Problems at ARRL?

[coppercone2]

https://tech.slashdot.org/story/18/10/06/0356254/its-ham-vsham-as-radio-amateurs-are-in-conflict-at-arrl

What do you guys think of this?

[rgarnett1923]

I'm not a HAM operator, but it sounds like some corporate "elites" are trying to take over the ARRL so they can monetize it.  A bit like Nacy Vos and charter schools.  To corporate parasites, the ARRL would have "brand salience" and could be worth a lot of money in the wrong hands.

[boB]

I understand that this issue was from several months ago and they're taking care of the problem.

Someone wanted to kinda make it their own empire.  One of the board members objected publicly that he didn't
like how things were going and got chastised for that by the others.  All hell broke loose and lots of letters back
and forth etc...

The members evidently were to have none of it ?   I'm not a member although I think I approve of the outfit.

boB

[coppercone2]

the main cash flow in commercialization would be to make the spectrum so that certain protocols can be effectively forced. i.e. bandwithes and power levels

How does that even work? Are there radio protocols that if you decide to implement a language you can be forced to pay someone money?

or is it a one time thing forcing a sudden migration to recently developed hardware and programs that currently exist only commercially and are not popular? (but how could this even be a thing with SDR? amplifier bandwidth?)

[jh15]

No info about they hiring a public relations firm to study why membership is poor? Surveymonky could do it.

Or a company in their back yard to make an improved website page for half a million dollars? And the ARRL would have to provide the content.

Sounds like someone is or has a family member around there.

I became a life member in the '70s. Otherwise I would not renew each year for the price of a Baofeng.

Right after paying, they dropped most technical content into QEX.

So I get ads and political no-doings instead of the tech I was expecting to get.

[ikrase]

The ARRL was never terribly interesting to me, with their almost exclusive focus on types of HAM that I don't do. (what I do do: build my own antennas and ragchew with a VHF HT, fantasize about getting my general license but never actually do it).  I finally got angry at them when they wrote a hack job attacking the use of HAM radio communications with drones.

The frustrating thing is, there's actually a lot of abuse of spectrum and especially unlicensed operation in the world of drones, which is what they were criticizing! (Though I've never heard of somebody who wasn't another drone flyer complaining about interference that they could convincingly attribute to drones). However, the ARRL article was needlessly hostile and assumed that there is no reason for drone flyers to do anything with HAM ever, and totally ignored the existence of drone flyers who have HAM licenses and operate within the HAM rules!

[coppercone2]

I find flying repeaters very interesting so you can make a temporary high bandwidth good reception area using a bunch of repeater drones to allow some other kind of drone to work in a large area (like search and rescue with streaming HD camera to scan the woods for lost people).

Like a buncha heavy slow drones acting as aerial nodes to give a large area coverage so some faster drones hooked up with advanced sensors that have very high bandwidth can do a grid search or something.

The whole HAM thing is sorta aimed at helping in disasters and such.. finding lost people in the high wilderness fits the bill IMO. Better sensors and more bandwidths means you can look in a greater area for a long period of time and find small clues/evidence of recent human activity.

Also could be used for S&R to find small shit, possibly even with volunteer remote operators (pieces of airplane wreckage floating in water).

What you describe their behavior as towards drones is extremely short sighted even with their narrow goals.

[Johncanfield]

Politics aside, the ARRL is the big dog advocating for our radio spectrum. Squabbling happens in EVERY organization.  I will remain a remember.

73 de John WB5THT

[tkamiya]

I've been a ham for last 35 years.  Started as JF2DKG and came to US; then, became a KB4EMF. 

I don't remember a time when ARRL wasn't involved in some kind of dispute.  I was a member from time to time but an only benefit I really enjoyed was its publications. 

I'm mostly involved in experimentation.  What ARRL does really does not affect what I do, nor do I need it to do what I do.  ONAIR time was only for me to prove my new creation work to myself.  I remember I had different antenna up every week.

I have no time for someone's personal agenda disguised as representation of US hams.

[In Vacuo Veritas]

Amateur radio is still a thing? What else? Whale oil lamps?

[bd139]

Any significantly large cluster of humans tends to self organise into chaos, especially ones run by old men I've noticed.  Hell I know someone who quit a club after an argument over dinner arrangements one day that went on for 4 years.  I don't get it myself but surely par for the course?

Then again at least your lot are trying to move in the right direction. We just got some crap t-shirts to divide us further: https://www.rsgbshop.org/acatalog/Online_Catalogue_RSGB_27.html .... note the sizes they stock as well 

[CJay]

Any significantly large cluster of humans tends to self organise into chaos, especially ones run by old men I've noticed.  Hell I know someone who quit a club after an argument over dinner arrangements one day that went on for 4 years.  I don't get it myself but surely par for the course?

Then again at least your lot are trying to move in the right direction. We just got some crap t-shirts to divide us further: https://www.rsgbshop.org/acatalog/Online_Catalogue_RSGB_27.html .... note the sizes they stock as well 

Well if they're going to follow that line then I'll not bother renewing. The RSGB and its mailing list is full of miserable old farts who regard anything newer than spark gap as an abomination agains the spirit of ham radio. (may be slightly exaggerating)

[bd139]

I suspect you aren’t exaggerating there. I haven’t even signed up as an RSGB memeber yet...

[Bud]

Amateur radio is still a thing? What else? Whale oil lamps?

You have no clue what you are talking about, do you.

