Do you mean for FiOS? If so, thats not a modem.. It's an OPTICAL NETWORK TERMINAL. Think fancy media converter.
David Murman wrote: > > > I have found that the FIBER OPTIC modems that Verizon is installing has > many spurious signals in the two meter band. Trying to get Verizon to > replace my FIBER OPTIC modem with on that does not cause interference to > the two meter band. > > Just my 2c > > > David > wa4ecm > > ----- Original Message ----- > *From:* skipp025 <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > *To:* Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com > <mailto:Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com> > *Sent:* Saturday, November 10, 2007 11:39 AM > *Subject:* [Repeater-Builder] Re: Possible interference on 146.160 > > Hi Ken, > > ATV activity... both from Amateur Operations and of course the > import Wireless Video TV Extenders. Dont' forget the wonderful > RF-ID tags. We're starting to get bombed by spread spectrum > devices that are very hard to find/locate. > > In the UHF Band we have the now Famous Pave Paws System... and > just to join in the fun we also have the Eplers System. A Repeater > Site within a short distance of two large Air Force Bases is > a very rough go... > > s. > > > Ken Arck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > I DESPISE the proliferation of all these unlicensed wireless devices > > cropping up these days (I saw the downward spiral in wireless > > "professionalism" starting when the FCC started eliminating 1st, 2nd > > and 3rd Class RadioTelephone licenses and replacing them with the - > > IMHO - useless General RadioTelephone ticket). But I digress... > > > > After many years of operation with no problems, about 2 weeks ago we > > started experiencing an intermittent "hash" type interference on my > > 434.xxx link receiver at one of my sites. It didn't appear on any > > other receiver up there - not the 146.320 nor the 446.900 one. When > > it occurs, it sounds a lot like horizontal sync buzz and usually > > lasts a few hours or so. Of course the link is toned so the buzz > is a > > problem only as it relates to "capturing" a valid link signal being > received. > > > > I went up to the site and luckily it was happening while I was > there. > > According to my handheld, it was fairly weak and was wide - from > > about 200 kHz below my receive link channel to above it by almost > 500 > > kHz. This seems a bit narrow to be a video signal but I noticed > > towards the high end of the range, the buzz fades only to be > replaced > > by a "quiet" carrier. Strange.... > > > > I plan on taking my SA up there next week to see if I can better > > identify the offending signal but I suspect it's one of those low > > power, Part 15 434 mHz POS.... > > > > Ken > > -- Jay Urish W5GM ARRL Life Member Denton County ARRL VEC N5ERS VP/Trustee Monitoring 444.850 PL-88.5
