Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [WestMichiganHams] Re: Technicality?

Expand Messages
  • jason mackay
    Hi All, I have been reading these messages but don t understand how this help or hurts us. Please help simplify all this stuff. Thanks KC8OVS ... Get your
    Message 1 of 23 , Nov 3, 2006

      Hi All,  I have been reading these messages but don't understand how this help or hurts us.  Please help simplify all this stuff.  Thanks KC8OVS


      Get your email and see which of your friends are online - Right on the new Yahoo.com
    • k8mhz@k8mhz.com
      FM broadcast is 88.0 to 108.0. They don t operate by the same rules we do. Attached is a great frequency chart. Adobe Acrobat Reader required. 73, Mark K8MHZ
      Message 2 of 23 , Nov 3, 2006
        FM broadcast is 88.0 to 108.0.  They don't operate by the same rules we do.
         
        Attached is a great frequency chart.  Adobe Acrobat Reader required.
         
        73,
         
        Mark K8MHZ
         
        ----- Original Message -----
        Sent: Saturday, November 04, 2006 00:59
        Subject: Re: [WestMichiganHams] Re: Technicality?

        Who operates / owns 88.7-106.5 MHz ? I have heard phone conversations there before . As well with the UHF standard and "T" band .
         
        UHF standard = 450-470 MHz
        UHF "T" band = 470-512 MHz
         
                                                           KD8BIG
         
        ------------ -- Original message ------------ --
        From: <k8mhz@k8mhz. com>

        "No, because the cellphone does not transmit in an amateur band. So
        you can't use it for a repeater input, even if it were technically
        possible."
         
        It is technically possible with ACUs.  Reverse phone patches using land lines are and have been legal for some time.  If the phone is cellular instead of a land line it is still a reverse phone patch but in actuality is a re-transmission of a non-amateur frequency.  Both the Motorola ACU-1000 and a properly set up EchoStation repeater have the capability of re-transmitting ANY audio input to an amateur frequency, or any frequency that there is a transmitter for.  EchoStation can be set up with a cell phone as a receiver and a ham rig as a transmitter so the cell # could be called and the received audio is sent out over the transmitter.  EchoLink uses many frequencies via the Internet in the same manner.   This seems like a breech of the law, not just to me,  but others as well.  NOT to be taken that this use is a travesty, but more to be taken as a need to address Part 97's failure to keep up with the times. /FONT>
         
        "I totally disagree with your premise, Mark. The fact that cellphones
        use RF is incidental to their operation, and would not fall under an
        interpretation of the amateur rules prohibiting re-broadcasting of
        other services."
         
        The only allowance for incidentals is clearly outlined and pertains to things such as music on the ISS for instance.  Nowhere in Part 97 is there an exception for devices that use RF 'incidental to their operation',  which I don't think is the case for cell phones.  Cell phones are radio phones and the radio part is the primary function of those devices, not merely incidental.
         
        The re-transmission exclusion bears no written exceptions and leaves little room for interpretation.  Without an exception for cellular or cordless phones it is against the ruling of 97.113. 
         
        If I missed something in other sections of Part 97 please point them out to me.
         
        I think this is the case of the law not keeping up with the technology.
         
        73,
         
        Mark K8MHZ
         
        ----- Original Message -----
        Sent: Friday, November 03, 2006 22:06
        Subject: [WestMichiganHams] Re: Technicality?

        --- In WestMichiganHams@ yahoogroups. com, <k8mhz@...> wrote:
        >
        > Chris,
        >
        > Sending TO a pager is different, no other form of radio transmission
        is being re-broadcast via amateur radio unless it was done using a
        radio telephone.
        >
        > So, if it is OK to use a phone patch to re-broadcast cellular
        phones, would it then be OK to have a repeater in which the input was
        a cellular phone?
        >
        > See where I am concerned?

        No, because the cellphone does not transmit in an amateur band. So
        you can't use it for a repeater input, even if it were technically
        possible.

        > If it is NOT OK to use a cellular phone as a repeater input it is
        also NOT OK to use them on a phone patch as the exact same
        retransmission is suspect, just connected differently.

        I totally disagree with your premise, Mark. The fact that cellphones
        use RF is inci dental to their operation, and would not fall under an
        interpretation of the amateur rules prohibiting re-broadcasting of
        other services.

        Good discussion though.

        Laryn K8TVZ


        No virus found in this incoming message.
        Checked by AVG Free Edition.
        Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.13.21/510 - Release Date: 11/1/2006


        No virus found in this incoming message.
        Checked by AVG Free Edition.
        Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.13.21/510 - Release Date: 11/1/2006
      • Laryn Lohman
        ... What is an ACU? ... to things such as music on the ISS for instance. Nowhere in Part 97 is there an exception for devices that use RF incidental to their
        Message 3 of 23 , Nov 3, 2006
          >
          > "No, because the cellphone does not transmit in an amateur band. So
          > you can't use it for a repeater input, even if it were technically
          > possible."
          >
          > It is technically possible with ACUs.

