• 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.

FCC: Out of touch with the global community?

Go do some research on the CB mile limit rule. Whether or not you remember there being one, there was for quite some time, and there were specific reasons for it. I never said Amateur radio had a distance limitations. I said all amateur communications were shut down during WWII.

Wow, this thread got sidetracked! :LOL:
 
Sonwatcher said:
Ok, I did some searching and I think I found an answer that is more in line with what is actually going on and it has nothing to do with the argument of interference.International law stated that in order to communicate internationally on HF, code is required to be learned and tested. The Amateurs were upset when CB was allotted the 11 meter spectrum which is part of HF spectrum and allowed to talk voice without a license.This angered the Amateurs that used HF spectrum because they are not allowed to talk on HF until they took a written test and passed code. Now we are entering a new ball game.Now the International law states that it is no longer a requirement for international HF voice communication to have to pass a code test. Now the FCC is planning on dropping the code requirement for HF in the US.The 155 mile limit is a US law. Since the technicality that kept HF from legally being able to talk internationally is dropped elswhere and now soon here would now be a time to address the legal changing of this CB law ? The law that was based on International requirement is now gone.

Keep the same Type Accepted equipment and power regulations.

I would not be producing anymore interference than when I talk local.


The ITU regulation regarding CW deals with only amateur radio. It does not go in any other radio service. Yes ITU used to require that international amateur comms required the passing of a code test for amateur licenses using HF. Since ITU says Morse is no longer a requirement for amateur radio licensees, countries are free to do whatever they wish.

And I found a source that indicates that when war broke out in Euarope, the U.S. hams were required under nuetrility reasons not to do any international contacts. International, not distance. If you were in Texas, you couldn't communicate with Mexico This was prior to 12/7/41. Once we declared war against Japan, amateur radio operations were complety suspended.

After that time, a Ware Emergency Radio Service was created that hams operated for emergencies. This was not part of amateur radio, but was a Civil Defense communications agnecy for use in war emergencies such as air raids. It also did service in other emergencies as major storms.

73
 
Ok, I got my info from a thread on Eham about Alan Dixon's proposal.I am interested in the info Moleculo found on the mile requirement. That would be included in outdated law.
 
Sonwatcher said:
Ok, I got my info from a thread on Eham.I am interested in the info Moleculo found on the mile requirement. That would be included in outdated law.

Do a Gogole search on citizen's band radio there are a number of sources defining CB. The history articles I read all said CB is intended for "short range" communication. This would explain the distamce rule as well as the low power, low antenna rules which do keep it local when the band isn't open and if it is open, you cant work skip. It has to stay local. "Short range."

I found no technical reason for the distance rule, just the "short range" intention.

So that's as far as I was able to go. The distance limit is there because CB radio is intended for short range communication.
 
This historical timeline is presented as a tribute to the pioneer's and forward thinkers. They created an industry and a social phenomenon we know as CB.


27 Megacycle History in the U.S.
1933
Experimental Station W6XBC operated by Dr. A.H. Schermann in Yuma AZ operated at 27.1 MHz. (W6XBC stood for Experimental Broadcaster 6th radio district).

1934

The FCC is established by an Act of Congress commonly known as the Communications act of 1934. Radio "services" are created in three categories, Broadcast, Public & Safety/Special.

1938

Forward thinking Herbert Brooks, W9SDG of Port Wing WI. writes a letter to the editor of QST magazine and it is published in November 1938 describing a theoretical "Citizens Radio Service" nearly identical to what we know today.

1940
World War II spurs development of 27MHz equipment for use in tanks and beachhead landing networks. The BC-1335 an 18 tube 6 or 12v 4 Watt military unit weighing 25 lbs. was a forerunner of things to come.

1944
Speaking at the FCC frequency allocation hearings held during late 1944, Rear Admiral Stanford C. Hooper presents a draft of an obscure project proposing a band of frequencies be set aside for veterans returning home from WWII. The thought was that many returning vets possessed the technical knowledge, ideas & skills to create a new industry based on personal communications.

