Why did the ITU/FCC pick 27MhZ

[KE5FRF]

This is something I've often wondered about. I mean, the logical reasoning behind that particular frequency segment.

BTW, this thread is not a troll, it is an honest "technical" discussion about regulatory reasoning and band propogation.

I do have a little experience with CB's, so I know how the band behaves. I also know that the FCC regulates that 27 MHz be a LOCAL communication 2-way service. I know the rules on it's inception where even stricter than today. The idea was to provide a public access sliver of frequency real estate to provide local emergency comms, communications for motorists, and local personal, family, or even business communications, etc.

Anyway, it seems like the band that was selected was a HORRIBLE choice...11 meters being so much like 10 meters in regards to worldwide propogation conditions during sunspot peaks. It seems like a more logical alternative would have been to give the CB service a sliver of UHF or VHF frequencies. I know that 11 meters at one time was an amateur alocation. It seems like the 220 MHz band would have been a better choice.

Anyway, I wonder if anyone has a recollection or any insight as to why an HF band was allocated for a local communications service.

[kl7aj]

Actually there WAS a UHF CB service. "Class A" CB was up around 450 MHz. The equipment was too expensive though, and the easiest band the FCC could steal from was the 11 meter amateur band, because, supposedly,
"nobody was there." The rest, shall we say is, hysteria

[ka0gkt]

One thing Hams who were licensed after eleven meters was given to the Class C and Class D CB service (Myself included) often forget is that Eleven was shared with a bunch of industrial users including Diathermy. #I can remember the noise from a chiropractor's diathermy machine making the lower sixteen channels of the old 23 channel CB band unusable whenever he was warming a patient with RF. #Dielectric heating was also used in several industrial processes, many in the aerospace industries.

I have been told by old-timers that the reason eleven wasn't used to a great extent was due to the noise, mainly QRM from non-amateur users of the band, as Amateur radio was secondary to Government and ISM on the band from 26.96 to 27.23 MHz.

73 DE KAØGKT/7

--Steve

[wa4ilh]

Why do you ask about "ITU"? I believe this was a local (US) decision. Tom WA4ILH

[AG3Y]

Heath, that question remains in my mind, one of the "mysteries of the ages" !

I do know that there are other "Citizens Radio Services" and that the band that we call the "CB band" is actually the "Class D Citizens Radio Service" band. #Classes A through C are higher in frequency, and the equipment needed to operate in those bands was much more expensive than "Class D" stuff.

I believe the FCC had in mind to create a service that wouldn't require paying huge amounts of money in order to set up. #It was visualized as a "Mom and Pop" sort of service, and indeed, if the limitations were adhered to ( 5 watts, crystal control, tip of antenna height not to exceed 20 feet above any existing structure, etc. etc. ) not to mention the REQUIREMENT that communications were NOT to extend beyond a certain distance ,( I forget how much, but certainly NOT skywave! ) #it would have been almost impossible to communicate great distances for a good amount of the sunspot cycle.

However, we all know what happened to the "Class D Citizens Radio Service" #It became a hobbyist's band and amplifiers, modified ham rigs, beam antennas at heights that would be the envy of hams worldwide, etc. all became widespread enough that the FCC virtually threw up its collective hands in despair and effectively ceased regulating it.

Well, that is my take on it, and I too would like to know WHY this all took place. #


The following has been edited to clarify something, based on a post from Glen that appears further down the string.

One little piece of the puzzle that has been a thorn in the OF's side was the belief that the FCC took 11 meters AWAY from the Amateur Radio Service in order to create the Class D service. #Whether this was true or not, this belief explains a lot of the animosity and hard feelings that a lot of OTs have against any and all CB operators to this very day!

Hope this helps. #73, Jim

[KE5FRF]

Quote[/b] (wa4ilh @ Jan. 26 2007,14:33)]Why do you ask about "ITU"? #I believe this was a local (US) decision. #Tom WA4ILH
It may very well have been?

I assumed it was by international treaty because it is my understanding that the citizen's band is used around the world, certainly in Europe and South/Central America, and is allocated the same band. But I may indeed be wrong about it being by ITU treaty. Sorry if I miss stated any facts.

[K7JEM]

11 meters was not "technically" a ham band. It was shared, kind of like 900 and 2400 are today. It was not a worldwide allocation either.

That part of the spectrum was being used for two way radios, remote broadcast, etc. It was available, since hams were not much using it, and CB would fit into the international allocation.

I think the reason is that in 1957, that was probably the highest frequency that a decent quality transceiver could be built for, at a decent price. It was hard and expensive to make power much above about 50MHz, same with good RX sensitivity. If you are going to create a CB service, the radios need to be priced much cheaper than commercial 2 way.

I'm sure the thought process was that 5 watts wouldn't allow much skip type interference. Of course, they were totally wrong about that.

AM was chosen over FM for the same reason: economy. FM sets were relatively difficult to make back then, and they required much more bandwidth, to boot.

All in all, the FCC probably made the best decision they could have, at the time. The problem was not moving CB up to VHF or UHF in the 70's or so. But by then, there were 10 million licensed CB ops, and kind of hard to turn that thing around.

Joe

[K0RGR]

Someone else may recall better, but I don't think 11 was ever an Amateur exclusive allocation worldwide. I think in much of the world, it was allocated as Land Mobile, with ISM and Amateur secondary. The new CB band was just viewed as another form of Land Mobile.

I think 12 meters today is suffering the same fate as 11 did years ago. It's fairly uncommon to find 12 open when 10 isn't, though it might be interesting to see how that works in the next sunspot cycle. Maybe the Techs on 10 meters will chase the Generals down to 12?

I don't own a 12 meter antenna, do you? I think I've had about 3 QSO's there.

[ka0gkt]

Actually, Class C Citizens service is (was) the 27 MHz radio remote control frequencies and fell on 26.995 (Between Channels 3 and 4) and 27.045 (Between channels 7 and 8),between channels 11 and 12 (27.095) and two other "special channels between channels 15 and 16 (27.145) and channels 19 and 20 (27.195) and between channels 25 and 26 (27.255).

