Ham radio bad, liaison channels good?

[wuzafuzz]

A variety of threads have discussed the use of ham radio by licensed CAP members.  While it's clear we have internal rules against using ham radio to perform CAP duties, the outright prohibition seems curious compared to some other things we do. 

First, our radios contain other liaison frequencies for services not regulated by NTIA.  Second, I know of at least two states that have CAP talkgroups on statewide trunked systems.  How do we justify those uses while completely banning ham, even from a supplemental role?

A few guesses:

• One obvious difference is that ham radio requires individual licensing.  However, no one is suggesting we include amateur frequencies in our CAP radios.
• Perhaps ham radio in CAP is perceived as a threat to our own communications systems?  Funding might dry up if the feds believed we could accomplish our missions using ham radio.
• Using ham radio to supplement our internal comms would exclude non-ham members from some participation.

CAPTalk lawyers: have at it!

[N Harmon]

Perhaps international agreements restrict the use of Ham radio to private citizens and not corporations and government agencies?

[RADIOMAN015]

It all depends how you look at it when/where you are & the operation challenges that occur.

From an organizational standpoint, CAP can't indorse the use of amateur radio equipment & frequencies for CAP's PRIMARY usage, because it would appear to violate FCC rules.  The organization must have it's own taxpayer funded multi million dollar radio system to perform the mission.   

From an individual CAP members' perspective, IF you are a licensed amatuer radio operator (e.g. technician class), it gives you significantly more access to repeaters & others that could help you in an emergency situation.  Furthermore, as we march on to full implementation of rebanding/tighter technical standards, member owned modified ham equipment (such as the Vertex 150's) will become non-compliant.  Overall there will be less radios available, capable/authorized to access the multi million dollar CAP repeater system.

If a mission should come up, the traditional alert methods of telephone, pager, cellphone voice/text message will continue to be used.  However, there's no prohibition for individual CAP members who are licensed hams to be communicating with one another about responding to the situation/coordinating aspects prior to arriving at the squadron to operate the squadron's radio station; obtain the "very small" cache of portable radio equipment; & maybe the squadron van (with installed high power VHF radio) to actually deploy to the mission search area when told by the IC.

Frankly, we need to encourage our ES ground team folks to get study & get licensed for the technician class amateur radio license, and deploy them not only with a CAP radio but also with a less expensive amateur radio portable, for "just in case" emergencies that could occur.

Furthermore, I wouldn't loose any sleep if a 4 to 8 member ground team deployed with only one expensive CAP portable VHF radio (and perhaps some low powered Intra squad radios), had to split up during a search and found that the ISR's (remember that aircraft are prohibited from using ISR radios)  didn't give them the range they needed to effectively communicate with one another, and chose to use their less expensive amateur portable radio, that they were proper licensed/authorized to use, on a amateur radio designated simplex frequency to coordinate their activity.

In the end we have to remember that most squadrons are quite far away from Maxwell headquarters (that in all fairness are forced into these policy decisions).

CAP communications supports the accomplishment of the operational mission.  We need to use our CAP radio system to the maximum extent possible, BUT when/where limitations are encountered "creativity", "flexibility", and just "plain common sense" needs to be applied in using the various communications tools provided by CAP as well as individually owned radio equipment (and other comm devices)  funded by our membership.       
RM     

[wuzafuzz]

I don't think "it depends how you look at it," the rules are pretty clear.

What you seem to be proposing is endorsing, "wink wink," ham radio as a secondary communications medium to overcome operational challenges.  This is currently contrary to the rules. 

If there is a REAL emergency, you do what you have to do and don't look back.  That doesn't support using amateur radio as a backup or tactical system.  As  CUL I'll have some explaining to do if I designate an amateur frequency or repeater pair for "backup" use during a mission.

We aren't talking about idle chit-chat here.  If you have a ham ticket, GMRS, etc and decide to talk about things incidental to CAP, go for it.  When it becomes a tool to accomplish your mission it runs afoul of the current rules.

Instead, we should be lobbying like the dickens to obtain more radios to use on the CAP system.

As for the purpose of my original post, I was curious why liaison or mutual aid channels are OK when ham isn't.

[FW]

As for the purpose of my original post, I was curious why liaison or mutual aid channels are OK when ham isn't.

I am by no means a comm expert however, to my limited and, maybe, flawed knowledge:
Liason/Mutual aid channels are also under NTIA  (the services may not be covered but the channels are)
Ham radio freqs. are under FCC
I wonder if that is the deciding factor.

Also, the CAP radio network is a single user nationwide system  for CAP business.  If we need to talk to other agencies, we can using our own network.  So far,  the taxpayer has funded the modernization of our system for about $10 million.  I think there will be more money to keep things going for some time because the other "agencies" we work with are satisfied with our service. 