1945
In January of 1945, just after Admiral Hoopers plan was announced, the FCC took unusually rapid action in announcing CB docket # 6651. The FCC commissioner E. K. Jett outlines in the July issue of the Saturday Evening Post his vision for the CB service.

1946
Doctors use 27MHz, operating diathermy medical equipment on a band of frequencies between 26.96 to 27.28

1947
The Atlantic City Conference - Amateurs lose parts of 10 meters and 20 meters, but will gain a new band at 15 meters in 1952. To compensate for the loss, the FCC allows use of the 11 meter band (26.96 to 27.23 Mc) on a shared basis with Industrial, Scientific and Medical devices. Class D radio for shared professional use introduced at 465MHz UHF. Doctors are permitted to continue using 27MHz.

1947
Licensed February 1947, radio Engineer John M. Mulligan fires up W2XQD using homemade equipment he was able to maintain spotty communications on temperamental UHF channels for a distance of 5 miles.

1948
On March 23 1948 the FCC issued the first certificate of type approval for equipment to be used in the Citizens Radio Service at 465 megacycles. The model 100-B designed by Citizens Radio Corporation becomes the worlds first type approved CB radio.

1948
Firestone Tire Company granted experimental license W10XXD on 27.255MHz using two 3Watt transmitters. The experiments Firestone conducted are lost amid the company's corporate records but they may have been testing fore-runners of modern CB gear.

Laying practically dormant for a decade, 465MHz Class D service deemed a failure, the search is on for a replacement band.

Early 1957
FCC Docket #11994 proposes reallocating Class D in the very underused 11 meters Ham band 26.96-27.23 MHz (USA-only). At this time there was little business/military use of 27MHz and model control on 27.255 was inadequate, being shared with paging and other services.

11th Sept 1958
The 11 meters ham band is reassigned to models and Class D Citizens' Band radio. The band is divided into 10kHz channels, the first channel bounded by 26.96 and 26.97 with the carrier frequency centered at 26.965 - and 27.225 being the last channel center - 27 channels in all. Models were allocated 5 new channel centers, 50kHz apart, the outer channels being 35kHz away from the band edges. 22 Class D channels were arranged around the model channels that later became known as channels 3A, 7A, 11A, 15A and 19A. The old model channel at 27.255 was allocated as a further 23rd Class D channel, a shared frequency that remains as the 6th model channel also. The Business Band above 27.23 couldn't yet be used for CB apart from channel 23 - the two-channel gap between 22 and 23 gave rise to pirate channels 22A and 22B.




26.965 01
26.975 02
26.985 03
26.995 3A
27.005 04
27.015 05
27.025 06
27.035 07
27.045 7A
27.055 08
27.065 09
27.075 10
27.085 11
27.095 11A
27.105 12
27.115 13
27.125 14
27.135 15
27.145 15A
27.155 16
27.165 17
27.175 18
27.185 19
27.195 19A
27.205 20
27.215 21
27.225 22
--27.23-----
(27.235 22A before becoming 24 in 1977)
(27.245 22B before becoming 25 in 1977)
27.255 23
March 1959
Mr. Donald L. Stoner publishes an article in Radio & TV News that includes design details on constructing a homemade CB radio transceiver. The schematic, component layout and alignment instructions are all included, this spurs many individuals to build their own version. This movement is picked up quickly by the fledgling industry and commercially produced kits become available almost overnight.

1st Jan 1977
More CB channels added - there was talk of having 99 channels up to 27.995 but it was decided not to allow a span of more than 440kHz - to prevent intermod breakthrough to any 455kHz receiver Intermediate Frequency stages. The business band lost 27.23 - 27.41, to new CB channels 24 to 40. Channels 24 and 25 filled in the reclaimed gap between 22 and 23 (which is why the order is strange), and channels 26 to 40 continued from 27.265 to 27.405 - by coincidence the first two decimal places match the channel number. The five newer model freqs are now part of an allocation from 26.96 to 27.28 . In the USA, channel 23 is still the "Blue" model channel.

