Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net

donate to eham
   Home   Help Search  
Pages: Prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 Next   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: intentional intereference?  (Read 21918 times)
N0YXB
Member

Posts: 1140




Ignore
« Reply #15 on: February 04, 2016, 09:09:28 AM »

What's the frequency, Kenneth?
I guess I didn't notice the "? on first reading the response and thought you were signing. I do not understand the question (i.e. whether frequency means "MHz" or "how often"), nor do I know who Kenneth refers to.

It refers to a song by REM. Dan Rather was attacked one day by a couple of guys and one assailant asked him, "Kenneth, what is the frequency?".
Logged
KA4DPO
Member

Posts: 815




Ignore
« Reply #16 on: February 04, 2016, 09:25:59 AM »

Subject: intentional interference (cannot seem to edit Subject line to fix typo)
I notice some people intentionally interfering with ham communications ranging from isolated 1 on 1 QSO's, nets, contests, etc. It is sporadic but occurs more than I would like to hear (>0 is too much in my view). These people intentionally generate carriers, ramble and swear, or play audio to disrupt communications. I've had my General license for almost two years but have only gotten more active over the last 6-mo or so. I had my General license back in the late 60's but let it lapse before going to college and letting life get in the way but I really don't remember that kind of thing going on back then. Does anyone remember whether it was a problem then too? I've read some articles (e.g. QRZ.com) about some hams getting fined by the FCC. I'm not sure how strong their enforcement/punitive capability is or whether offenders go right back to doing what they were doing. My sense is that they are basically very discontent and unhappy people. I cannot think of a reason why else would they do it? I know people say to just ignore them but sometimes I just sit there and shake my head. Comments?

In answer to your post, I have been licensed since the 60's and you are correct, that sort of stuff was exceptionally rare back then.  I don't recall hearing any truly malicious QRM until the 80's when a group took offense at the MM net on 14.300.  That was a well known feud that ended in FCC fines and even a few people losing their licenses. 

Things were quiet for a time after that but there was a small group of hams around the 1985/87 timeframe who, in spite of the fact they couldn't copy CW at even 5 WPM, magically wound up with general class tickets and a few even got extras.  After the VE program was re-vamped no more magic tickets appeared.   These hams went on to infect the amateur bands with similar bad habits carried over from another service.  We seem to have a fair number of these types today but then it is so incredibly easy to obtain a license now days that anyone can get one.

So yes the problem is much worse than it was in the 60's and 70's.  Sometimes it is embarrassing to listen to that crap and realize I am still a ham.
Logged
KC1BMD
Member

Posts: 610




Ignore
« Reply #17 on: February 04, 2016, 09:39:56 AM »

...Sometimes it is embarrassing to listen to that crap and realize I am still a ham.
I feel the same way. I wish there was some way to rid the air waves of these sick characters,... but I'm a realist.
Logged
DRBEN
Member

Posts: 324




Ignore
« Reply #18 on: February 04, 2016, 10:08:19 AM »

Quote
(...)  Also, with regard to 40 meters from 7.200 thru 7.300; this part of the band is primary useage by amateurs in Region 2 US specific. Apparently we hams in the US have been putting up with international SW stations encroachment in what was historically our total band from 7.0 thru 7.3 Mhz.  Only a few short years ago the international radio bodies were able to compel SW stations to move out of 7.1 thru 7.2 Mhz.  Therefore, when it comes to operating within 7.2 thru 7.3, most if not all hams here in the US could give a rat's ass about interfering with international broadcasters using that spectrum since we are primary users according to our FCC.  What's more shocking to me when it comes to 40 meters is that the ARRL and other radio societies seem to have given up the fight to claim back the 100 Khz (7.2 - 7.3) lost to the international broadcasters and would rather boondoggle membership dues to gain some puny 7 Khz below the broadcast band that only a handful of experimenters have any interest in.

Under current ITU and FCC rules, hams must not interfere with broadcast stations on 40 meters, whether such interference is willful or accidental.

Part 97.101 prohibits "intentional" interference (basically willful jamming).

