Ham radio bad, liaison channels good?

[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!