🚀 go-pugleaf

"JasonG" <jgoldring@99istop.com> wrote in message news:<3d9f27d6@news.eol.ca>...
> So just what the heck is the best way to communicate in the middle of
> nowhere? Some people say FRS works, others say that they are trash in the
> bush. CB Radios?
>
> No cell sites up here so phones are out of the question.
>
> I'm not looking for a ton of range, but at least 2 miles would be nice. I
> have a 30ft tower at the cabin with the satellite dish on the side of it so
> I guess I can put something on top of it. Any ideas? (This would be a base
> station communicating with a boat and a car)
>
> Thanks,
> Jason.

Flat or hilly?

CB can be good and it's cheap and easy, but you can get pounded when
the skip is working. Blasted linears down in LA sometimes wipe out CB
in SEAlaska.

A technician class HAM license maybe. There's a lot of gear out there
at many different frequencies. Costs more and you have to pass the
exam.

[G] You can sometimes find cell phone repeaters for sale in the back
of magazines, so maybe you can set up your own with that tower.

On 10/5/02 12:58 PM, in article 3d9f27d6@news.eol.ca, "JasonG"
<jgoldring@99istop.com> wrote:

> So just what the heck is the best way to communicate in the middle of
> nowhere? Some people say FRS works, others say that they are trash in the
> bush. CB Radios?
>
> No cell sites up here so phones are out of the question.
>
> I'm not looking for a ton of range, but at least 2 miles would be nice. I
> have a 30ft tower at the cabin with the satellite dish on the side of it so
> I guess I can put something on top of it. Any ideas? (This would be a base
> station communicating with a boat and a car)
>
> Thanks,
> Jason.
>
>
 You might take a look at GMRS radios.  They're supposed to have more range
than FRS radios.  Cabelas has some in their online catalogue.


http://www.cabelas.com/cabelas/en/templates/index/index-display.jhtml;jsessi
onidªM4Q3AYVZBTCCWQNVDCFFAK0BWUOIV0?idÊt130007&navAction=push&navCount=1
&parentIdÊt130007&parentTypeÊtegory&rid
  They aren't cheap but they sell good stuff.  They have something called
the bargain cave.  There are some better deals there on returned goods.


                              Dean

In article <3d9f27d6@news.eol.ca>, "JasonG" <jgoldring@99istop.com> wrote:
>So just what the heck is the best way to communicate in the middle of
>nowhere? Some people say FRS works, others say that they are trash in the
>bush. CB Radios?
>
>No cell sites up here so phones are out of the question.
>
>I'm not looking for a ton of range, but at least 2 miles would be nice. I
>have a 30ft tower at the cabin with the satellite dish on the side of it so
>I guess I can put something on top of it. Any ideas? (This would be a base
>station communicating with a boat and a car)

I'd say CB, since you can buy the base to communicate for a number of miles,
and regular walkie talkies for the boat and car within 2 miles.  (They use a
couple of CB bands).

Back in the pre-CB craze, my grandfather used to be able to talk on his base
to my aunt with her mobile CB at a distance of about 20 miles.  With the
exception of a few valleys between her work and home, they could stay in
contact the entire commute.  I would frequently be able to contact my folks
from my mobile for 10-15 miles.  (Then the CB craze hit, we were lucky to get
3 miles, and that was the end of CBs for us....)

Woods

In article <3d9f27d6@news.eol.ca>, jgoldring@99istop.com writes:
> So just what the heck is the best way to communicate in the middle of
> nowhere? Some people say FRS works, others say that they are trash in the
> bush. CB Radios?

> No cell sites up here so phones are out of the question.

> I'm not looking for a ton of range, but at least 2 miles would be nice. I
> have a 30ft tower at the cabin with the satellite dish on the side of it so
> I guess I can put something on top of it. Any ideas? (This would be a base
> station communicating with a boat and a car)

If you put up good antennas on both ends you will get 3, maybe 4 miles
easy.  Be sure to dig up a grid dip meter and adjust your SWR.  The
little rubber antennae on walkie talkies are only good for short range.

FRS works good if you have line of sight.  Get a hill in between and they
lose it.

If you want to spend some money, you can go mobile short wave.  The FCC
lets you run up to 10 watts with very little hassle nowadays.  It won't
be cheap, but you will be able to talk to the world.

