GSM/GPRS connection from a balloon

Phil Allison wrote:
" David the Shit Head TROLL "



** Try learning to read sometime ARSEHOLE !!
Please explain what *you* understand by "all the time".
I guess you don't need English skills to repair cheap Chinese toasters.

David

Waiting patiently for a bitter response.
 
" David the Shit Head TROLL "



** Try learning to read sometime ARSEHOLE !!

Not my job to teach you how.

Cos your reading comprehension is that of a genetically autistic fuckwit.

Which it is 100% certain you ARE.

No kidding.

You are a classic case.




........ Phil
 
"Chris Jones = total MORON "
"David = an even bigger IDIOT"

** ROTFLMAO !!!!!!

Almost as misconceived and funny as "bassett" explaining how DTV works.


Chris is actually correct.


** Bullshit he is.


The original reason the FCC banned cellular phones in any aircraft or
balloon, was to prevent harmful interference to terrestrial cellular
systems. The original ban did not consider the potential impact on
aircraft navigation or communication systems.

When in the air, the distance to the cell tower causes the cell phone to
operate at maximum power, and this cause co-channel interference.


** Complete bollocks.

Mobiles operate at max power all over the place, all the time.

Now usually you are right but this time you are not, and I can prove it.
Read the specification:

** Read what I wrote - CAREFULLY !!!!!!!!!!!

It does ** NOT ** say what you have *stupidly* assumed.



Anyway my first post did not mention the handset transmit power control
setting,

** And my words are NOT a reply to any post of YOURS !!!!!!

YOU FUCKING TENTH WIT !!



I was referring to the fact that terrain and the curvature of the
earth ...

** What absolute CRAPOLOGY !!!

Curvature of the earth is not involved - FUCKWIT !!!

YOU have not got ONE single tiny clue about RF propagation or how mobile
phones REALLY work.


The FCC in the USA made up its dumb regulation when ANALOGUE ( ie simple
FM ) cell phones were the ONLY kind in use.

Which has got ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the situation of a SINGLE
mobile on board an UNMANNED experimental balloon being used for data
communication in AUSTRALIA !!


Now FUCK the HELL OFF !!!!!!!!!

& take that ASD fucked " David " puke head with you !!





......... Phil
 
Phil Allison wrote:

"David"
Phil Allison wrote:


** ROTFLMAO !!!!!!

Almost as misconceived and funny as "bassett" explaining how DTV works.



Chris is actually correct.


** Bullshit he is.


The original reason the FCC banned cellular phones in any aircraft or
balloon, was to prevent harmful interference to terrestrial cellular
systems. The original ban did not consider the potential impact on
aircraft navigation or communication systems.

When in the air, the distance to the cell tower causes the cell phone to
operate at maximum power, and this cause co-channel interference.


** Complete bollocks.

Mobiles operate at max power all over the place, all the time.
Now usually you are right but this time you are not, and I can prove it.
Read the specification:

For GSM phones see page 12 of this:
http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/archive/05_series/05.05/0505-8k0.zip

For 3G phones, see page 22 of this document:
http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/archive/25_series/25.101/25101-780.zip

Anyway my first post did not mention the handset transmit power control
setting, I was referring to the fact that terrain and the curvature of the
earth help operators to be able to reuse frequencies at closer distances
than would be possible if handsets had line-of-sight to all basestations in
a city, like on a balloon. This would be true even if maximum transmit
power were always used.

And as usual, insulting people will not make you right.

Chris
 
David wrote:
Phil Allison wrote:
Mobiles operate at max power all over the place, all the time.
** Try learning to write sometime. "All the time" implies continuously,
and clearly mobile phones don't operate at maximum power continuously.
Actually David, Phil is quite right, but ambiguous.
All of the time, *some* phone will be operating at full power.
Just not *all* phones, *all* the time.
You *both* failed to communicate clearly.
 
"Clifford Heath"
David wrote:
Phil Allison wrote:
Mobiles operate at max power all over the place, all the time.
** Try learning to write sometime. "All the time" implies continuously,
and clearly mobile phones don't operate at maximum power continuously.

Actually David, Phil is quite right, but ambiguous.

** Not to anyone who can read English an follow a context.


All of the time, *some* phone will be operating at full power.
Just not *all* phones, *all* the time.

