"R J Carpenter" wrote in message
...

"Steve Stone" wrote in message
...
I'm sure satellite radio is great for tunes on the road but once locked
into
Sirius or equiv how are you warned
that the road ahead is blocked by an overturned sewerage sludge carrier
?
Listen to channel 19 on the old CB radio ??? lol

CB Chan 19 is probably the best solution. Broadcast traffic reports
hardly
ever helped me.

I accept Rich's suggestion of 2-m ham radio as being better.

On 2 Jan 2004 17:42:00 GMT, "Bob Haberkost"
wrote:

Rich - I've got the scoop on traffic reporting and other "breaking news" items on
broadcasting....in many cases, they're bogus.

Alas, I feel you're right.

"Breaking news" is often as much as 6 hours old, with the major actor(s) already
apprehended or otherwise dealt with. And, as often as not, the newspaper story the
next day will have the actual story, whereas the field reporter, being so far from
reliable sources of information, will have gotten it wrong in the live shot,
breathlessly intro'ed by the blowdried anchor whose closest encounter with a real
news event was the time he was at the Orlando airport when a plane went down....in
Europe.

While I think you're being too harsh with blown-dry anchors (there's
an entire hairdressing and makeup industry at stake) I would
occasionally listen to my NYC precinct's frequency. I was amazed often
at how quickly the police apprehended the person they were after. It
was old news before it got to be news.

In my new market we have an anchor who must be the wife of the owner.
She looks as though she just rolled out of bed. I can only imagine
what the show looks like in HDTV where Bondo as makeup no longer
works.

Rich

"Steve Stone" wrote in message
...
I'm sure satellite radio is great for tunes on the road but once locked into
Sirius or equiv how are you warned
that the road ahead is blocked by an overturned sewerage sludge carrier ?
Listen to channel 19 on the old CB radio ??? lol

Of course I'm no more 'locked into' a Sirius music stream than if I were
listening to any other station that doesn't report on the particular road I'm
riding.

I'm in dairy country, so the sniff test is not a reliable indicator of
oncoming sewage sludge. There'd be too many false positives. Likewise with a
couple of little kids in the car.

In a rural area, the local dial is good for a whiff of nostalgia, rather
than for actionable information on the road. Visiting NYC, traffic reports can
be used skillfully. Presets for traffic on the ones, fives and eights, and I
bounce from report to report to choose among competing routes.

Telematics is one of satellite radio's killer apps. I expect that in a
couple of years satellite receivers will be receiving traffic and weather
information text encoded from all over the country. Subscribers, having
previously punched in the routes and zones they're interested in, will obtain
that information on the road via synthesized voice over the music bed.

Jerome

On 2 Jan 2004 17:41:53 GMT, David wrote:

I listen to Metro Traffic, 455.95 mHz on my Beartrackers.

Hmm. As I recall scanners are illegal in cars in many states, several
surrounding New York. We know you wouldn't want to commit a crime, so
you'll remove it, I'm sure.

If you have a Ham license, you're exempted.

I'm not sure why you'd do that since it's available on nearly every
station in the city.

Rich

On 30 Dec 2003 20:07:36 GMT, "Ron Cole" wrote:

On Sat, 27 Dec 2003 21:09:19 +0000, Arklier wrote:

I'm asking about 96.5 FM-KYPT in Seattle. From around January 2000
until Monday December 22nd 2003, it was an 80s station called The
Point. When it came online, there were a few stations that had a mix
of 70s, 80s, and more recent stuff, but after the others gradually
shifted to other eras of music. At the end, it was virtually the only
station in Seattle to have any 80s music at all, and the only one that
was 100% 80s music. Now it is an alternative/hard rock station called
K-ROCK. I personally don't think it's an improvement, as I dislike
alternative music intensely. I'm OK with hard rock, but it's not worth
dodging Nirvana and their copycats.


Because Invinity needed to do someting.
It's all about the money.
80's music has no listener appeal.