--
http://home.teleport.com/~larryc

Larry Caldwell <larryc@teleport.com> wrote in message news:<MPG.180a24da3eb100d898a0b7@news.earthlink.net>...
> I swear, there ought to be federal background checks before you can
> purchase a linear amplifier.  I was on the freeway a while back, and some
> trucker was over-driving his linear amp so bad on 17 that he was bleeding
> all the way down to 5 and all the way up to 26.  He apparently had not a
> clue that smearing his bandwidth all over the spectrum like that was
> ruining his range.

That's the sort that lands on us up here, scattered over half the
channels so we can't just switch over to another.

I understand a straight pin through the co-ax does interesting things
to linears. (Though an icepick through somewhere else,,, nah, nothen
there to hurt.)

In article <c80c24b1.0210051718.f58f3e7@posting.google.com>, offbreed@my-
deja.com writes:

> CB can be good and it's cheap and easy, but you can get pounded when
> the skip is working. Blasted linears down in LA sometimes wipe out CB
> in SEAlaska.

I swear, there ought to be federal background checks before you can
purchase a linear amplifier.  I was on the freeway a while back, and some
trucker was over-driving his linear amp so bad on 17 that he was bleeding
all the way down to 5 and all the way up to 26.  He apparently had not a
clue that smearing his bandwidth all over the spectrum like that was
ruining his range.

Knife edge bandwidth is why a 5 watt CW rig will get you anywhere in the
world.

--
"The American Republic will endure, until politicians realize they can
bribe the people with their own money."
                             -- Alexis de Tocquevile

On Sat, 05 Oct 2002 21:07:02 -0500, Dean Hoffman
<dh0496@inebraska.com> wrote:


>>
> You might take a look at GMRS radios.  They're supposed to have more range
>than FRS radios.  Cabelas has some in their online catalogue.

We have had good results with "high band" (174 mhz) GMRS. We can
consistently get 5+ miles between the 2 watt portables. They are
licenced to a business.

What do you mean by "mobile shortwave" and "very little hassle?"...
If I call them and let 'em know you're doing this, are they going to come
out and confiscate your stuff, put you in jail, etc..?
They are getting pretty serious about such things again...


"Larry Caldwell" <larryc@teleport.com> wrote in message >
> If you want to spend some money, you can go mobile short wave.  The FCC
> lets you run up to 10 watts with very little hassle nowadays.  It won't
> be cheap, but you will be able to talk to the world.

If you can get him to identify himself (by asking for a mile-marker or some
other nearby landmark), call the FCC....  He'll atleast loose his equipment,
get fined, etc.

"Larry Caldwell" <larryc@teleport.com> wrote in message
>
> > CB can be good and it's cheap and easy, but you can get pounded when
> > the skip is working. Blasted linears down in LA sometimes wipe out CB
> > in SEAlaska.
>
> I swear, there ought to be federal background checks before you can
> purchase a linear amplifier.  I was on the freeway a while back, and some
> trucker was over-driving his linear amp so bad on 17 that he was bleeding
> all the way down to 5 and all the way up to 26.  He apparently had not a
> clue that smearing his bandwidth all over the spectrum like that was
> ruining his range.
>
> Knife edge bandwidth is why a 5 watt CW rig will get you anywhere in the
> world.

"them" = FCC... ;)

As for a suggestion.. Get an Amateur-radio license and quit playing with toy
radios.


"BD" <bodu@pobox.com> wrote in message news:3da343a9@news.mhogaming.com...
> What do you mean by "mobile shortwave" and "very little hassle?"...
> If I call them and let 'em know you're doing this, are they going to come
> out and confiscate your stuff, put you in jail, etc..?
> They are getting pretty serious about such things again...
>
> > If you want to spend some money, you can go mobile short wave.  The FCC
> > lets you run up to 10 watts with very little hassle nowadays.  It won't
> > be cheap, but you will be able to talk to the world.
>
>

"BD" <bodu@pobox.com> wrote in message news:3da343ab@news.mhogaming.com...
> If you can get him to identify himself (by asking for a mile-marker or
some
> other nearby landmark), call the FCC....  He'll atleast loose his
equipment,
> get fined, etc.

I don't think so.   The FCC just doesn't have the resources to chase someone
down the interstate.

I suspect that the FCC will not get carried away with enforcement on the CB
bands at all unless it spills over into other bands.

