- -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Difference between revisions of "Ham Radio"
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
Hamfest - Orange Texas Feb 24, 2018 | Hamfest - Orange Texas Feb 24, 2018 | ||
| + | |||
| + | Lake Charles | ||
The battle against malicious interference. | The battle against malicious interference. | ||
| Line 12: | Line 14: | ||
Give up? Go to a different mode? Sell your gear? Call the FCC? | Give up? Go to a different mode? Sell your gear? Call the FCC? | ||
| − | The offender probably has a grudge and no respect for the law. The FCC is so busy that it does not do anything. He gets his jollies by interfering with others. If he can not interfere, he probably would go away. | + | Right. deaf_ear.gov |
| + | |||
| + | They only listen to private conversations. | ||
| + | |||
| + | The offender probably has a grudge and no respect for the law. | ||
| + | |||
| + | The FCC is so busy that it does not do anything. | ||
| + | |||
| + | He gets his jollies by interfering with others. | ||
| + | |||
| + | If he can not interfere, he probably would go away. | ||
| + | |||
| + | One solution would be to install a reverse autopatch. | ||
| − | + | Registered users could phone in to the patch and transmit on the patch and listen on their receiver. | |
The patch should take priorty, and any RF would be locked out. | The patch should take priorty, and any RF would be locked out. | ||
| + | |||
This would shut off the abuser. | This would shut off the abuser. | ||
| − | The patch should accept conference calls, so several users could phone in at the same time. | + | The patch should accept conference calls, |
| + | |||
| + | so several users could phone in at the same time. | ||
Perhaps a call back feature. | Perhaps a call back feature. | ||
| Line 25: | Line 42: | ||
The patch should have vox. | The patch should have vox. | ||
| − | Should be able to drop the patch with a tone but retain the phone link. VOX would bring it back up. | + | Should be able to drop the patch with a tone but retain the phone link. |
| + | |||
| + | VOX would bring it back up. | ||
The patch would transmit only. | The patch would transmit only. | ||
| + | |||
Cell phones are better with simplex. | Cell phones are better with simplex. | ||
Need an anti-trip circuit. | Need an anti-trip circuit. | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | Need more thoughts, pro and con. | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
-- | -- | ||
Revision as of 21:26, 16 February 2018
Hamfest - Orange Texas Feb 24, 2018
Lake Charles
The battle against malicious interference.
Things are not getting better.
What can you do when someone comes in and takes over the repeater with profanity, music and obnoxious comentary?
Give up? Go to a different mode? Sell your gear? Call the FCC?
Right. deaf_ear.gov
They only listen to private conversations.
The offender probably has a grudge and no respect for the law.
The FCC is so busy that it does not do anything.
He gets his jollies by interfering with others.
If he can not interfere, he probably would go away.
One solution would be to install a reverse autopatch.
Registered users could phone in to the patch and transmit on the patch and listen on their receiver.
The patch should take priorty, and any RF would be locked out.
This would shut off the abuser.
The patch should accept conference calls,
so several users could phone in at the same time.
Perhaps a call back feature.
The patch should have vox.
Should be able to drop the patch with a tone but retain the phone link.
VOX would bring it back up.
The patch would transmit only.
Cell phones are better with simplex.
Need an anti-trip circuit.
Need more thoughts, pro and con.
--