          What is an ACU?


          > "I totally disagree with your premise, Mark. The fact that cellphones
          > use RF is incidental to their operation, and would not fall under an
          > interpretation of the amateur rules prohibiting re-broadcasting of
          > other services."
          >
          > The only allowance for incidentals is clearly outlined and pertains
          to things such as music on the ISS for instance. Nowhere in Part 97
          is there an exception for devices that use RF 'incidental to their
          operation', which I don't think is the case for cell phones. Cell
          phones are radio phones and the radio part is the primary function of
          those devices, not merely incidental.
          >
          > The re-transmission exclusion bears no written exceptions and leaves
          little room for interpretation. Without an exception for cellular or
          cordless phones it is against the ruling of 97.113.

          OK Mark, how about microwave hops within the landline telephone
          system? I would submit that these fall into the same category as the
          cordless in your house, or cellphone RF link. If a cellphone is
          illegal in a phone patch, then so is the microwave link. That would
          make a great many patches illegal going back to the first day of using
          microwave links for landlines, including of course domestic and
          international phone patches. Then, since we cannot always know when
          microwave is involved in ANY phone call, we must stop all patches.

          Laryn K8TVZ
        • kc8dei
          ... Thanks for pointing this out. I need to go buy a new keyboard before next week s MFSK net, as my current keyboard is wireless. Clearly, I m
          Message 4 of 23 , Nov 3, 2006
            --- In WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com, <k8mhz@...> wrote:

            > The only allowance for incidentals is clearly outlined and pertains
            > to things such as music on the ISS for instance. Nowhere in Part 97
            > is there an exception for devices that use RF 'incidental to their
            > operation', which I don't think is the case for cell phones. Cell
            > phones are radio phones and the radio part is the primary function of
            > those devices, not merely incidental.
            >
            > The re-transmission exclusion bears no written exceptions and leaves
            > little room for interpretation. Without an exception for cellular or
            > cordless phones it is against the ruling of 97.113.

            Thanks for pointing this out. I need to go buy a new keyboard before
            next week's MFSK net, as my current keyboard is wireless. Clearly,
            I'm retransmitting its 27MHz signal on the lower end of the 2m band,
            which goes against the rules.

            Also, somebody might want to inform the HSMM guys of this rule. After
            all, they're using off-the-shelf wireless networking equipment under
            part 97, rather than part 15, but how can they guarantee that the
            packets their equipment fowards _never_ crossed through wireless
            networking equipment operating under Part 15?

            The idea that passing through the ether outside the bounds of Part 97
            somehow poisons a signal so that it can never be legally transmitted
            on an amateur frequency just doesn't pass the sniff test. To me, this
            seems like nothing more than FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt) rather
            than a real problem (unless, of course, there is some reason to
            believe the FCC actually interprets their rule this way).

            Mark Moss, KC8DEI
          • Al Pepping
            If you have a cell phone that is working, why would you use a phone patch???? Kinda like taking a shower with your socks on. But in an emergency use of
            Message 5 of 23 , Nov 4, 2006
              If you have a cell phone that is working, why would you use a phone patch????   Kinda like taking a shower with your socks on.  
               
              But in an "emergency"  use of any radio on any frequency is permitted, just make sure you know the meaning of "emergency".  KV8X 
               
              -------Original Message-------
               
              From: k8mhz@...
              Date: 11/03/06 13:53:25
              Subject: [WestMichiganHams] Technicality?
               
              Please read the section below and offer up your take on whether or not using a cell (radio) phone to communicate on a phone patch is legal or not.  I guess cordless (radio) phones would also be suspect if the provision were to be followed to the letter.
               
              From: ยง97.113 Prohibited transmissions.

              (e) No station shall retransmit programs or signals emanating from
              any type of radio station other than an amateur station, except
              propagation and weather forecast information intended for use by the
              general public and originated from United States Government stations
              and communications, including incidental music, originating on
              United States Government frequencies between a space shuttle and its
              associated Earth stations. Prior approval for shuttle
              retransmissions must be obtained from the National Aeronautics and
              Space Administration. Such retransmissions must be for the exclusive
              use of amateur operators. Propagation, weather forecasts,
              and shuttle retransmissions may not be conducted on a regular basis,
              but only occasionally, as an incident of normal amateur radio
              communications.
              ------------------------------------------
               
              This section is referred to when talks of using ACU devices, such as Muskegon's Motorola ACU-1000,  EchoStation and other ACUs (Audio Combining Units) but if followed to the letter prohibits cordless and cellular telephone re-transmissions as well.

               
            • k8mhz@k8mhz.com
              What is an ACU? ACU stands for Audio Combining Unit. What it does is takes the audio from any device as an input and outputs it to a transmitter. The
              Message 6 of 23 , Nov 4, 2006
                "What is an ACU?"
                 