If you use CB, you can help yourself a LOT by using SSB (single side band)
radios and putting a highly directional antenna on at least one of the two
locations you want to link.

Most CB'rs have just enough knowledge of such things to get a radio-shop or
friend to hook the stuff up for 'em, yet still do it themselves...
OTOH, I've listened to the "freebanders" (often just modified CB's) talking
to each other all over the North America (assuming they're being honest
about their locations, that is)...

"Larry Caldwell" <larryc@teleport.com> wrote in message
>
> I swear, there ought to be federal background checks before you can
> purchase a linear amplifier.  I was on the freeway a while back, and some
> trucker was over-driving his linear amp so bad on 17 that he was bleeding
> all the way down to 5 and all the way up to 26.  He apparently had not a
> clue that smearing his bandwidth all over the spectrum like that was
> ruining his range.

In article <3da343a9@news.mhogaming.com>, bodu@pobox.com writes:

> What do you mean by "mobile shortwave" and "very little hassle?"...
> If I call them and let 'em know you're doing this, are they going to come
> out and confiscate your stuff, put you in jail, etc..?
> They are getting pretty serious about such things again...

You have to have a license and pass a written test, but don't have to
pass a code test any more.  And yes, you can buy off the shelf mobile
short wave transceivers and be completely legal.

Check rec.radio.amateur.misc

--
"The American Republic will endure, until politicians realize they can
bribe the people with their own money."
                             -- Alexis de Tocquevile

Thanks to all.....
I ended up going with a CB Radio Setup (using Sideband) and it seems to work
well.

Jay.

"JasonG" <jgoldring@99istop.com> wrote in message
news:3d9f27d6@news.eol.ca...
> So just what the heck is the best way to communicate in the middle of
> nowhere? Some people say FRS works, others say that they are trash in the
> bush. CB Radios?
>
> No cell sites up here so phones are out of the question.
>
> I'm not looking for a ton of range, but at least 2 miles would be nice. I
> have a 30ft tower at the cabin with the satellite dish on the side of it
so
> I guess I can put something on top of it. Any ideas? (This would be a base
> station communicating with a boat and a car)
>
> Thanks,
> Jason.
>
>


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.393 / Virus Database: 223 - Release Date: 9/30/2002

I've also actually started using CB, even tho I have an amateur-radio
license...
The band is pretty much dead outside big cities nowdays (or maybe just
around here), which means it's pretty good for the usual situation where not
everyone is a Ham...

"JasonG" <jgoldring@99istop.com> wrote in message
news:1034338253.387628@ip195.istop.com...
> Thanks to all.....
> I ended up going with a CB Radio Setup (using Sideband) and it seems to
work
> well.

Larry Caldwell <larryc@teleport.com> wrote in message news:<MPG.180cfb99973e61098a0d0@news.earthlink.net>...


> You have to have a license and pass a written test, but don't have to
> pass a code test any more.  And yes, you can buy off the shelf mobile
> short wave transceivers and be completely legal.
>
> Check rec.radio.amateur.misc

Very small quibble.

From the ARRL website: <http://www.arrl.org/FandES/ead/classes.html>

"Hams enter the hobby as Technicians by passing a 35-question
multiple-choice examination. No Morse code test is required. The exam
covers basic regulations, operating practices, and electronics theory,
with a focus on VHF and UHF applications.

Technician Class operators are authorized to use all amateur VHF and
UHF frequencies (all frequencies above 50 MHz). Technicians who pass a
5 WPM Morse code examination are entitled to limited power outputs on
certain HF frequencies. "Technicians with HF" may operate on the 80,
40, and 15 meter bands using CW, and on the 10 meter band using CW,
voice, and digital modes."

Sooo, no. Not HF. Not without a morse code certification. That's just
5WPM, pretty slow. From what I can see (I'm thinking of trying for a
license), the faster code becomes easier to understand because the
letters start developing unique sounds at higher speeds. Not so good
when the time between letters gets shorter, though.

Frequency = 3000/band (roughly). "10 meters" is next to the CB freqs,
just below 30MHz.

In article <dmEp9.51$tp2.38078@newsfeed.slurp.net>, bodu@pobox.com
writes:

> I've also actually started using CB, even tho I have an amateur-radio
> license...
> The band is pretty much dead outside big cities nowdays (or maybe just
> around here), which means it's pretty good for the usual situation where not
> everyone is a Ham...