Even though Ham Radio is a great thing (i've been associated with it for about 25 years now as KA3VAC), I think we are comparing apples with oranges here.

[RRLE]

Before thinking that you can use amateur frequencies to conduct CAP business, consider the following FCC rule.

Sec. 97.113  Prohibited transmissions.

(a) No amateur station shall transmit:
(5) Communications, on a regular basis, which could reasonably be furnished alternatively through other radio services.

[maverik]

Well if used as a secondary comms system then we would not be in violation of the rule since we wouldn't run say a net on it. Also Iam talking using ham on a mission when there is no alternative.

[arajca]

The Amatuer Radio lobby is been effective in prohibiting federal governement entities from using ham freqs for their communications. Which protects the spectrum used by hams.

CAP members have a bad habit of ignoring limitations on rules. If CAP were to allow the use of ham freqs strictly for liaison, as has been suggested, it would only be a short matter of time until some members start using them for CAP business, regardless of the regulatory limits, due to convience and cost.

[RRLE]

Also Iam talking using ham on a mission when there is no alternative.

The FCC will never buy that CAP had no alternative then the illegal use of the amateur frequencies. To put this bluntly, if a CAP squadron, group, wing or Nat is too cheap to buy CAP frequenciy radios then that does not give any CAP member, squadron, group, wing or Nat permission to use amateur frequencies for routinte use.

The alternative is the frequenices CAP has assigned to it. If a CAP member or group doesn't have CAP frequency radios then it cannot communicate that day. CAP cannot just barge into another radio service (amateur or other) just because it doesn't have its own radios. Being cheap about supplying the hardware to use those frequencies does not make amateur radio an alternative.

since we wouldn't run say a net on it

The rules say nothing about running nets. Using amateur frequencies to communicate CAP info on a point-to-point basis is 'regular use'. Neither the FCC nor non-CAP hams would take this abuse of the amateur radio service lightly.

An amateur radio license does not give the licensee permission to use amateur frequencies for offical government or private business use unless there is a disaster and immediate danger to life or property. While under orders, CAP is a government agency and when not under orders it is a private corporation. Neither is allowed to use amateur frequencies to further its business except in the disaster situation mentioned above.

[RiverAux]

I'm not sure this is too off-topic or not...But what if your state has their own radio network and has made radios programmed for its use available to CAP.  Can CAP use those for CAP to CAP communication or only CAP to the other agency(ies)? 

[cap235629]

I'm not sure this is too off-topic or not...But what if your state has their own radio network and has made radios programmed for its use available to CAP.  Can CAP use those for CAP to CAP communication or only CAP to the other agency(ies)?

Arkansas wing is in this situation.  We have a statewide trunked radio network in Arkansas for public safety agencies.  There are specific talkgroups for each agency as well as interoperability channels. 

Arkansas Wing received radios on this system because we are part of the State's emergency response plan for various disasters both natural and manmade.  This system is FAR superior to the Arkansas Wing VHF nets.  If I had my way, we would use this system exclusively.

That being said, It is a liason radio and can only be used to transmit CAP official traffic if all other corporate radio assets can not be used to transmit the traffic.

I have on 2 separate occasions in the past 2 years seen this done.  Both times were live SAR missions and CAP radios could not accomplish the needed communication.

According to our Wing DC this this is the only time it can be used and according to 100-1, this is correct.

[BTCS1*]

Add that the frequencies being used(ham) could be transmited on by other hams, possibly mistaking I for an ARES net. But I do think that it should not be banned, I do know however, that NYWG/SEG HQ in Westchester has a club sign and ham equiptment under the call K2CAP, the trustee is WA2NRV, Major Rothman.

[sardak]

Clues as to CAP's justification for prohibiting the use of ham radio can be found in the CAP-American Radio Relay League (ARRL) MOU. It's really a baffling MOU as it pretty much says that CAP won't and can't use ham radio, but we have this MOU with the largest ham group in the US anyway.

From the MOU: Therefore, use of Amateur Radio while acting as a CAP member is inconsistent with Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Regulations, including 47 CFR §97.113(a)(3) and §97.113(a)(5) and the U.S. Government Table of Frequency Allocations contained in the NTIA Manual of Regulations and Procedures for Federal Radio Frequency Management (47 CFR 300).

Sec. 97.113  Prohibited transmissions.
(a) No amateur station shall transmit:
    (3) Communications in which the station licensee or control operator has a pecuniary interest, including communications on behalf of an employer.
    (5) Communications, on a regular basis, which could reasonably be furnished alternatively through other radio services.

