CW is allowed anywhere under the frequency limits of the operator license....what was being transmitted via the repeater was MCW, a tone modulating the FM carrier...legal only in phone bands above 29.5 MHz..a tone fed into a SSB transmitter is considered A1A or true CW, not MCW which is A2 or F2 depending on modulation method.only two segments, 50.0-50.1 and 144.0 - 144.1 are CW only....you can find it online at several places ...Google FCC Part 97Chris WB5ITT Sent via my Samsung Galaxy S10e, an AT&T 5G Evolution capable smartphone..so there! 😂 -------- Original message --------From: Mike Knerr via BVARC <bvarc@bvarc.org> Date: 6/18/23 8:46 AM (GMT-06:00) To: BRAZOS VALLEY AMATEUR RADIO CLUB <bvarc@bvarc.org> Cc: Mike Knerr <mike5586m...@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [BVARC] 146.940 Repeater Problems and Repeater Operation I'm still new at this, is CW allowed on 2 meters?On Sat, Jun 17, 2023, 6:52 PM Suggs, Marvin (KTRK-TV) via BVARC <bvarc@bvarc.org> wrote:
Did they find out who was sending CW over the 146.94 machine a week ago Friday? Marvin N5RKW Sent from my iPhone On Jun 17, 2023, at 2:49 PM, Eddie Runner via BVARC <bvarc@bvarc.org> wrote: This Message is From an External Sender Caution: Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. When something like this happens its pretty simple for EVERYONE to monitor the 146.34 input to the repeater and forward signal reports.. Most folks have a rev button... this is what its for. Last night Suzanne (KF5GWZ) and I set out to find the problem and we did. We had a few previous reports (Guesses??) like Mike forwarded, but that didn't match the results Suzanne and I were getting.. I think the area that was under suspicion WAS NOT the area we went to... All those calls would have been a waste.. We used the signal strength meter on a mobile rig (icom r7000) and a handheld with a signal strength meter as well, monitoring 146.34. Took a little over an hour then after it was fixed, we stopped and had some good tx mex for dinner.. It was a fun Friday Date night.. ha ha Wish more folks were out there to join us, we had a blast.. Eddie (NU5K) PS - good subject for future BVARC training... On Saturday, June 17, 2023 at 02:07:05 PM CDT, John Denison via BVARC <bvarc@bvarc.org> wrote: I'm glad this issue was resolved, and for what its worth, there are at least 50 hams in the area which would have made it time consuming to contact each one. This was a good (not good) unplanned fox hunt, and it reminds me of the time there was interference on the 146.92 repeater years ago. At the time I had an Icom mobile which had an attenuator on the squelch control, so it was relatively easy to narrow the signal down to a few square blocks. This is one of the things I like about ham radio the most... hams coming together to offer a service or resolve an issue. 73 John Denison KD5YOU ________________________________________________ Brazos Valley Amateur Radio Club BVARC mailing list BVARC@bvarc.org https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://mail.bvarc.org/mailman/listinfo/bvarc_bvarc.org__;!!Om87Lau1Cg!KnnpCyVbXy-lZSz_HgnYMbE8nGY7kwr4wfprArQZlnCrh4Faw6ftcL7jhFb1sqy7n3DWgyjuqEIKKA$ Publicly available archives are available here: https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.mail-archive.com/bvarc@bvarc.org/__;!!Om87Lau1Cg!KnnpCyVbXy-lZSz_HgnYMbE8nGY7kwr4wfprArQZlnCrh4Faw6ftcL7jhFb1sqy7n3DWgyhCgqte1Q$ ________________________________________________ Brazos Valley Amateur Radio Club BVARC mailing list BVARC@bvarc.org http://mail.bvarc.org/mailman/listinfo/bvarc_bvarc.org Publicly available archives are available here: https://www.mail-archive.com/bvarc@bvarc.org/
________________________________________________ Brazos Valley Amateur Radio Club BVARC mailing list BVARC@bvarc.org http://mail.bvarc.org/mailman/listinfo/bvarc_bvarc.org Publicly available archives are available here: https://www.mail-archive.com/bvarc@bvarc.org/
