I am actively involved in CAP Communications as well as working for one of the world's largest distributors of ham radio equipment, and I have considered purchasing (for my own use) from one of our vendors one these Bluetooth adapters (like the one shown at http://www.pryme.com/index.php?l=product_detail&p=2163 (http://www.pryme.com/index.php?l=product_detail&p=2163)) for my EF Johnson handheld radio, and I was just wondering if anyone else out there has any experience using anything like this while serving on a ground team. I would appreciate any feedback (good or bad) from anyone that has used such an item, to see if it would be worth purchasing.
The problem with anything like this, even hand mikes that keeps the radio immediately next to the body, is that unless you are in a very strong signal area (very close to the repeater or aircraft flying right overhead), your body blocks/absorbs part of the signal and this will affect transmitter range.
Also IF any encryption was being used the blue tooth could not be used because it is an RF emitter on 2.4 ghz range. The more accessories items you add to a simple radio, in my opinion, the more chances something will not work correctly or overall impede the radio performance (with the exception of an external mobile/base antenna or a roll up J pole for a portable).
RM
Within the strict letter of the law, a Bluetooth system is a separate radio, and converts the EFJ into a crossband repeater. After the way people were claiming that hooking up a power supply to an HT was out-of-standard, I can't wait for the argument about THIS! ;)
Bluetooth units which are not SPECIFICALLY approved for aviation may not be used in or around aircraft.
I don't like Bluetooth because I prefer to cut close-to-body RF emissions as much as practical. Also, you're adding another powered device which may fail from damage or battery issues.
OTOH, it could be VERY useful in fringe areas or inside buildings to set your HT where it is illuminated by the repeater and be able to communicate from several feet away, so it is a capability which may be worth having.
Quote from: Buzz on September 24, 2011, 06:30:27 PM
<snip>
Bluetooth units which are not SPECIFICALLY approved for aviation may not be used in or around aircraft.
<snip>
Citation for this restriction, please.
Thom
I don't know of anything in the CFR that prohibits the use of Bluetooth in any aircraft, although FAA guidelines seem to allow commercial carriers as much latitude as they want to approve or disapprove of any PED. Obviously, you could not install ( permanently attach) a Bluetooth enabled device to an aircraft without the device and installation being approved. Experimental Aircraft people can install just about anything in their ships. I don't know of any flight systems that have BT built-in, but it would not be terribly surprising to find one I suppose, especially in the EFIS gear and other wild and crazy experimental gear. I have manufactured ham radio APRS transmitters using Bluetooth in "serial port profile" ( replacing an actual serial cable) and I know that quite a few of these are in the sky right now.
Personally, I think it would be kind of cool to have a Bluetooth headset, but there better be a back up set of wired "cans" for when the unit goes dark!
Major Lord
Quote from: Major Lord on September 25, 2011, 12:46:39 AM
I don't know of anything in the CFR that prohibits the use of Bluetooth in any aircraft, although FAA guidelines seem to allow commercial carriers as much latitude as they want to approve or disapprove of any PED. Obviously, you could not install ( permanently attach) a Bluetooth enabled device to an aircraft without the device and installation being approved. Experimental Aircraft people can install just about anything in their ships. I don't know of any flight systems that have BT built-in, but it would not be terribly surprising to find one I suppose, especially in the EFIS gear and other wild and crazy experimental gear. I have manufactured ham radio APRS transmitters using Bluetooth in "serial port profile" ( replacing an actual serial cable) and I know that quite a few of these are in the sky right now.
Personally, I think it would be kind of cool to have a Bluetooth headset, but there better be a back up set of wired "cans" for when the unit goes dark!
Major Lord
Nice Hack!
+5 Geek Points for You!
Thom
We just received some Bluetooth speaker/mics to test on our fire department Motorola P25 portables. Haven't had a chance to play with one yet; I'll post the results if I can get my hands on one.
I see no reason why you can't, but they are fairly expensive when compared to standard surveillance-style earpieces, which most of the people
around me use.
A higher-end BT earpiece, dual-paired to a cel phone and a radio would be a nice-to-have, though. I have a couple nice ones that allow pairing to more than one device.