Sec. 300.1  Incorporation by reference of the Manual of Regulations and Procedures for Federal Radio Frequency Management.
    (b) The Federal agencies shall comply with the requirements set forth in the May 1992 edition of the NTIA Manual, as revised...

Personally, I think the prohibition under (a)(3) using the rationale that CAP members have a pecuniary (financial) interest because we are covered by FTCA and FECA (as stated in 100-1) is a real stretch. The employer part is also hard to agree with. These only apply on AFAMs, but 100-1 is blanket coverage on all CAP activities.

Compare CAP to the National Weather Service's (NWS) SKYWARN(R) program which uses hams to transmit and receive severe weather information. This is not considered use on a regular basis or as emergency comms, which is authorized by both FCC and NTIA. Many NWS weather forecast offices (WFO) have ham radio equipment installed in the offices. I know of several NWS meteorologists who are licensed hams and will use the equipment to talk with hams in the field. On active weather days hams operate the equipment in the offices because, of course, the weather folks are really busy.

Club stations, which require licensed hams as trustees and have many other rules defined by the FCC, are set up in many WFOs, with some clubs having the name of the WFO and even more having "vanity" callsigns with the ID of the WFO. A few examples are WX0DEN (Denver/Boulder), WX0STL (St. Louis), WX2BGM (Binghamton), WX4NHC (National Hurricane Center).

Mike

[sardak]

First, our radios contain other liaison frequencies for services not regulated by NTIA.  Second, I know of at least two states that have CAP talkgroups on statewide trunked systems.  How do we justify those uses while completely banning ham, even from a supplemental role?
--------------------
I am by no means a comm expert however, to my limited and, maybe, flawed knowledge:
Liaison/Mutual aid channels are also under NTIA  (the services may not be covered but the channels are)
Ham radio freqs. are under FCC
----------------------
I'm not sure this is too off-topic or not...But what if your state has their own radio network and has made radios programmed for its use available to CAP.  Can CAP use those for CAP to CAP communication or only CAP to the other agency(ies)?

There are both federal (NTIA) and non-federal (FCC) liaison, mutual aid and interoperability frequencies. FCC and NTIA rules make it very clear that just because these frequencies exist, the two sides cannot automatically use the other's freqs. The DHS National Interoperability Field Operations Guide (NIFOG) sums it up this way:

   1. The FCC and NTIA rules allow for some flexibility in frequency use by personnel directly involved in a situation where human life or property are endangered. This does NOT mean "In an emergency, anything goes."
   2. For communications not covered by #1, your use of a radio frequency must be authorized by:
     a. Your (or your agency's) FCC license or NTIA authorization
     b. "License by rule" – a provision in FCC rules that authorizes use of a radio frequency under specified conditions without a specific license or authorization issued to the user
     c. A "Special Temporary Authorization" provided by FCC or NTIA.

NTIA and FCC also allow federal agencies to use non-federal frequencies in the FCC's Part 90 Private Land Mobile Radio Service on a regular basis. Part 90 includes all the public safety frequencies including 700/800 MHz digital trunked radio (DTR) systems. From the NTIA Manual:
Provision is made in part 7.12 for a Federal radio station to use any frequency authorized to a non-Federal radio station under Part 90 of the Rules of the Federal Communications Commission where such utilization is necessary for intercommunication with non-Federal stations or required for coordination with non-Federal activities, provided a mutually-approved arrangement has been concluded between the Federal agency concerned, the Federal Communications Commission, and the non-Federal licensee involved.

Two steps are required to conclude a mutually- approved arrangement. The Federal agency must obtain from the non-Federal licensee a written certification that the Federal operation is necessary, and, after receipt of the certification, the Federal agency must coordinate the proposed usage with the FCC.

In our state, CAP has a couple of statewide DTR talk groups for CAP-to-CAP comm only. There is a statewide SAR talk group which CAP is not authorized on. There are however, mutual aid talk groups that by the state comm plan all radios on the DTR system must have. This past winter we had a missing aircraft search in which 13 different agencies, including CAP, in five counties were able to talk with one another using one of the state mutual aid talk groups. Overall, there are 543 local, state and federal agencies on the state network.

Conversely, NTIA and FCC allow non-federal agencies to use some federal frequencies.
NTIA has specified forty (40) Federal Government frequencies that can be used by non-Federal government public safety entities for communications involving coordination and cooperation with Federal Government agencies. In order for non-Federal public safety entities to use these frequencies they must obtain a license from the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).  License applications must contain written certification from a Federal Government agency that use of the requested frequency or frequencies is necessary to improve interoperability communications between the applicant and the Federal Government agency during emergencies.

Do I believe that CAP has written agreements and plans coordinated with the FCC for all the non-federal mutual aid and other frequencies CAP units use nationwide? No. Nor do I believe that non-federal agencies have the proper authorizations to use federal freqs.

Does it matter? Generally not until a user complains.

Mike

[wuzafuzz]

CAP members have a bad habit of ignoring limitations on rules. If CAP were to allow the use of ham freqs strictly for liaison, as has been suggested, it would only be a short matter of time until some members start using them for CAP business, regardless of the regulatory limits, due to convience and cost.

I suspect you hit the nail on the head.  Ironic, since licensed amateur radio operators are supposed to be self-policing. 

The CAP prohibition seems unnecessarily harsh, taking the most conservative interpretation possible.  If there is a compelling history of CAP hams going "too far" I can see how it might have come about.  Is there an actual documented history of that happening or is our rule a prevention measure?

The assertions that CAP is completely prohibited by FCC and NTIA regs are a huge stretch, especially the pecuniary interest part.  It's obvious we can't use amateur radio for CAP to CAP comms. Case closed on that.  However,  interoperability use would seem permissible under the FCC and NTIA rules.  NWS's participation in SKYWARN proves it. No one is telling them to cease and desist.  To the contrary, that program is enthusiastically embraced by ARRL and the feds.

It will be interesting to see if CAP only talkgroups on state-wide trunked systems eventually earn a similar prohibition from NHQ.  CAP to CAP comms are not interoperability use as described by the FCC Part 90 section sardak mentions.  It would be a shame to lose it, but NHQ's parochial view of comm is such that I wouldn't be surprised by a "talkgroup smackdown."

[RRLE]

The ARRL CAP MOU also answers the question about how does CAP coordinates with the ARRL or amateur radio in general.

6. Carry out joint training exercises to provide simulated emergency and disaster communications support when suitable occasions are identified at local, regional, or national levels. These exercises may include CAP training missions in which Amateur Radio volunteers use their personal equipment on Amateur frequencies while CAP volunteers use equipment approved for CAP operation on Federal frequencies assigned to CAP.

The equipment and operators are co-located and neither steps on the other's frequencies.

[RADIOMAN015]

The Amatuer Radio lobby is been effective in prohibiting federal governement entities from using ham freqs for their communications. Which protects the spectrum used by hams.

CAP members have a bad habit of ignoring limitations on rules. If CAP were to allow the use of ham freqs strictly for liaison, as has been suggested, it would only be a short matter of time until some members start using them for CAP business, regardless of the regulatory limits, due to convience and cost.

Well the last time I looked I am also a member of the ARRL & trained ARES member who participates in 2 weekly repeater  nets (VHF/UHF) & 1 simplex emergency VHF net every week without fail.  I'm not advocating using amateur radio as our primary communications system, BUT things happen in real world operations, far from Maxwell's policy making.

I do think the new proposed CAPR 100-1, at least cracks the window of opportunity for amateur radio operators to assist CAP and also gives CAP members the opportunity to choose to use amateur radio equipment, (however restricted from signing into a mission).  Of course at the policy making level this makes perfect sense, in a perfect communications world.

Realistically perhaps the best approach is "DON'T ASK, DON'T TELL!", everyone can go on their merry way accomplishing the mission, using ideally CAP radio communications systems, BUT if it doesn't work choosing another radio system (or non radio system), that supports mission success is what we as communicators must do
RM

[RiverAux]

Personally, I have a hard time understanding the justirfication for the limitations on use of any particular frequency either by CAP regulation, federal laws, or anything else in an emergency situation.

Just read about almost any recent disaster and the biggest problem has been interagency communications since everyone is using their own equipment and frequencies with very little interaction.  It seems that we've locked ourselves into this straightjacket that makes it more difficult to work with other folks rather than easier.

Sure, if we're talking about routine operations everyone should stay in their own box, but there needs to be something that loosens these rules in emergency situations.

[JoeTomasone]

Well, the issue is that there are different types of emergencies.


One is the type where you have an immediate threat to life (or property, but life is easier to understand/justify).    If someone on a GT has a heart attack, for example, and you can't contact anyone via CAP radio or cell phone and your ham radio is the last shot you have, you take it.   

The second is the Katrina-type scenario where it is more a recovery effort even though it may have been declared a disaster/emergency.   Here, the same sense of urgency does not apply.  I can see ham radio assisting in CAP comms (co-located teams), but no CAP use of ham frequencies.   

However, what I don't necessarily agree with is a prohibition on liaison activity by CAP hams -- i.e. an MRO/CUL using ham radio to contact a ham station with messages to pass or receive.   If it is done using the ham callsign, I really don't see a valid reason to have a policy that prohibits this.   It's like having a co-located ham and CAP member all in one person.   Saves a resource as well.