** What I wrote said there are lotsa mobiles phones, all over the country,
running at max power, at any time of day.

Range to the tower has NOTHING to do with it.

Signal attenuation in the pathway to one has.

The phones all get along just fine.




........ Phil
 
Phil Allison wrote:

** ROTFLMAO !!!!!!

Almost as misconceived and funny as "bassett" explaining how DTV
works.


Chris is actually correct.


** Bullshit he is.


The original reason the FCC banned cellular phones in any aircraft or
balloon, was to prevent harmful interference to terrestrial cellular
systems. The original ban did not consider the potential impact on
aircraft navigation or communication systems.

When in the air, the distance to the cell tower causes the cell phone
to operate at maximum power, and this cause co-channel interference.


** Complete bollocks.

Mobiles operate at max power all over the place, all the time.

Now usually you are right but this time you are not, and I can prove it.
Read the specification:


** Read what I wrote - CAREFULLY !!!!!!!!!!!
Aaah now I see what you meant to say - when you wrote:
"Mobiles operate at max power all over the place,  all the time."
what you actually meant was
"At any given time, there is likely to be a phone operating somewhere at
maximum power.", and by implication, "that is not a problem or they'd do
something about it". Well if that's what you meant then why didn't you say
so?

As you will note, I never said that operating at any particular power level
was a problem, only that having line-of-sight to every basestation in a
city does not help the operators to make profitable use of their spectrum.

It does ** NOT ** say what you have *stupidly* assumed.
Good.

Anyway my first post did not mention the handset transmit power control
setting,

** And my words are NOT a reply to any post of YOURS !!!!!!
Well you disagreed with my explanation, albeit not in a post directed at me.

YOU FUCKING TENTH WIT !!
whatever...

I was referring to the fact that terrain and the curvature of the
earth ...

** What absolute CRAPOLOGY !!!

Curvature of the earth is not involved - FUCKWIT !!!
It does limit line-of-sight propagation along with buildings, mountains or
other terrain. They don't launch all those satellites for nothing.

YOU have not got ONE single tiny clue about RF propagation or how
mobile
phones REALLY work.
Please do tell! How do they REALLY work?

The FCC in the USA made up its dumb regulation when ANALOGUE ( ie
simple
FM ) cell phones were the ONLY kind in use.

Which has got ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the situation of a SINGLE
mobile on board an UNMANNED experimental balloon being used for data
communication in AUSTRALIA !!
I never speculated about the motivations of the FCC, as I agree that it is
not relevant in Australia. I simply mentioned that the network operators
could have reason to be upset with this sort of thing, and that it would
probably be illegal also. If you can show that it is not illegal then I
will have learnt something, but so far I remain suspicions that it may be
illegal, and so if the OP did intend to do this experiment then he might be
well advised to make sure that he does not get into trouble over it.

Here are some documents which primarily relate to installing basestations
within aircraft, but which also have some information relevant to airborne
handsets connecting to basestations on the ground.
http://www.ero.dk/documentation/docs/doc98/official/zip/eccrep093.zip
"MS/UE not connected to the GSMOB system must be prevented from attempting
to connect to terrestrial networks (in both the GSM 1800 band and other
relevant bands), as this would disrupt the operation of these networks and
cause interference to them"

http://portal.etsi.org/docbox/MSG/GSMOBA/GSMOBA_05/GSMOBA-07017.pdf
"Disturbance to ground networks. Depending on the power levels and the
effective shielding of the aircraft, the transmissions from equipment
onboard may interfere with ground networks. Due to the altitude and line of
sight propagation, the interference may reach many ground stations very far
away."

Now FUCK the HELL OFF !!!!!!!!!

& take that ASD fucked " David " puke head with you !!
Thank you for being more than usually civil. A good day to you too.

Chris
 
Chris Jones wrote:
YOU have not got ONE single tiny clue about RF propagation or how
mobile
phones REALLY work.
Please do tell! How do they REALLY work?
Come on Phil, tell us what you learnt before you got kicked out of
university.

The FCC in the USA made up its dumb regulation when ANALOGUE ( ie
simple
FM ) cell phones were the ONLY kind in use.