However, the situation on 40m is specifically addressed in 97.303(i):

"Amateur stations transmitting in the 7.2-7.3 MHz segment must NOT cause harmful interference to, and must accept interference from, international broadcast stations...."


Under 97.303(i) it doesn't matter whether interference is intentional or not. Suppose someone anywhere is trying to listen to one of those international broadcasters on a day when for you the BC station has a very weak signal but because of propagation, for the other person, your signal is stronger and covers the BC signal. If you do not take that possibility into account and your signal prevents him from listing to the BC station, YOU are in violation of 97.303(i). The only way you can avoid any possibility of causing harmful interference is to avoid transmitting on the same frequency.
Logged
WA2ISE
Member

Posts: 1057




Ignore
« Reply #19 on: February 04, 2016, 11:59:14 AM »

"Amateur stations transmitting in the 7.2-7.3 MHz segment must NOT cause harmful interference to, and must accept interference from, international broadcast stations...."


I know a ham who used this to his advantage, in that, during a busy contest, he waits for a broadcast station to sign off, then park himself on the now free frequency and contest on. 
Logged
G3RZP
Member

Posts: 8142




Ignore
« Reply #20 on: February 04, 2016, 12:12:54 PM »

KC2QYM,

I quite agree. In Europe, the Administrations attitudes seem to be that in a band where the amateur service is a PRIMARY (to use ITU nomenclature), amateurs cannot, by definition, cause 'interference' to any other service who just to have to accept it - and any complaints from Administrations on behalf of the amateur services. There is actually a problem at the moment with VP8SGI who are operating on 3525: so is a French naval transmission (equal PRIMARY status!)using some 6kHz wide pulse transmission on the same frequency. Now if VP8SGI were to move to 3520 listening 3522 to 3528 and the usual EU chaos let go, I wonder how long the French Navy would stay there?

To my mind, the wording in Part 97 is more than somewhat ambiguous as to what 'intentional jamming' is. To my mind, if I am operating on 40 m up to 7.2 and a country that footnoted the RRs 5.140, 5.141, 5.141A and 5.141B have difficulties, that is their problem, not mine, and the same should apply in the US. The same applies in 18 MHz with Footnote 5.154. Further, do other services know? There is a story that in 1982, the Royal Australian Navy complained about amateurs in 18 MHz and being told what to do with themselves when they complained on air about interference: it is said that the fact that they were no longer authorised to use 18068 to 18168 had never filtered down to them!

Plus I still feel that all those countries that footnoted frequencies between 7 and 7.2 must get some pretty upset users during the big contests - and long may it continue!
Logged
KC1BMD
Member

Posts: 610




Ignore
« Reply #21 on: February 04, 2016, 02:12:57 PM »

These finer (gray area) points are interesting discussion. However, from my perspective the intentional interference/jamming that I started asking about in this thread is obvious and not gray at all. I wish the FCC could do something about it to clean up the bands (maybe some type of targeted E/M pulse that would melt their equipment, or perhaps traditional forms of insecticide Shocked).
« Last Edit: February 05, 2016, 03:44:28 AM by KC1BMD » Logged
SWMAN
Member

Posts: 1084




Ignore
« Reply #22 on: February 04, 2016, 06:19:57 PM »

BMD. Great that's the best answer I have seen yet. Or how about a good 44 Mag.
« Last Edit: February 04, 2016, 07:01:35 PM by SWMAN » Logged
KC1BMD
Member

Posts: 610




Ignore
« Reply #23 on: February 05, 2016, 03:52:06 AM »

Lately I'm hearing this a couple of times a day. Mostly it's tuning up and obvious. I understand occasionally someone tunes on the exact frequency but that is short duration and typically low power and not what I would call obnoxious (only mildly annoying Smiley). The "tuner" can often be handled by my notch filter (unless he's playing with his VFO simultaneously). Society on the whole is getting much more advanced in some ways but also deteriorating much more in others. Of course, the ham community is just a microcosym.
- Hearing a troublemaker on 7.200 MHz lately.
« Last Edit: February 05, 2016, 02:39:38 PM by KC1BMD » Logged
N1FM
Member

Posts: 178




Ignore
« Reply #24 on: February 05, 2016, 04:51:43 PM »

- Hearing a troublemaker on 7.200 MHz lately.

