146.52 MHz hailing frequency ? in Ham Radio http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r21023265 en Wed, 11 Nov 2009 13:33:47 EDT Wed, 11 Nov 2009 13:33:47 EDT Re: 146.52 MHz hailing frequency ? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21043996 n1zuk : Again, it comes to how much activity that 2M FM simplex gets in the area that you are operating. All of the amateur frequency allocations are subject to "use it, or lose it".

Here in northern Vermont, there is virtually no FM simplex activity. But then, if you never hear anyone on a particular band/mode, why would anyone be listening there in the first place? An occasional short QSO on the calling frequency might get more people to listen for someone to speak with, thus increasing activity overall.

Of course, if you are in an area where FM simplex is active, you would of course QSY after making your initial contact.
--
New to Forum Life? Click here and learn.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21043996 Tue, 02 Sep 2008 09:39:04 EDT Re: 146.52 MHz hailing frequency ? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21043953 wenter99 :
said by battleop See Profile :

I don't think my post came out as I intended for it to. I was trying to say that you do not HAVE to move but it's common courtesy to move...
When you become a HAM, you agree to follow all established rules and regulations. In the case of using a "calling channel" it should be used for just exactly what the term implies, calling another operator. Once contact has been established the conversation should be moved to an appropriate alternate frequency.

That said, there is no "law" that has been broken if you don't move, it's just considered poor operating practice. HAMs who operate outside the long established gentlemens agreement of proper proceedure or conduct will earn themselves the title of lid, or worse. :(

Terry
--
"Sometimes all you can do is just hunker down and take it, like a jackass caught out in a hail storm". LBJ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21043953 Tue, 02 Sep 2008 09:29:04 EDT Re: 146.52 MHz hailing frequency ? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21032750 KA3SGM :
said by mb See Profile :

All these Q signals being thrown around. Don't forget Q signals were intended to save time on CW communication, not phone or internet blogging...
Seldom have I had a conversation on Phone where 'Q' signals were not used verbally.

"Lets QSY to 145.555", or QRZ, was there a station calling there?

Even using an FM repeater, what part of 5-9 doesn't anyone understand about a quick signal report??

You could add a Critique, that "You are Full Quieting, but there is some Background Noise, but I can Fully Understand Every Word you are saying, and if you are into operating "Suicide Mobile", go ahead and take your eyes off of the road for 30-40 seconds to carefully watch the meter, to tell someone that they are between S-5 and S-9, with occasional peaks to S9+20.

Not that the S meter is actually a carefully calibrated instrument, as it only gives an approximation with a simple LCD bar graph.

Try to decipher some of the Text messages that kids use today to get a point across easier.

ROTFLMAO???

Crap, don't end a Phone "Conversation" without saying '73', and some operators might consider you to be rude.

I don't think I am alone here in believing that a lot of CW based 'shorthand' carries over to phone, as well as Forum Postings, Blogs, and IM's.

It's just a quicker way to get a point across, in very much the same way you might find those Smiley 'Emoticons', plastered all over an email message.

73, :D
--
"Follow The White Rabbit....."]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21032750 Sat, 30 Aug 2008 17:02:47 EDT Re: 146.52 MHz hailing frequency ? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21031902 mb : All these Q signals being thrown around. Don't forget Q signals were intended to save time on CW communication, not phone or internet blogging...]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21031902 Sat, 30 Aug 2008 13:47:31 EDT Re: 146.52 MHz hailing frequency ? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21031808 battleop : I don't think my post came out as I intended for it to. I was trying to say that you do not HAVE to move but it's common courtesy to move. Most of the guys who have 5 to 10 minute QSOs in this area leave some room for anyone to break in if needed.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21031808 Sat, 30 Aug 2008 13:24:39 EDT Re: 146.52 MHz hailing frequency ? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21030903 KA3SGM : I would QSY if someone breaks in and asks to use the frequency to make a call, it's not like propagation is so different that you couldn't conduct the same QSO 25-30 KHz up or down the band.

The biggest problem with 146.52 that I have experienced, is when someone moves in, and mindlessly decides to use the frequency for Packet.

This was more of an issue in the past, when you could not find the packet ops email on a place like QRZ.com, or do a reverse Landline lookup,
and you had to write letters to beg them to move off of the FM Simplex frequency.
--
"Follow The White Rabbit....."]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21030903 Sat, 30 Aug 2008 09:33:20 EDT Re: 146.52 MHz hailing frequency ? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21028339 battleop : You can QSO on 146.52 if you wish. Nothing says that you must move your QSO to another frequency. I hear traffic here on 146.52 almost as much as I do on some of the local repeaters.

10 to 15 years ago it was probably a big deal, now it's not. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21028339 Fri, 29 Aug 2008 19:01:25 EDT Re: 146.52 MHz hailing frequency ? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21026102 Ender3rd : That official FCC complaint will be promptly filed in the round file of the field office that receives it. Licensed stations have every right to use 146.52 for communication purposes. As has been mentioned in the thread, it is commonly understood that this is a calling frequency, and good operating practice would suggest that stations should hook up and then move on, but this is not an enforcement issue. An operator who takes offense to any chit chat on that frequency could politely ask the stations to move, but that's about it. I once got an OO courtesy report for having too much carrier in my "SSB" signal. I was operating plate modulated AM at the time... You gotta laugh and consider the source sometimes.

