Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: 430mhz band under th
From: emd@ham.almanac.bc.ca
Date: Sat, 09 Jan 93 20:38:24 PST
Distribution: world
Organization: Robert Smits

clemon@lemsys.UUCP (Craig Lemon VE3XCL) writes:

> In article <kPJqwB2w164w@ham.almanac.bc.ca>, emd@ham.almanac.bc.ca writes:
> 
> > 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. 
> 
>         Hey, guess what, if the repeater owner is OUTRIGHT AND UTTERY
> STUPID enough to put a mountaintop repeater on a nationally accepted
> simplex frequency (and not even putting on PL access) he had better expect
> interference (ie. people not knowing it's a repeater input) at times.  We
> are NOT psychic.  How are we supposed to know we're accessing a repeater? 
> Kerchunk endlessly while listening on every possible output frequency in
> turn to see if we hear ourselves?  I think not.  If no one has the decency
> to tell anyone (via Directory's, even though they aren't mandatory) about
> the odd split, there's no reason why ham's should be *afraid* to transmit
> on a simplex frequency while on a trip and using standard simplex
> frequencies just in case we are accessing someone's PRIVATE mountaintop
> repeater on his PRIVATE frequency that he feels no one else should have the
> gall to use.  Get Real!
> 

Don't be so silly, Craig. Why should you assume that what's simplex where 
you come from means that everybody uses it that way? It tells you right 
in the repeater directory that local bandplans can vary, often for good 
technical reasons. 

For example, I can remember when 147.33 MHz was THE Western Canada 
Simplex Frequency, even though many other areas, including Ontario, were 
using it for repeater outputs. We didn't expect that we could continue to 
use 147.33 simplex when we were in other areas. 

> > > 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.
> 
> > 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.
> 
>         Right,  I'll sell my radio now, just in case.  If you read his
> post, you would have seen that he was using standard simplex freqs. and
> probably low power as they would have been close to each other.  He *DOES*
> know the band (national standard simplex).  There's no excuse for being so
> irresponsible to put a mountaintop repeater on simplex frequencies, not
> publish the freq to state this conflict, which, after all, you state could
> affect a life or death situation.  If the band is full, why don't you
> follow the advice of many of the other private repeater operators (who
> already have what they wanted) : Why not go up to 902, 1240, hell even
> 2400.  There's LOTS of space up there.  You'll probably say you don't want
> to for the same reason all of the other open-repeater supporters have.
> 

You're (deliberately ?) missing the point. The repeater in question was 
NOT on a simplex frequency, it was on a repeater frequency that is used 
as a simplex frequency in other areas of the continent. Who says every 
area has to have an identical bandplan when conditions and needs vary so
across North America? Besides, nobody's going to jump down your throat if 
you do it inadvertently (i.e.carelessly) and then move as soon as you 
find out you're on the wrong frequency. If on the other hand, you take 
the attitude that, "well, it's a simplex channel in my area, so I'm gonna 
ignore the fact that hams in other areas have differing bandplans, and 
transmit on it even if it's a repeater input in some areas", then sir, 
you would be behaving inappropriately.

> > 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. 
> 
>         Yes, and he was on them.
> 
No, he wasn't. He was operating on a repeater input frequency in that 
area. That it may be used for simplex elsewhere is beside the point.

> > 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.
> 
>         Hmmm.  Maybe I'll join a co-ordinating committee across the country
> just in case I travel there.  Thanks for the tip.
> 
I suggest instead that you buy a repeater directory. Or write to the 
coordinating committee (listed in the directory) and ask for the latest, 
most up-to-date list, which they'll gladly furnish you.

You're welcome.

> --
>  Craig Lemon VE3XCL (Advanced) - Kitchener, Ontario. +1 519 741 0297
>  clemon@lemsys.UUCP clemon%lemsys@xenitec.on.ca  | 1B Electrical Engineering
>  TCP/IP: ve3xcl@ve3xcl.ampr.org [44.135.84.51]   |  University of Waterloo
>  AX.25 Packet: ve3xcl@ve3euk.#SWON.ON.CAN.NA     | Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA


Robert Smits  VE7EMD Ladysmith B.C. 
Ph (604) 245-2553 e-mail: emd@ham.almanac.bc.ca 
PACKET VE7EMD@VE7KIT.#VANC.BC.CAN.NA