Sounds like the FCC has had enough:
FCC Releases Warning Notices to Several Radio Amateurs
FCC Releases Warning Notices to Several Radio Amateurs
Recent Enforcement Actions against Amateur Operators
- Thread starter n9mxq
- Start date
- Status
KB7MIB
Member
Wirelessly posted (Opera/9.80 (BREW; Opera Mini/6.0.3/27.2354; U; en) Presto/2.8.119 320X240 LG VN530)
Follow the rules, and this won't happen to you.
http://www.arrl.org/news/fcc-releases-warning-notices-to-several-radio-amateurs
Follow the rules, and this won't happen to you.
http://www.arrl.org/news/fcc-releases-warning-notices-to-several-radio-amateurs
KB7MIB
Member
Wirelessly posted (Opera/9.80 (BREW; Opera Mini/6.0.3/27.2354; U; en) Presto/2.8.119 320X240 LG VN530)
Sorry for the double post. There is some kind of recent, ongoing issue between my phone browser and the server apparantly. One of these threads can be deleted. (There is no report button on the mobile version for me to report it.)
Sorry for the double post. There is some kind of recent, ongoing issue between my phone browser and the server apparantly. One of these threads can be deleted. (There is no report button on the mobile version for me to report it.)
Isn't 14.313 where all the morons hang out?
Nice they're starting to go after some of them.
Delta
Nice they're starting to go after some of them.
Delta
KB7MIB
Member
Wirelessly posted (Opera/9.80 (BREW; Opera Mini/6.0.3/27.2354; U; en) Presto/2.8.119 320X240 LG VN530)
It's one of the frequencies. 80m and 160m have their share of rule violators as well. And of course, you can probably find them on virtually any frequency at various times if you travel across the country.
It's one of the frequencies. 80m and 160m have their share of rule violators as well. And of course, you can probably find them on virtually any frequency at various times if you travel across the country.
I'm glad to know that the FCC monitors these morons and is finally going after some of them. I have heard some astonishingly rude behavior and bad language on 40m as well, specifically 7.200 ... If they want to talk that way on the radio, take away their HF equipment and give them some $5 kiddie walkie-talkies (you know, 49 MHz at 50 milliwatts). Then they can rip at each other all they want.
profiledescent
Member
I wonder how many of these (General and above) HF guys are ones who complain that VHF/UHF has gone to a bunch of non code CBers? I don't even stop on that freq anymore, just keep twisting the VFO to the next signal.
jdobbs2001
Member
- Joined
- Apr 20, 2005
- Messages
- 221
I just tuned into the LID calling channel at 14.313 and there are some crazy folks on that frequency right now.
kayn1n32008
ØÆSØ
There usually are. At least they leave the rest of the band alone...
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
jdobbs2001
Member
- Joined
- Apr 20, 2005
- Messages
- 221
I never heard anything like it. older guys arguing over 14.313, one guy calling the other guy a Nazi Collaborator during WW II etc.. lots of bad bad blood regarding WW II.
hehe wow.
Token
Member
Sure, there needs to be enforcement on several frequencies, 14313 kHz being among the first. However the second bit concerns me. Although I have not seen the letter itself it sounds like they warned N9RSY concerning a violation of 97.111 (a) (1).
N9RSY was warned for repeatedly attempting to get another station to ID. Since the other station never IDed RSY was warned for a possible violation because the other station “may not have been in the Amateur Service”. Yeah, anyone who has ever listened to 14313 knows that there is probably more to this than meets the eye. Was N9RSY goading the other station, trying to get him to ID, in a way that tied up the freq for extended periods of time? Did RSY know the unIDed station, and want him to incriminate himself? Did he know the other station was not a ham and wanted to drive this point home? Was this the easiest and quickest way for the FCC to get his attention and let him know they were looking at his activity? All or none of the above?
Regardless, a written warning for talking with a station that never IDed looks and feels like a slippery slope to me unless the warned operator knows for sure the other station is not a ham. If I talk with another station in another country with different ID criteria, say not every 10 minutes, how am I supposed to know for sure he is a ham? He “may” not be in Amateur Service, for all I know, until he finally IDs. If I talk to an operator who forgets to ID, never does it, he is in violation (depending on his local regulations), but does that make me in violation for conversation with a station that “may” not have been in Amateur Service? If I know another station is in Amateur Service, say I have recognized his voice for years, and ask him several times to ID, and he never does before leaving the air, does that make me in violation?
I could be wrong but I don’t remember a section of Part 97 that requires I be my brothers keeper. I am not responsible for how any other operator operates. If he runs too much power, goes too long between IDs, or uses foul language on the air I am not in violation unless I do those things also. I am not responsible for his spectral purity. I am not responsible for him having a license at all or for knowing if the callsign he IDs with is good or not. Sure, if I know or have reasonable suspicion that he is not an Amateur than I should not communicate with him, but what if I suspect he is a ham, just one who does not particularly care about the regulations? Maybe not someone I want as a friend, but how does that put me in violation?
Like I said, enforcement may be needed, hammer those nails down. But this seems a little iffy to me…unless there is more to the story than what the article portrays.