[bd139]

Don’t feed the trolls

[chris_leyson]

The RSGB and its mailing list is full of miserable old farts who regard anything newer than spark gap as an abomination agains the spirit of ham radio. (may be slightly exaggerating)

I think that's probably not to far from the truth. I see what you mean about the crap t-shirts 
I let my licence lapse decades ago but might take it up again as some of the digital modes might be worth looking into. Then again how much of the software is open source and where is the documentation for the modulation and encoding ?

[bd139]

It’s all open source: https://physics.princeton.edu/pulsar/k1jt/wsjtx.html (see bottom) and cross platform.

Protocol specs: http://physics.princeton.edu/pulsar/k1jt/wsjtx-doc/wsjtx-main-1.7.1-devel.html#PROTOCOLS

And there’s stuff like this round the corner: https://www.qrp-labs.com/qsx.html

Screw old fart radio. This stuff is golden.

[CJay]

It’s all open source: https://physics.princeton.edu/pulsar/k1jt/wsjtx.html (see bottom) and cross platform.

Protocol specs: http://physics.princeton.edu/pulsar/k1jt/wsjtx-doc/wsjtx-main-1.7.1-devel.html#PROTOCOLS

And there’s stuff like this round the corner: https://www.qrp-labs.com/qsx.html

Screw old fart radio. This stuff is golden.

Absolutely, there's also JS8Call (previously FT8Call) which allows conversation using an extension to the protocol of FT8, it's in beta with new releases almost weekly, there are mutterings of a conversational variant of FT8 from Franke, Taylor (the F and T of FT8) in dvelopment.

Don;t mention it in the  presence of RSGB members, it provokes all sorts of frothing at the mouth but if you want a giggle have a look at the RSGB technical forum where my mention of FT8Call prodced the admission from one person that amateur radio wasn't about being polite and pleasant to strangers.

[PhilipPeake]

You see this sort of problem in any organization that claims to represent people interested in any topic.
ARRL, RSGB or NRA (I am member of all).

They all take themselves much too seriously, and get way out of touch with the membership.
They grow to the point of needing full time staff, then begins the empire building and "compromise", to say nothing of the "Fudd factor".

[coppercone2]

why are they so hesitant to adopt all this new technology?

is it a barrier to entry that is lowered? different spectrum usage patterns that are some how unfavorable?

I typically lost most interests in electronics once it deviates from electric theory or reliability etc.

[chris_leyson]

Nice one bd139 thanks for the links  Screw old fart radio, I can get away that because I am an old fart. The whole point of amateur radio is "a station that is operated for the purposes of self-training in radiocommunications". The new digital modes work really well especially when you have very poor SNR, they teach you about coding and error correction and they have a lot going for them. It's definately a step in the right direction for amateur radio.

If you put "amateur radio operator" on your CV you would want it look good rather than the interviewers thinking "oh, one of those" and the CV goes straight into the bin. Amatuer radio has a long way to go to tidy up it's image.

Talking of QRN, man made interference, I found another source, not switched mode power supplies but my broadband cable connection. Will have to fix the Chase HFR2000 EMC receiver and do a measurement with a ferrite clamp but I don't think fixing the receiver is going to happen any time soon. Oddly enough, yesterday evening there were some guys stuffing cable up the pavement so I asked if it was for power or broadband and said no it's for fibre to the premises, can't wait.

[jmelson]

The RSGB and its mailing list is full of miserable old farts who regard anything newer than spark gap as an abomination agains the spirit of ham radio. (may be slightly exaggerating)

I think that's probably not to far from the truth. I see what you mean about the crap t-shirts 
I let my licence lapse decades ago but might take it up again as some of the digital modes might be worth looking into. Then again how much of the software is open source and where is the documentation for the modulation and encoding ?

These digital modes are quite amazing.  I have a crap antenna, and the cheapest SDR receiver and HF converter.  If I can JUST BARELY detect a sequence of tones, then I can decode the message at close to 100%.  I'm totally AMAZED at how well this stuff works!  If the S/N ratio is some 20 dB below what can be decoded with RTTY or Morse, I can read the digital modes quite well.

Jon

[bd139]

These digital modes are quite amazing.  I have a crap antenna, and the cheapest SDR receiver and HF converter.  If I can JUST BARELY detect a sequence of tones, then I can decode the message at close to 100%.  I'm totally AMAZED at how well this stuff works!  If the S/N ratio is some 20 dB below what can be decoded with RTTY or Morse, I can read the digital modes quite well.

Yes indeed. It's amazing how good it is. I like WSPR as a test tool. I am rather enthusiastic about it actually (opposite to the grumpy lot!). When I put my last antenna up, a simple homebrew dipole with balun, I didn't bother tuning it just cutting it about right. I didn't have an SWR meter believe it or not. Got it up and transmitted down it and the TX's auto ATU matched it fine. Left it at that as I was tired. Didn't bother trying to make any contacts. Got up next morning and plugged my QCX into it. Like I said didn't have an SWR meter at all then so "winged it".

First WSPR transmission:



Nearly fell on my butt. Went out in the garden about an hour after that success and found that the antenna had actually half collapsed. Put it back up and lived with it and the auto tuner for a bit. Then I got an MFJ941 tuner and tuned it up properly. Turned out it was resonant at around 7.9MHz, way off band and SWR was awful (explaining the excessively warm QCX). Also I found the QCX had lost a BS170 at some point so was only kicking out about 0.7W.