                ACU stands for Audio Combining Unit.  What it does is takes the audio from any device as an input and outputs it to a transmitter.  The ACU-1000 at 27 grand a pop or so is the top of the line and EchoStation is a 10 or 20 dollar program that enables a computer with a sound card to function in a similar manner.
                 
                "OK Mark, how about microwave hops within the landline telephone
                system?"
                 
                I have questioned that since I first read 97.113.  When cell phones came on the scene I further questioned it.  Now with ACUs there may be reason to get the FCC to give us an opinion.  If phones such as cells and microwave assisted land lines don't violate 97.113 how do cell phones used as an input device in an ACU violate the same rule?  What is the difference, as far as the law goes, WHERE the cell phone is in the loop?  97.113 only addresses the re-transmission of non-amateur frequencies.
                 
                "Hi All,  I have been reading these messages but don't understand how this help or hurts us.  Please help simplify all this stuff.  Thanks KC8OVS"
                 
                The issue pertains to the design of an ACU used as an emergency repeater.  I have been experimenting with EchoStation.  I have also had the privilege of seeing the ACU-1000 in action.  ACUs are perfect for emergency comms as they are the ultimate interoperability devices.  They enable any form of comms to interface with any other form.  With an ACU it is possible to talk on a Nextel and be heard on a commercial 2-way radio or have a police frequency connected to a fire frequency, or one fire service to another.  The possibilities are endless.  I saw this with my own eyes.  Playing with EchoStation I realized that I had the same capability using an old scanner, a 40 dollar mobile rig, a cheap laptop and a homebrew interface.  Beats spending 27 grand, no?
                 
                "If you have a cell phone that is working, why would you use a phone patch????"
                 
                More likely would be the issue of calling a cell phone using a phone patch.
                 
                The question that comes to my mind is the definition of a radio station.  The rule states "No station shall retransmit programs or signals emanating from
                any type of radio station other than an amateur station".  Is a cell phone a 'radio station?'  If not, then I should be able to set up a reverse phone patch in the field using a cell phone and be able to connect to it anywhere in the world by calling a phone number.  What about FRS and GMRS radios, are they 'radio stations'?  Can I legally use an FRS or a GMRS radio as an input?  This would be great for SAR where FRS is used on the ground and amateur freqs are used for command.  A licensed control operator at the transmitter would enable legal 3rd party traffic.
                 
                I sent off a question to the FCC about clarification of the rule.  I will post their response when I get it.  (They are slow, please be patient.)
                 
                Check out the link in the message that K8COP sent about the Raytheon ACU.
                 
                73,
                 
                Mark K8MHZ
                 
                 
                ----- Original Message -----
                Sent: Saturday, November 04, 2006 04:16
                Subject: [WestMichiganHams] Re: Technicality?


                >
                > "No, because the cellphone does not transmit in an amateur band. So
                > you can't use it for a repeater input, even if it were technically
                > possible."
                >
                > It is technically possible with ACUs.

                What is an ACU?

                > "I totally disagree with your premise, Mark. The fact that cellphones
                > use RF is incidental to their operation, and would not fall under an
                > interpretation of the amateur rules prohibiting re-broadcasting of
                > other services."
                >
                > The only allowance for incidentals is clearly outlined and pertains
                to things such as music on the ISS for instance. Nowhere in Part 97
                is there an exception for devices that use RF 'incidental to their
                operation', which I don't think is the case for cell phones. Cell
                phones are radio phones and the radio part is the primary function of
                those devices, not merely incidental.
                >
                > The re-transmission exclusion bears no written exceptions and leaves
                little room for interpretation. Without an exception for cellular or
                cordless phones it is against the ruling of 97.113.

                OK Mark, how about microwave hops within the landline telephone
                system? I would submit that these fall into the same category as the
                cordless in your house, or cellphone RF link. If a cellphone is
                illegal in a phone patch, then so is the microwave link. That would
                make a great many patches illegal going back to the first day of using
                microwave links for landlines, including of course domestic and
                international phone patches. Then, since we cannot always know when
                microwave is involved in ANY phone call, we must stop all patches.

                Laryn K8TVZ


                No virus found in this incoming message.
                Checked by AVG Free Edition.
                Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.13.21/510 - Release Date: 11/1/2006
              • Laryn Lohman
                ... OK, I just wasn t familiar with the particular model ACU that you referenced. There is one of these units in the Ottawa CO. comm. trailer. However, I
                Message 7 of 23 , Nov 4, 2006
                  --- In WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com, <k8mhz@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > "What is an ACU?"

