Loss of two meter simplex frequencies IMMINENT in Texas!

I think that is what I said. But regarding the post linked to, we need to remember that any frequency in the 2M band is available for simplex use, except 144.0 to 144.1. Simplex users are not bound to the segments from 146.4 to 146.6 and 147.4 to 147.6. They can legally use any frequency that is currently not in use.

Got a bunch of "paper repeaters"? Great! More simplex channels! If those coordinated frequencies are not being used, then there is no law or rule that prevents them from being used as simplex. I guess we need to define how much space is truly needed for dedicated simplex operations. Simplex users are frequency agile, by nature. Repeaters are locked into a fixed channel, they cannot move. The simple solution is to move simplex operations that are currently in this proposed area to another segment. It's not like there are tons of rock bound radios out there.

There is a danger with approaching the FCC on this matter, and asking them to "reserve" certain channels for simplex only use. The FCC will usually side with the people that have the best argument, and get the most amateur support. The FCC is likely to do something the simplex users don't like. They are likely to affirm the current rule and state that local frequency coordinators are allowed to coordinate repeaters in any part of the repeater area that they choose. Why? Simply because simplex and non-repeater use has plenty of space in other areas where repeaters cannot tread. Unless the simplex users can show that all of these frequencies are in use, and needed, this will probably occur. Once that happens, the whole 400KHz of that spectrum will suddenly be up for grabs by repeaters.

Think this won't happen? The FCC has historically sided with frequency coordinators in such disputes. Unless the simplex users are well organized and articulate in their arguments to the FCC, that will be the case. There are dozens of channels that can be used for simplex only operations, make good use of them.

Joe

 

I think that now is of most importance for the SIMPLEX users to vote at Summer Fest to show the “VHF-FM Society” the number of SIMPLEX users are out there and that they outnumber the hard core repeater users and that the Digital Users are clearly a minority user of the VHF bands, especially 2M.<o></o>
<o> </o>
I became a member so that I will be able to vote; however, as I have said many times, I am so inexperienced in this hobby, especially the SIMPLEX vs. Repeater movement; but, it is clearly evident to me that from my readings and quest to learn more about D-STAR over the past two years, there isn’t much interest in it except for a few “pockets” of users in scattered across the nation, such as Houston. I got into D-STAR by default because the first Radio I bought had the D-STAR chip in it and it was an ICOM, and I did a lot of research on D-STAR when I purchased the unit. With this VHF-FM Society vote coming up, I have spent more time researching it and I don’t believe there has been a whole lot of a surge of many more users in this mode.<o></o>

 

The special interest groups pushing this agenda have been rallying their members to get out and vote for this band plan change. It is very important to all simplex users and ham users who are tired of band plans changing and special interest groups taking control over the majority's wishes to get out and vote.

Get your membership in, or join at the door and get in and vote. We need every vote to count and we need every one to vote this band plan change down.

There is no need to take freq from people who are using them, between incroachment by repeaters, Digital repeaters now and Echo link open simplex freq are disappearing quickly. We have the numbers to prevent this but we need everyone to get out and vote NO to the band plan change.

 

The Armadillo group is the group who are spear heading this attack upon our simplex freq......It is amazing how arrogant they are.

#1: They run CLOSED REPEATERS. Only members can use them, and they want to take away our freq and not even permit others to use them.

#2: To be a member you have to pay $105 per year membership and they review you and do a back ground check to see if they want you as a member

We need to fight these people who are attacking our band plan and think the 2 meter band exist solely for their amusement and no one else matters. As
we were told if they want a repeater on a freq we are using, we can turn the dial.

VOTE AGAINST THESE PEOPLE....SATURDAY AT THE AUSTIN SUMMER FEST...IT IS VERY IMPORTANT WE PRESERVE OUR FREQUENCIES.

 

I had not looked at this thread in a few days. I did not know about this stuff in San Antonio! Who was the guy that said, "turn the knob if you don't like it"? The Texas VHF-FM Society needs to understand that if they railroad this band plan through by some "under the table shenanigan" or "last minute stunt" that they will have just opened a new can of worms. If simplex operators and non-supporters of this band plan are the majority, make no mistake, WE WILL PREVAIL. We have many options and resources.

See everyone in Austin!
Aaron Scott
WX5VHF

 

WB5UEN

Actually, Joe, I have been on a simplex frequency since 1978 and no I will not move just to please a handful of people who think what they are doing is ok. These people are trying to steamroll over every ham in the state. They need to use dead repeater frequencies instead of simplex. And the problem IS, they are up against a deadline to get these Dstar repeaters on the air or lose the grant money(taxpayers money). I say Pis Poor planning on their part does not contitute an emergency on my part. I will see you in Austin!

