222 mhz

222 mhz DEFAULT

Rule Part

47 C.F.R, Part 90


Radio Service Code(s)

  • QT - Phase I Trunked service
  • QD - Phase I Other service
  • QO - No new QO licenses being issued beyond existing incumbent service contours
  • QM - Public Safety licenses are issued on channels 161 through 170 and channels 181 through 185
  • NC - Phase I Nationwide Commercial service
  • QA - Phase II auctioned service

QT: . Licenses were authorized on channels originally for trunked operations but later made available for other types of operations (there are 20 groups with 5 channels per group interleaved throughout the band). There are no new QT licenses being issued beyond existing incumbent service contours. : Phase I Data service. Licenses were authorized on a contiguous group of channels originally for data operations but later made available for other types of operations. There are no new QD licenses being issued beyond existing incumbent service contours. This service occupies channels 186 through 195. : . Licenses were authorized on a contiguous group of “other” channels. There are no new QO licenses being issued beyond existing incumbent service contours. This service occupies channels 171 through 180. : . The QM radio service has stations from Phase I and Phase II. NC: . Four licenses were issued in groups of five channels per license. This service occupies channels 21 through 25, 26 through 30, 151 through 155, and 156 through 160. All four licenses that were available in this service have been assigned. Licensees in this service may apply for new licenses to add specific sites but are no longer required to license their sites in this “site specific” manner (see Memorandum Opinion and Order, FCC 99-196) QA: . 155 channel pairs are allocated to this radio service. There is one nationwide area, 175 basic economic areas, and 6 regional areas. 30 of the 155 channel pairs are available for nationwide use, 50 of the 155 channel pairs are available for basic economic area use, and 75 of the 155 channel pairs are available for regional use. Therefore, in total, there are 3 nationwide licenses with 10 channel pair per license, 875 basic economic area licenses with 10 channel pair per license, and 30 regional area licenses with 15 channel pair per license for a total of 908 licenses.

220 MHz Band Terminology

This section explains some of the terminology used in the 220 MHz services.

Phase I and Phase II

220 MHz licenses initially authorized from applications filed on or before May 24, 1991 are referred to as "Phase I" licenses. Licenses initially authorized from applications received after May 24, 1991 are referred to as "Phase II" licenses. Phase I licenses have radio service codes QT, QD, QO, and NC; Auctioned (Phase II) licenses have the radio service code QA, and Public Safety licenses have the radio service code QM (Phase I and Phase II).

Radio Service Codes

  • QT: Phase I Trunked service. Licenses were authorized on channels originally for trunked operations but later made available for other types of operations (there are 20 groups with 5 channels per group interleaved throughout the band). There are no new QT licenses being issued beyond existing incumbent service contours.
  • QD: Phase I Data service. Licenses were authorized on a contiguous group of channels originally for data operations but later made available for other types of operations. There are no new QD licenses being issued beyond existing incumbent service contours. This service occupies channels 186 through 195.
  • QO: Phase I Other service. Licenses were authorized on a contiguous group of “other” channels. There are no new QO licenses being issued beyond existing incumbent service contours. This service occupies channels 171 through 180.
  • QM: Public Safety licenses are issued on channels 161 through 170 and channels 181 through 185. The QM radio service has stations from Phase I and Phase II.
  • NC: Phase I Nationwide Commercial service. Four licenses were issued in groups of five channels per license. This service occupies channels 21 through 25, 26 through 30, 151 through 155, and 156 through 160. All four licenses that were available in this service have been assigned. Licensees in this service may apply for new licenses to add specific sites but are no longer required to license their sites in this “site specific” manner (see Memorandum Opinion and Order, FCC 99-196)
  • QA: Phase II auctioned service. 155 channel pairs are allocated to this radio service. There is one nationwide area, 175 basic economic areas, and 6 regional areas. 30 of the 155 channel pairs are available for nationwide use, 50 of the 155 channel pairs are available for basic economic area use, and 75 of the 155 channel pairs are available for regional use. Therefore, in total, there are 3 nationwide licenses with 10 channel pair per license, 875 basic economic area licenses with 10 channel pair per license, and 30 regional area licenses with 15 channel pair per license for a total of 908 licenses.

Geographic Area Names

Fundamental geographical areas in Part 90 are referred to as Economic Areas (EAs). These same areas are also referred to as Basic Economic Areas (BEAs) for Auctions and Licensing purposes.

Regional groupings of fundamental geographic areas in Part 90 are referred to as Regional Area Groupings (REAGs). These same areas are also referred to as Economic Area Groupings (EAGs) for Auctions and Licensing purposes.

A nationwide geographical area is referred to as Nationwide in Part 90. The same geographic area is referred to as Nationwide or NWA for Auctions and licensing purposes.

Auctions History in the 220 MHz Band

As of the last update to this web site there have been four auctions of the 220 MHz band. There is additional information regarding auctions at the FCC Auctions Home Page. The four 220 MHz auctions are listed below:

  • On October 22, 1998, the Federal Communications Commission completed the auction of 908 licenses for the Phase II 220 MHz Service, raising (in net high bids) a total of $21,650,301 for the U.S. Treasury (Auction 18).
  • On June 30, 1999, the Federal Communications Commission completed the auction of 225 Phase II 220 MHz service licenses, raising (in net high bids) a total of $1,924,950 for the U.S. Treasury (Auction 24).
  • On January 17, 2002, the FCC completed the auction of 4 Phase II 220 MHz licenses in the Multi Radio Service auction, raising (in net high bids) a total of $182,700 for the US Treasury (Auction 43).
  • On June 26, 2007, the FCC completed the auction of 94 Phase II 220 MHz service licenses, raising (in net high bids) a total of $185,416 for the U.S. Treasury (Auction 72).

Band Plan

There is a total of 2 MHz of spectrum in the 220 MHz services band. The spectrum is divided into 200 channel pairs, each channel’s center frequency is spaced 5 KHz apart, with "mobile side" frequencies 1 MHz higher than the corresponding “base side” frequencies. 10 channel pairs are available exclusively for Government operations and 15 channel pairs are available exclusively for Public Safety. Accordingly, there are a total of 175 channel pairs available for use by commercial, business, or other eligible entities (see Rule 90.703).

In Phase I, the channels were organized functionally into radio service groups: QT, NC, QO, QD, and QM. In the QT radio service, channels were initially required to be trunked. To account for trunked radio technologies, the channels for each trunked radio license maintained a separation of 150 KHz (e.g., if a trunked radio license had five channels, the mobile side frequency for the first channel would be 150 KHz away from mobile side frequency for the second channel and so on, similarly the base side frequencies would have a corresponding separation). These trunked channels were assigned in groups of 5 channel pairs per license (trunked channel groups). The non-trunked channel pairs (NC, QO, QD, and QM) were divided so that they would be licensed in contiguous channel groups. In total for the 220-222 MHz band, there are 100 QT channel pairs, 20 Nationwide Commercial (NC) channel pairs, 10 Other (QO) channel pairs, 15 Data (QD) channel pairs, and 15 Public Safety (QM) channel pairs. 10 channels are for Government Nationwide use and 30 channels did not become available until Phase II.

In Phase II, QT radio service trunked channel groups or contiguous single channel pairs were combined to create channel blocks for auction. Each block, A through E, includes 10 channel pairs (100 KHz) for each Economic License (EA) license area. Each block, F through J, includes 15 channel pairs (150 KHz) for each Regional Economic Area Group (REAG) license area. And each block, K through M, includes 10 channel pairs (100 KHz) for each nationwide license.

All of the channel groupings are depicted in 220 MHz Auction Band Plan (pdf). Channel assignments for each channel block are shown in Rule 90.721.

Service Areas

Incumbent Service Areas

A Phase I licensee's service area is defined by the predicted 38 dBu service contour of its authorized base station or fixed station transmitting on frequencies in the 220-221 MHz band at its initially authorized location, or if the station was modified as described in Rule 90.751, at its modified location. The Phase I licensee's predicted 38 dBu service contour is calculated using the F(50,50) field strength chart for Channels 7-13 in Rule 73.699 (Fig. 10), with a 9 dB correction factor for antenna height differential, and is based on the authorized effective radiated power (ERP) and antenna height-above-average-terrain of the licensee's base station or fixed station.

Phase I operating areas are overlaid by Phase II geographic areas. Phase II licensees must protect site-licensed stations as outlined in Rule 90.763.

Geographical Service Areas

In March 1997, the Commission restructured the licensing framework that governs the 220 MHz Service. Site-specific licensing, used in the Phase I, was replaced with a geographic-based system in Phase II. Phase II geographic area licensees are permitted to operate within the geographic limits of their EA, REAG, or NWA areas that are identified by their authorization, but they must protect Phase I stations as described in Rule 90.763.

The geographic areas for the licenses were created based upon Economic Areas (EAs), developed by the Bureau of Economic Analysis of the U.S. Department of Commerce. The Commission developed larger, regional areas called Economic Area Groupings (EAGs). EAGs include groupings of EAs and encompass the sum total of all EAs. Nationwide licenses include all of the EAGs. Three Nationwide licenses (NWA), 30 regional licenses (EAG), and 875 EA licenses were offered in Phase II. A map (pdf) of 220 MHz geographical areas may be found at the Auction-Data-Map site. The geographic areas are defined in Rule 90.7.

Licenses in this band, whether they were initially issued as a result of lottery or auction, are maintained through our Universal Licensing System (ULS). New licenses are issued only via auction for all 220 MHz spectrum except Public Safety or Government only spectrum.

Obtaining Spectrum

There are a total of 908 geographical area licenses (QA radio service). Most of these licenses have been successfully auctioned in auctions 18, 24, 43, and 72. The Commission may hold additional auctions in the future for QA licenses that revert back to the FCC. Information about such auctions may be obtained at the FCC Auctions website.

Also, there are additional ways to gain access to this spectrum:
  1. You may lease spectrum by entering into a contract with a 220 MHz Band Manager.
  2. A Licensee may sell all or part of its license to you, subject to FCC approval. (Assignment or Partial Assignment).
  3. You may acquire a 220 MHz licensee’s company, including its FCC license, subject to FCC approval. (Transfer of Control).

Methods 2 and 3 require an application via the ULS and subsequent approval of the FCC.

220 MHz Band Manager

Leasing contract. See Public Notice DA 02-2717 (pdf)
1.9001 to 1.9080

Assignment of Authorization

Sale of an entire license.
1.948

Partition

Sale of part of a license based on a geographic area.
90.1019

Disaggregation

Sale of part of a license’s spectrum.
90.1019

Partition & Disaggregation

A combination of the sale of a part of a license based on geographic area containing only a part of a license’s spectrum.
90.1019

Transfer of Control

Acquisition of a company and its assets, including its licenses.
1.948
Frequencies in the 220 - 222 MHz band are available for land mobile or fixed use for both Government and non-Government operations as described in Rule 90.733. This rule section also allows licensees (except Public Safety licensees) to combine any number of their authorized, contiguous channels to form channels wider than 5 KHz. Permissible operations include the following:
  • One-way or two-way paging operations on a primary basis by all non-Government Phase II licensees.
  • Fixed operations on a primary basis by all non-Government Phase II licensees and all Government licensees.
  • One-way or two-way paging or fixed operations on a primary basis by all non-Government Phase I licensees.

