Any radio operators/HAMs on here? I've heard that you

You're talking about the walkie-talkie frequencies. You'll be fine transmitting encrypted over that as long as you aren't obnoxious with it.

>>1108891
In a word: No.
FCC does not allow encryption. Digital modulation yes but no encryption.

>>1108957
Why doesn't the FCC allow encryption?

I bought a ham for cheap on ebay but haven't learned to use it yet. Paid subs to ham associations in two bloody countries and never got my license yet. Should do that this year

>>1109024
Because you would be using a publicly maintained service for your own private means that could well be illegal. Imagine if drug dealers or gang members could all collude in secret from the police
>>1108891
>analog encryption
wut? Encrypt your message and then modulate it?

>>1109049
>Because you would be using a publicly maintained service for your own private means that could well be illegal. Imagine if drug dealers or gang members could all collude in secret from the police

And yet they do anyways.

>wut? Encrypt your message and then modulate it?
Don't know what that means either. It's just a term I've heard floating around HAM forums where I'm sure they're just calling any form of analog voice distortion "encryption".

>>1108957
But then how are devices supposed to communicate? The MURS frequency used to be for garage openers and similar short range radio controlled devices. I can't imaging it would be a good thing for garage door communications to be sent in plaintext, especially if several of the same type of unit is present in the same area.

>>1109066
You know, they can allow encryption for door openers while disallowing it for voice communications. And have different rules for different bands, different user groups and so on.

Might make a amateur radio general on /diy/ desu there's quite a few hams here

File: 1443983081834.jpg (14KB, 251x242px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 251x242px

>>1109115

>You know, they can allow encryption for door openers while disallowing it for voice communications

>>1109132
There used to be one, id pop in every once in a while even though I dont ever plan on getting into the hobby.

People would post some really funny frequencies you could listen to online with crazy fucks talking

>>1108891
Legal? No.
Enforced? If you're obvious and obnoxious.

The amateur radio community self-enforces, so if you're not bothering anyone and the hobby is almost non-existent in your area there's little likelihood of you being caught, and even less of a likelihood of being tracked down and charged. However, it IS possible for radio nuts to triangulate your position once you're discovered.

Radio is a dying hobby, so unless you're in a major metropolitan area I doubt you'd ever even be discovered.

I live in Ocean County, NJ - very heavily populated and amateur radio nuts all over the place. I own a pair of handheld HAMs and I use them as walkies on the FRS channels when I walk my dogs at night. It's technically illegal because they don't have fixed antennas, but I keep my head down and keep the chatter minimal and nobody's said 'boo' in the past 2 years I've used them. But I don't encrypt and I use the low power setting so that I don't interfere with anyone else in the area.

>>1109066
>garage door communications

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolling_code

>>1109065
>calling any form of analog voice distortion "encryption"

Avoid those kinds of people talking like that if you want to learn. They are using bad terminology. This is what was feared to happen when they dumbed down the licencing requirements. Anyways, moving forward....

Unless they are talking about voice inversion scrambling (which is illegal as well), that's a real primitive form of encryption that is easy to defeat. It sounds like Donald Duck quacking.

There is also compandering modulation like AM compandered side-band which is not very common and didn't take off in a big way in the ham fraternity in NA. It's a compression method that uses less RF bandwidth but is not a form of encryption.

Encryption is a coded form of communication whose sole intention is to preserve the privacy between the comunicating parties. Encryption can mean electronically encoded and/or using code words/letter/number groupings in plain open language (think 'numbers stations'). Strictly verboten on the ham bands world wide as per ITU agreements.

Btw, I love this hobby and all the natural physics it encompasses. My interests lay in the VLF/ELF and microwave/laser comms. :^)

>>1109049
>publicly maintained service
The government could collapse tomorrow and ham radio would still work. That's the whole point.

>>1109478
Maybe for the lunatic fringe, but not for the majority of hams.

>>1109218
>Radio is a dying hobby

There's more amateur radio operators each year, people are getting older though. The hobby desperately needs younger people.

I went to the RSGB convention last year and was the youngest person there and probably the only person in my 20s.