[wingnut55]

Great Discussion!!

I wonder if we have forgotten that the CAP equipment is owned by the US Government/USAF and the frequency assignments in CAP is US Government (USAF). I believe that at one time the USAF used our frequencies and turned them over to CAP/USAF in the 1960s and 1970s.

[JoeTomasone]

I wonder if we have forgotten that the CAP equipment is owned by the US Government/USAF

No, the CAP equipment is owned by CAP. 

Some of it may have been FUNDED by USAF (and in which case the regs require it be allocated as per the Table of Allowances), but equipment may be self-funded, State funded, etc.

[wuzafuzz]

The Amatuer Radio lobby is been effective in prohibiting federal governement entities from using ham freqs for their communications. Which protects the spectrum used by hams.

CAP members have a bad habit of ignoring limitations on rules. If CAP were to allow the use of ham freqs strictly for liaison, as has been suggested, it would only be a short matter of time until some members start using them for CAP business, regardless of the regulatory limits, due to convience and cost.

Realistically perhaps the best approach is "DON'T ASK, DON'T TELL!", everyone can go on their merry way accomplishing the mission, using ideally CAP radio communications systems, BUT if it doesn't work choosing another radio system (or non radio system), that supports mission success is what we as communicators must do
RM

"Don't ask, don't tell."  We'll have to agree to disagree.  The rules are clear; my suggestion is to lobby for a change in the rules instead of ignoring them.  What kind of role model does the "don't ask, don't tell" philosophy provide for our cadets?

At the risk of sounding "preachy" I'll share the following:

CAP’s CORE VALUES
The core values of Civil Air Patrol establish a common set of behavioral
expectations as well as a set of standards to assess member conduct. The
values of Integrity, Volunteer Service, Excellence, and Respect, serve as the
ethical framework for CAP’s service to America.

http://members.gocivilairpatrol.com/media/cms/u_082503081659.pdf

[wuzafuzz]

100-1 is silent on MURS.  I can't find mention of it in NTIA sources either. Any thoughts on that? 

As long as the radios are type accepted, it might be a handy place for some of our "obsolete" wide-band gear to find a home.  At best it would be limited to the same kind of uses as FRS.  Definitely no ES, AFAMS, etc.  Can't use them as "backup radios" for ground teams, or mission base radios (that's ES).  Airshows, conferences, encampments, training...maybe?

FCC MURS Home:
http://wireless.fcc.gov/services/index.htm?job=service_home&id=multi_use

The FCC rules allow almost everyone to use MURS.  The tricky part is the 2 watt max on transmitter power.

No licenses are issued for this service. An entity is authorized by rule to operate a MURS transmitter if it:

• is not a foreign government or a representative of a foreign government;
• uses the transmitter in accordance with 47 CFR. 95.1309;
• otherwise operates in accordance with the rules contained in Sections 95.1301-95.1309.

I am NOT suggesting we go out and replace our CAP radios.  As a comm guy I merely find this conversation interesting and like to anticipate the questions others might ask me.

[RedFox24]

I also find this conversation interesting, as well as some of the other comms threads. 

The rules and regs are pretty clear, IMO, on both the CAP and Amateur side of things.  The confusion lies with the people who are trying to interoperate them.  I am amazed how many times I have been told, by some CAP ES Guru, that I as a licensed Amateur operator can't use my Ham radio while in CAP uniform.  What?  I can use my Ham radio no matter how I am dressed so long as I don't conduct any business (CAP or otherwise) on the Ham bands. Business would be anything I have a 'pecuniary interest' in. 

Just as I can only use my CAP radio license to talk about CAP business on a CAP frequency, and not use it for personal or other business means.  Can I only operate a CAP radio while in uniform?

There is, again IMO, no conflict between the two.

There is a gray area when it comes to "emergency" communications.  The FCC states that an Amateur may use any means or frequencies to communicate in an emergency if "no other means are available".  The kicker is that last part.  So if you key up on the local police band to report an accident, and you have other means at your disposal, like a cell phone, you will face the consequences.  You may face them anyway for being outside your privileges as an Amateur.  But that is the risk you take in an emergency.

A CAP licensed radio operator, even a unlicensed civilian, may do the same thing, under FCC rules.  Again you face the consequences of your actions if you had "other means". 