                  OK, I just wasn't familiar with the particular model "ACU" that you
                  referenced. There is one of these units in the Ottawa CO. comm.
                  trailer. However, I don't think these connect DIRECTLY to a
                  cellphone, do they? In other words, I can't walk up to one of these
                  and use my cellphone to talk to the sheriff's department, for example.
                  There is no RF connection inherent within these units that would
                  allow my cellphone to receive service, authentication, etc. That can
                  be done only by my carrier's system. The ACU will connect to the PBX
                  in the trailer, and then the outside world via copper, however.


                  > "OK Mark, how about microwave hops within the landline telephone
                  > system?"
                  >
                  > I have questioned that since I first read 97.113. When cell phones
                  came on the scene I further questioned it. Now with ACUs there may be
                  reason to get the FCC to give us an opinion. If phones such as cells
                  and microwave assisted land lines don't violate 97.113 how do cell
                  phones used as an input device in an ACU violate the same rule?


                  My point EXACTLY. We're beating a dog that doesn't exist. If 97.113
                  is out of date now, it NEVER was up to date. As I posted earlier,
                  microwave landline links have been used for what, 60+ years now? Part
                  97 has been re-written several times in that period. If the FCC had
                  any intention of including microwave links in the rule as applied,
                  they would have stated so way back then. As another poster succinctly
                  stated, perhaps I need to get rid of my wireless keyboard?? I don't
                  think so. That would be absurd.

                  I still think the word "incidental" applies here. Cellphones,
                  wireless keys, WiFi systems, landline microwave links, etc., are not
                  Radio Stations. They use RF only as a part of their infrastructure,
                  incidental to their normal operation. The spirit of this rule has
                  always applied to radio services such as police, fire, broadcasters,
                  Joe Plumber's two way system, etc.

                  Think about the term "wireline" in Part 97, I don't remember which
                  particular rule right now. As far as the FCC is concerned, this term
                  does not necessarily mean "copper". If a segment of the "wireline"
                  control system for an Amateur Station, for example, happens to be
                  fiber, or microwave, it is STILL a "wireline".

                  Laryn K8TVZ
                • k8mhz@k8mhz.com
                  In other words, I can t walk up to one of these and use my cellphone to talk to the sheriff s department, for example. That is exactly what you can do. All
                  Message 8 of 23 , Nov 4, 2006
                    "In other words, I can't walk up to one of these
                    and use my cellphone to talk to the sheriff's department, for example."
                     
                    That is exactly what you can do.
                     
                    All it takes is a cable from the earphone of ANY device, even a telephone, connected to the audio input of an ACU.  A VOX feature in the computer activates the PTT of the transmitter.  All the devices are audio connected. The line out of the soundcard is impedance matched to the mic of the transmitting device or devices.  With the ACU-1000 as many devices as there are ports for can be connected.  The devices that can talk to one and other are connected by dragging and dropping icons on the computer screen, or sending control tones from DTMF capable devices.  With EchoStation the connections must be made by external switching means but can accomplish almost the same thing, with fewer bells and whistles.
                     
                    An example of use is to have a cell phone plugged into an ACU and set to auto answer and auto disconnect.  A simple direct cable for the RX and an impedance matching transformer for the TX is all that is needed.  The com port on the computer fires an opto-coupler that turns the PTT on and off.  The cell phone would not need to be triggered as it is full duplex, it only has to be connected to the line in and line out.  So, the cell # could be called and the audio output would be re-transmitted to any radio desired and vice-versa.  The ACU-1000 comes equipped with full duplex capabilities whereas it would take two EchoStation programs and two sound cards to do the same thing, but could be done.
                     
                    Is it legal?  To me, it is as legal as using a cell phone on a phone patch.  I gather you see it the same way?
                     
                    Think of how nice it would be for hobby use.  Some older equipment, an old cell phone with a cheap (prepay?) service connected to your 2 meter rig so you could call your ACU from anywhere and be connected to the repeater.  EchoStation is set up for remote control and can be turned off by hitting a key, such as the # key.  It also has a fail safe feature that can be employed which disconnects the repeater under certain failure circumstances.
                     
                    This is kind of like a cross band repeater, only using cellular SHF instead of UHF.
                     
                    ----- Original Message -----
                    Sent: Saturday, November 04, 2006 16:50
                    Subject: [WestMichiganHams] Re: Technicality?

                    --- In WestMichiganHams@ yahoogroups. com, <k8mhz@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > "What is an ACU?"

                    OK, I just wasn't familiar with the particular model "ACU" that you
                    referenced. There is one of these units in the Ottawa CO. comm.
                    trailer. However, I don't think these connect DIRECTLY to a
                    cellphone, do they? In other words, I can't walk up to one of these
                    and use my cellphone to talk to the sheriff's department, for example.
                    There is no RF connection inherent within these units that would
                    allow my cellphone to receive service, authentication, etc. That can
                    be done only by my carrier's system. The ACU will connect to the PBX
                    in the trailer, and then the outside world via copper, however.

