I'm in the San Francisco Bay Area. I do hear people from time to time on 146.520. I like to call out once in a while just to see who's there. I find it isn't particularly busy but I can find someone about half the time. I've only heard activity on 446.000 during field day or contesting events.
2m ham: 146.520 simplex...anyone actually using it?
- Thread starter needairtime
- Start date
- Status
I have noticed more activity along expressway routes, on the outskirts of metropolitan areas.
There is a lot of randomness, as others have noted. I wonder how many of us are listening, and not keying up?
Sent using Tapatalk
There is a lot of randomness, as others have noted. I wonder how many of us are listening, and not keying up?
Sent using Tapatalk
needairtime
Member
Were they "legal" ?
(Meaning, were they reporting their call every 10 minutes? I think they are still required to use ITU standards for reporting call sign despite speaking Spanish, so I'm curious.)---
I do notice something on the local 70cm repeater, people who are listening sometimes report that they're 'monitoring' along with their callsign (of course), sounds like a good plan.
On the other hand I only have FM radios, so I guess I should get rid of the 432.10MHz programming from my UHF radio. Seems like this is dedicated for SSB which won't work for my radio.
K5MPH
Member
Here in Brownsville some still use simplex but not as much as back in the 90's its kind of dead now and even though i live closer to the mexico border than Robert (KG5YWM) dont really hear a lot of spanish and i live right on the border 2 miles from it.........
mikepdx
Member
Yes, particularly commute times and evenings around here.
.
bb911
Member
Very little use in my neck of the woods in the San Bern/Riverside, CA area. In fact, most of the 2m repeaters are generally very quiet, except for during the daily commuting hours, a few nets, and during emergencies.
It’s starting to get used more and more in my area. We have a few mountains in the arena that people will hike and call out CQ once on the summit and can be heard quite a few miles away.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yes, Still Do
Reminds me of Wall of Voodoo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eyCEexG9xjw
I have various 6m/2m/1.25m/70cm simplex frequencies (not just call) programmed in all my radios to include scanners. I was active on 2m/70cm simplex within the past week.
Reminds me of Wall of Voodoo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eyCEexG9xjw
Were they "legal" ?
---
I do notice something on the local 70cm repeater, people who are listening sometimes report that they're 'monitoring' along with their callsign (of course), sounds like a good plan.
On the other hand I only have FM radios, so I guess I should get rid of the 432.10MHz programming from my UHF radio. Seems like this is dedicated for SSB which won't work for my radio.
I have various 6m/2m/1.25m/70cm simplex frequencies (not just call) programmed in all my radios to include scanners. I was active on 2m/70cm simplex within the past week.
techman210
Member
It was only designated that way by the ARRL in recent years. In the days of crystal radios, 52.525, 146.52, 223.5 and 446.0 were designated "National Simplex" and most radios coming off the assembly line had 146.52 xtals in them and usually a popular repeater pair or two, usually 146.16/76 and/or 146.34/94 - at least on the 2M radios popular at the time.
Years ago I recall some FCC desk jockey sent someone a NOV or Warning notice about ragchewing on 146.52, and I think the ARRL weighed in and notified them it was not a legally designated a calling frequency, and no rules were being violated.
needairtime
Member
Ah, that's true that there's a difference between National Simplex vs calling channel. It would be nice however, for people to be on specific frequencies at least for a little while, otherwise you end up with the same problem trying to find life in the universe - both channel and time spent on that channel determines whether a contact is made or not.
Alas at least around here things are so quiet that I'd say ragchewing is good, shows signs of life... Then again if there is ragchewing, they should be expected to be interrupted as it is a shared medium, after all.
On my old Regency it looks like I also have the 146.34/146.94 pair, but looking at the repeaters around here, they don't use these frequencies. The local ham club repeaters use frequencies another MHz down so these and other crystals in the radio are useless for listening to anything but static.
Alas at least around here things are so quiet that I'd say ragchewing is good, shows signs of life... Then again if there is ragchewing, they should be expected to be interrupted as it is a shared medium, after all.