So crap propagation, crap half collapsed antenna, poorly tuned antenna, half stuck in a tree, 700mW power, a 15m RG58 feed line and all those spots. Digimodes rock!

[coppercone2]

that's pretty impressive for such a half ass setup.

Why do people hate on the digimodes?? 700mW for across the atlantic seems really impressive for me

[bd139]

Gatekeeping is why.

[HerbTarlek]

Why do people hate on the digimodes??

Because "HRMFF real radios glow in the dark.  Now get offa mah lawn!"

[CJay]

that's pretty impressive for such a half ass setup.

Why do people hate on the digimodes?? 700mW for across the atlantic seems really impressive for me

"it's not real amateur radio, it's just two computers talking to each other" is the most common whine from the old hands. So JS8Call comes along and introduces a chat mode, then the complaint turns into "that's not what Ham radio is about, I don't want to exchange pleasantries with people I don't know" or "We've already got a digital mode, it's PSK31 and there's no point to FTxxx" from the friends of the guy who invented PSK31.

They're basically a bunch of curmudgeonly old farts who won't accept anything that's not in their sphere of interest, they resent the fact that 'youngsters' can get into radio and not take the exact same exams they did, some are actively rude to new licence holders but cokplain that there's no new blood in teh hobby and the bands are quiet.

Like BD139, I've had some impressive contacts with the weak signal digimodes, they're great fun but are boring to just sit and watch so the 'conversational' versions have great appeal to me.

[djacobow]

Most of the hate is not on digital modes but on the JT modes specifically, because, at least until JT8CALL, you could not use them communicate -- at least outside the narrow definition of a contact.

Personally, I don't hate them, but I don't do the JT modes because they bore me. I wish more hams used more of the large variety of the keyboard to keyboard modes, though.

[bd139]

This is from the same haters that have run propagation beacons for ages but that's fine because they were CW or something 

[chris_leyson]

The amateur radio organizations like the ARRL for example at least fight to keep our spectrum space, I say "our" spectrum space although I haven't got around to renewing my licence but you know what I mean. The weak signal digimodes have a lot going for them especially on HF and I'm just waiting to get the QRN sorted out at my location.
Maybe if you could use an Arduino shield running digimodes at 10mW in an ISM band that might spark a bit more interest in amateur radio.

[bd139]

I’m not sure there is much spectrum to fight over. HF and below is mostly abandoned by commercial services in favour of VHF and higher because of logistics, propagation, bandwidth and the rise of the internet.

Plenty of Arduino things out there: https://www.kanga-products.co.uk/m0xpd-arduino-shields

I think you can use ISM bands for some beacon purposes outside of our region. Typical. Lucky America

[HB9EVI]

I was ARRL member for some years, mostly because of the magazines.
But QST filled year by year more with ads and after abolishing the digital version as pdf I already lost quite much interest; I stucked for a while with the new downloadable format, but after they changed to the online version-only I gave it up; I prefer to pay the non-member fee for the QEX subscription rather than stucking with another mag, I cannot really use the way I want.

For sure the ARRL is a heavy weight also in global dimension for ham radio, much more than the swiss USKA, which has no other occupation to be to itself the biggest obstacle.

Yea I hear all the advocates screaming about the defenders for the ham privileges; I don't know such details about the ARRL, but I know quite well the stories of the german DARC and swiss USKA, who had nothing better to do than fighting for entry level licenses which, in the big picture 1. more endangered the ham privileges, since the level of knowledge required for acquiring the licences was more and more reduced, so in CH we already ended up with the entry level license without a right to build its own transmitters - and 2. advocated the ELL only in their own interest to get more paying members.

Altogether the european clubs failed already, when they were unable to avoid the implementation of Galileo frequencies in the middle of the 23cm ATV-band, which seems to me already as a bad message if other commercial services should grab for the ham spectrum in the GHz-bands - and they will - for sure!

I could very well imagine similar issues in Americas in general in the ARRL in particular. The commercialization is not going to stop in front of those associations, and it seems to me, that the management of all the clubs was closing eyes for a too long time already instead of getting active; personally I think Pandoras box is open already

[djacobow]

An interesting upcoming "test" for ARRL will be how it responds to the FCC's latest announcement that all the vast majority of Chinese HT's are illegal. (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-18-980A1.pdf)

Essentially, it seems to say that these HTs are illegal for ham use if they can tx outside the amateur bands even if they are operated by amateur licensees within the ham bands.

These HT's are extremely popular, and they are driving hams to new modes like DMR in droves. I know a lot of purists don't like them, but lots of amateurs are buying them. They certainly lower the bar for participation in amateur radio. l think it would be a shame if these radios were to go away -- though the big three, I'm sure, feel otherwise. Therefore, considering how much the big manufacturers advertise in QST, it will be interesting to see if the ARRL sides with its membership or its advertisers.

[coppercone2]

That's pretty ridiculous. I hate software lockouts on DAC functionality, its fucking retarded.

Maybe they should say you need some kind of band pass filter on the broadband radios when you use it to transmit, to make sure the software does not mess up and transmit on other frequencies, but a strait up lockout is retarded/lazy. It is a super slippery slope. Some test equipment can be used to transmit too. I assume they mean mostly the Bofeng or w/e that I see on youtube alot.

 But the antenna should kind of take care of that anyway..... a BPF would only make sense on a broadband antenna. But if their super hell bent they can say buy a radio thats compliant or outfit your radio with an appropriate filter network... that's infinitely better then making a import illegal.