                    > "OK Mark, how about microwave hops within the landline telephone
                    > system?"
                    >
                    > I have questioned that since I first read 97.113. When cell phones
                    came on the scene I further questioned it. Now with ACUs there may be
                    reason to get the FCC to give us an opinion. If phones such as cells
                    and microwave assisted land lines don't violate 97.113 how do cell
                    phones used as an input device in an ACU violate the same rule?


                    My point EXACTLY. We're beating a dog that doesn't exist. If 97.113
                    is out of date now, it NEVER was up to date. As I posted earlier,
                    microwave landline links have been used for what, 60+ years now? Part
                    97 has been re-written several times in that period. If the FCC had
                    any intention of including microwave links in the rule as applied,
                    they would have stated so way back then. As another poster succinctly
                    stated, perhaps I need to get rid of my wireless keyboard?? I don't
                    think so. That would be absurd.

                    I still think the word "incidental" applies here. Cellphones,
                    wireless keys, WiFi systems, landline microwave links, etc., are not
                    Radio Stations. They use RF only as a part of their infrastructure,
                    incidental to their normal operation. The spirit of this rule has
                    always applied to radio services such as police, fire, broadcasters,
                    Joe Plumber's two way system, etc.

                    Think about the term "wireline" in Part 97, I don't remember which
                    particular rule right now. As far as the FCC is concerned, this term
                    does not necessarily mean "copper". If a segment of the "wireline"
                    control system for an Amateur Station, for example, happens to be
                    fiber, or microwave, it is STILL a "wireline".

                    Laryn K8TVZ


                    No virus found in this incoming message.
                    Checked by AVG Free Edition.
                    Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.13.21/510 - Release Date: 11/1/2006
                  • Andrew Young
                    I think this issue is one of splitting hairs. A phone patch is a connection to the telephone system. How the audio gets to the phone jack is really not of
                    Message 9 of 23 , Nov 4, 2006
                      I think this issue is one of splitting hairs.  A phone patch is a connection to the telephone system.  How the audio gets to the phone jack is really not of much importance to us.  We have no control beyond that telephone jack at the repeater.
                       
                      You could reverse-engineer systems all day if you want to find problems.  How about Echolink on a WI FI connection?
                       
                      Retransmit police/TV/broadcast/MURS/FRS frequencies through a crossbander?  That's what it prohibits if you think about it in a reasonable manner.
                       
                      Actually, I think it's only illegal if you have a flashing yellow light attached to the antenna of the cell phone.
                       
                       
                      ----- Original Message -----
                      Sent: Friday, November 03, 2006 8:45 PM
                      Subject: Re: [WestMichiganHams] Re: Technicality?


                      Hi All,  I have been reading these messages but don't understand how this help or hurts us.  Please help simplify all this stuff.  Thanks KC8OVS


                      Get your email and see which of your friends are online - Right on the new Yahoo.com


                      No virus found in this incoming message.
                      Checked by AVG Free Edition.
                      Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.13.28/518 - Release Date: 11/4/2006
                    • k8mhz@k8mhz.com
                      Actually, I think it s only illegal if you have a flashing yellow light attached to the antenna of the cell phone. Only in a vehicle not engaged in snow or
                      Message 10 of 23 , Nov 4, 2006
                        "Actually, I think it's only illegal if you have a flashing yellow light attached to the antenna of the cell phone."
                         
                        Only in a vehicle not engaged in snow or trash removal.....
                         
                        Anyway, what I am trying to establish is if a device using a cell phone as a repeater input is in violation of Part 97 or not.
                         
                        If it is not (and it is as I read the law) then where is the exception that allows the other re-transmissions, such as those used in EchoLink, regular phone lines, etc.  WiFi, if used on the first 6 channels, is an amateur band (in the 2.4 GHz range).  Yes, the law is obvious in some cases, like TV, MURS, police, etc.  Not so obvious when telephones come into play.
                         
                        Maybe in a few months the FCC will answer my question.   Or sooner....it could happen.
                         
                         
                        ----- Original Message -----
                        Sent: Saturday, November 04, 2006 22:29
                        Subject: Re: [WestMichiganHams] Re: Technicality?

                        I think this issue is one of splitting hairs.  A phone patch is a connection to the telephone system.  How the audio gets to the phone jack is really not of much importance to us.  We have no control beyond that telephone jack at the repeater.
                         
                        You could reverse-engineer systems all day if you want to find problems.  How about Echolink on a WI FI connection?
                         
                        Retransmit police/TV/broadcast /MURS/FRS frequencies through a crossbander?  That's what it prohibits if you think about it in a reasonable manner.
                         
                        Actually, I think it's only illegal if you have a flashing yellow light attached to the antenna of the cell phone.
                         
                         
                        ----- Original Message -----
                        Sent: Friday, November 03, 2006 8:45 PM
                        Subject: Re: [WestMichiganHams] Re: Technicality?


