"Steve Robeson, K4CAP" wrote in message
om...
"D. Stussy" wrote in message
rg...
On Mon, 12 Jul 2004, Steve Robeson K4CAP wrote:
Subject: WX Receivers and Repeaters retransmitting non-weather
alerts.


If their transmitters fail, ANYWHERE! :-)

And when was the last time one failed and caused a problem?


Plus if their weather transmitters fail, how are you going to retransmit
that which isn't there.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Subject: WX Receivers and Repeaters retransmitting non-weather alerts.
From: "Dee D. Flint"
Date: 7/18/2004 6:45 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:


"Steve Robeson, K4CAP" wrote in message
. com...
"D. Stussy" wrote in message
. org...
On Mon, 12 Jul 2004, Steve Robeson K4CAP wrote:
Subject: WX Receivers and Repeaters retransmitting non-weather
alerts.


If their transmitters fail, ANYWHERE! :-)

And when was the last time one failed and caused a problem?


Plus if their weather transmitters fail, how are you going to retransmit
that which isn't there.

The do what our club does when the SKYWARN net is active...

Read the announcement from the website.

The announcement is published on NWS's website...Print it off and READ it
on the repeater. THAT way you comply with the letter AND the spirit of the
law, plus you don't create enemies in the local repeater crowd for all the
unannounced "alerts" that would ignore what ever was already going on the
repeater.

73

Steve, K4YZ

In article , "Dee D. Flint"
writes:

If their transmitters fail, ANYWHERE! :-)

And when was the last time one failed and caused a problem?

Plus if their weather transmitters fail, how are you going to retransmit
that which isn't there.

"In emergencies, all infrastructure radios fail but amateur radio
always survives to save the day." :-)

LHA / WMD

"Dee D. Flint" wrote in message ...
"Steve Robeson, K4CAP" wrote in message
om...
"D. Stussy" wrote in message
rg...
On Mon, 12 Jul 2004, Steve Robeson K4CAP wrote:
Subject: WX Receivers and Repeaters retransmitting non-weather
alerts.


If their transmitters fail, ANYWHERE! :-)

And when was the last time one failed and caused a problem?


Plus if their weather transmitters fail, how are you going to retransmit
that which isn't there.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

It's possible that it will keep transmitting on lower power.

When was the last time a failed amateur transmitter caused a problem?

On Sun, 17 Jul 2004, Steve Robeson, K4CAP wrote:
"D. Stussy" wrote in message rg...
On Mon, 12 Jul 2004, Steve Robeson K4CAP wrote:
Subject: WX Receivers and Repeaters retransmitting non-weather alerts.

And if you bothered to look at the current .113, there is also a "waiver" for
retransmitting NOAA/NWS weather transmissions - with the limitation that it is
NOT done on a continuous basis (communications emergency or failure
notwithstanding for which the rules in .400 ff. take priority anyway).

I DID read them, Dieter. You however, seem to think that ANY
acknowldegement of it's opportunity means you can retransmit that
audio "automatically".

The rules specifically say no.

Where does it say that it may NOT be automatically retransmitted? A repeater
MAY be under automatic control (.205(d)), these signals CAN BE RETRANSMITTED
(.113(e)), and there is no rule that specifies that a repeater cannot be the
station doing the retransmission. There very well may be other conditions on
the retransmission, but automatically isn't among the restrictions. [On a
continuous basis is among the restrictions; e.g.]

Neither my $150 2 meter rig nor my $350 V/UHF rig have SAME function in
them either. What would be the point of having those alert tones squawking on
2M or 70CM...?!?!

Because those alert tones are part of "EAS," while the normal weather status
transmission isn't. Emergency communications that may affect life or property
are always ALLOWED - and the concept of the FCC enacting the new EAS to replace
EAB was to have it reach as many [people] as possible as soon as possible.
Yet, we have the FCC's Mr. Cross now saying that this is forbidden. If so,
then I think he's insane - a rules violation is clearly less significant than
saving someone's life.

No one's life is likely to be saved due to retransmitting NWS
audio on an Amateur transceiver, Dieter. Amateur transceivers don't
decode the SAME codes.

The WX-200 unit that the original forum was about is a piece of equipment that
is meant to be interfaced to an amateur repeater that listens to the WX station
and DOES decode SAME codes. Amber Alerts are among the non-weather events that
can be transmitted over the WX stations with a SAME code of "CAE" - and that is
a message conveying a direct threat to a [specific] life.

The FCC response indicates that there is no problem with the WEATHER RELATED
alerts, but apparently states that non-weather related messages that still
represent content regarding a threat to life or property are a violation, even
considering 47 CFR 97.403.

I don't see how ANYTHING can be more important that someone's life.
Apparently, William Cross at the FCC thinks that there is, but doesn't explain
himself.

So...We bump the $20 up to $40...I can find at least a half dozen radios
in that price range that DO have SAME in them. So what then?

Personally, I'd rather keep the radio seperate so I could monitor NOAA
while keeping my 2M rig for 2-way purposes.

Well, no one said that YOU (or anyone else) HAD TO interface your local
repeater to a SAME-activated weatherradio. However, now that the rules do
permit it, why is there this "strange" interpretation of that rule?

There's nothing strange here EXCEPT your interpretation that this
would be a legitimate rebroadcast.

R E A D T H E R E G U L A T I O N, D I E T E R ! ! ! ! ! !

I have. That's the COMMON SENSE conclusion one gets from the plain reading of
the regulations in toto: That non-weather related transmissions that
communicate a [immediate] threat to life or property are provided for and are
LEGAL under .403, so they don't need to be included under .113(e).

The places where NOAA transmissions can NOT be heard are extremely
few. I
am sure there is some remote butte in Montanna or some valley in West
Virginia
that has poor or no coverage...But certainly not enough for the FCC to
reverese
it's policy...Espeically in light of NOAA's expenditures to spread the net.
In
my "neighborhood" alone I can hear transmissions on 3 of the seven channels
on
an HT...I can imagine what I might hear with a dedicated receiver and
appropriate antenna.

Those Amateurs who want to hear it are usually already involved in
SKYWARN
and already know the frequencies to tune to. They don't have to cling to a
local repeater hoping that someone else will "rebroadcast" NOAA audio.

Then explain why the rules were changed a couple of years ago to permit
it....

Explain to me where it's permitted 24/7, Dieter...

Explain to me where it's allowed to be AUTOMATICALLY retransmitted.

Follow along:

97.113(e) No station shall retransmit programs or signals emanating from any
type of radio station other than an amateur station, except propagation and
weather forecast information intended for use by the general public and
originated from United States Government stations and communications, including
incidental music, originating on United States Government frequencies between a
space shuttle and its associated Earth stations. Prior approval for shuttle
retransmissions must be obtained from the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration. Such retransmissions must be for the exclusive use of amateur
operators. Propagation, weather forecasts, and shuttle retransmissions may not
be conducted on a regular basis, but only occasionally, as an incident of
normal amateur radio communications.

Re-read that LAST LINE over and over, Dieter.

I have. That does not forbid automatic retransmission.

It SPECIFICALLY says no automatic retransmissions, Dieter! ! !

I don't see such: The word "automatic" is missing from the text.

It does forbid
scheduled, regular, and/or continuous retransmission. It permits occasional
retransmission. [Emergencies are also not "regular" in nature.]

And without the intervention of a control operator (manual
operation), how do you determine which transmissions are in compliance
with Part 97...?!?!

If I were to answer that question the way you posed it, repeater transmissions
would be themselves a violation - because there could be no retransmission
without manual operation. Obviously, they are not a violation - because they
are allowed to be automatically controlled.

All that is required is that there be a means of intervention available to a
control operator that can be used the moment a violation is detected to prevent
its continuance, JUST LIKE WITH ANY REPEATER OPERATION that is automatically
controlled.

Why is that not obvious to you? Are you really that stupid?

As for automatic, the issue arose with regard to a device that would be
interfaced to an amateur repeater, and repeaters MAY BE AUTOMATICALLY
CONTROLLED, so that's where the "automatic" aspect comes in.

You're trying to twist the regulation to fit YOUR interpretation.

Wrong. Read the identification of the ORIGINAL CONTEXT. The original point
was specifically with regard to the interfacing of a "CAT Automation" WX-200
unit to an amateur repeater.

You can try that excuse if Riley sends you a QSL, but the sting
from tjhe slap on the wrist you'll get will still hurt none-the-less.

So what would be your point? There's no way you can make those
rebroadcasts and NOT be assured that the broadcast was NOT being used by
non-Amateurs.

Not any more so than under circumstances where no shuttle or weather
transmissions are occuring. Amateur frequencies are often included in
scanners - devices which don't require an FCC license to operate.

No, they don't.

But FCC rules DO specify what we can "retransmit" via our
stations. Like I said...you go right ahead and push the envelope on
this one. I think you'll get your wrist slapped.

Yes, the rules do say what we can retransmit:

..113(e) Weather related broadcasts originating from U.S. Government stations
.... if not on a continuous basis ... and [paraphrased] for the exclusive use of
amateur stations.

..403 NO PROVISION OF THESE RULES PREVENTS the use by an amateur station OF
ANY MEANS OF RADIO COMMUNICATION AT ITS DISPOSAL to provide essential
communication needs IN CONNECTION WITH THE IMMEDIATE SAFETY OF HUMAN LIFE and
immediate protection of property when normal communication systems are not
available.

