Pave Paws

[km5yk]

I read about the Pave Paws problems and the mandate that many repeaters have to shut down, or somehow help eliminate the interference problem. I couldn't help but begin to think about that situation. Here we (U.S. Govt.) spend millions on a system that can be taken down by a relatively few, well placed, analog ham repeaters, which most are probably little used. It would seem to me that the USAF would want to reduce/eliminate the problem at their end. You mean that those who would want to disrupt the Pave Paws system only have to put up a repeater and scream "10-4 good buddy" during an attack? This situation doesn't leave me with a warm and fuzzy feeling......oh, it is time to watch Bush's State of the Union address on tv.

73

Chuck

[KE7JFA]

I think they can have them but only run 5 watts into the antenna AFTER the duplexers.
Makes repeaters useless.

[KU0DM]

Oh to live in Kansas. :D

Good repeaters and no military intervention...yet.

[WA9SVD]

The issue has already been argued ad nauseum in several posts. Maybe search the archives(?) and look at the comments there. (And look at comments in the current "Articles" section on the subject.)
70 cm is a secondary allocation for Amateurs. The DoD could ask the NTIA to TELL the FCC to close down ALL Amateur users in the country.
The FCC and ARRL are working with the DoD to come up with a compromise solution so that repeaters do NOT have to shut down completely. However, it may be that some will not be functional at the EIRP allowed, so they will probably go QRT rather than not be able to serve the user base they had. Unfortunate, but it's better than all of us losing 70 cm.

[KD6WAG]

We should all start screaming again and demand that the FCC allocate BACK to us hams the 40% of the 222mHz spectrum that was taken from us a few years ago.

To my understanding, either UPS or FedEx (can't remember who wanted that piece of the 220mHz puzzle) discovered that they couldn't use that portion of 1.25m after all.

So,,,, to compromise and showing that the gov't can employ good will, they should say to us hams, "...ok, since we're forcing you guys off of some 70cm repeaters, we'll give you back all that you lost on 1.25m."

...and then I woke up.

[ai4ep]

no need in getting all paranoid about a nuclear war....it aint gonna happen.

but then you can prove me wrong.

[WA4TM]

OK, so we are secondary users..... But now with all the hoopla about it all the "bad guys" have to do is fire up a "stolen " or however acquired rig an screw up the whole system.... and guess who gets the blame!!!!

All the publicity just told the world how to screw it up.. Brilliant...

[ai4ep]

we get blamed IF we DO any thing and blamed if we are innocent......cant win either way .

[K9STH]

It was UPS that wanted to have a nationwide radio system on the 220 MHz to 222 MHz band. To persuade the FCC to allocate these frequencies UPS promised to use narrowband technology, primarily ACSB. So, the FCC did allocate that band segment for land-mobile with the provision that narrowband technology must be used. After getting the band segment UPS then petitioned the FCC to allow "normal" FM operation. This was because UPS did not want to pay the additional cost of ACSB equipment. They were "sure" the FCC would "go along" with this change. However, the FCC refused to allow "normal" (+/- 5 KHz deviation) FM and UPS abandoned their plans for a nationwide system.

UPS did have a few "pilot" systems in place around the country using ACSB. But, they were "banking on" the FCC allowing them to go to FM.

There are a relatively few ACSB commercial systems operating in the 220 MHz to 222 MHz range. Unfortunately for amateur radio, land-mobile was the primary allocation of the 220 MHz band although it was not being used as such and, like the Class "D" Citizen's Radio Service on 11 meters, once a land-mobile service was established there was no chance that the FCC would again allow amateur radio usage of the band.

Glen, K9STH

[KB5FSV]

Oh to live in Kansas. :D

Good repeaters and no military intervention...yet.

Yeah, I feel bad for those guys in California who are having to bend over and let the USAF screw them. 440 isn't super active over here, sparsely active repeaters. I can only imagine that California has a need for that spectrum because any state that has it's own call area must have a lot of hams.

[kc7gnm]

Yeah, I feel bad for those guys in California who are having to bend over and let the USAF screw them. 440 isn't super active over here, sparsely active repeaters. I can only imagine that California has a need for that spectrum because any state that has it's own call area must have a lot of hams.

Ok explain how they are getting screwed when ham are secondary users in the 440 spectrum? Wow the brilliance of some folks on here.

[KC5CSG]

Ok explain how they are getting screwed when ham are secondary users in the 440 spectrum? Wow the brilliance of some folks on here.


Well said. The military is the PRIMARY and for all practical purposes OWNS that band. We're just operating there under their good graces. What is our response to this situation? Oh, lets berate the military on how their system SUCKS. Yes, that's a real real good way to deal with the landlord. Believe it or not, our military doesn't have to get FCC approval to run our butts off that band. All they have to do is say they're tired of negotiations (which they didn't have to open in the first place) and DEMAND our removal.