>>1109476
Used to use vlf for mapping faults to find gold... Tapped into some submarine comms to see under the earth. Fun times

>>1109172
>>1109132
..Are you retards serious?
>>1109675

Why the fuck do we even have a catalogue?

>>1111151
I've heard of that but have never seen it demonstrated and not entirely sure how that works. I am familiar with the ELF sub comm reception having used the soundcard method.

>>1111297
I'm sure I could send you the manual for the equipment if you wanted mate. Juicy with technical jargon

>>1108891
sup guys i bought a cheap baofang transmitter and use it to fart and burp to the repeater during the weekly sunday ham meetup

those guys get so upset. hahahahaha idiots should try to get laid

Totally piggybacking on this thread but I have a question for hams. I live on a boat and am thinking about getting a cheap HAM setup for packet radio. My question is if I could hop on some frequency and talk to an open gateway to send and receive email?

>>1112244
For the love of god, don't.
People doing that have lead to a massive shitfest in the amateur radio community, since it's often unlicensed users or people who just got their license for free email.

>>1112256
O rly? Because I do have an SSB and both my SSL and RRO permit. My SSB can operate on some HAM freqs that I listen to when bored. Mainly on the 20 meter band. Haven't heard anyone saying anything like that and if HAMs do one thing when they drop the hammer it's complain.

>>1112264
If you want a more detailed look at the clusterfuck, look up "Echolink yacht." A short version of all this is that the FCC is suggesting that archaic restrictions on digital modes get lifted, and there's a ton of opposition to it due to certain people tying up ham frequencies for hours with email messages.

>>1112277
I found http://www.winlink.org/ which is pretty much what I want on opinion on. It has the proposed rule change you mentioned in the news section. RM-11708. Looking over the comments to the rule change on FCC.gov I see most are without substance but a few are compelling. I read one from "Theodore S. Rappaport, N9NB" a professor at a NY uni. While 90% of his response is strict conjecture I do believe that tests should be done to see if increasing bitrate will in fact degrade to channel as speculated. As for the rest of the arguments they mostly border on using ssl over public packet radio and old people yelling, "Get off mah yard." All which brings me back to my original point; All HAM's seem to do is bitch.

>>1112304
Can't argue with that.

>>1112244
Not on a ham frequency if you are unlicenced. And in my country you actually can't possess amateur radio transmitters when not licenced.

However, if you subscribe to Sailmail, with a relatively modern HF radio and a special (read-> expensive) type of PACTOR modem you can access several special gateways on select frequencies (non-Ham as it's a commercial enterprise) worldwide that will allow you to send and retrieve e-mail. Most sailors use it to retrieve GRIB files.

------

And speaking of packet, I haven't used packet since 1998. I'm in the PNW and I don't hear VHF packet too often. At 1200 baud most find it too slow. I hear mostly APRS stuff. I'm totally clueless about 300 baud HF packet, I know stations that used it to support the packet BBS network such as it existed in the mid-90s.

>>1112362
Understandable. If I did try this I would get a licence even though anytime I'd use it I'd be outside any jurisdiction. I'll probably get my technician license (usa/fcc) regardless. With a 35 question basic knowledge test setting the bar no reason not to.

1200 baud would be perfect. It'd take a couple seconds max. 300 baud would even work. I'm wanting to transfer pure text email. Nothing fancy. thanks for your input.

>>1112244
You already skimp on rent, why not just get a decent data package on your phone plan? He'll my marina has WiFi everywhere

>>1112675
PS I didn't mean to sound like a dick, just genuinely curious why you'd want that instead of a data plan / going without

>>1112675
My boat is not a dock queen. I have no marina and mainly anchor out sometime hopping on a public mooring. I have a great data plan for my phone. Regretfully it doesn't help when I'm off the coast. On good days I can get signal 15 miles out but past that it's no phone's land.

btw, I'd happy pay rent over what a month's dock fees cost my baby.

>>1112713
Man congrats, that's living the dream. Alas I still have to work so the dock is handy. It's not much anyway but it's enough. That said it's a fraction of what an apartment would cost in Dublin city centre!