Rules governing these bands are found in Title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 90, Subpart T.Rule 90.721.

Phase I Construction Requirements

Phase I non-nationwide licensees are required to complete construction and place their systems into operation within 12 months of initial license grant in accordance with Rule 90.725.

Phase I non-nationwide licensees that modified their stations pursuant to Rule 90.753 are required to construct their stations on or before August 15, 1996 or within 12 months of the initial grant date of their modification application in accordance with Rule 90.757.

Phase I Nationwide licensees are required to follow a schedule for construction and file benchmark reports at 2, 4, 6, and 10 years after initial license grant. The Construction requirements for Phase I Nationwide licenses are provided in Rule 90.725.

Phase II Construction Requirements

Phase II economic area (EA) or regional area (REAG) licensees are required to provide coverage to 1/3 of the population of their EA or REAG within 5 years of the issuance of their initial license and 2/3 of the population of their EA or REAG within 10 years of the issuance of their initial license in accordance with Rule 90.767. Alternatively a Phase II EA or REAG licensee may demonstrate substantial service at their 5 and 10 year benchmarks also in accordance with Rule 90.767.

Phase II nationwide (NWA) licensees are required to provide coverage to a composite area of at least 750,000 square kilometers or 37.5 percent of the population of the US within 5 years of the issuance of its initial license and coverage to a composite area of at least 1,500,000 square kilometers or 75 percent of the US population within 10 years of the issuance of its initial license in accordance with Rule 90.769. Alternatively a Phase II NWA licensee may demonstrate substantial service at its 5 and 10 year benchmarks also in accordance with Rule 90.769.

Deconstruction or Discontinuance of Station Operations

A station that is not operational for one year or more is considered to have been permanently discontinued as described in Rule 90.157.

Sours: https://www.fcc.gov/wireless/bureau-divisions/mobility-division/220-mhz-services

1.25-meter band

Regions with 220 MHz allocations:
Green areas allocate the whole band.
Blue areas allocate a portion of the band.
Red areas are in ITU Region 2, but do not allocate the band.

The 1.25-meter, 220 MHz or 222 MHz band is a portion of the VHF radio spectrum internationally allocated for amateur radio use on a primary basis in ITU Region 2, and it comprises frequencies from 220 MHz to 225 MHz.[1] In the United States and Canada, the band is available on a primary basis from 222 to 225 MHz, with the addition of 219 to 220 MHz on a limited, secondary basis.[1][2][3] It is not available for use in ITU Region 1 (except in Somalia[4]) or ITU Region 3.[1] The license privileges of amateur radio operators include the use of frequencies within this band, which is primarily used for local communications.

History[edit]

The 1.25-meter band has a very long and colorful history, dating back to before World War II.

Pre-Cairo Conference[edit]

Some experimental amateur use in the U.S. was known to occur on the "1+1⁄4-meter band" as early as 1933, with reliable communications achieved in fall of 1934.[5]

The Cairo Conference[edit]

In 1938, the FCC gave U.S. amateurs privileges in two VHF bands: 2.5 meters (112 MHz) and 1.25 meters (224 MHz).[6] Both bands (as well as 70 centimeters) were natural harmonics of the 5-meter band. Amateur privileges in the 2.5-meter band were later moved to 144–148 MHz (becoming the modern-day 2-meter band), and the old frequencies were reassigned to aircraft communication during World War II. At that time, the 1.25-meter band expanded to a 5 MHz bandwidth, spanning 220–225 MHz.

The VHF/UHF explosion[edit]

Amateur use of VHF and UHF allocations exploded in the late 1960s and early 1970s as repeaters started going on the air. Repeater use sparked a huge interest in the 2-meter and 70-centimeter (420–450 MHz) bands, however, this interest never fully found its way into the 1.25-meter band. Many amateurs attribute this to the abundance of commercial radio equipment designed for 136–174 MHz and 450–512 MHz that amateurs could easily modify for use on the 2-meter and 70-centimeter bands. There were no commercial frequency allocations near the 1.25-meter band, and little commercial radio equipment was available. This meant that amateurs who wanted to experiment with the 1.25-meter band had to build their own equipment or purchase one of the few radios available from specialized amateur radio equipment manufacturers. Many of the repeaters which have been constructed for 1.25-meter operation have been based on converted land-mobile base station hardware,[7] often extensively modifying equipment originally designed for other VHF bands.[8]

U.S. Novice licensees get privileges[edit]

By the 1980s, amateur use of 2-meter and 70-centimeter bands was at an all-time high while activity on 1.25 meters remained stagnant.[citation needed] In an attempt to increase use on the band, many amateurs called for holders of Novice-class licenses (the entry-level class at that time) to be given voice privileges on the band. In 1987, the FCC modified the Novice license to allow voice privileges on portions of the 1.25-meter and 23-centimeter (1.24–1.30 GHz) bands. In response, some of the bigger amateur radio equipment manufacturers started producing equipment for 1.25 meters. However, it never sold well, and by the early 1990s, most manufacturers had stopped producing equipment for the band.[citation needed]

U.S. reallocation[edit]

In 1973, the FCC considered Docket Number 19759, which was a proposal to establish a Class E Citizen's band service at 224 MHz. The proposal was opposed by the ARRL and after the explosive growth of 27 MHz Citizen's Band usage, the FCC dropped consideration of the docket in 1977.[9]

In the late 1980s, United Parcel Service (UPS) began lobbying the FCC to reallocate part of the 1.25-meter band to the Land Mobile Service. UPS had publicized plans to use the band to develop a narrow-bandwidth wireless voice and data network using a mode called ACSSB (amplitude-companded single sideband). UPS's main argument for the reallocation was that amateur use of the band was very sparse and that the public interest would be better served by reallocating part of the band to a service that would put it to good use.[10]

In 1988, over the objections of the amateur radio community, the FCC adopted the 220 MHz Allocation Order, which reallocated 220–222 MHz to private and federal government land-mobile use while leaving 222–225 MHz exclusively for amateur use.[citation needed] The reallocation proceeding took so long, however, that UPS eventually pursued other means of meeting its communications needs. UPS entered into agreements with GTE, McCall, Southwestern Bell, and Pac-Tel to use cellular telephone frequencies to build a wireless data network.[citation needed] With the 220–222 MHz band then left unused, the FCC issued parts of the band to other private commercial interests via a lottery in hopes that it would spark development of super-narrowband technologies, which would help them gain acceptance in the marketplace.[citation needed] In the 1990s and into the 2000s paging companies made use of the 1.25-meter band. Most all such use ended by the mid-2000s, with the paging companies being purchased by others and services moved to newer systems, or having gone out of business.[citation needed]

Canadian reallocation[edit]

Until January 2006,[11] Canadian amateur radio operators were allowed to operate within the entire 220–225 MHz band. Canadian operations within 120 km of the United States border were required to observe a number of restrictions on antenna height and power levels to coordinate use with non-amateur services in the United States.[12]

In 2005, Industry Canada decided to reallocate 220–222 MHz to land mobile users, similar to the US, but unlike in the US, a provision was included to allow the amateur service, in exceptional circumstances, to use the band in disaster relief efforts on a secondary basis. In addition, the band 219–220 MHz was allocated to the amateur service on a secondary basis. Both of these reallocations went into effect January 2006.[3][11]

Band use[edit]

Canadian band plan[edit]

License class 219–220 220–222 222.00–222.05 222.05–222.10 222.10–222.275 222.275–222.3 222.31–223.37 223.39–223.49 223.49–223.59 223.59–223.89 223.91–225
Basic(+), Advanced
= Available on a secondary basis to other users.[3][11]
= Available only to assist with disaster relief efforts.[3][11]
= Reserved for EME (Moon bounce)
= Continuous wave (CW), 222.1 calling freq.
= SSB, 222.2 calling freq.
= Propagation beacons
= FM repeaters (input −1.6 MHz)
= High-speed data
= FM simplex

Scope of operation in North America[edit]

Wouxun KG-UVD1P dual-watch handheld for 2 m and 220 MHz.

Today, the 1.25-meter band is used by many amateurs who have an interest in the VHF spectrum.

There are pockets of widespread use across the United States, mainly in New England and western states such as California and Arizona with more sporadic activity elsewhere. The number of repeaters on the 1.25-meter band has grown over the years to approximately 1,500 nationwide as of 2004.[13]

The attention that band received in the late 1980s and early 1990s due to the reallocation of its bottom 2 MHz sparked renewed amateur interest. Many amateurs feared that lack of 1.25-meter activity would lead to reallocation of the remaining 3 MHz to other services.[14] Today, new handheld and mobile equipment is being produced by amateur radio manufacturers, and it is estimated that more amateurs have 1.25-meter equipment now than at any point in the past.[15]

Auxiliary stations[edit]

An auxiliary station, most often used for repeater control or link purposes or to remotely control another station, is limited in the United States to operation on frequencies above 144.5 MHz[16] excluding 144.0–144.5 MHz, 145.8–146.0 MHz, 219–220 MHz, 222.00–222.15 MHz, 431–433 MHz, and 435–438 MHz. Operation of such control links in the crowded 2-meter band is problematic[17] and on many frequencies in that band expressly prohibited, leaving 1.25-meter band frequencies as the lowest available for remote control of repeaters and unattended stations.[18]

List of transceivers[edit]

Main article: List of amateur radio transceivers

Standard Communications c228a dual-band handheld for 2 m and 220 MHz.

Since the band is allocated mostly in ITU Region 2 (Somalia, in Region 1, being the only exception thus far), the major equipment manufacturers (Kenwood, Yaesu, and Icom) do not often offer transceiver models that cover the frequency range. (see US Novice licensees get privileges). This exacerbates the lack of usage of the 1.25-meter band, though manufacturers argue that what equipment they have produced hasn't sold well compared to other products.[citation needed]

In recent years, Kenwood and Yaesu have both included the 1.25-meter band in some of their multiband handheld transceivers. The Kenwood TH-F6A and TH-D74A; the Yaesu VX-6R, VX-7R and VX-8R (USA and Canada version) include coverage of the 1.25-meter band in addition to the more popular 2-meter and 70-centimeter bands. Wouxun now has the KG-UVD1P in a 2-meter / 1.25-meter model, legal for use in the United States. In the 1980s, ICOM offered the IC-37A—a 220 MHz, 25-watt FM transceiver that can still be obtained as used equipment from various sources such as eBay and private collectors. In 2013, the BaoFeng UV-82X, an inexpensive 2-meter / 1.25-meter handheld, became available.[citation needed]

Several 1.25-meter base/mobile transceivers are available. Among these are the Alinco DR-235T,[19] the Jetstream JT220M,[20] BTech UV-2501-220, BTech UV-25X4 quadband, and the TYT TH-9000 monoband radio, which comes in a 1.25-meter model.[citation needed]

The Chinese company Wouxun offers a 2 m and 1.25 m dual-band HT, the KG-UVD1P.[21] These have received FCC approval in the United States; but are awaiting approval by Industry Canada.[citation needed]

Elecraft offers an all-mode (CW, FM, SSB) transverter for the band[22] compatible with its K2 and K3 transceivers.