I wouldn't say NO listener appeal. I listened to it all the time. I
have a bunch of 80s songs on CD (my CDs were stolen out of my car, so
I replaced them with downloaded copies of the same songs).

--


If you can't figure out my address, you need help.

Girl gamer since 1984,

Atari/NES/Genesis/SNES/DC/GBA/GC/PS1-2/Xbox/PC gamer

Who wants to listen to those crappy stations?

XM and Sirius are both launching traffic reports next month.

I am in the media. No one has ever questioned the appropriateness of
me having a mobile receiver. In fact, I can easily justify it with
any peace officer by telling the story of a deputy who bled to death
when his gun went off by accident and he severed a leg artery. His
partner did not know the groin pressure point and the man bled to
death.

Had a scanner user with first aid training been nearby that deputy
would still be alive.

On 3 Jan 2004 17:21:49 GMT, Rich Wood wrote:

On 2 Jan 2004 17:41:53 GMT, David wrote:

I listen to Metro Traffic, 455.95 mHz on my Beartrackers.

Hmm. As I recall scanners are illegal in cars in many states, several
surrounding New York. We know you wouldn't want to commit a crime, so
you'll remove it, I'm sure.

If you have a Ham license, you're exempted.

I'm not sure why you'd do that since it's available on nearly every
station in the city.

Rich

On 8 Jan 2004 15:21:45 GMT, David wrote:

I am in the media. No one has ever questioned the appropriateness of
me having a mobile receiver. In fact, I can easily justify it with
any peace officer by telling the story of a deputy who bled to death
when his gun went off by accident and he severed a leg artery. His
partner did not know the groin pressure point and the man bled to
death.

Had a scanner user with first aid training been nearby that deputy
would still be alive.

I think such laws are stupid. However, they were lobbied for by law
enforcement who believed criminals were tracking their movements and
knew when they were about to arrive. They were also concerend that the
media would monitor and interfere with their operation or expose
something that shouldn't happen.

A "peace officer" doesn't make the rules. If he sees a receiver
capable of receiving police and fire frequencies, he's supposed to
take action in those states that forbid scanners in cars. The same is
true for states that ban radar detectors.

With the no-code ham license an exemption is easy to get. Just show
the cop your license and you're free to go. The next time a cop shoots
himself, you'll be there to help.

There was a case in Cranford, NJ where a ham offered to help the
police track down someone who was causing malicious interference to
public safety services. They ended up charging him with doing it in
spite of the fact that it continued while he was in custody. Charges
were dropped after the ARRL assigned a lawyer (John Norton) to
represent him.

In my experience in the NY/NJ area it's been the "peace officer" who
is most against scanners. I wouldn't appeal to his "save my comrade"
sensibilities.

Rich

Nowadays cops use digital cellphones if they want to be secure from
the press.

I've never heard of anybody around here getting busted for having a
scanner. That sounds like crazy talk.

On 8 Jan 2004 18:20:21 GMT, Rich Wood wrote:

On 8 Jan 2004 15:21:45 GMT, David wrote:

I am in the media. No one has ever questioned the appropriateness of
me having a mobile receiver. In fact, I can easily justify it with
any peace officer by telling the story of a deputy who bled to death
when his gun went off by accident and he severed a leg artery. His
partner did not know the groin pressure point and the man bled to
death.

Had a scanner user with first aid training been nearby that deputy
would still be alive.

I think such laws are stupid. However, they were lobbied for by law
enforcement who believed criminals were tracking their movements and
knew when they were about to arrive. They were also concerend that the
media would monitor and interfere with their operation or expose
something that shouldn't happen.

A "peace officer" doesn't make the rules. If he sees a receiver
capable of receiving police and fire frequencies, he's supposed to
take action in those states that forbid scanners in cars. The same is
true for states that ban radar detectors.

With the no-code ham license an exemption is easy to get. Just show
the cop your license and you're free to go. The next time a cop shoots
himself, you'll be there to help.

