Build Your Own Cell tower

Sweet! by IO+ERROR · 2005-03-21 05:59 · Score: 5, Interesting

This is just exactly what I've been looking for. I just have to wonder if the sort of power output this thing needs is entirely legal. Oh well, who cares until the FCC shows up. According to this page though, the range is 130km (80 miles) at sea level! Who needs a cell phone anymore unless you're going waaaay out of town. I suspect that's a typo though.

It's not so much that I don't want a cell phone, it's more that I don't see any use paying $40-50 a month for something I don't use more than 100 minutes a month. Even if I only got five miles of range out of it, it would easily cover 99% of my needs.

--
How am I supposed to fit a pithy, relevant quote into 120 characters?

Re:Sweet! by garcia · 2005-03-21 06:02 · Score: 5, Interesting

Please note the "Update:" under the blurb that is linked to from Slashdot...

The phone might not adhere to FCC regulations. If you can't use a FRS radio for more than a couple miles w/o a license why would you be able to use this cordless phone?
Re:Sweet! by Shakrai · 2005-03-21 06:02 · Score: 5, Interesting

I've joked about building something like this with friends before (probably using 2.4ghz cordless phones and external antennas meant for Wi-Fi) but they actually released a product?

If the security is up to par (I'm thinking FHSS and maybe encryption) screw the cell phone! Why should I pay for both the cell phone and the landline? Ditching the landline isn't an option anymore because I need it for ADSL.

With Verizon's freedom packages the landline is cheaper anyway (at least with the way I use the phone). And think of the possibilities if you attached it to a VoIP box....

--
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
Re:Sweet! by Dr+Reducto · 2005-03-21 06:09 · Score: 5, Interesting

...And pair it with VOIP, and you should be able to save the cost of the phone over time, assuming the phone works as advertised. A cell phone that you can call all over the world for "free".
Re:Sweet! by Subgenius · 2005-03-21 06:12 · Score: 5, Informative

Think twice folks, these devices are illegal to use in the US (lets not get into the 'rights of the airspace within a Farrady cage in a private club' stuff, ok?). Look for fines ranging from $7,500 to over $10k for 'wilfull and repeated violations' of FCC regulations if you fire one of these up (and your local hams or ANYONE ELSE reports you).

Most of these types radios use frequencies right in the midle of the the 2 meter band (140Mhz), allocated to gov't/amateur radio.

Just wait and see what happens when you fire up one of these and step all over coordinated 2m repeater....

--
Toil is Stupid. Don't be Stupid.
Re:Sweet! by VAXcat · 2005-03-21 06:23 · Score: 4, Informative

I concur...and there is no such thing as a frequency where no one will notice you...there is always an amateur radio op or scanner fan checking the spectrum for interesting signals.

--
There is no God, and Dirac is his prophet.
Re:Sweet! by deacon · 2005-03-21 07:33 · Score: 5, Informative

If you had bothered to read the linked articles you would have seen:
"Now for the long awaited question. I took the whole setup over to a friends place who is a ham radio operator. He immediately chastised me for importing such contraband into the country and continually tsked tsked me while he checked the frequency on the equipment and salivated over it all wishing he had a set of his own. Well, here's the bad news....the frequency range is indeed 450 transmit from the base and 230 from the handset, reverse for the receive frequencies. This of course puts this outside the GMRS band and in the case of the 230 mhz band into some part of the aircraft communication band of frequencies. I do not have the exact frequencies in front of me at this moment but I have been for warned that by using these new toys of mine I would be infringing upon part of the Private Radio Service in the 450mhz range and, as mentioned, part of the aircraft comm band in the 230mhz range. So things look a little bleak as far as using this stuff in the US is concerned."
Are you and the mods new here or something?
Don't even go there.
Re:Sweet! by budgenator · 2005-03-21 08:39 · Score: 5, Informative

It operates in a licensed part of the RF spectrum; if operate this in that portion of the spectrum without a license, the FCC can and has fined people $10,000.00.

Released: February 26, 2004
By the District Director, Philadelphia Office, Enforcement Bureau:

I. INTRODUCTION
1. In this Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture ("NAL"), we find that Best Wok has apparently violated Section 301 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the "Act").[1] The violation occurred because Best Wok operated radio transmitting equipment on the frequency 145.8376 MHz without a license issued by the FCC. We conclude that Best Wok is apparently liable for a forfeiture in the amount of ten thousand dollars ($10,000). ...

At 11:30 a.m. on February 28, 2003, the agent entered Best Wok and inspected the radio transmitting equipment in the presence of the restaurant manager, Sae C. Hauwo. The agent found that Best Wok was operating a long-distance cordless telephone system. The system was comprised of a base unit that was located under the counter of the restaurant and a mobile unit that was in Hauwo's vehicle. There were no identifying markings on the mobile unit, but the base unit was marked with the Model Number GSM WLT-988. The FCC agent used frequency-measuring equipment to determine that the base unit actually operated on the frequency 145.8376 MHz and not the frequency 145.835 MHz as specified in the complaints. Hauwo stated that he installed the long-range cordless telephone system so that his employees could answer customers' telephone calls while making deliveries in their vehicles. Hauwo stated that he purchased the long-range cordless telephone system in another country and brought it into the United States to operate at the restaurant.