Except for that guy in Mobile, Alabama, who must be running a 10,000 watt
CB rig.  I heard him in Calgary last month, and here on the west coast
yesterday.

--
"The American Republic will endure, until politicians realize they can
bribe the people with their own money."
                             -- Alexis de Tocquevile

You're slightly behind the times, Off... ;)
www.arrl.org/news/restructuring/


"Offbreed" <offbreed@my-deja.com> wrote in message
>
> Technician Class operators are authorized to use all amateur VHF and
> UHF frequencies (all frequencies above 50 MHz). Technicians who pass a
> 5 WPM Morse code examination are entitled to limited power outputs on
> certain HF frequencies. "Technicians with HF" may operate on the 80,
> 40, and 15 meter bands using CW, and on the 10 meter band using CW,
> voice, and digital modes."
>
> Sooo, no. Not HF. Not without a morse code certification. That's just
> 5WPM, pretty slow. From what I can see (I'm thinking of trying for a
> license), the faster code becomes easier to understand because the
> letters start developing unique sounds at higher speeds. Not so good
> when the time between letters gets shorter, though.
..

"BD" <bodu@pobox.com> wrote in message news:<POSp9.241$tp2.299600@newsfeed.slurp.net>...
> You're slightly behind the times, Off... ;)
> www.arrl.org/news/restructuring/

That was straight from the ARRL website, about half a minute before I
posted, Sue. Clicked on your link and checked, so far as I can see,
this is the only part that addresses the HF band (traditionally
3-30MHz).

'  As it had proposed earlier, the FCC decided to lump Technician and
Tech Plus licensees into a single licensee database, all designated as
"Technician" licensees. Those who can document having passed the 5 WPM
Morse code examination will continue to have the current Tech Plus HF
privileges. "If documentation is needed to verify whether a licensee
has passed a telegraphy examination, we may request the documentation
from that licensee or the VECs," the FCC said. '

I'm studying for the Tech or General now. Biggest cause for hesitation
is the astounding degree of government control over radio amateurs.
National data base, SSN number on file, etc.

There's lots of 2 Meter (144-148MHz) equipment around and Tech Class
can use it, that I'd suggest it for the OP's original intent, 'cause
he's going to get bombed out when atmospheric conditions are right for
DX work. 2 Meter is also smaller equipment for the range. Of course CB
is cheaper.

I don't know what you're replying to, Off (and who the heck is Sue?), but
you were refering to the "Tech Plus HF" license and said that you'd have to
pass a 5wpm test to upgrade to it...
I simply posted the link to show you that the class doesn't exist for new
licensee's now...  Thus, you're behind the times, and may need to get some
updated study-material...

I've no idea where the "As I proposed earlier" part refers to.. You said
nothing at all about lumping anything together...

"Offbreed" <offbreed@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:c80c24b1.0210130835.40e735b3@posting.google.com...
> "BD" <bodu@pobox.com> wrote in message
news:<POSp9.241$tp2.299600@newsfeed.slurp.net>...
> > You're slightly behind the times, Off... ;)
> > www.arrl.org/news/restructuring/
>
> That was straight from the ARRL website, about half a minute before I
> posted, Sue. Clicked on your link and checked, so far as I can see,
> this is the only part that addresses the HF band (traditionally
> 3-30MHz).
>
> '  As it had proposed earlier, the FCC decided to lump Technician and
> Tech Plus licensees into a single licensee database, all designated as
> "Technician" licensees. Those who can document having passed the 5 WPM
> Morse code examination will continue to have the current Tech Plus HF
> privileges. "If documentation is needed to verify whether a licensee
> has passed a telegraphy examination, we may request the documentation
> from that licensee or the VECs," the FCC said. '
>
> I'm studying for the Tech or General now. Biggest cause for hesitation
> is the astounding degree of government control over radio amateurs.
> National data base, SSN number on file, etc.
>
> There's lots of 2 Meter (144-148MHz) equipment around and Tech Class
> can use it, that I'd suggest it for the OP's original intent, 'cause
> he's going to get bombed out when atmospheric conditions are right for
> DX work. 2 Meter is also smaller equipment for the range. Of course CB
> is cheaper.

Duh... Sorry 'bout that post. Please just ignore it, Off...
I must''ve been asleep when I typed it in.... I read the ARRL quote as if
you'd written it, I guess..
But I'm still wondering who Sue is.. ;)

"BD" <bodu@pobox.com> wrote in message
news:v_qq9.849$tp2.1250061@newsfeed.slurp.net...
> I don't know what you're replying to, Off (and who the heck is Sue?), but
> you were refering to the "Tech Plus HF" license and said that you'd have
to
> pass a 5wpm test to upgrade to it...
> I simply posted the link to show you that the class doesn't exist for new
> licensee's now...  Thus, you're behind the times, and may need to get some
> updated study-material...
>
> >
> > That was straight from the ARRL website, about half a minute before I
> > posted, Sue. Clicked on your link and checked, so far as I can see,
> > this is the only part that addresses the HF band (traditionally
> > 3-30MHz).
> >
> > '  As it had proposed earlier, the FCC decided to lump Technician and
> > Tech Plus licensees into a single licensee database, all designated as
> > "Technician" licensees. Those who can document having passed the 5 WPM
> > Morse code examination will continue to have the current Tech Plus HF
> > privileges. "If documentation is needed to verify whether a licensee
> > has passed a telegraphy examination, we may request the documentation
> > from that licensee or the VECs," the FCC said. '

"BD" <bodu@pobox.com> wrote in message news:<v_qq9.849$tp2.1250061@newsfeed.slurp.net>...
> I don't know what you're replying to, Off (and who the heck is Sue?), but

Ooops. *That* "BD" is in another ng. Sorry.

> you were refering to the "Tech Plus HF" license and said that you'd have to
> pass a 5wpm test to upgrade to it...
> I simply posted the link to show you that the class doesn't exist for new
> licensee's now...  Thus, you're behind the times, and may need to get some
> updated study-material...

Yeah. "Tech Plus" is now, effectively, "Tech with code certification".
Seems silly to me, there's nothing immedeately availible showing any
difference other than the words on the license. I need to get a
"General Class" study guide and see if it's worth the trouble to go
straight for that. "Extra Class" is a bit steep.

> I've no idea where the "As I proposed earlier" part refers to.. You said
> nothing at all about lumping anything together...

That's part of the quote, isn't it? "As it proposed earlier": FCC.

>
> "Offbreed" <offbreed@my-deja.com> wrote in message
> news:c80c24b1.0210130835.40e735b3@posting.google.com...

Quotation from website:
> > '  As it had proposed earlier, the FCC decided to lump Technician and
> > Tech Plus licensees into a single licensee database, all designated as
> > "Technician" licensees. Those who can document having passed the 5 WPM
> > Morse code examination will continue to have the current Tech Plus HF
> > privileges. "If documentation is needed to verify whether a licensee
> > has passed a telegraphy examination, we may request the documentation
> > from that licensee or the VECs," the FCC said. '

The General written test is easier than the Technician written test.
You can take them at same session, or separate, but take the Tech first.

5 wpm code is no problem if you get the online helps.

#1 program to learn code:  Koch method from G4FON
#2 program to learn code, with sample QSO's and everything: Nu-morse.

Check it out on my Ham Radio Page:
	http://www.billsparks.org/Ham_Radio/

You can get the Gordon West study books at most Radio Shack stores.
abiyt $10 for Tech book, and about $15 for General book. They mainly
are a recap of all the questions in the question pools, with the answers
given.  Gordon then gives a paragraph or a sentence after each one
explaining the why, or a memory help to help you memorize the answer.

Also on the above Ham Radio page are online resources to the question
pools.  If all you are going to do is memorize the questions and answers
(that's what I did) then you can get the question pools for free online.

One place even has "auto generated" tests, where they test you on the
exact # of questions from each sub-section of the pool that the real
tests are from.

The Koch Method from G4FON is the best way to learn.  The Nu-morse (from
www.nu-ware.com), even the free version, is good to practice listening
to morse code QSO's (one side of a CW communication) which is what the
morse code test consists of.

The morse code test for the General license (or Tech w/code cert)
is 5 words/minute. BUT... The "code speed" is FARNSWORTH, at 13/5.
Meaning the dits and dahs are sent at 15 words/min, then the LETTERS ARE
SPACED OUT to give an effective speed of 5 words/min.  So you get a
BURST of one letter, a pause, then a BURST of another letter.