Countries with known allocations[edit]

ITU Region 1

ITU Region 2

References[edit]

  1. ^ abcd"FCC online table of frequency allocations"(PDF). 47 C.F.R. Federal Communications Commission. 2 June 2011. Retrieved 2 September 2011.
  2. ^ ab"US amateur radio frequency allocations". The American Radio Relay League. 1.25 meters. Retrieved 2 September 2011.
  3. ^ abcde"Canadian table of frequency allocations"(PDF). Industry Canada. February 2007. pp. 24, 99. Retrieved 2 September 2011.
  4. ^ ab"Regarding authorised amateur radio frequency bands and transmitter power output in Somalia"(PDF). 22 June 2004. Ministry of Information, Telecommunication and Culture Garowe, Puntland, Somalia. p. 2. Archived from the original(PDF) on 10 September 2008. Retrieved 26 March 2013.
  5. ^DeSoto, Clinton B. (2001). 200 Meters and Down: The story of amateur radio. Newington, CT: The Amateur Radio Relay League. p. 129.
  6. ^de Wolf, Francis Colt (July 1938). "The Cairo telecommunication conferences". The American Journal of International Law. 32 (3): 562–568.
  7. ^(¿Jon Adams?) WB6RHQ (20 January 1989). "GE Mastr II modifications for 220 MHz". jonadams.com. Archived from the original on 26 April 2009. Retrieved 27 March 2009.
  8. ^Custer, Kevin; Zimmerman, Scott. "222 MHz Motorola Micor modifications". repeater-builder.com. Archived from the original on 26 April 2009. Retrieved 27 March 2009.
  9. ^"JPL amateur radio club newsletter". November 1977. Retrieved 9 February 2010.
  10. ^Ellis, Todd (6 March 2002). "Why 220MHz?". MRT Magazine. 220MHz: An MRT Special Report. Archived from the original on 26 April 2009. Retrieved 26 March 2013.
  11. ^ abcde"Spectrum Allocation and Utilization Policy Regarding the Use of Certain Frequency Bands Below 1.7 GHz for a Range of Radio Applications"(PDF). Industry Canada. June 2009. Retrieved 2 September 2011.
  12. ^"Interpretation of the U.S.-Canada For 220–222 MHz". Radio Amateurs of Canada. Archived from the original on 6 March 2010. Retrieved 14 March 2010.
  13. ^"Repeaters: What are they and how to use them"(PDF). American Radio Relay League. Archived from the original(PDF) on 26 April 2009. Retrieved 27 March 2009.
  14. ^"220 MHz (125 cm) info". Radio Amateurs of Canada. 2004. Archived from the original on 26 April 2009. Retrieved 27 March 2009.
  15. ^"Getting on the 220 band". St. Lawrence ValleyRepeater Council. Archived from the original on 26 April 2009. Retrieved 27 March 2009.
  16. ^"FCC regulations, part 97, subpart C – Special Operations". Federal Communications Commission – via American Radio Relay League.
  17. ^"In the Matter of Kenwood Communications Corp. Request for Declaratory Ruling to Determine Compliance With Applicable Sections of Part 97 of the Commission's Rules or Waiver of Applicable Rule Sections". Federal Communications Commission. 28 July 2000.
  18. ^Hendrickson, Gary. "What is the difference between a repeater and an auxiliary station?". mrc.gen.mn.us.
  19. ^"Alinco DR-235T MK III 25 W FM mobile / base unit". Alinco Corporation. Archived from the original on 13 October 2004.
  20. ^"Jetstream 220 MHz 50 Watt radio". Archived from the original on 28 May 2009.
  21. ^"Handheld two-way radio with dual band dual frequency dual display dual standby KG-UVD1P". Wouxun. Archived from the original on 12 December 2009. Retrieved 6 November 2009.
  22. ^"Elecraft XV Series Transverters". Archived from the original on 9 April 2018. Retrieved 15 May 2007.
  23. ^"Anguilla Table of Frequency Allocations 88 MHz to 59 GHz"(PDF). Ministry of Infrastructure Communications Utilities and Housing (MICUH). p. 12. Archived from the original(PDF) on 22 December 2015. Retrieved 8 August 2015.
  24. ^"Reglamento General del Servicio de Radioaficionados" [General Rules of the Amateur Radio Service] (PDF) (in Spanish). Ministry of Communications. p. 67. Archived from the original(PDF) on 22 December 2015. Retrieved 10 August 2015.
  25. ^"Aruba application for a visitor's license"(PDF). Retrieved 1 November 2008.
  26. ^"Spectrum Management Handbook". Telecommunications Unit Barbados. p. 27. Archived from the original(DOC) on 22 December 2015. Retrieved 10 August 2015.
  27. ^"Belize National Frequency Spectrum Allocation Plan"(PDF). April 2002. Retrieved 23 March 2016.
  28. ^"Plan Nacional de Frecuencias" [National Frequency Plan] (PDF) (in Spanish). Ministry of Public Works and Housing Services. p. 55. Archived from the original(PDF) on 24 September 2015. Retrieved 8 August 2015.
  29. ^"Application for Amateur Radio License"(PDF). Netherlands Radiocommunications Agency. p. 2. Archived from the original(PDF) on 29 January 2015. Retrieved 8 August 2015.
  30. ^"The Information and Communications Technology Authority (Amateur Radio Licences) Regulations, 2010"(PDF). Information and Communications Technology Authority. p. 10. Retrieved 10 August 2015.
  31. ^"Presentación del Proyecto de Norma de Estaciones Repetidoras y Radiobalizas" [Presentation of the Draft of Relay Stations and beacons] (in Spanish). Federación de Clubes de Radioaficionados de Chile. Retrieved 10 August 2015.
  32. ^"Plan Nacional de Atribución de Frecuencias" [National Frequency Allocation Plan] (in Spanish). Ministry of Science, Technology and Telecommunications. p. 209. Archived from the original on 24 September 2015. Retrieved 10 August 2015.
  33. ^"Cuadro Nacional de Atribución de Bandas de Frecuencias" [National Table of Frequency Allocations] (in Spanish). The National Spectrum Agency. p. 52. Archived from the original on 22 December 2015. Retrieved 8 August 2015.
  34. ^"Reglamento Sobre el Servicio de radioaficionados de Cuba" [Regulations on the amateur radio service in Cuba] (PDF) (in Spanish). Ministry of Informatics and Communications. p. 21. Archived from the original(PDF) on 22 December 2015. Retrieved 10 August 2015.
  35. ^"Application for Amateur Radio License"(PDF). Bureau Telecommunications and Post (BT&P). p. 2. Archived from the original(PDF) on 23 September 2015. Retrieved 8 August 2015.
  36. ^"Telecommunications (Amateur Radio) Regulations, 2012"(PDF). Minister for Telecommunication. p. 15. Archived from the original(PDF) on 23 September 2015. Retrieved 12 August 2015.
  37. ^"Plan Nacional de Atribucion de Frecuencias" [National Frequency Allocation Plan] (in Spanish). Dominican Institute of telecommunications (INDOTEL). p. 34. Archived from the original on 24 September 2015. Retrieved 8 August 2015.
  38. ^"Plan Nacional de Frecuencias" [National Frequency Plan] (PDF) (in Spanish). The National Telecommunications Council (CONATEL). p. 62. Retrieved 8 August 2015.
  39. ^"Cuadro Nacional de Atribución de Frecuencias" [National Table of Frequency Allocations] (PDF) (in Spanish). General Superintendency of Electricity and Telecommunications (SIGET). p. 52. Archived from the original(PDF) on 4 March 2016. Retrieved 10 August 2015.
  40. ^"Décision no 2013-1515" [Decision No. 2013-1515] (PDF) (Press release) (in French). Autorité de Régulation des Communications Électroniques et des Postes. Réseau des Émetteurs Français. 17 December 2013. pp. 4–5. Archived(PDF) from the original on 17 March 2014. Retrieved 17 March 2014.
  41. ^"Loi sur les télécommunications" [Telecommunications Act] (PDF) (in French). National Council of Telecommunications (CONATEL). p. 22. Archived from the original(PDF) on 22 December 2015. Retrieved 10 August 2015.
  42. ^"Plan Nacional de Atribución de Frecuencias" [National Frequency Allocation Plan] (PDF) (in Spanish). National Telecommunications Commission (CONATEL). p. 46. Archived from the original(PDF) on 22 December 2015. Retrieved 10 August 2015.
  43. ^"RESOLUCIÓN NR007/10" [Resolution NR007 / 10] (PDF) (in Spanish). National Telecommunications Commission (CONATEL). p. 21. Retrieved 8 August 2015.
  44. ^"Mexico Amateur Radio frequency bands and channel allocations"(PDF). 15 December 1994. Archived from the original(PDF) on 19 October 2009. Retrieved 1 November 2008.
  45. ^"Info-Communications Authority's Spectrum Plan for the Island of Montserrat"(PDF). The Info-Communications Authority of Montserrat. p. 24. Retrieved 10 August 2015.
  46. ^"Manual del Radioaficionado" [Amateur Radio Manual] (PDF) (in Spanish). Ministry of Government and Justice. 2005. p. 107. Archived from the original(PDF) on 22 December 2015. Retrieved 10 August 2015.
  47. ^"Plan Nacional de Atribucion de Frecuencias de la Republica del Paraguay" [National Frequency Allocation Plan of the Republic of Paraguay] (in Spanish). National Telecommunications Commission (CONATEL). p. 18. Archived from the original(DOC) on 22 December 2015. Retrieved 8 August 2015.
  48. ^"Reglamento del Servicio de Radioaficionados" [Amateur Radio Service Regulations] (in Spanish). Radio Club Peruano. p. 12. Archived from the original(DOC) on 30 September 2013. Retrieved 14 August 2015.
  49. ^"Amateur Radio License Application Form"(PDF). Bureau Telecommunications and Post St. Maarten. p. 2. Retrieved 8 August 2015.
  50. ^"National Frequentie Plan Suriname (NFPS)" [National Frequency Plan Suriname (NFPS)] (PDF) (in Dutch). Telecommunication Authority Suriname (TAS). p. 83. Archived from the original(PDF) on 21 February 2015. Retrieved 10 August 2015.
  51. ^"Trinidad and Tobago Frequency Allocation Table (9 kHz to 1000 GHz)". The Telecommunications Authority of Trinidad and Tobago. 16 October 2009. p. 27. Archived from the original on 21 July 2011. Retrieved 15 November 2009.
  52. ^"Wireless Telegraphy (Amateur Radio Operator Licensing) Regulations 2004"(PDF). Turks and Caicos Amateur Radio Society. p. 5. Archived from the original(PDF) on 24 September 2015. Retrieved 10 August 2015.
  53. ^"Reglamento Servicio de Radioaficionados" [Regulation amateur service] (PDF) (in Spanish). Regulatory Unit of Communications Services (URSEC). p. 14. Retrieved 8 August 2015.
  54. ^"Cuadro Nacional de Atribución de Bandas de Frecuencias" [National Table of Frequency Allocations] (PDF) (in Spanish). National Telecommunications Commission. p. 17. Retrieved 8 August 2015.

