> Subject: Re: [aprssig] Transmitting data to a hot
Ray McKnight shortsheep at worldnet.att.netWed Oct 19 20:40:21 UTC 2005
- Previous message: > Subject: Re: [aprssig] Transmitting data to a hot
- Next message: [aprssig] Re: Lets Fix New-N now!
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
First, I don't know how the "hot air balloon" thread got mixed up with the "worldwind Sirrus airplane tour" thread. Anyway... This has nothing to do with "who is the intended recipient". I *does* have everything to do with the licensee's responsibilities in regard to A) control operator B) preventing unauthorized transmissions The transmission is obviously permitted. What I fiercely protest is providing a transmitter to a unlicensed individual, ESPECIALLY when you damn well know they will be trekking all over the country. And clearly too far away for the control operator to access the equipment if necessary. The control operator has a responsibility to have access to his equipment and for the CONTROL OPERATOR to effect termination of transmissions if necessary. The whole crux of the arguement lies in whether the control operator feels they are complying with this requirement by using the "3rd party method" of control operation - that is to call the unlicensed people who have possession of the tracker maybe on a cell phone, marine or aircraft radio, whetever, and merely tell them to turn it off. My point is that the responsibilities of control operator CANNOT be delegated to an unlicensed individual. I don't care that the final result is that the transmitter gets shut down, in my opinion that job lies with the control operator, no one else. All your friends have to do is ignore you, or be outside radio range, or whatever, and now your ability to shut it off is lost. The important thing here is that NO ONE ELSE other than you the control operator has any responsibilities, and its YOU that will get the fine, suspension or go to jail (most extreme case, but possible). There used to be wording in the regulations and also in various publications, such as ARRL operating guides, that discussed the physical control of your transmitting equipment. How you should prevent access to it, to prevent unlicensed people from making unauthorized transmissions. These methods were mainly physical security, such as fences and locks for repeaters, removing fuses, battery connections and microphones when you took you car in for repairs, etc. This seems to have fallen by the wayside - WHY? And don't overlook the rest of the control operator regulations that specifically prohibit 3rd party traffic from stations operating under automatic control, EXCEPT for automatically repeated digital transmission. Many seem to feel this allows trackers to be placed in the hands of unlicensed people, but I feel this is a serious error and misinterpretation. A tracker is INITIATING a transmission, not relaying it. This whole part merely allows digipeaters to do their thing, and allows us IF WE CHOOSE TO as control operator to IGate unauthenticated traffic onto RF. It has nothing to do with a tracker INITIATING a transmission on behalf of a 3rd party. A few years ago the regulations were also relaxed a lot in regards to log keeping. You used to have to "delegate" control operator responsibilties in writing, most commonly accomplished by noting it in your log, and having the person sign their name. I don't see these changes as any relaxing of your responsbilities, but merely making it easier and less of a hassle to perform them. Placing a tracker in the hands of an unlicensed individual in my opinion is originating 3rd party traffic, which is prohibited under automated control. There are those that agree, and those that don't, and we'll likely never come to a concensus. 73's Ray - WB3ABN Kingston, WA ----- Original Message ----- From: <w2pi at optonline.net> To: "TAPR APRS Mailing List" <aprssig at lists.tapr.org> Cc: <kmcaviezel at global-western.com> Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2005 11:44 Subject: Re: > Subject: Re: [aprssig] Transmitting data to a hot > This has been covered here many times over the years... but here goes once again... > > Unattended (automatic control) transmission of one-way telemetry is permitted under the US FCC amateur rules. > > With respect to one-way transmissions of weather information: > > 97.3(a)(45) defines "telemetry" as "a one-way transmission of measurements at a distance from the measuring instrument." > > 97.111(b)(7) explicitly permits one-way transmission of telemetry information. > > As for unattended transmitters: > 97.3(a)(6) defines automatic control as "The use of devices and procedures for control of a station when it is transmitting so that complaince with the FCC Rules is achieved without the control operator being present at a control point." > > 97.109(d) states that "When a station is being automatically controlled, the control operator need not be at the control point...Automatic control must cease ipon notification by a District Dierector that the station is transmitting improperly..." > > Under 97.221(b), "A station may be automatically controlled while transmitting RTTY or data emissions on the 6 m or shorter wavelength bands..." > > I'm not a lawyer (and I don't play one on TV), but these rules tell me that: > > 1. Using an amateur radio transmitter to transmit weather data (or the position of an aircraft, for that matter) is a permited one-way transmission. (One way means there does not have to be an intended recipient.) > > 2. It is permitted to build a tracker that has built in identification and put it in a place or vehicle that is not attended by a licensed amateur, as long as you can get to it and turn it off if it creates a problem. > > (flame resistant clothing on) > > 73, > Paul W2PI > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Richard Amirault <ramirault at erols.com> > Date: Wednesday, October 19, 2005 1:47 pm > Subject: Re: > Subject: Re: [aprssig] Transmitting data to a hot > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "K. Mark Caviezel" > > Subject: > Subject: Re: [aprssig] Transmitting data to a hot > > > > > > >> From: "Richard Amirault" <ramirault at erols.com> > > >> I assume you would be doing this on the ham bands. > > >> Unless there is a ham > > >> onboard the balloon I don't think that this would be > > >> legal ... > > > > > >>>>> huh? since when did you have to be a liscenced > > > ham to listen ? > > > > The "listening" part is the part you deleted from the quote of my > > message. > > Hams are supposed to talk to other hams, not the general public, > > aren't > > they? A ham transmission, be it voice, fast scan TV, data, or > > whatever, to > > the general public at large is called 'broadcasting' That's > > against the > > rules. A transmission from a ham to a single, specific non-ham > > is, as far > > as I understand it, also against the rules .. THAT was the way the > > original > > question was phrased. (something to the effect of: "I want to > > transmit WX > > data to a hot air baloon") > > > > Richard Amirault N1JDU > > Boston, MA, USA Go Fly A Kite > > > > _______________________________________________ > > aprssig mailing list > > aprssig at lists.tapr.org > > https://lists.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aprssig > > > > _______________________________________________ > aprssig mailing list > aprssig at lists.tapr.org > https://lists.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aprssig
- Previous message: > Subject: Re: [aprssig] Transmitting data to a hot
- Next message: [aprssig] Re: Lets Fix New-N now!
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the aprssig mailing list
