FAA ADS-B Out NPRM needs your input

Angelo Campanella wrote:

So, other than the possibly that the FAA can make terribly inefficient
actions while wasting huge amounts of taxpayer money in the process if
we don't maintain a close rein on the matter, what are the negative
aspects of this specific NPRM?

Read my writeup. One biggie is having to pay lots of money for no
benefit (I don't consider the SAR related possible benefit as worth
anything to me).

Ron Lee

"Ron Lee" wrote in message
...
Angelo Campanella wrote:

So, other than the possibly that the FAA can make terribly inefficient
actions while wasting huge amounts of taxpayer money in the process if
we don't maintain a close rein on the matter, what are the negative
aspects of this specific NPRM?

Read my writeup. One biggie is having to pay lots of money for no
benefit (I don't consider the SAR related possible benefit as worth
anything to me).

What was the link for your write-up, again, please?

One comment off the top of my head, (before I have read more of your info
about the issue) is that if the feds want us to all change to a GPS
reporting type of traffic surveillance and control, is that they should pay
to put the technology in each plane.

A box could be contracted (to be designed and built) that would have a GPS
in it linked to the reporting transmitter, in a all in one unit. To save
cost and complexity, it would not need to have any display of the GPS data
available to the pilot.

The government is going to be doing a similar type of purchase of technology
for the public to make the change from standard definition TV to high
definition TV, by allowing all households to get two coupons free of charge
to be exchanged for a set top box that changed high definition signals to
standard definition signal for the old TV's.
--
Jim in NC

"Morgans" wrote in
:



The government is going to be doing a similar type of purchase of
technology for the public to make the change from standard definition
TV to high definition TV, by allowing all households to get two
coupons free of charge to be exchanged for a set top box that changed
high definition signals to standard definition signal for the old
TV's.

Those coupons for a DTV to analog converter are only worth $40 each.
Wednesday, Fry's Electronics was selling this converter for $179. The Feds
are NOT giving the consumer a free converter.

--
Marty Shapiro
Silicon Rallye Inc.

(remove SPAMNOT to email me)

"Marty Shapiro" wrote

Those coupons for a DTV to analog converter are only worth $40 each.
Wednesday, Fry's Electronics was selling this converter for $179. The
Feds
are NOT giving the consumer a free converter.

40 bucks is way too low, and 179 bucks is way too high.

I hope the price of the converters come down, a lot.
--
Jim in NC

"Morgans" wrote in
:


"Marty Shapiro" wrote

Those coupons for a DTV to analog converter are only worth $40 each.
Wednesday, Fry's Electronics was selling this converter for $179. The
Feds
are NOT giving the consumer a free converter.

40 bucks is way too low, and 179 bucks is way too high.

I hope the price of the converters come down, a lot.

The National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA)
expects the price of the converter box to drop to about $50 to $60. Of
course, if the manufacturers want to push us into buying new TVs, VCRs,
DVRs, etc, they will just keep the price on these high. At Fry's
Electronics, they only converter they had for sale was from Samsung. My
guess is that there will be a run on these come February 17, 2009.

The web site http://dtvanswers.com gives a lot more information.

--
Marty Shapiro
Silicon Rallye Inc.

(remove SPAMNOT to email me)

On Sat, 24 Nov 2007 17:20:11 GMT, in rec.aviation.piloting, Marty Shapiro
wrote:

"Morgans" wrote in
:

I hope the price of the converters come down, a lot.

The National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA)
expects the price of the converter box to drop to about $50 to $60. Of
course, if the manufacturers want to push us into buying new TVs, VCRs,
DVRs, etc, they will just keep the price on these high. At Fry's
Electronics, they only converter they had for sale was from Samsung. My
guess is that there will be a run on these come February 17, 2009.

The sensible part of my mind wants to think that if DTV adoption is not high
enough, the television advertising industry (which is the only bunch of
folks with any real stake in this) will subsidize the devices to whatever
degree necessary to retain their audience. The cynical part of me says that
in that circumstance, the ad industry will cry and whine until the
government pays to subsidize them.

I'd be more ashamed of my cynicism if that business model didn't seem to be
working so well for the airlines.

-Scott

(Scott) wrote in news:4748e56a.551894267@localhost:

On Sat, 24 Nov 2007 17:20:11 GMT, in rec.aviation.piloting, Marty
Shapiro wrote:

"Morgans" wrote in
:

I hope the price of the converters come down, a lot.

The National Telecommunications and Information
Administration (NTIA)
expects the price of the converter box to drop to about $50 to $60.
Of course, if the manufacturers want to push us into buying new TVs,
VCRs, DVRs, etc, they will just keep the price on these high. At
Fry's Electronics, they only converter they had for sale was from
Samsung. My guess is that there will be a run on these come February
17, 2009.

The sensible part of my mind wants to think that if DTV adoption is
not high enough, the television advertising industry (which is the
only bunch of folks with any real stake in this) will subsidize the
devices to whatever degree necessary to retain their audience. The
cynical part of me says that in that circumstance, the ad industry
will cry and whine until the government pays to subsidize them.

I'd be more ashamed of my cynicism if that business model didn't seem
to be working so well for the airlines.

-Scott


I wouldn't hold my breath. OTA (over-the-air)class A channels (high
power) must switch to all digital on February 17, 2009. They do not have
the option of continuing to broadcast in analag after that date. Most
channels already are broadcasting in digital as well as analog. Just about
every HD set sold for the past three years already has the ATSC (digital)
tuner. As of March 1, 2007, all tunable sets (TV, VCR, DVR) imported to
the U.S. or manufactured in the U.S. have to have both the analog and
digital tuners, although existing stock without a digital tuner could be
sold as long as a warning about the requirement of a converter was clearly
displayed at the point of sale. If the price of the converter remains
high, it might just push the sale of new sets. The prices I saw last
Wednesday on VCRs and DVD recorders, for example, made it a much smarter
choice to simply buy a new one rather than buy a converter even with the
$40 coupon.

Cable and satellite are not required to switch to digital. Since
their customers pay for service, there is more clout there for them to
supply an analog signal, at least for a few years. But some cable
companies are already switching some cable only channels to digital to
better utilize their available bandwidth.

--
Marty Shapiro
Silicon Rallye Inc.

(remove SPAMNOT to email me)

http://home.pcisys.net/~ronlee/Reply...S-BOutNPRM.doc

Morgans wrote:


The government is going to be doing a similar type of purchase of technology
for the public to make the change from standard definition TV to high
definition TV,


A common misconception. It's not an SD vs HD issue. It's analog vs
digital.

"Newps" wrote

A common misconception. It's not an SD vs HD issue. It's analog vs
digital.

Close enough, for the great masses. My mom has a hard (very hard) time just
operating a TV remote. Tell her HD vs. SD and she has a chance at it.

The only thing you need to know is that it is a different signal format, and
one won't work with the other.
--
Jim in NC