wrote:

...
People living on the reservation have all the consumer electronics that
can be interfered with that people living off the reservation have.


Jim:

Most likely equal or better!

Those Indians living on the reservation in Amador County receive approx.
$5000.00 per month/per individual.

A family of three would get about $15,000 a month from the proceeds of
the casino, if they actually work in the casino, more ... they don't pay
taxes on their cigarettes either!

That just ain't bad, and leaves a couple of bucks left over to purchase
hobby items ... some drive nice Hummers, I have noticed ...

Regards,
JS

wrote in message
oups.com...
John,

So, say I had a CW oscillator on the colorburst frequency. I'll shunt
the output
with a 50 ohm resistor to ground. I'll put a random wire at the top of
the
resistor.

Basic equations yield P = (EE) / R

If R is 50 Ohms and maximum output power is 1.7e-9 watts, then E
is 4.1e-5 volts.

So, would a measurement of 40 microvolts or less across the resistor
be satisfactory?

Thanks,

The Eternal Squire

I think it would be about 300 uV across 50 ohms ( I think you are off by
about an order of magnitude). Yes, I think that would be okay. A good place
to understand this stuff is on the ARRL site. Look into the BPL and RFI
things there. Read everything you can find about this subject. If you
research this thoroughly, you will find allies in the field, I'm sure.

My intent here is not to discourage you in your project, but to encourage
you to think critically. Always ask yourself why this has not been done
before. Most of the time there is a reason, but sometimes (a small
percentage of the time) it is because nobody has had an interest in the
subject.

But, you didn't ask for my philosophy. I sometimes get carried away. I
apologize for that.

Cheers and 73,
John

Paul,

Its my opinion, the fact that these childrens' homes are on Navajo
Land is legally irrelevant.

From what I understand, Native territories are jurisdictions having
roughly equal standing
to the states, but just like states are still subject to the
Constitution and to Acts of Congress,
such as the one authorizing the FCC and parts 15 and 97.

As for using a pseudonym, I use that rather than my name or call for
obvious reasons of
personal safety for myself and my family.

Cheers,

The Eternal Squire

On Jan 26, 10:38 pm, Paul W. Schleck wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

In John Smith I writes:

Paul W. Schleck wrote:
...
I certainly hope Paul is an attorney, as if he speaks about the
reservation, I hope he speaks with knowledge.I am not a lawyer. When faced with legal questions about my own
operation, or when trying to help keep apparently honest and sincere
people like "Eternal Squire" stay out of trouble, I defer to the true
experts. Existing, compiled, and expert advice like that provided at
the ARRL TIS site I previously mentioned would seem to be a good place
to start. I also value the insight provided here by Usenet participants
who are attorneys with experience in communications law. I would
certainly defer to their input on this matter, if offered (*).

I also ask myself if I am obeying the spirit as well as the letter of
any law or regulation. I don't feel it's within the scope of good
amateur practice, personal ethical conduct, or even just overall "good
neighbor" guidelines to be focusing on alleged loopholes such as being
on a Native American Reservation, in international waters, or an
"educational project." Often such excuses are transparent,
self-serving, and not borne out in actual legal practice, regulations,
treaties, enforcement, etc. Unless I had a lot of legal resources at my
disposal (pro bono counsel, etc.), I would probably not seek to try and
make myself a legal test case, as some on the newsgroups seem bent on
doing.

I would hope that "Eternal Squire", whose post implies that he is a
licensed radio amateur, is thinking along these same lines, also. I
offered my layperson's advice in that context.

Here is a paper which will demonstrate there is "quite a bit of
controversy" over legality of 97 and 15 on reservations:
http://www.fcc.gov/sptf/files/0801fcc.pdfI read the above transcript you provided. I note with interest that my
friend, fellow ham, and Usenet peer Carl Stevenson (WK3C) was a member
of this workshop. I'd certainly defer to his technical expertise.
However, the gist I got from the transcript, and from asking legal
experts, is that case law is mixed on the subject of whether what
happens on a reservation is strictly an internal, tribal matter. That
no one present at the workshop wanted to venture an authoritative answer
doesn't meant that there aren't those involved in enforcement who could
give one. Radio transmitters and casinos are given as principal
examples where case law, practice, and jurisdictional agreements go
against the assertion that on a reservation, U.S. law does not apply.

Course, with some, an amateur license immediately makes them an
authority in all areas ...It was a question about amateur radio, asked in an amateur radio
newsgroup. I suggested that he seek expert advice, such as that
summarized at the ARRL TIS web site I linked previously. No more, and
no less.

Warmest regards,
JS(*) I did ask one of the experts in communications law that I know
personally. He offered the following observations:

"I would add something to the extent that you have been advised
by a communications attorney with over 50 years' experience in
FCC regulatory matters that unless there is a specific treaty
granting a tribe authority to regulate amateur radio
transmissions on a reservation, and there isn't, FCC law and
jurisdiction prevail. There are agreements giving tribes
authority to determine who may operate a broadcast station
from a reservation, but the FCC must regulate the technical
parameters (frequency, power, location) to be observed and
grant the callsign and make all necessary international
notifications.