IIRC, one or more of the 27 MHz frequencies which I listed were set aside for either civil defense or CAP usage, but it has been a long time since I needed to know such trivia and brain cells die so easily http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

73 DE KAØGKT/7

--Steve

[KE5FRF]

Quote[/b] ]Well, that is my take on it, and I too would like to know WHY this all took place. One little piece of the puzzle that has been a thorn in the OF's side was the fact that the FCC took 11 meters AWAY from the Amateur Radio Service in order to create the Class D service. This explains a lot of the animosity and hard feelings that a lot of OTs have against any and all CB operators to this very day!

Yeah, Jim. I'm not trying to further animosity about it. That, indeed, would be the ultimate dead horse! But it does indeed seem like a foolish decision. What did they expect would happen when the first CB user heard AUSTRALIA on the band? Did they really believe the average person would change the frequency to avoid speaking to a DX CBer? HA!

To be quite honest, I don't blame 11 meter users for "shooting skip", and I won't lie and say that when I had a CB in my car as a young 19 year old in 1992, and heard propogation kicking up, that I didn't jump in and try to work people in Australia!

I have a good example of that. I have a friend who has a black lab retriever that he hunts ducks with. A young one, still a pup. He trains the do every day, works with him, giving commands. He demonstrated to me, by throwing a chew toy, the dog's discipline, even as a pup. He tossed the toy and yelled to the dog "WAIT!!"....Don't you know that pup was quivering with excitement, coveting the toy that his master had told him to wait, knowing that he would momentarily be able to please his master by retrieving it. Well, in this case, with the young pup, and me standing there as an audience, the excitement was too great for him, and he broke his discipline and went for the toy before his master gave him permission.

I suspect for anyone hearing DX on a CB radio, the prospect of establishing contact would be very much like the pup's excitement in retrieving the toy. It would be very hard for even the most disciplined person to resist the temptation. And the logical conclusion to that reality is that the CB user, like a ham, would be intrigued by propogation, and desire to learn ways to make the contacts easier, more reliable, stable, etc. Thus, for the more technically inclined, comes amps and illegal antennas. And for the less technically inclined, a local community of "in the know" people to do business with and get hands on such equipment.

It was the natural progression of things, and terribly niave of the FCC.

But anyway, that's a moot point. And the noisemakers and echomikes are another story. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[K0RGR]

I'm not sure when the criminal element really moved into CB. It didn't start that way.

Some of the criminality was a reaction to FCC clamping down on CBers who violated the rules, in some cases fairly innocently. Or, at least, stories passed through the jungle grapevine about swastika-wearing FCC Storm troopers descending on innocent women on their way to church who happened to find 11 meters open at the time. This was in much the same way that news passes through AM talk radio, today.

Also, remember that FCC established the CB band in the 1950's when we had the highest sunspot peak in history.
11 meters was no doubt open worldwide for much of the time.

Doesn't everybody have a story about somebody they know that was driving down the highway one night, talking to somebody on the CB radio, that turned out to be thousands of miles away?

By the mid-60's the criminal element was well established.

[K7JEM]

Remember in 1957, the US was the only country in the world that had CB. It took years and decades for it to be established by other countries.

No-one was thinking about people talking to Australia, that was just inconceivable. There was a law against that kind of stuff anyway. Radio was fairly new, at least radio that the public could own, and the numbers for the first few years were relatively small. I think it was around 1963 that the numbers of CBers surpassed the ham licensees.

Joe

[K9STH]

Class "A" Citizen's Radio Service has evolved into what is now the General Mobile Radio Service (GMRS). It started out after World War II utilizing FM equipment in the 460 MHz region. The technical requirements were the same as the Business Radio Service but the power INPUT was limited to 50 watts. Repeater operation was allowed and virtually any citizen of the United States could obtain a license just by applying.

Class "B" Citizen's Radio Service was also in the 460 MHz region. However, it only allowed very low power transmitters and they were generally of the "free running oscillator" type. Class "B" went the way of the dodo bird in the early 1960s.

Class "C" Citizen's Radio Service is still around. It started on the 11 meter band for radio control purposes. The frequency of 27.255 MHz was the most popular and thousands of model airplanes were controlled on this frequency. Class "C" now allows operation in the 70 MHz range.

Class "D" Citizen's Radio Service is what is generally referred to as "CB" although technically any of the Citizen's Radio Service are "CB".

The Class "E" Citizen's Radio Service was suggested by several manufacturers of "CB" equipment. The proposed service was going to use the 220 MHz to 222 MHz band with FM equipment with an INPUT power of 25 watts. In fact, the Japanese were so confident that the Class "E" service was going to happen that they built quite a few 220 MHz FM units. But, the FCC did not approve this band and those Japanese FM units were "dumped" on the amateur radio market in the United States during the early 1970s.

As has been "pointed out", 11 meters was NEVER an amateur radio band. After World War II the 27 MHz range was allocated to land mobile services and for industrial / medical purposes. Amateur radio operations were allowed UNTIL such time as any government decided to use the frequency range for land mobile. The Class "D" Citizen's Radio Service is a land mobile service. Thus, for about 8 years United States amateur radio operators were allowed to use the 11 meter band. However, the interference from things like diathermy machines made the band very unpopular especially in metropolitan areas. Also, the band was not harmonically related to the other bands which did not allow crystals and VFOs operating within those bands to be used to control the transmitting frequency. As such, the band was never very popular with amateur radio operators.

The 11 meter band was in use by amateur radio operators in countries other than the United States for several years after it became the Class "D" Citizen's Radio Service in the U.S. During the early days of "CB", when the FCC was definitely enforcing the regulations, quite a number of "CB" operators were cited for trying to contact amateur radio operators in other countries.

Most of the high frequency amateur radio equipment manufactured during the 1950s had the 11 meter band included. On crystal controlled transmitters this was nothing more than the 10 meter band. But, on transmitters with VFOs there usually was a separate position on the bandswitch which usually added a small amount of capacitance to the tuned circuit in the oscillator portion of the VFO which shifted the frequency downward to cover the 11 meter band. Of course receivers either had an expanded 10 meter band or else a separate band.

Those amateur radio operators who "claim" that the "CB" operators "took away" the band are just plain wrong! Amateur radio operators were permitted to use the 27 MHz frequencies until such a time as they were needed for a land mobile service. Amateur radio operators were always secondary users and never had any legitimate "claim" to the frequencies.

Glen, K9STH

[ky5u]

Nevermind...

