[BC] Amatuer radio spectrum

[towers at mre.com]

Why not.  Unlike commercial operations where too many squawks crimp
business, Part 97 can run free as long as the licensee doesn't care.  The
whole purpose of the FIPS code is to allow filtering of desired locations
from a much larger data buss.

A while back, a few friends did some digging into the rules and there is
nothing illegal about sending EAS via Part 97 stations. It's the same (or
lack of) rule which allows third party transmission of emergency
information from a government orginated transmission (eg--NWS). The Part
97 station would only monitor the NWS all-hazards or a state defined
transmission.  NOT another OTA station of any kind UNLESS their source is
a government station as well.

The practical problems arise when one starts to consider the formal state
plans. No one considers Part 97 repeaters viable as a LP.  Which is a
terrible, if not ignorant conclusion. There are some Part 97 repeaters
which would put commercial operations to shame in terms of reliability,
but also capability (UPS and generator back-up).

And lets not forget using HF AM or 10M FM to cover larger areas. The
typical General class station could cover a fair portion of the USA from a
modest station using simple dipoles.

MM

> On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 12:05 PM, <towers at mre.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Amateur repeaters are the next best thing to broadcast to get the word
>> out.  I suggested long ago that amatuers be included in the EAS program.
>> There are MANY repeaters which have equal or better coverage than some
>> Class B or C stations.  I know of systems in every part of the USA which
>> would relay EAS/CAP messages. Especially those in areas without LP's in
>> a
>> heartbeat.
>>
>> -----------
>
> That's an interesting idea.  We have a 2-meter repeater here on Mt. San
> Jacinto, at 8500 feet ASL that gets into Las Vegas.  Of course you can't
> do
> that with an HT -- at least 50 watts into a beam will work.  But the
> problem
> is, coverage may be TOO good.  We would need to implement county sub-codes
> because there would be coverage of three California counties and parts of
> Nevada and Arizona, and warnings would not need to be disseminated to
> everybody in those areas.
>