On my old Regency it looks like I also have the 146.34/146.94 pair, but looking at the repeaters around here, they don't use these frequencies. The local ham club repeaters use frequencies another MHz down so these and other crystals in the radio are useless for listening to anything but static.
KG5YWM
Member
Were they "legal" ?
I honestly don't know. My Spanish comprehension is pretty limited so I don't listen long. When my radio scan stops on the frequency, it usually sounds like the same couple of guys rag chewing. I just move on.
K3DRQ
Member
I live near a national park (Delaware Water Gap NRA) which has lots of hiking, fishing, kayaking, and waterfalls, and every now and then I'll hear activity from the park on 146.52
I just drove from Long Island, NY to Disney World Florida and back via I-81, I-77, I-26 and I-95. I was listening to 146.520 the entire time and sending out my call. No activity at all. I wish there was more activity. I have had similar dead quiet on trips to Ohio, Wisconsin and Kentucky.
needairtime
Member
What's the LoS propagation like on average for 2m, per watt (discounting hills, reflections, etc.)?
Speaking of hams, I don't see that many cars out there with multiple antennas. Either they don't do mobile, don't listen to FM broadcast, or there aren't that many hams out there versus the general population. 2m antennas should be somewhat noticeable - mobile hams normally would have at least two antennas. (The 6m/10m/CB guys have really noticeable antennas due to required loading coils else have really long ¼λ antennas).
Or perhaps HT antennas are sufficient going out/coming in of the Gaussian shield known as your car frame?
Speaking of hams, I don't see that many cars out there with multiple antennas. Either they don't do mobile, don't listen to FM broadcast, or there aren't that many hams out there versus the general population. 2m antennas should be somewhat noticeable - mobile hams normally would have at least two antennas. (The 6m/10m/CB guys have really noticeable antennas due to required loading coils else have really long ¼λ antennas).
Or perhaps HT antennas are sufficient going out/coming in of the Gaussian shield known as your car frame?
Look Harder
:wink:
I have a ham tri-bander and a more noticeable scanner antenna on one of my vehicles.
:wink:
I have a ham tri-bander and a more noticeable scanner antenna on one of my vehicles.
We live three miles off the Interstate. My son monitors .52 and will have QSOs with hams passing through on the Interstate from time-to-time.
talking about driving down the interstate and trying to make contacts reminds me of using voice alert! http://www.aprs.org/VoiceAlert3.html
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2002
- Messages
- 2,486
There is no per watt calculation as curvature of the earth will stop you first. You can easily hear 2 watts from a satellite.
But back to the general discussion. Designating 146.52 for calling only makes sense if both sides could easily switch to another channel. With today's radios that is not the case and invites an accident or invites a ticket. Designating it for National Simplex makes more sense and it is clearly not over taxed for that.
The reason there is not much traffic is that most amateur travelers use it mostly on interstates and locals only when DX opens up. I have made contacts when traveling and have found a couple cases where an isolated ham at home monitors it looking for people passing through.
needairtime
Member
Granted yes, QRP'ing is a "thing" - if conditions are optimal, yes you can go quite far with little power. However I'd expect conditions to usually be far from optimal. There is a SNR limit at the receiving end based on background noise, so there should be an average distance before it becomes too weak to extract with a typical RF frontend. Mobile use also typically require lower gain omnidirectional antennas as heading direction may change frequently. I'd also suspect most stationary VHF users use omnidirectional antennas too.
I would hope that people aren't using 146.52 only when traveling on roads but indeed it would be a problem if one must change channels while in motion. But if radio traffic is low on that frequency, I have no problem people just using it for things other than calling.
It seems that at least around here, I've yet to picked up any chatter on 146.52 for the past few weeks, maybe my radio is bad or antenna insufficient! (Hoping to get licensed real soon now!)
I would hope that people aren't using 146.52 only when traveling on roads but indeed it would be a problem if one must change channels while in motion. But if radio traffic is low on that frequency, I have no problem people just using it for things other than calling.
It seems that at least around here, I've yet to picked up any chatter on 146.52 for the past few weeks, maybe my radio is bad or antenna insufficient! (Hoping to get licensed real soon now!)
- Status