You need to be very careful when purchasing RF equipment outside the US; that it's legal inside the US. A mistake can be expensive!

--
Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds

And how soon before they cross frequencies? by NaruVonWilkins · 2005-03-21 06:00 · Score: 5, Insightful

This sounds to me like it'll be short-lived. More than ten people in your neighborhood get one and it's all over.

Low speed WiFi by nharmon · 2005-03-21 06:00 · Score: 4, Interesting

Could these be adapted for slow (modem speed) wifi?

High-power RF interference by powdered+toast+dude · 2005-03-21 06:02 · Score: 5, Interesting

In a neighboorhood where I once lived, someone had a very high-powered (and likely illegal) phone of which this reminds me. It was so powerful, and perhaps poorly designed, that I'd hear his conversations inducted into my own landline as he drove by. Weird but kind of cool.

$0.02,
ptd

--
I'm an animal lover -- they're delicious!

Re:High-power RF interference by krgallagher · 2005-03-21 06:15 · Score: 4, Interesting

"It was so powerful, and perhaps poorly designed, that I'd hear his conversations inducted into my own landline as he drove by. "
In my neighboorhood I have three ham radio operators within about ten blocks of me. I am convinced one of them is running an illegal amplifier. When it is transmitting, I get sine waves on the screen of every television in the house. When he keys the microphone, he broadcasts through my computer speakers even with my computer turned off. I finally got fed up with it and complained to the FCC. They sent me some nice brochures on how to shield my home entertainment equipment from RF interferance.

--
Insert Generic Sig Here:
Re:High-power RF interference by shaitand · 2005-03-21 06:27 · Score: 5, Interesting

Yup, the HAM is licensed your not. In fact, if your TV interferes with his transmission he can contact the FCC to have YOU shut down.
Re:High-power RF interference by lukewarmfusion · 2005-03-21 06:40 · Score: 4, Interesting

If nothing else, shouldn't the FCC be responsible for managing the spectrum in such a way that these kinds of problems do not happen?

A licensed operator running an illegal amplifier obviously should be given lower priority than the owner of an FCC-approved consumer device. The other guy has no right to remove your use of the spectrum, while his use is probably considered beyond reasonable.

I'm just arguing for the sake of arguing. This is Slashdot, after all.
Re:High-power RF interference by TomorrowPlusX · 2005-03-21 06:56 · Score: 5, Funny

When I was a bus driver in college, there was this one neighborhood ( close to downtown Charlottesville, VA ) where somebody's wireless landline would cause massive interference with our CB radios. Massive enough that we could here *complete* conversations, clearly, if we were within a few blocks.

Once I heard one hell of a yelling match, he threatened to kill somebody and bury him in his garage.

Those were the days...

--

lorem ipsum, dolor sit amet

Wonderful.. by ackthpt · 2005-03-21 06:03 · Score: 5, Interesting

So it's basically a long range phone, not an actual cell phone. Fine if you live on a ranch, but with all the structures and interference in town, I wonder how effective it really is.

FWIW I avoid cell phones because the cost is just too damn high for what little I need one for. I'd consider pay-as-you-go without some stupid limit placed upon how soon I need to use up my time or artificial wallet robbing schemes

--

A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar

legal issue in the US by Flying+Purple+Wombat · 2005-03-21 06:03 · Score: 5, Informative

Most of these things are illegal in the US. They use frequecies assigned to other services, and power that far exceeds limits in FCC part 15.

I don't know about other places, but using that in the US risks huge fines ($10,000).

--
If God had meant for man to see the sunrise, He would have scheduled it later in the day.

I just use my normal cordless by PhraudulentOne · 2005-03-21 06:03 · Score: 5, Funny

I live downtown in a *small* rural community. I can take my 900Mhz cordless to the corner store, the parks, and a couple of restaurants without it dropping calls. Plus, I have bonus of looking like Zack Morris as I stroll around with my big-ass phone.

--
You create your own reality - Leave mine to me.

Re:I just use my normal cordless by Shakrai · 2005-03-21 06:10 · Score: 4, Funny

I live downtown in a *small* rural community. I can take my 900Mhz cordless to the corner store, the parks, and a couple of restaurants without it dropping calls.

Your "small rural community" has a corner store and a couple of restaurants? We were lucky to get that stop light a few years ago....

--
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.

Is that really a good idea?? by pg110404 · 2005-03-21 06:04 · Score: 5, Insightful

Only friends and family know my cellphone number and perhaps my car garage.

I've never been bothered by telemarketers on my cell phone yet. With this, you can get harrassed by them all day long.

With this, you'll need to leave town to get peace and quiet.

* excellent * by bizmark22 · 2005-03-21 06:04 · Score: 5, Funny

now I can have fake "cell phone" conversations with my "girlfriend" on my own network, with no chance of that phone ringing halfway through to give me away...

--

I read slashdot for the sigs...

