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

Re: Technicality?

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 of 23 , Nov 3, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      >
      > "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 2 of 23 , Nov 3, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        --- 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 3 of 23 , Nov 4, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          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 4 of 23 , Nov 4, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            "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 5 of 23 , Nov 4, 2006
            • 0 Attachment
              --- 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 6 of 23 , Nov 4, 2006
              • 0 Attachment
                "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 7 of 23 , Nov 4, 2006
                • 0 Attachment
                  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 8 of 23 , Nov 4, 2006
                  • 0 Attachment
                    "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 9 of 23 , Nov 4, 2006
                    • 0 Attachment
                      --- 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 10 of 23 , Nov 5, 2006
                      • 0 Attachment
                        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 11 of 23 , Nov 5, 2006
                        • 0 Attachment
                          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 12 of 23 , Dec 8, 2006
                          • 0 Attachment
                            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 13 of 23 , Dec 8, 2006
                            • 0 Attachment
                              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.