Rob W1AEX
--
My Jeep is not an SUV. Your SUV is not a Jeep.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21026102 Fri, 29 Aug 2008 12:02:17 EDT Re: 146.52 MHz hailing frequency ? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21025919 n1zuk : In most places, there is typically little, if any, activity on 2M FM simplex. Just hearing someone on 146.52 is a treat. ;)

When I do find myself there, if someone else justs breaks in, I've always been happy to move my QSO to another frequency, or invite them to join in the conversation.

On VHF FM, it typically isn't an issue, as power levels are low, and signals won't propegate very far. Ragchewing on 144.2 SSB with a yagi and some power, well, that's a different issue...

An interesting news story from 2002 on ARRLWeb: »www.arrl.org/news/stories/2002/1···00/?nc=1
--
New to Forum Life? Click here and learn.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21025919 Fri, 29 Aug 2008 11:35:42 EDT Re: 146.52 MHz hailing frequency ? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21025076 mr weather :
said by Axilla See Profile :

I would like to know if the ham that made the complaint was trying to use the freq himself or he was just being a "real ham" ;) My guess is it was a newer ham that didn't know any better.
My guess would be a self-appointed kilocycle cop OF. :p
--
"It's all coming down!!" - Mike Holmes]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21025076 Fri, 29 Aug 2008 09:19:21 EDT Re: 146.52 MHz hailing frequency ? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21024648 GeekNJ : Is there anything in Part 97 about it? If not, then I'm not sure the FCC has any rule against what they are doing.

For me personally, I rarely hear anyone on simplex FM and when I do, I have no issue with them talking on it. There's nothing to prevent someone else from putting their call sign out there during their conversation.

The following was from 2002 by Hollingsworth of the FCC. »www.arrl.org/news/stories/2002/1···00/?nc=1
It indicates that there's nothing "illegal" about he says:
"In an ideal world, stations making initial contact on 146.52 MHz probably should move off to another accepted simplex channel to continue their conversation," Hollingsworth said.

Band plans are informal agreements that outline how various segments of the different bands should be used. Their primary goal is to minimize conflicts among users of different modes. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21024648 Fri, 29 Aug 2008 06:43:28 EDT Re: 146.52 MHz hailing frequency ? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21024611 SmokChsr : 99.44% of the time when someone says they filed a complaint with the FCC, they are just blowing smoke. Those that do file a complaint are usually quite about it. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21024611 Fri, 29 Aug 2008 06:26:11 EDT Re: 146.52 MHz hailing frequency ? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21024594 accounting : 146.52 is not very heavily used in my area. Most people, like myself, usually just use the local area repeaters.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21024594 Fri, 29 Aug 2008 06:12:01 EDT Re: 146.52 MHz hailing frequency ? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21024392 funchords : Who coordinates your repeaters and, if anyone, have they ever taken a position on 146.52?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21024392 Fri, 29 Aug 2008 02:48:49 EDT Re: 146.52 MHz hailing frequency ? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21023757 Axilla : Exactly, i don't recall any FCC regarding moving off a calling frequency. Yeah its polite and the right thing to do. But however how often does that become a problem? I would like to know if the ham that made the complaint was trying to use the freq himself or he was just being a "real ham" ;) My guess is it was a newer ham that didn't know any better. Would be a great time for some teaching. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21023757 Thu, 28 Aug 2008 23:25:31 EDT Re: 146.52 MHz hailing frequency ? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21023658 mb : The reason that you move to another frequency after you make your contact is to keep the calling frequency clear for other potential users. Now, I'm sure that the FCC has more important things to dedicate their limited resources to instead of pursuing a licensee who isn't following good amateur practice on the 2 meter calling frequency. In my opinion whoever made that complaint to the FCC is more of a problem to the hobby than the guys chatting on 146.520mHz.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21023658 Thu, 28 Aug 2008 23:03:55 EDT Re: 146.52 MHz hailing frequency ? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21023473 mr weather : Up here there's a gentlemen's agreement that you make your initial call on "6-5-2" then QSY.

I personally have no problem with guys yacking on the frequency. Heck, 99% of the time when I'm monitoring I hear nobody.

On UHF 446.000 (accepted calling frequency on 70cm) is hardly used at all.
--
"It's all coming down!!" - Mike Holmes]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21023473 Thu, 28 Aug 2008 22:18:18 EDT 146.52 MHz hailing frequency ? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21023265 accounting : I understand 146.52 MHz is the usual 2 meter calling frequency, but is it not acceptable to continue a QSO on that frequency?

I'm asking because I heard a few ham's discussing this on 146.52 simplex this evening, and one guy said someone had filed an official FCC complaint that he was using 52 for more than just "a hailing frequency". That got my curiosity up.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21023265 Thu, 28 Aug 2008 21:32:33 EDT