[Repeater-Builder] Re: Amateur repeater ID's
A quick visit to the site revealed some workers had tripped the breaker on the circuit powering the repeater. I wonder if someone tripped the breaker or if it's just getting tired? If it trips again, it's probably time to replace it. Hope it isn't a long trip out to the site. Tom --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, TGundo 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: MCH [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So, you are left with people who want to cause trouble by reporting something they don't feel is right in how someone else is operating. IOW, sticking their nose in the business of others. Operating should be between the licensee and the FCC and nobody else. AMEN! I for one have used such IDs as an indication that a repeater is still operating correctly. It also gives technical info (telemetry) of the site conditions which is a legal one-way transmission. Me too- The hourly ID lets me make sure all is well with the system during monitoring. Two days ago I noticed I did not hear the ID, found one of the Linked Repeaters not up. A quick visit to the site revealed some workers had tripped the breaker on the circuit powering the repeater. Had it back up and running within hours, as opposed to getting the call when I am not able to run out. Joe M. However- this is all food for thought. I might consider removing all of the top of the hour ID's. Makes you wonder about all the time put into repeater controller engineering to facilitate things like schedulers and such to make all of these illegal broadcasting possible. Thats it- I'm blaming S-Com Bob for all the trouble 73's Tom W9SRV __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Amateur Repeater ID's
This suddenly got me wondering, I plan to try ATV, and would it supposedly be a violation of the rules sending when you don't know if anyone will actually receive it? As far as a QST, that could be considered as a one way transmission when you really think about it. There are parts of the rules that tend to be in the grey zone rather than BW... Yet part of the idea is to be able to experiment, and that is sometimes going to be one way no matter how you slice it. I do agree that having a repeater simply sit there and ID every 9 or 10 meniutes with nobody using it is not a good idea. I had to solve a minor detail with the controller I now have. The PSE 508 series has an option for a recorded message to be played at a given time interval. If I had it set to CW ID, and had the timer for the message set for 9 minutes, it would wind up doing so every 9 minutes. Not what I really wanted. I did resolve that, and the recorded message is the voice ID, which will revert to CW if someone keys up while it is in ID mode. At least it now only ID's one time after the last activity and not again till someone keys up the repeater. It would be nice to also have another message, timer can be set for a long time. It does say voice recorded message for ID and/or announcement, so it would seem I can do both. Still learning all of the details for the controller, but it is a fast and fairly easy way to put a Mastr II station with the normal shelf online as a repeater. Anyway, it is a bit common for some repeaters to ID at times when they have not had a user. But there again, it could be annoying to some of those monitoring for activity using a scanner, who only want to hear when a user comes on the repeater... YMMV Wayne WA2YNE Imperial, Tejas 441.950 TX 446.950 RX 167.9 On Wed, 09 Apr 2008 08:12:34 -0500, Robert Pease [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I agree with your thinking, but along that line couldn't a repeater ID and time announcement be considered a QST, an announcement to all amateurs that the repeater is there with info about the repeater owner, PL and Time? Rob KS4EC From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dan Hancock Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2008 8:44 AM To: repeater builders Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Amateur Repeater ID's First let's agree on one thing, amateur repeaters are amateur stations. Second, let's admit that the rules prohibit amateur stations from one-way transmissions, except for general calling for a contact (CQ's) and announcements of interest to amateurs (QST's). Hence, having the repeater ID periodically when not in use would constitute one-way transmissions (broadcasting). Now let me play devil's advocate. What if the periodic ID used when the repeater was not in use was CQ de WR8DAR? That would not be just an ID, but rather an invitation for contact (an invitation to use the repeater). Wouldn't that put things in a different light? Dan N8DJP Re: Amateur repeater ID's Posted by: kb1we6r [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://us.f431.mail.yahoo.com/ym/[EMAIL PROTECTED]YY=104 68y5beta=yesy5beta=yesorder=upsort=datepos=0 kb1we6r Date: Tue Apr 8, 2008 12:49 pm ((PDT)) As an OO, my interpretation of the rules is that it would be considered a beacon, and they are only allowed on certain frequencies. And the ones that do the hourly chimes too! (I have given verbal advisements). Remember, users are scanning MANY repeaters, if they had to listen to that for every repeater, they (or their wives) would go postal!! It also is covered in the good engineering practice rule. Keith WE6R -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/ Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ * Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional * To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/join (Yahoo! ID required) * To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Amateur Repeater ID's
