NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #31/NN_1992_31.iso/spool/rec/radio/amateur/misc/21623

Internet Message Format | 1993-01-02 | 3.9 KB

Path: sparky!uunet!gatech!destroyer!cs.ubc.ca!mala.bc.ca!oneb!ham!emd
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: 430mhz band under th
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
From: [e-mail]
Date: Fri, 01 Jan 93 21:56:55 PST
References: <[e-mail]>
Distribution: world
Organization: Robert Smits
Lines: 68

[e-mail] (sohl,william h) writes:

> I think John's points are quite on target and
> here's a basic question...How does anyone know there actually is a repeater
> "assigned" to a certain frequency in a certain area.  Yes, I know there's
> an ARRL repeater directory and repeater coordinators, BUT no where in
> part 97 am I required to obtain the ARRL directory and/or to stay in
> touch with all the many repeater frequency coordinators that exist
> across the country.  So...If I am traveling across the USA with a friend in
> another vehicle and we start out using XYZ frequency simplex and it happens
> to be used in 50 or 60 places as a repeater input, I can't see how any
> argument/case can be made against my friend and I using that frequency
> during the whole trip as long as we make sure the frequency is not in
> use before we attempt communications (simplex) between us.
>

And how are you going to do that? If you're both on simplex on the
repeater input frequency, it's very likely that you will never hear most
of the people you are interfering with. A repeater receiver on a 3,000 ft
hilltop is going to hear a lot better than a mobile receiver running
along the road below it at 200 ft elevation. It will hear a handheld
at fifty miles, in all probability, while you guys in your mobiles may
get twenty or thirty miles or less.

> Now I'm not saying that I wouldn't change frequencies if asked politely,
> but that often is not the case when you read about all the nasty
> comments tossed at those "infringers" on a particular frequency.
> Bottom line seems to be (IMHO) that the ONLY requirement to avoid being
> labeled an interferer by the FCC is that you check the frequency
> before using.  If it is clear, you are not infringing.  I'll be happy
> to see if there's any other "case history, legal opinion, or otherwise"
> to sustain any other interpretation as it specifically relates to
> the amateur bands.
>

There's no excuse for not knowing what part of the band in your area is
used for repeater inputs, and as far as I'm concerned, operating simplex
on a repeater input is nothing short of MALICIOUS INTERFERENCE. While you
may not be concerned about the possibility, there is every likelihood
that sooner or later you will interfere with someone trying to access a
repeater to report a traffic accident or call an ambulance.

There are always simplex frequencies on every band if you want to operate
simplex, just as there are sections set aside for packet, for voice, for
cw, etc. Many of the "rules" governing amateur behaviour are not written
in national rules and regs, but are practices that have arisen over the
years from general agreement and common sense.

If you don't like the way repeater spectrum is allocated, get on the
coordinating committee, or VUAC. Please don't advocate the anarchy of
everyone operating wherever he/she pleases without regard for the rest of
us.

> Happy new year and here's a hope for a pleasant and friendly
> 1993 amongst all hams.
>
> Standard Disclaimer- Any opinions, etc. are mine and NOT my employer's.
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Bill Sohl (K2UNK) BELLCORE (Bell Communications Research, Inc.)
> Morristown, NJ             email via UUCP      bcr!cc!whs70
> 201-829-2879 Weekdays      email via Internet  [e-mail]


Robert Smits  VE7EMD Ladysmith B.C.
Ph [phone] e-mail: [e-mail]
PACKET VE7EMD@VE7KIT.#VANC.BC.CAN.NA