Proper Repeater Etiqutte?

[JStemann]

Great program if you have a lot of traveling to do. You can map your route, set your range, specify what repeater types/bands you want. It will generate a spreadsheet of all freq's. You can the import it straight into your radio programming software. It can also be saved as a .csv file and imported that way. I've used it with my kenwood d710, yaseu 7800 and yaseu ft-60. I haven't tried it with my ic92, yet. Works great and saves a lot of typing, especially on 500+ mile trips.

It may not be 100% accurate, but it's pretty close. I believe it uses the data from the ARRL repeater directory, since that's who puts out the software.

jeff s.

[dz86]

Originally Posted by n5ims

I'm sorry that KC9NCF has has such a bad experience with repeaters. My experience has been just the opposite.

Mine too. I look at the repeater map before I go on a trip and program repeaters that will cover my route the entire way. When I'm in range of one I say "W9DAZ mobile listening". Sometimes nobody answers. Sometimes I'll have a nice conversation with one or two people. One rainy early morning in South Carolina a few years ago, when we were on our way to Florida, one person answered, then another joined in, and pretty soon we had a whole big group going. Several of those guys mentioned that their repaeater hadn't had that much "business" in the morning for a long time, and promised to start meeting more often. A couple of them thanked me for getting it started. I have even checked into social nets while traveling, and from motel rooms, you'll find that they will welcome you as long as they state that the net is open in the preamble.

I have never been told to leave a repeater or not felt welcome.

I also monitor 146.520 when travelling and when things have been quite for awhile sometimes I'll call CQ with a location like "CQ CQ W9DAZ mobile westbound Indiana Toll Road from South Bend 146.520 simplex CQ". I get many responses when mobile when I give a location like that than I do when just calling CQ.

When you start operating mobile get the the ARRL repeater guide. It talks alot about protocol and ettiquite.
Then listen. As others have mentioned, you will find some that are not polite and use poor procedure, but for the most part they are in the minority.
Listen alot at first, and join in when you feel comfortable.
It's a great hobby.

[MTS2000des]

Originally Posted by KC9NCF

My whole point, as long as I made it is this: why can't the amateur community accept their fellow amateur and allow them to be themselves? No one should be "required" to "fit in" by being anything less than themselves. You brought up a good topic of a group having specific interest in something...what about those of us who have an interest in everything? Shouldn't these "specialized" groups allow people into the group who want to learn something, versus telling them to go away because they "don't fit in"? without both parties getting to first know each other beyond all of 30 seconds?

you'll never meet a more eccentric, aloof and odd bunch than amateur radio operators. We all have various eccentricities and cliques, you cannot let it deter you from your enjoyment. If I had a dime for everytime someone ignored another on a repeater, or HF, well I'd be retiring at 40. Take a look at the QRZ forums if you want to see the degree of elitism and exclusiveness that some hams go to extremes with. Lots of power and control freaks, I don't take it personally. I've been a ham since I was 9, talk about feeling left out when I was the ONLY person under 30, make that 40- back in 1986 when I took and passed my novice.

don't give up, amateur radio, like any other hobby, is what you choose to make of it.

[APTN]

I guess I'm lucky. I've never run into any grouches throwing out my call on repeaters.

[KC9NCF]

Neither have I, so long as i worked a repeater that was 1. outside of Chicago and 2. Outside of Cook County

[DirtyLarry]

Originally Posted by KC9NCF

Neither have I, so long as i worked a repeater that was 1. outside of Chicago and 2. Outside of Cook County

Are you a local? Maybe they think you talk funny.

[jwatters]

Well this has been in interesting thread to read indeed. I must say that I have belonged to a club though, as one poster mentioned, was back in the mid80's early 90’s that had an auto patch. W7DK in Tacoma, WA. You needed to be a member only to get the codes for the auto patch but general use was open to all. There were also the BEARs (Boeing Employee’s Amateur Radio club) repeaters that were linked and you needed to be a member there too to get the codes to bring the links up and down. But as far as talking on the many nets (one I miss the most – the night owl net) it was open to anyone who could talk into the machine.

