It is Resolved! (updated August 30, 2001)

Responses from Firstech have always been positive towards resolution of the harmful interference issue to amateur operations. It seems they simply didn't get good advice in their initial frequency selection. In addition to my own inquiries, there is no doubt that other HAMs called Firstech to complain about this "infringement".

It pleases me to report that Firstech will no longer be shipping the 447.7 MHz product. A new 907 MHz device has been FCC approved. Ongoing sales of the older units will occur at 433 MHz. See below for the latest e-mail response.

Now that Firstech understands proper frequency selection at the design stage, the amateur community must be vigilant to ensure other potential manufacturers steer clear of the amateur band.

Realizing how tedious it is to change established regulations, procedural means have been suggested within the existing regulatory framework to avoid this situation. This would include such things as:

• Involve radio amateurs in the unlicensed device certification process as a "notified party" where it involves the amateur band. While FCC web pages are open to the public to view new devices, formalize sign off from the Amateur organizations where appropriate.

• ARRL/FCC Part 15 web pages to also cater to the business community. An informative and technically vetted web page would offer reasons why the ISM band is better for unlicensed devices, and even go so far as to describe the technical merits/design considerations of different ISM frequencies. This would be a guide to the RF design engineer as well as the businessman to whom "a frequency is a means that justifies the end result". This web page would have to be offered on web pages suitable to be found by companies considering spectrum for their Part 15 devices.

• While keeping unlicensed devices out of the amateur band altogether is the ultimate goal, can there be a fallback position? The shotgun approach is not a good one, but it already seems that 433 MHz is unstoppable as an international low power frequency.

I formulated a response to Firstech on my own.... I'm not a bureaucrat at heart, so my response may not be politically correct... you be the judge....

From: "Jason Lee"
To: "Tony K"
Subject: Re: 900 MHz 2 way car alarm
Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2001 15:02:09 -0800

Hi Tony:

I am glad to hear from you.
1. 447.7 is out as of August 31.
2. We will be using 433 as of September 1. We wanted to do sooner, however,
we have limited resources to buy engineering time for all these changes.
3. We have FCC approval for N99SSTM and N99SSTR that will be marketed as of
October 1, 2000. We are using 50 channel hopping between 907 and 909.

It cost us 1 year and $200,000 engineering fees and another $100,000 for
expenses to 900 MHz thing. I think it was worth it and I deeply appreciate
your suggestion about the spread spectrum.

Thanks,
Jason Lee

----- Original Message -----
From: "Tony K"
To: Compustar
Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2001 2:08 PM
Subject: 900 MHz 2 way car alarm

Dear Mr. Lee:

This is in regards to my previous contact with you about the negative
interference aspects of using the amateur radio band for your car alarm
devices. In our e-mail exchange of June, 2000, the use of 900 MHz ISM
band was suggested as an alternative.

I am pleased to see that you have now developed a 900 MHz version SSR and
SSM! Will this be the "new and improved" replacement for the older 2W?
Will the older unit using 447.700 MHz be phased out? Presently, the
interference to our Toronto repeater from the Compustar transmitters is
severe. Hopefully in a few years, 447 MHz units will fall out of use as
people replace their automobiles and the car alarms within.

I wish you much success with your new product. As I've stated before, your
units seem to be very advanced and desirable in comparison to other car alarm products.

Thank you for your understanding.

Sincerely,

Tony K

for VA3BMC repeater group

Thank you sending me the information.  With regard to your suggestion that we
contact IC Toronto, we have already done so.  Until now, we do not understand
what is happening exactly.  We decided following:

1. There will no shipment to Ontario with 447 frequencies. 
2. We will change the 447 frequencies to something else either to 445 or 900. 
If we select 433, we will have problems with the harmonics and spurious because
some of the harmonics fall into the restricted bands. The engineering will be
done by September 30, FCC/IC application with a prototype by 12/31/00, FCC/IC
approval by 3/31/2001 and the first product will be June 30, 2001. 
3. We have forwarded your e-mail to our distributor in Quebec.  We will give the
warning to the installers the potential problems with miswiring.

I will appreciate very much if you let me know what will be the frequencies I
should avoid between 440 to 450.

Sincerely,
Jason Lee
--------

>From: "jsl" <[email protected]>
>To: "Tony K" <[email protected]>
>Subject: Re:
>Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 10:53:05 -0700
>
>We sold less than 100 units in Toronto for the entire year of 1999.  This
>problem arose when one unit - just one unit was installed wrong by mistake.
>Other than that incident, I have not heard any complaint whatsoever through
>out the North America. .   The IC certification will be done in a month.
>
>We will change the frequency.  Also, we will stop selling in an area if we
>hear complaints.  The Canadians are the incidental buyers of Compstar. We 
>do
>not have big market in Canada and we do not have an office in Canada.  We
>are US based company. The change of frequency will take a year because we
>use the FM modulation and we use double-heterodyne crystal receivers.  
>Those
>crystals are only custome made depending on the frequency.  Most auto
>security devise use between 400 to 450.  433 is not very idealistic for us
>because of a lot of interference with other band users in the US.  We have
>to go, therefore above 900; then, we have to deal with codeless phones - we
>will have a lot more hassle than dealing with the amateurs.  Change
>frequency is not just changing the crystal; that requires total new
>engineering.
>
>I have the following questions:
>1. If there had been no such incident of wrong installation in Toronto, do
>you think you would hear complaints of the interference?  I am asking this
>because until that happen I have never heard any complaints about the
>frequency.
>2. Have you heard any other complaint in any other cities in Canada?
>3. Would you explain more about the mobiles transmitting 50W of RF power on
>447.700 MHz in US?
>
>Thank you for your time
>Jason Lee

----- Original Message -----
From: Firstech, Inc. <[email protected]>

Sent: Monday, June 12, 2000 1:45 PM
Subject: Compustar - Interference


You claim that Compustar is causing interference to Ham Radio stations
throughout North America.
We are selling Compustar 50 different states of the US and 6 different
provinces of Canada.  So far, we never heard any interference issue other
than from you.  We heard about your problem from Paul Taris of Industry
Canada in May.  Since then, we investigated the issue; however, we cannot
come up with any clue for your problem.  Only possible cause might be that
Compustar was installed wrong.  For example, the guy who has Compustar might
have installed door pin switch to the brake switch and took the automatic
arming mode. Then, each time he press the brake while Compustar is in the
arming mode, Compustar module transmit signal to the pager informing that
the vehicle has been broken into.

Compustar will be licensed in Canada by the end of July. The amateur band,
where you are operating, is also allowed band to the auto security systems
in the US and Canada. As long as we are operating legally, the sharing same
frequency itself does not become illegal harmful interference under the law.
If you know the guy who is causing the interference, please let me know.  We
will contact him for the further investigation.


Jason Lee
Legal Counsel




Back to http://www.qsl.net/va3bmc/