 

My only point was to say that there are no reserved frequencies for simplex. If you want to stay, that's your business. They may never place a repeater on your frequency, anyway. Or it might be far enough apart that it won't bother you, so no harm done. Maybe they will exempt your channel in a 100 miles radius in your area, who knows?

In any case, I won't be there, I really don't have a dog in the fight, since I live in AZ. It will be up to the people there to make that decision, and whatever they decide will be OK with me. It just seems like a stubborn response from some simplex users on those few channels who seem incapable of rotating a VFO to a channel where repeaters are not allowed to be.

Joe

 

The fact of the matter is that WB5UEN and our group of simplex operators have been using this frequency for years. During this time we have made many friends in Oklahoma, South Texas, Louisiana, and several other states.

These guys look for band openings and QSO with us whenever possible. It would be next to imposable to notify all of those hams of a change in frequency. At this point the frequency we use is not on the chopping block, but whats to say it will not be in the future.

 

Yes I am in Oklahoma and FM simplex is not "just" a local issue. I can easily communicate with Texas, Arkansas, Kansas and many other surrounding states on 2m simplex.

The entire mentality this is somehow limited to only affecting a certain localized area or no one living outside Texas is dead wrong.

 

Then you need to make that clear to the coordinators. Explain the frequencies being used, the importance of them, and why you cannot get by without them. This probably explains why so many in TX want their own repeater pair protected in the whole state, the propagation out there is bigger and badder than anywhere else.

Seriously, though, looks like you need to vote out the people running it, and put in a bunch of simplex lovers. Maybe cancel all existing coordinations and make people re-apply. That might free up enough channels for waiting people. If nothng else, get a promise in writing that they will not seek any additional channels from that area being used by simplex.

Or do away with the coordination all together, let people operate repeaters and simplex wherever they want. Nothing like a good old "repeater war" to bring back the fun of the 70's.

I still don't understand why simplex users would want to be in a segment that could have repeaters on it as well. I understand that some communication might be necessary between groups to let them know that the channel is moving from 146.49 to 145.62 (or whatever), but that is not an impossible task. If the majority moves, the rest will follow if they want to talk with your group. Word will get around pretty quickly, really.

Joe

 

Don't they also require one to be recommended by a member in order to be able to apply? Real good old boys club.

 

What's not to say what won't be on the chopping block in the future? Any mode that TX VHF-FM Society doesn't do or like will be on the chopping block as they seek out more frequencies. While I have a few simplex freqs here that I use to communicate with other folks I really worry about the weak signal part of the band getting squashed. Don't say that it can't happen.

 

Yes you can only be invited to join
Yes the repeaters are CLOSED TO NON-MEMBERS

YES THEY WANT TO STEAL VALID SIMPLEX FREQUENCIES FOR PERSONAL GAIN AND USE LOCKING OUT OTHER HAMS.

IT'S BULL AND WE NEED TO GET EVERYONE THERE AND VOTE TO STOP THIS.

 

The term I think you are looking for is "poor engineering practice" which in itself is often considered a violation part 97.

Obviously the idea of cramming repeaters and simplex users in the same segment of the band isn't exactly what I would call an organized and technically sound approach to the idea of band management.

It has been stated over and over again that Dstar is not compatible with the current simplex frequency arrangement because the bandwidth is entirely different than FM simplex. Therefore, it unnecessarily wastes resources and allocated space when used in this manner.

It's has also been stated that Dstar systems are not capable of hearing if a frequency is already in use or not before they start transmitting. Obviously and from a technical engineering point of view, this this means Dstar when mixed with FM simplex band assignments has a great potential for causing intentional interference to simplex users who may be located out of state who are using these simplex frequencies.

Additionally, engaging and implementing poor engineering practices was never the FCC's intention when they first established coordinating councils. The proposed activity entirely contradicts the basis, purpose and entire objective of having coordination councils in the first place.

The main objective of a coordination council is intended for the function of band preservation, not to further reduce available frequencies in a manner consistent to causing harmful interference with existing users and for the purpose of serving a dedicated mode for a small special interest group.

Repeater councils exist to "serve" in the greater interests of the "ENTIRE" amateur radio community, and this does not in any way translate to somehow mean they exist only for the sole purpose of serving just a few select members of a club.

 

You figure in a public open forum this subject with 314 posts someone from the "Society" would have made a post or two to their defense. This speaks volumes on how this organization is run.