SERA Wants All Repeaters Toned!

Thats the bad thing about it ,if 3 repeaters are in the same town they will all have different tones .I dont know what the survey says about who all has DCS caplaible radios or not but, there is still alot of radio out there with no DCS or CTCSS. i know one guy thats does alot of emergency traffic he doesnt even have a toned radio, not all of us have toned radio like it or not still a potential of someone not being able to get into a repeater if they had a emergency and i have seen in alot of cases owners change "tones" to try to keep out like pager interference so, if they told SERA it is toned at 100.0 the next week it might be on 103.5 tone because they found some problems and that book does no good for a emergency or a traveling ham and heck i have a $1000 dollar radio that cant scan output tones

Please go to and check out some very interesting emails and some poll figures of what alot of Hams in the SERA area believe in. www.wm4t.com

I'm am not here to critize all things SERA does but i like the idea of more advanced technolgy to save band space and easy of flow of information with out ,in my mind going backwards.

Not just for coordinations BUT ALL repeaters in SERA area

SERA discussions and Polls link

 

Funny. Waty back in 1978 -- when I was still writing the "Looking West" FM/repeater column for 73 Magazine I predicted that this would happen by 1998. Well I was off by 6 years but it has now transpired.

To address some issues raided: First off, CTCSS (the proper name for "PL") does not a closed or private repeater make. It is "attitude" on the part of an owner and/or user group that does this. CTCSS is only one possible mechanical device to that end.

As far as the "visitor" or "traveling ham,: unless he/she bought their radio in the 1960's, 1970's or early 1980's, it has a CTCSS tone generator or generator/decoder built in. There really is no excuse not to be able to access CTCSS systems as long as the CTCSS tone is published.

Folks -- this is not the 1970's. It is 2004 and while using antiquated analoh techbology, the SERA plan makes sense from a frequency coordinators standpoint. And I know this first hand as I served as one -- on both sides of the USA -- from the late '60's through the middle 1980's.

For those of you who do not have a proper understanding of what CTCSS is and how it is properly used, might I suggest you check to see if your local library has a copy of "The Practical Handbook of Amateur Radio FM and Repeaters" written by this "scribe" and Michael Morris WA6ILQ. It is TAB book #1212 and while out of print the technology and radioo psychology there-in will make the use of CTCSS understandable -- if not "politically palitable."

One last item: One poster asked what next? Well a decade or more ago there was a discussion among several large repeater groups in the North-Easty of requesting coordinators "assign users" to specific repeaters. Maybe it was in jest, but I kind of doubt that any coordinator would ever be so stupid as to even consider such.

de
Bill Pasternak, WA6ITF

 

Your reply sounds condescending as we all know what CTCSS is. I've often stated that confirmity kills experimentation. If we wrap ourselves in regulations and requirements, we lose our ability to experiment. Those of us who cherish experimentation will move onto other hobbies.

 

personal opinion follows..

IF SERA tries to 'delist' a repeater from active coordination simply because the repeater owner CHOOSES NOT to 'PL' ('tone', CTCSS, CG, or whatever acronym or initals you like to use ) their machine

AND they choose to LIVE with whatever happens to come upon the input of THEIR machine...

AND (prior to the SERA 'dictate') they had ZERO **REAL** interference issues with any other co-channel machine..

AND SERA then tries to strong-arm them into complying by threatening 'delisting' and 'decoordination'.. then SERA is going to have a distinct problem.

I can tell you that SOME repeater owner or Club is going to decide to spend the time and money to press the point in court based on the principle of the issue.

They are going to contest the concept that an unelected body of individuals can FORCE, by dictate and fiat, other independent entities to adapt when no such authority exist for them to do so.

Yes, the FCC may (and I mean 'MAY') get involved, but I suspect they will try to have the parties work it out.

If you lived through the 'repeater wars' or the 'packet VS FM repeaters wars' or 'the in-high, out-low' and '20 kHz vs 15 kHz wars' you KNOW what I'm talking about..

I did and let me tell you, it was NOT pretty. There are MANY folks, currently licensed and operating TODAY who were unfairly and adversly affected by dictates and mandates by fiat that were thrust upon them without proper coordination or debate.

THEY still harbor very bad feelings and some STILL look for ways to legally impact things by skirting the rules 'just close enough to the edge' but no so close as to be cited or in violation.

