.com/e/aus.aviation/mobile_phone_interference_734886147m.html</guid>
    <link>http://www.nnseek.com/e/aus.aviation/mobile_phone_interference_734886147m.html</link>
    <description><![CDATA[... handset power   on-and-off caused the most significant changes in the spurious  radiated spectrum".  This seems to dovetail with my earlier speculation:  "I have a feeling that the CPUs within the devices actually cause more   <b>interference</b>"  Only if by 'dovetail' you actually mean 'have nothing to do with'..........  <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tin_foil_hat" rel="nofollow" class="url" target="_blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tin_foil_hat</a>    HTH<br><br>
    <table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0">
      <tr>
        <td width="30">&nbsp;</td>
        <td>Posted In: <a href="http://www.nnseek.com/e/aus.aviation/">aus.aviation</a></td>
        <td width="20">&nbsp;</td>
        <td><a href="http://www.nnseek.com/e/aus.aviation/mobile_phone_interference_718646787t.html">no comments</a></td>
        <td width="20">&nbsp;</td>
        <td><a href="http://www.nnseek.com/e/aus.aviation/mobile_phone_interference_734886147m.html">Reply</a></td>
      </tr></table>]]></description>
    <pubDate>Sat, 20 Sep 2008 09:00:22 PDT</pubDate>
  </item>
  <item>
    <title><![CDATA[Re: Mobile phone interference]]></title>
    <guid>http://www.nnseek.com/e/aus.aviation/mobile_phone_interference_734748163m.html</guid>
    <link>http://www.nnseek.com/e/aus.aviation/mobile_phone_interference_734748163m.html</link>
    <description><![CDATA[... that "Interestingly, repeatedly turning the handset power   on-and-off caused the most significant changes in the spurious  radiated spectrum".  This seems to dovetail with my earlier speculation:  "I have a feeling that the CPUs within the devices actually cause more   <b>interference</b>"    Only if by 'dovetail' you actually mean 'have nothing to do with'..........    --   Kwyj.     <br><br>
    <table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0">
      <tr>
        <td width="30">&nbsp;</td>
        <td>Posted In: <a href="http://www.nnseek.com/e/aus.aviation/">aus.aviation</a></td>
        <td width="20">&nbsp;</td>
        <td><a href="http://www.nnseek.com/e/aus.aviation/mobile_phone_interference_718646787t.html">no comments</a></td>
        <td width="20">&nbsp;</td>
        <td><a href="http://www.nnseek.com/e/aus.aviation/mobile_phone_interference_734748163m.html">Reply</a></td>
      </tr></table>]]></description>
    <pubDate>Sat, 20 Sep 2008 05:42:42 PDT</pubDate>
  </item>
  <item>
    <title><![CDATA[Re: Mobile phone interference]]></title>
    <guid>http://www.nnseek.com/e/aus.aviation/mobile_phone_interference_734512643m.html</guid>
    <link>http://www.nnseek.com/e/aus.aviation/mobile_phone_interference_734512643m.html</link>
    <description><![CDATA[... range of all the mobiles/devices etc on the ground.   Flying into Sydney from the north, the count would be in the tens of   thousands.    I guess most of the mobiles/devices are emitting - so do we get reports   of erratic instrument behaviour? Radios not working?    Surely from the welter of signals filling the atmosphere in those   situations there would be some proof of <b>interference</b>?    Paul<br><br>
    <table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0">
      <tr>
        <td width="30">&nbsp;</td>
        <td>Posted In: <a href="http://www.nnseek.com/e/aus.aviation/">aus.aviation</a></td>
        <td width="20">&nbsp;</td>
        <td><a href="http://www.nnseek.com/e/aus.aviation/mobile_phone_interference_718646787t.html">no comments</a></td>
        <td width="20">&nbsp;</td>
        <td><a href="http://www.nnseek.com/e/aus.aviation/mobile_phone_interference_734512643m.html">Reply</a></td>
      </tr></table>]]></description>
    <pubDate>Fri, 19 Sep 2008 23:58:40 PDT</pubDate>
  </item>
  <item>
    <title><![CDATA[Re: Mobile phone interference]]></title>
    <guid>http://www.nnseek.com/e/aus.aviation/mobile_phone_interference_734464003m.html</guid>
    <link>http://www.nnseek.com/e/aus.aviation/mobile_phone_interference_734464003m.html</link>
    <description><![CDATA[...happy to disregard reports of demonstrated  <b>interference</b> in favour of hypothetical rejection capabilities...the relative probabilities of sources of <b>interference</b>.    In contrast, GSM operates in a... startup.  Surprisingly, this maximises the <b>interference</b> that it  generates.    X-rays ... yourself deeper    Thus, "do *not*  <b>interfere</b> with aircraft navigation systems" would ...<br><br>