Which has got ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the situation of a SINGLE
mobile on board an UNMANNED experimental balloon being used for data
communication in AUSTRALIA !!
I never speculated about the motivations of the FCC, as I agree that it is
not relevant in Australia. I simply mentioned that the network operators
could have reason to be upset with this sort of thing, and that it would
probably be illegal also. If you can show that it is not illegal then I
will have learnt something, but so far I remain suspicions that it may be
illegal, and so if the OP did intend to do this experiment then he might be
well advised to make sure that he does not get into trouble over it.
Check with the ACMA. The class license for the operation of cellular
phones, modems or other devices does not authorize the operation in an
airbourne aircraft. What the OP wants to do is *illegal* in Australia
(and USA).

David
 
"David"


Check with the ACMA. The class license for the operation of cellular
phones, modems or other devices does not authorize the operation in an
airbourne aircraft. What the OP wants to do is *illegal* in Australia (and
USA).

** What a load of IRRELEVANT BOLLOCKS !!!!!!!!

The regulation is absurd and unenforceable - thousands of folk in the USA
ignore it every single day as do hundreds of Australians. Only the fact
that major airlines enforce it on board scheduled flights gives it any
reality.

In my first post to the OP, I pointed out HIS idea was pointless and /or
illegal under the aviation regulations in relation to balloons.

http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:YqJn5sEyG9QJ:www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_reg/casr1998333/+tethered+balloon&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=9&gl=au

See part 101.


Launching a sizeable balloon is a highly visible activity - only one
person seeing it has to report the OP in to CASA or the police to get him in
serious trouble.




....... Phil
 
Phil Allison wrote:
"David"


Check with the ACMA. The class license for the operation of
cellular phones, modems or other devices does not authorize the
operation in an airbourne aircraft. What the OP wants to do is
*illegal* in Australia (and USA).


** What a load of IRRELEVANT BOLLOCKS !!!!!!!!

The regulation is absurd and unenforceable - thousands of folk in
the USA ignore it every single day as do hundreds of Australians.
Only the fact that major airlines enforce it on board scheduled
flights gives it any reality.
Just because people do something which is illegal every day does not
make it safe, legal or absurd.

In my first post to the OP, I pointed out HIS idea was pointless and
/or illegal under the aviation regulations in relation to balloons.

http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:YqJn5sEyG9QJ:www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_reg/casr1998333/+tethered+balloon&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=9&gl=au


See part 101.


Launching a sizeable balloon is a highly visible activity - only
one person seeing it has to report the OP in to CASA or the police to
get him in serious trouble.
Pity that was not a question he asked. It is not illegal if the OP has
approval from CASA, as explained in the link you provided above. You
know nothing about the balloon and it background. The OP was asking
sensible questions about telemetry, not about ballooning.

What the OP *DID* ask was:

- Is there a legal altitude limit for GSM/GPRS operation?
For which the answer is yes, it must not be used whilst airbourne, as
per the ACMA regulations for cellular phones. Plain and simple.


David
 
"David the TOTAL FUCKING IDIOT " "


In my first post to the OP, I pointed out HIS idea was pointless and
/or illegal under the aviation regulations in relation to balloons.

http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:YqJn5sEyG9QJ:www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_reg/casr1998333/+tethered+balloon&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=9&gl=au


See part 101.


Launching a sizeable balloon is a highly visible activity - only
one person seeing it has to report the OP in to CASA or the police to
get him in serious trouble.


Pity that was not a question he asked.

** What a fucking fuckwit ASSHOLE you are !!!!

Posters don't know what they need to know or ask about.



It is not illegal if the OP has
approval from CASA,

** As stated in my post to the OP.

But getting that approval is another matter entirely.


You know nothing about the balloon and it background. The OP was asking
sensible questions about telemetry, not about ballooning.

** What a fucking fuckwit ASSHOLE you are !!!!

Posters don't know what they need to know or ask about.



What the OP *DID* ask was:

- Is there a legal altitude limit for GSM/GPRS operation?

For which the answer is yes, it must not be used whilst airbourne,

** Bollocks.

A tethered balloon at 300 feet is not "airborne".

A free balloon requires hard to get approval from CASA.



BTW:

You are a nothing but a vile, posturing ASD fucked moron - David.

Idiots like you are a pox on the face of the earth.




....... Phil
 

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top