Where this runs into issues is the question of "spirit of the law." The rules for aux operation started many years ago, and envisioned individual licensees operating remote stations by remote control, on a somewhat secure basis.
Indiscriminately opening an aux HF station to a community of users like that attracted by a repeater, under automatic control, doesn't appear to violate any rule I can find. You're essentially calling the transmitter on your repeater a repeater and an aux station at the same time, but again, no rule prohibits that. Like anything else, it's only a real problem for the people who abuse it. Sure is annoying on 29.6 in a band opening, though. And manufacturer support for a feature does not mean it's legal! 73, Paul, AE4KR ----- Original Message ----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [email protected] Sent: Sunday, December 23, 2007 10:06 PM Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: 10 meter desense help, split site, high noise floor. HF Remote bases have been supported for decades by various repeater controller manufacturers. They're not just limited to outputs in the 10M FM Repeater band, you'll hear them on 75 meters, 20 meters, 10M SSB, etc. It's legal to repeat the 160M CW band up to UHF, if you want to. It's completely legal! -----Original Message----- From: Brian Romine Sent: Dec 23, 2007 9:21 PM To: [email protected] Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: 10 meter desense help, split site, high noise floor. I would have to agree with Keith WE6R, the FCC has been on a roll here lately re-banding several different frequency bands, why not reband the 10m band to accomodate more repeater pairs? One thing some people seem to be missing in this thread... at least I haven't seen anyone else mention it... are the numerous 10m 'remote bases' that are out there. Even though according to one ARRL official "if a repeater is linked in any manner to 10m; the 10m frequency must be within the 10m repeater sub-band." Just my two cents worth...... Brian Romine KC5CAY --- In [email protected], "Jeff Kincaid" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > That sounds like a great way to cause massive, worldwide interference > problems when the sunspots return. But hey, you can petition the FCC > for it and see what happens if you'd like. > > 'JK > > --- In [email protected], Johnny <jstowers@> wrote: > > > > I know it may sound to simple but how about splitting the repeater > > sub-band. Put the repeater inputs at the top of the main band and the > > outputs at the bottom of the main band. Or vice-versa. > > Johnny > > > > > > Jeff Kincaid wrote: > > > The band may be huge, but the FM sub band is smaller and the repeater > > > sub band is smaller still. Just how wide of a split would you like to > > > use in a 200 kHz wide band? > > > > > > Jeff W6JK > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "kb1we6r" <capyo670@> wrote: > > > > > >>Why oh why did they pick 100KHz??? The 10m band is HUGE with no > > >>activity (even when the band is open, there should be plenty of room > > >>for a better repeater plan). > > >>.... Keith, WE6R in Monterey CA > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