Trust me. if this spreads.. without proper coordination and debate amongst those affected by it.. you will see MORE dissension and problems.

My own thoughts were 'why not do a decent survey (over time) and find out WHAT kinds of ACTUAL operation (official term 'loading') and activity is ACTUALLY ongoing in the repeaters in the SERA area?

Bet you will find that MANY machines lie fallow and unused MANY hours of the day and week.

Working to reallocate frequencies to those machines that ARE active and utilized with lesser used machines being redistributed makes MORE sense than a dictate from the Star Chamber and leading by fiat.

K3FT

It will NOT be pretty.

 

I believe I talked on that machine recently as I was on vacation! Excellent machine, and yes I did hear the tone information go out.

 

My opininated ramblings:

From a technical standpoint, CTCSS-access is doable.  There is hardly a VHF FM rig that has been made in the last twenty or so years that doesn't have CTCSS, either built-in or as an option.  And even then, if one has an older radio without it, there are aftermarket tone-boards that will enable one to at least transmit a tone.

From a regulatory standpoint, SERA seemingly is beginning to tread into the FCC's territory.

To coin a phrase, who died and left them king?  Don't get me wrong...no one likes interference, malicious or accidental.  But I hardly think SERA should be trying to dictate rules or policy, when it is a private organization.  Personally, I've never really liked the idea of private organizations coordinating repeaters [I've seen the ego trips that occur, and what I saw wasn't pretty].

Overall...if I were running a repeater, I'd rather have CTCSS suggested as an aid to combat co-channel interference, not because some self-appointed yoyo commands me to use it.

Just my opinion...  

 

Sorry guy’s but this is my two cents worth…..

These guys are full of CRAP! It’s amazing how people who need to be in touch with everyone are so far out of it they live in the next galaxy. Come on guy’s do your job you volunteered for! It amazes me to go look at the meeting minutes see the “crap” that they put out…. Something this big on rates this piece off work! Display the whole conversion or are they afraid too?

http://www.sera.org/meet0604.htm

“EXPLORING FUTURE AUXILIARY OPERATION ON TWO METERS: Steve Grantham presented his thoughts on auxiliary operations on the two meter band. He reminded us that we all have had problems with in band linking and/or remote base operations. He had previously started an e-mail thread about this topic and said we need to think about what position we are going to take in the future. There was lively and lengthy discussion from just about all present. Steve offered a motion that “we require the use of CTCSS/DCS on both transmit and receive on all new FM voice repeater coordinations, effective June 13, 2004, and any existing FM voice repeater that is in operation now must utilize full time CTCSS/DCS on both transmit and receive by July 01, 2006.” Seconded by Terry Jones, the motion passed unanimously.

Dick Fowler remarked that a notice should be inserted in the forthcoming datasheet mailing that contains the Policy 17 revision and a notice of our new official position on CTCSS/DCS use adding that any interference complaint, that involves a situation where CTCSS or DCS is not in use, will not be considered for review by the SERA. Alex noted that the Policy 17 insert was a matter included in the motion made by Andy. There was a general consensus by the staff present that the additional information concerning CTCSS/DCS should be included in the mailing.”

First off, why was this issue not posted for all to see instead of an email? You would figure that these are “best and the brightest” doing their jobs? Gee, it looks like all they want to do make more money! First off if you get right down to it they want to do this so they have more repeaters in the same area…. Encode / Decode. But think about it if you will….. Who’s going to regulate the power that stations run? SERA or the FCC? I have a prim example…. Here in Tennessee we a very nice repeater that covers the Knoxville area really well…. But we can’t use it because of a “HAM” in Virginia that runs 160 watts just to talk to “his” local machine. So we said fine and went out purchased a set of corner beams, co-phased them and put them on the tower with the rear of the beams aimed at Virginia. Then we toned our repeater and had it transmit the tone out also so we decode the repeater and not hear the Virginia machine (both are SERA coordinated). That was a rather large waste of money…. It worked great till he keyed up….. Then he overrode our signal with the tone and still terrorized the repeater… So that does not work… well the makers of amps will befit…. (more money) The more power up to 1500 watts you can have you might be able to talk to the machine you can see on the hill.