Quote from: Eclipse on September 25, 2011, 01:03:28 AMA higher-end BT earpiece, dual-paired to a cel phone and a radio would be a nice-to-have, though. I have a couple nice ones that allow pairing to more than one device.
This...
Quote from: Thom on September 24, 2011, 06:40:26 PM
Quote from: Buzz on September 24, 2011, 06:30:27 PM
<snip>
Bluetooth units which are not SPECIFICALLY approved for aviation may not be used in or around aircraft.
<snip>
Citation for this restriction, please.
http://www.faa.gov/news/fact_sheets/news_story.cfm?newsid=6275
http://www.fcc.gov/guides/wireless-devices-airplanes
The guys at Bose spent a lot of money getting the Bluetooth addition TSOed on their already-approved headset.
Quote from: Major Lord on September 25, 2011, 12:46:39 AMI don't know of any flight systems that have BT built-in,
PS has a TSOed Bluetooth version of their top-of-the-line audio panel.
It is wonderful that some manufacturer went to BT enabled device, but that's a pretty cry from taking the position (that): " Bluetooth units which are not SPECIFICALLY approved for aviation may not be used in or around aircraft." As I said, any device designed for installation in type accepted ( non-experimental) aircraft would have to use an approved ( TSO'd) avionics. There is a lot that could be done with BT devices, and a few competing technologies with similar features.
Major Lord
Quote from: Major Lord on September 27, 2011, 07:16:41 PM
It is wonderful that some manufacturer went to BT enabled device, but that's a pretty cry from taking the position (that): " Bluetooth units which are not SPECIFICALLY approved for aviation may not be used in or around aircraft." As I said, any device designed for installation in type accepted ( non-experimental) aircraft would have to use an approved ( TSO'd) avionics. There is a lot that could be done with BT devices, and a few competing technologies with similar features.
Major Lord
In the Part 91 world, if the PIC is satisfied that a PED does not cause interference with the aircraft systems, then it's approved for use.
Quote from: JeffDG on September 27, 2011, 07:28:26 PM]In the Part 91 world, if the PIC is satisfied that a PED does not cause interference with the aircraft systems, then it's approved for use.
Yep. That's "specific approval."
As opposed to just using your BT stuff and hoping that nobody complains.
There is currently a rule review, which would specifically permit Bluetooth, but it is on hold and has been for several years.
Part of the reason that I have considered using a wireless handsfree attachment to my radio is that it may be REQUIRED for use in a vehicle under pending legal changes connected with "distracted driving" laws. While those laws were intended to address cellphone use while driving, they are written so broadly that the use of ANY radio equipment while mobile (with a few very specific exceptions that have been lobbied for by industry groups) could result in a criminal charge and a fine. The specific exceptions that I have found cover one-way broadcast/satellite reception; use by State Certified PAID police/fire/EMT personnel; Amateur Radio, Citizens Radio Service operators, and other current holders of FCC licenses using equipment type-accepted for use only within bands allocated specifically by the FCC to those services; US or state military personnel with a military servicemember ID using them in the performance of their duties; or persons using a handsfree wireless headset. Unless the USAF either decides that we qualify for some type of military ID, or our Wing becomes a part of the State Guard when NOT on a mission, or they clearly and unequivocally state that our CAP ID card qualifies as a military servicemember ID, I think that I will take my chances with acquiring a wireless dongle for now.
"could" is a pretty big word there. I wouldn't personally spend money based on "could" in this instance.
For example cell-phone use by the driver in any vehicle is banned on Navy bases (all bases?), hands-free or otherwise, except when in the performance of
your duties. I've never felt uncomfortable using mine during encampments, etc., nor the radios, and we've never heard anything about it from the base (though the regular warnings are briefed regularly). We all do the "call drop" when entering the base "...gotta go, I'm coming up to the gate".
That doesn't mean that an overzealous officer won't write you up, but there are shades to this, especially when you are legitimately working.
Quote from: Eclipse on September 28, 2011, 04:46:43 PM
"could" is a pretty big word there. I wouldn't personally spend money based on "could" in this instance.
