Re: [Repeater-Builder] RAIN Report: KT1B Commentary on Green Petition to Ban Closed Repeaters
They pretty much have to. There is no way the FCC can mandate anyone to allow any/all other licensed hams use of their station. As I said from day one: this petition was doomed before it was written. Joe M. WA3GIN wrote: > > > Thanks for the info, > > I suspect the FCC is going to frustrate him further. > > Best, > dave > > - Original Message - > *From:* Dan Blasberg <mailto:ka8...@verizon.net> > *To:* Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com > <mailto:Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com> > *Sent:* Friday, August 28, 2009 10:55 PM > *Subject:* Re: [Repeater-Builder] RAIN Report: KT1B Commentary on > Green Petition to Ban Closed Repeaters > > > > Dave, > > I think Murray has an issue with repeaters that have a PL but not > "advertising" the pl in any of their announcements. I'm not aware of > any closed repeaters in Metro DC either, but I am aware of several > with PL that do not have it on the ID/Announcement. > > As for GMRA and PL, they have a transmit PL on the repeaters and the > members can activate receive PL on their radios so as not to get any > bleed over from other repeaters on the same frequencies. I too wish > they would have a PL on both of their machines. > > Dan > KA8YPY > > On Aug 28, 2009, at 8:27 PM, WA3GIN wrote: > > > > > > > I'm not aware of any closed repeaters in the WDC area. In the VA-Md- > > DC area perhaps a half dozen noted as (c) by T-MARC. There are > > dozens of repeaters in the WDC area that go unused day after day > > after day with a little use in the evenings by a few hand fulls of > > civil defense volunteers. There is no spectrum use issue. Perhaps as > > the commentator noted, there are too many low power repeater pairs > > that perhaps preclude the installation of better coverage systems. I > > tend to think there are some that hog freq. pairs purely for > > egocentric reasons. > > > > SO, where is the beef - MURRAY? Who cares if there are a few closed > > repeaters? Not me. What I'd like to see is the GMRA provisioning > > PL on their repeater which is just 15KHz down from ours. As trustee > > I get tired of silly request from the GMRA asking us to do something > > about our users who occassionaly bring up their OPEN NON PL'd > > repeater ;-)) > > > > My subjective opinion of one...please flame direct and spare the > > reflector members ;-) > > > > 73, > > dave > > wa3gin > > www.w4ava.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
Re: [Repeater-Builder] RAIN Report: KT1B Commentary on Green Petition to Ban Closed Repeaters
Thanks for the info, I suspect the FCC is going to frustrate him further. Best, dave - Original Message - From: Dan Blasberg To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, August 28, 2009 10:55 PM Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] RAIN Report: KT1B Commentary on Green Petition to Ban Closed Repeaters Dave, I think Murray has an issue with repeaters that have a PL but not "advertising" the pl in any of their announcements. I'm not aware of any closed repeaters in Metro DC either, but I am aware of several with PL that do not have it on the ID/Announcement. As for GMRA and PL, they have a transmit PL on the repeaters and the members can activate receive PL on their radios so as not to get any bleed over from other repeaters on the same frequencies. I too wish they would have a PL on both of their machines. Dan KA8YPY On Aug 28, 2009, at 8:27 PM, WA3GIN wrote: > > > I'm not aware of any closed repeaters in the WDC area. In the VA-Md- > DC area perhaps a half dozen noted as (c) by T-MARC. There are > dozens of repeaters in the WDC area that go unused day after day > after day with a little use in the evenings by a few hand fulls of > civil defense volunteers. There is no spectrum use issue. Perhaps as > the commentator noted, there are too many low power repeater pairs > that perhaps preclude the installation of better coverage systems. I > tend to think there are some that hog freq. pairs purely for > egocentric reasons. > > SO, where is the beef - MURRAY? Who cares if there are a few closed > repeaters? Not me. What I'd like to see is the GMRA provisioning > PL on their repeater which is just 15KHz down from ours. As trustee > I get tired of silly request from the GMRA asking us to do something > about our users who occassionaly bring up their OPEN NON PL'd > repeater ;-)) > > My subjective opinion of one...please flame direct and spare the > reflector members ;-) > > 73, > dave > wa3gin > www.w4ava.org > > > > > >