Another thing what about an emergency? If you don’t have the latest “SERA” journal (more money) you will not have the latest info…. Well the latest that hasn’t changed the previous day. The bigger joke is the ARRL repeater director it’s printed every year (more money) so that is about useless more than it is now, if you travel your uup the creek. Thank about the risk that they are taking…. I am net control operator for the East Tennessee area aka www.etskywarn.net we had a very destructive tornado a couple of years ago in an area called Mossy Grove. It took just about everything; the ONLY communication in and out was ham radio. The local radio system was out and what worked was over loaded or was not cross compatible. We all went to the repeaters that covered that area… one was toned and the others were not. The one that was toned had the toned removed to help. We used that repeater for days….. Just like now it is toned, but he turns the tone off just in case the primary repeater is taken out we can still use his as a back up during Skywarn events. According to what I have see if you turn off the tone and have interference tough cookie’s… If your traveling to an event and you don’t know the tone what are going to do? How can you risk the valuable seconds it will take for everyone to reprogram their radio’s? What about borrowed equipment…? If the user is not familiar with the radio, then what do you do…? Who wants stand up and say someone died because I can’t program a tone into an unfamiliar radio…? Get back in touch with the rest of the world!

I guess my last topic… then I will get down off the soap box…. It’s amazing who people can make such a decision that affects everyone but can not take the time to do mundane part of their jobs…. Example I have sent my manager 14 emails with no replays, no read receipt acknowledgement, and then tried to fax him several times, and I even called and left voice messages and still not a word back. I started this little ordeal back along the time frame of late May to early June this year. He has time to go to the meeting but I can’t have a simple email, fax or phone call back to answer my questions! This is prime example off of lack of account ability…. In my humble opinion on this we should tell SERA to take a flying leap off a very BIG cliff and I hope they hit every branch on the way down. Between them and the ARRL they making this “hobby” in to something that is nothing but a money racket with no accountability to anyone but them selves. People fuss about code / no-code need to open up their eyes and see the writing on the wall that this, THIS is more of a threat to the hobby than that will ever be..... It looks like SERA is now in bed with BPL…. Stop and think about it Encode / Decode…… WRITING IS ON THE WALL!

73, hope to hear you on six meters….. oh BTW when are they going to tone that?

Moe KE4CQW always listening on 50.150 usb

 

K3FT sed, "K3FT... It will NOT be pretty."

Chuckster, I disagree. It is going to be PRETTY UGLY

I can remember a time when an even more basic fuss
than the 15/20 kHz spacing issue and the Packet issue.
Remember when the FCC opened the 147 MHz portion of
2 meters to repeater operation? I do! There are still some older than me farts(uglier, too! ) who are still
operating Cleggs and other rigs that wouldn't go to the +
600 repeater shift! Some of those folks got plumb teeth-
grinding angry over that issue. They ain't over it yet!
Why, just the other day I went to the cemetery to put flowers on my mother's grave. An old ham buddy of mine
is buried just a short distance away in that cemetery.
He and I had argued until his dying day about that issue. My wife said to me as we approached my old friend's grave, "Do you hear that sound? It is like teeth
grinding coming from the ground." Even though it has
been 28 years since my friend's funeral, I swear that the dirt over his grave is still warm!
So, after everybody has had their fecal hemorrhage over
the issue, which, by the way, is mandatory, everybody
will settle down to whatever the next change is and start
the process all over again! It amazes me that more ham
shack doors don't have quarter moons cut in them at top center! I guess it is because HRO and AES catalog pages
are too danged brittle!
After all, we ain't hams unless we have upset bowels
and our panties are in a knot! Personally, I think it is all
a John Kerry plot!

73, whether you want 'em or not! Cal K4JSR
Bug Tussle, Georgia

PS. If you have read this epistle to this point, may I add a small reminder that the Great Shelby, NC Hamfest
is this next Saturday and Sunday. SERA always has had
a contingent of representatives there. Come stomp on
those poor blokes there...Bring Golf shoes for stomping and a good set of walking shoes, also. Shelby is one of
the best hamfests going. Nice, big boneyard.