Lost in someone else's couch? by Anonymous Coward · 2005-03-21 06:05 · Score: 5, Funny

I have a hard enough time finding my portable phone in my house. Now it can get lost within 30 miles? Eep.

Don't do it in the U.S. by Bruce+Perens · 2005-03-21 06:10 · Score: 5, Informative

Here's what FCC did to someone who had one of these devices that operated in the ham bands.

Bruce

--
Bruce Perens.

Re:Don't do it in the U.S. by cot · 2005-03-21 06:13 · Score: 5, Funny

Thanks for taking the time to format that by hand, I'm sure it was tedious.

--

Fake ! by MaxOliver · 2005-03-21 06:17 · Score: 5, Informative

This is not a Samsung model. In fact it is made by several Chinese factories as fakes of Samsung, SENAO, etc. They normally use HAM radio frequencies or comercial VHF/UHF. Due to the fact that they are only certified in China it is illegal to use in most countries.

Re:Fake ! by javaxman · 2005-03-21 06:30 · Score: 4, Insightful

This is not a Samsung model. In fact it is made by several Chinese factories as fakes of Samsung, SENAO, etc.
That would explain the results you get when entering "Samsung Super Long Range Phone" into google. It's really a shame we can't convince /. editors to google the subjects of stories before submitting them. I guess that's our job.
They normally use HAM radio frequencies or comercial VHF/UHF. Due to the fact that they are only certified in China it is illegal to use in most countries.
This explains why you don't see these for sale in the US anywhere... it's clearly not a new product, and if someone did come up with a way to do this legally ( and in a manner that would allow everyone in town to have such a phone- say a wide-spectrum mesh network device or something ), it'd be big, big news. Too bad this isn't something like that- instead, it's just more crap to clutter HAM frequencies and/or screw up over-the-air broadcasts. Only the stupid and extremely anti-social would even consider purchasing such a thing in most developed countries...
Me, I'm not to afraid of low-level RF emissions- I think my cell phone probably won't give me cancer... but you do have to wonder what sort of radiation *this* sucker puts out...
Nothing to look at here, folks, move along...
Re:Fake ! by magarity · 2005-03-21 07:23 · Score: 4, Funny

do have to wonder what sort of radiation *this* sucker puts out

Electromagnetic?

lol

Not a good idea if unlicensed... by jim_deane · 2005-03-21 06:17 · Score: 4, Informative

If you operate one of these devices in the U.S., and it operates on ANY frequency used by the military, government, business, or amateur radio, you will be hunted down and taken out--by the FCC.

The price of the unit may be cheaper than cell phone bills, but add on that $10,000 fine and seizure of the equipment and it gets real expensive real quick.

And in case you think you're safe because it's in an amateur band, you should note that amateur radio operators practice RDF (Radio Direction Finding) or "Foxhunting" for fun. They will hunt you down, and the FCC accepts evidence from licensed operators in cases against violators.

Jim

FCC Fine Letters by Subgenius · 2005-03-21 06:19 · Score: 5, Informative

Please read these before buying/using these phones...

http://www.fcc.gov/eb/Orders/2002/DA-02-453A1.html
http://www.fcc.gov/eb/Orders/2002/DA-02-2474A1.htm l

4. On July 27, 2001, agents from the Miami Office visited Lightning's retail store located at 231 E. Flagler Street, Unit #1, Miami, Florida. The agents saw several long-range, cordless telephones on display at the store, including a Super Phone CT-9000, a Prolink CT-6000CID, and an Optima OP8810. A salesperson
offered to sell one of the units to the agents. The long-range cordless telephones displayed at the store were capable of causing serious interference to aviation communications and were
not approved6 by the Commission for use in the United States.

--
Toil is Stupid. Don't be Stupid.

Oh, great... by kclittle · 2005-03-21 06:23 · Score: 4, Funny

now my daughter can loose the cordless phone within a 30 mile radius. Just frick'n wunnerful...

--
Generally, bash is superior to python in those environments where python is not installed.

Can be converted by elgatozorbas · 2005-03-21 07:24 · Score: 4, Informative

No doubt this could be converted. HAM radio amateurs use something comparable which is called 'packet radio'. The most common rate (afaik) is 9k6, which is referred to as 'fast packet'. Probably you can do better (using your own modulation scheme), but not very much (assuming the link quality is comparable to normal telephone).

Something that I find surprising in some slashdotters is the fascination for wireless technology. Charming as it is, wireless is just another type of technology having its own benefits and hurdles. In general it is not the 'being wireless' part that is difficult: transmitters have existed for over 100 years.
I understand other people's fascination, but anyone can have his own transmitter, given that you can pass the HAM exam (if not you shouldn't be fooling around with wireless equipment anyway). Wireless links can be bought almost off-the-shelf.

IMHO the communication scheme itself is a lot more difficult. This can be understood easily by looking at the evolution of wireline modems: they started at 150 (or so) bps and worked their way up to 33kbps (higher rates use special tricks). All the time the medium remained the same, only progress was in the digital layers. For the same reason, I don't think it is fair to say 'wireless problem solved, halfway there'.
Just my 2ct...

31 of 377 comments (clear)