jim wrote:

wrote:
"Twistedhed" wrote in message
...

Organized, long term freebanders are very aware where they
operate and take great measure to ensure against talking on an amateur f
requency or one that isn't heavily used on the freeband.
If the non-U.S. stations can operate ssb there, why shouldn't I,
especially if I want to have a nice DX contact with one of them?


I've been a so-called "freebander" since the late sixties but rarely for DX.
The primary reason I talked outside of allotted frequencies was for privacy
or to contact a specific distant station I wouldn't normally hear on the
allotted band. We used to run Ch. 16 -5khz down and 15A a RC Channel running
slightly above stock power on 3-4 element directional and easily talk 75-100
miles. I spoke all over the world with better than 1000 confirmed QSL
contacts from a slightly peaked Golden Eagle Mark III/IV running through a 4
beam element at 60 feet from Central NJ.



actually a good point. if i were to use the freq's the u.s. gov said i can
then what is the problem with slipping +/- 5kc's between 'channels'? is
that freebanding?
better yet, who the hell is the u.s. gov to tell me what is legal or
not? if i were to float out to bermuda and xmit would i be freebanding
there? do our friends to the north and south really care what the fcc
says what americans can/cannot do? not likely....

just make it worse for every body next thing you know
they'll require a digatal id on all transmitters or they'll be
terrorist and arrested without due process.

just make it worse for every body next thing you know
they'll require a digatal id on all transmitters or they'll be
terrorist and arrested without due process.

I take it you haven't heard of transmitter fingerprinting then?
http://www.motron.com/TransmitterID.html

"joseph mcdavid" wrote in message
...


jim wrote:

wrote:
"Twistedhed" wrote in message
...

Organized, long term freebanders are very aware where they
operate and take great measure to ensure against talking on an amateur
f
requency or one that isn't heavily used on the freeband.
If the non-U.S. stations can operate ssb there, why shouldn't I,
especially if I want to have a nice DX contact with one of them?


I've been a so-called "freebander" since the late sixties but rarely
for DX.
The primary reason I talked outside of allotted frequencies was for
privacy
or to contact a specific distant station I wouldn't normally hear on
the
allotted band. We used to run Ch. 16 -5khz down and 15A a RC Channel
running
slightly above stock power on 3-4 element directional and easily talk
75-100
miles. I spoke all over the world with better than 1000 confirmed QSL
contacts from a slightly peaked Golden Eagle Mark III/IV running
through a 4
beam element at 60 feet from Central NJ.



actually a good point. if i were to use the freq's the u.s. gov said i
can
then what is the problem with slipping +/- 5kc's between 'channels'? is
that freebanding?
better yet, who the hell is the u.s. gov to tell me what is legal or
not? if i were to float out to bermuda and xmit would i be freebanding
there? do our friends to the north and south really care what the fcc
says what americans can/cannot do? not likely....

Quick comment to Jim from above:
Actually, they just might. Treaties are sometimes used as
bargaining chips. If a problem arises such as radio interference, then an
aggrieved country can take it up with
the offending country. Where the US is concerned, it may be that a country
that needs loans, etc. will agree to
abate the RFI in exchange for said loans, grants, or other concessions. And
of course, it can be taken up with ITU.

just make it worse for every body next thing you know
they'll require a digatal id on all transmitters or they'll be
terrorist and arrested without due process.


People don't realize that illegal activities *CAN* cause adverse actions
such as the above. Sometimes it may hurt the innocent as well as the guilty.
In 1978, during the peak of CB's popularity, CB amplifiers became one of the
sought after "options" in many operators' stations. All of a sudden, every
garage, it seems, was pumping out splatterboxes by the hundreds. FCC then
passed a regulation that required that no amplifiers be built or imported
into the US capable of operation between 24 and 30 MHZ. The manufacturer
could provide the enabling modification upon proof of license. Who did that
hurt? Not the illegal amp makers; they kept on sneaking their junk under the
radar to the detriment of hams. Not a major thing to the hams, but it
caused *some* inconvenience to the Amateurs who had to take time to make the
mod.