International amateur radio frequency allocations[v]

Range Band ITU Region 1ITU Region 2ITU Region 3
LF2200 m135.7–137.8 kHz
MF630 m472–479 kHz
160 m1.810–1.850 MHz1.800–2.000 MHz
HF80 / 75 m3.500–3.800 MHz3.500–4.000 MHz3.500–3.900 MHz
60 m5.3515–5.3665 MHz
40 m7.000–7.200 MHz7.000–7.300 MHz7.000–7.200 MHz
30 m[w]10.100–10.150 MHz
20 m14.000–14.350 MHz
17 m[w]18.068–18.168 MHz
15 m21.000–21.450 MHz
12 m[w]24.890–24.990 MHz
10 m28.000–29.700 MHz
VHF6 m50.000–52.000 MHz
(50.000–54.000 MHz)[y]
50.000–54.000 MHz
4 m[x]70.000–70.500 MHzN/A
2 m144.000–146.000 MHz144.000–148.000 MHz
1.25 mN/A 220.000–225.000 MHzN/A
UHF70 cm430.000–440.000 MHz430.000–440.000 MHz
(420.000–450.000 MHz)[y]
33 cmN/A 902.000–928.000 MHzN/A
23 cm1.240–1.300 GHz
13 cm2.300–2.450 GHz
SHF9 cm3.400–3.475 GHz[y]3.300–3.500 GHz
5 cm5.650–5.850 GHz5.650–5.925 GHz5.650–5.850 GHz
3 cm10.000–10.500 GHz
1.2 cm24.000–24.250 GHz
EHF6 mm47.000–47.200 GHz
4 mm[y]75.500 GHz[x] – 81.500 GHz76.000–81.500 GHz
2.5 mm122.250–123.000 GHz
2 mm134.000–141.000 GHz
1 mm241.000–250.000 GHz
THFSub-mmSome administrations have authorized spectrum for amateur use in this region;
others have declined to regulate frequencies above 300 GHz.

[v] All allocations are subject to variation by country. For simplicity, only common allocations found internationally are listed. See a band's article for specifics.
[w] HF allocation created at the 1979 World Administrative Radio Conference. These are commonly called the "WARC bands".
[x] This is not mentioned in the ITU's Table of Frequency Allocations, but many individual administrations have commonly adopted this allocation under "Article 4.4".
[y] This includes a currently active footnote allocation mentioned in the ITU's Table of Frequency Allocations. These allocations may only apply to a group of countries.

See also: Radio spectrum, Electromagnetic spectrum
Sours: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1.25-meter_band
  1. 2020 sling tsi
  2. Bing clip art thank you
  3. Cadillac dts navigation system
  4. Typora math

I think that's a fair question to ask. If there's something I hear all the time it's, "I never go on 2 meters anymore. It's nothing but CBers. It's garbage." While I don't buy into that to the extent that some people do, I do agree that 144 MHz does seem to be a magnet for band crowding, commercial interference and bad operators lately.

I'm in no way saying that everyone on 144 MHz is a bad operator, nor am I saying that myself or anyone else is a model operator. But we all know people whose operating practices could use some sharpening.

For those of us who don't want to deal with the crowded band conditions, interference from commercial equipment located just above the band, and bad operating, might I suggest 222 MHz?

222 MHz is still in the VHF spectrum and has propagation that rivals 144 MHz any day of the week. An even bigger bonus is that you don't have digital paging systems and endless other commercial transmitters spewing spurious garbage into the ham band like you do on 144 MHz in a lot of areas.

One common thing I hear from people is "144 is our VHF band and 440 is our UHF band, so 222 really doesn't have a place." I don't buy that one bit. To me, that's no different than saying "17 meters has no place because we have 20 and 15." In my experiences, a lot of people who say these kinds of things would also be the first ones in line to complain if we lost the band. Remember, use it or lose it!

Here in Rhode Island, an increasing number of us have moved over to 222 MHz to escape the 144 MHz wasteland. And making the transition is a lot easier and less expensive than you might think!

Another common thing I hear is "Nobody makes any affordable 222 MHz equipment." That's not entirely true. If you're a Kenwood purist then you might have a case since "nobody" would mean anyone who's not Kenwood.

I'll be the first to gush about Kenwood's legendary audio and the quality of their equipment, but sometimes that can't justify the extortionist prices they charge for their gear. Kenwood makes the TM-642A which is a 144/222 MHz dual-bander for the chest-pain-inducing price of $719.95. Or you could get a TM-742AD which is a 144/440 MHz dual-bander and put a UT220S module (222 MHz) in it, which will cost you a heart-attack-inducing $979.90 ($639.95 for the radio and $339.95 for the module). I don't know about you, but I can find many better things to spend $700 or more on.

If the mere thought of spending that much for a VHF radio made your blood pressure rise, relax. There are some far more affordable options for those of us who don't want to take a second mortgage out on the house to buy a radio. I've composed a list of both HTs and mobile rigs which are either still in production, or recently out of production with stock left that you might be able to purchase at an amateur retailer like HRO or AES:

In Production:

The following units are in production as of June 2004 and should be able to be purchased at most amateur retailers.

  • Alinco DJ-296 222 MHz Monoband HT ($189.95)
  • Kenwood TH-F6A 144/222/440 MHz Triband HT ($309.95)
  • Kenwood TM-642A 144/222 MHz Dualband Mobile ($719.95)
  • Kenwood TM-742A 144/440 MHz Dualband Mobile + UT220S Module ($979.90)
  • Alinco DR-235 222 MHz Monoband Mobile ($249.95)

Out of Production

The following units are out of production but still may have stock available. Consult an amateur retailer.

  • ADI AR-247 222 MHz Monoband Mobile ($209.95)
  • Kenwood TM-331A 222 MHz Monoband Mobile ($499.95)

There are also a number of excellent antennas available for 222 MHz. Some are monoband, some multiband. A little research should find you something that will suit your needs.

As for my own 222 MHz setup, I own both the Alinco DJ-296 and Kenwood TH-F6A HTs, and I have an ADI AR-247 in the car running into a Hustler MX-220 5/8 wave antenna.

As you can see, there are plenty of options for those of us who don't have $700 or more to blow on a VHF radio.

Overall, 222 MHz offers an excellent refuge for those of us tired of the overcrowding, interference and bad operating on 144 MHz. So what are you waiting for? Get a few of your fellow hams together, buy some 222 MHz gear and discover this fabulous VHF band!

73 de K1VSR

N7EOJ2005-10-29
Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
We've heard all the excuses, but in the past six months, three new 222 MHz repeaters have come on the air in Southern Arizona. A weekly net is held on one of those wide coverage mountaintop repeaters.
All are open. One hosts a six band remote base from 144MHz to 1.29 GHz, another is linking to a 2M repeater via EchoLink and will have IRLP & WIRES capabilities soon. The third may be linked into a UHF network as soon as time permits. There is another in production that will host an autopatch. Remember? Those were the reason so many got licensed a few years ago, before they could afford cellphones.
We also have a Yahoo discussion group dedicated to promoting the band. [email protected]
Anyone wishing to unload any 222 MHz equipment, please contact me. (my callsign at yahoo dot com)
73
Budd
224.50, 224.18, 224.06, 223.94 & 224.74 MHz U.S.E.R.S.
Tucson, AZ
G0RTN2004-12-06
RE: Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
VHF/UHF operation is well down everywhere, not just in the US. I live in one of Europe's biggest cities (London) and have visited its two main rivals for that title - Paris (and speak passable French) and Istanbul (and speak good Turkish) with my VX7R in the past 6 months. In all three activity is relatively sparse. Despite all repeaters being 'open' in Europe (as far as I know) you can call for ages, even with a semi-exotic foreign callsign, and get nowhere, except maybe in the rush hours. 70 cms is in slightly better shape in London, with a few repeaters having regular activity. But not enough to justify our 10 MHz of spectrum space now that ATV has migrated to 23cm, especially when you listen to how crowded the spectrum above 440 and below 430 is with commercial users.

IARU Region 1 has moved from 25kHz to 12.5kHz channels on 2 metres recently and lots of new 2 metre repeaters are being licensed in the UK at present. God alone knows why. Although I suppose a lot of people just get a buzz from building repeaters, which is fair enough. If you want my honest opinion, when packet came along in the 80s, a lot of people dropped out of VHF FM, and the amount of unlicensed and other tools jamming repeaters, etc., chased a lot of others away and they never came back.

Because of all that, I tend to operate almost exclusively on HF CW, where I find lots of other people to chat to. Although of course, that's a dying, obsolete mode, isn't it...
Reply to a comment by : W6EMRon 2004-07-28

W9UD, what type of antenna(s) are you using and what modes? A lot of mention of rigs here, but little of the antennas used. I have a 1/4 wave "spike" for the roof of the car, NMO mount. I use a Ventenna VT-22 for QTH operation.

Reply to a comment by : W9UD on 2004-07-11

Yes, some 222mhz gear is expensive. But there have been articles over the years about building transverters that interface with your low band transceivers for your home qth operating. Oops, build something? Holy Cow! I must be out of my mind. Jim Roseman w9ud en41rl 41 states worked on 222mhz 160 grids

W6EMR2004-07-28
RE: Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
W9UD, what type of antenna(s) are you using and what modes?
A lot of mention of rigs here, but little of the antennas used.
I have a 1/4 wave "spike" for the roof of the car, NMO mount. I use a Ventenna VT-22 for QTH operation.

Reply to a comment by : W9UD on 2004-07-11

Yes, some 222mhz gear is expensive. But there have been articles over the years about building transverters that interface with your low band transceivers for your home qth operating. Oops, build something? Holy Cow! I must be out of my mind. Jim Roseman w9ud en41rl 41 states worked on 222mhz 160 grids

KC2MLZ2004-07-27
RE: Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
Hey K2WH...

You need to see the light...
but stuck up there in the mountians is likly why you can not hear all the many repeaters that i am able to hear & talk to on even my HT...Ha Ha Ha..

get your head out of the sand...ups i ment the lake & reseviors & if you need to take a ride to high point to smell the coffee...

untill then do not complain of things you have no knowledge of...

Have a nice day..