[n0nwo]

The reason is that 11 meter rigs were/are cheap and easy to make making them affordable to the average family. #VHF Was very expensive at that time.

Minton

[PE1RDW]

For your entertainment I´ll add a bit of history of 27mhz in the Netherlands, I don´t know the dates but after the 23 channels in the usa where alocated as CB we only had R/C models and medical users officialy on that band, between the 23 channels and 10 meter was hospital radio and voice paging systems.
As soon as the pirates found out about the am transievers from the usa they where imported by the dozens, mostly the ponies, or however the brand was called, and before and after tv time there was quite a bit of activety (anyone getting in the air during TV time was shouted off the band with the letters TVI)
It didn´t take long before the first users where busted but a clever lawyer found a loophole in the law, by using the term radiotelephone he got around the forbitten use of a transmitter.
Not much later germany started alowing 12 channels using AM with 1 watt and the number of iligal operaters started to grow so much that the goverment could not stop it anymore, in those times the CEPT started to harmonice several laws and CB was alocated 22 channels in FM with 0.5 watt with germany alowing am 1 watt on the old 12 channels.
The band was later expanded to 40 channels fm 2 watt folowed by 40 channels fm 4 watt, the channels used the same nummering as in the usa because of the R/C models.
some 5 years ago Germany added 40 channels below the normal 40 channels and recently the restriction on modes was let go completly but power restriction was kept at 4watt pep, meaning am was 1 watt carrier.

[kn4ds]

STH... thank you for a very informative post. I learned a lot from that, as well as the other posts in this thread.

[WA2ZDY]

Quote[/b] (KE5FRF @ Jan. 26 2007,15:02)]But it does indeed seem like a foolish decision. What did they expect would happen when the first CB user heard AUSTRALIA on the band? Did they really believe the average person would change the frequency to avoid speaking to a DX CBer? HA!
With the state of technology of the day, it was really the only "practical" decision. And yes they really did believe the average user would refrain from working the DX. For the vast majority they were right too.

This was 1958 and society was different then. Folks obeyed the law as the norm. Most folks wouldn't have considered breaking the rules. In fact back then most channels were reserved for stations communicating only with others under the same license, and yes, that was obeyed too. CB was a tool, not a toy.

When I was a very young child my mother and grandmother had a CB in the house and one in the family car. It was used just as a cell phone is today. Tool, not toy.

[AG3Y]

Glen, thanks for the clarification. I re-worded my post to more accurately reflect the real situation.

BTW, I must say this; if "No Test International" gets a foothold, I cannot forsee the situation on the HF bands being any different than it is on 27 Mhz. Andre did a great job of pointing out how vast numbers of operators can over-rule ANY regulatory agency by shear force !

It would NOT be a good idea to take away ALL restraints !

73, Jim

[K7JEM]

Exactly. There was no other form of radio that the average person could get. It was CB radio, or maybe business band if you were really wanting to spend some bucks, and qualified for that service.

Radio was strictly enforced, and people did obey they rules, at least at first.

AM broadcast was king, FM was in its infancy. Color TV was new, and a mobile phone was only for the very rich.

Ham radio was for tinkerers, and took up a whole "shack". Any kind of handheld radio was a novelty.

Joe

[kn4ds]

Quote[/b] (AG3Y @ Jan. 26 2007,16:44)]It would NOT be a good idea to take away ALL restraints !
I agree completely.

However, I do think that the exams need to change with the times, and I think they need to be tougher.

I can pass General without cracking a book... I have, many times here on QRZ.

Extra's a little tougher, and the current Extra question pool is what I think General should be... and get the really tough stuff for Extra... and make it 100 questions, not 50.

Considering all the older gear up for sale today and going to be put on the air, it wouldn't even hurt if there were questions on how tubes work...

I've never thought that it should be easy to get into Amateur radio... I just didn't have any interest in the code, and didn't want on HF badly enough to force myself to go there. Thousands and thousands of folks did want it badly enough. I recognize that, and commend them for their efforts and success.

[kn4ds]

Quote[/b] (K7JEM @ Jan. 26 2007,16:53)]Exactly. There was no other form of radio that the average person could get. It was CB radio, or maybe business band if you were really wanting to spend some bucks, and qualified for that service.

Radio was strictly enforced, and people did obey they rules, at least at first.

AM broadcast was king, FM was in its infancy. Color TV was new, and a mobile phone was only for the very rich.

Ham radio was for tinkerers, and took up a whole "shack". Any kind of handheld radio was a novelty.

Joe
I like how you put it in perspective...

I remember when phones had cords, too.

[wa4ilh]

Quote[/b] (KE4UWL @ Jan. 26 2007,14:56)]Joe
I like how you put it in perspective...

I remember when phones had cords, too.[/QUOTE]
yes, phones had cords and BELONGED to the phone company. You couldn't add an extension (legally) without having it installed by them, and paying an additional monthly fee. Same with a phone patch interface. The good old days? NOT
Tom WA4ILH

[KI4PEQ]

Quote[/b] (AG3Y @ Jan. 26 2007,15:44)]Glen, thanks for the clarification. #I re-worded my post to more accurately reflect the real situation.

BTW, I must say this; if "No Test International" gets a foothold, I cannot forsee the situation on the HF bands being any different than it is on 27 Mhz. #Andre did a great job of pointing out how vast numbers of operators can over-rule ANY regulatory agency by shear force !

It would NOT be a good idea to take away ALL restraints ! #

73, Jim
Jim,

With all due respect to a senior amateur, is there really such an organization as "No Test International" or is this supposed organization purely a speculation of what organization MIGHT form with the goal of NCI now realized?

Not pointing a finger at you, as you are one of the more reasonable voices on this forum, but this "NTI" seems to be one of the first things brought up when the subject of know coders vs. no coders comes up. Some of the posts can get downright nasty and insulting.

While I may gain privileges sooner with the code requirement falling by the wayside, I don't think that all testing should be eliminated.

[W5HTW]

There were quite a lot of restrictions on Class D. One not already mentioned was that a station license (there was NO operator license) covered only 8 units. Communications was supposed to be only between those units, and not with units under another license.

In the very early 1960s there were quite a number of businesses that tried to use Class D, and that was legal. I knew of two or three. One was a plumbing supply house, another was a local taxi company. CB, in fact, was touted as the "poor man's business band."