                        Hi All,  I have been reading these messages but don't understand how this help or hurts us.  Please help simplify all this stuff.  Thanks KC8OVS


                        Get your email and see which of your friends are online - Right on the new Yahoo.com


                        No virus found in this incoming message.
                        Checked by AVG Free Edition.
                        Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.13.28/518 - Release Date: 11/4/2006


                        No virus found in this incoming message.
                        Checked by AVG Free Edition.
                        Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.13.21/510 - Release Date: 11/1/2006
                      • Laryn Lohman
                        ... phone as a repeater input is in violation of Part 97 or not. ... exception that allows the other re-transmissions, such as those used in EchoLink, regular
                        Message 11 of 23 , Nov 4, 2006
                          --- In WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com, <k8mhz@...> wrote:


                          > Anyway, what I am trying to establish is if a device using a cell
                          phone as a repeater input is in violation of Part 97 or not.
                          >
                          > If it is not (and it is as I read the law) then where is the
                          exception that allows the other re-transmissions, such as those used
                          in EchoLink, regular phone lines, etc.

                          How was 97.113 ever written into the rules if it instantly indicts
                          hundreds of hams every day for being illegal in their operations? In
                          other words, if no other "radio station" can be a part of any amateur
                          transmission, then each and every autopatch could be illegal. Yet no
                          ham has ever been fined, I'm quite sure, for simply initiating and
                          participating in a patch, with the FCC referring to 97.113, just
                          because there was a microwave link in the audio path somewhere. And
                          for 6+ decades! Please clarify for me.

                          Laryn K8TVZ
                        • k8mhz@k8mhz.com
                          I am awaiting said clarification from the FCC. Or I could just build the TX input repeater and see what is said, using the already allowed re-transmissions as
                          Message 12 of 23 , Nov 5, 2006
                            I am awaiting said clarification from the FCC.  Or I could just build the TX input repeater and see what is said, using the already allowed re-transmissions as a precedent.
                             
                            Probably 97.113 was written before there were such services, perhaps even before phone patches.
                             
                            If I can get any info that will help I will surely post it here. 
                             
                            As I said earlier, I think this is a case of the law not keeping up with technology.
                             
                            73 
                             
                            Mark
                             
                             
                            ----- Original Message -----
                            Sent: Sunday, November 05, 2006 04:53
                            Subject: [WestMichiganHams] Re: Technicality?

                            --- In WestMichiganHams@ yahoogroups. com, <k8mhz@...> wrote:

                            > Anyway, what I am trying to establish is if a device using a cell
                            phone as a repeater input is in violation of Part 97 or not.
                            >
                            > If it is not (and it is as I read the law) then where is the
                            exception that allows the other re-transmissions, such as those used
                            in EchoLink, regular phone lines, etc.

                            How was 97.113 ever written into the rules if it instantly indicts
                            hundreds of hams every day for being illegal in their operations? In
                            other words, if no other "radio station" can be a part of any amateur
                            transmission, then each and every autopatch could be illegal. Yet no
                            ham has ever been fined, I'm quite sure, for simply initiating and
                            participating in a patch, with the FCC referring to 97.113, just
                            because there was a microwave link in the audio path somewhere. And
                            for 6+ decades! Please clarify for me.

                            Laryn K8TVZ


                            No virus found in this incoming message.
                            Checked by AVG Free Edition.
                            Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.13.21/510 - Release Date: 11/1/2006
                          • jtlr.fischer@sbcglobal.net
                            thank you andrew I agree with the yellow light idea ... From: Andrew Young To: WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, November 04, 2006 5:29 PM
                            Message 13 of 23 , Nov 5, 2006
                              thank you andrew I agree with the yellow light  idea
                              ----- Original Message -----
                              Sent: Saturday, November 04, 2006 5:29 PM
                              Subject: Re: [WestMichiganHams] Re: Technicality?

                              I think this issue is one of splitting hairs.  A phone patch is a connection to the telephone system.  How the audio gets to the phone jack is really not of much importance to us.  We have no control beyond that telephone jack at the repeater.
                               
                              You could reverse-engineer systems all day if you want to find problems.  How about Echolink on a WI FI connection?
                               
                              Retransmit police/TV/broadcast /MURS/FRS frequencies through a crossbander?  That's what it prohibits if you think about it in a reasonable manner.
                               
                              Actually, I think it's only illegal if you have a flashing yellow light attached to the antenna of the cell phone.
                               
                               
                              ----- Original Message -----
                              Sent: Friday, November 03, 2006 8:45 PM
                              Subject: Re: [WestMichiganHams] Re: Technicality?


                              Hi All,  I have been reading these messages but don't understand how this help or hurts us.  Please help simplify all this stuff.  Thanks KC8OVS


                              Get your email and see which of your friends are online - Right on the new Yahoo.com


                              No virus found in this incoming message.
                              Checked by AVG Free Edition.
                              Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.13.28/518 - Release Date: 11/4/2006

                            • k8mhz@k8mhz.com
                              I don t know why this came through now. I sent it 11-3-06. As long as we are on the subject, the FCC wrote to me and told me that the audio from a cell phone
                              Message 14 of 23 , Dec 8, 2006
                                I don't know why this came through now.  I sent it 11-3-06.
                                 