Later

Reply to a comment by : N3TTN on 2004-07-05

The answer to the question is simple: To coin a phrase, the silence was deafening, literally. I live in one of the most high density repeater environments to be found anywhere in the country (Wash. DC/Baltimore metro area) and there are several dozen 220 repeaters around, the trouble is NOBODY and I mean NOBODY is to be found on them. I actually went to the trouble of setting up a 220 station when I first got my ticket, to try and help "stimulate" some activity on the band, and basically I was rewarded with DEAD silence. The few contacts I managed to make were fleeting and far between, and after a year or so I just gave up and sold the rig, a Kenwood HT as I recall. One notable contact I did make was with a General class op who had set up a repeater so he could talk with his YL, a novice, on her commute home. He was genuinely shocked to hear me on the repeater, and told me I was the first (besides his YL) he had heard in many months, although he said I was welcome to use the machine any time I wanted, for what it was worth. Bottom line: I agree with you that 220 is a promising band, if we could just get more hams to utilize it. I am no ratchet jaw by any means, but I like to have an occasional contact, and as it stand around here at the moment, there just is not enough activity on the band to justify buying a rig and antenna for 220 mhz. All the best, N3TTN

W9UD2004-07-11
Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
Yes, some 222mhz gear is expensive. But there have been
articles over the years about building transverters that interface with your low band transceivers for your home qth operating.

Oops, build something? Holy Cow! I must be out of my mind.

Jim Roseman w9ud en41rl
41 states worked on 222mhz
160 grids
K6RMR2004-07-08
RE: Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
Hi
I have a TS-790 Also. The only Module for the 790
is 1.2 Gigs.
Look at the Alinco DR235. We have a lot of 222Mhz.
Activity in the area and many have bought it.
No complaints except that it can not listen on the
input of a repeater. With 100 Memories the guys just
Program the repeater input into the next memory.
The ADI DR237 is made in China and seems to be Junk.
The Displays are forever going out on them.
Stan

Reply to a comment by : WA2BOB on 2004-06-27

Hi just want to say that you are right the 222 Band is more fun, N2QOT and myself WA2ROB use it alot went we want to get away from 2 meter we use simplex 223.500 and sometime we use the repeater 224.820 but we stay on simplex all the time.So give us a call ones in wail to see if we can here you we are on the south side of Long Island so try it I like to send QSL card to the station I take to. From Robert PS I have three radio that work on 222 Band Two are Kenwood 742A 2M/440B/222B KW 631A 2M/222B and a ADI AR 247 222B. And if anybody know where I can get a 222B Modular for a Kenwood 790A PSE. let me know E-mail is [email protected] again thank you.

K8KAS2004-07-08
Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
Whats with 222Mhz, there is little to no activity on 2 and 6 meters, repeaters execpt for the going home boys are dead. Why would I want to spread it out even more. I wish 146.52 had a good crowd, you might hear one or two stations on all day in this area. No, I don't need 222Mhz at all.
K0RKS2004-07-07
Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
Good article as of today My wife and I built a 220 Jpole. I fired up the old cobra 12 channel and had fun just like the old days.. I ordered a new ADI 220mhz mobile.
I'm back on 220 and it's a blast..

Ron K0RKS

W6EMR2004-07-07
RE: Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
Contacting Manufacturer's and letting them know what we want is fine, but they will only make what the vendors can sell.

NA6DF had a good point about "reciever selectivity". All the new radio's available have "wide open" recievers that cover Broadcast and Public Safety freq's. This is cute, but a good scanner can do that, at least from my standpoint.
Ham radio Transceivers should only cover........The Ham Bands!!
This "DC to Daylight" reciever coverage opens the "front end" to everything; especially Intermodulation products. My ICOM 207 is a prime example. I have to keep the attenuator on all the time or the local Cellular and Paging stuff gets in.......ugh!

A new Tri-Band mobile rig (with 1.35M included, even if it's a "module") from a major Mfgr.?
Excellent idea.
Broadcast, Aircraft and public safety recieve capability?
BAD idea.

Reply to a comment by : KD4ZGJ on 2004-07-07

I think 222 Mhz is a great band. It has the best of both worlds 2m/70cm. You get the distance of 2m & the penetration of 70cm through buildings. Let's all start e-mailing/writing all the ham manufactures and let's all ask for a true tri-display / tri-band mobile radio with cross band repeat in any direction on 2m/1.25m/70cm. This would truly be the cat's meow! I own a Kenwood TH-F6a HT and I think it is the best HT on the market right now for performance. Full power on all the bands and it receives AM broadcast with that internal ferrite core antenna like a champ! The more bands we have in our HT's, Mobiles and Bases, the better! Andrew Rosengarten KD4ZGJ Use them, or we will loose them!!!!!!!!

KD4ZGJ2004-07-07
Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
I think 222 Mhz is a great band. It has the best of both worlds 2m/70cm. You get the distance of 2m & the penetration of 70cm through buildings.

Let's all start e-mailing/writing all the ham manufactures and let's all ask for a true tri-display / tri-band mobile radio with cross band repeat in any direction on 2m/1.25m/70cm.

This would truly be the cat's meow!

I own a Kenwood TH-F6a HT and I think it is the best HT on the market right now for performance. Full power on all the bands and it receives AM broadcast with that internal ferrite core antenna like a champ!

The more bands we have in our HT's, Mobiles and Bases, the better!

Andrew Rosengarten
KD4ZGJ


Use them, or we will loose them!!!!!!!!
K6BBC2004-07-06
RE: Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
"You must be joking. There's not a single available repeater pair in the region. There are scores of machines up and running in greater SoCA. "

Yeah, up and running call sign beacos.

K6BBC
Reply to a comment by : K6LCSon 2004-07-06

>>I live in So. Cal. Two meters is as dead as everywhere else. You must be joking. There's not a single available repeater pair in the region. There are scores of machines up and running in greater SoCA. Clint Bradford
Reply to a comment by : K6LCSon 2004-07-06

>>Not only is the TH-F6 a damn poor radio generally, in my opinion, but the miniscule power it outputs on 222 (220, 222, whatever it takes) hardly qualifies it as a "true" 222 radio. You are confusing the TH-F6a with some other HT...Because the TH-F6a is a solid performer - at full power on 2M, 220 and 440. Clint Bradford
Reply to a comment by : W7DJMon 2004-06-27

Not only is the TH-F6 a damn poor radio generally, in my opinion, but the miniscule power it outputs on 222 (220, 222, whatever it takes) hardly qualifies it as a "true" 222 radio. The fact is, even though you tried to justify your own arguement by posting some current models, the list was pretty short. None of those radios is really a good candidate for stuff like link or repeater/hilltop use. What I'm trying to say, is things are pretty limited.
Reply to a comment by : KF4VGXon 2004-06-27

Most hams on the first introduction to their tickets will buy a 2 meter HT. Why price and convenience. There are a few 440 and one 222 mhz repeaters here in this area. with only a handful of guys using them. (The same handful that hangs on two meters . These repeaters were linked together just this year because of no activity ,to a two meter repeater. Skywarn Repeater at that and still not that much activity .The main reason ( In This Area ) no activity on the bands. Hams will not pay ex-sum amount of cash for a radio where there is no activity? I agree with the poster that it would be great to have different ideas to use 222 mhz . But how to get amateur's to buy these radios is the question? I would love to experiment with the 900 / 1240 band and have started looking for used equipment Good post 73

Reply to a comment by : WA2BOB on 2004-06-27

Hi just want to say that you are right the 222 Band is more fun, N2QOT and myself WA2ROB use it alot went we want to get away from 2 meter we use simplex 223.500 and sometime we use the repeater 224.820 but we stay on simplex all the time.So give us a call ones in wail to see if we can here you we are on the south side of Long Island so try it I like to send QSL card to the station I take to. From Robert PS I have three radio that work on 222 Band Two are Kenwood 742A 2M/440B/222B KW 631A 2M/222B and a ADI AR 247 222B. And if anybody know where I can get a 222B Modular for a Kenwood 790A PSE. let me know E-mail is [email protected] again thank you.

K6LCS2004-07-06
RE: Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
>>I live in So. Cal. Two meters is as dead as everywhere else.

You must be joking. There's not a single available repeater pair in the region. There are scores of machines up and running in greater SoCA.

Clint Bradford
Reply to a comment by : K6LCSon 2004-07-06

>>Not only is the TH-F6 a damn poor radio generally, in my opinion, but the miniscule power it outputs on 222 (220, 222, whatever it takes) hardly qualifies it as a "true" 222 radio. You are confusing the TH-F6a with some other HT...Because the TH-F6a is a solid performer - at full power on 2M, 220 and 440. Clint Bradford
Reply to a comment by : W7DJMon 2004-06-27

Not only is the TH-F6 a damn poor radio generally, in my opinion, but the miniscule power it outputs on 222 (220, 222, whatever it takes) hardly qualifies it as a "true" 222 radio. The fact is, even though you tried to justify your own arguement by posting some current models, the list was pretty short. None of those radios is really a good candidate for stuff like link or repeater/hilltop use. What I'm trying to say, is things are pretty limited.
Reply to a comment by : KF4VGXon 2004-06-27

Most hams on the first introduction to their tickets will buy a 2 meter HT. Why price and convenience. There are a few 440 and one 222 mhz repeaters here in this area. with only a handful of guys using them. (The same handful that hangs on two meters . These repeaters were linked together just this year because of no activity ,to a two meter repeater. Skywarn Repeater at that and still not that much activity .The main reason ( In This Area ) no activity on the bands. Hams will not pay ex-sum amount of cash for a radio where there is no activity? I agree with the poster that it would be great to have different ideas to use 222 mhz . But how to get amateur's to buy these radios is the question? I would love to experiment with the 900 / 1240 band and have started looking for used equipment Good post 73

Reply to a comment by : WA2BOB on 2004-06-27

Hi just want to say that you are right the 222 Band is more fun, N2QOT and myself WA2ROB use it alot went we want to get away from 2 meter we use simplex 223.500 and sometime we use the repeater 224.820 but we stay on simplex all the time.So give us a call ones in wail to see if we can here you we are on the south side of Long Island so try it I like to send QSL card to the station I take to. From Robert PS I have three radio that work on 222 Band Two are Kenwood 742A 2M/440B/222B KW 631A 2M/222B and a ADI AR 247 222B. And if anybody know where I can get a 222B Modular for a Kenwood 790A PSE. let me know E-mail is [email protected] again thank you.

K6LCS2004-07-06
RE: Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
>>Not only is the TH-F6 a damn poor radio generally, in my opinion, but the miniscule power it outputs on 222 (220, 222, whatever it takes) hardly qualifies it as a "true" 222 radio.

You are confusing the TH-F6a with some other HT...Because the TH-F6a is a solid performer - at full power on 2M, 220 and 440.

Clint Bradford
Reply to a comment by : W7DJMon 2004-06-27

Not only is the TH-F6 a damn poor radio generally, in my opinion, but the miniscule power it outputs on 222 (220, 222, whatever it takes) hardly qualifies it as a "true" 222 radio. The fact is, even though you tried to justify your own arguement by posting some current models, the list was pretty short. None of those radios is really a good candidate for stuff like link or repeater/hilltop use. What I'm trying to say, is things are pretty limited.
Reply to a comment by : KF4VGXon 2004-06-27

Most hams on the first introduction to their tickets will buy a 2 meter HT. Why price and convenience. There are a few 440 and one 222 mhz repeaters here in this area. with only a handful of guys using them. (The same handful that hangs on two meters . These repeaters were linked together just this year because of no activity ,to a two meter repeater. Skywarn Repeater at that and still not that much activity .The main reason ( In This Area ) no activity on the bands. Hams will not pay ex-sum amount of cash for a radio where there is no activity? I agree with the poster that it would be great to have different ideas to use 222 mhz . But how to get amateur's to buy these radios is the question? I would love to experiment with the 900 / 1240 band and have started looking for used equipment Good post 73

Reply to a comment by : WA2BOB on 2004-06-27

Hi just want to say that you are right the 222 Band is more fun, N2QOT and myself WA2ROB use it alot went we want to get away from 2 meter we use simplex 223.500 and sometime we use the repeater 224.820 but we stay on simplex all the time.So give us a call ones in wail to see if we can here you we are on the south side of Long Island so try it I like to send QSL card to the station I take to. From Robert PS I have three radio that work on 222 Band Two are Kenwood 742A 2M/440B/222B KW 631A 2M/222B and a ADI AR 247 222B. And if anybody know where I can get a 222B Modular for a Kenwood 790A PSE. let me know E-mail is [email protected] again thank you.

K6LCS2004-07-06
Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
Kenwood's TM-742 is no longer available...None in production, none in the pipeline. Existing stock only.

Clint Bradford, K6LCS
K6LCS2004-07-06
Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
Kenwood's TM-642 is no longer available. None in production...none in the warehouse.

Clint Bradford, K6LCS
KS9Y2004-07-06
Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
I use the Yaesu FT-311RM on 222Mhz. It has served me well for over 20 years.
K6BBC2004-07-05
RE: Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
K0KMA, I live very close to a Condor repeater. The system, like most VHF/UHF repeaters, is vastly underutilized and silent. On the rare occasion I did encountered someone on the system, they were clannish. This was my experience.

K6BBC
Reply to a comment by : K7VOon 2004-07-05

I keep reading how monobanders are too expensive. A Yaesu FT-127RA "Memorizer" was advertised here on eHam for all of $75. I just arranged to buy it and the money order will be in the mail first thing in the morning. Is $75 too much to invest in a band? I read how DC area repeaters are silent. Yep, I've been there, and unless the repeater (i.e.: the one in Manassas) is linked to another band I found silence. I did put out several calls. However, if instead of abandoning the band, selling off equipment, and leaving it silent how about a few people start using the band and see how good it is? I don't think our repeaters in the Raleigh area and eastern North Carolina are in any way "better" than the ones in the DC metro area. We just use ours :) Well, several of them anyway. I agree that many hams cheat themselves of wonderful opportunities. 73, Caity K7VO

Reply to a comment by : PHINEAS on 2004-07-05

K6BBC obviously does not own a 222mhz radio. I am not only originally from Los Angeles, but I can tell you there is a well used system in that area called the condor system. They have links all over the state, and there is always someone on it. The last time I drove there, I did not even get on 2 meters.(unless it was simplex!) Not only that, I could talk on the system all the way from Kingman AZ. As a whole I have found people are more ready to cheat themselves way more and faster than anyone else is out to cheat them. That is not only in Amateur radio, but in life. Operate like you want where you want, and I will do the same. I think this was a good article personally. Phineas K0KMA

K7VO2004-07-05
RE: Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
I keep reading how monobanders are too expensive. A Yaesu FT-127RA "Memorizer" was advertised here on eHam for all of $75. I just arranged to buy it and the money order will be in the mail first thing in the morning. Is $75 too much to invest in a band?

I read how DC area repeaters are silent. Yep, I've been there, and unless the repeater (i.e.: the one in Manassas) is linked to another band I found silence. I did put out several calls. However, if instead of abandoning the band, selling off equipment, and leaving it silent how about a few people start using the band and see how good it is? I don't think our repeaters in the Raleigh area and eastern North Carolina are in any way "better" than the ones in the DC metro area. We just use ours :) Well, several of them anyway.

I agree that many hams cheat themselves of wonderful opportunities.

73,
Caity
K7VO

Reply to a comment by : PHINEAS on 2004-07-05

K6BBC obviously does not own a 222mhz radio. I am not only originally from Los Angeles, but I can tell you there is a well used system in that area called the condor system. They have links all over the state, and there is always someone on it. The last time I drove there, I did not even get on 2 meters.(unless it was simplex!) Not only that, I could talk on the system all the way from Kingman AZ. As a whole I have found people are more ready to cheat themselves way more and faster than anyone else is out to cheat them. That is not only in Amateur radio, but in life. Operate like you want where you want, and I will do the same. I think this was a good article personally. Phineas K0KMA

PHINEAS2004-07-05
Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
K6BBC obviously does not own a 222mhz radio. I am not only originally from Los Angeles, but I can tell you there is a well used system in that area called the condor system. They have links all over the state, and there is always someone on it. The last time I drove there, I did not even get on 2 meters.(unless it was simplex!) Not only that, I could talk on the system all the way from Kingman AZ.

As a whole I have found people are more ready to cheat themselves way more and faster than anyone else is out to cheat them. That is not only in Amateur radio, but in life.

Operate like you want where you want, and I will do the same. I think this was a good article personally.

Phineas
K0KMA

N3TTN2004-07-05
Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
The answer to the question is simple: To coin a phrase, the silence was deafening, literally. I live in one of the most high density repeater environments to be found anywhere in the country (Wash. DC/Baltimore metro area) and there are several dozen 220 repeaters around, the trouble is NOBODY and I mean NOBODY is to be found on them. I actually went to the trouble of setting up a 220 station when I first got my ticket, to try and help "stimulate" some activity on the band, and basically I was rewarded with DEAD silence. The few contacts I managed to make were fleeting and far between, and after a year or so I just gave up and sold the rig, a Kenwood HT as I recall. One notable contact I did make was with a General class op who had set up a repeater so he could talk with his YL, a novice, on her commute home. He was genuinely shocked to hear me on the repeater, and told me I was the first (besides his YL) he had heard in many months, although he said I was welcome to use the machine any time I wanted, for what it was worth. Bottom line: I agree with you that 220 is a promising band, if we could just get more hams to utilize it. I am no ratchet jaw by any means, but I like to have an occasional contact, and as it stand around here at the moment, there just is not enough activity on the band to justify buying a rig and antenna for 220 mhz. All the best,

N3TTN
KC8BTM2004-07-04
Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
A better question would be, why have many of the manufacturers chosen to ignore the band? Some companies didn't hesitate to jump on the 60 meter "bandwagon", yet, how long has 1.25 been around? If more manufacturers produced 222 mhz equipment, perhaps the competition would force down the ridiculous prices some makers are charging. I'd like to see 222 mhz integrated, just like 6, 2, and 440, into HF rigs, instead of making expensive monobanders.
Monobanders are already well overdone in the market.
They're called CB's.
W9ZS2004-07-04
Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
Nice artical on the 220 band! I have a 220 repeater in
Northern Illinois that rivals most of the 2 meter machines in the area. It was the best investment I have made in Ham radio. We have around a dozen members, and its the perfect intercom for our club members. EVERYONE useing the repeater supports it!
We don't have folks breaking in for a signal report, and totally interrupting the conversations in progress.
If someone wanted to join in the conversation, without taking over the roundtable, then a signal report wouldnt be a problem. 220 mhz users are among the most
courteous and friendly operators. I almost hate to advertise 220, fearing that it might attract the 2 meter folks that caused a lot of us to move up in frequency! In addition to the radios you mentioned, I
recently found a "Motorola" 220 radio MADE for the
220 to 240 range, 25watts, 64channels, that works perfectly for the 220 US band. It isn't made in the US, but it is typical Motorola high quality stuff!
220 is so popular in the Chicago area, that there are NO MORE repeater pairs available for new machines!
Best Regards...
Tom, W9ZS
K7VO2004-07-04
RE: Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
Funny, I'm not rich. Far from it. $200 for a single mode, single band rig used to be the norm on 2m. I am buying another Alinco 222 rig brand new. For the amount of use I get out of 222 it is well worth it.

Oh, used rigs can be had around $100-$125 if you don't mind older equipment.

If you think 222 is expensive, try 1240-1300MHz rigs.

73,
Caity
K7VO

Reply to a comment by : N0TONE on 2004-07-04

Whew - thanks for hitting us over the head with a 2 X 4. Based on your list there are ZERO inexpensive rigs for 222 MHz. Two hundred bucks for a single-band, single-mode rig is nuts for anybody who's not wealthy! I tend to drive to Dayton every second or third year, and despite my best efforts, one of the gang insists on having a multi-band rig or more along. We scan 2, 222, 440, and 1.2 Gig. On Hamvention weekend, the QSOs on all bands are the same drivel. I'm equipped for 144 and 440 FM, and via transverters, 50 through 2.3 Gig multi-mode. My own experience (living not too far from the west coast, and making frequent trips elsewhere) is that 144 and 440 MHz have exactly the same type of QSOs. A fair amount of "honey bring home some milk" and a fair amount of "I love this rig because it fits my shirt pocket" and precious little of "I was using the propagation modelling tool to predict the best times for us to possibly see some ducting..." in other words, people mainly talk about trivial grocery store matters or how many buttons a given model has, and little of technical meat. I would want another band, sandwiched between these? I agree with several others on here - in the past ten years, I have never heard anybody complain that two meters is crowded. Sure, for the ego-driven gang, there are no repeater allocations left, but those frequencies are completely unused. Heck, I get to the San Francisco Bay Area at least once a month, and have never encountered a situation where more than four frequencies are in use at once on two meter FM! And that's with a ground plane, clamped to the balconey of a hotel on the 30th floor, so it's not for want of an antenna! As far as the claim that UPS isn't using 222 MHz, they're actually WAY ahead of the hams! They're using it for truck monitoring, using meteor scatter. You don't THINK they're using it because the transmissions are in bursts and your FM-only rig can't possibly hear them. AM

N0TONE2004-07-04
Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
Whew - thanks for hitting us over the head with a 2 X 4. Based on your list there are ZERO inexpensive rigs for 222 MHz. Two hundred bucks for a single-band, single-mode rig is nuts for anybody who's not wealthy!

I tend to drive to Dayton every second or third year, and despite my best efforts, one of the gang insists on having a multi-band rig or more along. We scan 2, 222, 440, and 1.2 Gig.

On Hamvention weekend, the QSOs on all bands are the same drivel.

I'm equipped for 144 and 440 FM, and via transverters, 50 through 2.3 Gig multi-mode. My own experience (living not too far from the west coast, and making frequent trips elsewhere) is that 144 and 440 MHz have exactly the same type of QSOs. A fair amount of "honey bring home some milk" and a fair amount of "I love this rig because it fits my shirt pocket" and precious little of "I was using the propagation modelling tool to predict the best times for us to possibly see some ducting..." in other words, people mainly talk about trivial grocery store matters or how many buttons a given model has, and little of technical meat. I would want another band, sandwiched between these?

I agree with several others on here - in the past ten years, I have never heard anybody complain that two meters is crowded. Sure, for the ego-driven gang, there are no repeater allocations left, but those frequencies are completely unused. Heck, I get to the San Francisco Bay Area at least once a month, and have never encountered a situation where more than four frequencies are in use at once on two meter FM! And that's with a ground plane, clamped to the balconey of a hotel on the 30th floor, so it's not for want of an antenna!