26.965 01
to
27.225 22
27.235 24 *new*
27.245 25 *new*
27.255 23
27.265 26 *new*
to *new*
27.405 40 *new*

Thank You, Tom Kneitel, K2AES (ex-2W1965) for providing historical data. Also Meg A Hertz for frequency data. Without their help this page would not be possible.

taken from http://www.retrocom.com/index.html
27 Megacycle history.

73 Jeff
 
I would add that in Allan Dixon's proposal to abolish the mile rule the FCC did not mention "interference" at all. And to the complaint about more power being used with amps coming in if passed was knocked down by the FCC because it stated that there were already laws prohibiting them and therefore a non-issue to the proposal.The ARRL chimed in about it competing with Amateur radio.
 
We did kinda steal this thread a little, the only point I was trying to make is the 150 mile rule is just one of many things the fcc has done that is way out of touch But they are your goverment at its best, and being so the only thing that motivates them is MONEY, or how they can sell something to get some.
 
Yeah, sorry Mole. I saw this rule as something that fit in with the Title of the thread. I just like a good debate with a good exchange of ideas.
 
"Section 301 of the Communications Act states "No person shall use or operate any apparatus for the transmission of energy or communications or signals by radio" without a license from the FCC.

As early as 1938, however, the FCC was allowing "unlicensed" uses at low power. The justification for this was that because these devices operate at such low power, they had no interstate effect and therefore fell outside the licensing requirement of 301, which at the time required licensing only of _interstate_ use of "radio."

So Congress created Section 307(e). 307(e)(1) states that "notwithstanding any license requirement established in this act...the Commission may by rule authorize operation of radio stations without individual licenses" in four radio services: (a) citizen's band radio service; (b) radio control service; (c) certain kinds of aviation service; (d) certain kinds of maritime service. Congress gave the FCC flexibility to define the relevant services, and Section 307(e)(3)"

First we have a law that the FCC is breaking by allowing unlicensed use
So to justify its actions they state these devices are too low a power to cause "interstate" interference therefore not needing a license. Then Congress passes a law to allow unlicensed use of these low power devices which includes the CB.
Now by their own admission based on their answer to Congress for their own bending of the law they have admitted that the CB in its low power design poses no interference threat. Correct ?

As an added thought, by putting a mile limit on talking do they not contradict themselves when they argue that these low power devices pose no interstate effect ? The very argument they used to excuse their breaking the Communications law ?
 
o

the Commission may by rule authorize operation of radio stations without individual licenses" in four radio services: (a) citizen's band radio service; (b) radio control service; (c) certain kinds of aviation service; (d) certain kinds of maritime service. Congress gave the FCC flexibility to define the relevant services, and Section 307(e)(3)"

*****

Note the last sentence. FCC is the sole authority on CIVILIAN communications in the USA. There is no contradiction in the above. All the services are meant to be short-ranged radio applications. Therefore, their restrictions are appropriate to the USAGE of each given that the technical limitations of radio waves cannot be controlled except by placing restrictions on how the USERS apply the service. Given the economics and the techology of the time, 27 MHZ was the only way to make CB a viable, public service at a price the users could afford. In
1958, UHF was considered exotic and the equipment expensive.
Ideally, IMHO, FCC should have carved out a chunk of VHF spectrum at 220 MHZ (still exotic), and they briefly considered it in the 70's, I believe. It would have certainly taken care of the desire to use CB as a hobby by talking long distances with only occasional inversions (what CBers call "skip"). The rest of us wouldn't have to be bothered by the users of "extree" channels and splatter caused by 27 MHZ users. But that proposal (which would've caused the hams to scream bloody murder) was shot down. I actually wish 27 MHZ WOULD be vigorously enforced and "sunsetted" with an alternative piece of VHF spectrum being introduced. Such would not harm builders as they could transition over to VHF equipment, and it would answer a lot of the technical issues we face now. Of course, CBers would then scream FOUL because it would remove most, if not all, of their precious "skip" and the thing that attracts them to illegal activity to start with! :( On the good side, many more people could use radio at the same time without causing interference.