T!
N9RSY was warned for repeatedly attempting to get another station to ID. Since the other station never IDed RSY was warned for a possible violation because the other station “may not have been in the Amateur Service”. Yeah, anyone who has ever listened to 14313 knows that there is probably more to this than meets the eye. Was N9RSY goading the other station, trying to get him to ID, in a way that tied up the freq for extended periods of time? Did RSY know the unIDed station, and want him to incriminate himself? Did he know the other station was not a ham and wanted to drive this point home? Was this the easiest and quickest way for the FCC to get his attention and let him know they were looking at his activity? All or none of the above?
Regardless, a written warning for talking with a station that never IDed looks and feels like a slippery slope to me unless the warned operator knows for sure the other station is not a ham. If I talk with another station in another country with different ID criteria, say not every 10 minutes, how am I supposed to know for sure he is a ham? He “may” not be in Amateur Service, for all I know, until he finally IDs. If I talk to an operator who forgets to ID, never does it, he is in violation (depending on his local regulations), but does that make me in violation for conversation with a station that “may” not have been in Amateur Service? If I know another station is in Amateur Service, say I have recognized his voice for years, and ask him several times to ID, and he never does before leaving the air, does that make me in violation?
I could be wrong but I don’t remember a section of Part 97 that requires I be my brothers keeper. I am not responsible for how any other operator operates. If he runs too much power, goes too long between IDs, or uses foul language on the air I am not in violation unless I do those things also. I am not responsible for his spectral purity. I am not responsible for him having a license at all or for knowing if the callsign he IDs with is good or not. Sure, if I know or have reasonable suspicion that he is not an Amateur than I should not communicate with him, but what if I suspect he is a ham, just one who does not particularly care about the regulations? Maybe not someone I want as a friend, but how does that put me in violation?
Like I said, enforcement may be needed, hammer those nails down. But this seems a little iffy to me…unless there is more to the story than what the article portrays.
T!
elk2370bruce
Member
At least these clowns self-quarantine to 14.313. There was also a hangout on 14.275 with Canadian Karol and his antagonists but that seems to have died a well-deserved death. Don't dwell on the channel 13 group. 20 meters has lots of great people and its even better when grey line dx abounds. Ditto for 17. Enjoy the bands and forget the fools on.313 who are unworthy of mention but worthy of our silent contempt.
Interesting. For instance, around here on VHF/UHF repeaters a single operator will sometimes identify both (or multiple) parties to the conversation. For example, "This is KC3- - - with KB3- - - and W3- - - in the group" and then continue on with the discussion. Of course they all know each other, but oftentimes you've never met in real life but they know all the call signs in the conversation.
Would that technically be considered a violation? Even though you ID'ed properly and weren't trying to use another's call as your own; a person did give another op's call sign.
My apologies if this doesn't pertain to this particular thread.
KB7MIB
Member
I was wondering about that as well. I think what it boils down to is, if another station fails to ID, you can ask them once or twice to ID, but after that, you have to cease any further communication with them if they continue to fail to properly ID.
It sounds like the operator carried on a lengthy two-way conversation with an apparant unlicensed station, which we are not permitted to do, and that is what got him into trouble.
It sounds like the operator carried on a lengthy two-way conversation with an apparant unlicensed station, which we are not permitted to do, and that is what got him into trouble.
Is this a proper ID for yourself? I've always known it to be "W3xxx with KB3xxx this is KC8xxx" - as in identifying yourself last in the order.
Works the same way if you're on the key. "W3xxx DE KC8ESL"
Now I need to look at part 97 to make sure I know what I'm talking about... Edit pending.
I couldn't find anything suggesting you need to ID last, contrary to my last post.
Parts of interest may include sections a and 2. Section a suggests that you will not be able to ID for the other station(s) and part 2 suggests that even though its taboo to use phonetics on VHF/UHF FM, the FCC would like to hear that done.
§97.119 Station identification.
(a) Each amateur station, except a space station or telecommand station, must transmit its assigned call sign on its transmitting channel at the end of each communication, and at least every 10 minutes during a communication, for the purpose of clearly making the source of the transmissions from the station known to those receiving the transmissions. No station may transmit unidentified communications or signals, or transmit as the station call sign, any call sign not authorized to the station.
(b) The call sign must be transmitted with an emission authorized for the transmitting channel in one of the following ways:
(1) By a CW emission. When keyed by an automatic device used only for identification, the speed must not exceed 20 words per minute;
(2) By a phone emission in the English language. Use of a phonetic alphabet as an aid for correct station identification is encouraged;
(3) By a RTTY emission using a specified digital code when all or part of the communications are transmitted by a RTTY or data emission;
(4) By an image emission conforming to the applicable transmission standards, either color or monochrome, of §73.682(a) of the FCC Rules when all or part of the communications are transmitted in the same image emission
(c) One or more indicators may be included with the call sign. Each indicator must be separated from the call sign by the slant mark (/) or by any suitable word that denotes the slant mark. If an indicator is self-assigned, it must be included before, after, or both before and after, the call sign. No self-assigned indicator may conflict with any other indicator specified by the FCC Rules or with any prefix assigned to another country.