I kind of wonder what Mr. Carlson has to say about this, he owns alot of radios.

[cdev]

Is the FCC trying to end ham radio for some reason? 

Why now and not - five or ten years ago - when they first appeared?

Isnt it possible for their owners to program them to not be able to transmit outside of the bands the owners are licensed to use? (or even to just receive, not transmit) I suspect it must be.

Is there a problem thats been seen anywhere with unlicensed use of them?

The low cost HTs seem to be one of the only bright spots in an otherwise dismal picture for the amateur radio hobby in general.

Its clear that people are required to obey the rules. Functional rules like only transmit within ham bands with the best practices which are appropriate. getting a ham license is supposed to certify that somebody has the requisite skill level to manage their own equipment's performance.

Certainly, the cheap radios are the only means by which a lot of people- especially young people but likely many older people too, have gotten on the air.

This is a bad sign for the hobby, this kind of thing.

[bd139]

The lock outs there are to stop you pissing over band edges into spectrum you're not allowed in. I'm fine with it if I'm honest. It only takes one asshat to cause a problem to a commercial service and then everyone is fecked.

You can actually program a 'feng's transmit region into 2m/70cm only easily. They just need to stipulate that they ship like that and all is done. They are no different to a "regionised" Yaesu HT then.

I think people get privilege confused with freedom.

Also I don't get the deal with the pricing. Amateur radio is to be honest, dirt cheap to get into if you want to stay on VHF anyway and now with the QSX etc on the way on HF as well. There were people at my local club chucking brand HT's at people for nothing (£10 or so). Literally way cheaper than ANY other hobby I've ever been into.

[coppercone2]

Yea but if there is a really big problem or its used as a survival tool it can save your bacon. People use these things as emergency radios. Seems like a cheap cop out compared to actually enforcing the law.  They can get rid of the religious BS while their at it.

[bd139]

146.550 MHz right in the middle of 2m. If no one is listening you picked the wrong survival strategy.

I think most of the problems with these came from the militia idiots and the private emergency services (Hatzalah) using them as PMRs on other unlicensed frequencies for ref.

[Kalvin]

It’s all open source: https://physics.princeton.edu/pulsar/k1jt/wsjtx.html (see bottom) and cross platform.

Protocol specs: http://physics.princeton.edu/pulsar/k1jt/wsjtx-doc/wsjtx-main-1.7.1-devel.html#PROTOCOLS

And there’s stuff like this round the corner: https://www.qrp-labs.com/qsx.html

Screw old fart radio. This stuff is golden.

Absolutely, there's also JS8Call (previously FT8Call) which allows conversation using an extension to the protocol of FT8, it's in beta with new releases almost weekly, there are mutterings of a conversational variant of FT8 from Franke, Taylor (the F and T of FT8) in dvelopment.

Don;t mention it in the  presence of RSGB members, it provokes all sorts of frothing at the mouth but if you want a giggle have a look at the RSGB technical forum where my mention of FT8Call prodced the admission from one person that amateur radio wasn't about being polite and pleasant to strangers.

CJay, thank you for pointing out this new JS8Call digimode.  I guess this will be quite popular mode as it should workable in the urban noisy environment, with small antennas and QRP power. And you do not have to be a fast typist to enjoy this new digimode

[bd139]

I'm certainly going to have a bash at it

[djacobow]

146.550 MHz right in the middle of 2m. If no one is listening you picked the wrong survival strategy.

I think most of the problems with these came from the militia idiots and the private emergency services (Hatzalah) using them as PMRs on other unlicensed frequencies for ref.

If that is the case, then it seems pretty straightforward to crack down on the illegal operators. The whole "x can be used for bad, so let's outlaw x" can be dangerous. Sometimes it is justified, but the same reasoning can be applied to just about everything on earth.

One thing the FCC announcement was noticeably devoid of was data: how many times have these radios interfered with license users, and what were the circumstances. If the FCC wants to created a new rule, it can institute anorder instituting rulemaking and that will kick off a process by which the FCC and stakeholders will create a record, which can be used to shape and adjudicate a new rule. That is, if the FCC were serious, they could put up or shut up. And I suspect, lawyers working for the ARRL or someone else are going to force that issue sooner or later.

[bd139]

Well the main thing is that if the handsets are locked they can only shit on the amateur bands. At which point the reporting and tracking networks will hunt the bastards down in days and they get the FCC knock or the OFCOM shitpost letter.

FCC publish the data. I've seen it and I'm not even under FCC regulation.

[djacobow]

Is the FCC trying to end ham radio for some reason? 

...
Certainly, the cheap radios are the only means by which a lot of people- especially young people but likely many older people too, have gotten on the air.

This is a bad sign for the hobby, this kind of thing.

I agree that the cheap HT's are helping the hobby. And I suspect that the FCC is indifferent to ham radio, and perhaps slightly disposed against it, as it is spectrum that doesn't generate revenue.

I'm gonna wait and see what happens here. It could be that the BF's just ship with lockouts and the whole thing goes away. (and, of course, there will be hacks to unlock them again) or perhaps they backtrack under pressure from ... maybe the ARRL! or not! :-/

[In Vacuo Veritas]

Amateur radio is still a thing? What else? Whale oil lamps?

You have no clue what you are talking about, do you.

Once you read a newspaper to a whale oil lamp, you don't go back. I'm an amateur telegrapher myself.

[jh15]

What font size on the newspaper?

