NEW REVIEW: Tiny Wireless Video Camera by David Johnson  
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Tower Hobbies
Enter up to 4 keywords or Tower stock numbers
Logged in as Guest



Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
       


Hobbico Electristar Select - RTF
Seller:  Cody85
Details:   $1,200.00   |  10/25/2008   |  Classified Ad
We will rotate YOUR AD in this spot if you select "Forum Featured" when placing or editing your ad!

All Forums >> Radios, Batteries, Clubhouse and more >> Aerial Photography and Video >> NEW REVIEW: Tiny Wireless Video Camera by David Johnson
Page: [1] 2   next >   >>  

Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
NEW REVIEW: Tiny Wireless Video Camera by David Johnson - 12/27/2003 5:32:41 AM   
PlaneKrazee



Posts: 3583
Joined: 5/15/2002
From: Westerly, RI, USA
Status: offline 		Dave did not mention the exact frequencies that this system transmits on, and that they are illegal to transmit on in the United States.

_____________________________

KB1DTB
AMA11123
       Post #: 1

RE: NEW REVIEW: Tiny Wireless Video Camera by David Joh... - 12/27/2003 6:56:58 PM   
reznikvova-RCU



Posts: 128
Joined: 12/20/2002
From: Loganville, GA, USA
Status: offline 		This is not true. These systems are completly leagal. They operate on 1.2 ghz which is in the HAM band.

(in reply to PlaneKrazee)
       Post #: 2

RE: NEW REVIEW: Tiny Wireless Video Camera by David Joh... - 12/27/2003 11:16:48 PM   
closetflyer



Posts: 92
Joined: 3/18/2003
From: None, OR, USA
Status: offline 		I did some research on the PLL 1.2ghz systems and they operate on four very stable frequencies.

Here is the quote I see on www.microcameras.com:

"There are two types of 1.2GHz transmitters being sold.

The first type would be a four channel phase-lock-loop (PLL) transmitter. The four channels are 1080MHz, 1120MHz, 1160MHz, and 1200MHz. None of these channels fall within the legal amateur band of 1240-1300MHz."


I am not complaining just pointing to the truth. Sorry.

David

(in reply to reznikvova-RCU)
       Post #: 3

RE: NEW REVIEW: Tiny Wireless Video Camera by David Joh... - 12/28/2003 2:37:13 AM   
mr.rc-cam



Posts: 536
Joined: 6/6/2002
From: West Coast, CA, USA
Status: offline
quote:

These systems are completly legal. They operate on 1.2 ghz which is in the HAM band.

Please post the exact frequency that the tinywireless system uses. Your web site does not mention these specs.

Also, the "legal" 1.2Ghz systems still require a ham license to operate. I did not see this info on the web site either. It would be good to state this so that users are aware of the federal requirements.

_____________________________

Best Regards,
Mr. RC-CAM

(in reply to reznikvova-RCU)
       Post #: 4

RE: NEW REVIEW: Tiny Wireless Video Camera by David Joh... - 12/28/2003 5:43:59 AM   
PlaneKrazee



Posts: 3583
Joined: 5/15/2002
From: Westerly, RI, USA
Status: offline 		If these systems operate on any frequency below 1240mhz in the 1200mhz band they are not legal even with a Ham license. The next lower legal frequency would be 910.1mhz. This is why most retailers have pulled them from the US market and why they are being sold on ebay for less than $50.00 brand new. A call to the FCC is now in order.

Why is the review locked to replies?

quote:

reznikvova-RCU Date 12/27/2003 1:56:58 PM
This is not true. These systems are completly leagal. They operate on 1.2 ghz which is in the HAM band
.

The review should clearly state that the frequencies are not legal and even a ham license would not make there operation legal. It is very irresponsible for RCU to allow this review to remain on the site.

_____________________________

KB1DTB
AMA11123

(in reply to mr.rc-cam)
       Post #: 5

RE: NEW REVIEW: Tiny Wireless Video Camera by David Joh... - 12/28/2003 3:03:44 PM   
Spanky1


 

Posts: 138
Joined: 2/18/2002
From: My place, MI,
Status: offline 		I've emailed the fcc for an explaination as to why we CAN use this stuff.