By about 1963 (when I first tried CB) the skip was starting to pour in. Some of the companies that had tried CB as a business radio were no longer able to use it. A few gave up on radio entirely, and some were forced into the far more expensive Class A or Class C systems. These were in the 465 mhz range.

I tried CB briefly, as my wife was not at that time inclined to get a ham ticket (later she did, a Novice license, but she never went further.) I thought it would be useful for us as a means of car to house communication around town. Sometimes it was, most of the time it wasn't. I gave up and either sold or gave away the two radios I had, I don't recall which.

The real puzzle may not be why the FCC chose 27 mhz as the place for Class D, but why they chose that particular era in time. It was, as already noted, a very hot solar cycle. It would seem the FCC was out of touch with the concept of propagation. They were definitely out of touch with the American mentality that was just beginning "If I can do it and not get caught, I will do it." That attitude spread quickly through society in the mid and late sixties.

The FCC had no foresight concerning this. They were accustomed to amateur radio, and prior to the 1970s, hams were almost entirely rules-abiding. There were the very occasional exceptions, and because there were so few, the FCC found it easier to track them down and fine them, and so they did. That put the fear into most hams. Virtually none of us would have had the courage to say "hell" on the air, or to slip below the edge of the phone band. Or to run 2 watts over legal power input. We didn't do it!

Society as a whole was a rules follower. It was the wild 60s of hippies and "tune out" and "screw the establishment" that also spawned the CB nutty craze.

Just to give an idea. I used to have to drive through a tiny village after midnight a couple of times a week. There was a traffic light, and it was never on flash. With no cars in sight for miles, and no lights in any of the houses in that tiny village, I would stop and wait for that light to change green. It is what we did. We followed the rules.

So the FCC must have thought, "Gee, hams are such great citizens, maybe all citizens are that way."

Turns out that was not the case! CBers quickly learned that using handles and po boxes, kept the FCC out of their front yard. And the legitimate uses of CB fell by the wayside, another great idea gone to the dogs.

Ed

[WA9SVD]

Remember also, that during the late 50's and early 60's that in the Class "D" CB service, along with the licensed operators (allowed 5 Watts input power) the FCC also allowed unlicensed operations with Crystal-controlled transmitters, and 100 mW or less input power. I'm sure Allied Radio (pre-Tandy, pre-Rat Shack days) sold millions of their little blue 100 mW "Walkie-Talkie KITS." It used a whole three transistors, and sold for about $10. And there was no such thing as "certified" equipment (nee "type-accepted.")

[AG3Y]

I had a couple of those little 100 mW kits from Allied. I anticipated building them like I would anticipate getting a new Icom 756 now days !

In fact, I can remember making my first contact with someone else besides someone who was holding the 2nd of the two "walkie-talkies"! I firmly believe that that was what got me on the road to ham radio, and my career in Broadcast electronics! That, and a little "Phone-Broadcaster" that reached a whole mile to a friend's house!

73, Jim

[KC5SAS]

Quote[/b] (K9STH @ Jan. 26 2007,13:45)]Class "A" Citizen's Radio Service has evolved into what is now the General Mobile Radio Service (GMRS). #It started out after World War II utilizing FM equipment in the 460 MHz region. #The technical requirements were the same as the Business Radio Service but the power INPUT was limited to 50 watts. #Repeater operation was allowed and virtually any citizen of the United States could obtain a license just by applying.
As a GMRS licensee I dont understand how this service didn't catch on as well as it should have. FM professional grade radios and repeater capabilities for family use. No test, just pay the fee for the license and it covers your entire household. The FCC originally allowed businesses to license there but changed that rule and made it personal use only. Then they carve out the FRS with shared frequencies and allow the introduction of combination FRS/GMRS bubble pack radios to be sold with virtually no mention of the license requirements for the GMRS channels. Lack of enforcement of teh rules resulted in numerous pirates jumping on the band, putting up repeaters and interfering with legal comms. Some GMRS users, such as the guys over at Popular Wireless dot com, started reporting problems and Riley and his gang at the FCC have made a few attempts at thumping heads of certain violators. Just when you think there is some small hope for this service the FCC goes and allows Garmin to market GMRS radios with GPS data bursts on the frequencies. WTF? Basically the FCC has totally sold out to business and has no regard for it's own rules and regulations or the future of this service.
Could this be the way the Ham Bands go in the future? Who knows. We've seen how the FCC will bow to big money when it comes to BPL and even giveing away chunks of spectrum to businesses such as UPS for radio systems which never get built. Follow the money.
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif

[ai4ep]

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif follow the evil almighty dollar.

This one thread has more real time education in it that the average amateur can use and remember from their own personal past than just about any other thread currently in this forum.

There are no insults, or innuendoes, or smart remarks in any ones posts ( if you dont believe me, just go back and read it all again.)

I applaud each of you for your contributions to this thread, for every one brought a bit of facts that adds up at the end to be one of the best threads I have seen here on qrz in quite a while.

Each contributor should be proud of theirselves.

73 to each of you ( yep, you too ) .

[KB3LIX]

A few VERY minor points:

26.510 mHz was allocated to the Civil Airpatrol. It was common practice in single conversion receivers to take rocks (crystals) for CB channel 1, 26.965, and #reverse the transmit and receive crystal.

Also: channels 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 & 23 were permitted to be used interstation. Channel 9 was supposed to be for emergencies only.
The rest 1-8, 15-22 were for intrastation communications only.

There was a 5 minute time limit, communicate for 5 minutes (maximum) then stop for 5 minutes (at minimum).

No hobby type conversation. Strickly family or business type communications.

5 watts input and crystal control mandatory.

No communications or ATTEMPTED communications with stations greater than 150 miles distant.

Antenna system not to exceed 20' above existing structure.

On the application, you could request the number of transmitters you wished to operate. You did not have to operate the number listed on the license but you could not EXCEED the number listed.

License cost was $ 20.00
Valid for 5 years.
Minimum age for license: 18 yoa.

I made a BOAT load of $$$ in the 70's & early 80's servicing CB equipment. You cannot imaging the number of transcievers I serviced. Biggest problem, was reverse DC power polarity. 10 minutes of service time (or less), a $.50 diode and $25 later the radio was back in business. Fools remember to check polarity when it costs them $ 25.00 (or more)

KB3LIX # # #Formerly KRP-5818 & KFW-4763

[W0LPQ]

Up until the late 60's, the PACAF HF Network had 26.515 USB and several in the 27Mhz range as well. They were used quite often. Think those have been deleted since the Collins HF station ceased to be part of the Air Force Comm Network.

