The 4 coordinated  NARCC repeaters on the 147.945/345  pair in Northern 
California will be very upset to learn that after decades of  operation on this 
pair, that their operation is illegal and should be shut down. 
I think I'll pass on telling them that. 
 
Bruce K7IJ
 
In a message dated 10/14/2007 11:30:35 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 
 
 
Glen,

I think you should read Part 97 on this, hi. There is not one  word of 
language making 147.435 a simplex freq and not a repeater  freq.

A repeater that has been on this pair for what over 15 years  would speak to 
it being legal and allowed.

73, ron,  n9ee/r

>From: Glenn Shaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) >
>Date:  2007/10/14 Sun AM 09:00:48 CDT
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
(mailto:Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com) 
>Subject:  RE: [Repeater-Builder] 147.435 Repeater in Simplex Channels 
Contrary to Part  97

> 
>147.435 most definately is a simplex freq and is not  authorized for a
>repeater freq.
>
>See: re:Section  97.101(a)
>
>and: _http://www.bloominghttp://wwwhttp:/_ 
(http://www.bloomington.in.us/~wh2t/)   and Riley Hollingsworth opinion
>FCC
>
>and: ARRL Band Plan  and Simplex National Channels
>_http://www.arrl.http://www.http://www.arrl.http://www.http://_ 
(http://www.arrl.org/FandES/field/regulations/bandplan.html#2m) 
>
>After  reading these sites each can come to his own interpretation of them.
>It  looks quite clear. There are many more sites, documents and opinions  if
>one wishes to search for them that pretty much say the same thing.  147.435
>is NOT a repeater freq. The simplex frequenciesa are there for  a reason and
>need to be protected, probably even more so than the  Satellite frequencies. 
 
>
>Glenn
>N1GBY
>
>-----Original  Message-----
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
(mailto:Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com) 
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
(mailto:Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com) ]  On Behalf Of JOHN MACKEY
>Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2007 12:29  AM
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
(mailto:Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com) 
>Subject:  RE: [Repeater-Builder] RAIN Report: D-STAR Repeater Trustee,  
K6BIV,
>Responds to NFCC Letter to the FCC
>
>Hi  Mike,
>I certainly did NOT expect a reply like this from you! Since you  spent many
>years serving on a coordination coucil, you should know  better.
>
>First, the repeater (I am sure you are referring to)  has the output on
>147.435 MHz and the input on 146.400 MHz. BOTH  frequencies are in the
>repeater sub-band as directed by FCC part 97.  They are NOT simplex
>frequencies and ARE authorized for repeater  use.
>
>Second, the repeater is NOT mine and operates under  someone else's callsign.
>I only maintain it and link to it with my UHF  and 6 meter repeaters.
>
>Third, while I appreciate your advice  regarding the repeater frequencies you
>advised me on, it IS active here  in this area, and has been for several
>months.
>
>------  Original Message ------
>Received: Sat, 13 Oct 2007 09:26:53 AM  CDT
>From: "Mike Mullarkey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED])   
<mailto:k7pfj%mailto:k7pmai> >
>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
(mailto:Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com) 
><mailto:Repeater-mailto:Repeater-mailto:Re>  >
>Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] RAIN Report: D-STAR Repeater  Trustee, K6BIV,
>Responds to NFCC Letter to the FCC
>
>>  Hi John,
>> 
>> I could expect a reply like this from you.  You are the only one in 
>> Oregon that has an odd split both working  in the simplex band. For a 
>> person that
>is
>> in  the broadcast business, that has spent many years on the 
>>  coordinating council you would know better. Why don't you do like I  
>> told you several years ago and send in paperwork on the channel I  told 
>> you that would work, hell it has not seen ac power for over  five years 
>> and its free for the taking. Hum, sounds to easy for  me. If you do not 
>> remember the
>conversation,
>> I  could refresh your memory if you would like. On the other hand, just  
>> let the other people in the Portland, Oregon area coordinate it.  They 
>> will probably put a good repeater up, work by the rules, and  maintain 
>> the repeater the proper way a repeater should be  operated.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Mike Mullarkey  (K7PFJ)
>










************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com

Reply via email to