There was a case in Cranford, NJ where a ham offered to help the
police track down someone who was causing malicious interference to
public safety services. They ended up charging him with doing it in
spite of the fact that it continued while he was in custody. Charges
were dropped after the ARRL assigned a lawyer (John Norton) to
represent him.

In my experience in the NY/NJ area it's been the "peace officer" who
is most against scanners. I wouldn't appeal to his "save my comrade"
sensibilities.

Rich

On 9 Jan 2004 15:44:15 GMT, David wrote:

Nowadays cops use digital cellphones if they want to be secure from
the press.

I've never heard of anybody around here getting busted for having a
scanner. That sounds like crazy talk.

Check with the ARRL. They'll quote you all the cities and states where
the police wanted scanners and VHF and UHF ham radios banned in
vehicles. Just because no one has been busted doesn't mean the laws
aren't on the books.

I agree it's crazy talk, but from the police.

The New Jersey scanner law:

397. EQUIPPING MOTOR VEHICLES WITH RADIO RECEIVING SETS CAPABLE OF
RECEIVING SIGNALS ON THE FREQUENCIES ALLOCATED FOR POLICE USE.

A person, not a police officer or peace officer, acting pursuant to
his special duties, who equips a motor vehicle with a radio receiving
set capable of receiving signals on the frequencies allocated for
police use or knowingly uses a motor vehicle so equipped or who in any
way knowingly interferes with the transmission of radio messages by
the police without having first secured a permit to do so from the
person authorized to issue such a permit by the local governing body
or board of the city, town or village in which such person resides, or
where such person resides outside of a city, or village in a county
having a county police department by the board of supervisors of such
county, is guilty of a misdemeanor, punishable by a fine not exceeding
one thousand dollars, or imprisonment not exceeding six months, or
both. Nothing in this section contained shall be construed to apply to
any person who holds a valid amateur radio operator's license issued
by the federal communications commission and who operates a duly
licensed portable mobile transmitter and in connection therewith a
receiver or receiving set on frequencies exclusively allocated by the
federal communications commission to duly licensed radio amateurs.

Crazy talk, all right, but legal crazy talk.

Rich

Yeah. I'm aware that such laws exist. But wouldn't you get laughed
off the force for busting somebody for having a radio?

I can see where it might be an aggravating circumstance attendant to a
serious crime.

On 10 Jan 2004 18:31:55 GMT, Rich Wood wrote:

On 9 Jan 2004 15:44:15 GMT, David wrote:

Nowadays cops use digital cellphones if they want to be secure from
the press.

I've never heard of anybody around here getting busted for having a
scanner. That sounds like crazy talk.

Check with the ARRL. They'll quote you all the cities and states where
the police wanted scanners and VHF and UHF ham radios banned in
vehicles. Just because no one has been busted doesn't mean the laws
aren't on the books.

I agree it's crazy talk, but from the police.

The New Jersey scanner law:

397. EQUIPPING MOTOR VEHICLES WITH RADIO RECEIVING SETS CAPABLE OF
RECEIVING SIGNALS ON THE FREQUENCIES ALLOCATED FOR POLICE USE.

A person, not a police officer or peace officer, acting pursuant to
his special duties, who equips a motor vehicle with a radio receiving
set capable of receiving signals on the frequencies allocated for
police use or knowingly uses a motor vehicle so equipped or who in any
way knowingly interferes with the transmission of radio messages by
the police without having first secured a permit to do so from the
person authorized to issue such a permit by the local governing body
or board of the city, town or village in which such person resides, or
where such person resides outside of a city, or village in a county
having a county police department by the board of supervisors of such
county, is guilty of a misdemeanor, punishable by a fine not exceeding
one thousand dollars, or imprisonment not exceeding six months, or
both. Nothing in this section contained shall be construed to apply to
any person who holds a valid amateur radio operator's license issued
by the federal communications commission and who operates a duly
licensed portable mobile transmitter and in connection therewith a
receiver or receiving set on frequencies exclusively allocated by the
federal communications commission to duly licensed radio amateurs.

Crazy talk, all right, but legal crazy talk.

Rich