As far as the claim that UPS isn't using 222 MHz, they're actually WAY ahead of the hams! They're using it for truck monitoring, using meteor scatter. You don't THINK they're using it because the transmissions are in bursts and your FM-only rig can't possibly hear them.

AM
K8OT2004-07-03
Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
Years ago many people had Radio's that had shortwave bands on it. It was AM. they could listen to hams on the HF bands. Today their are few radios that have shortwave om them and DO NOT recieve SSB.
they have scanners that will recieve 2 Mtrs. that is their introduction to ham radio. so what can we expect.
NN2G2004-07-03
RE: Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
Can any multiband multimode VHF?UHF radio be modified for 222 Mhz? FT-100 ? IC-706?

Maybe there is a market for off the shelf 220 Mhz radio put together by a ham.

Somebody could sell a HTX 10 or HTX 100 with a transverter all set up and ready to go. Sell them together and reset the 10 meter radio to 222 Mhz readout. It could sell for $400 to $ 450 and a profit still could be made. Anyone interested?
Reply to a comment by : K7VOon 2004-07-02

What is a "mono mode transverter"? I've never seen one. 73, Caity K7VO
Reply to a comment by : G7HEUon 2004-07-02

How much for a mono mode-tranverter? :-)
Reply to a comment by : K7VOon 2004-07-02

N1VLQ: You want a 222 FM rig for under $150 but can't find one? Hmmm... I jjust did a search of completed auctions on eBay for 222 gear. Several Icom IC-37As sold in your price range. The older gear I mentioned (above) is often around $100 at hamfests. How many rigs do you want? I can find you plenty. Regarding all mode transverters, you are right. None will be $150 or under. I had to take a day trip to Monroe, NC (about 168 miles each way) and had solid 222 coverage and several QSOs for the entire trip. $100-$150 is well worthwhile in this part of the country. 73, Caity K7VO
Reply to a comment by : N1VLQon 2004-07-01

I would gladly buy a rig if I could get one for under $150 for an FM mobile rig, or even better, an all-mode transverter for $150 or so. And to be honest, I haven't actively searched for one. But I somehow doubt there'll be very many available in that price range, and I'm not interested in paying more than that for a band on which I'll not make many contacts. But I would like the capability. The lack of affordable transverters somewhat mystifies me. I guess I can understand why the big-boys don't add that band to their rigs, 220 being a North American band. But why are the transverters for 220 so much more than for 6, 2 or 440?

Reply to a comment by : W6PMR3 on 2004-07-01

I've been using 220 for years and it's a great band. True, there are not a lot of radios for the band but good used radios are at swap meets and on the net. In Southern California the 440 band is almost all PRIVATE machines, not closed, PRIVATE. Don't bother to use the band because small groups of Hams have seen to it that everyone is excluded from 440. But 220 was/is filled with wide coverage open systems. For years the band, (220) was always more active in LA then most places because of this. Now I live in Northern Cal. and the band is still full of systems but it's DEAD. I brought up a bunch of 220 gear, slapped up antennas and found machines all over the place, but nobody on any of them!! Oh well. BTW my Kenwood F-6 is THE BEST HT I have ever had. Mine is 5 watts on all bands and has no RX problems, what is up with that bad review? Just a couple of early morning rambles before the coffee guys. Paul.

K7VO2004-07-02
RE: Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
What is a "mono mode transverter"? I've never seen one.

73,
Caity
K7VO
Reply to a comment by : G7HEUon 2004-07-02

How much for a mono mode-tranverter? :-)
Reply to a comment by : K7VOon 2004-07-02

N1VLQ: You want a 222 FM rig for under $150 but can't find one? Hmmm... I jjust did a search of completed auctions on eBay for 222 gear. Several Icom IC-37As sold in your price range. The older gear I mentioned (above) is often around $100 at hamfests. How many rigs do you want? I can find you plenty. Regarding all mode transverters, you are right. None will be $150 or under. I had to take a day trip to Monroe, NC (about 168 miles each way) and had solid 222 coverage and several QSOs for the entire trip. $100-$150 is well worthwhile in this part of the country. 73, Caity K7VO
Reply to a comment by : N1VLQon 2004-07-01

I would gladly buy a rig if I could get one for under $150 for an FM mobile rig, or even better, an all-mode transverter for $150 or so. And to be honest, I haven't actively searched for one. But I somehow doubt there'll be very many available in that price range, and I'm not interested in paying more than that for a band on which I'll not make many contacts. But I would like the capability. The lack of affordable transverters somewhat mystifies me. I guess I can understand why the big-boys don't add that band to their rigs, 220 being a North American band. But why are the transverters for 220 so much more than for 6, 2 or 440?

Reply to a comment by : W6PMR3 on 2004-07-01

I've been using 220 for years and it's a great band. True, there are not a lot of radios for the band but good used radios are at swap meets and on the net. In Southern California the 440 band is almost all PRIVATE machines, not closed, PRIVATE. Don't bother to use the band because small groups of Hams have seen to it that everyone is excluded from 440. But 220 was/is filled with wide coverage open systems. For years the band, (220) was always more active in LA then most places because of this. Now I live in Northern Cal. and the band is still full of systems but it's DEAD. I brought up a bunch of 220 gear, slapped up antennas and found machines all over the place, but nobody on any of them!! Oh well. BTW my Kenwood F-6 is THE BEST HT I have ever had. Mine is 5 watts on all bands and has no RX problems, what is up with that bad review? Just a couple of early morning rambles before the coffee guys. Paul.

NN6EE2004-07-02
RE: Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
About a year ago I had my Kenwood TM-331A re-aligned and it has USUALLY always been a stellar performer!!!

Even though we don't typically use 222mhz or above that much, at least the activity up there is "Gentlemanly" and reliable!!!

Jim/ee
Reply to a comment by : G7HEUon 2004-07-02

How much for a mono mode-tranverter? :-)
Reply to a comment by : K7VOon 2004-07-02

N1VLQ: You want a 222 FM rig for under $150 but can't find one? Hmmm... I jjust did a search of completed auctions on eBay for 222 gear. Several Icom IC-37As sold in your price range. The older gear I mentioned (above) is often around $100 at hamfests. How many rigs do you want? I can find you plenty. Regarding all mode transverters, you are right. None will be $150 or under. I had to take a day trip to Monroe, NC (about 168 miles each way) and had solid 222 coverage and several QSOs for the entire trip. $100-$150 is well worthwhile in this part of the country. 73, Caity K7VO
Reply to a comment by : N1VLQon 2004-07-01

I would gladly buy a rig if I could get one for under $150 for an FM mobile rig, or even better, an all-mode transverter for $150 or so. And to be honest, I haven't actively searched for one. But I somehow doubt there'll be very many available in that price range, and I'm not interested in paying more than that for a band on which I'll not make many contacts. But I would like the capability. The lack of affordable transverters somewhat mystifies me. I guess I can understand why the big-boys don't add that band to their rigs, 220 being a North American band. But why are the transverters for 220 so much more than for 6, 2 or 440?

Reply to a comment by : W6PMR3 on 2004-07-01

I've been using 220 for years and it's a great band. True, there are not a lot of radios for the band but good used radios are at swap meets and on the net. In Southern California the 440 band is almost all PRIVATE machines, not closed, PRIVATE. Don't bother to use the band because small groups of Hams have seen to it that everyone is excluded from 440. But 220 was/is filled with wide coverage open systems. For years the band, (220) was always more active in LA then most places because of this. Now I live in Northern Cal. and the band is still full of systems but it's DEAD. I brought up a bunch of 220 gear, slapped up antennas and found machines all over the place, but nobody on any of them!! Oh well. BTW my Kenwood F-6 is THE BEST HT I have ever had. Mine is 5 watts on all bands and has no RX problems, what is up with that bad review? Just a couple of early morning rambles before the coffee guys. Paul.

G7HEU2004-07-02
RE: Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
How much for a mono mode-tranverter? :-)
Reply to a comment by : K7VOon 2004-07-02

N1VLQ: You want a 222 FM rig for under $150 but can't find one? Hmmm... I jjust did a search of completed auctions on eBay for 222 gear. Several Icom IC-37As sold in your price range. The older gear I mentioned (above) is often around $100 at hamfests. How many rigs do you want? I can find you plenty. Regarding all mode transverters, you are right. None will be $150 or under. I had to take a day trip to Monroe, NC (about 168 miles each way) and had solid 222 coverage and several QSOs for the entire trip. $100-$150 is well worthwhile in this part of the country. 73, Caity K7VO
Reply to a comment by : N1VLQon 2004-07-01

I would gladly buy a rig if I could get one for under $150 for an FM mobile rig, or even better, an all-mode transverter for $150 or so. And to be honest, I haven't actively searched for one. But I somehow doubt there'll be very many available in that price range, and I'm not interested in paying more than that for a band on which I'll not make many contacts. But I would like the capability. The lack of affordable transverters somewhat mystifies me. I guess I can understand why the big-boys don't add that band to their rigs, 220 being a North American band. But why are the transverters for 220 so much more than for 6, 2 or 440?

Reply to a comment by : W6PMR3 on 2004-07-01

I've been using 220 for years and it's a great band. True, there are not a lot of radios for the band but good used radios are at swap meets and on the net. In Southern California the 440 band is almost all PRIVATE machines, not closed, PRIVATE. Don't bother to use the band because small groups of Hams have seen to it that everyone is excluded from 440. But 220 was/is filled with wide coverage open systems. For years the band, (220) was always more active in LA then most places because of this. Now I live in Northern Cal. and the band is still full of systems but it's DEAD. I brought up a bunch of 220 gear, slapped up antennas and found machines all over the place, but nobody on any of them!! Oh well. BTW my Kenwood F-6 is THE BEST HT I have ever had. Mine is 5 watts on all bands and has no RX problems, what is up with that bad review? Just a couple of early morning rambles before the coffee guys. Paul.

K7VO2004-07-02
RE: Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
N1VLQ: You want a 222 FM rig for under $150 but can't find one? Hmmm... I jjust did a search of completed auctions on eBay for 222 gear. Several Icom IC-37As sold in your price range. The older gear I mentioned (above) is often around $100 at hamfests. How many rigs do you want? I can find you plenty.

Regarding all mode transverters, you are right. None will be $150 or under.

I had to take a day trip to Monroe, NC (about 168 miles each way) and had solid 222 coverage and several QSOs for the entire trip. $100-$150 is well worthwhile in this part of the country.

73,
Caity
K7VO
Reply to a comment by : N1VLQon 2004-07-01

I would gladly buy a rig if I could get one for under $150 for an FM mobile rig, or even better, an all-mode transverter for $150 or so. And to be honest, I haven't actively searched for one. But I somehow doubt there'll be very many available in that price range, and I'm not interested in paying more than that for a band on which I'll not make many contacts. But I would like the capability. The lack of affordable transverters somewhat mystifies me. I guess I can understand why the big-boys don't add that band to their rigs, 220 being a North American band. But why are the transverters for 220 so much more than for 6, 2 or 440?

