That is all fine and dandy if you have phone, or internet at the site.Some repeaters let you dial into them via a telephone. (or log into them via internet control) The control op can then log in and issue commands that way. If someone is so concerned about security, then they need a controller that can operate that way.
But digital is in no manner encryption either-I was replying to the claim that digital voice was just like encryption as some could not copy it and that that argument was a failure--in no way did I mean to imply cw was encryption--I could have used ordinary RTTY as a better comparison. In one case it is skill and in the other it is equipment. Really makes no difference as one can be easily replaced by the other. Yes, I also believe encryption has no place in amateur radio. But digital voice, which is not encrypted, does have a place. The argument I objected to would even have prevented the development of single sideband.As Steve posted, there's a huge difference. With encryption, only one or very few select people can copy. And THAT is not the intent of amateur radio what so ever!
Also as Steve pointed out, a person can go to their local amateur radio dealer and buy a digital transceiver and listen in.
Also, CW in no manner is encryption. All a person has to do is study the Morse code and copy what is being transmitted.
I would hate to see the day come, (and it will not happen) when amateurs' are allowed to encryption their transmission. If someone wants to talk in private, all they have to do is pick up the telephone and talk all they want with out anyone hearing them, (other than NSA, or other 3 letter government agencies) hearing what they need said in privacy!
Tell me, just WHY do you want amateur radios to be able to transmit encryption? Seriously, why???
Around here, in Ft. Lauderdale/Pompano, Cert has about 10 freq's they use, & they are all in the 450-470 band, so encryption would be legal. They do not use ham freq's, although the users are hams.kc4raf: there are times when we perform ares or Cert stuff when transmitting for the agency we are supporting that confidential matters pertaining to minors or health and welfare, they are agency normal requirements that require this.
That sounds like an issue with the agency you are working for, as others have said.kc4raf: there are times when we perform ares or Cert stuff when transmitting for the agency we are supporting that confidential matters pertaining to minors or health and welfare, they are agency normal requirements that require this.
Again, not a requirement under HIPAA rules. If your group has made this part of their SOP, and they don't have a proper solution, then they need to take a closer look at this.When we do car rally support, if an accident involving injuries to a driver, no driver names are to be transmitted over the net at any time.
Handling two forms of communications at the same time should be a requirement of any network control person. If they are understaffed, that's something that needs to be addressed.We are forced to use cell phone which requires net to handle two methods of comms. The radio and a cell phone at sometimes the same time.
AKA: Whackers, Ricky Rescue, Wannabe, etc. Anyone trying to listen to 5 radios and expecting to be effective is probably not doing a very good job. Some professional 911 dispatchers can do it, but not reliably. Usually one or two radios are"select" and at a higher volume with the rest "unselect" and at a lower volume. Rarely are they expected to actually be handling traffic reliably on more than one or two channels at a time.Sure other hams can listen in, though to be 100% sure, they would have to carry 5 radios. True there are a few hams that report in who carry 4 or 5 radios. Agencies who see this , they refere to those volunteers as "Billy Blue Lights".
And moved they probably shouldn't be. This isn't the purpose of amateur radio.The FCC has not been moved to accept these arguments by others yet. In a net operations, a channel can be preset with whatever the encryption scheme would be, and the general public would not be able to listen in.
Someone (maybe you?) need to manage their expectations. Amateur radio doesn't allow encryption. Expecting the FCC to change the rules so a public safety agency can utilize amateur radio for their operations gets into the slippery slope area.This would satisfy most agencies that are being supported.
I hear you, and please don't take my comments as an argument. Only providing an alternate point of view to consider.I am not trying to get in an argumen
I wouldn't necessarily assume those ears were deaf. Just because some didn't agree with the ruling doesn't mean the ruling was wrong. FCC may be trying to keep amateur radio connected to it's roots. Trying to expand it into an extension of public safety radio systems would lead to a bunch of issues that amateurs probably don't realize. And, in reality, it isn't needed. HIPAA rules don't require it, and public safety agencies shouldn't be expecting it.... as confidential comms have been presented to the FCC many times before and deaf ears have maybe listened.