                                As long as we are on the subject, the FCC wrote to me and told me that the audio from a cell phone was legal to retransmit through amateur radio.  According to the dude at the consumer center it was Riley himself that answered me.
                                 
                                73
                                 
                                Mark K8MHZ
                                 
                                ----- Original Message -----
                                From: k8mhz@...
                                Sent: Friday, November 03, 2006 20:47
                                Subject: Re: [WestMichiganHams] Re: Technicality?

                                FM broadcast is 88.0 to 108.0.  They don't operate by the same rules we do.
                                 
                                Attached is a great frequency chart.  Adobe Acrobat Reader required.
                                 
                                73,
                                 
                                Mark K8MHZ
                                 
                                ----- Original Message -----
                                Sent: Saturday, November 04, 2006 00:59
                                Subject: Re: [WestMichiganHams] Re: Technicality?

                                Who operates / owns 88.7-106.5 MHz ? I have heard phone conversations there before . As well with the UHF standard and "T" band .
                                 
                                UHF standard = 450-470 MHz
                                UHF "T" band = 470-512 MHz
                                 
                                                                                   KD8BIG
                                 
                                ------------ -- Original message ------------ --
                                From: <k8mhz@k8mhz. com>

                                "No, because the cellphone does not transmit in an amateur band. So
                                you can't use it for a repeater input, even if it were technically
                                possible."
                                 
                                It is technically possible with ACUs.  Reverse phone patches using land lines are and have been legal for some time.  If the phone is cellular instead of a land line it is still a reverse phone patch but in actuality is a re-transmission of a non-amateur frequency.  Both the Motorola ACU-1000 and a properly set up EchoStation repeater have the capability of re-transmitting ANY audio input to an amateur frequency, or any frequency that there is a transmitter for.  EchoStation can be set up with a cell phone as a receiver and a ham rig as a transmitter so the cell # could be called and the received audio is sent out over the transmitter.  EchoLink uses many frequencies via the Internet in the same manner.   This seems like a breech of the law, not just to me,  but others as well.  NOT to be taken that this use is a travesty, but more to be taken as a need to address Part 97's failure to keep up with the times. /FONT>
                                 
                                "I totally disagree with your premise, Mark. The fact that cellphones
                                use RF is incidental to their operation, and would not fall under an
                                interpretation of the amateur rules prohibiting re-broadcasting of
                                other services."
                                 
                                The only allowance for incidentals is clearly outlined and pertains to things such as music on the ISS for instance.  Nowhere in Part 97 is there an exception for devices that use RF 'incidental to their operation',  which I don't think is the case for cell phones.  Cell phones are radio phones and the radio part is the primary function of those devices, not merely incidental.
                                 
                                The re-transmission exclusion bears no written exceptions and leaves little room for interpretation.  Without an exception for cellular or cordless phones it is against the ruling of 97.113. 
                                 
                                If I missed something in other sections of Part 97 please point them out to me.
                                 
                                I think this is the case of the law not keeping up with the technology.
                                 
                                73,
                                 
                                Mark K8MHZ
                                 
                                ----- Original Message -----
                                Sent: Friday, November 03, 2006 22:06
                                Subject: [WestMichiganHams] Re: Technicality?

                                --- In WestMichiganHams@ yahoogroups. com, <k8mhz@...> wrote:
                                >
                                > Chris,
                                >
                                > Sending TO a pager is different, no other form of radio transmission
                                is being re-broadcast via amateur radio unless it was done using a
                                radio telephone.
                                >
                                > So, if it is OK to use a phone patch to re-broadcast cellular
                                phones, would it then be OK to have a repeater in which the input was
                                a cellular phone?
                                >
                                > See where I am concerned?

                                No, because the cellphone does not transmit in an amateur band. So
                                you can't use it for a repeater input, even if it were technically
                                possible.

                                > If it is NOT OK to use a cellular phone as a repeater input it is
                                also NOT OK to use them on a phone patch as the exact same
                                retransmission is suspect, just connected differently.

                                I totally disagree with your premise, Mark. The fact that cellphones
                                use RF is inci dental to their operation, and would not fall under an
                                interpretation of the amateur rules prohibiting re-broadcasting of
                                other services.

                                Good discussion though.