Bill, W0LPQ

[N0NB]

Two-way radio always has fascinated me. #I was coming of age just as the CB boom hit in the wake of the fuel supply crisis of the early '70s and then the imposition of the 55 MPH speed limit. #I think that the "double nickel" and the resulting attempt by many motorists to avoid slowing down by getting a CB so they could avoid the radar traps contributed much to the current lack of respect for authority. #I wanted a radio ohhhh so badly, but in our family's budget there just wasn't the money to spend on such frivolity. #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif #Then came the country-western truckin' tunes and the newspaper articles (even a frequent column by, appropriately enough, Ink Dipper) and my interest in radio knew no end. #But, I was tied to my Panasonic Panapet 70 and the AM broadcast band.

Then one Christmas, perhaps about '75 or '76, the folks gave me a pair of walkie-talkies. #Yeah, they were the really cheap things that squealed on transmit and were on channel 14 only. #But, interestingly enough, they had the Morse Code on the front and a second button that transmitted a tone. #Needless to say, we weren't very proficient. #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif #None of that mattered for a while because I was "on the air"! #

Even though they didn't work well, they had an element of mystery and once in a while, even out on the farm, a strange signal or two were heard. #Sometimes coyote hunters, other times someone else. # Several futile attempts were made at contact, but the interest remained.

A magazine intended for a cousin of mine was mis-directed to our house. #In it was an article about something called Amateur Radio and the employment of something called repeaters. #This amateur radio sure sounded interesting, but I had no idea about how to go on and learn more, so the seed was left to fester some more.

In 1980 as a Junior in high school (27 years ago this month!) the local Radio Shack was participating in a nationwide sale of 40 channel units for $50. #We decided a few units would be a good addition around the farm and we used them for a few years. #Initially on 19 since that's where everyone else was (dumb idea) and then to channel 39 where it was generally more quiet and somewhat more private.

Then toward the end of my Senior year I had to write a term paper and it had to be about something we hadn't investigated before. #Somehow, while in the school library, amateur radio came to mind and I did my paper on what I could find in two encyclopedias, which wasn't much, and got a good grade. #Most importantly, I did get the ARRL's mailing address and I was able to write them for more information and I was on my way.

Even though the illegal operators have sullied the band, for my part I'm thankful that 27 MHz CB was available back then with its affordable price. #Even though it had long since lost its usefullness as a business band (I now have a 450 MHz repeater at the farm), we were able to use it to some good effect and it got us out of a few jams. #More importantly is that it sparked an interest in two-way radio that led to amateur radio and a rewarding career in the telecommunications field. #Whether 27 MHz is a technically sound choice for such a service, I'm glad it was there and accessable.

[K7JEM]

Quote[/b] (KC5SAS @ Jan. 26 2007,18:02)]As a GMRS licensee I dont understand how this service didn't catch on as well as it should have. FM professional grade radios and repeater capabilities for family use. No test, just pay the fee for the license and it covers your entire household. The FCC originally allowed businesses to license there but changed that rule and made it personal use only. Then they carve out the FRS with shared frequencies and allow the introduction of combination FRS/GMRS bubble pack radios to be sold with virtually no mention of the license requirements for the GMRS channels.
GMRS never caught on because the rules were somewhat restrictive, and the radios were too pricy. Prior to 1998 (IIRC) the rules limited you to one or two of the 8 channels, and a repeater required licensing, a separate line on the application. Commercial radios in the mid 90's were in the $400-$500 price range. There was only one true made for GMRS portable, and it was $200.

By the time the regs were relaxed, and the radio prices fell, almost everyone had a cellphone, so the novelty and demand for GMRS fell.

Joe

[kg4kww]

I would like to know why the FCC dropped the licensing requirement for CB.
This has always been a puzzle to me. Does anyone know?

[K7JEM]

Quote[/b] (kg4kww @ Jan. 26 2007,23:14)]I would like to know why the FCC dropped the licensing requirement for CB.
This has always been a puzzle to me. Does anyone know?
It was getting out of hand, and the government started requiring the FCC to justify their license costs. At the time, they charged $20 per license, and they had to make them free, or develop a reason for what they were charging.

The FCC just decided to wash their hands of the whole deal, at least as far as licensing was concerned. Ham radio licenses went to free at about the same time.

Joe

[KC5SAS]

Quote[/b] (K7JEM @ Jan. 26 2007,23:25)]Quote[/b] (kg4kww @ Jan. 26 2007,23:14)]I would like to know why the FCC dropped the licensing requirement for CB.
This has always been a puzzle to me. Does anyone know?
It was getting out of hand, and the government started requiring the FCC to justify their license costs. At the time, they charged $20 per license, and they had to make them free, or develop a reason for what they were charging.

The FCC just decided to wash their hands of the whole deal, at least as far as licensing was concerned. Ham radio licenses went to free at about the same time.

Joe
If that's the case I wonder how they justify charging me 85 fracking dollars for a 5 year GMRS license. Then they don't bother enforcing most of the rules they write for it.

[K7JEM]

Thats their fee schedule, now. If CB still required a license, it would be similar.

[KG6YTZ]

Quote[/b] (K0RGR @ Jan. 26 2007,12:23)]Doesn't everybody have a story about somebody they know that was driving down the highway one night, talking to somebody on the CB radio, that turned out to be thousands of miles away?
Thousands of miles away? #Not me, but I do have a story about sitting in the car at work [east of Los Angeles], well past sunset, and getting into a conversation with an operator who turned out to be in Oregon. #I'd say that would have been sometime in early 1988, and my first experience with "night skip."

I don't recall whether it was AM or SSB, but I'm thinking it was probably AM - I wasn't on sideband very much at all in those days, and the most active sideband channel around here [39 LSB] was populated with cantankerous and exclusionary OF's who resented "AM'ers coming up here to practice talking sideband."

My best DX would probably be Alaska, SSB mode, in the summer of 2002 - there was a YL who made almost daily appearances from... <thinks>... dangit, I don't remember exactly where now. #Somewhere in Alaska, anyway.