[bson]

For me FT8 is a great test tool - I can CQ, get QSO reports, just run for an hour or two after trimming an antenna or something, and get pretty good quantitative feedback when used in conjunction with pskreporter.info.  Good tool, but not terribly exciting in the long run.  I haven't had much time to try out JS8Call yet, I have it installed but the odd early AM hours I experimented with it a bit I could find no activity on 40m/20m.  I should update it and try again, it seems to have seen tons of pick up lately!

[Beamin]

https://tech.slashdot.org/story/18/10/06/0356254/its-ham-vsham-as-radio-amateurs-are-in-conflict-at-arrl

What do you guys think of this?

That site could have fit a few more ads in. There was a small box of white space. Oh while looking through the ads if you look closely enough you can find two paragraphs on the ARRL that quite interesting.

They might become like the NRA formerly a gun safety club the NRA was actually a good thing that would be outraged at putting guns in the hands of the mentally ill and 5 year olds (not kidding there are laws making it illegal not to let them buy/shoot guns).

Unfortunately this is not just an America problem with the scott pruits and betsy devoses making charter schools and for profit jails but a world wide globalist capitalist thing. I only see this getting worse as he has the most money has the loudest voice and most votes. When the privatize something its taken away from the people and never be givin back less it "costs people jobs".


What angle are these companies working? Are they just using the arrl to gain advertisement and sponsorship? Or is it more sinister like creating a monopoly that to transmit you have to have a certain spec antenna tuner to "minimize interference" that just happens to be only made by one company and is way over priced? The state I live in does that with "easypass" a toll booth that works by driving through with a transponder in your car. Problem is they took out the cash tool booth on certain sections of federally paid for road so if you drive through by mistake they send you a bill for 60.00 in the mail or try to say its toll elevation but its not and legally you only owe them the toll.


Funny one reason why I like ham is because its not commercialized and whored out. Guess not. You can't even go to jail in this country for toll evasion without having several companies profit off you: Ezpass, tow truck, bail bonds, fine collecting company, and lastly a for profit prison.

[AF6LJ]

ANOTHER DECENT TH4READ SPOILED BY SOMEONE INJECTING POLITICS.
 

[Beamin]

ANOTHER DECENT TH4READ SPOILED BY SOMEONE INJECTING POLITICS.
 

Sorry but politics aren't spoiling the thread they are spoiling the ARRL. I don't like them either.

But seriously I will "tone" down the "frequency" of my posts and not "propagate" them further. 

[coppercone2]

I thought the first half of the third paragraph was interesting as it addresses possible motive behind nontransparentcy.

But in general I got a paranoid vibe from the post that is not giving the benefit of the doubt to the organization.

What companies? I find the risk analysis interesting in terms of how profit could be generated if the organization  did infact become corrupt or how it could inadvertently give certain companies favoritism/protection from the free market. The organization should analyze the possible effects from its actions to see how they interfere with the free market and if the best 'freedom' is being offered in regards to its decision making, to make sure they decide on the optimal decision.

Obviously any legislation is going to effect the market but they should act to disrupt the economy as little as possible for the good of the nation, while keeping the community in mind.  It sounds like small manufacturers can get potentially fucked.

They should also make provisions to grandfather in existing equipment as not to effect the capital of firms that are using equipment and in order to protect the consumer. Imagine you spent alot of quarterly profits to equip your company with a radio system which then becomes prohibited for use, this can hurt future investment, cause unemployment, etc. Strict prohibition is heavy handed and is basically economic waste, theoretically complex electronics can become scrap over night. The decisions should be made to minimize waste and the FCC should make provisions with manufacturers to possibly modify equipment to comply if necessary, in the worst case some waste can still be eliminated.

It would also be nice if manufacturers would work with the consumers to re-certify their equipment so they don't use it as an opportunity for profits at the expense of the consumer.

[CJay]

ef.

If that is the case, then it seems pretty straightforward to crack down on the illegal operators. The whole "x can be used for bad, so let's outlaw x" can be dangerous. Sometimes it is justified, but the same reasoning can be applied to just about everything on earth. [/quote]

There's an obvious logical step here, radios aren't designed to kill things but that's strayubg into an area that's contentious enough already so let's not dwell on that.

I do think having a radio in the hands of someone who knows nothing about how to use it is a risky proposition, at leas the YaeKenCom radios which are limited to the ham bands (unless someone has done the MARS mod which seems very common over in the US) only allow those who know nothing to interfere with us hams and not some critical service.

There are certain Baofengs that bear an FCC mark (mine is one of them) and as such it'd be interesting to see how they're dealt with or if indeed they're carrying that FCC mark legally!

The FCC have stated, informally, that if you're using a Baofeng legally on bands you're licensed for then they're unlikely to take issue with it.

[Beamin]

ef.

If that is the case, then it seems pretty straightforward to crack down on the illegal operators. The whole "x can be used for bad, so let's outlaw x" can be dangerous. Sometimes it is justified, but the same reasoning can be applied to just about everything on earth.

There's an obvious logical step here, radios aren't designed to kill things but that's strayubg into an area that's contentious enough already so let's not dwell on that.

I do think having a radio in the hands of someone who knows nothing about how to use it is a risky proposition, at leas the YaeKenCom radios which are limited to the ham bands (unless someone has done the MARS mod which seems very common over in the US) only allow those who know nothing to interfere with us hams and not some critical service.