I was in a group that operated a 426 MHz ATV repeater (transmitter) for over 10 years in Dallas (1980's), whose initial purpose was the rebroadcast of color weather radar from a local TV station for mobile storm spotters. This was well before the days of the Internet providing free and easy access to their weather radar images as they do today. Back then, it was a big deal to have the radar image in your car as you storm spotted. We got the video from the TV station, beamed it up to the top of a building on 1.2 GHz, downconverted and then fed all of this into an ATV transmitter/amplifier to a 5 dB omni gain antenna atop a 73 story building, the highest in Dallas. We controlled the system via phone line at the station. We eventually shut down the system after Internet images were becoming easy to acquire and we eventually gave up our cheap rented location. We knew the FCC was aware of the system from the first, as we approached the local FCC office in Dallas with our idea and they said Great idea. We took that as a yes and the rest is history. The system was only active during severe storm times and regularly scheduled RACES training nets. We never heard of anyone mentioning that the system was indeed in the broadcasting mode for over a decade. Roger W5RD Original Message - From: Wayne [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2008 9:33 PM Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Amateur Repeater ID's This suddenly got me wondering, I plan to try ATV, and would it supposedly be a violation of the rules sending when you don't know if anyone will actually receive it? As far as a QST, that could be considered as a one way transmission when you really think about it. There are parts of the rules that tend to be in the grey zone rather than BW... Yet part of the idea is to be able to experiment, and that is sometimes going to be one way no matter how you slice it. I do agree that having a repeater simply sit there and ID every 9 or 10 meniutes with nobody using it is not a good idea. I had to solve a minor detail with the controller I now have. The PSE 508 series has an option for a recorded message to be played at a given time interval. If I had it set to CW ID, and had the timer for the message set for 9 minutes, it would wind up doing so every 9 minutes. Not what I really wanted. I did resolve that, and the recorded message is the voice ID, which will revert to CW if someone keys up while it is in ID mode. At least it now only ID's one time after the last activity and not again till someone keys up the repeater. It would be nice to also have another message, timer can be set for a long time. It does say voice recorded message for ID and/or announcement, so it would seem I can do both. Still learning all of the details for the controller, but it is a fast and fairly easy way to put a Mastr II station with the normal shelf online as a repeater. Anyway, it is a bit common for some repeaters to ID at times when they have not had a user. But there again, it could be annoying to some of those monitoring for activity using a scanner, who only want to hear when a user comes on the repeater... YMMV Wayne WA2YNE Imperial, Tejas 441.950 TX 446.950 RX 167.9 On Wed, 09 Apr 2008 08:12:34 -0500, Robert Pease [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I agree with your thinking, but along that line couldn't a repeater ID and time announcement be considered a QST, an announcement to all amateurs that the repeater is there with info about the repeater owner, PL and Time? Rob KS4EC From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dan Hancock Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2008 8:44 AM To: repeater builders Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Amateur Repeater ID's First let's agree on one thing, amateur repeaters are amateur stations. Second, let's admit that the rules prohibit amateur stations from one-way transmissions, except for general calling for a contact (CQ's) and announcements of interest to amateurs (QST's). Hence, having the repeater ID periodically when not in use would constitute one-way transmissions (broadcasting). Now let me play devil's advocate. What if the periodic ID used when the repeater was not in use was CQ de WR8DAR? That would not be just an ID, but rather an invitation for contact (an invitation to use the repeater). Wouldn't that put things in a different light? Dan N8DJP Re: Amateur repeater ID's Posted by: kb1we6r [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://us.f431.mail.yahoo.com/ym/[EMAIL PROTECTED]YY=104 68y5beta=yesy5beta=yesorder=upsort=datepos=0 kb1we6r Date: Tue Apr 8, 2008 12:49 pm ((PDT)) As an OO, my interpretation of the rules is that it would be considered a beacon, and they are only allowed on certain frequencies. And the ones that do the hourly chimes too! (I have given verbal advisements). Remember
