Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site mouton.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mouton!karn
From: karn@mouton.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.ham-radio
Subject: Re: Simplex patches - (nf)
Message-ID: <103@mouton.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 21-Jul-84 23:50:19 EDT
Article-I.D.: mouton.103
Posted: Sat Jul 21 23:50:19 1984
Date-Received: Sun, 22-Jul-84 03:38:04 EDT
References: <13200006@smu.UUCP>
Organization: Bell Communications Research, Inc
Lines: 18

This topic was brought up just this afternoon at the ARRL National
Convention in New York. Ray Kowalski's (of the FCC) first answer was
"don't ask". He then went into a very strong series of comments that
if we're not careful, "simplex autopatches will end amateur radio
as we know it".  Read into this what you will. I think there are
several issues involved:

1. Technical legality under existing rules (need for separate control
link via wire or 220 mhz radio or above, control operator monitoring)

2. The potential for abuse (business calls, etc).

In my (KA9Q) opinion, there really isn't any difference between simplex
and duplex autopatches, but the latter have raised a number of grey-area
issues over the past ten years, and simplex autopatches are likely
to force the issues because "everybody will have one".

Phil