• 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.

CB Milage Limit

If you pose that question to Larry Brock. Field Engineer of FCC's Dallas Office, he would likely tell you the reason is one word. Interference. It is why the rule was initiated to start with--along with that bugaboo about CB as a hobby is against the law.

Sorry Jerry I believe you might be flat wrong about that. A couple years ago I did a little research on where the 155 mile rule limit on CB came from and why it was created. The best answers I found in my research is as follows:

During World War II, first all international ham communications was prohibited, then later all amateur activities except those specifically sanctioned by the military became prohibited. Why was that? Because of espionage concerns.

The cold war started & sanctions were lifted. At the time CB and Ham shared the 11m spectrum and CB required a license. However, there were already certain other HF frequencies where unlicensed usage was permitted, dating back to 1938. At that time, power restrictions had been put in place to keep the communications at a short distance to avoid crossing state lines. At the time, congress only had limited ability to regulate commerce, and stuff that crossed state lines fell within certain existing laws that would preclude the feds (FCC, in this case) from allowing unlicensed operation.

When what was the precurser to the modern CB service was created in 1945, the 155 mile rule was put into effect for two reasons: Because of concerns on the legality (at the time) of FCC's authority over anything that crossed state lines, and also continued concerns over espionage.

In 1959, Donald Stoner published a detailed article on how to design and construct a home made CB. At this time, it was not illegal to do so, and commercially available kits became available. By definition, CB at it's earliest stages was experimental. It wasn't until much later that the FCC decided to try and change that.

In 1977, when CB expanded from 23 to 40 channels, there was actually talk about expanding all the way to 27.995, but it was decided against to prevent intermod breakthrough to any 455kHz receiver that used the 455kHz IF stage.

Are the same concerns that started the 155 mile limit still concerns today? I doubt it. Maybe that's why the FCC doesn't enforce it. Remember why the FCC dropped the CB license rule? Becuase everyone ignored it, and they decided it didn't matter anymore since they already had a protocol all the way back to 1938 that could allow it.

Definition of hobby: "An activity or interest pursued outside one's regular occupation and engaged in primarily for pleasure." (source dictionary.com) The government can't regulate one's intellectual interests, and according to existing rules, it is perfectly ok to talk on the CB "primarily for pleasure". So by definition of the word hobby, the FCC cannot regulate CB as "not a hobby".

BTW, another analogy keeps getting used: speeding. Does anyone know or remember why the 55 mph national speed limit was created? It was created by Nixon as a result of fuel economy concerns during the first oil embargo of 1974, and that was the ONLY reason. It was an arbitrary limit that was set that incidentaly gave rise to mobile CB use to look out for cops while ignoring what many felt was a stupid law.
 
Still, the HARM in making CB a hobby, i.e., DXing, is that it DOES cause harm to other users. That's the bottom line. We may not LIKE it, but it is the truth.


Sorry Jerry, I still disagree with you. If DX causes harm on 27 mhz, then it also causes harm on 28 mhz. Many of the other illegal activities on CB bands do cause harm. But DX of and by itself cannot if it's considered perfectly OK only 1 Mhz away.

It competes wrongfully with the Amateur Radio Service where DX is welcomed AND encouraged.

There's the real rub a lot of amateurs have; They feel threatened. And the ARRL promotes this mindset.

A lot of the reasons stated are about how an activity is "wrong" because it violates the law. Supporting arguments usually include something about morality. Remember what I posted before: that is strictly a matter of personal belief systems. There are just as many people that feel there is nothing immoral about ignoring a law that they recogize as arbitrary and harm to noone. You may not like, agree, or even understand that. It doesn't change the point of view.
 
Mole,
I want to thank you for your time and effort of what you posted ! That was very enlightening and helps us to see that things are different that what we tend to be led to believe as fact. :D
Now I hope my question can be answered in light of the facts you have shared. :Wavey
 
leftcoast118 said:
I think the FCC created these restrictive rules for cb to try to create more interest in amatuer radio where its legal to run power and talk DX ( and spend a lot more $$ on radio equipment). :) I think thats the ARRLs reason to fight the distance increase, too.

More for equipment? Depends on what you GET for those dollars. Recently, you could buy an IC706 for around $699 brand new. Ten bands PlUS! General coverage receiver, aircraft receiver, public service receiver and scanner. If you divide that cost by EACH single band radio,, it comes to $69.00.
Cheaper than your $299 "export" (and illegal, BTW) Connex with all them " extra channels"--cheaper STILL if you add in the scanner, the aircraft receiver, and the police capability.

