Loss of two meter simplex frequencies IMMINENT in Texas!

That's because D-STAR, and everything associated with it sucks.

Trying to scarf up the VHF simplex freqs across Texas for a proprietary system that nobody except a few cranks utilize is typical behavior for this group. - Talk about being thoughtless, antisocial and self-absorbed!

They couldn't force out the real repeaters ( though not from lack of trying! ) so now they are seeing what they can rip off from simplex users who will tend to be less organized, easier to screw.

Great group of amateurs, those D-STAR folks.

Fortunately, Texans have a long history of ignoring the Texas VHF-FM society.

It is only because the VHF-FM society has fallen into such hard times that this socially challenged D-STAR group managed to get any pull there, in the first place.

This may be the last nail in the Texas VHF-FM society's coffin. - Hardly anybody paid much attention to them to start with, and now that the riff-raff have taken over, the writing is on the wall. Without legitimacy, outfits like that tend to go down fast.

If the D-STAR folks want to declare war on their fellow amateurs, trying to snatch up our simplex frequencies with some BS runaround, here is one fellow amateur who will see to it that they draw back a nub.

 

hmm sounds stinky,if my brain banks serve me right they say some where,in the rules or what nots,if one can carry on a converstaion and do it via simplex rather then tie upa machine,then use simplex,they take all these away then whats left? every body hog,52"?here in south texas most of us use simplex even tho we have many machines around.i for one prefer never to go digital,no need to ,to costly,

 

The challenge is the analog repeater users would rather have a talking clock on the air than make room for new technology. So the Simplex users are being sacrificed

 

D star crap....

 

The amateur community is requesting the spectrum clearing and not a manufacturer. I haven’t compared the profit margins between amateur and commercial radio vendors but even without performing my due diligence I would be willing to bet that commercial vendors make much more in absolute and percentage terms. One set of cellular radios cost approximately $50k. Depending on the capacity requirements a site could need as many as 20 of these (NASCAR, NFL, etc.) Do you really think that big business is behind the clearing of a couple of two meter channels?

 

D'Star is NOT exclusively Icom. I have and use a TS2000 on d'Star and use the 10ghz backbone to enter gateways and pop out almost anywhere. I travel a lot and send pictures, check email and send text messages to almost anyone that is in the system, while taliking to other hams. Don't knock it until you have tried it. Know your enemy, it might turn into a friend.

AF4LG

 

Letting a tiny group of self-absorbed lids rip off spectrum from countless numbers of their fellow hams - cannot accurately be characterized as "advancement of a hobby".

Attack on the hobby is a much more accurate description of what this sorry group is attempting.

 

I "was" too. Same sentiments here.

 

I "was" too! My sentiments exactly.

 

Loss of 2m simplex freq's in Texas

Not sure why this is causing a stir...Simplex frequencies in this state are seldom used. I monitor 146.52, live in the 3rd most populated area in the state and NEVER hear anyone. Most of the area repeaters are silent as well in the evenings.

If hams were really using simplex frequencies this would be a non-issue. Let them build their repeaters. If 146.49 is where you hang out, then consider moving to one of the other 6 to 8 frequencies that remain vacant.

 

Funny we here the words "semantics" brought up ......

Actually, that kinda hits right on target, but not as just described ...... we are not talking about one "un-coordinated repeater station" interfering with a "coordinated repeater" ..... we are discussing a co-ordinating registry declaring they have the power to confiscate simplex frequencies at their own whim and turn them into more repeater pairs for their select members. Not sure this is going to fly very well if anyone decides to push this issue .... could bode badly for certain club executives that try to swing this one ..... I am no lawyer, but as someone already said in this thread ....... think logicaly (common sense)

That is not the case at all. We are talking about a "Co-Ordinating registry" somehow thinking they have the power to subject an entire state to their own rule changes that can somehow surreptitiously replace existing FCC rules by simply getting their membership to "take a vote" ...... How ludicrous is that?

I have absolutely nothing against D-STAR or any other mode or new technology. We have all sorts of them in this hobby. It is part of what attracts so many to it to begin with. That does NOT give any one of those new modes some inherent rights or privileges over any other. This is especially true since the FCC themselves have already ruled on this matter when they approved the use of D-STAR in the first place.

It is much like a recent discussion about the use of quasi spread spectrum when trying to describe certain digital modes normally used on HF. Wow, what a fiasco that was, only because the author of certain software errantly described his software to use spread spectrum, This turned out to be "semantics" only because he did not understand the US definition of the term. Wow, it was amazing how many people seemed to know much more about his program than even he did ..... Turns out, his software was really no different than many of the other PSK schemes out there, just his "description" caused the gaff. Once that was changed, SURPRISE, now it is acceptable with no changes to the software. SEMANTICS ! ........nowhere but ham radio, right ?

My SEMANTICS are pretty straight forward ..... I object to a co-ordination registry / agency somehow taking on the apparent authority that was never given to them by any official regulatory agency, and arbitrarily preparing, or planning, or threatening to take any such action as this. It gives the hobby / service a bad name for people not involved to see the infighting over issues that should never even be brought up.

If the VHF Society feels they somehow have the right to declare they have the power by the vote of their private membership to change bandplans for all users within their state boundaries, let them show where that authorization comes from ...... and show how they plan to handle interference between their "coordinated stations" and stations (repeaters or not) outside their boundaries that operate within the recognized bandplan in place most everywhere else within the continental United States.

What bothers me

 

I just checked the Texas VHF-FM society's web page and if you click the "Contact Us" menu item, it turns out that only registered administrators can "Contact" the Society online.

Heh.

Yep, I would shut down the contact item too if I was trying to screw thousands of Texas hams.

- But you will never find me in a situation like that... Too much character and intelligence for that, here.

I don't have to hide under my desk and disable any way for amateurs to contact me.

 

With all the "paper" repeaters in this state already, this is just what we need. With the use of simplex in this state what it is, I think these d-star hams got a good fight coming.....

 

Must have....Sorry

 

The ARRL started all of this "privileged mode" stuff with WinLink, several years back. This happened after there was a sudden influx of TAPR people showing up at ARRL HQ.

The concept has no place in amateur radio.

Protocol warriors, out to screw anybody who uses anything besides the preferred pet mode.

"Zero-Sum" thinkers who only believe that they can advance their pet activity by screwing somebody else out of what they want to do. These people, by definition, are incapable of playing well with others.

Anybody who does something different is subject to attack.

They are the least of all hams.