Similarly, in international waters or airspace, the country of
registration of the vessel or aircraft retains jurisdiction,
and any country may lodge a complaint of violation of the
International Radio Regulations with the country of registration
if that is the case. If the vessel or aircraft is 'unregistered',
any country has the authority to blast it out of the water or the
air, although that is a drastic measure. The International
Radio Regulations do, however. oblige all countries to not
condone or support any radio (or TV) broadcasting from
international waters or airspace."

As this seems to be drifting into a *.policy area, and not *.homebrew,
I've set followups as appropriate. Feel free to override my default if
you must.

- --
Paul W. Schleck, K3FU
/~pschleck/
Finger for PGP Public Key

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (SunOS)

iD8DBQFFuuMd6Pj0az779o4RAidgAJ4tmvrsIgefuGREQz/Eqw20LljowACfRg1f
glmhM6RbiJJcbgT3quj9GmM=
=Dai7
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

I had thought to start an unlicensed micro-power code practice net
whose range would be limited to about a 30 mile radius, which is about
the size of the local reservation right next to the school.

What I want to do is provide each kid with a popcorn CW transceiver for
the colorburst frequency (3579 khz), a key, a short random wire, and a
battery. That way they could practice amongst themselves with
myself as occasional net control.

My question is this: so long as final output to the antenna is within
the requirement of part 15 unlicensed operation, is part 15 unlicensed
operation allowed within a band normally governed under part 97?
Part 15 operation would easily cover a 30 mile radius on 80M.

If no, I'll run the net under part 15 on the edge of the AM band near
160M.

Thanks in advance,

The Eternal Squire


I have been thinking about this for a while before making this reply.

I would strongly suggest looking at the lowfer band.
160Kc to 190Kc
The limitations are relatively straight forward.
Maximum length of feed line, and antenna are 15meters.
Maximum power input to the final amp stage is 1W.
No other real limitations besides the fact that out of band emissions have
to be below a specific point.

That is about a 50 foot long antenna. There isn't much of a chance that they
will try to string one up longer than that, unless they were really
industrious.
And they can learn about antenna loading, to get a better transmitted
signal/range.

The one watt input power level is easy to determine. If the input is 10V
then adjust the current to a maximum of 100mA.

They can use any mode of communication they want. CW, AM, SSB, FM, PSK31,
BPSK, MFSK
The sky is the limit as for as modes.

If they have computers, most of the digital modes can be implemented with
soundcard based communications software that is available as freeware
Look up "MULTIPSK"

They can set up beacons for propagation checks, or talk to each other in
real time.

30 miles is an easy distance to reach with basic loaded antennas. Especially
with PSK31 and CW.

It will allow them to learn how to build receiving antennas.

And if they can't reach, or hear someone on the other side of the
reservation, then it will allow them to learn the basics of traffic handling
by the stations in the middle relaying information from one station to
another.

It will also teach them the basics of the narrower bandwidth/greater range
relationship. With the low bandwidth BPSK, PSK31 modes, they will easily
communicate across the reservation even if they can barely hear each other
on voice.

You can either get kit equipment for receiving or transmitting, which is
widely available on line. Or you can design and build your own.

If they are lucky, they may even hear stations, and beacons from hundreds of
miles away. Or even thousands. There is nothing like the thrill of DX.

N9WOS wrote:


I have been thinking about this for a while before making this reply.

I would strongly suggest looking at the lowfer band.
160Kc to 190Kc
The limitations are relatively straight forward.
Maximum length of feed line, and antenna are 15meters.
Maximum power input to the final amp stage is 1W.
No other real limitations besides the fact that out of band emissions have
to be below a specific point.

That is about a 50 foot long antenna. There isn't much of a chance that they
will try to string one up longer than that, unless they were really
industrious.
And they can learn about antenna loading, to get a better transmitted
signal/range.

The one watt input power level is easy to determine. If the input is 10V
then adjust the current to a maximum of 100mA.

They can use any mode of communication they want. CW, AM, SSB, FM, PSK31,
BPSK, MFSK
The sky is the limit as for as modes.

If they have computers, most of the digital modes can be implemented with
soundcard based communications software that is available as freeware
Look up "MULTIPSK"

They can set up beacons for propagation checks, or talk to each other in
real time.

30 miles is an easy distance to reach with basic loaded antennas. Especially
with PSK31 and CW.

It will allow them to learn how to build receiving antennas.

And if they can't reach, or hear someone on the other side of the
reservation, then it will allow them to learn the basics of traffic handling
by the stations in the middle relaying information from one station to
another.

It will also teach them the basics of the narrower bandwidth/greater range
relationship. With the low bandwidth BPSK, PSK31 modes, they will easily
communicate across the reservation even if they can barely hear each other
on voice.

You can either get kit equipment for receiving or transmitting, which is
widely available on line. Or you can design and build your own.