There are certain Baofengs that bear an FCC mark (mine is one of them) and as such it'd be interesting to see how they're dealt with or if indeed they're carrying that FCC mark legally!

The FCC have stated, informally, that if you're using a Baofeng legally on bands you're licensed for then they're unlikely to take issue with it.
[/quote]

I saw video on youtube where they did their own testing of the boafung handhelds in a way similar to what the FCC does and it was over powered and way over modulated and had harmonics all over the place. The FCC approval is probably just a sticker. You can transmit on the weather bands with mine and everything that you can receive you can transmit less the FM Broadcast bands.

They are good if you need a cheap two way radio and you need more range then those junk "business band/MURS?" radios they sell for hikers and skiers etc with "2 mile range* _{*2 miles was line of sight no obstructions in ideal conditions} That's actually what it says on the box. Any obstruction and those radios don't work, even if you are 20 feet below a hill they won't go to the other side, they are basically toys. I'm not saying you shouldn't use them without a license, I don't, but if you needed a short term solution and were mindful of the rules, say hiking in a really remote area where no one is for miles or cell phones don't work, then no harm no foul since no one will even hear you let alone interfering with others.

Using them around critical infrastructure even with a license can cause problems. But for me the cost of entry was huge, while I got into the hobby when I was a kid and had money back then, I can't afford a nice radio now, I'm still saving up for a SW rig but that might not be possible now due to cost and not being able to work. Sucks because now that I have time, lots of time and I have no money.

[coppercone2]

well I won't defend shitty analog front ends, sounds like standard chinese design optimizations.

I don't support control system restraints but I also don't support control systems which don't do what they are supposed to do.

[djacobow]

I saw video on youtube where they did their own testing of the boafung handhelds in a way similar to what the FCC does and it was over powered and way over modulated and had harmonics all over the place. The FCC approval is probably just a sticker. You can transmit on the weather bands with mine and everything that you can receive you can transmit less the FM Broadcast bands.

...

Using them around critical infrastructure even with a license can cause problems. But for me the cost of entry was huge, while I got into the hobby when I was a kid and had money back then, I can't afford a nice radio now, I'm still saving up for a SW rig but that might not be possible now due to cost and not being able to work. Sucks because now that I have time, lots of time and I have no money.

It's worth pointing out is that the FCC has said nothing about the spectral quality of this radios. The radios might be causing all kind of violations, but that has not been the FCC's story thus far. And, by the way, though I suspect that some of the Chinese radios are splatter disasters, I think most of them are not. I've seen analyses that show they pretty well-behaved, with, some with spurs that are sometimes several dB higher than than the -40dB they ought to be -- definite violations, but hardly QRM bombs:

https://kd8twg.net/2015/10/17/a-quick-and-unscientific-spectral-analysis-of-two-baofeng-radios/

https://imgur.com/a/up2ne

https://www.reddit.com/r/amateurradio/comments/45oq81/baofeng_vs_yaesu_spurious_emissions_test_results/

https://hamradiohawaii.wordpress.com/2018/03/24/most-baofeng-and-a-few-wauxon-do-not-comply-with-part-97-standards/

I also notice that most people performing these measurements measure the radio's output wired directly into an SA through an attenuator, without taking into account the antenna.

97.307(e) states:
(e) The mean power of any spurious emission from a station transmitter or external RF power amplifier transmitting on a frequency between 30-225 MHz must be at least 60 dB below the mean power of the fundamental. For a transmitter having a mean power of 25 W or less, the mean power of any spurious emission supplied to the antenna transmission line must not exceed 25 µW and must be at least 40 dB below the mean power of the fundamental emission, but need not be reduced below the power of 10 µW. A transmitter built before April 15, 1977, or first marketed before January 1, 1978, is exempt from this requirement.

I just checked 97.3 to see if they define "transmitter". They don't. But one could interpret as meaning the whole radio, not just up to the connector, in which case the performance of the antenna system should be included. Clearly, in the case of HTs with captive antennas, this would be the only way to do it.

It seems that the Baofangs in particular fail spectral purity tests pretty often, but I don't see much evidence that this applies to the TYT's, Anytones, etc.


The FCC approvals, by the way, are not just stickers. You can look them up in the FCC's own database. They came from labs that were certified by the FCC. I've been in compliance labs and will happily agree that the test procedures can be gamed a little, but no, they're not just stickers.

[Beamin]

I saw video on youtube where they did their own testing of the boafung handhelds in a way similar to what the FCC does and it was over powered and way over modulated and had harmonics all over the place. The FCC approval is probably just a sticker. You can transmit on the weather bands with mine and everything that you can receive you can transmit less the FM Broadcast bands.

...

Using them around critical infrastructure even with a license can cause problems. But for me the cost of entry was huge, while I got into the hobby when I was a kid and had money back then, I can't afford a nice radio now, I'm still saving up for a SW rig but that might not be possible now due to cost and not being able to work. Sucks because now that I have time, lots of time and I have no money.

It's worth pointing out is that the FCC has said nothing about the spectral quality of this radios. The radios might be causing all kind of violations, but that has not been the FCC's story thus far. And, by the way, though I suspect that some of the Chinese radios are splatter disasters, I think most of them are not. I've seen analyses that show they pretty well-behaved, with, some with spurs that are sometimes several dB higher than than the -40dB they ought to be -- definite violations, but hardly QRM bombs:

https://kd8twg.net/2015/10/17/a-quick-and-unscientific-spectral-analysis-of-two-baofeng-radios/

https://imgur.com/a/up2ne

https://www.reddit.com/r/amateurradio/comments/45oq81/baofeng_vs_yaesu_spurious_emissions_test_results/

https://hamradiohawaii.wordpress.com/2018/03/24/most-baofeng-and-a-few-wauxon-do-not-comply-with-part-97-standards/

I also notice that most people performing these measurements measure the radio's output wired directly into an SA through an attenuator, without taking into account the antenna.

