Wa4MJF wrote:
> Well, while there are NOT de jure assignments
> of frequencies by the recognized coordinator, they
> are de facto assignments. Read the letters
> that RH sends out and he enforces the
> actions of the coordinators against interlopers
> on "coordinated" frequency pairs. Also, letters
> to hams who use coordinated repeater imputs
> for simplex.
Ronnie, many of the people who get enforcement letters are known troublemakers who defy the repeater trustee's request to stop malicious interference to repeater users. They are not people who casually use the repeater's output frequency for an occasional QSO.
Also, there are people who set up uncoordinated repeaters which interfere with coordinated ones. Right now our club's coordinated repeater has an uncoordinated one interfering with it. The owner of the uncoordinated repeater will get a warning letter from the FCC one day soon.
> So, again, I say you have de facto freqeuncy
> assignment by the coordinators. I'm all for
> the coordinators, but think you oughta call
> a spade, a spade.
> Were that not so, the FCC would not say anything
> to hams that set up repeaters on bands
> authorized for repeaters, nor would it not be good > amateur
> practice to operate simplex on repeater inputs
> and it would be just like other ham station
> frequency use,
> that is, first station on a frequency has
> the frequency until finished.
Not at all.
You can talk on a repeater's output frequency as long as no one is using the repeater. If and only if someone uses the repeater, you must QSY or go QRT.
I agree that some coordination has gone amok, with frequencies being reserved for friends and coordination applications being denied for all sorts of BS reasons, but it does serve a valid purpose - i.e. to make sure that repeaters (largely unattended) don't have to QSY every time someone wants to use it.
Also, there are so many simplex frequencies that go unused, why are you on a repeater output frequency anyway?