For local communications, Tech is all you need to get on 6m, 2m, 220 Mhz
(1.25 meter), 440 Mhz (70 cm) and above.

Most local repeaters are 2m or 440Mhz.

On 14 Oct 2002 11:25:47 -0700, offbreed@my-deja.com (Offbreed) wrote:

>Yeah. "Tech Plus" is now, effectively, "Tech with code certification".
>Seems silly to me, there's nothing immedeately availible showing any
>difference other than the words on the license. I need to get a
>"General Class" study guide and see if it's worth the trouble to go
>straight for that. "Extra Class" is a bit steep.


non_sp@mmers_eradicate(oops,email_address)
Ai-Chihuahua!

oopsdaveng@oopsindynerds.com (Ai-Yi-Yi!) wrote in message news:<3dab162a.45519733@news-server.indy.rr.com>...
> The General written test is easier than the Technician written test.
> You can take them at same session, or separate, but take the Tech first.

[snip]

Many thanks. Most of what I found on the net was more enthusiasm than
content, or assumed I knew more about Ham Radio than I do.

Clarity a rare pleasure.

I've had a Tech Lite license for over six years now.  I basically just
use it to operate handy-talkies in and around town; have never connected
with another ham while travelling.  It suits my needs just fine, and I'm
not willing to spend the time and energy to learn Morse code.  But as
you noted, if I ever wanted to get into HF and talk to people all over
the world (like my dad N5NBW, an Extra-class from before the dawn of
time) I'd have to.

--
Sylvia Steiger RN BS KC5PFA
Remove "remove-this" from address to reply
http://www.SteigerFamily.com
Cheyenne WY, USDA zone 5a, Sunset zone 1a
Home of the Wyoming Wind Festival, January 1-December 31

Sylvia Steiger  <SylviaRN@canadaREMOVETHIS.com> writes:

> I've had a Tech Lite license for over six years now.  I basically
> just use it to operate handy-talkies in and around town; [...]


Something that's never been clear to me: What's the difference
between a handy-talkie and a *walkie*-talkie?



Geoff

--
 "Even Islamic terrorists don't hate America like liberals do.
  They don't have the energy.  If they had that much energy,
  they'd have indoor plumbing by now." -- Ann Coulter

A handy-talkie is a real amateur-band radio, but fairly small and
portable.  They're more expensive than walkie-talkies, and generally
dial through a wide range of frequencies, either the 2 meter or 440 mm
bands (sometimes both).  They are almost always sold individually, and
require an amateur license to use legally.

Walkie-talkies are typically sold in pairs designed to be used together,
not interchangeable with other walkie-talkies, require no license, and I
have no idea what band they broadcast on but I've never heard my kids'
on my handy-talkie.

Clear as mud?  <g>

--
Sylvia Steiger RN BS
Remove "remove-this" from address to reply
http://www.SteigerFamily.com
Cheyenne WY, USDA zone 5a, Sunset zone 1a
Home of the Wyoming Wind Festival, January 1-December 31

In article <3DB97743.9070900@canadaREMOVETHIS.com>,
 Sylvia Steiger <SylviaRN@canadaREMOVETHIS.com> wrote:

> Walkie-talkies are typically sold in pairs designed to be used together,
> not interchangeable with other walkie-talkies, require no license, and I
> have no idea what band they broadcast on but I've never heard my kids'
> on my handy-talkie.

Walkie-talkies used to (dunno if they still do or not) run on CB channel
14. I forget the frequency, it's been so many years, but the number
sticks with me for some reason.

--
Don Bruder -  dakidd@sonic.net <--- Preferred Email - unmunged, SpamAssassinated
Hate SPAM? See <http://www.spamassassin.org> for some seriously great info.
I will choose a path that's clear: I will choose Free Will! - N. Peart
Fly trap info pages: <http://www.sonic.net/~dakidd/Horses/FlyTrap/index.html>

On Sat, 26 Oct 2002 04:46:14 GMT, Don Bruder <dakidd@sonic.net> wrote:

