Xref: utzoo rec.ham-radio.packet:955 rec.ham-radio:4030 sci.electronics:2263 Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!linus!philabs!ttidca!sorgatz From: sorgatz@ttidca.TTI.COM ( Avatar) Newsgroups: rec.ham-radio.packet,rec.ham-radio,sci.electronics Subject: Re: low power license free packet? Message-ID: <1943@ttidca.TTI.COM> Date: 18 Feb 88 00:15:12 GMT References: <8802111609.AA16271@decwrl.dec.com> <440@n8emr.UUCP> <1983@saturn.ucsc.edu> Reply-To: sorgatz@ttidcb.tti.com (Erik Sorgatz - Avatar) Organization: Citicorp/TTI, Santa Monica Lines: 112 Keywords: CB == garbage, LICENSE-FREE == CB; Summary: GO GET YOUR NOVICE LICENSE! In article <1983@saturn.ucsc.edu> matthew@ucsck.ucsc.edu (Matthew Kaufman, KA6SQG) writes: > >The topic of license-free packet radio has been floating around for >some time. Several ideas have come and gone, including the 52-54 MHz >"reallocation" and the use of 49 MHz license free bands. The 1st of which will happen on a cold day in HELL, the second is not a useful option due to the range of the devices available and... >Why not class D CB (27 MHz)... ..this suggestion, while it might seem reasonable is actually not. Some of us have tried this and while it *does* work, the amount of hate 'n' discontent it generates would not endear such packet users to the rest of the CB community! >The power limit on this band is sufficient to set up a reasonable >packet network (i.e. doesn't require lots of close-together low-power nodes). The power "limits" are seldom enforced, and you will find that in metropolitian areas like L.A. and such, seldom observed. I.E.-noone will hear you @ 5 w. >The radios are cheap (<$60) and come with simple speaker and microphone >connectors, suitable for connecting a comercially available TNC. With good reason, the radios are not very selective and have little in the way of sensitivity. FM would be better, but F3E is illegal on 11 meters. >The bandwidth available is sufficient to support at least the 300 baud >HF modem standard, and almost certainly will also support the standard >VHF 1200 baud (202) standard. 1200 works fine on a clear channel, AM or SSB. On a crowded channel only SSB will get your packets across without a very large number of retrys. >The channels already exist and, even better, already sound as bad as >packet channels would to voice users. No comment. >Contrary to popular belief, packet WILL work on AM. In fact, it may >work better than voice on the same channel, because heterodynes >with existing carriers are usually NOT within the modem filter bandpass. Yes, it will work, but the hetrodynes cause retries, many retries. >A reasonable license-free packet network seems to be needed, and, >setting it up on existing personal radio channels would alleviate >complaints from users of other spectrum space (such as amateurs) >that would otherwise be reallocated to provide for such a service. Oh phooey! Stop sniveling, and go study a little! The Novice ticket is well within the reach of anyone who wants it. There are Amateur Radio Clubs around that will bendover backwards to assist you in doing so. >The only restriction that currently exists is FCC Part 95.627 >which states that: >d) Digital emmissions are not permitted in the GMRS or the CB radio service. >e) The transmission of data is prohibited in the Personal Radio Services. And with good reason! Study packet a little closer and you will notice that improperly used, packet can cause a tremendous amount of interference. The use of such equipment by completly untrained users would be difficult to actually justify on the International level. Everything the FCC does is fuel for those that participate at the WARC's..you're asking for blood. >I am interested in finding out what other opinions exist regarding >the expansion of CB to include digital packet radio. Certainly if The Amateur community stands ready to welcome you and all others as fellow operators...anytime you are ready to get serious. The expansion of CB radio, is something the FCC will only laugh at. It's been proposed several times. Some of the proposals have included such things as: A) Expansion of class D 11 meter CB from 27.405Mhz to 27.995. mixed modes. B) 27.410-27.510 A3J voice, F3E voice 27.515-27.715 and AX25a Packet only from 27.720-27.995 using F2/3/E. C) A new class of service, from 27.410-27.510, for AX25a Packet only, using F2/3E. (i.e. "CB Packet" but with a license!) As an Amateur, I can tell you that the majority of such schemes will *NEVER* garner a shred of support from the Amateur ranks because of the attitude that exists on CB. Look at the hassle that SSB users get/give to/from the AM users. Better still is the use of the "funny freqs"...there must be 40-50 times a week in L.A. that someone figures that since they don't "hear" anyone using the region between 28.0 and 28.2, that it's ok for them to have a nice FM QSO with their Trucker-buddies on their 'Rangers'...number 1: Most of these jerks don't know the difference between CW and fly-to-the-moon. The fact that some of us are indeed having a CW-QSO on 28.150 (right where they fire-up!) is of no interest to them, after all, they bought the radio! It *CAME* with the frequencies! Therefore... number 2: The number of existing radios that are equipped with A.M.-only...bad news is most CB users hate SSB, because they dont have it..more 'Low-buck mentality'. I would favor Frequency expansion (ala item B) if: 1) the radios were equipped in such a way that no firther expansion of the frequency range were possible. Use a rom-based composite PLL/VCO chip that has NO equal for replacement, MANDATE unusual I.F. freqs and no "extra" lines to play with. Make that sucker 99.9% impossible to expand! Cast the boards in epoxy or something like that. 2) the stations were Registered/Licensed. Nothing expensive, just a simple form which insures a better attitude by the users of the frequencies, and a unique callsign identifier for your packet-headers. 3) That the FCC could have an enforcement budget to police violators. Like: a) The LIDS that decide to play music, curse or jam. b) The 'LinearLids', who think 1Kw operation is "cool". c) The jokers who insist on running out-of-band, mixed mode, or who refuse identify their stations. d) The clowns that modify CB gear to encroach on the Amateur 10 meter band. Send these guys to jail for 10+ years! >enough people are interested, the FCC can be persuaded to modify these existing regulations. Don't count on it! Amateur Radio is what it is because everyone involved has a vested interest in keeping the 'GoodBuddy' types from overrunning the bands, the FCC's enforcement budget is almost nil, expansion that does not provide for the safeguards listed above has no chance. Period. You want more? CB radio is a sewer, the majority of CB users are braindead, burntout Kids that have so little to do with their miserable lives they congragate around the 11 meter band hoping for any kind of amusement. Just try cleaning it up, I did. I managed to interest 7 people to UPGRADE to Novice tickets..you can do the same. -- -Avatar-> (aka: Erik K. Sorgatz) KB6LUY +-------------------------+ Citicorp(+)TTI *----------> panic trap; type = N+1 * 3100 Ocean Park Blvd. (213) 450-9111, ext. 2973 +-------------------------+ Santa Monica, CA 90405 {csun,philabs,randvax,trwrb}!ttidca!ttidcb!sorgatz **