Who knows what "freebanding" could cause? Not me. I only know about some
things I hear from time to time--like the transmitter fingerprinting
mentioned, or, maybe, areturn to more aggressive enforcement, or amendments
to the local enforcement law. I know only one thing; when enough people get
annoyed, like the people being interferred with on 10/12 Meters, eventually
something will be done. Sure, the people who "freeband" think their "hobby"
is harmless and see no reason why they shouldn't be able to just pick up a
mike and start talking anywhere, anytime, and with a bazillion watts. It
boils down to training, discipline, and safety. Training teaches the
discipline to know what and why to use a radio, and said discipline makes
certain their operation causes no harm toothers (safety); it all goes hand
in hand. Those regulations that seem to chafe "freebanders" are like
fences; one can move from one boundary to the next, but the fence prevents
the "cows" from getting into someone else's pasture.

Finally, I mentioned that "freebanders" can see no harm in going above or
below the 40 CB channels, or in between. It depends on whose cow is being
gored. If it were legal for you to operate on 6620 MHZ USB (international
avation HF band), how would you like to be aboard a flight that couldn't
find its way because someone was chatting on the "channel"? What if the
aircraft was experiencing mechanical trouble and couldn't talk to the
company engineers for help?

It used to be that people didn't 'dare' to "freeband" AND they had more
civility and respect for others to do it. If the break in the fence isn't
mended, the "freebanders" will breach the gap like a broken dam.
Eventually, OTHER bands and frequencies will be violated (Hello? Is anyone
here? I think I will occupy this "room" and sit a spell) and as each band is
screwed up, the rightful users are stepped on, another band is "stolen",
more illegals rush in, and so on. Think not? Well, who'd a-thunk it that
10 and 12 Meters would be violated with truckers beeping and squeaking their
way along while the digital modes (per ITU convention) were interferred
with?


Jerry

Jerry Oxendine wrote:
"joseph mcdavid" wrote in message
...


jim wrote:


wrote:

"Twistedhed" wrote in message
...


Organized, long term freebanders are very aware where they
operate and take great measure to ensure against talking on an amateur

f

requency or one that isn't heavily used on the freeband.
If the non-U.S. stations can operate ssb there, why shouldn't I,
especially if I want to have a nice DX contact with one of them?


I've been a so-called "freebander" since the late sixties but rarely

for DX.

The primary reason I talked outside of allotted frequencies was for

privacy

or to contact a specific distant station I wouldn't normally hear on

the

allotted band. We used to run Ch. 16 -5khz down and 15A a RC Channel

running

slightly above stock power on 3-4 element directional and easily talk

75-100

miles. I spoke all over the world with better than 1000 confirmed QSL
contacts from a slightly peaked Golden Eagle Mark III/IV running

through a 4

beam element at 60 feet from Central NJ.




actually a good point. if i were to use the freq's the u.s. gov said i

can

then what is the problem with slipping +/- 5kc's between 'channels'? is
that freebanding?
better yet, who the hell is the u.s. gov to tell me what is legal or
not? if i were to float out to bermuda and xmit would i be freebanding
there? do our friends to the north and south really care what the fcc
says what americans can/cannot do? not likely....


Quick comment to Jim from above:
Actually, they just might. Treaties are sometimes used as
bargaining chips. If a problem arises such as radio interference, then an
aggrieved country can take it up with
the offending country. Where the US is concerned, it may be that a country
that needs loans, etc. will agree to
abate the RFI in exchange for said loans, grants, or other concessions. And
of course, it can be taken up with ITU.


jerry you may be right with the treaties as I am not up on international
law. point is if there are such agreements has anyone ever been
prosecuted by their governing bodies or hell have any nations been notified
by another that one of their citizens is causing harm? I dont know the
answers but at this point it still won't stop people freebanding. Its
human nature to nonconform especially concerning something as trivial as
this.

JerrO wrote:
Sure, the people who "freeband" think their "hobby" is harmless and see
no reason why they shouldn't be able to just pick up a mike and start
talking anywhere, anytime, and with a bazillion watts.
_
Jerry, my man, you are full of ****. Why are you talking this smack?
Speaking falsely and of this type bull**** really takes away from your
other knowledge, as you know this is untrue, yet you continue to
propagate such bull**** for whatever reason. Gee, how the pseudo-elmers
have fallen. You have informed me of several things I did not not
realize concerning the MARS/CAPS (such as many, many hammies using it as
an excuse to have their radios modded for cb) and a few things
concerning mathematics as relating to certain harmonics. It's a shame
how one can taint years of integrity with a single post. Problems with
your posting host, Jer?