There is NO "normal communication system" designed to reach all people.
Neither is the "EAS" a system for normal use. The only non-weather related
messages over WX receivers would be EAS messages, except for the weekly test
message, that would relate either directly to the safety of human life and/or
property.

Therefore, the content that can come over the WX receiver that is not permitted
by .113 is permitted by .403. So, where's the violation, assuming all other
aspects of the two rules are met?

The only thing I gather from your statements is that you believe that ANY
retransmission of non-amateur communications is a rules violation.

Then you're not paying attention.

That also
is not what .113 says - it is permitting SOME types of non-amateur originated
communications to be [re]transmitted on an OCCASIONAL basis.

And that "OCCASSIONAL" basis will require that a livign, breathing
person make the determination as to whether to make the rebroadcast.

THAT is NOT "automatic".

Being occasional and being automatic have nothing to do with each other.
Something can be BOTH: E.g. The EAS SAME weekly test message occurs for 15
seconds once per week. It is certainly "occasional" because its period isn't
even a measurable percentage of weekly time, and what the repeater does when it
receives the message can be fully automatic, such as having its controller
speak, "EAS Weekly test message received" (then identifying).

Explain why that example isn't occasional nor automatic?

How come I don't find Dieter Stussy in any of those NG's howling about the
inappropriateness of those posts...?!?!

1) I don't read every newsgroup.

Just the one's where you might get your feelings hurt?

2) Spam happens. You expect me to "explain the entire universe" to you?

No I don't. However Bill Pasternak's posts are not spam. YOU
may not like them, but that's you.

Apparently, you couldn't care less about the newsgroup charter/guidelines. I'm
not like you - willing to let the few newsgroups I participate in "go to hell."

3) There is quite alot of "****" posts that happen here.

Most of them by persons who find it necessary to use profanity in
order to effectively express themselves. =)

4) What is the point of complaining about someone else's off-topic post if
nothing can or will be done about it? Here, there is someone to whom I can
complain about to get it stopped.

Yuo are one person "complaining" about a post that IS relevant to
this NG whether it meets YOUR definition or not.

It's not my definition. I didn't write the newsgroup charter, nor did I vote
on founding this group. However, aren't you the hyprocrite? You bitch about
this stuff violating the amateur rules but have no problem with BP's violation
of the newsgroup policy.

5) For the most part, people RESPECT the purpose of the group and usually stay
on topic. Amateur radio seems to attract anarchists by its nature - and it is
clear what we have here is anarchy.

Only to you, and only due to your frustration with Bill.

Lastly, I didn't imply that this wasn't about the rules...It certainly
is...I just said I find it ironic that you want to play junior disc jockey with
NOAA weather broadcasts.

WHERE in LA County can you go and NOT hear an NOAA broadcast, Dieter?

If their transmitters fail, ANYWHERE! :-)

And when was the last time one failed and caused a problem?

The fact that it CAN is all that the amateur rules need address.

Remember that Mr. Cross's comment was the same when the issue of a
communications emergency was brought up. However, is your question even
relevant? It doesn't matter that I can hear up to 5 NWS transmitters where I
may be. The issue was with regard to the retransmission rule. To retransmit,
it first must be heard (obviously).

And if you can hear it, what's the purpose of retransmitting it?

Why ask me? I didn't lobby to have the weather stuff added to .113(e).
However, it is there, and thus there must have been some reason why the FCC
chose or was persuaded to add it. Whether that reason makes sense I cannot
say.

I've been in Mojave, up to Bishop and down in Imperial County and was
never out of earshot of an NOAA weather station...and THAT was in the late 80's
and early 90's. I used to sit in the Marine Expeditionary Airfield shelters
with my HT and copy NOAA.

And having BEEN in SoCal, I am intimately aware at how congested most of
the 2meter band is...All we need is for Uncle Same to "green light" the
rebroadcasts you suggest to have a whole band full of junior weathermen...What
next? Health reports on Ashley and Mary-Kate?

The Olsen Twins are not in the rules. NWS weather transmissions are. I leave
it to you to get the rules amended to add them if that's what you really want.

No, I leave it to YOU to get the rules ammended to what YOU want.
Right now automatic rebroadcast of NWS transmissions is NOT legal.

Your citation?

What I see in .113(e) is that CONTINUOUS retransmission of NWS signals are not
legal, but occasional retransmission for use by amateur stations IS permitted.
The rule makes NO reference to the type of control - automatic or manual.

On Sun, 18 Jul 2004, Dee D. Flint wrote:
"Steve Robeson, K4CAP" wrote in message
om...
"D. Stussy" wrote in message
rg...
On Mon, 12 Jul 2004, Steve Robeson K4CAP wrote:
Subject: WX Receivers and Repeaters retransmitting non-weather
alerts.


If their transmitters fail, ANYWHERE! :-)

And when was the last time one failed and caused a problem?