    <table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0">
      <tr>
        <td width="30">&nbsp;</td>
        <td>Posted In: <a href="http://www.nnseek.com/e/aus.aviation/">aus.aviation</a></td>
        <td width="20">&nbsp;</td>
        <td><a href="http://www.nnseek.com/e/aus.aviation/mobile_phone_interference_718646787t.html">no comments</a></td>
        <td width="20">&nbsp;</td>
        <td><a href="http://www.nnseek.com/e/aus.aviation/mobile_phone_interference_734464003m.html">Reply</a></td>
      </tr></table>]]></description>
    <pubDate>Fri, 19 Sep 2008 21:38:12 PDT</pubDate>
  </item>
  <item>
    <title><![CDATA[Re: Mobile phone interference]]></title>
    <guid>http://www.nnseek.com/e/aus.aviation/mobile_phone_interference_731716355m.html</guid>
    <link>http://www.nnseek.com/e/aus.aviation/mobile_phone_interference_731716355m.html</link>
    <description><![CDATA[...>> (say) 3x = 2.4GHz. Now this might <b>interfere</b> with 802.11 but it is even   *less* likely to <b>interfere</b> with VHF.  No, the GSM *switching* frequency; TDMA... I mentioned was more likely.    Now VHF harmonics might <b>interfere</b> with GSM, but the problem isn't the   ... cajoled Eastern to test his 146 mhz radio for <b>interference</b>, and they  OK'ed its use in writing... BUT...<br><br>
    <table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0">
      <tr>
        <td width="30">&nbsp;</td>
        <td>Posted In: <a href="http://www.nnseek.com/e/aus.aviation/">aus.aviation</a></td>
        <td width="20">&nbsp;</td>
        <td><a href="http://www.nnseek.com/e/aus.aviation/mobile_phone_interference_718646787t.html">no comments</a></td>
        <td width="20">&nbsp;</td>
        <td><a href="http://www.nnseek.com/e/aus.aviation/mobile_phone_interference_731716355m.html">Reply</a></td>
      </tr></table>]]></description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 18 Sep 2008 15:09:18 PDT</pubDate>
  </item>
  <item>
    <title><![CDATA[Re: Mobile phone interference]]></title>
    <guid>http://www.nnseek.com/e/aus.aviation/mobile_phone_interference_731420931m.html</guid>
    <link>http://www.nnseek.com/e/aus.aviation/mobile_phone_interference_731420931m.html</link>
    <description><![CDATA[...at   (say) 3x = 2.4GHz. Now this might <b>interfere</b> with 802.11 but it is even   *less* likely to <b>interfere</b> with VHF.    No, the GSM *switching* frequency; TDMA,... gets into many audio  systems.    Now VHF harmonics might <b>interfere</b> with GSM, but the problem isn't the   "safety ...  cajoled Eastern to test his 146 mhz radio for <b>interference</b>, and they  OK'ed its use in writing... BUT ...<br><br>
    <table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0">
      <tr>
        <td width="30">&nbsp;</td>
        <td>Posted In: <a href="http://www.nnseek.com/e/aus.aviation/">aus.aviation</a></td>
        <td width="20">&nbsp;</td>
        <td><a href="http://www.nnseek.com/e/aus.aviation/mobile_phone_interference_718646787t.html">no comments</a></td>
        <td width="20">&nbsp;</td>
        <td><a href="http://www.nnseek.com/e/aus.aviation/mobile_phone_interference_731420931m.html">Reply</a></td>
      </tr></table>]]></description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 18 Sep 2008 09:31:43 PDT</pubDate>
  </item>
  <item>
    <title><![CDATA[Re: Mobile phone interference]]></title>
    <guid>http://www.nnseek.com/e/aus.aviation/mobile_phone_interference_731269891m.html</guid>
    <link>http://www.nnseek.com/e/aus.aviation/mobile_phone_interference_731269891m.html</link>
    <description><![CDATA[... use UHF frequencies and do *not* <b>interfere</b> with aircraft   navigation systems. The issue...happy to disregard reports of demonstrated  <b>interference</b> in favour of hypothetical rejection capabilities...* case could the claimed/suspected <b>interference</b>   be repeated under controlled lab conditions...within that band.      Thus, "do *not*  <b>interfere</b> with aircraft navigation systems" would seem...<br><br>
    <table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0">
      <tr>
        <td width="30">&nbsp;</td>
        <td>Posted In: <a href="http://www.nnseek.com/e/aus.aviation/">aus.aviation</a></td>