Only that Oregon contact was truly surprise DX, though.

[SM0AOM]

Another European perspective.

In Sweden, a 460 MHz UHF citizens radio service was introduced in the mid-50's, but never gained any popularity.

Following the US example, 27 MHz CB was introduced in 1961 after great hesitation by the Swedish Board of Telecommunications, as it would comprise a step aside from the Government policy of that time that all radio transmitters should be state-owned and rented by the users (with amateur radio transmitters as the sole exception, a lot of faith was thus put into the Swedish radio amateurs...). CB was primarily intended for i.a. small business, hunting and boating purposes.
Communications between CB stations belonging to different parties was expressly prohibited, except in emergencies.

CB usage virtually exploded in the mid-and late-60's, and "hobbyist" or disguised amateur operations soon made the "legitimate users" of the band a small and downtrodden minority.

This eventually lead to the introduction in 1971 of the codeless "Technician License" that permitted operation above 144 MHz. Similar amateur radio licenses were introduced in other European countries at about the same time, as a form of "safety valve" that was supposed to attract the technically oriented CB-ers to amateur radio.

The scheme was however not entirely successful, and volume illegal CB operations continued into the late 70's, when mobile telephones and other public mobile communications began to surface, and the CB activity in Sweden waned quickly.

Enforcement by the "authorities", including equipment confiscation and criminal prosecution, had been tried in various forms but the sheer volume of offenders made enforcement impractical, and in the mid-80's it was abandoned entirely.

Regarding the frequency allocation, the 1959 Geneva Radio Regulations show the frequency range of 26100 to 27500 kHz as Fixed and Mobile, with the ISM allocation of 27120 kHz +/- 0.6% in the middle. A footnote allowed amateur radio operation in the ISM band in certain countries and areas.

CB became something of a mixture between an industrial radio user and a communications service, as it uses the ISM spectrum, and is not protected from interference in any form.

The power limit of 5 W comes from an age-old practice in international frequency planning where crystal controlled transmitters of 5 W or less were considered unable to create international interference, and the coordination requirement could be waived.

Obviously the choice of the 27 MHz ISM band for CB was not very wise from a propagation standpoint, as 5 W transmitters on 27 MHz certainly were able to support international communications, contrary to the intentions of the legislators.

The long term effects of this mishap can be felt in amateur radio circles still today.

73/

Karl-Arne
SM0AOM

[N0NB]

Quote[/b] (K7JEM @ Jan. 27 2007,00:25)]Quote[/b] (kg4kww @ Jan. 26 2007,23:14)]I would like to know why the FCC dropped the licensing requirement for CB.
This has always been a puzzle to me. Does anyone know?
It was getting out of hand, and the government started requiring the FCC to justify their license costs. At the time, they charged $20 per license, and they had to make them free, or develop a reason for what they were charging.

The FCC just decided to wash their hands of the whole deal, at least as far as licensing was concerned. Ham radio licenses went to free at about the same time.
I don't recall everything behind those actions completely. #We bought CBs for the farm in early 1980 and received a license application form with one of them. #As I recall there was no cost and we were assigned an honest to God license, KBPA5404. #At that time, the rules required that a temporary callsign be used made up of K followed by the licensee's initials and then the ZIP code while the license application was pending.

It wasn't long after that the FCC dropped the whole CB licensing thing completely and gave every CB transmitter blanket authorization. #I'm thinking this happened in 1982 about the same time the VEC exam system was created, the commercial operator licenses were combined into the GROL, and the requirement to have a First or Second class license to service type-accepted equipment was dropped as well.

In short, all of these things were the result of "deregulation" championed at the federal government level in the early 1980s. #It was about the same time that Part 95 was changed to "plain language" and the FCC proposed the same for Part 97, but the amateur radio community was so heavily opposed to it that the idea was dismissed.

The reality was that newly created agencies like EPA and Dept. of Education were getting the attention and hence the $$$. #The electronics manufacturers were probably lobbying congress very hard for relaxation of the rules. #So congress essentially gutted the FCC under the guise of deregulation. #

Radio had become a commodity and congress seemed bent on removing as many barriers to access of the RF spectrum as possible. #The result has been a considerable number of unlicensed operations in the various services. #Particularly misused around these parts is the Marine Band which is abused as a pseudo CB. #Ahh well, this is a topic for another time...

[KC9JIQ]

Quote[/b] (N0NB @ Jan. 27 2007,06:30)]The result has been a considerable number of unlicensed operations in the various services. Particularly misused around these parts is the Marine Band which is abused as a pseudo CB. Ahh well, this is a topic for another time...
Coon hunters on Channel 68 of the Marine band. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif

[K7JEM]

Quote[/b] (N0NB @ Jan. 27 2007,06:30)]Quote[/b] (K7JEM @ Jan. 27 2007,00:25)]Quote[/b] (kg4kww @ Jan. 26 2007,23:14)]I would like to know why the FCC dropped the licensing requirement for CB.
This has always been a puzzle to me. Does anyone know?
It was getting out of hand, and the government started requiring the FCC to justify their license costs. At the time, they charged $20 per license, and they had to make them free, or develop a reason for what they were charging.

The FCC just decided to wash their hands of the whole deal, at least as far as licensing was concerned. Ham radio licenses went to free at about the same time.
I don't recall everything behind those actions completely. We bought CBs for the farm in early 1980 and received a license application form with one of them. As I recall there was no cost and we were assigned an honest to God license, KBPA5404. At that time, the rules required that a temporary callsign be used made up of K followed by the licensee's initials and then the ZIP code while the license application was pending.

It wasn't long after that the FCC dropped the whole CB licensing thing completely and gave every CB transmitter blanket authorization. I'm thinking this happened in 1982 about the same time the VEC exam system was created, the commercial operator licenses were combined into the GROL, and the requirement to have a First or Second class license to service type-accepted equipment was dropped as well.

In short, all of these things were the result of "deregulation" championed at the federal government level in the early 1980s. It was about the same time that Part 95 was changed to "plain language" and the FCC proposed the same for Part 97, but the amateur radio community was so heavily opposed to it that the idea was dismissed.

The reality was that newly created agencies like EPA and Dept. of Education were getting the attention and hence the $$$. The electronics manufacturers were probably lobbying congress very hard for relaxation of the rules. So congress essentially gutted the FCC under the guise of deregulation.