Good luck on getting back what we lost on 1.25 though. From what I hear, we're still not using what was left for us to use. Way to go guys.

Jerry

[kc7gnm]

Well said. The military is the PRIMARY and for all practical purposes OWNS that band. We're just operating there under their good graces. What is our response to this situation? Oh, lets berate the military on how their system SUCKS. Yes, that's a real real good way to deal with the landlord. Believe it or not, our military doesn't have to get FCC approval to run our butts off that band. All they have to do is say they're tired of negotiations (which they didn't have to open in the first place) and DEMAND our removal.

Good luck on getting back what we lost on 1.25 though. From what I hear, we're still not using what was left for us to use. Way to go guys.

Jerry

The problem is hams think we are primary in every band we can operate on. They fail to realize that we do have to yield to the primary users of the spectrum.

PS what is up with this porn BS. The old forums never had this garbage.

[KC5CSG]

The problem is hams think we are primary in every band we can operate on. They fail to realize that we do have to yield to the primary users of the spectrum.

PS what is up with this porn BS. The old forums never had this garbage.


Wow, I notice other forums that look like this new change had problems with bots posting porn in them. I guess QRZ will not be the exception now. What's funny is I told my wife (laughingly of course) that it would be funny to see that in here now. In hindsight I was wrong. I was actually pretty shocked. At least they could have posted better looking women.

BTW, until the moderators get this problem resolved they should ban all people under 18. We wouldn't want them to see this crap by accident. I know I sure am not going to miss Calvin's posts for a few days.

Jerry

[kc7gnm]

Wow, I notice other forums that look like this new change had problems with bots posting porn in them. I guess QRZ will not be the exception now. What's funny is I told my wife (laughingly of course) that it would be funny to see that in here now. In hindsight I was wrong. I was actually pretty shocked. At least they could have posted better looking women.

BTW, until the moderators get this problem resolved they should ban all people under 18. We wouldn't want them to see this crap by accident. I know I sure am not going to miss Calvin's posts for a few days.

Jerry

I sure won't. The little brat needs a good butt whooping. LOL

[KD4IFB]

Whats up with the porn??? Surely they arent trying to recruit new hams..Charlie Id better not see my picture in there....:D

[kc7gnm]

Whats up with the porn??? Surely they arent trying to recruit new hams..Charlie Id better not see my picture in there....:D

Probably some bug in this new software that is allowing these morons in.

[KC5CSG]

Probably some bug in this new software that is allowing these morons in.


Well I went and looked at all the places where that junk was posted and some of the messages seemed to be pretty personal. Looks to me like we have a disgruntled ham or cber on our hands. Who knows. I'm far from a guru in this area.......

Jerry

[KE6SHJ]

Gotta love the new ignore feature!!!!! :)

[K9STH]

There were over 40 porn posts put here on QRZ.com over night. The moderators are doing their best to get a handle on these. It seems that there were at least 2 login i.d. used and that person has had their login, ISP, etc., banned.

Unfortunately, there are a few "misguided" individuals that get their "jollies" by doing such things.

If anyone notices such a post that has gotten by the moderators please let us know by a PM or E-Mail just as soon as you see it.

Glen, K9STH
One of the QRZ.com moderators

[K0RGR]

I'm awfully glad I didn't open up the forum from work yesterday!

As for Pave Paws - you have to feel sorry for those who invested large amounts of cash to establish UHF repeaters in the affected areas. We've coexisted with the military very well for decades, and suddenly, there's a conflict.

And yes, in that region of 6-land, every repeater pair on every band is over-subscribed, and has been for ages. This should open up additional pairs for repeaters outside the affected area.

I think the displaced UHF repeater users should consider putting up DSTAR repeaters on 1.2 Ghz. as replacements. This could help to open up a new band and new functions for everybody. Of course, our 1.2 Ghz. band is shared, also.

[km5yk]

I evidently didn't make my thought clear. I am not concerned that much about ham's right on a secondary usage band. It is what is is, or in some parts, it be what it be. I just thought it odd that we would spend so much money and resource on a system that is so susceptable to interference from a relatively accessable, easy to duplicate, analog radio system.

Gotta be a better way.....or so it seems.

73

chuck

[WA9SVD]

I evidently didn't make my thought clear. I am not concerned that much about ham's right on a secondary usage band. It is what is is, or in some parts, it be what it be. I just thought it odd that we would spend so much money and resource on a system that is so susceptable to interference from a relatively accessable, easy to duplicate, analog radio system.