How do you mean "sit on the side"? Amateur radio operators are not public safety professionals. They are hobbyists. A 70% passing score on a 35 question multiple choice test and a <$100 Chinese radio doesn't make someone a public safety professional. Amateur radio operators are communicators, that's it.Hams have offered services that agencies could not provide for many years. First we had repeaters, agencies were in many areas just simplex . Repeaters gave them greater and clearer comms., Then we offered auto patch, or phone contact before there were cell phones. This was helpful for those who had needs to talk to others whop were not radio savey. , Then we offered slow scan tv, or the providing of images, which was a great benefits. Pictures of a scene were for more descriptive than words said. We had repeater linking, providing wider area comms. Agencies now have repeaters, cell phones that carry voice and pictures, trunking that offers wider coverage or in some states state wide comms. We have adapted DMR , but no encryption and now they have encrypted comms while we as hams sit on the side.
The truth is most public safety agencies don't "need" amateur radio to do their job. The days of amateur radio operators being the only source of reliable communications in a disaster are mostly gone. While amateur radio does have it's place, it's a lot different than it was back in the days of Civil Defense. Public safety communications really changed a lot after 9/11. DHS took care of that when they rolled out nationwide interoperability frequencies. That allows agencies that were smart enough to program their radios correctly to communicate in simplex mode with other agencies as needed. Add in satellite communications, cell phones, FirstNet and all the others, and the need for volunteers with radios is greatly diminished.Agencies have passed us by, and if we can not provide what they are used too, I feel we are of less or no use at all.
Probably not a good example, but I get what you mean.Its like we have the guns, but the ammo is nor provided.
Again, I'd have to disagree. Even public safety agencies are learning their lessons about encryption. When many went to trunked radio systems with subscriber access control, they effectively locked out mutual aid help from other agencies. Public safety learned from that.This was like the time in Viet Nam. We knew the targets, but Washington told us what targets we could go after. Sometimes it as like , well in Indians didn't have bows and arrows anymore, they had guns that shot pretty darm good, and we had blinders on. Washington at their finest once more.
I'll add:The FCC has not been moved to accept these arguments by others yet.
Yup. Every incident I've ever been to on one side of the mic or the other, the hams haven't provided much. In fact, some of our resources were used keeping them on their task because they felt they should be doing more than their assignment.It's time to realize that ham radio is becoming irrelevant in terms of emergency communications and technological development.
I have to agree. I retired from LE work 10 years ago but I still operate the mobile incident command center. It has satellite communications & Internet, an ACU-1000, cameras and more. We also have various ham radios and can talk over much of the ham spectrum. We've been to Hurricane Katrina, tornadoes, train wrecks, chemical spills, and lord knows what else but we seldom use the ham radios for official work. Both myself and the other operator have licenses.Yup. Every incident I've ever been to on one side of the mic or the other, the hams haven't provided much. In fact, some of our resources were used keeping them on their task because they felt they should be doing more than their assignment.
Purpose Matters.§97.113 Prohibited transmissions.
(a) No amateur station shall transmit:
4) Music using a phone emission except as specifically provided elsewhere in this section; communications intended to facilitate a criminal act; messages encoded for the purpose of obscuring their meaning, except as otherwise provided herein; obscene or indecent words or language; or false or deceptive messages, signals or identification.
Sorry, no. Those examples are well beyond the scope of the encryption restrictions.Purpose Matters.
Talking in FM analog on simplex with a large group then going to DMR to obscure information from the FM users would be an issue, not because DMR is an issue, but because your reason for encoding the transmission is a problem. Same might go for using Q codes to hide what you're saying from scanner users when in a crowded area. But using them for shorthand among those expected to know them, namely most hams, to make communication faster and quicker, just fine. Secret words or having an agreement among your buddies to always talk about your radios as being 1/4 the price you paid for them so the XYLs don't overhear what you actually paid, might really be an FCC issue.
Another impractical interpretation. If your rig does not go below 5 watts, then you are not violating the regs at any time when using 5 watts.Now what about those all of those hams using 5 watts of power in their HT to hit the repeater, when only 1 watt would get the job done just as well? Minimum necessary transmitter power to complete the desired communication is in the regulations [97.313(a)]...
Since MD-380 is acceptable for commercial use, you can use encryption using frequencies outside 420-450 Mhz, with the right FCC license.I'm curious about the "Basic" and "Enhanced" encryption that is available on the TYT DM-380. Are those scrambling techniques legal on amateur radio frequencies. I'm asking because I'm tempted to use them but I'm hesitant about it due to the questionable legality of it all.
Except you are not operating them as a Part 97 amateur operator. They would fall under part 15 (or whatever part they are under). 902-928 is a shared ham band, shared with other services.it is legal to use encryption on 902-928Mhz ham radio band. My Nextel radios are encrypted by default.