        <td width="20">&nbsp;</td>
        <td><a href="http://www.nnseek.com/e/aus.aviation/mobile_phone_interference_718646787t.html">no comments</a></td>
        <td width="20">&nbsp;</td>
        <td><a href="http://www.nnseek.com/e/aus.aviation/mobile_phone_interference_731269891m.html">Reply</a></td>
      </tr></table>]]></description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 18 Sep 2008 06:19:06 PDT</pubDate>
  </item>
  <item>
    <title><![CDATA[Re: Mobile phone interference]]></title>
    <guid>http://www.nnseek.com/e/aus.aviation/mobile_phone_interference_731249411m.html</guid>
    <link>http://www.nnseek.com/e/aus.aviation/mobile_phone_interference_731249411m.html</link>
    <description><![CDATA[...<bjfoster@<a href="http://yahoo.com" rel="nofollow" class="url" target="_blank">yahoo.com</a>> writes:  I've actually seen mobile phones <b>interfere</b> with VOR, the needle  swinging from side to side until they are ...GSM has harmonics at   (say) 3x = 2.4GHz. Now this might <b>interfere</b> with 802.11 but it is even   *less* likely to <b>interfere</b> with VHF.    Now VHF harmonics might <b>interfere</b> with GSM, but the problem isn't the   "safety of the cellphone" is it?      ...<br><br>
    <table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0">
      <tr>
        <td width="30">&nbsp;</td>
        <td>Posted In: <a href="http://www.nnseek.com/e/aus.aviation/">aus.aviation</a></td>
        <td width="20">&nbsp;</td>
        <td><a href="http://www.nnseek.com/e/aus.aviation/mobile_phone_interference_718646787t.html">no comments</a></td>
        <td width="20">&nbsp;</td>
        <td><a href="http://www.nnseek.com/e/aus.aviation/mobile_phone_interference_731249411m.html">Reply</a></td>
      </tr></table>]]></description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 18 Sep 2008 05:22:27 PDT</pubDate>
  </item>
  <item>
    <title><![CDATA[Re: Mobile phone interference]]></title>
    <guid>http://www.nnseek.com/e/aus.aviation/mobile_phone_interference_731032067m.html</guid>
    <link>http://www.nnseek.com/e/aus.aviation/mobile_phone_interference_731032067m.html</link>
    <description><![CDATA[...>>>>>>  Mobile phones use UHF frequencies and do *not* <b>interfere</b> with  aircraft navigation systems. The issue is that whilst the  <b>interference</b> is infinitesmally small it cannot be entirely  dismissed -... ridiculous.  I've actually seen mobile phones <b>interfere</b> with VOR, the needle  swinging from side to side until...<br><br>
    <table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0">
      <tr>
        <td width="30">&nbsp;</td>
        <td>Posted In: <a href="http://www.nnseek.com/e/aus.aviation/">aus.aviation</a></td>
        <td width="20">&nbsp;</td>
        <td><a href="http://www.nnseek.com/e/aus.aviation/mobile_phone_interference_718646787t.html">no comments</a></td>
        <td width="20">&nbsp;</td>
        <td><a href="http://www.nnseek.com/e/aus.aviation/mobile_phone_interference_731032067m.html">Reply</a></td>
      </tr></table>]]></description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 18 Sep 2008 01:41:13 PDT</pubDate>
  </item>
  <item>
    <title><![CDATA[Re: Mobile phone interference]]></title>
    <guid>http://www.nnseek.com/e/aus.aviation/mobile_phone_interference_730935555m.html</guid>
    <link>http://www.nnseek.com/e/aus.aviation/mobile_phone_interference_730935555m.html</link>
    <description><![CDATA[...  Mobile phones use UHF frequencies and do *not* <b>interfere</b> with  aircraft navigation systems. The issue is that whilst the  <b>interference</b> is infinitesmally small it cannot be entirely  dismissed -... ridiculous.  I've actually seen mobile phones <b>interfere</b> with VOR, the needle  swinging from side to side until...<br><br>
    <table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0">
      <tr>
        <td width="30">&nbsp;</td>
        <td>Posted In: <a href="http://www.nnseek.com/e/aus.aviation/">aus.aviation</a></td>
        <td width="20">&nbsp;</td>
        <td><a href="http://www.nnseek.com/e/aus.aviation/mobile_phone_interference_718646787t.html">no comments</a></td>
        <td width="20">&nbsp;</td>
        <td><a href="http://www.nnseek.com/e/aus.aviation/mobile_phone_interference_730935555m.html">Reply</a></td>
      </tr></table>]]></description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 18 Sep 2008 00:07:20 PDT</pubDate>
  </item>
</channel>
</rss>