From: rcanders@nyx.cs.du.edu (Rod Anderson)
Subject: Re: 430mhz band under th
X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University
	of Denver for the Denver community.  The University has neither
	control over nor responsibility for the opinions of users.
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 93 18:55:45 GMT

In article <1992Dec31.123918.1@ttd.teradyne.com> rice@ttd.teradyne.com writes:
>In article <8245@lib.tmc.edu>, jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard) writes:
>> In article <1992Dec29.161631.1@ttd.teradyne.com> rice@ttd.teradyne.com writes:
>>>  That works both ways. In an area where there's extremely high frequency
>>>congestion, If a pair of simplex stations pick a repeater input on which to
>>>hold a simplex QSO (and the repeater's not in use at the time), any station
>>>knowingly transmitting on the input and QRMing their QSO is equally at fault.
>> 
>> ...assuming that they can hear him. If the repeater is PLed, and they're not
>> using the repeater's PL tone, then someone using the repeater from across town
>> won't know that thay're there. Nevertheless, if he gets into a conversation on
>> the repeater with someone else who, likewise, cannot hear the "simplex"
>> conversation, then the only interference going on is from the "simplex" users.
>
>That's why I said "knowingly".
>
>> 
>>>The only thing the rules say is that the repeater operator can turn off the
>>>repeater to prevent the 'non members' from being repeated. The rules say
>>>nothing about giving the repeater operator(s) EXCLUSIVE rights to the
>>>frequencies, input or output. The spectrum is still a shared resource - it's
>>>first come first served.
>> 
>> OK...but why should someone hold a "simplex" conversation on a frequency known
>> to be a repeater input? The only reason I can come up with is that they
>> deliberately wish to QRM the repeater, especially if they do not QSY after
>> being advised of the situation. Otherwise, they can accomplish the same thing
>> by using a repeater's OUTPUT frequency, and they thereby gain the advantage
>> that the repeater user is much more likely to hear them and avoid them.
>
>This happened to me some years ago. The repeater was 'co-ordinated' on
>non-standard frequencies. In my part of the country, the input (and output)
>frequencies were both simplex freqs. In California, these frequencies were
>a repeater with a non-standard split. My friend and I had been using the
>frequencies to co-ordinate a cross country car trip for 2000 miles with no
>problem.
>
>When we got into the L.A. Basin, some A**hole read us the riot act. He didn't
>bother to explain that it was a repeater freq, or ask us to move. He just
>blew his top about malicious interference on "HIS" frequency. I didn't need
>that attitude then and I don't need it now.
>
>> 
>> It is simply not good amateur practice to hold a conversation on the
>> repeater's input frequency if you do not intend to use the repeater. Folks
>> have been held to be maliciously interfering with the users of the repeater
>> for doing so.
>
>It's also not "good amateur practice" to put repeaters on frequencies that
>are considered simplex channels in the rest of the world, either. I can
>understand it happening where spectrum is scarce, but if it's a 'so called'
>private repeater, and the operator won't have it published in a repeater 
>directory so that you know it's there - the frequency is fair game..
>
>--------
>
>   John Rice -  K9IJ         |  "Did I say that ?" I must have, but It was    
>   rice@ttd.teradyne.com     |   MY opinion only, no one else's...Especially  
>   (708)-940-9000 - (work)   |   Not my Employer's.... Licensed since 1959
>   (708)-438-5065 - (bbs )   |   Ex: K8YZR, KH6GHC, WB9CSP, W9MMB, WA1TXV

In the 92-93 ARRL  Repeater Directory the following are given as as
the simplex frequencies on the ARRL band plan:

144.90-145.10
146.40-146.58 with a note that 146.40 may be a repeater input in some
147.42-147.57                                                   places

Of the above the  144.9-145.1 is in urban areas filled with packet
activity.

In some areas frequencies in the 147.42-147.57 range have been
assigned a repeater inputs.

I don't know what gives a repeater frequency coordinator the right to
disregard the accepted national band plan and assign repeaters to
simplex frequencies.  After all they only speak for the repeater
owners not the average users.  Just think of how few closed repeaters
there would be if all hams chose the repeater coordinators.

Rod Anderson      N0NZO on ao-16      rcanders@nyx.cs.du.edu

Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc