• Effective immediately we will be deleting, without notice, any negative threads or posts that deal with the use of encryption and streaming of scanner audio.

    We've noticed a huge increase in rants and negative posts that revolve around agencies going to encryption due to the broadcasting of scanner audio on the internet. It's now worn out and continues to be the same recycled rants. These rants hijack the threads and derail the conversation. They no longer have a place anywhere on this forum other than in the designated threads in the Rants forum in the Tavern.

    If you violate these guidelines your post will be deleted without notice and an infraction will be issued. We are not against discussion of this issue. You just need to do it in the right place. For example:
    https://forums.radioreference.com/rants/224104-official-thread-live-audio-feeds-scanners-wait-encryption.html

Will narrowbanding effect ham radio?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Jan 10, 2003
Messages
71
Location
Grove City, Ohio, USA
#1
I am a ham op and also on our local FD, so I know that our county has to comply with the FCC mandate for narrowbanding of all public safety/service frequencies in the VHF & UHF bands, but will the narrowbanding mandate effect the 2-meter VHF and 440-UHF amateur bands in any way? (ie, will narrowbanding also apply to amateur bands or are they exempt form the narrowbanding mandate)
 
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
2,141
#3
The FCC has been very clear. Narrowbanding DOES NOT affect Amateur (Part 97), GMRS (Part 95), or Marine at all. It only affects Part 90 licensees BELOW 512 MHz.
 
Joined
Feb 6, 2007
Messages
5,934
Location
175 DME, HEC 358° Radial
#12
And how is that? With exception of the 60-meter band (would not be covered under narrow-banding anyway) I can operate on any frequency that my license allows (BTW, since I am an Extra that means all frequencies in the Amateur Radio Service).
"47CFR Part 97 Subpart B 97.101 (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."

In the case of repeater operation, entire sub-bands are channelized. Since it would be poor engineering and poor amateur practice to operate between assigned channels, or grossly off frequency with a VFO, with the potential to cause interference to at least two repeaters, that could be a violation of 97.101(a).
 
Joined
Mar 27, 2006
Messages
1,934
Location
Washington DC
#13
Hams have been operating "between channels," as you put it for years on simplex, usually at hamfests, in 5 kHz steps, and it does no one any harm. Take a listen sometime and you'll find it's true.
 
Joined
Nov 12, 2010
Messages
1,364
Location
Greenfield, Indiana USA
#14
"47CFR Part 97 Subpart B 97.101 (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."

In the case of repeater operation, entire sub-bands are channelized. Since it would be poor engineering and poor amateur practice to operate between assigned channels, or grossly off frequency with a VFO, with the potential to cause interference to at least two repeaters, that could be a violation of 97.101(a).
A big difference between causing interference and operating within the band. There are many parts of the country where you could operate and not be anywhere close to interfering with a repeater. And if you really want to blast the "narrow-banding" concept, 440 does not have any bandwith restrictions (hence 440 fast-scan ATV). We can throws words at each other all day but in the end there are not any FCC recognized channels in the Amateur Radio Service with exception of the 60-meter band.
 
Joined
Apr 18, 2003
Messages
1,002
Location
Williamsburg, VA.
#15
Personally, I see narrow banding as a good thing. Although, I am coming from a commercial background to support my thoughts on the subject. I have yet to see a modern FM amateur grade transceiver NOT capable of doing narrow band. If we could ever make the move to narrow band, that would create more repeater pairs. In areas where the pairs are far and few between, I know this would be a welcomed change.
 
Joined
Feb 6, 2007
Messages
5,934
Location
175 DME, HEC 358° Radial
#17
A big difference between causing interference and operating within the band. There are many parts of the country where you could operate and not be anywhere close to interfering with a repeater.
This is true. And in those areas, you can do what you stated - just operate anywhere.

And if you really want to blast the "narrow-banding" concept, 440 does not have any bandwith restrictions (hence 440 fast-scan ATV).
"Blast the narrow-banding concept"? Who said anything about blasting narrow banding? You said:

Also Amateur Radio does not operate on channels or specific frequencies. As long as you stay in your band (or sub-band) you can operate on any frequency.
So, I said:

That's not 100% accurate.
In the context of channelized repeater operation, and 60 meters, your statement above is not 100% accurate, and I stand by my statement.

We can throws words at each other all day but in the end there are not any FCC recognized channels in the Amateur Radio Service with exception of the 60-meter band.
Part 97 doesn't define repeater channelization specifically, but I would suggest you read the parts where frequency coordination is recognized. It's not my desire to get into some pedantic argument about some fine point of the rules, I just wanted to point out that channelized operation can and does occur on the ham bands, and even outside the 60 meter band, it's recognized and enforced, when necessary, by FCC rules.
 

timkilbride

Member
Database Admin
Joined
Feb 9, 2006
Messages
1,772
Location
Iowa County, Iowa
#18
Hams have been operating "between channels," as you put it for years on simplex, usually at hamfests, in 5 kHz steps, and it does no one any harm. Take a listen sometime and you'll find it's true.
I run simplex with a guy on 146.475 and another group runs on 146.460. Believe me, they get into my radio and we are a few miles apart.

Tim
 
Last edited by a moderator:

James_Bond_007

Newbie
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 27, 2008
Messages
5
Location
Lakewood, Co 80235
#19
i think on 2m and 70cm in area's where there are no repeaters pairs available (typically the major metro area's) narrow banding should be phased in to open up frequency pairs.

hams used to be the innovators now we barely catch up to the rest of the world. we need to at least keep pace with technology if not go back to being the innovators that ham radio once was.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top