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Amateur Repeater ID's
We added an extension to this system in Greenville, Tx (about 50 miles NE of Dallas) located on the roof of the local hospital. We had an input on 426 with a beam for the Dallas feed and on 43x? to allow local crossband repeat to the 900 mHz band. We later installed a 1296 input when a radar was installed at Majors Field in Greenville. We would switch from the Dallas feed to the local feed when the weather became more local to the Greenville area. We did ID the 900 mHz output every 10 minutes, but when we had bad weather in the area, we did not allow any local repeat operations through the ATV repeater. The repeater was TT controlled through a 440 receiver, which selected the input frequency and turned the system on/off. 73 - Jim W5ZIT [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I was in a group that operated a 426 MHz ATV repeater (transmitter) for over 10 years in Dallas (1980's), whose initial purpose was the rebroadcast of color weather radar from a local TV station for mobile storm spotters. This was well before the days of the Internet providing free and easy access to their weather radar images as they do today. Back then, it was a big deal to have the radar image in your car as you storm spotted. We got the video from the TV station, beamed it up to the top of a building on 1.2 GHz, downconverted and then fed all of this into an ATV transmitter/amplifier to a 5 dB omni gain antenna atop a 73 story building, the highest in Dallas. We controlled the system via phone line at the station. We eventually shut down the system after Internet images were becoming easy to acquire and we eventually gave up our cheap rented location. We knew the FCC was aware of the system from the first, as we approached the local FCC office in Dallas with our idea and they said Great idea. We took that as a yes and the rest is history. The system was only active during severe storm times and regularly scheduled RACES training nets. We never heard of anyone mentioning that the system was indeed in the broadcasting mode for over a decade. Roger W5RD __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Amateur Repeater ID's
I thought the Moderator closed this tread? No? Rick Klinge KC5UIW
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Amateur Repeater ID's
Yes, of course your right Rick, but.there are always those that just 'have to' let all of us know what they think or know, because they are the ones that are right. Jim-WA9FPT - Original Message - From: Rick Klinge To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, April 11, 2008 10:21 AM Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Amateur Repeater ID's I thought the Moderator closed this tread? No? Rick Klinge KC5UIW
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Amateur Repeater ID's
Jim, I thought our groups experience would add some useful info to the interesting posts. You do not know me, so I am not sure how you can say that about me truthfully. We were involved in the system here in the North Texas area for many, many years and it was a mainstay in the storm spotting activities. We were proud of it and all that saw what we did were to, including city, county and state officials besides the numerous hams in the area. Roger W5RD . - Original Message - From: Jim McLaughlin To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, April 11, 2008 11:05 AM Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Amateur Repeater ID's Yes, of course your right Rick, but.there are always those that just 'have to' let all of us know what they think or know, because they are the ones that are right. Jim-WA9FPT - Original Message - From: Rick Klinge To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, April 11, 2008 10:21 AM Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Amateur Repeater ID's I thought the Moderator closed this tread? No? Rick Klinge KC5UIW
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Amateur Repeater ID's