Re: [Repeater-Builder] RAIN Report: KT1B Commentary on Green Petition to Ban Closed Repeaters
Dave, I think Murray has an issue with repeaters that have a PL but not "advertising" the pl in any of their announcements. I'm not aware of any closed repeaters in Metro DC either, but I am aware of several with PL that do not have it on the ID/Announcement. As for GMRA and PL, they have a transmit PL on the repeaters and the members can activate receive PL on their radios so as not to get any bleed over from other repeaters on the same frequencies. I too wish they would have a PL on both of their machines. Dan KA8YPY On Aug 28, 2009, at 8:27 PM, WA3GIN wrote: > > > I'm not aware of any closed repeaters in the WDC area. In the VA-Md- > DC area perhaps a half dozen noted as (c) by T-MARC. There are > dozens of repeaters in the WDC area that go unused day after day > after day with a little use in the evenings by a few hand fulls of > civil defense volunteers. There is no spectrum use issue. Perhaps as > the commentator noted, there are too many low power repeater pairs > that perhaps preclude the installation of better coverage systems. I > tend to think there are some that hog freq. pairs purely for > egocentric reasons. > > SO, where is the beef - MURRAY? Who cares if there are a few closed > repeaters? Not me. What I'd like to see is the GMRA provisioning > PL on their repeater which is just 15KHz down from ours. As trustee > I get tired of silly request from the GMRA asking us to do something > about our users who occassionaly bring up their OPEN NON PL'd > repeater ;-)) > > My subjective opinion of one...please flame direct and spare the > reflector members ;-) > > 73, > dave > wa3gin > www.w4ava.org > > > > > >
Re: [Repeater-Builder] RAIN Report: KT1B Commentary on Green Petition to Ban Closed Repeaters
Not this again... sheesh. -Brian On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 5:27 PM, WA3GIN wrote: > > > I'm not aware of any closed repeaters in the WDC area. In the VA-Md-DC area > perhaps a half dozen noted as (c) by T-MARC. There are dozens of repeaters > in the WDC area that go unused day after day after day with a little use in > the evenings by a few hand fulls of civil defense volunteers. There is no > spectrum use issue. Perhaps as the commentator noted, there are too many low > power repeater pairs that perhaps preclude the installation of better > coverage systems. I tend to think there are some that hog freq. pairs purely > for egocentric reasons. > > SO, where is the beef - MURRAY? Who cares if there are a few closed > repeaters? Not me. What I'd like to see is the GMRA provisioning PL on > their repeater which is just 15KHz down from ours. As trustee I get tired of > silly request from the GMRA asking us to do something about our users who > occassionaly bring up their OPEN NON PL'd repeater ;-)) > > My subjective opinion of one...please flame direct and spare the reflector > members ;-) > > 73, > dave > wa3gin > www.w4ava.org > > > > >
Re: [Repeater-Builder] RAIN Report: KT1B Commentary on Green Petition to Ban Closed Repeaters
I'm not aware of any closed repeaters in the WDC area. In the VA-Md-DC area perhaps a half dozen noted as (c) by T-MARC. There are dozens of repeaters in the WDC area that go unused day after day after day with a little use in the evenings by a few hand fulls of civil defense volunteers. There is no spectrum use issue. Perhaps as the commentator noted, there are too many low power repeater pairs that perhaps preclude the installation of better coverage systems. I tend to think there are some that hog freq. pairs purely for egocentric reasons. SO, where is the beef - MURRAY? Who cares if there are a few closed repeaters? Not me. What I'd like to see is the GMRA provisioning PL on their repeater which is just 15KHz down from ours. As trustee I get tired of silly request from the GMRA asking us to do something about our users who occassionaly bring up their OPEN NON PL'd repeater ;-)) My subjective opinion of one...please flame direct and spare the reflector members ;-) 73, dave wa3gin www.w4ava.org
[Repeater-Builder] RAIN Report: KT1B Commentary on Green Petition to Ban Closed Repeaters
RAIN Report 8/21/09: KT1B Commentary on Green Petition to Ban Closed Repeaters (9 minutes) http://www.therainreport.com/rainreport_archive/rainreport-8-21-2009.mp3 RAIN Report 7/24/09: K3BEQ Petitions the FCC to Outlaw Closed Repeaters (14 minutes) http://www.therainreport.com/rainreport_archive/rainreport-7-24-2009.mp3