Gotta be a better way.....or so it seems.

73

chuck

Yes, but the subject (including your sentiment, thoughts, and objections) has already been beat (almost) to death in the recent past, when it was first reported as an issue. Looking at the archive for the old threads will give you a better perspective on current discussions and comments.

[WA9SVD]

I'm awfully glad I didn't open up the forum from work yesterday!

As for Pave Paws - you have to feel sorry for those who invested large amounts of cash to establish UHF repeaters in the affected areas. We've coexisted with the military very well for decades, and suddenly, there's a conflict.

And yes, in that region of 6-land, every repeater pair on every band is over-subscribed, and has been for ages. This should open up additional pairs for repeaters outside the affected area.

I think the displaced UHF repeater users should consider putting up DSTAR repeaters on 1.2 Ghz. as replacements. This could help to open up a new band and new functions for everybody. Of course, our 1.2 Ghz. band is shared, also.


But will the repeater owners and users be able to afford D* equipment? Or willeven conventional analogue 23 cm equipment work for the majority of users at all? There's still far less equipment available for 23 CM than for 70 cm, and MOST users in either situation rely on off-the-shelf commercial equipment

[w8znx]

my oh my
its amazing how some ops get cranked

70 cm
how much time have you spend
ragchewing on a 70 cm machine


ham use
or USAF use
hell
i don't much care for the military
think most generals should be thrown in jail

but
if the USAF wants to use 70 cm
its their band

funny how ssb / cw / ect weak signal ops
are not causing any probs for the USAF

just FM machines
heck shut down 7/8 of the vhf uhf fm machines
in the USA
nobody would notice

mac
real ham ops know morse code

[K1CJS]

Up in Mass., two or three of the repeaters were told to reduce their output to less than 500 milliwatts. Another couple were advised their operation would have to cease. All in all, about a dozen repeaters closed down operations because simplex proved to be more effective than their reduced output was. One or two of them were over fifty miles from the Cape Cod Pave Paws site.

We're a secondary user there on the 440 mhz band. The primary user wants us to tone down use. Whether or not it is because of incompetence on the contractors part--or the militarys part (oh heck, that'll never happen--right?), it is up to us to do as requested or lose privileges on that band.

The next step may well be radio quiet zones on the 440 band within a hundred mile radius of the Pave Paws sites. Do we want it to go that far? If we resist and push the matter, it may well happen.

[WA0LYK]

I guess I need to ask a question. Is it only fm wide coverage repeaters in the specific amateur band that is causing a problem? Does simplex not interfere? How about commercial users or even gmrs? Perhaps the military's system was designed to only use the frequencies allocated to hams as a secondary user?

Jim
WA0LYK

[WA9SVD]

I guess I need to ask a question. Is it only fm wide coverage repeaters in the specific amateur band that is causing a problem? Does simplex not interfere? How about commercial users or even gmrs? Perhaps the military's system was designed to only use the frequencies allocated to hams as a secondary user?

Jim
WA0LYK

Well, that's been the topic of discussion in the past, and probably brought up by the ARRL and FCC in their arbitration with the DoD. Not sure if GMRS or Commercial users are close enough in frequency to cause a problem with PAVE-PAWS. Simplex operations would be random, and not always in fixed locations, or have the EIRP of a repeater. so may not be as much a problem.
Also, GMRS or other UHF users might not have the EIRP of an Amateur repeater.

[KE7JFA]

Hmm. Makes sense to have a killer radar system yet our borders are still not secure. :eek:
Thanks homeland security. I feel so much safer now. :rolleyes:

[N1BHH]

Education is the key to understanding what's going on. It wasn't just a couple repeaters that were shut down. All of the repeaters on Cape Cod were shut down, a number of repeaters, about 18 were required to reduce radiation. Several repeaters have met the requirements set forth by the USAF reduction. It wasn't that repeaters had to reduce power, it was radiation. If you set up a corner reflector antenna away from PAVE PAWS, such as has been done on the Norwell repeater, you satisfy the reduction. In Norwell's case it was a 22 db reduction requirement.

More repeaters have been identified in California, 75 in fact were added onto what has already been on "the list" which are required to reduce radiation. If you reduce radiation ion the direction of PAVE PAWS sufficiently you can co-exist. If not, you get shut down.

PAVE PAWS operates at 25% duty cycle at an average power of 145.6 kW and peak power of 582.4 kW in the 420-450 MHz. range. You should look at this link to understand how PAVE PAWS works: http://www.fas.org/spp/military/program/track/pavepaws.htm

[KC5CSG]

Up in Mass., two or three of the repeaters were told to reduce their output to less than 500 milliwatts. Another couple were advised their operation would have to cease. All in all, about a dozen repeaters closed down operations because simplex proved to be more effective than their reduced output was. One or two of them were over fifty miles from the Cape Cod Pave Paws site.