I have given my call at times on repeaters and heard nothing back - even after others (local I assume) had just finished a QSO. However, I did not take it to mean I was ignored or not welcome. I myself don't always respond to a “something something mobile near the I-55” or other identification because I might be busy and just listening myself and not able or wanting to carry on a QSO at the time. It doesn’t mean I did not want the stranger on the repeater or the simplex frequency I frequent.

I have recently relocated and only last weekend got on the air and used some of the local machines. I talked to two trustees of some of the repeaters in my area and each one welcomed me to use their repeaters at anytime. However, I did listen around the band for several weeks, went to the local radio clubs website and saw that they had posted the local repeaters and the tones - I felt welcomed to use the repeaters from the start. I also went to a club meeting and introduced my self around - before going on the air. I feel that this did help some because when I did talk to others on the air I already was familiar with who owned what machine and what the machines capabilities were etc. and more so who was using them. Did I chime up every time I heard the squelch break, no. Sometimes I just don’t care who’s getting out of their car to go get supplies for next weeks lunches… Hi Hi. But when I heard a call and I thought that I wanted to talk to them, or that I had something of value to offer to the round robin QSO – or it was a just to get to know you sorta thing I acknowledged the station or sent my own call -

I would not hesitate for a moment if I was traveling to jump on a repeater that I new the operating frequency of and had the tones for. If that information is published then how can it truly be held as private? As an amateur operator you are polite anyway. So be polite enjoy the road trips and whether your simplex, FM, HF, or linking up to a digi-peater to send a WIRES message - just have fun.

One thing I might mention though - is that a lot of information published on repeaters and trustees is not always static - Some times a machine owner moves - or sells his gear etc. There are several repeaters in my local area that show as being updated as recently as March of 2009 - that I know for sure have changed frequencies as well as control operators. So beware just because you have some information for a repeater it doesn’t mean that it will be there or online.

73
KB7NHD

[KG4DGN]

Their are 12 dedicated simplex frequencies Just as a challenge. Put these in your mobile and scan them going back and forth to work. you will be suprised at how much you hear.

** be aware they maybe more published but they are actually repeater inputs. Some that are used (even as backup freq's for repeater failures for ARES nets) such as 146.400; 146.460 etc stay away from these.**

They are:
Simplex Freq
146.520
146.535
146.550
146.565
146.580
146.595
147.510
147.525
147.540
147.555
147.570
147.585

Jason

[W9RXR]

You missed a few. According to the bandplan in the ARRL Repeater Directory, start at 146.400 and go up to 146.595 and start at 147.405 and go up to 147.600.

[Nubz]

still gets me how the idea of a closed repeater contradicts the rule about no one having exclusive use of any frequency

[zz0468]

Originally Posted by Nubz

still gets me how the idea of a closed repeater contradicts the rule about no one having exclusive use of any frequency

It's called a gentlemen's agreement. And open repeaters operate under the same principle. A repeater HAS to operate on a fixed frequency pair, there is no choice. And FCC rules specifically allow limited access i.e. 'closed repeaters'. So, there really IS no contradiction.

[Nubz]

Originally Posted by zz0468

And FCC rules specifically allow limited access i.e. 'closed repeaters'

exactly its contradicts the other rule lol
i already knew this

[zz0468]

Originally Posted by Nubz

exactly its contradicts the other rule lol
i already knew this

I guess you're unclear on the concept of amateur frequency coordination and band planning.

Repeaters operate on their frequency pairs solely through "gentleman's agreement", not FCC rules. In the case of interference between repeaters, it's only when one party refuses to follow the "gentleman's agreement" that they will rule in favor of the party that does.

There is nothing in the FCC rules that grant exclusivity to a frequency, but the rules don't prohibit mutual agreements among hams that do. In fact, at that level, it's encouraged. It's part of the "self regulation" that the FCC encourages. That's what frequency coordination is - it's a group of hams agreeing to the controlled sharing of frequencies. And in that regard, there is no difference between open repeaters, and closed repeaters.

The rule allowing limited access of repeater users is irrelevant to any discussion of frequency sharing. It's the hardware that the FCC allows to be restricted. But in the case of a repeater that gets interfered with by a non-member, if that repeater is coordinated, the FCC would come down in favor of the of the repeater owner, regardless of whether the repeater is open or closed. The FCC looks favorably upon regional frequency coordination and band planning, and even though your license privileges may say you can transmit on any repeater input or output you want, in practice, that could constitute harmful interference, if your presence there isn't welcome by the repeater owner, and it's authorized users.

The same holds true of the satellite uplink sub-bands. Sure, your license authorizes you to transmit there, but you could face FCC action if you interfere with a satellite input if you're not actually trying to communicate with that satellite.

[KC9NCF]

"in practice, that could constitute harmful interference, if your presence there isn't welcome by the repeater owner, and it's authorized users."

Self regulation is fine and dandy. If the FCC is allowing the "hardware" to be restricted, then what is the whole point of coordination? I have tried and tried to understand why it is that the FCC will always rule in favor of a "coordinated" repeater when it's simply a "gentleman's agreement" and would therefor, have no legal standing except that the FCC has gone and created caselaw and legal precedents that back up a repeater which does nothing more than hog up a part of frequency spectrum.

Repeaters are truly cheating anyway, because REAL amateurs rely on good engineering practice and good propagation to get a signal through. Propagation sucks? You can always crank up the power to the minimum needed for the contact. That whole point of course, becomes moot in the case of a severe solar event affecting VHF and UHF, in which case you can move to a another usable MUF in AM mode, go into the microwave bands, or just wait it out.

My opinion is not to invalidate repeaters at all, just to point out that it is really impractical to have your little click and then cry about who uses your toys when it was YOU who put the repeater on the air to begin with! You want a PRIVATE radio service where you can say who uses YOUR frequency? Then go to another radio service and then ENCRYPT! Those who only want an amateur license to play with their clique aren't wanted! I'm not just speaking for myself! I have spoken to many different amateurs who feel the same as me, and they apparently outnumber the "I'm taking my basketball home cause I don't wanna play with you". It's juvenile crap unless someone without a license is jamming your machine up or the person is a disgruntled amateur who is jamming or cussing or whatever..being harmful. I hope the rules get changed one day to reflect who can and cannot be banned / restricted.

You made the mistake of mentioning the users of a repeater getting a say who uses the system. Part 97 calls you wrong on that point because only a "Trustee, Owner, or Control Operator" can ban or otherwise restrict someone.

Use the inputs all you want folks! Just use low enough power with a PL tone, and then that way the folks on the machine can't start whining about you being on "their input". Weak signal works well if done right! I did it today on 5 watts across the city while standing right next to the river! Simplex rules!

[zz0468]

Huh. I thought you were banned. Oh well... better luck next time, then.

Originally Posted by KC9NCF

"in practice, that could constitute harmful interference, if your presence there isn't welcome by the repeater owner, and it's authorized users."

Self regulation is fine and dandy. If the FCC is allowing the "hardware" to be restricted, then what is the whole point of coordination?

The purpose of coordination is so that all repeaters - open or closed - can have a "permanent" frequency pair, a requirement for repeater operation. The hardware is private property, so if someone doesn't want someone else to use it, they don't have to let them. Is that such a difficult concept to understand?

Originally Posted by KC9NCF

I have tried and tried to understand why it is that the FCC will always rule in favor of a "coordinated" repeater when it's simply a "gentleman's agreement" and would therefor, have no legal standing except that the FCC has gone and created caselaw and legal precedents that back up a repeater which does nothing more than hog up a part of frequency spectrum.

Who defines "hogging spectrum"? You, or a recognized frequency coordinating group? It's a hobby... we're ALL "hogging spectrum" anytime we transmit. Fact of the matter is, if there weren't a ton of repeaters out there, most of that spectrum would lie there completely empty and unused, not a very efficient use, if you ask me, and a sure formula to lose it all.

Originally Posted by KC9NCF

Repeaters are truly cheating anyway, because REAL amateurs rely on good engineering practice and good propagation to get a signal through.

What a ridiculous notion. The purpose of a repeater is two-fold. One is to provide consistent CLEAR communications over it's coverage area. the other is to serve as a common meeting place for the users. Not everyone wants to struggle with weak signals all of the time. And they shouldn't have to, unless that's your thing.

