On 9/5/2013 6:58 PM, rickman wrote:
On 9/5/2013 9:16 AM, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 9/5/2013 4:37 AM, rickman wrote:
On 9/4/2013 12:49 AM, Geoffrey S. Mendelson wrote:
rickman wrote:

So at this point it looks like the idea of getting a simple commercial
unit for the truck is not an option for this year (the paddle is two
weeks away). I will look into getting a ham license which I believe
would allow me to communicate with the paddlers. Also, as I have said,
I want to begin monitoring channel 16 at Lake Anna. But no point in
monitoring if I'm not allowed to respond. So maybe this will be an
option for next year...


As we have been saying, there is no problem with you monitoring in your
truck, but your state may have laws against using a scanner or other
receiver in a vehicle.

A good scanner and antenna at home would allow you to monitor them, and
a telephone list of emergency numbers would do you good. If someone is
in trouble, you could use your phone to call for help.

Note that a ham license only allows you to communicate with other hams
on ham frequencies. There is a provision in US law that allows you
to operate outside of the ham bands in an emergency, but it is very
often
misunderstood, and you would be well advised to study it.

The law was intended for situations like the Titanic, where the ship
was
going down, but unlike the Titanic, no one else was able to hear or
speak with them. I doubt that would ever occur on the Chesapeake.

If there is ANY other means of communication, e.g. a VHF radio, a cell
phone,
etc, then it is still illegal for you to operate outside the ham bands.

Is VHF outside of ham bands? I looked at the test data a little, but
didn't find that particular info. From the wording I found about the
licenses, I guess I thought ham use included the marine VHF band. There
seems to be concern about operating at frequencies below 30 MHz unless
you pass a tougher test.

It seems very restrictive that anyone can use a marine VHF radio on
their boat, but if they want to speak with someone on shore that is not
allowed except for special cases like drawbridge operators. I can
understand that marine radios are not for shore to shore communications,
but it only seems natural to use the same radio for ship to ship and
ship to shore comms.


Hams have frequencies all over the place - including VHF, but a ham
license only allows you to use the ham bands. Other bands have other
license requirements.

And yes, the marine band licenses are very restrictive, but for a very
good reason - there are a limited number of channels available, and they
are meant for ship business. The FCC doesn't want everyone and their
brother to use it to chat with the family/friends back on shore; in
busier areas the channels would quickly become too crowded to be usable.
That's why it is limited to shore stations providing services to ships.

Maybe your best bet is to just use cell phones. I would think coverage
around Kent island should be OK.

Lol, if cell phones were remotely practical they would be used. We
carry them on board, but never count on them working... hmmm, sounds a
lot like VHF!

Your concerns with the usage of marine VHF is a bit pedantic. If you
monitor channel 16 in that area 90% of the traffic is, "I caught a large
one, start the grill and chill some beer". It doesn't seem to cause any
problems. I think you over estimate how many ships are out there. It's
not like trucks on the highway, "Breaker, breaker 19..."

Part of the reason for using VHF in kayaks is because that is the type
of radio actually designed for that sort of use. So there are any
number of features built in such as weather warnings, etc. But the main
reason is that if you need help and you use your VHF, you are likely to
get a response from someone very close by who can actually *help* you.
The goal is not to communicate with one person you are kayaking with or
even me on the shore. Other types of radios are just not realistic.


I don't care what you think, or how many ships you think are out there,
or what you hear on the radio.

The bottom line is - what you want to do is illegal, and I gave a
perfectly reasonable explanation for it. You can accept that reason or
come up with your own. I really don't care any more at this point.

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry, AI0K

==================

On 9/5/2013 7:08 PM, rickman wrote:
On 9/5/2013 1:47 PM, Michael Black wrote:
On Thu, 5 Sep 2013, rickman wrote:


It seems very restrictive that anyone can use a marine VHF radio on
their boat, but if they want to speak with someone on shore that is
not allowed except for special cases like drawbridge operators. I can
understand that marine radios are not for shore to shore
communications, but it only seems natural to use the same radio for
ship to ship and ship to shore comms.

The magic reasoning is that if you're on a boat or ship, then you are on
the water, and the marine band would then apply. You may need it for
emergency, or talking to other boats. I'm sure you used to have to be
licensed in order to have a Marine band license, so things have changed.
Indeed, it was only about the late sixties that the VHF Marine band came
into existence, before that you had to use the 2 to 3MHz Marine band,
with much longer antennas and I think more serious licensing
requirements. The VHF Marine band gave a lot more boaters the use of
radio, and some of that was because in putting the band at higher
frequencies, the range was limited, so more people could make use of the
allocation. And about that time, the equipment on the HF marine band got
fancier and more expensive, precisely to make better use of that
allocation.

But, if anyone could get a marine band radio and use it from shore,
what's to keep them from just using it as a general radio band? The
allocation is for marine use, yet if anyone could use a radio for the
band from shore, then they might use it for any purpose.

That's the difference, it's now easy to use the radio from a boat, where
the band is intended for, and difficult to use from shore since you need
to justify that you actually will be using it for ship to shore use.

Faulty reasoning. I can use the marine band radio from shore now. The
only thing stopping me is the law. Last year I was told it was ok to
use it from shore if I was communicating with a boat (which makes
perfect sense), now I find that is *not* the case. During our trip I
heard any number of conversations between boats and what appeared to be
their homes. There was no congestion, no interference of the airways,
just ship to shore communications when useful.



You need to look at the law, not listen to some armchair lawyer. We
pointed you to the actual regulations.

And if someone is caught using a marine radio on shore without a
license, it is a $10K fine - and chances are you will NEVER get ANY kind
of FCC license in the future.

There is every need for a boat to have a radio, no need for everyone on
shore to have a radio, so the licensing is restrictive. Likely not as
restrictive as you perceive it, but still there to weed out the people
who might wish to use it for other things.

The utility of a radio, especially in emergency situations, is greatly
diminished if you can't reach people on the shore. My understanding is
that the range of these radios is *very* short if you are close to the
water. There were kayaks less than 4 miles away who I could not raise
on the radio and I was likely the closest point of assistance. If they
had needed to call for help, who exactly would they be able to reach?


You can reach people on shore. For instance, the Coast Guard regularly
monitors the marine emergency channel, as do many other people. Not to
say other ships. There are lots of people they can reach.

And these *legal* stations have relatively high antennas - 4 miles is
nothing to them.

In the sea kayaking community VHF radio is both regarded as an important
safety device because of the importance of communications and as a joke
because of how often it communicates with no out outside of your paddle
group. I don't think it is unreasonable for shore stations to be able
to monitor VHF and respond in an emergency situation or to prevent one.
In the situation at Lake Anna, if I am not allowed to have a VHF
license for my shore station, then what is the use of having a VHF radio
in a boat?


In a *real emergency*, then rules are out. But you need to learn what
the term emergency means to the FCC. It does NOT mean "there's a storm
brewing". It does, however, mean things like "My boat is sinking and we
need immediate help".

The radio in the boat is not meant to talk to *YOU* - it is to talk to
*anyone* who can help - be it the Coast Guard, a marine, another ship or
whatever.

You keep arguing - but the law is the law. If you don't like it,
petition the FCC to have the law changed. Constantly bitching here is
not going to change anything - and will rapidly turn people off (like it
has me).

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry, AI0K

==================

On 9/5/2013 7:49 PM, Patty Winter wrote:
In article ,
Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 9/5/2013 3:20 PM, Bill Gunshannon wrote:

And i can show oyu hiking magazines with ads for aircraft ELT beacons
for hikers to carry in case they get lost. Don't confue reality with
marketing or sales. Remember, for most of this stuff, selling it isn't
illegal, using it for the advertised purpose is.

Are you sure these are aircraft ELT's? There are personal ones also,
made especially for hikers. They are perfectly legal.

Yeah, it's surprising if companies are trying to sell ELTs to hikers
given that Spot units were designed especially for hikers and, as you
say, are perfectly legal for them to use. I suppose there could be
some ELT companies that don't want to cede the market to Spot and
thus are continuing to try to sell to hikers, but it's unfortunate
if magazines are letting those run ads for products knowing full well
that they'll be used illegally.


Patty



Spot is not the only ELT legal to use by hikers.

Again - are you sure the advertised ELTs are aircraft? What makes you
think they are?

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.

==================

On 9/5/2013 9:24 PM, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 9/5/2013 6:58 PM, rickman wrote:
On 9/5/2013 9:16 AM, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 9/5/2013 4:37 AM, rickman wrote:
On 9/4/2013 12:49 AM, Geoffrey S. Mendelson wrote:
rickman wrote:

So at this point it looks like the idea of getting a simple
commercial
unit for the truck is not an option for this year (the paddle is two
weeks away). I will look into getting a ham license which I believe
would allow me to communicate with the paddlers. Also, as I have
said,
I want to begin monitoring channel 16 at Lake Anna. But no point in
monitoring if I'm not allowed to respond. So maybe this will be an
option for next year...


As we have been saying, there is no problem with you monitoring in
your
truck, but your state may have laws against using a scanner or other
receiver in a vehicle.

A good scanner and antenna at home would allow you to monitor them,
and
a telephone list of emergency numbers would do you good. If someone is
in trouble, you could use your phone to call for help.

Note that a ham license only allows you to communicate with other hams
on ham frequencies. There is a provision in US law that allows you
to operate outside of the ham bands in an emergency, but it is very
often
misunderstood, and you would be well advised to study it.

The law was intended for situations like the Titanic, where the ship
was
going down, but unlike the Titanic, no one else was able to hear or
speak with them. I doubt that would ever occur on the Chesapeake.

If there is ANY other means of communication, e.g. a VHF radio, a cell
phone,
etc, then it is still illegal for you to operate outside the ham
bands.

Is VHF outside of ham bands? I looked at the test data a little, but
didn't find that particular info. From the wording I found about the
licenses, I guess I thought ham use included the marine VHF band. There
seems to be concern about operating at frequencies below 30 MHz unless
you pass a tougher test.

It seems very restrictive that anyone can use a marine VHF radio on
their boat, but if they want to speak with someone on shore that is not
allowed except for special cases like drawbridge operators. I can
understand that marine radios are not for shore to shore
communications,
but it only seems natural to use the same radio for ship to ship and
ship to shore comms.


Hams have frequencies all over the place - including VHF, but a ham
license only allows you to use the ham bands. Other bands have other
license requirements.

And yes, the marine band licenses are very restrictive, but for a very
good reason - there are a limited number of channels available, and they
are meant for ship business. The FCC doesn't want everyone and their
brother to use it to chat with the family/friends back on shore; in
busier areas the channels would quickly become too crowded to be usable.
That's why it is limited to shore stations providing services to ships.

Maybe your best bet is to just use cell phones. I would think coverage
around Kent island should be OK.

Lol, if cell phones were remotely practical they would be used. We
carry them on board, but never count on them working... hmmm, sounds a
lot like VHF!

Your concerns with the usage of marine VHF is a bit pedantic. If you
monitor channel 16 in that area 90% of the traffic is, "I caught a large
one, start the grill and chill some beer". It doesn't seem to cause any
problems. I think you over estimate how many ships are out there. It's
not like trucks on the highway, "Breaker, breaker 19..."

Part of the reason for using VHF in kayaks is because that is the type
of radio actually designed for that sort of use. So there are any
number of features built in such as weather warnings, etc. But the main
reason is that if you need help and you use your VHF, you are likely to
get a response from someone very close by who can actually *help* you.
The goal is not to communicate with one person you are kayaking with or
even me on the shore. Other types of radios are just not realistic.


I don't care what you think, or how many ships you think are out there,
or what you hear on the radio.

The bottom line is - what you want to do is illegal, and I gave a
perfectly reasonable explanation for it. You can accept that reason or
come up with your own. I really don't care any more at this point.

What I want to do is *not* illegal if I get the appropriate license(s).
I don't know why you are getting all huffy about it.

--

Rick

On 9/5/2013 9:30 PM, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 9/5/2013 7:08 PM, rickman wrote:
On 9/5/2013 1:47 PM, Michael Black wrote:
On Thu, 5 Sep 2013, rickman wrote:


It seems very restrictive that anyone can use a marine VHF radio on
their boat, but if they want to speak with someone on shore that is
not allowed except for special cases like drawbridge operators. I can
understand that marine radios are not for shore to shore
communications, but it only seems natural to use the same radio for
ship to ship and ship to shore comms.

The magic reasoning is that if you're on a boat or ship, then you are on
the water, and the marine band would then apply. You may need it for
emergency, or talking to other boats. I'm sure you used to have to be
licensed in order to have a Marine band license, so things have changed.
Indeed, it was only about the late sixties that the VHF Marine band came
into existence, before that you had to use the 2 to 3MHz Marine band,
with much longer antennas and I think more serious licensing
requirements. The VHF Marine band gave a lot more boaters the use of
radio, and some of that was because in putting the band at higher
frequencies, the range was limited, so more people could make use of the
allocation. And about that time, the equipment on the HF marine band got
fancier and more expensive, precisely to make better use of that
allocation.

But, if anyone could get a marine band radio and use it from shore,
what's to keep them from just using it as a general radio band? The
allocation is for marine use, yet if anyone could use a radio for the
band from shore, then they might use it for any purpose.

That's the difference, it's now easy to use the radio from a boat, where
the band is intended for, and difficult to use from shore since you need
to justify that you actually will be using it for ship to shore use.

Faulty reasoning. I can use the marine band radio from shore now. The
only thing stopping me is the law. Last year I was told it was ok to
use it from shore if I was communicating with a boat (which makes
perfect sense), now I find that is *not* the case. During our trip I
heard any number of conversations between boats and what appeared to be
their homes. There was no congestion, no interference of the airways,
just ship to shore communications when useful.



You need to look at the law, not listen to some armchair lawyer. We
pointed you to the actual regulations.

And if someone is caught using a marine radio on shore without a
license, it is a $10K fine - and chances are you will NEVER get ANY kind
of FCC license in the future.

There is every need for a boat to have a radio, no need for everyone on
shore to have a radio, so the licensing is restrictive. Likely not as
restrictive as you perceive it, but still there to weed out the people
who might wish to use it for other things.

The utility of a radio, especially in emergency situations, is greatly
diminished if you can't reach people on the shore. My understanding is
that the range of these radios is *very* short if you are close to the
water. There were kayaks less than 4 miles away who I could not raise
on the radio and I was likely the closest point of assistance. If they
had needed to call for help, who exactly would they be able to reach?


You can reach people on shore. For instance, the Coast Guard regularly
monitors the marine emergency channel, as do many other people. Not to
say other ships. There are lots of people they can reach.

And these *legal* stations have relatively high antennas - 4 miles is
nothing to them.

So how far is it to the nearest coast guard station at Lake Anna?


In the sea kayaking community VHF radio is both regarded as an important
safety device because of the importance of communications and as a joke
because of how often it communicates with no out outside of your paddle
group. I don't think it is unreasonable for shore stations to be able
to monitor VHF and respond in an emergency situation or to prevent one.
In the situation at Lake Anna, if I am not allowed to have a VHF
license for my shore station, then what is the use of having a VHF radio
in a boat?


In a *real emergency*, then rules are out. But you need to learn what
the term emergency means to the FCC. It does NOT mean "there's a storm
brewing". It does, however, mean things like "My boat is sinking and we
need immediate help".

The radio in the boat is not meant to talk to *YOU* - it is to talk to
*anyone* who can help - be it the Coast Guard, a marine, another ship or
whatever.

I think we already covered the fact that neither the Coast Guard or
anyone else is monitoring VHF at Lake Anna. Marine VHF is *not* solely
for commercial uses and it is *not* solely for emergencies. As such it
is much more limited by not allowing communications with shore stations
other than the limited set currently allowed.


You keep arguing - but the law is the law. If you don't like it,
petition the FCC to have the law changed. Constantly bitching here is
not going to change anything - and will rapidly turn people off (like it
has me).

I understand what I've been told about the law. I'm saying it seems to
be a bit over strict. You seem to have a problem with the fact that I
have an opinion. If you don't like my posts, why do you reply?

I'm trying to find a legal way to do what I want. I still don't know
that this is not allowed. I do now know that I will have to file for a
license and possibly two. I appreciate the help and I regret that you
consider my posts to be "bitching". I would suggest that you reread
them with a different perspective.

--

Rick

On 9/5/2013 3:20 PM, Bill Gunshannon wrote:

In any event what the original poster wants to do just isn't legal
and all the grousing about why not isn't going to change that.

I don't think that has been established yet. I think there is an
opportunity for a license for a shore station. What I'm not clear on is
whether this has to be a fixed station or if it can be mobile. I know
the FCC often has different regulations for the two. I have also seen a
different license for shore use of a hand held unit (unless I am
confusing the two). I don't think the issue is that it *is* illegal,
but rather just how I would justify my use and exactly what the
restrictions will be.


Cellphones still look like the most practical to me.

That is because you aren't familiar with the area and likely aren't
familiar with most areas where people often kayak. Cell phones work
well in cities and near major roads. Other places the coverage can be
spotty or non-existent. Much of the Chesapeake bay has no cell coverage
regardless of what the coverage maps say. I know this from
experience... and my carrier is Verizon. Lake Anna is not much
different, more people, but not a lot more.

--

Rick

On 9/5/2013 9:53 PM, rickman wrote:
On 9/5/2013 9:24 PM, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 9/5/2013 6:58 PM, rickman wrote:
On 9/5/2013 9:16 AM, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 9/5/2013 4:37 AM, rickman wrote:
On 9/4/2013 12:49 AM, Geoffrey S. Mendelson wrote:
rickman wrote:

So at this point it looks like the idea of getting a simple
commercial
unit for the truck is not an option for this year (the paddle is two
weeks away). I will look into getting a ham license which I believe
would allow me to communicate with the paddlers. Also, as I have
said,
I want to begin monitoring channel 16 at Lake Anna. But no point in
monitoring if I'm not allowed to respond. So maybe this will be an
option for next year...


As we have been saying, there is no problem with you monitoring in
your
truck, but your state may have laws against using a scanner or other
receiver in a vehicle.

A good scanner and antenna at home would allow you to monitor them,
and
a telephone list of emergency numbers would do you good. If
someone is
in trouble, you could use your phone to call for help.

Note that a ham license only allows you to communicate with other
hams
on ham frequencies. There is a provision in US law that allows you
to operate outside of the ham bands in an emergency, but it is very
often
misunderstood, and you would be well advised to study it.

The law was intended for situations like the Titanic, where the ship
was
going down, but unlike the Titanic, no one else was able to hear or
speak with them. I doubt that would ever occur on the Chesapeake.

If there is ANY other means of communication, e.g. a VHF radio, a
cell
phone,
etc, then it is still illegal for you to operate outside the ham
bands.

Is VHF outside of ham bands? I looked at the test data a little, but
didn't find that particular info. From the wording I found about the
licenses, I guess I thought ham use included the marine VHF band.
There
seems to be concern about operating at frequencies below 30 MHz unless
you pass a tougher test.

It seems very restrictive that anyone can use a marine VHF radio on
their boat, but if they want to speak with someone on shore that is
not
allowed except for special cases like drawbridge operators. I can
understand that marine radios are not for shore to shore
communications,
but it only seems natural to use the same radio for ship to ship and
ship to shore comms.


Hams have frequencies all over the place - including VHF, but a ham
license only allows you to use the ham bands. Other bands have other
license requirements.

And yes, the marine band licenses are very restrictive, but for a very
good reason - there are a limited number of channels available, and
they
are meant for ship business. The FCC doesn't want everyone and their
brother to use it to chat with the family/friends back on shore; in
busier areas the channels would quickly become too crowded to be
usable.
That's why it is limited to shore stations providing services to ships.

Maybe your best bet is to just use cell phones. I would think coverage
around Kent island should be OK.

Lol, if cell phones were remotely practical they would be used. We
carry them on board, but never count on them working... hmmm, sounds a
lot like VHF!

Your concerns with the usage of marine VHF is a bit pedantic. If you
monitor channel 16 in that area 90% of the traffic is, "I caught a large
one, start the grill and chill some beer". It doesn't seem to cause any
problems. I think you over estimate how many ships are out there. It's
not like trucks on the highway, "Breaker, breaker 19..."

Part of the reason for using VHF in kayaks is because that is the type
of radio actually designed for that sort of use. So there are any
number of features built in such as weather warnings, etc. But the main
reason is that if you need help and you use your VHF, you are likely to
get a response from someone very close by who can actually *help* you.
The goal is not to communicate with one person you are kayaking with or
even me on the shore. Other types of radios are just not realistic.


I don't care what you think, or how many ships you think are out there,
or what you hear on the radio.

The bottom line is - what you want to do is illegal, and I gave a
perfectly reasonable explanation for it. You can accept that reason or
come up with your own. I really don't care any more at this point.

What I want to do is *not* illegal if I get the appropriate license(s).
I don't know why you are getting all huffy about it.


That's just it. You don't fit into any of the categories for which a
license is issued. "Providing services" does not mean giving weather
reports to your pals.

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.

==================

On 9/5/2013 10:06 PM, rickman wrote:
On 9/5/2013 9:30 PM, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 9/5/2013 7:08 PM, rickman wrote:
On 9/5/2013 1:47 PM, Michael Black wrote:
On Thu, 5 Sep 2013, rickman wrote:


It seems very restrictive that anyone can use a marine VHF radio on
their boat, but if they want to speak with someone on shore that is
not allowed except for special cases like drawbridge operators. I can
understand that marine radios are not for shore to shore
communications, but it only seems natural to use the same radio for
ship to ship and ship to shore comms.

The magic reasoning is that if you're on a boat or ship, then you
are on
the water, and the marine band would then apply. You may need it for
emergency, or talking to other boats. I'm sure you used to have to be
licensed in order to have a Marine band license, so things have
changed.
Indeed, it was only about the late sixties that the VHF Marine band
came
into existence, before that you had to use the 2 to 3MHz Marine band,
with much longer antennas and I think more serious licensing
requirements. The VHF Marine band gave a lot more boaters the use of
radio, and some of that was because in putting the band at higher
frequencies, the range was limited, so more people could make use of
the
allocation. And about that time, the equipment on the HF marine band
got
fancier and more expensive, precisely to make better use of that
allocation.

But, if anyone could get a marine band radio and use it from shore,
what's to keep them from just using it as a general radio band? The
allocation is for marine use, yet if anyone could use a radio for the
band from shore, then they might use it for any purpose.

That's the difference, it's now easy to use the radio from a boat,
where
the band is intended for, and difficult to use from shore since you
need
to justify that you actually will be using it for ship to shore use.

Faulty reasoning. I can use the marine band radio from shore now. The
only thing stopping me is the law. Last year I was told it was ok to
use it from shore if I was communicating with a boat (which makes
perfect sense), now I find that is *not* the case. During our trip I
heard any number of conversations between boats and what appeared to be
their homes. There was no congestion, no interference of the airways,
just ship to shore communications when useful.



You need to look at the law, not listen to some armchair lawyer. We
pointed you to the actual regulations.

And if someone is caught using a marine radio on shore without a
license, it is a $10K fine - and chances are you will NEVER get ANY kind
of FCC license in the future.

There is every need for a boat to have a radio, no need for everyone on
shore to have a radio, so the licensing is restrictive. Likely not as
restrictive as you perceive it, but still there to weed out the people
who might wish to use it for other things.

The utility of a radio, especially in emergency situations, is greatly
diminished if you can't reach people on the shore. My understanding is
that the range of these radios is *very* short if you are close to the
water. There were kayaks less than 4 miles away who I could not raise
on the radio and I was likely the closest point of assistance. If they
had needed to call for help, who exactly would they be able to reach?


You can reach people on shore. For instance, the Coast Guard regularly
monitors the marine emergency channel, as do many other people. Not to
say other ships. There are lots of people they can reach.

And these *legal* stations have relatively high antennas - 4 miles is
nothing to them.

So how far is it to the nearest coast guard station at Lake Anna?


I don't know, and I don't care. It is immaterial.


In the sea kayaking community VHF radio is both regarded as an important
safety device because of the importance of communications and as a joke
because of how often it communicates with no out outside of your paddle
group. I don't think it is unreasonable for shore stations to be able
to monitor VHF and respond in an emergency situation or to prevent one.
In the situation at Lake Anna, if I am not allowed to have a VHF
license for my shore station, then what is the use of having a VHF radio
in a boat?


In a *real emergency*, then rules are out. But you need to learn what
the term emergency means to the FCC. It does NOT mean "there's a storm
brewing". It does, however, mean things like "My boat is sinking and we
need immediate help".

The radio in the boat is not meant to talk to *YOU* - it is to talk to
*anyone* who can help - be it the Coast Guard, a marine, another ship or
whatever.

I think we already covered the fact that neither the Coast Guard or
anyone else is monitoring VHF at Lake Anna. Marine VHF is *not* solely
for commercial uses and it is *not* solely for emergencies. As such it
is much more limited by not allowing communications with shore stations
other than the limited set currently allowed.


I didn't say it was solely for commercial uses or solely for
emergencies. But it is not for talking to your pals in their boats when
you're on the ground.


You keep arguing - but the law is the law. If you don't like it,
petition the FCC to have the law changed. Constantly bitching here is
not going to change anything - and will rapidly turn people off (like it
has me).

I understand what I've been told about the law. I'm saying it seems to
be a bit over strict. You seem to have a problem with the fact that I
have an opinion. If you don't like my posts, why do you reply?

I'm trying to find a legal way to do what I want. I still don't know
that this is not allowed. I do now know that I will have to file for a
license and possibly two. I appreciate the help and I regret that you
consider my posts to be "bitching". I would suggest that you reread
them with a different perspective.


Then petition the FCC for a change in the law.

You have gone beyond constructive; you are just repeating yourself now.
It has become tiresome.


--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.

==================

On 9/5/2013 11:35 PM, Jerry Stuckle wrote:

That's just it. You don't fit into any of the categories for which a
license is issued. "Providing services" does not mean giving weather
reports to your pals.

They don't need weather reports, they have access to that themselves.

--

Rick

On 9/5/2013 11:38 PM, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 9/5/2013 10:06 PM, rickman wrote:
On 9/5/2013 9:30 PM, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 9/5/2013 7:08 PM, rickman wrote:
On 9/5/2013 1:47 PM, Michael Black wrote:
On Thu, 5 Sep 2013, rickman wrote:


It seems very restrictive that anyone can use a marine VHF radio on
their boat, but if they want to speak with someone on shore that is
not allowed except for special cases like drawbridge operators. I can
understand that marine radios are not for shore to shore
communications, but it only seems natural to use the same radio for
ship to ship and ship to shore comms.

The magic reasoning is that if you're on a boat or ship, then you
are on
the water, and the marine band would then apply. You may need it for
emergency, or talking to other boats. I'm sure you used to have to be
licensed in order to have a Marine band license, so things have
changed.
Indeed, it was only about the late sixties that the VHF Marine band
came
into existence, before that you had to use the 2 to 3MHz Marine band,
with much longer antennas and I think more serious licensing
requirements. The VHF Marine band gave a lot more boaters the use of
radio, and some of that was because in putting the band at higher
frequencies, the range was limited, so more people could make use of
the
allocation. And about that time, the equipment on the HF marine band
got
fancier and more expensive, precisely to make better use of that
allocation.

But, if anyone could get a marine band radio and use it from shore,
what's to keep them from just using it as a general radio band? The
allocation is for marine use, yet if anyone could use a radio for the
band from shore, then they might use it for any purpose.

That's the difference, it's now easy to use the radio from a boat,
where
the band is intended for, and difficult to use from shore since you
need
to justify that you actually will be using it for ship to shore use.

Faulty reasoning. I can use the marine band radio from shore now. The
only thing stopping me is the law. Last year I was told it was ok to
use it from shore if I was communicating with a boat (which makes
perfect sense), now I find that is *not* the case. During our trip I
heard any number of conversations between boats and what appeared to be
their homes. There was no congestion, no interference of the airways,
just ship to shore communications when useful.



You need to look at the law, not listen to some armchair lawyer. We
pointed you to the actual regulations.

And if someone is caught using a marine radio on shore without a
license, it is a $10K fine - and chances are you will NEVER get ANY kind
of FCC license in the future.

There is every need for a boat to have a radio, no need for
everyone on
shore to have a radio, so the licensing is restrictive. Likely not as
restrictive as you perceive it, but still there to weed out the people
who might wish to use it for other things.

The utility of a radio, especially in emergency situations, is greatly
diminished if you can't reach people on the shore. My understanding is
that the range of these radios is *very* short if you are close to the
water. There were kayaks less than 4 miles away who I could not raise
on the radio and I was likely the closest point of assistance. If they
had needed to call for help, who exactly would they be able to reach?


You can reach people on shore. For instance, the Coast Guard regularly
monitors the marine emergency channel, as do many other people. Not to
say other ships. There are lots of people they can reach.

And these *legal* stations have relatively high antennas - 4 miles is
nothing to them.

So how far is it to the nearest coast guard station at Lake Anna?


I don't know, and I don't care. It is immaterial.


In the sea kayaking community VHF radio is both regarded as an
important
safety device because of the importance of communications and as a joke
because of how often it communicates with no out outside of your paddle
group. I don't think it is unreasonable for shore stations to be able
to monitor VHF and respond in an emergency situation or to prevent one.
In the situation at Lake Anna, if I am not allowed to have a VHF
license for my shore station, then what is the use of having a VHF
radio
in a boat?


In a *real emergency*, then rules are out. But you need to learn what
the term emergency means to the FCC. It does NOT mean "there's a storm
brewing". It does, however, mean things like "My boat is sinking and we
need immediate help".

The radio in the boat is not meant to talk to *YOU* - it is to talk to
*anyone* who can help - be it the Coast Guard, a marine, another ship or
whatever.

I think we already covered the fact that neither the Coast Guard or
anyone else is monitoring VHF at Lake Anna. Marine VHF is *not* solely
for commercial uses and it is *not* solely for emergencies. As such it
is much more limited by not allowing communications with shore stations
other than the limited set currently allowed.


I didn't say it was solely for commercial uses or solely for
emergencies. But it is not for talking to your pals in their boats when
you're on the ground.


You keep arguing - but the law is the law. If you don't like it,
petition the FCC to have the law changed. Constantly bitching here is
not going to change anything - and will rapidly turn people off (like it
has me).

I understand what I've been told about the law. I'm saying it seems to
be a bit over strict. You seem to have a problem with the fact that I
have an opinion. If you don't like my posts, why do you reply?

I'm trying to find a legal way to do what I want. I still don't know
that this is not allowed. I do now know that I will have to file for a
license and possibly two. I appreciate the help and I regret that you
consider my posts to be "bitching". I would suggest that you reread
them with a different perspective.


Then petition the FCC for a change in the law.

You have gone beyond constructive; you are just repeating yourself now.
It has become tiresome.

Ok, then I guess you won't need to reply further. Thanks for the info
you have provided. It has been useful. I will be looking into
obtaining one of the licenses that have been discussed.

--

Rick