If they are lucky, they may even hear stations, and beacons from hundreds of
miles away. Or even thousands. There is nothing like the thrill of DX.



Yanno, that is damn good thinking. I haven't played in the lowfer freqs
for ages.

Regards,
JS

If (mind you, IF) I was going to make a device that would bootleg a signal
over a 30 mile range, the LAST frequency I would pick is one that had a real
good chance of messing up somebody's color TV set in that radius.

Google on Mouser, crystal, and you will get HUNDREDS of cheap crystals that
aren't going to be messing up anybody's home entertainment devices. You
might also google for "emergency frequency" to keep away from the Coast
Guard's "hit the red button" frequencies.

If it twer me, I'd probably find a quiet spot on 80 meters for the little
rugrats.

Jim



wrote in message
oups.com...
John,

So, say I had a CW oscillator on the colorburst frequency.

You can either get kit equipment for receiving or transmitting, which is
widely available on line. Or you can design and build your own.

Maybe I should clarify one of my statements before someone calls me stupid.

I mean easily modifiable equipment is widely available online.
It isn't sold for Lowfer operation.

Most heterodyne and direct conversion based short wave, receiving kits can
be modified over to the LF band from 160 to 190kc

On a 455kc heterodyne receiver, push the local oscillator down to 615 to 645
kc, and put a band pass network on the input peaked to the lowfer band, and
you are done.

Same thing can be done for SSB transmitter kits that use a fixed transmit IF

N9WOS wrote:
You can either get kit equipment for receiving or transmitting, which is
widely available on line. Or you can design and build your own.

Maybe I should clarify one of my statements before someone calls me stupid.

I mean easily modifiable equipment is widely available online.
It isn't sold for Lowfer operation.

Most heterodyne and direct conversion based short wave, receiving kits can
be modified over to the LF band from 160 to 190kc

On a 455kc heterodyne receiver, push the local oscillator down to 615 to 645
kc, and put a band pass network on the input peaked to the lowfer band, and
you are done.

Same thing can be done for SSB transmitter kits that use a fixed transmit IF



Only thing is, such low power xmitters, if designed and tuned to a
"quiet" portion of the mw band allows anyone with a standard am radio to
tune into and participate in ...

Rip apart any old transistor radio and you have the necessary parts for
the xmitter ...

VLF receivers can be a tad bit expensive ... however, most am radios
would easily be modified to VLF ... the patience of the elmer would be
the only resource in question.

Regards,
JS

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

In . com writes:

Paul,

Its my opinion, the fact that these childrens' homes are on Navajo
Land is legally irrelevant.

I agree. I was just rebutting the bad advice given here that you should
try to focus on legal loopholes or otherwise "stretch" the law in some
way. Especially when that advice is based on an incomplete or inexpert
knowledge of the law, whose misunderstanding could have expensive
consequences. I know that hams in general are an honorable lot, and as
a whole would not attempt to think or act that way. I'm glad that we
are thinking along the same lines. Which is one of the reasons that I
believed that you were sincere, and a licensed amateur radio operator.

From what I understand, Native territories are jurisdictions having
roughly equal standing
to the states, but just like states are still subject to the
Constitution and to Acts of Congress,
such as the one authorizing the FCC and parts 15 and 97.

Treaties with Native American tribes, and resulting laws and
inter-jurisdictional agreements bear out that viewpoint, according to
the expert that I consulted, and quoted in my previous post.

So, the one remaining question would appear to be your original one,
which was where does Part 15 leave off and Part 97 begin? I think that
the ARRL TIS site that I linked previously is a good place to start. I
invite everyone to consider the excellent advice offered at that site,
including links to FCC documents, independent of prejudicial dislike of
the involved sources or personalities.

As for using a pseudonym, I use that rather than my name or call for
obvious reasons of
personal safety for myself and my family.

That's too bad that Usenet has degraded to the point that we actually
fear for the safety of ourselves and our families when we participate
here, and merely state our intentions to operate lawfully, and not
tolerate unlawful behavior. I'm honestly surprised that these are
controversial viewpoints in some quarters.

Personally, in nearly 17 years of participating on-line, I've never felt
the need to use a pseudonym, or feared for my safety. However, I
respect the reasonable personal choices of others in this regard.

- --
73, Paul W. Schleck, K3FU

http://www.novia.net/~pschleck/
Finger for PGP Public Key

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (SunOS)

iD8DBQFFu8Cy6Pj0az779o4RAmvfAJ43WI9vMFjgeqA8+TOb/qWjmltMrQCgg5X1
0qp7+liEHUDgsygkj0fuRx4=
=Q/nQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Paul W. Schleck wrote:

...
Personally, in nearly 17 years of participating on-line, I've never felt
the need to use a pseudonym, or feared for my safety. However, I
respect the reasonable personal choices of others in this regard.

- --
73, Paul W. Schleck, K3FU

http://www.novia.net/~pschleck/
Finger for PGP Public Key

Just goes to show ya, the world is still left with a lot of people who
are of a good nature and would not wish harm on anyone ...

Regards,
JS