 

Don't be so sure. You would be suprised how many of the neo-hams have no idea what you are talking about. There's a shocking number of slightly older hams that are making an issue of this. I can't believe this is even an issue in the 21st century. We are just talking about applying 1960's technology to earlier 1960's technology. I have ALWAYS used CTCSS encode and decode on all my repeaters (ok, so that's only two), and I know a lot of the other operators would like to, because it reduces noise and squelch management problems almost 100%. The reason they don't is the users complain about it. I seriously doubt the SERA implemented this without at least talking to several, if not a majority of repeater owners. Not users, but owners. It's long, long past due.

Second, it's been said, but tell me who has marketed a store-bought radio in the last 20 years that doesn't at least have tone encode? If you don't know how to program a tone in your radio, I seriously doubt that this ruling will curtail your latatude of experimentation.

Three. SERA can't force you to do anything. You aren't required to coordinate a repeater. BUT, if you cause interference with a coordinated system, the FCC will dump on YOU. All they are saying, if you don't meet full coordination requirements, both carrier and tone frequencies, then you aren't coordinated. No one complains when they assign you a frequency pair to use, your rights aren't infringed then, right? So pick a tone, put it on the paper, and get over it. Or take your chances. Depending on where you are, it may never be an issue.

This rant was not directed at any specific individual

 

Some people are in such a deep rut that they can't even see over the top of it anymore.

Let's see... SERA wants all repeaters toned.  If an untoned system gets interference, it's basically their own problem.

Simple solution that I've seen done at quite a few repeaters across the country... Establish a tone freq for the system.  When interference acts up, turn it on.  When interference goes away, turn it off.  Regular users simply transmit tone all the time; they don't even know if the repeater needs it or not, unless the courtesy tone changes or some such.

Another system went about it differently.  They were up on top of a mountain co-sited with a broadcaster.  Their main antenna was at the top of the tower, and could hear just about everything within a few hundred miles.  When the wind blew in the right direction, they would get users from machines in other states.

Obviously, they needed PL, but didn't want to lock out travelers.

So, they put up a Ringo on the shack roof to its own (open) receiver, and used a simple circuit to use whichever receiver was active.

One interesting side note... when the band really opened up, the locals would turn OFF their own tones; they were heard better through the lower antenna.

As for the "emergency nets" that use a different PL... it's no big deal to add a second encoder in the TX audio line that can be switched in and out remotely.  Need to rally the troops?  A couple of DTMF tones and you're talking to them.

 

This ruling is totally and completely wrong!!! 1) It is out of line to close formerly open repeaters to travelers (and that is exactly what this will do) You can't travel in the northeast or midwest and talk to local hams because they all have tones on the repeaters, and it is nigh impossible to encode any modern transciever to tones while on the road. The methods are well hidden in the manual and are not easy to set on the fly. The only way is to look them up and program them in advance. Who is going to do that? and how do you know even which ones will be active? ... and this is assuming you have a 5-year-old or newer rig!!
2) as for the "60s technology" argument, pardon me but bravo sierra. Many rigs produced in the mid-90s do NOT have tone encoders. I personally own 5 two-meter rigs and only 2 have tone capability. They are obsoleting my magnificent (and expensive) TS-790A in my main station. The 2m rig in my sailboat is similarly obsoleted. And I will be off Packet, bcause that rig does not have tones (never needed it). Only the TM-V7A and an old backup TS-711A have tone, and the latter only because a prior owner had installed the optional board. The '790 does not have tone and no tone board is available for it.
For a retiree, you are talking a significant cost to replace numerous rigs - for no valid reason.
The use of a tone, and the need for it - if existing - should be the provence of the individual repeater owner, not some non-representative regulators.

 

There are quite a few - including Kenwood, Icom, Yaesu...  How long a list do you want?

 

The way I see it you should have up to date equipment not a bunch of old junk crystal sets.If you want to use that old junk fine just add a tone device to it.!Now if we could just take away repeater pairs from those who only have them on paper and have never had the thing on the air in the first place.

 

Why does this come up now?
The repeaters are all but totally dead in this part of the country.
15 years ago was a different story, and there was more use and more interference back then.
I say skip it, No SERA - - but "que sera, sera"
Hal, N6TZ

 

Why does this come up now?
The repeaters are all but totally dead in this part of the country.
15 years ago was a different story, and there was more use and more interference back then.
I say skip it, No SERA - - but "que sera, sera"
Hal, N6TZ