They may just be walking off the low end of 10 m... and turn until they hear something!!!!!
-
You can now help support WorldwideDX when you shop on Amazon at no additional cost to you! Simply follow this Shop on Amazon link first and a portion of any purchase is sent to WorldwideDX to help with site costs.
What would be the reaction if Hams used 11m legally using their calls.
- Thread starter KM3F
- Start date
I understand, per ARRL, that FCC designated call signs shall not be used on 11 meter CB band. They also say that you shall not exceed 4 watt carrier, but that's often ignored. I wouldn't use my call sign on there, anyone with half a brain and easily triggered can locate you and obtain sensitive information. I think best not, but you do whatever you want.
Really? IIRC a callsign issued to one radio service is NOT to be used in another radio service. Who in their right mind would use a ham callsign on 11m anyway? Pretty sure I read that somewhere at sometime. Maybe I dreamt it. Jeff.........maybe the guy you heard was bootlegging a call to get someone else in trouble.
(just because I think the subject is interesting)
So much to cover here......
When it comes to using an FCC Callsign issued in one particular service.........
I would think that it would depend on whether or not a "callsign" is required in BOTH services. Like... I would not expect that it would be acceptable to use an amateur service callsign in the GMRS service. In my thinking.... Part 97 requires a valid callsign to be used in the allowed amateur bands that are specified by Part 97. Likewise, I would not think it acceptable to use the GMRS issued callsign in the Part 97 Amateur bands. I believe that this is because each of those two services states that there are requirements for licenses (GMRS is 95.1705 and Amateur is 97.5). Each of those two services also states a requirement for "Station Identification" (GMRS is 95.1751 and Amateur is 97.119).
CB - Part 95 Subpart D - does not say anything at all about either subject. It does not mention a license and it does not mention any "Station Identification" requirements. At all !!!! It doesn't say what you CAN use. It doesn't say what you CAN'T use. My interpretation here is that they "don't have a dog in the fight" regarding how one identifies themselves.... as there is not even a requirement that they DO identify themselves.
So, adapting to that, handles have been adopted... and the choice it left up to the individual operator. I've seen people using their names, organizational callsigns, self-assigned callsigns.... basically... whatever they want to call themselves is fine.
Using a callsign that was assigned for one service.... in another service where a callsign is required and is of a different "format specification".... does not satisfy the requirement of the callsign in that band. So essentially... the violation is that you are not using a callsign that is appropriate for that band.
But using a callsign that was assigned for any service.... in a service that does NOT require a callsign or even identification.... I'm not sure that I think it is illegal.... and to that end.... I would possibly scratch my head, think about it for a minute....and then move on... and struggle to live the rest of a satisfying and meaningful life. I don't think any ill effects would persist!!!!!
So much to cover here......
When it comes to using an FCC Callsign issued in one particular service.........
I would think that it would depend on whether or not a "callsign" is required in BOTH services. Like... I would not expect that it would be acceptable to use an amateur service callsign in the GMRS service. In my thinking.... Part 97 requires a valid callsign to be used in the allowed amateur bands that are specified by Part 97. Likewise, I would not think it acceptable to use the GMRS issued callsign in the Part 97 Amateur bands. I believe that this is because each of those two services states that there are requirements for licenses (GMRS is 95.1705 and Amateur is 97.5). Each of those two services also states a requirement for "Station Identification" (GMRS is 95.1751 and Amateur is 97.119).
CB - Part 95 Subpart D - does not say anything at all about either subject. It does not mention a license and it does not mention any "Station Identification" requirements. At all !!!! It doesn't say what you CAN use. It doesn't say what you CAN'T use. My interpretation here is that they "don't have a dog in the fight" regarding how one identifies themselves.... as there is not even a requirement that they DO identify themselves.
So, adapting to that, handles have been adopted... and the choice it left up to the individual operator. I've seen people using their names, organizational callsigns, self-assigned callsigns.... basically... whatever they want to call themselves is fine.
Using a callsign that was assigned for one service.... in another service where a callsign is required and is of a different "format specification".... does not satisfy the requirement of the callsign in that band. So essentially... the violation is that you are not using a callsign that is appropriate for that band.
But using a callsign that was assigned for any service.... in a service that does NOT require a callsign or even identification.... I'm not sure that I think it is illegal.... and to that end.... I would possibly scratch my head, think about it for a minute....and then move on... and struggle to live the rest of a satisfying and meaningful life. I don't think any ill effects would persist!!!!!