Yesterday I heard an operator blame N0WOP and N3ZV and AE4FB for jamming. I'd never blame someone unless I saw them sitting at the controls of the controls of the radio. Too many digital recorders and remotely operated stations these days to blame anyone, unless you happen to be sitting in the same room while it's happening.
Logged
KC1BMD
Member

Posts: 610




Ignore
« Reply #25 on: February 05, 2016, 05:08:35 PM »

Yesterday I heard an operator blame N0WOP and N3ZV and AE4FB for jamming. I'd never blame someone unless I saw them sitting at the controls of the controls of the radio. Too many digital recorders and remotely operated stations these days to blame anyone, unless you happen to be sitting in the same room while it's happening.
I have to disagree. The jammer tonight on 7.200 was intentionally disrupting a QSO. He was swearing and playing obnoxious audio as well as talking over everyone in a quite unfriendly manner. There is no doubt. This guy, like many others, do not identify themselves as required. It was not necessary to be in the same room as this clown. When there is a tuner who is jamming, it often goes on for several minutes, sometimes while twisting the VFO knob to be even more obnoxious. Tonight it happened on a net when two stations were trying to work each other for a signal report exchange in difficult conditions. Again it was obvious and I stand by that as do several others who heard it.
Logged
N1FM
Member

Posts: 178




Ignore
« Reply #26 on: February 05, 2016, 06:24:11 PM »

I can't tell you how many times I've heard people being blamed for music or some other transmission, where you never hear a person's voice or an ID. That's what I'm taking about. On the other hand, if you absolutely KNOW who it is, because you recognize his voice, that's a different matter. I was talking about blaming someone making unidentified transmissions, when you really don't know who it is.
Logged
KC1BMD
Member

Posts: 610




Ignore
« Reply #27 on: February 05, 2016, 07:08:20 PM »

I can't tell you how many times I've heard people being blamed for music or some other transmission, where you never hear a person's voice or an ID. That's what I'm taking about. On the other hand, if you absolutely KNOW who it is, because you recognize his voice, that's a different matter. I was talking about blaming someone making unidentified transmissions, when you really don't know who it is.
The people I'm talking about are clearly violating FCC rules/regulations. If you doubt that then we just simply disagree and there's no point discussing it further with you.
Logged
N1FM
Member

Posts: 178




Ignore
« Reply #28 on: February 05, 2016, 07:30:53 PM »


I'm not disagreeing with you but I don't think you understand what I'm saying.

1) If you know who it is, then report it to the FCC.
2) If you don't know who it is, then you're just guessing.
3) Discussing it here won't prevent it and it might make it worse.

Logged
KA4DPO
Member

Posts: 815




Ignore
« Reply #29 on: February 05, 2016, 08:06:18 PM »

Lately I'm hearing this a couple of times a day. Mostly it's tuning up and obvious. I understand occasionally someone tunes on the exact frequency but that is short duration and typically low power and not what I would call obnoxious (only mildly annoying Smiley). The "tuner" can often be handled by my notch filter (unless he's playing with his VFO simultaneously). Society on the whole is getting much more advanced in some ways but also deteriorating much more in others. Of course, the ham community is just a microcosym.
- Hearing a troublemaker on 7.200 MHz lately.

These are the stations that make 7200 KHZ an embarrassment.  I have been recording them and keeping a log for the last few months and have been turning them in to the FCC.  There is one station in Florida that we have been able to determine is somewhere between Jupiter and Ft Lauderdale.  That's a lot of real estate but it gives the FCC a place to start.  Weather they actually do anything remains to be seen but at least it's a step in the right direction.  Anyway, it would be nice if other amateurs would take an active interest in helping to clean up the mess.  We just might make ham radio respectable again if enough people help us take out the trash.
Logged
Pages: Prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 Next   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!