Ben, I agree we need a ruling on this I think part 97 is vauge and vauge for a reason
What we need is to setup a confrance call or something so we can get a well written letter together and get it off to someone who can make a ruleing at the FCC Skype, echolink, dstar or something where those that are interested can all join in - Define a system and descuss the possablities of doing call sign routing, sending the pages up to a satellite ect ect But before "we" put a lot of time and effort and money into this I think we need a ruleing I know for a fact that our local repeater is cabable of doing 2 tone paging - and was in use back when I was very young and not a ham - the elders of the local club say it was able to send alerts for weather, pages for people to get on the radio, ect. It was all done with tones at the time - "our" pagers are far more advanced and can display the text of whatever No one in the club can tell me why they stopped using pagers - a couple of the guys thought it was because cell phones became small and able to be carried in your hand. But at around the same time they stopped paging, kantronics also stopped modify pagers for 2 meters, and I think they stopped making the tncs that were able to do POCSAG - so my thinking was that a rule had changed making pagers illegal in the ham bands. Or at very least questionable. From the kantronics point of view the may not have been selling many of them and just didn't want to put the time and resources into making them anymore. But something happended - As I said our local repeater is cabable of doing two tone - it was built like that from the beginning We need to setup something and get as many people as we can write up a well written paper and get a ruleing. That is bottom line on it - I am on the fence as far as if it is legal or not - on one hand an agrument can be made for telemetery - which is aloud - on the other hand pagers can be used to send one way personal pages which is where I am unclear I think as we see here agurements can be made on both sides. Which is why we need a ruleing. When rules are written this vauge some one needs to decide and stand by the decision LeRoy, KD8BXP http://www.HamOhio.com ------Original Message------ From: Ben Jackson To: Bob Bruninga Cc: kd8...@aol.com Cc: amsat-bb@amsat.org Subject: Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS Re: [amsat-bb] Re:dream) Sent: Jul 7, 2009 11:20 AM -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Bob Bruninga wrote: *snip* We'll agree to disagree regarding your take of the rules as almost everyone else did on APRSSIG. ;) > There is no reason to nit pick rules. When one is broadcasting (one > way) to the general public or using amateur radio inappropriately, I > think everyone can tell when it is blatanly illegal. I just don't > see the FCC cares one nit about some of these debates when any one > can see that hams are taking initiative to better their use of the > radio art. Considering that they've recently ruled on whether contesters should give blanket "5-by-9" signals, I'd think they'd be glad to rule on something interesting and relevant. :) >>> You just have to ignore the curmudgeons who have nothing better >>> to do than nit-pick ways to prevent other hams from developing >>> useful applications of technology. A pager is simply the >>> text-to-user device integrated into the normal local 2-way >>> amateur radio communications system. >> The issue is that, according to Part 97, it can't be used beyond >> QSTs, telemetry, or "necessary" emergency communications. Could I >> get away with setting up such a system? Likely. Do I foot to stand >> on when my local OO comes knocking? Not so much. > > Some OO's are part of the problem, not the solution... Then the solution has presented itself. Get a ruling from the FCC regarding the use of transmissions to receive-only devices such as pagers. Then we can finally put this issue to rest and if anyone comes knocking regarding the legality of these transmissions, we can have something concrete to cite. Again, I'd love to set up something like this, but I'd be hard pressed to spend a chunk of money on a system that could be taken down if someone files a complaint to the FCC. Let's take any further discussion about this offline. - -- Ben Jackson - N1WBV - New Bedford, MA bbj <at> innismir.net - http://www.innismir.net/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJKU2ejAAoJEAQiWVsfSvVvhxwH/29Y5oXeLMTfZXholTV4gSdF IQmEBb3wBQbZK/V9ltjNQZhVnH1senvo8M1eYH/Cb60H3e+3bimuj1awAEZc+ACX EIuUI+l88+vABjjkv0YGzES3tDobFPMIgyP1pUWdlbrG3c8ZRBUxu3dFUbYWNMaB zothv8yGChMIFF+S60h/StmNpA4lEKm+J4hBsHlFhoBhjiX0kVD3G6IOxZGworIa RNwCwbQ4M1NNG62hp3a8YWF3y7qgjO6hTaq2hz3hTx9ktb4ajyCeMZYesNXByQ2A eFepP7fNTTD4ga9wVTX5xZeQ9+saREFxU0NcFS/GeCkWeAwy9FcJczfJWBVnha0= =AgEy -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- Sent on the Now Network� from my Sprint® BlackBerry
_______________________________________________ Sent via amsat...@amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