Originally Posted by KC9NCF

Propagation sucks? You can always crank up the power to the minimum needed for the contact. That whole point of course, becomes moot in the case of a severe solar event affecting VHF and UHF, in which case you can move to a another usable MUF in AM mode, go into the microwave bands, or just wait it out.

How is AM going to help? And if the minimum power to complete a contact on the direct path is several kilowatts, how is that going to help?

Your anti-repeater bias is showing again.

Originally Posted by KC9NCF

My opinion is not to invalidate repeaters at all, just to point out that it is really impractical to have your little click and then cry about who uses your toys when it was YOU who put the repeater on the air to begin with!

I beg to differ.You're TRYING to invalidate the concept of repeaters - first by saying it's "hogging frequencies", second by calling it cheating, and third by complaining about the cliques that form. And suddenly it all becomes clear. I suspect that you're such a pain in the neck on the air that you've become persona non grata on every repeater you happen across. And I can certainly see why.

Originally Posted by KC9NCF

You want a PRIVATE radio service where you can say who uses YOUR frequency? Then go to another radio service and then ENCRYPT! Those who only want an amateur license to play with their clique aren't wanted! I'm not just speaking for myself! I have spoken to many different amateurs who feel the same as me, and they apparently outnumber the "I'm taking my basketball home cause I don't wanna play with you".

I rather doubt it, given the huge number of active repeaters across the country. If you're so dead set against repeaters, I would simply suggest that you limit yourself to simplex, and leave the repeaters, their owners, and their users the hell alone. They're not hurting you with their existance, and there is PLENTY of spectrum for you to operate without mutual interference.

Originally Posted by KC9NCF

It's juvenile crap unless someone without a license is jamming your machine up or the person is a disgruntled amateur who is jamming or cussing or whatever..being harmful. I hope the rules get changed one day to reflect who can and cannot be banned / restricted.

Clearly, one of the have-nots grumbling because he can't play well with others.

Originally Posted by KC9NCF

You made the mistake of mentioning the users of a repeater getting a say who uses the system. Part 97 calls you wrong on that point because only a "Trustee, Owner, or Control Operator" can ban or otherwise restrict someone.

Actually, it was not a mistake. While part 97 clearly defines the roles and responsibility of the control operators and system owners, in many, many repeaters, the user community is also the owners, and defines the particular personality that that system exhibits. I'm referring to club owned systems, where there isn't a single individual functioning as a "benevolent dictator".

Originally Posted by KC9NCF

Use the inputs all you want folks! Just use low enough power with a PL tone, and then that way the folks on the machine can't start whining about you being on "their input". Weak signal works well if done right! I did it today on 5 watts across the city while standing right next to the river! Simplex rules!

To what end? Trying to talk on repeater inputs like that could only be construed as intentional interference. Good luck with that.

[Nubz]

wow no i am not unclear about anything
no need to act like this is qrz and write me a novel
i was just making a comment

[zz0468]

Originally Posted by Nubz

wow no i am not unclear about anything
no need to act like this is qrz and write me a novel
i was just making a comment

You exhibited an apparent lack of understanding. I provided an explanation. You're not obligated to agree, or even read it.

LOL@QRZ. You're kidding, right? This place is worse!

[KC9NCF]

Originally Posted by zz0468

Huh. I thought you were banned. Oh well... better luck next time, then.



The purpose of coordination is so that all repeaters - open or closed - can have a "permanent" frequency pair, a requirement for repeater operation. The hardware is private property, so if someone doesn't want someone else to use it, they don't have to let them. Is that such a difficult concept to understand?



Who defines "hogging spectrum"? You, or a recognized frequency coordinating group? It's a hobby... we're ALL "hogging spectrum" anytime we transmit. Fact of the matter is, if there weren't a ton of repeaters out there, most of that spectrum would lie there completely empty and unused, not a very efficient use, if you ask me, and a sure formula to lose it all.



What a ridiculous notion. The purpose of a repeater is two-fold. One is to provide consistent CLEAR communications over it's coverage area. the other is to serve as a common meeting place for the users. Not everyone wants to struggle with weak signals all of the time. And they shouldn't have to, unless that's your thing.



How is AM going to help? And if the minimum power to complete a contact on the direct path is several kilowatts, how is that going to help?

