[amsat-bb] Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS Re: Re:dream)
W4ART Arthur Feller
afeller at ieee.org
Tue Jul 7 09:13:59 PDT 2009
"Whenever you get in bed with the Federal government, you often get
more than just a good night's sleep." Ronald Regan.
Translation: Don't ask for a ruling unless prepared to hear something
you won't like.
Better to proceed in good faith and sort out the matter only if needed.
I hope this helps.
W4ART/4 Miami FL
On 7-Jul-2009, at 11:42 AM, kd8bxp at aol.com wrote:
> Ben, I agree we need a ruling on this I think part 97 is vauge and
> vauge for a reason
> What we need is to setup a confrance call or something so we can get
> a well written letter together and get it off to someone who can
> make a ruleing at the FCC
> Skype, echolink, dstar or something where those that are interested
> can all join in -
> Define a system and descuss the possablities of doing call sign
> routing, sending the pages up to a satellite ect ect
> But before "we" put a lot of time and effort and money into this
> I think we need a ruleing
> I know for a fact that our local repeater is cabable of doing 2 tone
> paging - and was in use back when I was very young and not a ham -
> the elders of the local club say it was able to send alerts for
> weather, pages for people to get on the radio, ect. It was all done
> with tones at the time - "our" pagers are far more advanced and can
> display the text of whatever
> No one in the club can tell me why they stopped using pagers - a
> couple of the guys thought it was because cell phones became small
> and able to be carried in your hand.
> But at around the same time they stopped paging, kantronics also
> stopped modify pagers for 2 meters, and I think they stopped making
> the tncs that were able to do POCSAG - so my thinking was that a
> rule had changed making pagers illegal in the ham bands. Or at very
> least questionable. From the kantronics point of view the may not
> have been selling many of them and just didn't want to put the time
> and resources into making them anymore. But something happended -
> As I said our local repeater is cabable of doing two tone - it was
> built like that from the beginning
> We need to setup something and get as many people as we can write up
> a well written paper and get a ruleing. That is bottom line on it -
> I am on the fence as far as if it is legal or not - on one hand an
> agrument can be made for telemetery - which is aloud - on the other
> hand pagers can be used to send one way personal pages which is
> where I am unclear
> I think as we see here agurements can be made on both sides. Which
> is why we need a ruleing. When rules are written this vauge some one
> needs to decide and stand by the decision
> LeRoy, KD8BXP
> ------Original Message------
> From: Ben Jackson
> To: Bob Bruninga
> Cc: kd8bxp at aol.com
> Cc: amsat-bb at amsat.org
> Subject: Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS Re: [amsat-
> bb] Re:dream)
> Sent: Jul 7, 2009 11:20 AM
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> Bob Bruninga wrote:
> We'll agree to disagree regarding your take of the rules as almost
> everyone else did on APRSSIG. ;)
>> There is no reason to nit pick rules. When one is broadcasting (one
>> way) to the general public or using amateur radio inappropriately, I
>> think everyone can tell when it is blatanly illegal. I just don't
>> see the FCC cares one nit about some of these debates when any one
>> can see that hams are taking initiative to better their use of the
>> radio art.
> Considering that they've recently ruled on whether contesters should
> give blanket "5-by-9" signals, I'd think they'd be glad to rule on
> something interesting and relevant. :)
>>>> You just have to ignore the curmudgeons who have nothing better
>>>> to do than nit-pick ways to prevent other hams from developing
>>>> useful applications of technology. A pager is simply the
>>>> text-to-user device integrated into the normal local 2-way
>>>> amateur radio communications system.
>>> The issue is that, according to Part 97, it can't be used beyond
>>> QSTs, telemetry, or "necessary" emergency communications. Could I
>>> get away with setting up such a system? Likely. Do I foot to stand
>>> on when my local OO comes knocking? Not so much.
>> Some OO's are part of the problem, not the solution...
> Then the solution has presented itself. Get a ruling from the FCC
> regarding the use of transmissions to receive-only devices such as
> pagers. Then we can finally put this issue to rest and if anyone comes
> knocking regarding the legality of these transmissions, we can have
> something concrete to cite.
> Again, I'd love to set up something like this, but I'd be hard pressed
> to spend a chunk of money on a system that could be taken down if
> someone files a complaint to the FCC.
> Let's take any further discussion about this offline.
> - --
> Ben Jackson - N1WBV - New Bedford, MA
> bbj <at> innismir.net - http://www.innismir.net/
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Sent on the Now Network from my SprintÂ® BlackBerry
> Sent via AMSAT-BB at amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the
> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite
> Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
I'm on the road again for the Leukemia and Lymphoma Society. Please,
help! Donate and follow the story on my TNT web site!!
CAUTION: Web site may have a photo of me in Spandex..... ;-)
More information about the AMSAT-BB