Common sense says ebay can't sell illegal stuff by the hundreds every day without someone shutting them down.

My guess is either old technology and they don't worry about it or the output isn't enough to worry about.

If they don't email I'll call.

Spanky

_____________________________

No Crybabies....... Just fly!

(in reply to PlaneKrazee)
       Post #: 6

RE: NEW REVIEW: Tiny Wireless Video Camera by David Joh... - 12/28/2003 5:35:49 PM   
mr.rc-cam



Posts: 536
Joined: 6/6/2002
From: West Coast, CA, USA
Status: offline
quote:

I've emailed the fcc for an explanation as to why we CAN use this stuff.

It's best to call them (the various contact numbers are on the FCC web site). They do not do a good job responding to email.

FWIW, the FCC laws are not aimed at the seller, so that is why you see these "illegal" and/or licensed-required systems everywhere. All the regulations are aimed at the user. In other words, there is nothing illegal about selling wireless video devices, even if they use unauthorized freqs or require a license.

An exception involves the privacy laws. Wireless video gear that has a microphone (audio) in it, that is marketed for eavesdropping and spying, cannot be legally sold or used in the USA. That is one of the reasons why you will find a lot if audio-less video systems.

Most of the eBay RF gear originates from the Far East, and is shipped to end-users and resellers via Postal in small packages, so it easily slips through customs. I hear that the US custom's inspection budgets are too small to support a more thorough coverage of stuff that comes into the USA. So, that is why it is so easily found here.

The bottom line is that it is up to the user to ensure that they are following the laws (assuming that they care to do so). So, always ask questions at the time of purchase. Good sellers will be thoroughly educated on the FCC Regs and will go out of their way to tell you about any operating restrictions. For example, if you look through a SuperCircuits catalog, you will see exactly what license is needed for each of their wireless devices. Furthermore, when I placed an order they told me a ham license was required to use the device I wanted (I am licensed). Many ham radio retailers will often refuse to sell to a customer that does not have a valid ham license (they do need the backlash from a customer that may get caught transmitting illegally). On the other hand, some sellers are totally unaware of the federal restrictions or are more concerned with making a sale.

< Message edited by mr.rc-cam-RCU -- 12/28/2003 5:39:20 PM >

_____________________________

Best Regards,
Mr. RC-CAM

(in reply to Spanky1)
       Post #: 7

RE: NEW REVIEW: Tiny Wireless Video Camera by David Joh... - 12/29/2003 1:42:16 AM   
PlaneKrazee



Posts: 3583
Joined: 5/15/2002
From: Westerly, RI, USA
Status: offline 		Spanky,

Most equipment below 25mw doesn't require a fcc license, unless it is in a ham band. If it is over 25mw it will more than likely require some type of license, either ham or special user or it is illegal to use.

_____________________________

KB1DTB
AMA11123

(in reply to Spanky1)
       Post #: 8

RE: NEW REVIEW: Tiny Wireless Video Camera by David Joh... - 12/29/2003 2:16:22 AM   
yb2normal



Posts: 344
Joined: 12/21/2002
From: Broomfield, CO,
Status: offline 		Actually all 'intentional radiators' require a license, the question is who is responsible for getting the license.

Consumer devices are licensed under FCC "Part 15" rules. These devices are submitted to the FCC for testing to insure they meet Part 15 rules, and are then assigned an FCC ID number. The number will be clearly displayed on the outside of the device. Take a look at the wireless remote for your car...you'll find an FCC ID on it. These type of devices do not require the consumer to have a license obviously.

Devices aimed at the amateur radio market do not need an FCC ID, however the purchaser is responsible for getting a license from the FCC ("HAM" license), and is responsible for making sure the device operates within FCC guidelines for power output and frequency. These are the best to use since HAM operators are allowed to use much higher power levels.

Regards,
Bill

(in reply to PlaneKrazee)
       Post #: 9

RE: NEW REVIEW: Tiny Wireless Video Camera by David Joh... - 12/29/2003 3:21:01 PM   
Spanky1


 

Posts: 138
Joined: 2/18/2002
From: My place, MI,
Status: offline 		Just talked to the FCC.