97.307(e) states:
(e) The mean power of any spurious emission from a station transmitter or external RF power amplifier transmitting on a frequency between 30-225 MHz must be at least 60 dB below the mean power of the fundamental. For a transmitter having a mean power of 25 W or less, the mean power of any spurious emission supplied to the antenna transmission line must not exceed 25 µW and must be at least 40 dB below the mean power of the fundamental emission, but need not be reduced below the power of 10 µW. A transmitter built before April 15, 1977, or first marketed before January 1, 1978, is exempt from this requirement.

I just checked 97.3 to see if they define "transmitter". They don't. But one could interpret as meaning the whole radio, not just up to the connector, in which case the performance of the antenna system should be included. Clearly, in the case of HTs with captive antennas, this would be the only way to do it.

It seems that the Baofangs in particular fail spectral purity tests pretty often, but I don't see much evidence that this applies to the TYT's, Anytones, etc.


The FCC approvals, by the way, are not just stickers. You can look them up in the FCC's own database. They came from labs that were certified by the FCC. I've been in compliance labs and will happily agree that the test procedures can be gamed a little, but no, they're not just stickers.

That seems like common sense to test the antenna and to not is just lazy. What if the great engineers who proudly stick  "Engineered in China!_{made in china}" stickers on the box, know the radio is noisy but have tuned their antenna to cut out the harmonics that fall out of the band, or perform some other such magic? A radio is only as good as it's antenna and while many take the antenna of right away you are now modifying the product in a way not intended by the manufacture and then it that case you are causing the problem by altering their carefully engineered systems! In china they are just stickers. Always check for the FDD seal of approval!

[Howardlong]

https://tech.slashdot.org/story/18/10/06/0356254/its-ham-vsham-as-radio-amateurs-are-in-conflict-at-arrl

What do you guys think of this?

Sorry, I'm a bit late to the party on this. I was an ARRL member for quite some years, but not for about the last five.

I didn't know anything about this ARRL "problem" until I saw this thread, but as soon as I saw who the main protagonist was, it does not surprise me. Quick bio: he's is the original writer of BusyBox, and an open source advocate in extremis: he's a clever chap.

I happened to meet the him at a conference dinner where I was speaking some years ago, and again once at Dayton where, unsolicited, he confronted me about a piece of hardware I'd designed. As far as I could tell he didn't agree with some of the design decisions. While he's welcome to his opinions, he wasn't ever part of the design team, nor was he under no obligation to use my design, but he felt he had some sort of God given right to dictate his requirements to me in a rather harassing way.

It was difficult to have a two way conversation with him, on the contrary, it was very much one way. He didn't seem capable of tolerating my answers about the design, or accept that some might have slightly different opinions and priorities to his. It was quite uncomfortable to say the least.

It was a bit like trying to hold a conversation with Mr Logic from Viz. While I am sure he's well-meaning, I found that his absolutism, brashness and apparent inability to compromise or respect others' opinions makes him a divisive figure. I have no doubt he's exceptionally talented, but needless to say I would avoid sharing a dining table with him again.

[bd139]

That’s about right. Basically he’s an extremist.

[CJay]

I saw video on youtube where they did their own testing of the boafung handhelds in a way similar to what the FCC does and it was over powered and way over modulated and had harmonics all over the place.

I can similarly point you at a few where they seem to be absolutely fine and over modulaton is not a common complaint, it's way more common to find they don't have wide enough deviation, in fact I had to drill out the hole in front of the microphone element to get enough deviation on mine and even now the deviation is a little low...

I've tested mine with the gear I have (CMU200 test set, power meter, Rb locked frequency counter) and I have no problem using the radio as it seems to meet or exceed all regulations, the frequency accuracy out of the box is better than the Yaesu gear I have.

On a couple of the videos I've seen where they claim to test them and find them lacking, there are significant failings in the testing methodology, including overloading the input of the spectrum analyser which causes it to produce some terrible spurious responses.

There's a lot of prejudice against these cheap little radios and I find it difficult not to come to the conclusion that some videos were made with the express purpose of rubbishing them.

The FCC approval is probably just a sticker. You can transmit on the weather bands with mine and everything that you can receive you can transmit less the FM Broadcast bands.

They are good if you need a cheap two way radio and you need more range then those junk "business band/MURS?" radios they sell for hikers and skiers etc with "2 mile range* _{*2 miles was line of sight no obstructions in ideal conditions} That's actually what it says on the box. Any obstruction and those radios don't work, even if you are 20 feet below a hill they won't go to the other side, they are basically toys. I'm not saying you shouldn't use them without a license, I don't, but if you needed a short term solution and were mindful of the rules, say hiking in a really remote area where no one is for miles or cell phones don't work, then no harm no foul since no one will even hear you let alone interfering with others.

I've no idea about the FCC sticker, it's not applicable here so I don't particularly care if it's genuine or not.

