That's fine but they use them all over Canada and in the usa also... do u understand that fact ???
LADD - Alberta or Nationwide?
- Thread starter NDRADIONUT
- Start date
- Status
Ok, so what I should have said is "IMHO the database should reflect not only what is in use, but what's in use that can be corroborated by a licence when possible. That's why there is column for licenses."
It was also only an opinion, as it related to the topic of this thread, where LADD channels belong. The frequencies may not have a callsign, but you have to get a licence to use them according to Industry Canada, where it specifically states where they can be used.
That was the context of the statement. There was no comment, nor did I infer that we should "...go around and delete any data without a callsign???"
As for:
And
How do we know that they don't have the licence to use them because they work in BC, AB, or SK?
That isn't the point ! they are used all over allocated or not !!
What is your big objection anyway ? Your reaction is waaay out of line with level of importance here...
kayn1n32008
ØÆSØ
And the license for URMAS KURG, shows a bunch of frequencies for use in Ontario, that are NOT the basic 10, plus the basic ten, with the same restrictions as shown on the license from Manitoba. Again, please look at the ACTUAL license, rather than the site you are pulling this sort of correct data from... Oh license number 5156045 if you do not believe me.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
kayn1n32008
ØÆSØ
Too funny i have a couple on 173.3700 going through fargo as we speak... Lol
kayn1n32008
ØÆSØ
Then DF them and call the FCC... Only way to fix the problem is a bit of enforcement...
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
kayn1n32008
ØÆSØ
Better yet, get on the radio and tell them they are operating illegally...
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
I couldnt care less if they talk all over... My point is that it is happening and should be listed as such...
kayn1n32008
ØÆSØ
Actually they should be listed where they are, but have the area restrictions shown. They are NOT nation wide frequency allocations. Just because users do not abide by the restrictions on their licenses, does not mean they are nationwide frequencies.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Agree. And funny we have someone from the US telling us how to list frequencies in Canada incorrectly. If he wants to list them in the US, that is up to him. Let us in Canada do it the way IC has laid out the spectrum.
As Others not in my travels or monitoring. I suspect a hack trucker
Radio shop named the frequency and it lives as urban myth
Last edited:
kayn1n32008
ØÆSØ
That would be my guess. It is listed in the BC database as such, but when you look at any license for the basic ten, it is not authorized in BC. Funny thing is the name LAD is from BC for the those 4 specific frequencies. They have always been Just 4 LAD channels since I started monitoring in the early 90's. In all my monitoring, and use of Basic 10/Resource Road/LMR mobile to mobile frequencies, I have NEVER heard 153.0500 referred to as LAD-5. 23 years of monitoring and/or using two way radio.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
kayn1n32008
ØÆSØ
YA WELL PUT !
This is now being discussed at the management level so I'll close this thread.
- Status