For example cell-phone use by the driver in any vehicle is banned on Navy bases (all bases?), hands-free or otherwise, except when in the performance of your duties. I've never felt uncomfortable using mine during encampments, etc., nor the radios, and we've never heard anything about it from the base (though the regular warnings are briefed regularly). We all do the "call drop" when entering the base "...gotta go, I'm coming up to the gate".
That doesn't mean that an overzealous officer won't write you up, but there are shades to this, especially when you are legitimately working.
That must be a local thing for you. I regularly go to the bases (USN and USMC) in my area, and hands free devices are permitted at all five of them.
Quote from: SarDragon on September 28, 2011, 09:53:34 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on September 28, 2011, 04:46:43 PM
"could" is a pretty big word there. I wouldn't personally spend money based on "could" in this instance.
For example cell-phone use by the driver in any vehicle is banned on Navy bases (all bases?), hands-free or otherwise, except when in the performance of your duties. I've never felt uncomfortable using mine during encampments, etc., nor the radios, and we've never heard anything about it from the base (though the regular warnings are briefed regularly). We all do the "call drop" when entering the base "...gotta go, I'm coming up to the gate".
That doesn't mean that an overzealous officer won't write you up, but there are shades to this, especially when you are legitimately working.
That must be a local thing for you. I regularly go to the bases (USN and USMC) in my area, and hands free devices are permitted at all five of them.
http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=14689
+1 to Spaceman's article. This has been a briefing point for anything at NSGL for ages.
That's a five and a half year olde article. Many things have changed since then, both on and off the bases. My personal experience is current as of a month ago.
Quote from: SarDragon on September 28, 2011, 10:07:06 PM
That's a five and a half year olde article. Many things have changed since then, both on and off the bases. My personal experience is current as of a month ago.
Driving faster than 65mph on Illinois freeways is illegal. None of the police officers I have driven by really cared that I was going 70. Doesn't make it any less illegal.
Quote from: SarDragon on September 28, 2011, 10:07:06 PM
That's a five and a half year olde article. Many things have changed since then, both on and off the bases. My personal experience is current as of a month ago.
How about 3 days ago?
http://www.navy.mil/pod/navypod.asp?c=8
Driving and Cell Phone Use (24 Sep 2011)
Handheld cellphones not(sic) longer can be used while driving on DoD Installations. However, they can be used with a hands-free system or while parked. Any distraction while driving should be avoided, including changing radio stations, eating, combing hair, or putting on makeup. Make the right decision and avoid a mishap.The above says hands-free is OK, but I can tell you it ain't on Great Lakes, the gate guards will actually instruct you to remove your earpiece when you come through.
So then it's a local thing, isn't it? NOTHING I said was wrong.
Quote from: SarDragon on September 28, 2011, 10:19:45 PM
So then it's a local thing, isn't it? NOTHING I said was wrong.
Have you actually checked lately at whatever base you go to? Google says this is a pretty common restriction.
I've been to three of the five in the past month, two Navy, and one Marine. That qualifies as lately for me. My Sweetie goes to the closest Marine base (Miramar) every other week, and has seen nothing new on the signs at the gates that display cell phone rules.
Like I said - local rules.
Nothing at Great Lakes is posted anywhere, either. Local is local, I guess.
Quote from: Eclipse on September 28, 2011, 10:20:51 PM
Quote from: SarDragon on September 28, 2011, 10:19:45 PM
So then it's a local thing, isn't it? NOTHING I said was wrong.
Have you actually checked lately at whatever base you go to? Google says this is a pretty common restriction.
No problem at North Island NAS as of last Saturday. And Google is only as good as it's sources.
Yeah, hands free policies are local. Every base 'round hea allows hands-free devices.
The law says...
Quote from: 32 C.F.R. ยง 634.25
Vehicle operators on a DoD Installation and operators of Government owned vehicles shall not use cell phones unless the vehicle is safely parked or unless they are using a hands-free device. The wearing of any other portable headphones, earphones, or other listening devices (except for hand-free cellular phones) while operating a motor vehicle is prohibited. Use of those devices impairs driving and masks or prevents recognition of emergency signals, alarms, announcements, the approach of vehicles, and human speech...
I was informed earlier this evening that MCAS Miramar now has a policy of no cell phone use while the vehicle is in motion, regardless of any hands free devices. It's in small letters on the sign just inside the gate.