As for the rest of your statement, that's exactly the kind of use the FCC are trying to crack down on, the hikers, casual users etc. who have no clue about legal frequencies and will just buy radios and transmit wherever they find themselves. The casual users won't limit themselves to legal frequencies, they won't give a damn if they're smack bang inthe middle of the air band or wherever else as long as they can hear each other so from that point of view, the FCC have a valid case.

Using them around critical infrastructure even with a license can cause problems. But for me the cost of entry was huge, while I got into the hobby when I was a kid and had money back then, I can't afford a nice radio now, I'm still saving up for a SW rig but that might not be possible now due to cost and not being able to work. Sucks because now that I have time, lots of time and I have no money.

The point is that a licenced user is meant to be aware of the problems using a radio on the bands their licence allows them access to, that's kind of a major thing in the training for the licence isn't it?

[CJay]

It was a bit like trying to hold a conversation with Mr Logic from Viz. While I am sure he's well-meaning, I found that his absolutism, brashness and apparent inability to compromise or respect others' opinions makes him a divisive figure. I have no doubt he's exceptionally talented, but needless to say I would avoid sharing a dining table with him again.

You've described an awful lot of the hams out there, see my comments about FT/JS8call

[Howardlong]

It was a bit like trying to hold a conversation with Mr Logic from Viz. While I am sure he's well-meaning, I found that his absolutism, brashness and apparent inability to compromise or respect others' opinions makes him a divisive figure. I have no doubt he's exceptionally talented, but needless to say I would avoid sharing a dining table with him again.

You've described an awful lot of the hams out there, see my comments about FT/JS8call

I certainly won't deny that, although this individual did take it to the top level of the hierarchy IME!

FWIW, I don't think ham radio is alone as a pastime that collects its fair share of interesting characters: another pastime of mine is private aviation and it's pretty much the same there too, although the Darwinian risks are somewhat higher.

[Beamin]

https://tech.slashdot.org/story/18/10/06/0356254/its-ham-vsham-as-radio-amateurs-are-in-conflict-at-arrl

What do you guys think of this?

Sorry, I'm a bit late to the party on this. I was an ARRL member for quite some years, but not for about the last five.

I didn't know anything about this ARRL "problem" until I saw this thread, but as soon as I saw who the main protagonist was, it does not surprise me. Quick bio: he's is the original writer of BusyBox, and an open source advocate in extremis: he's a clever chap.

I happened to meet the him at a conference dinner where I was speaking some years ago, and again once at Dayton where, unsolicited, he confronted me about a piece of hardware I'd designed. As far as I could tell he didn't agree with some of the design decisions. While he's welcome to his opinions, he wasn't ever part of the design team, nor was he under no obligation to use my design, but he felt he had some sort of God given right to dictate his requirements to me in a rather harassing way.

It was difficult to have a two way conversation with him, on the contrary, it was very much one way. He didn't seem capable of tolerating my answers about the design, or accept that some might have slightly different opinions and priorities to his. It was quite uncomfortable to say the least.

It was a bit like trying to hold a conversation with Mr Logic from Viz. While I am sure he's well-meaning, I found that his absolutism, brashness and apparent inability to compromise or respect others' opinions makes him a divisive figure. I have no doubt he's exceptionally talented, but needless to say I would avoid sharing a dining table with him again.

There are so many in this field with aspergers or high functioning autism. They need to wear signs around their necks warning normal people that they can't figure out social skills or how to talk to another human being. Theres a reason why  they put some engineers in the back and sales people up front.

[cdev]

What about the complaints about the (lack of) transparency issues in the ARRL leadership? From what I read, that would seem to be problematic at an organization which claims to represent all US hams (and also all hams, from what I read).

Availability of affordable, legal radios are a part of it but by no means the most important part.
 

[rhb]

The amateur radio organizations like the ARRL for example at least fight to keep our spectrum space, I say "our" spectrum space although I haven't got around to renewing my licence but you know what I mean. The weak signal digimodes have a lot going for them especially on HF and I'm just waiting to get the QRN sorted out at my location.
Maybe if you could use an Arduino shield running digimodes at 10mW in an ISM band that might spark a bit more interest in amateur radio.

Actually, in the US at that power level you can legally use pretty much everything except the radionavigation frequencies.  My personal main interest in amateur radio is being able to send a 2 KB text message point to point over long distances over a 24 hr period at 10 mW.

Of late, I've been wondering if you could do meteor scatter at 435 MHz using ISM modules over distances of a thousand miles or more.  You would need a GPSDO and a lot of DSP, but so far I don't see any reason one could not make that work.

People rejecting digital modes is likely dominated by those who learned CW at 25+ wpm.  RTTY fans are not likely to see digital modes as being any different.  It's important to remember that MOPA CW is as simple as radio communications gets technically.  And skilled operators have a long track record of communicating over very long distances at QPRP power levels.

I remember my dad telling me that when he was young (1930's), some expedition into remote Africa or similar maintained regular contacts at levels of a watt or two (battery powered tubes).  The old guys tend to admire that more because it is *all* human skill.  I think that's fair, but I'm too lazy to develop that level of skill.  I'd rather use my math and DSP skills to substitute for the many hours of practice that top level CW skills require.

But the ARRL is the primary defender and advocate for amateur spectrum allocations.  I'm currently unlicensed, but when I was last  (30+ years ago),  60, 30, 17 and 12 m were not authorized.  So the ARRL has done a good job of advocating for the amateur. I'm looking forward to getting licensed again, especially now that Extra doesn't require CW at 25 wpm.