(d) When transmitting in conjunction with an event of special significance, a station may substitute for its assigned call sign a special event call sign as shown for that station for that period of time on the common data base coordinated, maintained and disseminated by the special event call sign data base coordinators. Additionally, the station must transmit its assigned call sign at least once per hour during such transmissions.
(e) When the operator license class held by the control operator exceeds that of the station licensee, an indicator consisting of the call sign assigned to the control operator's station must be included after the call sign.
(f) When the control operator is a person who is exercising the rights and privileges authorized by §97.9(b) of this part, an indicator must be included after the call sign as follows:
(1) For a control operator who has requested a license modification from Novice Class to Technical Class: KT;
(2) For a control operator who has requested a license modification from Novice or Technician to General Class: AG;
(3) For a control operator who has requested a license modification from Novice, Technician, General, or Advanced Class to Amateur Extra Class: AE.
(g) When the station is transmitting under the authority of §97.107 of this part, an indicator consisting of the appropriate letter-numeral designating the station location must be included before the call sign that was issued to the station by the country granting the license. For an amateur service license granted by the Government of Canada, however, the indicator must be included after the call sign. At least once during each intercommunication, the identification announcement must include the geographical location as nearly as possible by city and state, commonwealth or possession.
[54 FR 25857, June 20, 1989, as amended at 54 FR 39535, Sept. 27, 1989; 55 FR 30457, July 26, 1990; 56 FR 28, Jan. 2, 1991; 62 FR 17567, Apr. 10, 1997; 63 FR 68980, Dec. 14, 1998; 64 FR 51471, Sept. 23, 1999; 66 FR 20752, Apr. 25, 2001; 75 FR 78171, Dec. 15, 2010]
Parts of interest may include sections a and 2. Section a suggests that you will not be able to ID for the other station(s) and part 2 suggests that even though its taboo to use phonetics on VHF/UHF FM, the FCC would like to hear that done.
§97.119 Station identification.
(a) Each amateur station, except a space station or telecommand station, must transmit its assigned call sign on its transmitting channel at the end of each communication, and at least every 10 minutes during a communication, for the purpose of clearly making the source of the transmissions from the station known to those receiving the transmissions. No station may transmit unidentified communications or signals, or transmit as the station call sign, any call sign not authorized to the station.
(b) The call sign must be transmitted with an emission authorized for the transmitting channel in one of the following ways:
(1) By a CW emission. When keyed by an automatic device used only for identification, the speed must not exceed 20 words per minute;
(2) By a phone emission in the English language. Use of a phonetic alphabet as an aid for correct station identification is encouraged;
(3) By a RTTY emission using a specified digital code when all or part of the communications are transmitted by a RTTY or data emission;
(4) By an image emission conforming to the applicable transmission standards, either color or monochrome, of §73.682(a) of the FCC Rules when all or part of the communications are transmitted in the same image emission
(c) One or more indicators may be included with the call sign. Each indicator must be separated from the call sign by the slant mark (/) or by any suitable word that denotes the slant mark. If an indicator is self-assigned, it must be included before, after, or both before and after, the call sign. No self-assigned indicator may conflict with any other indicator specified by the FCC Rules or with any prefix assigned to another country.
(d) When transmitting in conjunction with an event of special significance, a station may substitute for its assigned call sign a special event call sign as shown for that station for that period of time on the common data base coordinated, maintained and disseminated by the special event call sign data base coordinators. Additionally, the station must transmit its assigned call sign at least once per hour during such transmissions.
(e) When the operator license class held by the control operator exceeds that of the station licensee, an indicator consisting of the call sign assigned to the control operator's station must be included after the call sign.
(f) When the control operator is a person who is exercising the rights and privileges authorized by §97.9(b) of this part, an indicator must be included after the call sign as follows:
(1) For a control operator who has requested a license modification from Novice Class to Technical Class: KT;
(2) For a control operator who has requested a license modification from Novice or Technician to General Class: AG;
(3) For a control operator who has requested a license modification from Novice, Technician, General, or Advanced Class to Amateur Extra Class: AE.
(g) When the station is transmitting under the authority of §97.107 of this part, an indicator consisting of the appropriate letter-numeral designating the station location must be included before the call sign that was issued to the station by the country granting the license. For an amateur service license granted by the Government of Canada, however, the indicator must be included after the call sign. At least once during each intercommunication, the identification announcement must include the geographical location as nearly as possible by city and state, commonwealth or possession.
[54 FR 25857, June 20, 1989, as amended at 54 FR 39535, Sept. 27, 1989; 55 FR 30457, July 26, 1990; 56 FR 28, Jan. 2, 1991; 62 FR 17567, Apr. 10, 1997; 63 FR 68980, Dec. 14, 1998; 64 FR 51471, Sept. 23, 1999; 66 FR 20752, Apr. 25, 2001; 75 FR 78171, Dec. 15, 2010]
- Status
Similar threads