CB radio is not now, nor was it ever, nor will it's illegal "hobby" activities be sanctioned or justified so long as there is reasonable and prudent law in place. The technical and legal aspects, ergo the foundations of practical radio law, have long been established thru experience and technical advances that drive *some* adjustments in rules to meet changing needs. CB radio does NOT NEED the ability to talk long distances and it does not NEED to become a justified alternative service to Amateur Radio. While FCC tries to meet the national needs for communications for civilian communications, it also must meet the need for the US to get along with other countries thru treaties and agreements that meet the needs of other nations, too. This involves not running headlong over other countries and creating a diplomatic headache. As do most advocates of their own particular interests, we often have "tunnel" vision and become blind to the needs of other countries. Those other countries don't WANT 27 MHZ to become like a raging torrent when it can be contained to a mild stream.

Once again, it is why we have the Amateur Radio ticket with its own set of rules, protocol, and culture that is designed to
promote technical advance, community service, and goodwill among nations. It CAN be used as a hobby, and, to many, IS a hobby by virtue of all the thing contained in it! CB radio is NOT
a hobby in legal terms and never will be. People confuse hobby radio with ham radio and CB radio with hobby. They want Amateur radio to be CB and CB to become "the" new Amateur Radio service. :shock:

I pray fervently THAT will never happen!
:roll:


CWM
 
But even as late as the 1950s, the FCC continued to justify "unlicensed" access on the grounds that it was purely _intra_state and, because of its limitations, could not have any effect _inter_state effect and therefore fell outside of Section 301.

The FCC continued to state that these devices posed no "interstate " effect because of the power limitations. They were placed under "intrastate" laws. It is by these qualifications the CB was placed with this group. This is how they got Congress to allow "no license" requirement for CB.How can they state at one point they posed no interstate problem ,according to the FCC , because of low power limitations but on the other hand impose a mile limit as though they do ? If they do have "interstate" effect, as the mile limit implies , they then by law need to be licensed. To impose a mile limit on communications seems to imply that "no interstate effect" is accomplished by the compliance of the operator and not (FCC's) their own argument of solely low power accomplishing it. If this is the case any device can be considered as having "no interstate effect".
I see a contradiction myself.

Also=

Congress said nothing about the existing devices operating under the old intrastate theory. In theory, all these devices were now illegal or, at the least, the FCC needed to find a new justification for them. But no one ever made this argument and the FCC never really reexamined its authority.

I wonder if this can be challenged ?
 
Re: o

C W Morse said:
.

Once again, it is why we have the Amateur Radio ticket with its own set of rules, protocol, and culture that is designed to
promote technical advance, community service, and goodwill among nations. It CAN be used as a hobby, and, to many, IS a hobby by virtue of all the thing contained in it! CB radio is NOT
a hobby in legal terms and never will be.


CWM

Ok here we go again Amateur Radio is not a hobby........
CB is not a hobby.........

But in your own words THEY ARE HOBBYS BY VIRTUE OF THE THINGS CONTAINED IN THEM............................




And I agree with CHARLEYMARBLES, good will sheeeeeesh the guys across the border not only splatter 27mhz they do it all over the spectrum now thats good will?
 
CHARLEYMARBLES said:
ALL I'M GONNA SAY IS M E X I C O !!!


Now tell me again about how we have an agreement with our neighboring countrys?




Chuck

We have agreements with nations who have signed on to ITU.
No one can force a country to join ITU.

CWM
 

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