                                Laryn K8TVZ


                                No virus found in this incoming message.
                                Checked by AVG Free Edition.
                                Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.13.21/510 - Release Date: 11/1/2006


                                No virus found in this incoming message.
                                Checked by AVG Free Edition.
                                Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.13.21/510 - Release Date: 11/1/2006


                                No virus found in this incoming message.
                                Checked by AVG Free Edition.
                                Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.15.11/575 - Release Date: 12/6/2006
                              • Jim KC8PCJ
                                Keep an eye out at the larger ham fest. I got one of these for free and it is 2ft by 3ft. Great wall paper. ... From: k8mhz@k8mhz.com To:
                                Message 15 of 23 , Dec 8, 2006
                                  Keep an eye out at the larger ham fest. I got one of these for free and it is 2ft by 3ft. Great wall paper.
                                   
                                  ----- Original Message -----
                                  From: k8mhz@...
                                  Sent: Friday, November 03, 2006 8:47 PM
                                  Subject: Re: [WestMichiganHams] Re: Technicality?

                                  FM broadcast is 88.0 to 108.0.  They don't operate by the same rules we do.
                                   
                                  Attached is a great frequency chart.  Adobe Acrobat Reader required.
                                   
                                  73,
                                   
                                  Mark K8MHZ
                                   
                                  ----- Original Message -----
                                  Sent: Saturday, November 04, 2006 00:59
                                  Subject: Re: [WestMichiganHams] Re: Technicality?

                                  Who operates / owns 88.7-106.5 MHz ? I have heard phone conversations there before . As well with the UHF standard and "T" band .
                                   
                                  UHF standard = 450-470 MHz
                                  UHF "T" band = 470-512 MHz
                                   
                                                                                     KD8BIG
                                   
                                  ------------ -- Original message ------------ --
                                  From: <k8mhz@k8mhz. com>

                                  "No, because the cellphone does not transmit in an amateur band. So
                                  you can't use it for a repeater input, even if it were technically
                                  possible."
                                   
                                  It is technically possible with ACUs.  Reverse phone patches using land lines are and have been legal for some time.  If the phone is cellular instead of a land line it is still a reverse phone patch but in actuality is a re-transmission of a non-amateur frequency.  Both the Motorola ACU-1000 and a properly set up EchoStation repeater have the capability of re-transmitting ANY audio input to an amateur frequency, or any frequency that there is a transmitter for.  EchoStation can be set up with a cell phone as a receiver and a ham rig as a transmitter so the cell # could be called and the received audio is sent out over the transmitter.  EchoLink uses many frequencies via the Internet in the same manner.   This seems like a breech of the law, not just to me,  but others as well.  NOT to be taken that this use is a travesty, but more to be taken as a need to address Part 97's failure to keep up with the times. /FONT>
                                   
                                  "I totally disagree with your premise, Mark. The fact that cellphones
                                  use RF is incidental to their operation, and would not fall under an
                                  interpretation of the amateur rules prohibiting re-broadcasting of
                                  other services."
                                   
                                  The only allowance for incidentals is clearly outlined and pertains to things such as music on the ISS for instance.  Nowhere in Part 97 is there an exception for devices that use RF 'incidental to their operation',  which I don't think is the case for cell phones.  Cell phones are radio phones and the radio part is the primary function of those devices, not merely incidental.
                                   
                                  The re-transmission exclusion bears no written exceptions and leaves little room for interpretation.  Without an exception for cellular or cordless phones it is against the ruling of 97.113. 
                                   
                                  If I missed something in other sections of Part 97 please point them out to me.
                                   
                                  I think this is the case of the law not keeping up with the technology.
                                   
                                  73,
                                   
                                  Mark K8MHZ
                                   
                                  ----- Original Message -----
                                  Sent: Friday, November 03, 2006 22:06
                                  Subject: [WestMichiganHams] Re: Technicality?

                                  --- In WestMichiganHams@ yahoogroups. com, <k8mhz@...> wrote:
                                  >
                                  > Chris,
                                  >
                                  > Sending TO a pager is different, no other form of radio transmission
                                  is being re-broadcast via amateur radio unless it was done using a
                                  radio telephone.
                                  >
                                  > So, if it is OK to use a phone patch to re-broadcast cellular
                                  phones, would it then be OK to have a repeater in which the input was
                                  a cellular phone?
                                  >
                                  > See where I am concerned?

                                  No, because the cellphone does not transmit in an amateur band. So
                                  you can't use it for a repeater input, even if it were technically
                                  possible.

                                  > If it is NOT OK to use a cellular phone as a repeater input it is
                                  also NOT OK to use them on a phone patch as the exact same
                                  retransmission is suspect, just connected differently.

                                  I totally disagree with your premise, Mark. The fact that cellphones
                                  use RF is inci dental to their operation, and would not fall under an
                                  interpretation of the amateur rules prohibiting re-broadcasting of
                                  other services.

                                  Good discussion though.

                                  Laryn K8TVZ


                                  No virus found in this incoming message.
                                  Checked by AVG Free Edition.
                                  Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.13.21/510 - Release Date: 11/1/2006


                                  No virus found in this incoming message.
                                  Checked by AVG Free Edition.
                                  Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.13.21/510 - Release Date: 11/1/2006

                                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.