We're a secondary user there on the 440 mhz band. The primary user wants us to tone down use. Whether or not it is because of incompetence on the contractors part--or the militarys part (oh heck, that'll never happen--right?), it is up to us to do as requested or lose privileges on that band.

The next step may well be radio quiet zones on the 440 band within a hundred mile radius of the Pave Paws sites. Do we want it to go that far? If we resist and push the matter, it may well happen.


I'm all for a quiet zone around pave paws sites. After all, I would never put Amateur Radio above National Security. Any ham willing to put his hobby over our security to exist as a country needs to have his/her head examined.

Jerry

[N2RJ]

Okay I do have to ask.

Yes, I do think national security is more important than ham radio.

But why doesn't PAVE PAWS have its own allocation?

Isn't it kind of stupid to have frequencies needed for technology critical to national defense shared with a bunch of hobbyists?

[KC5CSG]

Okay I do have to ask.

Yes, I do think national security is more important than ham radio.

But why doesn't PAVE PAWS have its own allocation?

Isn't it kind of stupid to have frequencies needed for technology critical to national defense shared with a bunch of hobbyists?


Exactly. I agree with you. That is why I think Amateur Radio should lose it's secondary status on 440 Mhz PERIOD. It should be a military only band.

Jerry

[WA9SVD]

Okay I do have to ask.

Yes, I do think national security is more important than ham radio.

But why doesn't PAVE PAWS have its own allocation?

Isn't it kind of stupid to have frequencies needed for technology critical to national defense shared with a bunch of hobbyists?
You forgot to mention garage door openers, wireless weather stations, auto alarms, "illegal" long-range wireless telephones, and a myriad of other "consumer electronic" devices that operate in the frequency band.

CSG just doesn't get it. NOBODY is questioning National Security, or it's priority. (To think otherwise is actually naive, foolish, or... nevermind.) But what IS being questioned is WHY suddenly there is a problem that did not exist before, WHY it's a problem (is it a design flaw or a true incompatibility with other users) and how it can be mitigated.

In a way, it's as if a neighbor gets a new TV, and suddenly complains about interference. You at least have to ASK id the interference is inherent in the new equipment, and the fault of the new equipment, or if the interference was always there (when it shouldn't be) and the old equipment just didn't detect it.

Two VERY different situations; two different solutions.

[KC5CSG]

You forgot to mention garage door openers, wireless weather stations, auto alarms, "illegal" long-range wireless telephones, and a myriad of other "consumer electronic" devices that operate in the frequency band.

CSG just doesn't get it. NOBODY is questioning National Security, or it's priority. (To think otherwise is actually naive, foolish, or... nevermind.) But what IS being questioned is WHY suddenly there is a problem that did not exist before, WHY it's a problem (is it a design flaw or a true incompatibility with other users) and how it can be mitigated.

In a way, it's as if a neighbor gets a new TV, and suddenly complains about interference. You at least have to ASK id the interference is inherent in the new equipment, and the fault of the new equipment, or if the interference was always there (when it shouldn't be) and the old equipment just didn't detect it.

Two VERY different situations; two different solutions.


No YOU fail to "get it". The primary has found a problem recently. It doesn't matter what the cause of it is. What matters is that they're the PRIMARY and do not have to explain crap to the secondary. The secondary isn't given any right to demand an explaination or to appeal any decision made. WE'RE THE FRIGGIN SECONDARY!!! Get it?

Every ham is real quick to brag about how services secondary on their bands have to "just accept amateurs as the primary and move on". Well now the shoe is on the other foot. We're being told to move on and the PRIMARY has every right to do it.

Jerry

[WA9SVD]

No YOU fail to "get it". The primary has found a problem recently. It doesn't matter what the cause of it is. What matters is that they're the PRIMARY and do not have to explain crap to the secondary. The secondary isn't given any right to demand an explaination or to appeal any decision made. WE'RE THE FRIGGIN SECONDARY!!! Get it?

Every ham is real quick to brag about how services secondary on their bands have to "just accept amateurs as the primary and move on". Well now the shoe is on the other foot. We're being told to move on and the PRIMARY has every right to do it.

Jerry


Jerry,

Sorry, YOU don't get it. If things were as you say (or wish they were) the FCC "coulda, woulda, shoulda" shut down all of 70 cm everywhere. But even the FCC has said that for the present time, it is the responsibility of the DoD PAVE-PAWS to provide evidencce (not necessarily to the public, but at least to the FCC, a Government Agency) thet there is interference caused by certain stations, and that it is HARMFUL to the PAVE-PAWS operations.