The FCC will also give you wide lattitude to break the rules if you can demonstrate the operation served a public need during times of emergency, was used only during such times, and didn't interfere with other providers. Sounds like you qualified. 73, Paul, AE4KR -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, April 11, 2008 7:53 AM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Amateur Repeater ID's I was in a group that operated a 426 MHz ATV repeater (transmitter) for over 10 years in Dallas (1980's), whose initial purpose was the rebroadcast of color weather radar from a local TV station for mobile storm spotters. This was well before the days of the Internet providing free and easy access to their weather radar images as they do today. Back then, it was a big deal to have the radar image in your car as you storm spotted. We got the video from the TV station, beamed it up to the top of a building on 1.2 GHz, downconverted and then fed all of this into an ATV transmitter/amplifier to a 5 dB omni gain antenna atop a 73 story building, the highest in Dallas. We controlled the system via phone line at the station. We eventually shut down the system after Internet images were becoming easy to acquire and we eventually gave up our cheap rented location. We knew the FCC was aware of the system from the first, as we approached the local FCC office in Dallas with our idea and they said Great idea. We took that as a yes and the rest is history. The system was only active during severe storm times and regularly scheduled RACES training nets. We never heard of anyone mentioning that the system was indeed in the broadcasting mode for over a decade. Roger W5RD Original Message - From: Wayne [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2008 9:33 PM Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Amateur Repeater ID's This suddenly got me wondering, I plan to try ATV, and would it supposedly be a violation of the rules sending when you don't know if anyone will actually receive it? As far as a QST, that could be considered as a one way transmission when you really think about it. There are parts of the rules that tend to be in the grey zone rather than BW... Yet part of the idea is to be able to experiment, and that is sometimes going to be one way no matter how you slice it. I do agree that having a repeater simply sit there and ID every 9 or 10 meniutes with nobody using it is not a good idea. I had to solve a minor detail with the controller I now have. The PSE 508 series has an option for a recorded message to be played at a given time interval. If I had it set to CW ID, and had the timer for the message set for 9 minutes, it would wind up doing so every 9 minutes. Not what I really wanted. I did resolve that, and the recorded message is the voice ID, which will revert to CW if someone keys up while it is in ID mode. At least it now only ID's one time after the last activity and not again till someone keys up the repeater. It would be nice to also have another message, timer can be set for a long time. It does say voice recorded message for ID and/or announcement, so it would seem I can do both. Still learning all of the details for the controller, but it is a fast and fairly easy way to put a Mastr II station with the normal shelf online as a repeater. Anyway, it is a bit common for some repeaters to ID at times when they have not had a user. But there again, it could be annoying to some of those monitoring for activity using a scanner, who only want to hear when a user comes on the repeater... YMMV Wayne WA2YNE Imperial, Tejas 441.950 TX 446.950 RX 167.9 On Wed, 09 Apr 2008 08:12:34 -0500, Robert Pease [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I agree with your thinking, but along that line couldn't a repeater ID and time announcement be considered a QST, an announcement to all amateurs that the repeater is there with info about the repeater owner, PL and Time? Rob KS4EC From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dan Hancock Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2008 8:44 AM To: repeater builders Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Amateur Repeater ID's First let's agree on one thing, amateur repeaters are amateur stations. Second, let's admit that the rules prohibit amateur stations from one-way transmissions, except for general calling for a contact (CQ's) and announcements of interest to amateurs (QST's). Hence, having the repeater ID periodically when not in use would constitute one-way transmissions (broadcasting). Now let me play devil's advocate. What if the periodic ID used when the repeater was not in use was CQ de WR8DAR? That would not be just an ID, but rather an invitation for contact (an invitation to use the repeater). Wouldn't
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Amateur repeater ID's
The most recent case posted on the FCC's Amateur Radio enforcement actions web site is this one: http://www.fcc.gov/eb/AmateurActions/files/BEDNA07_05_25_1078.pdf --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, George Henry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Can anyone point me to the specific enforcement case or warning letter where the FCC first said that regular, periodic repeater ID's irrespective of repeater usage were broadcasting and had to stop? The FCC's online archives don't seem to go back far enough (seems to me it was in the 80's), and all the references that DID turn up dealt with specific interference cases, not the broadcasting issue. A news item in a QST or CQ column would be sufficient... Thanks. George, KA3HSW / WQGJ413