CWM
:D
 
In the petition by Alan Dixon to get rid of the 155 mile limit the NAB(National Assosiation of Broadcasters) were against the petion because it would encourage the use of linears and cause interference. The FCC agreed with Dixon that that would not be a factor because there are already laws that regard the use of amplifiers and thus was not a good argument against the petition

"With regard to NAB’s opposition to the Petition on the basis that consumers must be protected from illegal transmissions43 on CB Radio Service channels that cause interference with other electronic communications, we agree with Dixon that such transmissions already are prohibited44 and that, as NAB notes,45 we take enforcement action against violators of the rules. Therefore, we believe that the concerns expressed by NAB are addressed in the Commission’s Rules. We also note, moreover, that equipment that is designed to receive transmissions from broadcast stations, and other electronic equipment such as telephone instruments and computer devices, may unintentionally receive the transmissions of CB stations that are operated in accordance with the rules. In that the equipment that is receiving these transmissions generally is authorized under Part 15 of our Rules46 on the condition that interference that may be caused by the operation of an authorized radio station must be accepted,47 we agree with Mr. Ort that the rules presently address the issue of undesired reception of authorized CB Radio Service station transmissions by broadcast receivers.48"

The other voices that commented on the petition were CB operators that agreed with the petition and the ARRL that saw the allowance of the rule change as competition with Amateur Radio.

"# Comments and reply comments were received from CB Radio Service operators and organizations representing them, amateur radio operators and the American Radio Relay League, Inc. (ARRL), and the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB). CB Radio Service operators generally support the proposed rule amendment.17 They state that the present rule is unenforceable,18 and that communications in excess of 250 km are inadvertent19 and beyond the operator’s control due to the eleven-year sun spot cycle or other natural phenomena.20 Jock Elliott and others state that the phenomenon of communicating beyond 250 km can be avoided only by relocating the entire CB Radio Service to different spectrum.21
# The ARRL opposes the Petition on the grounds that this proposal seeks to redefine the purpose of the CB Radio Service by allowing long-distance CB communications, which would undermine the core distinction between the CB Radio Service and the Amateur Radio Service.22 Similarly, Collin Dvork (Dvork) states that the rule should not be revised because the CB Radio Service is not a DX (long-distance) service, and someone who wants DX should obtain an amateur radio license and use bands that are allocated for it.23 The NAB also opposes the Dixon Petition. It states that the restriction in Section 95.413(a)(9) is necessary to deter CB operators from operating at power levels in excess of those permitted under the Commission’s rules,24 and that consumers must be protected from illegal CB radio transmissions that interfere with radio, television, telephone, and other forms of electronic communication.25"

So as far as the problem of a 4 watt station causing problems of interference and harm were not introduced as even an issue or seen as an issue by the FCC.
 
24 and that consumers must be protected from illegal CB radio transmissions that interfere with radio, television, telephone, and other forms of electronic communication

The signals are already there even with the law in place there is no stopping that?

My question is how can it be PROVEN you exceeded the 155 mile rule? That should be enough to get rid of the rule.

EXAMPLE: Speed limit is 65 MPH, you pass by "THE MAN" running radar and your traveling at 83 MPH.

Officer, can you PROVE I was speeding?

Why Yes you little punk ass come and look at my radar! :D



How can it be proved you talked past 155 miles on CB?

I am going to start signing ,,,,,,,,,558 from the top of Paris Hilton :p
 
Quote:
Likewise, while you, QRN, may see no harm in "skip talking", it does, in fact, cause harm to other users. Ever listen to that telltell howl and roar common to CB radio when the "skip" is in?
_______________________________________________________
Yap, I've listened to that "howl & roar" when the skips in.....nevered bothered me for 30 yrs now and never will. Next time "dx" comes into my station CW, I'll have to start asking every one that I hear if I am causing harm to them.

