In the southeast, we have specific digital simplex frequencies coordinated as so by SERA. Please use them and not frequencies coordinated as packet.
FM digital simplex on 2m are: 146.420, 146.440, 146.460, 146.480, 147.420, 147.440, 147.460, 147.480 For 440 use these: 440.9125, 440.9250, 440.9375, 440.9500, 440.9625, 440.9750, 440.9875, 441.0000, 441.0125, 441.0250, 441.0375, 441.0500, 441.0625, 441.0750, 441.0875, 441.1000, 441.1125, 441.1250, 441.1375, 441.1500, 441.1625, 441.1750 For other areas contact you band plan coordinator (and not a mailing list). --- In [email protected], Gary Pearce KN4AQ <kn...@...> wrote: > > At 10:23 AM 4/20/2010, cybersapient wrote: > >I'm surprised you didn't suggest that the analog FM users on simplex > >simply put a PL tone on- it works in simplex, as well, you know. > > Hi, Shane, > > PL (CTCSS) "works" on simplex technically, of course. But it's not feasible > logistically. > > CTCSS requires what I'll call a "cooperative effort" - everybody has to > know and agree to use it, and agree on a specific tone frequency. On analog > repeaters, cooperation is mandated, at least to access the repeater. > Keeping your own receiver quiet by using tone decode is your choice. > > Do you think that kind of cooperative effort is possible across a broad > range of simplex users (such as you'll find on 146.58, or any of the > band-plan simplex channels)? > > Do you think it can be imposed on simplex operators, as in, "Don't like my > D-STAR digital hash? Well, use CTCSS and don't bother me again."? (Do you > know how many hams don't even know what D-STAR IS yet?) > > That contains all the ingredients you need for a range war, and everybody > loses. > > Separate spectrum exists for simplex (while it is very had to come by for > repeaters). Let's use it, and be good neighbors. We will have to be aware > of packet or other digital activity in the 145.5-145.8 region, and dodge > that when we find it. > > ============ > bruce mallon <wa4...@...> wrote: > > >STAY OFF KNOWN SIMPLEX FREQUENCIES ! It's that simple. > > Closer, Bruce, but here's the rub. Simplex channels (or, what I think you > really meant is "known simplex USE") are "known" mostly by the people using > them regularly, not by the general population surrounding them. > > Here in my medium-size area (Raleigh-Durham NC, 29th TV market, ~1,000,000 > population demographic), various clubs and ARES groups have suggested that > their members use of one or another simplex channel. There are some ad-hoc > groups of hams who end up on one channel for weeks, months, maybe years. > None keep the channels very busy, but most have a few hams who monitor them > on and off. I know that exists, but I couldn't tell you who's using what > across the region. > > These simplex groups are all way too loose for coordinated CTCSS (except in > the mind of the dedicated urban planner). So I still think that, for now, > we're best off staying off ALL the band plan simplex channels, and > establish our own spot. Though if you think you know a spot above 146 MHz > that is truly vacant, well, enjoy it. > > Maybe some day we'll be established enough to get a spot for digital > simplex in the band plan, but don't hold your breath (and the guys in the > know are now holding their sides and ROTFL - not because we don't deserve > the spectrum, but because they know just how likely ANY "band plan" changes > and recognition are for anything new or different, but that's a whole > 'nother can of worms). > > 73, > Gary KN4AQ > > ARVN: Amateur Radio//Video News > Gary Pearce KN4AQ > 508 Spencer Crest Ct. > Cary, NC 27513 > <mailto:kn...@...>kn...@... > 919-380-9944 > www.ARVideoNews.com >