What has been asked is why Amateur repeaters specifically are considered a threat and source of interference to a governement facility that is imperative to the National Security, while Amateur mobile operations (which can certainly operate closer than the suspected 50 mile radius for repeaters) are not considered a threat? And of course, the question again is if Amateur repeaters can cause significant interference to the PAVE-PAWS system, why couldn't persons with malevolent intent do the same and incapacitate the PAVE-PAWS system?
Would YOU want to trust the National Security on a system that is THAT fragile or susceptible to interference? I know I and many others would expect a bit more "security" and protection from our govermnent's military facilities and capabilities.

[N2RJ]

SVD - you might as well argue with your foot. Jerry doesn't have any knowledge about complex military radio systems or probably anything beyond CB radio, except as perhaps an end user of military radios.

[KC5CSG]

Jerry,

Sorry, YOU don't get it. If things were as you say (or wish they were) the FCC "coulda, woulda, shoulda" shut down all of 70 cm everywhere. But even the FCC has said that for the present time, it is the responsibility of the DoD PAVE-PAWS to provide evidencce (not necessarily to the public, but at least to the FCC, a Government Agency) thet there is interference caused by certain stations, and that it is HARMFUL to the PAVE-PAWS operations.

What has been asked is why repeaters specifically are considered a threat and source of interference to a governement, while mobile operations (which can certainly operate closer than the suspected 50 mile radius for repeaters) are not considered a threat? And of course, the question again is if Amateur repeaters can cause significant interference to the PAVE-PAWS system, why couldn't persons with malevolent intent do the same and incapacitate the PAVE-PAWS system?
Would YOU want to trust the National Security on a system that is THAT fragile or susceptible to interference? I know I and many others would expect a bit more "security" and protection from our govermnent's military facilities and capabilities.


It's not a matter of what is actually happening on the military end. It's a matter of Primary/Secondary. The military has been courteous and has taken it upon themselves to TRY to work out the problem without having to become aholes about it. All it would take is a petition to our congress of the problem they're experiencing and a reminder of their PRIMARY status on that band and you can bet congress will order the FCC to ban amateur use of 70 cm.

Since the military is all about PR, we're lucky. They're trying to resolve the issue peacefully. They don't have to do that. All it takes is a few Generals in the Pentagon to say a few words in the right ears and you can bet your fat butt our days on 70 cm will be over.

The military doesn't have to justify why their new equipment is experiencing more interference. They don't have to justify why they're not going after mobile operations. They don't have to justify why they're not getting interference from garage door openers and wireless wx stations. All they have to do is tell congress they have a problem and they want the FCC to live up to the rules. They're the primary and do not have to accept ANY interfence from us. Interference to them can be just having to listen to the lame QSO's that happen there.

They have new equipment people. Probably means its much more sensitive than the older equipment. Meaning that devices put up by us to broadcast over a long distance is obviously causing a problem. We're supposed to know this kind of crap. You can hear a repeater from a much greater distance than a simplex signal from a mobile station. We're talking about repeaters up high (probably a tower on a mountain) with high gain antennas putting out fair amounts of power.

So stop knit picking and just sit back and wait. Sit back and hope the repeater owners actually abide by the military's demands. After all, they're the primary. If the Primary tells you to shut the hell up, you shut up. If they don't, they'll yank our access to that band and you can all cry about that in addition to your recent loss of your precious Morse Code test.

Jerry

[WA9SVD]

SVD - you might as well argue with your foot. Jerry doesn't have any knowledge about complex military radio systems or probably anything beyond CB radio, except as perhaps an end user of military radios.

Ryan, for once, I'll agree with you MORE than 100%! I think you give too much credit where credit is undue.

And I hope to catch you on the air one of these days.

[K4GUN]

Ugh... this again. I don't live in an affected area and I don't really even operate 440 FM so it doesn't have a direct impact on me anyway, but I have a real problem with all of this. Yes, I know we are secondary users on these frequencies. That doesn't mean we are not allowed to ask questions. We are tax payers and that means ultimately, the bands really do belong to us.

Let's make sure I understand the chronology here. First, a number of amateurs got permission to run repeaters in these areas and operated there for a number of years without serious problems. Then, the USAF tells the FCC and ARRL that certain repeaters need to change things because of harmfull interference on the PAVE/PAWS system. Questions are asked but few answers given. Amateurs comply like we always do as good citizens. A short time later, we are told that another 70 repeaters are causing problems.

Seventy? Are you serious? I don't think there are 70 440 repeaters in all of Virginia! How many are there in Norhtern CA?

As a tax payer, I really need to know a few things now. I'm not asking for classified information here, but what the USAF is saying in a very public way is that it doesn't take much to interfere with the PAVE/PAWS system. Why are we spending so much of my money on something that is so vulnerable? If its really not that vulnerable, they have no right recinding their permission to the repeaters to use that bandwidth.

So where does it end? We really need to know what the end game is here. We were lead to believe they were done a few months ago, but now they want the extra 70 taken down. Are they next going to tell us that the 2 meter repeaters are also causing problems? Maybe SSB and CW will be the next target. Who knows? They will not tell us. I'm getting tired of it.

[KC5CSG]

Cry me a river. Someone doesn't see Amateur radio as the "be all end all" of all things. How dare they? How dare the UNITED STATES MILITARY exercise their rights afforded to them as primary holders of 70 cm!!! Boo hoo........

You people will cry over anything that doesn't appear like the customary butt kiss you think you're owed for being a fat slob in front of a radio pretending to be the world's saviors.

I hope the miltary yanks the band from us just to PUT YOU PEOPLE IN YOUR PLACE!!!

Jerry

P.S. Some people may buy Amateur Radio operator's BS but not all. 10-4 good buddy? Hehehehe!!!

[N2RJ]

Cry me a river. Someone doesn't see Amateur radio as the "be all end all" of all things. How dare they? How dare the UNITED STATES MILITARY exercise their rights afforded to them as primary holders of 70 cm!!! Boo hoo........

You people will cry over anything that doesn't appear like the customary butt kiss you think you're owed for being a fat slob in front of a radio pretending to be the world's saviors.

I hope the miltary yanks the band from us just to PUT YOU PEOPLE IN YOUR PLACE!!!

Jerry

P.S. Some people may buy Amateur Radio operator's BS but not all. 10-4 good buddy? Hehehehe!!!

Last I checked this is America, and we're entitled to call BS when our Government hands it to us, and not just take it sitting down.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

[KC5CSG]

Last I checked this is America, and we're entitled to call BS when our Government hands it to us, and not just take it sitting down.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.


There is no law allowing us use of 70 cm. There is only permission granted to us by the governing body of 70 cm. Under that permission we have SECONDARY use of the band. Meaning we must accept any and all interference from them and they do not have to accept any interference from us. They have interference from us obviously so why are we not taking it like adults and accepting it as that? Instead, hams want to act like children and knit pick the crap out of this just for argument's sake.

Oh I loved what you quoted. With that view then I guess a person without a license can fire up on 20 meters. After all, the FCC has no right to surpress their freedom of speech huh? The first amendment doesn't apply here but if it does then I guess all them truckers on 10 have a case.

You can't have your cake and eat it too on this subject. Wipe the tears from your eyes and blow your nose. After all, we sure don't use 70 cm to the fullest extent anyway so why all the crying over it now?

You bunch of ninnys.

Jerry

[wa6itf]

The exact number of UHF repeaters in California is unknown, but the ARRL Repeater Directory lists several hundred. However, that lit is likely only about half the actual number because in California, 440 MHz is kind of a "by invitation" band where few open repeaters exist. Most are close or private and may so concerned about their privacy that the refuse (and refute) any public listing.

If I had to guess, and its only a guess, I would say that there are at least 600 to 700 UHF ham radio systems in the state of which more than half deny their very existance. Strange to those outside the area, but a lifestyle within the state -- and one dating back to the early 1950's when the very first ham rafio repeaters were born on California mountaintops -- a decade+ before they were anywhere else.

de
WA6ITF

[N2RJ]

There is no law allowing us use of 70 cm. There is only permission granted to us by the governing body of 70 cm. Under that permission we have SECONDARY use of the band. Meaning we must accept any and all interference from them and they do not have to accept any interference from us. They have interference from us obviously so why are we not taking it like adults and accepting it as that? Instead, hams want to act like children and knit pick the crap out of this just for argument's sake.

Oh I loved what you quoted. With that view then I guess a person without a license can fire up on 20 meters. After all, the FCC has no right to surpress their freedom of speech huh? The first amendment doesn't apply here but if it does then I guess all them truckers on 10 have a case.

You can't have your cake and eat it too on this subject. Wipe the tears from your eyes and blow your nose. After all, we sure don't use 70 cm to the fullest extent anyway so why all the crying over it now?

You bunch of ninnys.

Jerry

Your brain is probably smaller than a grain of sand to spout this nonsense, Jerry. I wonder how you even get up in the morning.

As for having a "right" to use 70cm, I've never said that.

Neither does one have any "right" to use any frequencies without a license.

What we do have a right to do is tell the Government that what PAVE PAWS is doing doesn't make sense, and that something more sensible has to be done.

[WA9SVD]

Ugh... this again. I don't live in an affected area and I don't really even operate 440 FM so it doesn't have a direct impact on me anyway, but I have a real problem with all of this. Yes, I know we are secondary users on these frequencies. That doesn't mean we are not allowed to ask questions. We are tax payers and that means ultimately, the bands really do belong to us.

Let's make sure I understand the chronology here. First, a number of amateurs got permission to run repeaters in these areas and operated there for a number of years without serious problems. Then, the USAF tells the FCC and ARRL that certain repeaters need to change things because of harmfull interference on the PAVE/PAWS system. Questions are asked but few answers given. Amateurs comply like we always do as good citizens. A short time later, we are told that another 70 repeaters are causing problems.

Seventy? Are you serious? I don't think there are 70 440 repeaters in all of Virginia! How many are there in Norhtern CA?

As a tax payer, I really need to know a few things now. I'm not asking for classified information here, but what the USAF is saying in a very public way is that it doesn't take much to interfere with the PAVE/PAWS system. Why are we spending so much of my money on something that is so vulnerable? If its really not that vulnerable, they have no right recinding their permission to the repeaters to use that bandwidth.

So where does it end? We really need to know what the end game is here. We were lead to believe they were done a few months ago, but now they want the extra 70 taken down. Are they next going to tell us that the 2 meter repeaters are also causing problems? Maybe SSB and CW will be the next target. Who knows? They will not tell us. I'm getting tired of it.

Ok, settle down. No offense, but you do have some misconceptions here.

First of all, the portion of spectrum that we use as Amateurs and consider "70 cm" is allocated to Amateur Radio on a secondary basis. THAT means we are NOT supposed to interfere with users on a PRIMARY basis, and we have to accept interference to OUR operations that may be caused by the primary user. THAT amounts to military users, primarily RADAR. (PAVE-PAWS is esentially a RADAR system.)
For a LONG time, we as Amateurs have enjoyed a peaceful co-existance with the military operations, (with some constraints in certain parts of the country that either curtail or restrict Amateur operations.) And at times, have had to tolerate interference caused by military RADAR.

Now there was no "permission" per seinvolved in repeater operations. The band was available, and all that was required by the FCC was that there be peaceful cooperation within the Amateur Service, which was achieved (for the most part) by various Coordination Organizations. These organizations tried to make suer frecuency pairs normally used by UHF repeaters would operate with less confusion and interference than you or I could imagine. But it brought mere to the band.

But there was no "permission" given to only a few Amateurs, and there were frequencies set aside for Weak signal work, Amateur satellite operations (on an INTRENATIONAL basis) and FM Simplex.
Again, we co-existed with the military/government users, and HAD to accept the (infrequent in most cases ) interference they caused to out operations.

Now a Government user (PAVE-PAWS to be specific; a PRIMARY user) decides that after numerous changes and upgrades to their system (that apparently operates in the 70 Cm area, ) Amateur operations by some stations, identified as repeaters, cause interference to their system.

The USAF, which operates PAVE-PAWS has informed the FCC that they are experiencing interference. But the USAF, PAVE_PAWS project, or anyone save for the President through a declaration of wartime emergency can not "shut down" any licensed operation. The Dod (AF PAVE-PAWS or ant military program) can tell the NTIA that there is a problem, and the NTIA can assess the problem, inform the FCC of the problem, and decide it the problem is severe enough to order the FCC to take action, or allow the FCC to work out a compromise that will allow all services to operate in at least some fashion. OBVIOUSLY, the military (or any other promary user) is not going to give (or offer) much in a compromise, but the FCC can work out such problems so that all servicescan operate, even if not to their desired potential.

Many (if not all) repeater owners worked with the ARRL and FCc to determine the extent of the problem, and ways to mitigate the interference, while still allowing Amateur repeaters tto remain in operation. Some were able to change radiation patterns of their system to null out the PAVE-PAWS system. MANT had to reduce power, with a resulting reduction of coverage. Some shut down because they were not usable at the power levels deemed acceptable.

Now because the DoD IS the primary user, they could demand that secondary users shut down all operations on 70 cm. And that would require the NTIA to actually make such a determination, but even the NTIA would have to consider the ramifications of such a decision on an International basis.
And then the NTIA could inform the FCC that 70 cm was no longer an Amateur allocation in the U.s.; the FCC would then have to comply. But notice, NOWHERE in this scheme is the ARRL involved.
AFTER the FCC makes a decision, the ARRL then disseminates the news of any regulation change made by the FCC. But the ARRL is not involved in the changes itself.