Your anti-repeater bias is showing again.



I beg to differ.You're TRYING to invalidate the concept of repeaters - first by saying it's "hogging frequencies", second by calling it cheating, and third by complaining about the cliques that form. And suddenly it all becomes clear. I suspect that you're such a pain in the neck on the air that you've become persona non grata on every repeater you happen across. And I can certainly see why.



I rather doubt it, given the huge number of active repeaters across the country. If you're so dead set against repeaters, I would simply suggest that you limit yourself to simplex, and leave the repeaters, their owners, and their users the hell alone. They're not hurting you with their existance, and there is PLENTY of spectrum for you to operate without mutual interference.



Clearly, one of the have-nots grumbling because he can't play well with others.




Actually, it was not a mistake. While part 97 clearly defines the roles and responsibility of the control operators and system owners, in many, many repeaters, the user community is also the owners, and defines the particular personality that that system exhibits. I'm referring to club owned systems, where there isn't a single individual functioning as a "benevolent dictator".




To what end? Trying to talk on repeater inputs like that could only be construed as intentional interference. Good luck with that.

The FCC has already clearly defined harmful interference. Talking on a repeater input if it isn't actively in use at the time and using low power with a PL tone so as to keep your signal away from the repeater operation doesn't fit the bill for interference.

You and the FCC are simply using different language to say "No one owns a frequency, but we're going to always rule on the side of the repeater station even though their coordination body isn't anything official and we'll help them protect "their" freq pair." That's just another way of "owning" a freq while using language that is directly contradictory to Part 97.

When a person keys a repeater up, they aren't "using" it. They used their OWN equipment to activate something that the owner or club trustee or control operator put on the air and their machine is in the way of MY radio! Their machine is causing harmful interference to MY station by being where they aren't welcome! To "use" a repeater, one must physically be at the controls of the repeater mic. In that sense, the repeater is private property.

Once you put a repeater on the air on frequencies that are not given any measure of privacy protection (amateur freq's aren't protected against people re-releasing contents of radio transmissions), then you lose your right to privacy unless it is physically at the control point. If you don't want your repeater interfered with (jammed, or other things that meet the criteria for harmful interference) then install something to protect your machine.

MDC - 1200, oddball PL tone, Maybe use a 12.5Khz Freq allocation and employ other protection techniques. But, it also follows that the amateur community has a right to not have their individual stations interfered with by the presence of repeater stations. When I tune through the band, I personally find it severely nerve grating to hear CW ID Tones, Stupid repeater announcements that tell me the time of day, and idle chit chat that could easily be sent via another radio service or even the telephone...this is also spelled out in part 97. I don't want to tune through the bands and hear repeater stations...they cause harmful interference to mt station because I cannot hear people that may be trying to communicate using REAL radio. We got a group of repeaters out here that you can tune through the band and hear for more than 700+ Khz. on 2M and more than 5+ Mhz / 25+ Mhz in each direction on UHF! People have complained to the FCC and turned in recordings till they're blue in the face and the FCC refuses to act simply because the "repeater is coordinated" and that somehow seems to excuse huge amounts of splatter!

Repeater stations also violate Part 97 rules because no one listens to the input or output freq to see if any other stations are transmitting. The repeater itself has no way of listening for other stations before it transmits, and that itself meets the qualifications for harmful interference! Unless the FCC has told you to stay away from a repeater or from a specific frequency, it isn't against any rules to transmit straight simplex on an input or output freq so long as you do it when the repeater isn't being used.

[zz0468]

Wow. So many bizarre ideas.

Originally Posted by KC9NCF

The FCC has already clearly defined harmful interference. Talking on a repeater input if it isn't actively in use at the time and using low power with a PL tone so as to keep your signal away from the repeater operation doesn't fit the bill for interference.

Considering that repeater inputs and outputs are published and known by the amateur community as a whole, it wouldn't be difficult to make a case of intentional interference if one operates as you say, especially in view of the fact that there are band plans that provide for direct simplex operation.

I'm at a loss as to understand how PL is supposed to help. Suppose the repeater is carrier operated? Do you even understand how PL operates? Even if the repeater is PL'ed, the presence of your carrier is going to degrade the receiver. That would fit the FCC's definition of harmful interference.