She said if the plane is a toy and not a large state to state aircraft, there are no FCC issues.

Spanky

_____________________________

No Crybabies....... Just fly!

(in reply to yb2normal)
       Post #: 10

RE: NEW REVIEW: Tiny Wireless Video Camera by David Joh... - 12/29/2003 5:45:46 PM   
yb2normal



Posts: 344
Joined: 12/21/2002
From: Broomfield, CO,
Status: offline 		My experience with most government organizations is that any individual you talk to is perfectly willing to state their opinion, but ask them for something in writing that represents the opinion of their organization and you'll find that their answer changes.

Spanky1, if the absolute worst happened and you were charged with doing something illegal, you can be sure that the verbal opinion of the gal that answers the phones at the FCC are not going to protect you. But let's be pragmatists here... the power of these systems ARE very low, and there is likely very little impact to using them or even getting caught. It's like speeding... everyone makes their own choice about doing it, most of us don't get caught, and everyone goes on living their lives.

Let's just be honest though about the legality of these systems so each person can make their own informed choice.

Cheers,
Bill

(in reply to Spanky1)
       Post #: 11

RE: NEW REVIEW: Tiny Wireless Video Camera by David Joh... - 12/29/2003 7:35:53 PM   
lvspark



Posts: 348
Joined: 4/19/2002
From: WALLA WALLA, WA,
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Spanky1

Just talked to the FCC.

She said if the plane is a toy and not a large state to state aircraft, there are no FCC issues.

Spanky


Just like there are no FCC issues with our RC control transmitters... So it's no big deal that I put an RC aircraft radio on my kids toy rc car and let him run it within a mile or so from the local flying field????? Maybe your getting FAA and FCC mixed up because there are definitely FCC issues on anything that transmits RF.

BTW, my HK tx is at 1108mhz

I am surprised RCU supports illegal RF devices.

I have a freq counter, and I will gladly videotape the test and measurement of the "review" camera system for all to see.
It's not a secret these things do not follow the rules. Pull your heads out of the sand.

(in reply to Spanky1)
       Post #: 12

RE: NEW REVIEW: Tiny Wireless Video Camera by David Joh... - 12/29/2003 9:08:09 PM   
Spanky1


 

Posts: 138
Joined: 2/18/2002
From: My place, MI,
Status: offline 		Whats interesting is this; you have a verified low power output, not enough to bother anything. You have a comment from the fcc saying they are not worried about it (I asked specifically "is there anyway to use this on my radio controlled airplane that would make you come and take my first born?" You have in your hands one of the coolest pieces of technology to fiddle with.

Common sense. It's almost as if some people WANT a problem. I believe if you want a problem you can find it. Dig deep and throw a stink to the fcc and you will get your problem and halt forward movement.

All things considered, the fcc's comment works for me. This stuff is WAY to cool to worry about insignificant things.

Spanky

_____________________________

No Crybabies....... Just fly!

(in reply to lvspark)
       Post #: 13

RE: NEW REVIEW: Tiny Wireless Video Camera by David Joh... - 12/29/2003 11:35:44 PM   
PlaneKrazee



Posts: 3583
Joined: 5/15/2002
From: Westerly, RI, USA
Status: offline 		Hey Spanky1,

Where do you fly?

Your comments are way off base. Black widow sells equipment that is legal as do others.

The whole point of this thread was to have the review modified to let people know about the legalites.

< Message edited by Skypilot_one -- 12/29/2003 10:37:20 PM >

_____________________________

KB1DTB
AMA11123

(in reply to Spanky1)
       Post #: 14

RE: NEW REVIEW: Tiny Wireless Video Camera by David Joh... - 12/29/2003 11:39:26 PM   
PlaneKrazee



Posts: 3583
Joined: 5/15/2002
From: Westerly, RI, USA
Status: offline 		Spanky1,

If the FCC has not put a sticker on this equipment then nothing is verified, that is the problem.

< Message edited by Skypilot_one -- 12/29/2003 10:36:57 PM >

_____________________________

KB1DTB
AMA11123

(in reply to PlaneKrazee)