Radio had become a commodity and congress seemed bent on removing as many barriers to access of the RF spectrum as possible. The result has been a considerable number of unlicensed operations in the various services. Particularly misused around these parts is the Marine Band which is abused as a pseudo CB. Ahh well, this is a topic for another time...
I'm pretty sure the licensing was dropped in 1977 0r 1978. I'd have to look that up, but almost positive it was prior to 1980.

EDIT: Checking it out, I couldn't find the date that the FCC dropped the license requirement, but I did find an interesting article. The Jan 1977 thing I remember was the dropping of the license fee, but it looks like the license might have been dropped several years later. This whole series of articles is a great resource, and seems to be very accurate in its history. Read them all.

Wayback (http://ham-shack.com/history32.html)

Joe

[ka5piu]

Hello.

First off, the 11 meter band is an ISM allocation.
This is planetwide.
11 meters was always a shared amauteur/business allocation, with a few government users mixed in.
CAP still to this day has an allocation at 26.62 MHz.
In 1956 the ITU made this an open allocation.
The class of service in the US.
Class A, now GMRS, up to 50 watts of power, AM at first, now normally FM but AM is permitted under a grandfather rule.
Class B, same freq's as class A but lower power and lighter technical requirements.
Class C, remote control (telecommand), still class C.
Allocations start at 27 MHz and go to 72/76 MHz.
Note that there are remote control devices at 27 and 49 MHz, this is part 15.
Class D, shared with business, 300 Watts max, and government.
The FCC decided to grandfather some business users to 11 meters, so I can legally run 300 watts, a very rare exception to the rules, however I am not in operation under the citizens band radio service but under the business radio service rules.
This means FCC approved equipment.
I could get a license for BRS at age 14, but not a CB license, that is how that happened.
And also note, FCC approved and FCC type accepted mean different things.
One can only use FCC type accepted equipment for police and fire.
One may use FCC type accepted OR FCC approved equipment for non compulsory marine applications.
Provided all requirements of licensing are met.
A radio can be both type accepted and type approved at the same time.
A classic example is the Bendix-King radio, fully front programmable in one mode and type approved and dongle required and type accepted in the other mode.
Normal CB radios are type approved.
Europe got into the CB act in the 70's.
Except for some places like Germany, where any mode is legal, FM is the rule.
In other parts of the world, like Saudi Arabia, CB is a stepping stone, between Amateur and Business.
One can legally use a CB or SOME ham rigs, depending on approval.
No Connex or Galaxy radios thank you.

[K7KBN]

Let's jump in the Wayback Machine and go wayback to 1960. I was in high school in Las Vegas. LVHS had just started a federally-funded electronics program, along with our "cross-town rivals", Rancho High and Western High. We were setting up a CB station, using a Hallicrafters transceiver (don't remember the model number), and operating with a genuine Citizen's Band License, 11Q0082. That's "Eleven-Cue-Zero-Zero-Eight-Two".

One fine day, the teacher, Mr. Chris Delzer (formerly KØOEI, then K7LBQ) was on the roof, adjusting a Hy-Gain 3-element CB yagi. I was inside, watching this thing called an "SWR bridge". When Mr. Delzer made an adjustment, he'd walk to a far corner of the roof and stomp his foot. That was my cue to key up, announce "11Q0082 testing" and determine whether the SWR had changed and in what direction. I'd report that to another student standing by the door, and he'd relay it up to Mr. Delzer.

After about the third cycle of this, the SWR was well below 2:1; our 5 watts input seemed to be happy, and it was then that the receiver came alive.

"11Q0082," came a voice with a strange accent, "I know you cawn't awnswer me because you're on your "Citizens Band", but this is still an amateur radio frequency here. I thought you'd loike to know you're putting a fine signal into Johannesburg. This is Zed Ess Three Alfa Charlie clear."

We passed the word to Mr. Delzer that the antenna was doing just fine. I was still in shock that but for the FCC I could have worked some significant (for me) DX! Mr. Delzer's first comment: "You didn't talk to him, did you?" He was always a stickler for obeying the amateur radio rules. I assured him that I had not, and the other students backed me up.

Terry (N7FE) - were you there when this happened? I can't remember everyone. Bris Gookin was the one who relayed information up to the roof.

[KB3LIX]

Quote[/b] (K0RGR @ Jan. 26 2007,15:23)]Doesn't everybody have a story about somebody they know that was driving down the highway one night, talking to somebody on the CB radio, that turned out to be thousands of miles away?
I have one too.

Quick geography lesson.
I was born and raised in a small town, Aspinwall , which is about 10 miles NE of Pittsburgh along the Allegheny River is SW Pennsylvania.

About 1965 or so, I and another person from across town were talking on 27.105, channel 12. Someone broke in and asked where we were located. I told them Aspinwall. Most people from the Pgh area know where the town is located, so it seemed rather strange when he asked where that was. I told him NE of Pittsburgh along the Allegheny river. I asked where he was, he was outside of Dallas Texas. Once we realized the distance we were transmitting, everyone quickly shut up.

No amplifiers, no exotic antennas, I was using a Ringo end fed 1/2 wave antenna mounted on the chimmney of the house, 5 watt stock radio, nothing special, except for atmospheric conditions.

By the way, the guy in Dallas was stronger than the guy I was talking to that was about 1.5 miles away.

[AG3Y]

Quote[/b] (KI4PEQ @ Jan. 26 2007,18:31)]Quote[/b] (AG3Y @ Jan. 26 2007,15:44)]Glen, thanks for the clarification. I re-worded my post to more accurately reflect the real situation.

BTW, I must say this; if "No Test International" gets a foothold, I cannot forsee the situation on the HF bands being any different than it is on 27 Mhz. Andre did a great job of pointing out how vast numbers of operators can over-rule ANY regulatory agency by shear force !

It would NOT be a good idea to take away ALL restraints !

73, Jim
Jim,

With all due respect to a senior amateur, is there really such an organization as "No Test International" or is this supposed organization purely a speculation of what organization MIGHT form with the goal of NCI now realized?

Not pointing a finger at you, as you are one of the more reasonable voices on this forum, but this "NTI" seems to be one of the first things brought up when the subject of know coders vs. no coders comes up. Some of the posts can get downright nasty and insulting.