>In article <3DB97743.9070900@canadaREMOVETHIS.com>,
> Sylvia Steiger <SylviaRN@canadaREMOVETHIS.com> wrote:
>
>> Walkie-talkies are typically sold in pairs designed to be used together,
>> not interchangeable with other walkie-talkies, require no license, and I
>> have no idea what band they broadcast on but I've never heard my kids'
>> on my handy-talkie.
>
>Walkie-talkies used to (dunno if they still do or not) run on CB channel
>14. I forget the frequency, it's been so many years, but the number
>sticks with me for some reason.

the very inexpensive units (toy store) are still on CB channels but
there are 40 channels and as far as i know they can be on
any of them.

latest mass market items are FRS (Family Radio Service).
14 channels .. some with privacy codes (a tone that must
be present for the receiver to open squelch).

the amateur radio option often includes mountain top repeaters that
extend the range over vast areas. BUT there are limitations as
to the type of communication permitted there.

In article <tvmlruoe0nha3jk1iha48ksvosns4r1j2b@4ax.com>,
 JeB <holdit!@nospam.org> wrote:

> On Sat, 26 Oct 2002 04:46:14 GMT, Don Bruder <dakidd@sonic.net> wrote:
>
> >In article <3DB97743.9070900@canadaREMOVETHIS.com>,
> > Sylvia Steiger <SylviaRN@canadaREMOVETHIS.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Walkie-talkies are typically sold in pairs designed to be used together,
> >> not interchangeable with other walkie-talkies, require no license, and I
> >> have no idea what band they broadcast on but I've never heard my kids'
> >> on my handy-talkie.
> >
> >Walkie-talkies used to (dunno if they still do or not) run on CB channel
> >14. I forget the frequency, it's been so many years, but the number
> >sticks with me for some reason.
>
> the very inexpensive units (toy store) are still on CB channels but
> there are 40 channels and as far as i know they can be on
> any of them.

Although if I recall rightly, they can legaly operate anywhere in the
CB-assigned spectrum, channel 14 has always been the "by convention"
standard for kiddie-level WTs. I doubt the folks that pump them out have
bothered to change that. Doing so would require a cash outlay to
redesign/retune the existing circuitry, and therefore eat into already
thin profit margins.

> latest mass market items are FRS (Family Radio Service).
> 14 channels .. some with privacy codes (a tone that must
> be present for the receiver to open squelch).

Ah, but that's a whole different kettle of fish, operating in an
entirely different part of the "ocean". Those are FM, for starters,
rather than AM, and 900Mhz - 1.4GHz is jumping to the front of my mind
as their operating frequency, but I suspect I'm getting them confused
with phones. Either way, we're talking about completely different
animals from either WTs or HTs - both medium and mechanism are vastly
different. A Ham's HT is still another species of fish - Depending on
the model, it's got a *WHOLE LOT* more spectrum it can play in, and most
of the decent ones can operate either AM or FM (sometimes restricted by
regulations as to which mode for a particular frequency) sideband,
compandered, or any of a whole slew of other modulation methods that
might not even have names yet, since the guy who designed it yesterday
hasn't thought of one. That's part of the fun of the amateur radio scene
- It don't work exactly the way you want it to? GET OUT THERE AND
DESIGN/BUILD SOMETHING THAT DOES!

> the amateur radio option often includes mountain top repeaters that
> extend the range over vast areas. BUT there are limitations as
> to the type of communication permitted there.

Not only are there limitations, there are *LOTS* of limitations. And
despite my dislike for some of them, they're mostly there for a good
reason: They keep the amateur bands from being overrun by commercial
operators, the RF equivalent of spammers. This is a VERY good thing.

--
Don Bruder -  dakidd@sonic.net <--- Preferred Email - unmunged, SpamAssassinated
Hate SPAM? See <http://www.spamassassin.org> for some seriously great info.
I will choose a path that's clear: I will choose Free Will! - N. Peart
Fly trap info pages: <http://www.sonic.net/~dakidd/Horses/FlyTrap/index.html>

> there are limitations as
> to the type of communication permitted there


Minimal.  Can't be commercial or obscene are the only limitations I
remember.  Also have to pause every few (five?) minutes in case another
radio user has an emergency, and give your call sign every 30 minutes.
I'm sure there are people on whom these restrictions would be a
hardship, but they don't hinder me at all.

--
Sylvia Steiger RN BS
Remove "remove-this" from address to reply
http://www.SteigerFamily.com
Cheyenne WY, USDA zone 5a, Sunset zone 1a
Home of the Wyoming Wind Festival, January 1-December 31