In article ,
"Geoffrey S. Mendelson" wrote:

wrote:
It is not illegal if it is done on an amateur frequency by a licensed
amateur.

You forgot the words "in the US".

Is using WiFi equipment for ham radio legal?

Geoff.

Yep, as long as your in the Ham portion of the 2.4 Ghz band....

been there, done that......

On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 18:07:32 -0500, Mike Coslo wrote:

Pickup a cell phone, dial, and talk. There's no magic
in that.

I remember making telephone calls to other countries when I was a little
kid in the 60's. The Transatlantic cable was laid in the mid 19th
century. People could talk a long way away then too. Worldwide
communications pre-dates radio communications. It's a matter of
infrastructure.

I think I will drop my oar into this one too.

Being able to call someone in China is not the same thing as calling
out, and getting a response from someone in China. A.G. Bell's
practical invention of telephony long preceded practical (or even
impractical) radiotelephony and no one seemed to care, but many got
excited.

And to invert the argument. When I lived in Europe in the late 50s
early 60s, Paris had such a funky telephone system that reportedly you
could dial a "special number" that put you into an open common trunk
where others would have been already deep in spontaneous conversation.
It was very popular and "exciting...." until they fixed it (in their
own time, of course - for the French that could have been many years
later).

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 16:14:04 +0000 (UTC), "Geoffrey S. Mendelson"
wrote:

wrote:
It is not illegal if it is done on an amateur frequency by a licensed amateur.

You forgot the words "in the US".
Is using WiFi equipment for ham radio legal?
Geoff.

I don't want to comment on the legal part of the puzzle (because I
already have a headache). However, it should be obvious that there's
a potential conflict between unlicensed Part 15 operation, and
licensed part 97 operation on 2.4GHz. Place your bets and blast a way
with kilowatts on 2.4Ghz. Will 800,000 licensed US hams prevail over
perhaps 300 million unlicensed wireless devices? Want to bet on who
will win before an FCC tribunal? If there is a conflict, I'll place
my bets on Part 15.

Hint: When dealing with the FCC, don't ask any questions for which
you don't already know the answer. It's highly likely that you'll get
a very weird and undesireable answer that you don't really want to
hear.



--
# Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
# 831-336-2558
# http://802.11junk.com
# http://www.LearnByDestroying.com AE6KS

On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 17:21:01 -0800, Jeff Liebermann
wrote:

I don't want to comment on the legal part of the puzzle (because I
already have a headache).

Oops. I forgot the link:
http://www.arrl.org/tis/info/part15.html

--
# Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
# 831-336-2558
# http://802.11junk.com
# http://www.LearnByDestroying.com AE6KS

Why not go find a couple of el cheapo PRS handi-talkies (Personal Radio
Service - 450 plus MHz) and let the kiddies talk to each other that way? Why
bring ham radio into it at all?

It was by way of introducing them to our hobby in the course of giving
a lesson. That's all.

Thanks for your input.

"Sal"

*Check with
your club and find a woman operator to respond to the CQ. *Smaller
children will respond better to a woman's voice.
--
Tom Horne

Ah -- good idea. It will be out of my home area, but I'll bet if I
scouted around after I get there, I'll be able to find someone.
Thanks.

On Dec 14, 9:13*am, Jeff Liebermann wrote:


Are there other sticking points?

Yes. *You'll bore the kids to death with such minutae and trivia.


LOL TKS..

"Sal"

Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 16:14:04 +0000 (UTC), "Geoffrey S. Mendelson"
wrote:

wrote:
It is not illegal if it is done on an amateur frequency by a licensed amateur.

You forgot the words "in the US".
Is using WiFi equipment for ham radio legal?
Geoff.

I don't want to comment on the legal part of the puzzle (because I
already have a headache). However, it should be obvious that there's
a potential conflict between unlicensed Part 15 operation, and
licensed part 97 operation on 2.4GHz. Place your bets and blast a way
with kilowatts on 2.4Ghz. Will 800,000 licensed US hams prevail over
perhaps 300 million unlicensed wireless devices? Want to bet on who
will win before an FCC tribunal? If there is a conflict, I'll place
my bets on Part 15.

Since 2.4 GHz is basically line of sight, few hams work 2.4 GHz, and the
Part 15 devices running under Part 15 can hop to other frequencies
including frequencies outside the ham bands, I don't see a lot of
potential for conflicts.



--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

Nobody was interested in Morse Code until I mentioned that it could be
used for "secret communications". *That means that the parents and
teachers couldn't understand what the kids were saying. *Lots of
interest (and potential problems) there.

The problem with todays version of ham radio is that it's really
boring. *Nobody wants to talk to someone around the world, when they
can pickup a POTS or cell phone and do it with much less effort and
expense. *With the demise of Heathkit, building radios is no longer a
draw. *The magic of radio is gone. *


I have a diverse collection of demonstrations for them, hoping to
catch each one of them with something they find interesting. I have a
handout with eight Morse Code characters on it, enough to spell out
some easy words, They're mostly 4th graders. I'm doing magnetism and
communications and showing how they relate. I taught school in the
Navy, but I have no experience with little kids, except my own. My
Navy students were almost always well-motivated but I have no idea
what the 4th graders are going to be like. They are all in the
Gifted And Talented Education program and I think it's either going
to be great or awful -- no in-between.

On Dec 14, 9:15*pm, KU2S wrote:

Seems to me that "KD6VKW Portable 1" and *and "KD6VKW Portable 2"
would be appropriate. *The addition of arbitrary letters and or
numbers after your call sign could be misconstrued as meaning
something other than what you intend. *The use of Portable 1, Portable
2, etc., is more straightforward and accurately describes the type of
conversation in progress. *

I thought of that but the numbers would seem to imply geography, like
when
I was in Colorado in the summer, I signed "Portable 0."

Thanks for the suggestion.