Oh, one more thing while I am here, I will be doing some "up grading" to my CB hobby, it's so I can talk more "skip" on the C.B. band........
Ok CW, it's your turn now, lets keep this thing going...Roger!
-------------------
DXman
 
Remember everyoone has valid points here so being sarcastic wont help anyone but we have had some great posts lately with great responses

keep up the great job everyone
 
OK

OK, now everybody seems to be getting edgy and just on the verge of snipping at each other :( Now, in spite of that, I will say what I "really" think. In Sonwatcher's quotes above, he hit on what *I*, if it were up to me, would do. I would shut the entire CB spectrum DOWN and move it up to the lower end of 150 MHZ. This would do two things: 1) allow FAR more stations to communicate at the same time without interferring with each other, 2) remove the issue of "155 mile" limits, 3) create an entirely new segment of equipment (market), and 4)
advance the technology of equipment. You gotta admit, there's not much change in equipment since CB was first created in the US, while commercial and Amateur gear have advanced in spades.

The way to do that would be to set a "sunset" date out........say 5-7 years to allow manufacturers and dealers to transition to VHF and bring VHF gear to market. Vigorously enforce infractions against transmitting on 27 MHZ, or adjacent frequencies after this "kill" date. I know, I know, folks
would scream, "I"LL turn loose of my CB radio when they pry my cold, dead hands, etc, etc", but it would open up some new possibilities. Now I'm not saying this would be perfect, and there is ALWAY gonna be abuse, but think of it. Maybe they could allow repeaters which would allow quiet, FM comms out to 100 miles or more (Mt Mitchell, NC Amateur machine hits up to 8 states). How about linking? You could tie repeaters together via computer like Echolink and talk nationwide--even overseas. Many new opportunities that, IMHO, would replace the limited, crowded, and............well, outdated 27 MHZ.

Due the nature of VHF, it tends to 'capture' the strongest signal, so the mishmash of signals now common on 27 MHZ wouldn't WORK. It would FORCE users to adopt some form of protocol and procedures, else users would quickly find that they OWN operations would paralyze if they DIDN'T cooperate with each other. But, then, too, simplex VHF with beam antennas gets out remarkably well--with limits, of course. Wouldn't it be NICE to call your buddies 50 miles away and talk to him just like on the phone? Nice, quiet FM and RELIABLE? Sure, you can boast about how "I can talk 50 miles and I don't need no VHF", but wouldn't it be nice to do it with-OUT that SKREEEEEEEEEEEEE, RAAARRRRRREEEERRRRRRRR, HOOOOOOWL,
ROOOOOOOOOOAR? Would you trade that for the dependability and quiet of VHF FM......IF the Fed would expand
MURS---or FRS? How about for the better technology and advanced equipment? I would! Whether on VHF or UHF, it would surpass 27 MHZ. And for the Feds, it would almost eliminate the market for spattering amps and bleeding radios that cover 10 channels at once. I think folks would gladly trade once they realized they could talk 50-75 miles with a 50 watt radio and a beam. No need for amps, "peaked, and squeaked, " radios, overmodulated radios that ya can't understand, and just......well, better all round than anything the "old" CB has to offer. That's why now there IS a market for FRS and MURS radios. People want cheap, reliable, local comms with-OUT listening to the bull---- on CB, and that's why I think it would take off. Sure, it would leave *some* people behind, those who are somehow, mysteriously addicted to the CB mystique and culture, and those who would want it to stay the same, OR be expanded into an even worse free-for-all. But over all, this is what I think should happen with CB radio.

CWM
 
MURS is slowly starting to catch on around here. But to make it a viable alternative to what CB has become, I do think they need to up the power limit to at least 25 watts instead of the current 2 watt limitation. And CWM also touched on something else....repeaters. Currently repeaters are not allowed on MURS, but that along with a reasonable power limit and some reasonably priced equipment would make this an extremely popular service.
 
OH MAN I SEEN THAT RM ITALY MAKES SOME GOOD AMPS FOR MURS 300 watts


God I love that, I Love it! BILL YOU DA MAN!!!!
LOL I rolled at that!!!!
:twisted: :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D


I think I broke sum`ptin

:D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D


pa1k.jpg



"LIFE IS TOO SHORT FOR Q R P ! "

73
Jeff
 

dxChat
Help Users
  • No one is chatting at the moment.
  • dxBot:
    Tucker442 has left the room.
  • @ BJ radionut:
    LIVE 10:00 AM EST :cool:
  • @ Charles Edwards:
    I'm looking for factory settings 1 through 59 for a AT 5555 n2 or AT500 M2 I only wrote down half the values feel like a idiot I need help will be appreciated