Now while as a taxpayer, you may want to control the airwaves, but they are actually controlled by the NTIA, and for Amateur purposes,,by the FCC. but changes in many cases would actually come through Congress, and often are determined by International treaty.

[KC5CSG]

Your brain is probably smaller than a grain of sand to spout this nonsense, Jerry. I wonder how you even get up in the morning.

As for having a "right" to use 70cm, I've never said that.

Neither does one have any "right" to use any frequencies without a license.

What we do have a right to do is tell the Government that what PAVE PAWS is doing doesn't make sense, and that something more sensible has to be done.

Sure voice your concerns LOL!!! Like the government is going to take comments from glorified CBers over the word of the Military and it's technicians. Like the government is going to chance your word over the military when it comes to NATIONAL DEFENSE. Like the goverment is actually going to take your word over the military after they spent billions on pave paws and tell them to spend even more money to accomodate a bunch of rag chewing old ninnys that think they're god's gift to communications technology. I wouldn't expect the government to sink one more dime in it either. I would expect the government to ban amateur use of 70 cm to make the current investment workable. Give me a break dude. You really do live in a fantasy land do you?

[WA9SVD]

Wasn't "Military knows best" what got us tax payers paying for $500 hammers, and $2000 toilet seats. until the Government Accounting Office questioned things? And THAT was by a government agency questioning another government agency, so who KNOWS what other military spending was inappropriate or wasted?
I'd rather see the $$$$$$ go for better protection of troops (and their vehicles) in Iraq and other areas, than on a possibly faulty or problem laden RADAR system.

[K4GUN]

Ok, settle down. No offense, but you do have some misconceptions here.




You and I have had this discussion before. Then, as now, I appreciate your respectful attempts to enlighten me. I think what is missing is that my disagreement is more of a philosophical one, rather than a regulatory one. My philosophy is that when there is a dispute between the government and the people, the people take precedence unless the government can show a compelling reason otherwise. The compelling reasons put forth here indicate a severe weakness in the system which argues against the existence of the system in the first place.

From a regulatory point of view, you are obviously correct. I really don't even have a dog in this fight. It doesn't affect me in the least. Its the principal of the matter that concerns me. Government and regulators tend to get one some very slippery slopes and I can see this one becoming steeper and steeper in the future.

[KC5CSG]

Wasn't "Military knows best" what got us tax payers paying for $500 hammers, and $2000 toilet seats. until the Government Accounting Office questioned things? And THAT was by a government agency questioning another government agency, so who KNOWS what other military spending was inappropriate or wasted?
I'd rather see the $$$$$$ go for better protection of troops (and their vehicles) in Iraq and other areas, than on a possibly faulty or problem laden RADAR system.


Well there's your problem. You think the radar is faulty. It's not. It's suffering interference problems from people that apparently don't give a crap about the interference they're causing. That is why all the bickering over this subject. Interference isn't due to faulty equipment. So, I guess the next time a cber is on 10 causing interference he can tell you to buy better equipment.

Look, there is no way you can justify an argument over this. The military is well within it's rights to shut repeaters down. Get over it. After all, they're the Primary. We're just tolerated guests there that have worn out our welcome.

Jerry

[AD5WY]

Wasn't "Military knows best" what got us tax payers paying for $500 hammers, and $2000 toilet seats. until the Government Accounting Office questioned things? And THAT was by a government agency questioning another government agency, so who KNOWS what other military spending was inappropriate or wasted?
I'd rather see the $$$$$$ go for better protection of troops (and their vehicles) in Iraq and other areas, than on a possibly faulty or problem laden RADAR system.

... just a minor caveat...

In the latter part of my military career, I was involved in the development of a new system (a SIGINT collection system; primary contractor was Unisys), as well as many other unrelated contracted enhancements to older systems. Military *personnel* (per se) DO *sometimes* attend the functions associated with this kind of bureaucracy. Sometimes "they" even solicited us for advice and input. Occasionally "they" even took that advice. *SOMETIMES* they took a significant amount of advice (I was an instructor with a long established history in the area, "they" generally followed my advice about interface design).

But "they" (the decision makers, the ones responsible for the $500 hammers and $2000 toilet seats) are *CIVILIANS* working for the government. The major players are *CIVILIANS* working for the DOD / Pentagon, et al.

Also, *people IN the military* are also taxpayers (there is no "we-them" in this context); even Military *RETIREMENT* pay is taxed.

So... no big deal, but understand whenever anyone complains about "Military" waste, they really need to be complaining about OTHER federal employees.

The people actually doing the job (men and women in uniform) are actually very thifty, and manage resources very well; they HAVE TO be.