If I heard hams using their call signs, I would double check what frequency I am on...
Possibly the most "right" response of ALL!!!!!!!If I heard hams using their call signs, I would double check what frequency I am on...
It was on channel 39 and he was throwing out the call, I answered and told him it was unusual to hear a ham call on CB channels.
He said thanks for the contact, that's about it.
I moved on and he was still calling CQ.
I was mobile, did not write it down, did not look it up.
Very well could have been someone using a pirated call, however I am not the frequency police and just went back to working DX.
Also made contacts on ten and checked into the 12 meter net from the mobile that same day.
It's on him if he is a legit ham using his call inappropriately, its not my job or my place to judge, I only worry about my own conduct on the air.
There are plenty of Kilohurts cops on the band's to do that, I just go on playing radio.
73
Jeff
He said thanks for the contact, that's about it.
I moved on and he was still calling CQ.
I was mobile, did not write it down, did not look it up.
Very well could have been someone using a pirated call, however I am not the frequency police and just went back to working DX.
Also made contacts on ten and checked into the 12 meter net from the mobile that same day.
It's on him if he is a legit ham using his call inappropriately, its not my job or my place to judge, I only worry about my own conduct on the air.
There are plenty of Kilohurts cops on the band's to do that, I just go on playing radio.
73
Jeff
Very well could have been, or just knows the format for a 2×3 call and made it up.
Again, all of that is on him, I only use my call on the band's I am licensed for.
73
Jeff
If you read a little further, post #24 has the explanation.
That is one of the reasons I have an issue with today's exam structure. A total idiot can get their license with a couple hours memorizing answers to questions without having a clue as to why the answer is as it is. No offense to licensed idiots out there BTW. IMHO there is NO excuse for not knowing your band edges even on your first day on the air.
I'll call BS on post #24 too lol. Rise time? Do they mean response time? The cellular tower is not measuring signal rise time. What is the rise time of a fixed frequency signal anyhow? A function of its peak output power only. How close are you to the tower??? On top of that, measuring the rise time of any signal assumes the bandwidth to do so, but yet we are talking about a receiver with a tuned antenna and a tuned front end. Multi-path/fading make this even more unrealistic.
If a signal has any sort of fingerprint, it would be its spurious emissions content, and there is no database for tracking people down based on that as countless factors affect those emissions such as power supply noise, antenna bandwidth and the gold content of the screwdriver used.
Wikipedia is not a reliable source of information. If it's not a page that has been heavily edited for political reasons, it's got a warning about a lack of citations. So, its either unverified nonsense or it has been changed so many times that anything it says should be taken with a grain of do better research. And they still beg like they are broke.
If a signal has any sort of fingerprint, it would be its spurious emissions content, and there is no database for tracking people down based on that as countless factors affect those emissions such as power supply noise, antenna bandwidth and the gold content of the screwdriver used.
Wikipedia is not a reliable source of information. If it's not a page that has been heavily edited for political reasons, it's got a warning about a lack of citations. So, its either unverified nonsense or it has been changed so many times that anything it says should be taken with a grain of do better research. And they still beg like they are broke.
Too bad FRN's weren't a little shorter lol, at least its not service-specific like a call.. This is double-0-fifteen plus six more waving a hand from the frozen north.
It's a good thing that they cited references.
ieeexplore.ieee.org
dl.acm.org
Improved Radiometric Identification of Wireless Devices Using MIMO Transmission
Authenticating wireless devices based on features of their transmitted waveform has become a topic of considerable interest. Recent work in this arena has shown that examination of features in a modulated waveform can lead to highly precise identification of 802.11 devices. This paper...
Stay Connected, Leave no Trace: Enhancing Security and Privacy in WiFi via Obfuscating Radiometric Fingerprints: Proceedings of the ACM on Measurement and Analysis of Computing Systems: Vol 4, No 3
The intrinsic hardware imperfection of WiFi chipsets manifests itself in the transmitted signal, leading to a unique radiometric fingerprint. This fingerprint can be used as an additional means of authentication to enhance security. In fact, recent works ...
dl.acm.org
Sorry to inform you that you are wrong.
The FCC has a way to take a on the air signal and analyse the signature of the signal, this technology has been available for a while.
They have lots of tools available to them to hunt down signals.
Just because they don't use them very often doesn't mean they don't have the capability.
Do a Google search for " Transmitter Fingerprinting Software"
It is a real thing.
73 Jeff
Last edited: