Parity Act of 2017 Introduced - HR 555

Well, here's the thing, each installation will be different, right? An OTARD antenna is usually an 18" dish on a clamp, fastened to a balcony. Or it could be a Yagi on a mast. A ham antenna for 160 meters will be at least an electrical quarter wave, end-fed antenna. Lots of hams use them on small residential lots. Again, what is an "effective" antenna? You can't cross common areas, or attach to anything in a common area; you can't use the roof, unless you own the roof. You'll have to put it in the back yard, probably, for aesthetic reasons. Do you have space in the back yard, and a support for an end-fed 160 meter antenna, and if so, do you consider that effective? If all of the above is YES, than you can work 160-6m with that antenna. Do you own a tree where you can mount a 2/440 vertical antenna? If so, you're probably in luck. This antenna (below) and a tuner will get you on the air. Effective - what's that mean?

"QSO-KING" 160-6 meters 1.5 KW end fed / ham antenna -- Your choice of length 98, 111, or 117 ft.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/QSO-KING-160-6-meters-1-5-KW-end-fed-ham-antenna-/172327870886

 

Well, not quite. The old rule is still true: you can have any two of:

1. Efficient
2. Small
3. Broadband

If you choose small and efficient, you can still have a very effective antenna, but you have to mind construction details. It absolutely can be done, and with readily available materials. Such things don't tend to be the kind of devices you can swipe a card and get from HRO. You tend to have to build them yourself.

It is entirely possible to run a highly-effective HF station using antennas that are no higher than the roof line. And that applies to the longer wavelengths as well.

 

YES... that's why I said do it now, in this or one of the other endless Ham Parody threads. Approach them with your plan; tell them about HR555. Tell them it's passed in the House. Ask about their thoughts regarding an effective antenna that you plan to erect after obtaining their permission. Even if they give you severe restrictions, at least you'll know what they're thinking so you can plan accordingly. Have you ever approached them about an antenna before?

 

I have been talking to an engineering friend of mine about an antenna we can market for exactly this situation. It would be an OTARD-compliant antenna, mounted on a mast, but the mast would have an insulator at the bottom. The OTARD antenna on top would be a cap hat, and the entire mast structure would be a top-loaded vertical. Put an SGC or MFJ coupler at the base, and have better than 2:1 SWR on the entire coax run for the entire coax run for any HF frequency. We have been talking about using a 1:1 isolation transformer on the TV coax, so that the TV antenna can run alongside the vertical, and they won't interfere with each other. So the XYL can watch TV while you use her OTARD HDTV antenna to call "CQ".

I would appreciate it if somebody would steal this idea so I can quit bugging my friend about it, and people can just buy them.

 

Oh I don't have any antenna restrictions. Big Mosley tribander over here..Lol

 

It's not a new idea in fact many hams are already doing just that at some HOAs, it's just that it would be nice to have something "legal standing" for the installation instead of everyone hiding their ham radio antennas in the shadows. The main need for the "legal" aspect is so they don't risk losing their home due to an unintended foreclosure for a violation of the HOA rules. But yeah don't think for one second there are no ham radio antennas currently installed at antenna restricted HOA's.

 

Excellent -- now that I have "accommodated" all the HOA hams with a single idea, let's dump ARPA and move on.

 

Okay, so you're just advocating for ham friends. That's fine. I thought you had a "need" for an emcomm antenna for some reason.

That's a good idea - and you can use it right now without Congressional intervention unless they also forbid transmitters. An insulated mast 35' tall with a TV yagi on top would probably give you 60-6m with a tuner. For all of these antennas though, here's the sticking point in HR555:

The bill would "permit a community association to establish reasonable written rules concerning height, location, size, and aesthetic impact of, and installation requirements for, outdoor antennas and support structures for the purpose of conducting communications in the amateur radio services."

That's where the argument starts. What's reasonable? How high is high enough? Where can I stick it (don't answer that), How much of it can I show the neighbors (ditto)... what does effective mean? An end-fed quarter wave will work, but your noise level will be high. If you have no room for a beverage, you can design an 8th wave loop. Can you hide it somewhere? How about a K9AY antenna for receiving? You can make it almost invisible. The question is, will the CA like and accept your plan?

http://www.hard-core-dx.com/nordicdx/antenna/loop/k9ay/

I wonder if all the guys in CAs with hidden/stealth antennas are now sweating the fact HR555 will make them reveal themselves as hams and ask the CAs for permission (for what they've had all along) otherwise, they'll be in violation of Part 97 and subject to monetary forfeiture.

 

In the interest of full disclosure, I also have no restrictions here, not CC&R nor zoning. My back yard is a jungle of copper, aluminum and stainless steel, and I enjoyed building every one of them.

That said, I'm not advocating for anybody but me. I know better than to buy a no-antenna property, but I'm concerned that the carelessly chosen language of the current bill will curtail my ability to move into an "any antenna" HOA down the road, since those are quite common in my state.

 

Hmmm. That's an interesting point. As with the rest of the bill, I'm quite sure they haven't even thought about it.

In fact, I wonder if that was the reason the HOAs asked for that specific language, because they want to stop all the bootleg antennas, and finally get control of all antenna projects?

Very interesting indeed.

 

Wow... a Manchurian Candidate Bill -- designed to bankrupt hams and out the stealth antenna guys who've been wiping out part 15 devices in the CAs!!

 

Good point. I'm peeling the tin foil off my cranium now.

 

Only if it was that easy.

OTARD antenna installations doesn't apply to ham radio. Well, at least not in the legal sense anyways.

The fear is if someone should install a ham radio antenna at an HOA, even if it's entirely reasonable and no one can see it, the HOA might discover it and then they can take legal action against the homeowner and foreclose on his home. The objective of 555 is to provide them with "legal standing" with respect to installing any kind of antenna even if the outdoor antenna is a 3" rubber duck hidden inside a rose bush.

 

You're putting a crimp in my style, bro. The idea was that the OTARD is legal for OTARD purposes, so if it gets an additional use, that shouldn't invalidate it's right to exist under OTARD rules...

Well, to be more accurate, it's about having the FCC take back legal standing that certain hams voluntarily surrendered, because they now regret their decision and have no other way out than to move. But I understand your point, just the same.

 

Wait... are you saying a CA could sue a ham over a stupid radio antenna? Wow... what kind of naif would sign up for that?