The other area that is also considered "gray", although it is not as gray as some try to make it, is hams engaged in "disaster relief". Red Cross, Salvation Army, Baptist Relief, RACES organizations – among others - all are covered by various forms of insurance and/or workmen's comp.  That does not constitute a 'pecuniary interest' such that the FCC finds that it would or should prohibit those folks from use of amateur radio communications during disaster relief operations (i.e., in a 'real' emergency).  This is often an argument used to state why CAP, because we are under workmen's comp when on an emergency mission, can't use Ham Radio at all.  The FCC was asked to rule on such cases ("Cardillo-Lee" petition) and determined that there was no need for a ruling, since the case was already covered by existing rules. 

I refer you to http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/1999/12/02/3/   that says "In denying the Cardillo-Lee petition, the FCC basically said a change in the rules was not required, in part because of amendments it made in 1993 regarding prohibited transmissions. The FCC said the requested clarification was unnecessary "because these two-way communications are permitted within the existing rules." The FCC said hams who also are emergency personnel engaged in disaster relief "do not appear to be receiving compensation for transmitting communications." The FCC said it views the Amateur Radio operation in such situations as incidental to the individual's primary disaster-relief duties."  (my emphasis added)

Remember this is dealing with an actual on going emergency where "other means" may not be available.  Katrina, wildfires, tornados etc. 

With specific regard to CAPM 100-1, 11-2 item (b), I believe the new manual has an unsupported claim.  That being said, that is CAP policy, and it will be followed.

There are many, many ways to "get around" that problem that are all above board and legal to Amateur and CAP, like co locating operators etc that have been discussed before.

Thought I would throw this out there............

[wuzafuzz]

The topic of using MARS to assist CAP came up in another CAP Comm group.  All our talk about amateur radio didn't explore the use of MARS.  In the highlighted case, Oregon Wing used Navy MARS to pass digital traffic on HF, which we aren't allowed to do. 

I'm certainly no expert on MARS, but don't they use non-amateur frequencies for MARS functions?  What are your thoughts on CAP/MARS cooperation?

http://www.flashalert.net/news.html?id=1184

[RedFox24]

I am no expert on MARS but MARS is similar to CAP in that MARS is "licensed" to use non amateur frequencies.  I think MARS has the same narrow/wide band issue that CAP has due to its use of military frequencies.  There sure has been a lot of used amateur gear on the market lately that has the "MARS mod". 

Our Section EC is a MARS operator as well, I will ask him how that works.  I know he has lamented how screwed up MARS/CAP comms are right now as he and I trade stories.  I will see him at our next meeting and see what he has to say.  I know in our recent state wide ARES drill with IEMA that MARS participated on the amateur side and checked in along with some of the hospitals and state police posts, and wondered how MARS could participate.  I will ask and get back with an answer unless someone else has one first. 

That being said, by FCC and CAP, in an actual emergency, CAP could get amateurs to do the same thing you reference.  However I see no allowance for "practice missions". 

The thing that is tricky in all of this is the difference in licensing that all parties undergo and the governing body that issues the license.  That is where the black and white occurs in the rules, not in the MOU's as someone else pointed to. 

One of the things I have been wondering is why the Comms Powers That Be at NHQ gave up our digital and APRS abilities when we made the switch.  That makes no sense at all.  I would like that explained in a coherent manner other than saying "100-X says so". 

Unrelated but similar, the US Coast Gurad Aux has been attempting to recruit Amateur Radio Operators for a few years now to get them to operate their radios at their bases and on some "missions", what ever that is.  I got a "recruiting" flyer not long ago on that, see if I can't dig it up, it was very interesting in the things it "offered" Amateurs. 

[RADIOMAN015]

The topic of using MARS to assist CAP came up in another CAP Comm group.  All our talk about amateur radio didn't explore the use of MARS.  In the highlighted case, Oregon Wing used Navy MARS to pass digital traffic on HF, which we aren't allowed to do. 

I'm certainly no expert on MARS, but don't they use non-amateur frequencies for MARS functions?  What are your thoughts on CAP/MARS cooperation?

http://www.flashalert.net/news.html?id=1184

Overall since I've been back in CAP, I've heard NOTHING about ANY attempts to coordinate MARS assistance to CAP nationwide via a MOU.  I think you will find that MARS availability nationwide will vary greatly.  There was (rumor)talk that all the MARS programs were going to be combined into a DOD comm activity with the US Army as the executive agent. 

I would prefer to use MARS stations for support to us because they are affiliated with the military, as we are.

Now regulation wise, what if a CAP member is also a MARS member, can he/she also operate a MARS stations while on a CAP mission  
RM   

[RedFox24]

Now regulation wise, what if a CAP member is also a MARS member, can he/she also operate a MARS stations while on a CAP mission  

I would say no, because MARS are licensed Amateurs, so your back to 100-1,11-2,(b). 

[RRLE]

US Coast Gurad Aux has been attempting to recruit Amateur Radio Operators for a few years now to get them to operate their radios at their bases and on some "missions", what ever that is

The Coast Guard Auxiliary is going thru the same sort of comm transitions as CAP - just not as public. First, if you want a quick look at where they are going look at the October 2004 Up Top In Operations. That is the newsletter of the Aux Operations department which covers comms.

The Aux was primarily trying to recruit amateur operators because of their interest in comms. The Aux doesn't have any significant amateur activity. They were looking to 'man' their new frequencies. From what I have heard the implementation of the repeater network described in the 2004 newsletter is years behind schedule. The HF network is pretty much non-existent.

For the really curious, this is the new USCG Aux COMMUNICATIONS QUALIFICATION (TCO). I see nothing in there that is not related to Marine VHF/FM. There is a very few tasks at the end dealing with nets, but the net frequencies (VHF, HF etc) are not mentioned.

[isuhawkeye]

^^^ Your Milage May vary

8th District Western rivers division is recruiting Ham radio operators to build and work with an HF radio network.  I have checked into it a few times using Ham radio equipment.  It operates on both Ham, and CG frequencies.

[RADIOMAN015]

Realistically perhaps the best approach is "DON'T ASK, DON'T TELL!", everyone can go on their merry way accomplishing the mission, using ideally CAP radio communications systems, BUT if it doesn't work choosing another radio system (or non radio system), that supports mission success is what we as communicators must do
RM

"Don't ask, don't tell."  We'll have to agree to disagree.  The rules are clear; my suggestion is to lobby for a change in the rules instead of ignoring them.  What kind of role model does the "don't ask, don't tell" philosophy provide for our cadets?

At the risk of sounding "preachy" I'll share the following:

CAP's CORE VALUES
The core values of Civil Air Patrol establish a common set of behavioral
expectations as well as a set of standards to assess member conduct. The
values of Integrity, Volunteer Service, Excellence, and Respect, serve as the
ethical framework for CAP's service to America.

http://members.gocivilairpatrol.com/media/cms/u_082503081659.pdf

Many very long term, very experienced operations/mission radio communicators have not been successful in lobbying the retention of radio communications concepts that have worked for many years. e.g. "repeater talkaround (ability to use repeater outputs as simplex frequencies), so I have serious doubts on ANY successes.

It's not my intention to personally or to encourage anyone to violate any regulation or policy AT WILL, BUT just to point out that imminent operational circumstances can occur, that MAY result in radio communicators POSSIBLY using "other personal communications tools" not specifically sanctioned to ensure successful mission accomplishment.   IMHO it's unlikely that reporting such deviation would be praised.  So IMHO "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" appears to the best way of keeping CAP HQ Maxwell happy!  (I might add that CAP does not require a formal after action report on any mission(s) anyways, IF that were the case, I would not lie on the report & would truthfully report any "deviation"!)
RM     

[RedFox24]

On the subject of MARS, here it the response I got from Brad, W9FX, the ARRL Illinois Section Emergency Coordinator, who is also a Navy MARS operator.

W9FX wrote:

MARS is an operation of and funded by the Dept of Defense.  We are not an auxiliary.  Our orders come from the three branches of the military that sponsor MARS activities - Army, Navy-Marine Corps, and, Air Force.  Each branch has it's 'Chief, MARS.'  Navy-Marine Corps has it's base of operations in DC.  Army is at Ft. Huachuca, AZ.  Not sure where AF is - used to be at Scott, but, not sure, nowadays.

An individual must be a licensed amateur to become a licensed MARS station/operator.  DoD installations, however - mil bases, activities, etc., - do not require amateur licenses.  The DoD can license them directly.  During the Vietnam war, for instance, the billet of MARS operator was a regular assignment.  Shipboard or land based operations, alike, used Navy (and the Army/Air Force equivalent) of Radiomen, as operators.

I obtained Navy MARS licenses for the Illinois State EOC  -  NNN0ILL, and, for Camp Lincoln, near Springfield - NNN0ILA.  In essence, the DoD can license anybody they choose.  It's their ballgame, they make the rules.

We do not have to be NTIA compliant.

MARS licenses do not allow one to QSY to amateur frequencies, just as ham licenses, in the absence of MARS licenses, do not allow one to operate on MARS freqs.

In the post-9/11 world, I am allowed to operate on any of the three services' MARS freqs, and, to participate in any of their nets, regardless of my service affiliation.  I can, in other words, check into Navy Marine Corps nets, or Air Force nets - digital or voice (or, CW, for that matter).

Navy Marine Corps has a very robust, well maintained, CONUS (and, maybe worldwide) digital network system.  It uses WinLink 2000.  The stations that operate in this system scan a variety of frequencies using PacTor.  It works quite well.  Army MARS has, in Illinois, at least, SQUAT, ZIPPO, NADA, in terms of digital stuff.   