Originally Posted by KC9NCF

You and the FCC are simply using different language to say "No one owns a frequency, but we're going to always rule on the side of the repeater station even though their coordination body isn't anything official and we'll help them protect "their" freq pair." That's just another way of "owning" a freq while using language that is directly contradictory to Part 97.

Here's where you're wrong. Part 97 merely states that no frequency will be assigned for the exclusive use of one station. It doesn't prohibit amateurs from deciding on their own to operate that way by mutual agreement.

At the same time, part 97 specifically recognizes the role of frequency coordinators to make recommendations.

Originally Posted by KC9NCF

When a person keys a repeater up, they aren't "using" it. They used their OWN equipment to activate something that the owner or club trustee or control operator put on the air and their machine is in the way of MY radio! Their machine is causing harmful interference to MY station by being where they aren't welcome! To "use" a repeater, one must physically be at the controls of the repeater mic. In that sense, the repeater is private property.

It can be difficult to make a rational argument when the person you're arguing with is completely irrational. But I'll try anyway... because it's good sport.

The notion that coordinated repeaters operating in sanctioned repeater sub-bands, on their assigned frequencies is interfering with you is simply preposterous. Repeaters and proper repeater operation is considered to be good amateur practice, it is supported by FCC regulations and administrative practice, and has proven to be a benefit to the amateur community and the public.

All I can say is, get over it. If you don't like them, stay off. There are specific sub-bands that you can operate free of repeaters. Amateur radio really does have something for everyone, but that requires that YOU follow the same rules and conventions that everyone else does.

Originally Posted by KC9NCF

Once you put a repeater on the air on frequencies that are not given any measure of privacy protection (amateur freq's aren't protected against people re-releasing contents of radio transmissions), then you lose your right to privacy unless it is physically at the control point. If you don't want your repeater interfered with (jammed, or other things that meet the criteria for harmful interference) then install something to protect your machine.

A discussion of privacy as it relates to amateur repeaters is completely irrelevant and pointless. Move on. It doesn't apply.

Originally Posted by KC9NCF

MDC - 1200, oddball PL tone, Maybe use a 12.5Khz Freq allocation and employ other protection techniques. But, it also follows that the amateur community has a right to not have their individual stations interfered with by the presence of repeater stations.

Placing your receiver upon the transmitter frequency of another station does not constitute interference.

Your suggestions for MDC 1200 and odd pl's and odd frequency spacing have no technical merit for the discussion at hand, and wouldn't serve to resolve the issue that you are incapable of operating within established amateur guidelines.

Originally Posted by KC9NCF

When I tune through the band, I personally find it severely nerve grating to hear CW ID Tones, Stupid repeater announcements that tell me the time of day, and idle chit chat that could easily be sent via another radio service or even the telephone...

So, why do you torture yourself so? Stop tuning through the band. Program your radio memory channels to the assigned simplex frequencies - the ones where you will find actual people willing to talk to you - and tune through them. Virtually every radio out there in practical use can be configured to operate on memory channels that YOU pick and chose from. Perhaps you should exercise that function.

Originally Posted by KC9NCF

this is also spelled out in part 97.

Yes. All of the activities that you detest so much are specifically allowed in part 97.

Originally Posted by KC9NCF

I don't want to tune through the bands and hear repeater stations...they cause harmful interference to mt station because I cannot hear people that may be trying to communicate using REAL radio.

So, again, stop tuning through the repeater sub-bands. As I previosly stated, placing your receiver onto a repeater frequency and complaining about what you hear does not constitute harmful interference.

Actually, it indicates sociopathic behavior and possible other mental instabilities. But that is really outside the scope of our discussion.

Originally Posted by KC9NCF

We got a group of repeaters out here that you can tune through the band and hear for more than 700+ Khz. on 2M and more than 5+ Mhz / 25+ Mhz in each direction on UHF! People have complained to the FCC and turned in recordings till they're blue in the face and the FCC refuses to act simply because the "repeater is coordinated" and that somehow seems to excuse huge amounts of splatter!