While I may gain privileges sooner with the code requirement falling by the wayside, I don't think that all testing should be eliminated.
I'll tell you my "surprise DX" story first, then try to answer the question that was posed to me.

We were on a vacation out in the midwest one year, and I had gotten turned around in directions after dark, and was wandering around aimlessly, trying to find my way back to the main highway so we could continue our journey before it got too late.

I keyed up the CB radio ( yes, I owned a CB in a car ! ) and "broke" asking for directions. A woman came back to me and offered to help, if I would just tell her what streetsigns I was able to see. When I told her there weren't any streetsigns, because I was in a little town in central Indiana, she about dropped the mic on the floor. You could hear the surprise in her voice as she replied to me, " I'm really sorry I can't help you, because I'm in Yonkers, New York ! Several hundred miles on a few watts! Too bad it wasn't legal ! Needless to say, I signed with her, real quickly.

Now as far as "No Test International"; I really don't believe that there actually IS an organization with that agenda, but I am referring more to the concept than an actual body or organization.

I am in hearty agreement with those who think that the current testing structure is waaaay too easy, and that the publication of the questions AND ANSWERS in the pool is a major mistake.

I completely agree with anyone who groans in agony when yet another argumentative thread breaks out here on the forum, and I feel that unless we stop this infighting, we, ourselves, are going to be the ruination of our own avocation.

Hope this answers your question.

73, Jim

[W2BBQ]

Perhaps another interesting side note is this story. I was in a group of folks at a hamfest seminar where an FCC rep. was present. The conversation came around to CB somehow and the guy remarked that if the FCC could do it all over again with what they know now, they would have made Class D CB all SSB and allowed 50watts. Makes sense. The AM carriers and cheap circuitry caused some ferocious "bleedover wars" in heavily radio populated areas plus was the cause of much interference to neighbor's TVs and cheap broadcast radios ect.... SSB only operation would have allieviated much of those problems....not all, but most.

[ai4ep]

...hindsight is almost always 20/20, even with the FCC...

but that does not change the REAL world. #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif

[N0NB]

Quote[/b] (AG3Y @ Jan. 27 2007,20:47)]I am in hearty agreement with those who think that the current testing structure is waaaay too easy, and that the publication of the questions AND ANSWERS in the pool is a major mistake.
I don't see any way of putting that genie back into the bottle. With the current VEC system trying to keep the complete pool secret would be impossible and would raise many integrity concerns. When the FCC did it, the examiners were disinterested government employees. If we hams tried to do it the same way, I'm afraid there would be allegations of favoritism. Remember that the FCC still retains the right to re-examine any one of us should questions be raised about the integrity of a VE team or VEC.

I do agree that the pools should probably be larger and more comprehensive. The key, as I see it, to making that happen is for people who think that way to get into the key positions of the VECs, namely the Question Pool Committee. Everyone that feels strongly about the written exams should get involved in the VEC system and make that happen.

[K7JEM]

Quote[/b] (w2bbq @ Jan. 28 2007,12:49)]Perhaps another interesting side note is this story. I was in a group of folks at a hamfest seminar where an FCC rep. was present. The conversation came around to CB somehow and the guy remarked that if the FCC could do it all over again with what they know now, they would have made Class D CB all SSB and allowed 50watts. Makes sense. The AM carriers and cheap circuitry caused some ferocious "bleedover wars" in heavily radio populated areas plus was the cause of much interference to neighbor's TVs and cheap broadcast radios ect.... SSB only operation would have allieviated much of those problems....not all, but most.
I don't think that would have been possible in 1958. SSB was too new an expensive. SSB rigs were also larger and more complex. It would not have been easy to manufacture such a rig for a decent price. Even today, SSB rigs are much more expensive to make than AM or FM.

Also, SSB is a poor choice for land mobile operation. The 50ppm frequency tolerance would not allow for reliable communications, so that would have to have been different, resulting in even higher cost. SSB radios are much harder to adjust for proper operation, especially when multiple radios are being received.

SSB would have done nothing to prevent the skip and other problems associated with CB. 50 watts would only make those problems worse.

No, if they had it to do over again, they would probably have done exactly the same thing. It's a case of doing what seems right at the time.

Joe

[PE1RDW]

Quote[/b] (ka5piu @ Jan. 27 2007,18:27)]Europe got into the CB act in the 70's.
Except for some places like Germany, where any mode is legal, FM is the rule.
A bit outdated info, last year every CEPT country went to allmode on CB, some countries have extra channels tough. (germany has 80 channels).
Even music broadcast is legal as long as the rights for the music are paid.

[ka0gkt]

Quote[/b] (K7JEM @ Jan. 28 2007,19:20)]Quote[/b] (w2bbq @ Jan. 28 2007,12:49)]Perhaps another interesting side note is this story. I was in a group of folks at a hamfest seminar where an FCC rep. was present. The conversation came around to CB somehow and the guy remarked that if the FCC could do it all over again with what they know now, they would have made Class D CB all SSB and allowed 50watts. Makes sense. The AM carriers and cheap circuitry caused some ferocious "bleedover wars" in heavily radio populated areas plus was the cause of much interference to neighbor's TVs and cheap broadcast radios ect.... SSB only operation would have allieviated #much of those problems....not all, but most.
I don't think that would have been possible in 1958. SSB was too new an expensive. SSB rigs were also larger and more complex. It would not have been easy to manufacture such a rig for a decent price. Even today, SSB rigs are much more expensive to make than AM or FM.

Also, SSB is a poor choice for land mobile operation. The 50ppm frequency tolerance would not allow for reliable communications, so that would have to have been different, resulting in even higher cost. SSB radios are much harder to adjust for proper operation, especially when multiple radios are being received.

SSB would have done nothing to prevent the skip and other problems associated with CB. 50 watts would only make those problems worse.

No, if they had it to do over again, they would probably have done exactly the same thing. It's a case of doing what seems right at the time.

Joe
General Radiotelephone manufactured a DSBSC adapter for the MC-5 transceiver. #IIRC the kit included a ring diode balanced modulator and a BFO for the tunable receive section which used, of all things, a nuvistor.

The General MC-5 was manufactured in 1963/1964 and sold in the $200.00 price range. #It had both a 6/12VDC vibrator power supply and a 110 VAC supply internally.

73 DE KAØGKT/7

--Steve