Until recently - actually, as of today, it's probably still true - one could operate on MARS HF freqs if one held a ham Tech license.  That's about to change, at least in Army.  They are going to allow Techs to join, but, they must upgrade to General within 12 months.

http://www.navymars.org/central/area/

So my earlier comments that MARS would fall under 100-1,11-2 would appear to be in error. 

Then again the regs dont speak to MARS, so it would be nice to know what position NHQ has on it.

FWIW

[RRLE]

FWIW NAVMARS (Navy/Marine Corps MARS) also serves the US Coast Guard.

MARS uses special frequencies. According to the Equipment Modifications page of the NAVMARS site above:

Equipment Modifications
Requests for modifications to commercially manufactured amateur radio equipment should be made directly to the manufacturer. They require a copy of your MARS license with your request. You may either mail a copy or fax it to them. Be sure to identify the model and serial number and the modification you are looking for.

So unless a CAP member was also an amateur radio operator and a MARS operator, they should not even have a MARS capable radio in their possession. Buying one used and then using it without both required licenses could be seen by the FCC as a deliberate act to violate the rules.

[wingnut55]

So unless a CAP member was also an amateur radio operator and a MARS operator, they should not even have a MARS capable radio in their possession. Buying one used and then using it without both required licenses could be seen by the FCC as a deliberate act to violate the rules.

ok, OK It is not against the law to own a MARS transmitter, it is against the law to use the transmitter.

Or maybe all the Surplus stuff out there is ILLEGAL

I am just happy CAP is becoming less anal retentive over communications.

We have a hard enough time recruiting without alienating an important community asset. I know many ham guys who can DF 10x better than most of our guys. And whynot use them for CAP.

[RedFox24]

RRLE

So unless a CAP member was also an amateur radio operator and a MARS operator, they should not even have a MARS capable radio in their possession. Buying one used and then using it without both required licenses could be seen by the FCC as a deliberate act to violate the rules.

Most radio manufactures consider the MARS mod a MARS/CAP mod because it does the same thing.  So it is possible, if not highly probable that most CAP members who are not amateur ops do possess a radio capable of MARS.  Again possession is not the problem, use of frequencies outside of ones licensed privileges is the problem.


wingnut55

I am just happy CAP is becoming less anal retentive over communications.

Wish I could say the same as I don't see CAP becoming less AR, more so, and then completely void of reason when they abandoned the digital modes that are more useful than voice in a lot ways.

But at lease we are discussing. 

[coolkites]

Nobody has seemed to mention that CAP does not operate on HAM frequencys I know what a shocker! the frequencys we operate on are specified for cap and are not avalible to anyone with just a HAM license you must have you ACUT so we really never use HAM radios Please take not of this

[SarDragon]

Nobody has seemed to mention that CAP does not operate on HAM frequencys I know what a shocker! the frequencys we operate on are specified for cap and are not avalible to anyone with just a HAM license you must have you ACUT so we really never use HAM radios Please take not of this

I suggest that you review other Comm related threads before making further comments. There are folks on this thread who have dozens of years of Comm experience, both as hams and CAP communicators.

[Major Lord]

Nobody has seemed to mention that CAP does not operate on HAM frequencys I know what a shocker! the frequencys we operate on are specified for cap and are not avalible to anyone with just a HAM license you must have you ACUT so we really never use HAM radios Please take not of this

Wait, wait, are you sure about this? Maybe I better just keep using my Radio Shack CB radios with channel 10 crystals in "backwards"! Thanks for this remarkable insight!

Major Lord

[wuzafuzz]

Nobody has seemed to mention that CAP does not operate on HAM frequencys I know what a shocker! the frequencys we operate on are specified for cap and are not avalible to anyone with just a HAM license you must have you ACUT so we really never use HAM radios Please take not of this

Re-read the very first post in this thread, with particular focus on the second sentence.  We had it covered.

I still think it would be fun to use my ham radio to cross-band repeat CAP frequencies to FRS using a EchoLink for long haul, and then back again.   

[RedFox24]

Wait, wait, are you sure about this? Maybe I better just keep using my Radio Shack CB radios with channel 10 crystals in "backwards"! Thanks for this remarkable insight!

Major Lord

:clap:

now that is funny!

[coolkites]

Wait, wait, are you sure about this? Maybe I better just keep using my Radio Shack CB radios with channel 10 crystals in "backwards"! Thanks for this remarkable insight!

Major Lord

:clap:

now that is funny!

Backwards seems to screw things up, I prefer upsidedown.