I question your statements as to the degree of interference. If it was that bad, lots of people infinately more knowledgeable than yourself would be working to resolve it. I think you're stretching things a bit there...

Originally Posted by KC9NCF

Repeater stations also violate Part 97 rules because no one listens to the input or output freq to see if any other stations are transmitting. The repeater itself has no way of listening for other stations before it transmits, and that itself meets the qualifications for harmful interference!

You're wrong about it being a violation. Part 97 states, and I quote:

"97.101. General standards. (a) In all respects not specifically covered by FCC Rules each amateur station must be operated in accordance with good engineering and good amateur practice."

Basically, what that means is, the current method of operating repeaters (i.e. on coordinated frequencies, under automatic control) is considered "good amateur practice", and therefor authorized and sanctioned by the FCC.

Incidentally, indiscriminately trying to communicate on repeater input frequencies as you describe would NOT be considered good amater practice, and would therefore be a violation.

Originally Posted by KC9NCF

Unless the FCC has told you to stay away from a repeater or from a specific frequency, it isn't against any rules to transmit straight simplex on an input or output freq so long as you do it when the repeater isn't being used.

That's a pretty narrow interpretation, and one that would likely fail if it was to be tested. Who are you going to talk to? The vast majority of hams would prefer to operate using good amateur practice, and within the rules. What you propose to do is neither.

So... I have a straight question for you.

Why do you have such a problem with repeaters? I mean, really... what happened to you? Your arguments against are weak and emotional, and have no basis in the FCC rules or the laws of physics. Yet you still persist with your skewed view as to how things are. I'm dying of curiosity as to just what made you this way.

[KC9NCF]

In tentional interference as I have been given the understanding directly BY the FCC per Riley Hollingsworth and Laura Smith is that such is described or interpreted to mean: JAMMING, Cussing, Spewing threats, or specific behaviors meant to keep the repeater from being used.

Gentleman's agreement cannot possibly have any real impact because that word itself varies from repeater to repeater. I know just how PL works, and I know that a repeater cannot be activated if you keep the duplex on your radio turned off. If you see the radio jump from the output to the input freq when you key, you're doing it wrong! Gentleman's agreement can't be used in Illinois as it is because things are never the same from day to day here. Changes occur in the local band plan everyday and it rarely gets communicated to anyone at all, unless you're on the coordination board.

I am not speaking of talking OVER other repeater users .That would be bad practice. I'm talking about using the input or output freq when the repeater isn't in operation with a user or users on it? Are w eclear? If and when you hear a user come up on that pair, vacate the freq. That way, everyone gets fair use...the issue is FAIR USE of the freq's.

In Illinois, operating this way is specifically allowed. The repeater folks have no complaint with it that I have ever heard about. Being that I live in a big city where everyone can be reached by Simplex, the repeaters aren't all that active. Using your argument, it would be a shame to see those freq's go unused. So, being that repeaters have their freq pairs not truly due to gentleman's agreement but because those are prime freq's for propagation does go to technical merit. See the argument made by the medical community for using UHF freqs for their implant devices. It speaks of a type of propagation at low power levels and the efficiency issue.

Privacy does enter into the conversation because if the repeater can be called private property, it implies that the owner wishes his/her conversations to be called private. Using low power without duplex when you know prime hours for repeater usage have gone (those times when repeater traffic is expected to be interfered with) and you do such at a time when you know that the repeater receiver cannot possibly hear your signal due to such weak signal from your station and your duplex is OFF and there are no users on the repeater...where is the interference? The receiver cannot be degraded when it can't hear you!!

Repeater pairs outnumber straight simplex freqs and that has created a defacto monopoly on amateur freqs, period. Look at your precious band plan! Perhaps I wanna hear a repeater from a couple of states away...your repeater drowns out that weak signal, a signal which I plan to return to on that pair because of the distance and being that it isn't local. You're telling me that part 97 doesn't call that interference? This whole thing of repeaters taking priority is indeed frequency hogging and seeing that I am advocating technical investigation via low power and testing it against the receiver capability to hear goes to experimentation and that is ALLOWED by part 97!

Yesterday, with 5 watts on 146.520 battery power, I made a contact way across the city when I was standing right next to the river. That was gratifying!