Plus if their weather transmitters fail, how are you going to retransmit
that which isn't there.

One could retransmit from a neighboring area. (Certainly, that does meet the
"communications failure" part of .403 in the amateur rules. All one needs to
add is an actual emergency - beyond transmitter failure.)

Aside:
When was the last time you listened for NWS transmissions? In the past week, I
have, and I found signals on five of the seven assigned frequencies.

For me, in Los Angeles County:
162.400 KEC62 San Diego (Inland)
.425 WNG57 San Diego (Coastal)
.450 WWG21 Santa Ana
.525 WNG58 Catalina Island (LA Coastal)
.550 KWO37 Mount Wilson (LA Inland)

The two channels I could not hear originate from Santa Barbara and Victorville.
Some of the signals would not be heard under all conditions. Only three of
them are strong enough to be heard in bad weather (i.e. rain/snow).

The NWS has maps showing where their transmitters are. For example, in Kansas,
they are laid out in a repeating cellular pattern, so for those counties that
don't have a transmitter themselves, there are usually 2 or 3 signals from
neighboring counties that can be heard that will overlap the counties lacking
their own. The overlapping transmitters would probably ALL carry messages for
the overlapped counties, even if they only covered part of it, and especially
if one failed.
-----------
Back to the topic:

Why is this in the rules if as K6YZ thinks, no retransmission is EVER
permitted?

Subject: WX Receivers and Repeaters retransmitting non-weather alerts.
From: "D. Stussy"
Date: 7/19/2004 2:45 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

On Sun, 17 Jul 2004, Steve Robeson, K4CAP wrote:

The WX-200 unit that the original forum was about is a piece of equipment
that
is meant to be interfaced to an amateur repeater that listens to the WX
station
and DOES decode SAME codes. Amber Alerts are among the non-weather events
that
can be transmitted over the WX stations with a SAME code of "CAE" - and that
is
a message conveying a direct threat to a [specific] life.

OK, Dieter...We can use that rationale to put all sorts of interfaces on
Amateur Repeaters.

Let's put an automatic alarm on the repeater anytime an aircraft ELT
squawks.

We can also inlcude EPIRB's.

Then we'll also put a receiver to pick up local "Medic Alert" pendants for
the elderly who have fallen at home.

We can then include an alarm for "LOW-JAC" systems...Anytime someone's
stolen HUMMER is within earshot of the repreater we'll get an alarm for that.

While we're at it, let's demand a smoke alarm in microwaves that tell us
when popcorn is about to go critical mass, and we can then shock our neighbors
with how fast we called 9-1-1.

We can also put FRS/GMRS monitors on our Amateur repeaters so any time
one of then transmits a LITZ tone, we get the beep.

You getting the picture of where things go if you open that
floodgate...?!?!

The FCC response indicates that there is no problem with the WEATHER RELATED
alerts, but apparently states that non-weather related messages that still
represent content regarding a threat to life or property are a violation,
even
considering 47 CFR 97.403.

More people are killed by bad weather every year other than auto
accidents. It can drop in on you even if you're in your own home watching
re-runs of "Twister"...

I don't see how ANYTHING can be more important that someone's life.
Apparently, William Cross at the FCC thinks that there is, but doesn't
explain
himself.

I think the above explained it perfectly well.

You want to add an "Amber Alert" to the repeater...?!?! Do it with a
controller card that sends "AE" so those who want to get involved and hear the
broadcast can tune in.

No, I leave it to YOU to get the rules ammended to what YOU want.
Right now automatic rebroadcast of NWS transmissions is NOT legal.

Your citation?

How are you going to meet the criteria of "occassional retransmission"
otherwise, Dieter?

A control operator needs to hear it, decide it's valid, then put it on the
air.

Otherwise you just have a system that breaks in whenever IT wants to,
regardless of what traffic may already be on there.

What I see in .113(e) is that CONTINUOUS retransmission of NWS signals are
not
legal, but occasional retransmission for use by amateur stations IS
permitted.
The rule makes NO reference to the type of control - automatic or manual.

I reiterate...HOW do you meet the prerequisite of "occassional" if the
repeater is set to retansmit any SAME alert "automatically"...????

Steve, K4YZ

Subject: WX Receivers and Repeaters retransmitting non-weather alerts.
From: "D. Stussy"
Date: 7/19/2004 3:07 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

Aside:
When was the last time you listened for NWS transmissions? In the past week,
I
have, and I found signals on five of the seven assigned frequencies.

24/7, here...On my battery-back-up RadioTrash WX receiver. Works just
fine.

We live in a tornado prone area.

Why is this in the rules if as K6YZ thinks, no retransmission is EVER
permitted?

Unless I missed something, K6YZ is not invlved in this discussion.

As for K-4-YZ, he N E V E R said "no retransmission is EVER permitted"...

Please show where I did...

73

Steve, K4YZ