Reply to a comment by : W6PMR3 on 2004-07-01

I've been using 220 for years and it's a great band. True, there are not a lot of radios for the band but good used radios are at swap meets and on the net. In Southern California the 440 band is almost all PRIVATE machines, not closed, PRIVATE. Don't bother to use the band because small groups of Hams have seen to it that everyone is excluded from 440. But 220 was/is filled with wide coverage open systems. For years the band, (220) was always more active in LA then most places because of this. Now I live in Northern Cal. and the band is still full of systems but it's DEAD. I brought up a bunch of 220 gear, slapped up antennas and found machines all over the place, but nobody on any of them!! Oh well. BTW my Kenwood F-6 is THE BEST HT I have ever had. Mine is 5 watts on all bands and has no RX problems, what is up with that bad review? Just a couple of early morning rambles before the coffee guys. Paul.

K7VO2004-07-02
RE: Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
To KA7JEX: You are confusing the Yaesu FT-127RA with the Yaesu FT-127. They are two DIFFERENT radios. The FT-127RA "Memorizer" is the synthesized rig you are thinking of. I had one way back when and it worked very well indeed. The original FT-127 is a 12 channel crystal controlled radio.

73,
Caity
K7VO

Reply to a comment by : KA7JEX on 2004-07-02

Someone listed older equipment and stated that the Yaesu FT-127 is crystal controlled. Not so - it is one of the older synthesized units, usually without a pl board. The factory board utilized a resistor to set the PL, as I recall... One of these units is slated to be part of a new 222 repeater system in Vancouver, Washington. Duane KA7JEX

KA7JEX2004-07-02
Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
Someone listed older equipment and stated that the Yaesu FT-127 is crystal controlled. Not so - it is one of the older synthesized units, usually without a pl board. The factory board utilized a resistor to set the PL, as I recall... One of these units is slated to be part of a new 222 repeater system in Vancouver, Washington.

Duane KA7JEX
N1VLQ2004-07-01
RE: Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
I would gladly buy a rig if I could get one for under $150 for an FM mobile rig, or even better, an all-mode transverter for $150 or so. And to be honest, I haven't actively searched for one. But I somehow doubt there'll be very many available in that price range, and I'm not interested in paying more than that for a band on which I'll not make many contacts. But I would like the capability.

The lack of affordable transverters somewhat mystifies me. I guess I can understand why the big-boys don't add that band to their rigs, 220 being a North American band. But why are the transverters for 220 so much more than for 6, 2 or 440?

Reply to a comment by : W6PMR3 on 2004-07-01

I've been using 220 for years and it's a great band. True, there are not a lot of radios for the band but good used radios are at swap meets and on the net. In Southern California the 440 band is almost all PRIVATE machines, not closed, PRIVATE. Don't bother to use the band because small groups of Hams have seen to it that everyone is excluded from 440. But 220 was/is filled with wide coverage open systems. For years the band, (220) was always more active in LA then most places because of this. Now I live in Northern Cal. and the band is still full of systems but it's DEAD. I brought up a bunch of 220 gear, slapped up antennas and found machines all over the place, but nobody on any of them!! Oh well. BTW my Kenwood F-6 is THE BEST HT I have ever had. Mine is 5 watts on all bands and has no RX problems, what is up with that bad review? Just a couple of early morning rambles before the coffee guys. Paul.

W6PMR32004-07-01
Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
I've been using 220 for years and it's a great band. True, there are not a lot of radios for the band but good used radios are at swap meets and on the net.
In Southern California the 440 band is almost all PRIVATE machines, not closed, PRIVATE. Don't bother to use the band because small groups of Hams have seen to it that everyone is excluded from 440. But 220 was/is filled with wide coverage open systems.
For years the band, (220) was always more active in LA then most places because of this. Now I live in Northern Cal. and the band is still full of systems but it's DEAD. I brought up a bunch of 220 gear, slapped up antennas and found machines all over the place, but nobody on any of them!! Oh well.
BTW my Kenwood F-6 is THE BEST HT I have ever had. Mine is 5 watts on all bands and has no RX problems,
what is up with that bad review? Just a couple of early morning rambles before the coffee guys. Paul.
KE4SKY2004-06-30
RE: Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
The 220 band has much to recommend it for Emergency and Public Service communications. The band is much quieter and has fewer problems with intermodulation disportion than 2 meters.

"220" also gets in, out and around buildings almost as well as UHF, but has very good simplex range which is similar to 2 meters. We recommend that our RACES operators have at least a portable which operates on the 220 band. If you must use a repeater or simplex frequency for an extended period for an exercise or public service event, you won't inconvenience as many users, if you use 220. Another advantage of 220 is that "most" popular handheld scanners don't receive it, only the more expensive commercial and public safety models do.

We use either digital modes or 220 voice for traffic that you would rather not have the public and news media listening to. Using 220 for local voice talk-around reduces interference which results from both voice and data systems on site operating on the same band.

It is true that no amateur mode is "secure" in the national security sense. However, using amateur bands not received on common consumer scanners, and packet store & forward protocols with file compression data modes is more "discreet."

Reply to a comment by : G7HEU on 2004-06-27

Shawn That interesting - even though we don't a have 222Mhz allocation here. If you can get a group of purchasers together it might might be worth contacting this company in the U.K. ( see bottom of page): http://www.garex.co.uk/pmr/pmr.htm And no, I have no connection with them. Best wishes Steve M0HEU / G7HEU.

WB4QNG2004-06-29
RE: Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
K6BBC, I agree with you. The tech. class is not a good entry to Ham radio. A person around here would get bored in a hurry if that is all he had. I like the new plan.
WB4QNG
Terry
Reply to a comment by : K6BBCon 2004-06-29

Dear VE7LGT, you are 100 percent correct. What you have stated has brilliantly made the argument that the Technician Class License is a poor entry level in ham radio. This is why I fully support the ARRL’s plan for license restructuring. And if the rest of you had an ounce of good judgment, you would too. K6BBC
Reply to a comment by : VE7LGTon 2004-06-29

Can anyone tell me where all the traffic on repeaters is . It would appear that non of them are busy . Lets face it other than scheduled nets it is all but impossilble to find any one on the local repeaters . As i sayed above there are a lot of other modes that can be experimented with on these bands lets start pushing them. How boring is it to be limited to a local area talking to the same old people . We can do that with CB and FRS . I use to live in a small town surrounded by mountains . the repeater was seldome used but when itwas down it was amazing to see how far you could get on simplex . Lets face it most repeaters are the comercial side of ham radio they are installed ,opperated and repaired by a select group . and are there as toys for the rest of us to use . And that also goes for most new radio equipment . We must find ways to put the amateur back in Amateur Radio!! Larry VE7LGT
Reply to a comment by : AG5Ton 2004-06-29

2 meters crowded? In Houston, Texas there are a ton of repeaters listed for both 2 meters and 440. Yet, in a city of nearly 4 million people, I can scan both bands and be lucky to come across 2 conversations on either band. We had better start using our local bands, yes, including 222, or we are going to lose them. Why are all the repeaters so silent in Houston? Well, many of them are from losing their site to businesses who want to charge outrageous fees for repeater site locations. Others are simply from lack of use. Apparently repeaters are not the rage in southeast Texas. Again, I stress, please use them or we are gonna lose them!

Reply to a comment by : DB2NK on 2004-06-29

You forgot to mention the elecraft XV 222 transverter for 349 $. MfG, Nicolas

KB0NHX2004-06-29
RE: Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
Here in Springfield, MO we have now 220 repeaters--but there's about 20 of us that use 223.500 simplex. I can talk to stations just as far if not farther on 220 simplex with 25w than I can on 2m simplex with 50w! 220 is a great band. And, the statement about the operators on 222 also holds true. Though I've not noticed it, I think every one I've talked to in this area on 220 IS an Advanced or Extra class operator. We have lots of good technical conversations.

The Alinco 235 is a great radio, as is the ADI-247. Both affordable and work well. I use a Kenwood TM-742 with 220 modules in the house and the car, and also use a Yaesu FT-736R for 222 SSB and some FM voice.

Hopefully our local club will get it's 222 repeater on the air soon. I think it will surge local activity. I talked to many hams at field day that have 222 gear, just didn't know there was activity. They're taking it out again and going to fire it up. That's great!
Reply to a comment by : K6BBCon 2004-06-29

Dear VE7LGT, you are 100 percent correct. What you have stated has brilliantly made the argument that the Technician Class License is a poor entry level in ham radio. This is why I fully support the ARRL’s plan for license restructuring. And if the rest of you had an ounce of good judgment, you would too. K6BBC
Reply to a comment by : VE7LGTon 2004-06-29

Can anyone tell me where all the traffic on repeaters is . It would appear that non of them are busy . Lets face it other than scheduled nets it is all but impossilble to find any one on the local repeaters . As i sayed above there are a lot of other modes that can be experimented with on these bands lets start pushing them. How boring is it to be limited to a local area talking to the same old people . We can do that with CB and FRS . I use to live in a small town surrounded by mountains . the repeater was seldome used but when itwas down it was amazing to see how far you could get on simplex . Lets face it most repeaters are the comercial side of ham radio they are installed ,opperated and repaired by a select group . and are there as toys for the rest of us to use . And that also goes for most new radio equipment . We must find ways to put the amateur back in Amateur Radio!! Larry VE7LGT
Reply to a comment by : AG5Ton 2004-06-29

2 meters crowded? In Houston, Texas there are a ton of repeaters listed for both 2 meters and 440. Yet, in a city of nearly 4 million people, I can scan both bands and be lucky to come across 2 conversations on either band. We had better start using our local bands, yes, including 222, or we are going to lose them. Why are all the repeaters so silent in Houston? Well, many of them are from losing their site to businesses who want to charge outrageous fees for repeater site locations. Others are simply from lack of use. Apparently repeaters are not the rage in southeast Texas. Again, I stress, please use them or we are gonna lose them!

Reply to a comment by : DB2NK on 2004-06-29

You forgot to mention the elecraft XV 222 transverter for 349 $. MfG, Nicolas

K6BBC2004-06-29
RE: Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
Dear VE7LGT, you are 100 percent correct. What you have stated has brilliantly made the argument that the Technician Class License is a poor entry level in ham radio. This is why I fully support the ARRL’s plan for license restructuring. And if the rest of you had an ounce of good judgment, you would too.

K6BBC
Reply to a comment by : VE7LGTon 2004-06-29

Can anyone tell me where all the traffic on repeaters is . It would appear that non of them are busy . Lets face it other than scheduled nets it is all but impossilble to find any one on the local repeaters . As i sayed above there are a lot of other modes that can be experimented with on these bands lets start pushing them. How boring is it to be limited to a local area talking to the same old people . We can do that with CB and FRS . I use to live in a small town surrounded by mountains . the repeater was seldome used but when itwas down it was amazing to see how far you could get on simplex . Lets face it most repeaters are the comercial side of ham radio they are installed ,opperated and repaired by a select group . and are there as toys for the rest of us to use . And that also goes for most new radio equipment . We must find ways to put the amateur back in Amateur Radio!! Larry VE7LGT
Reply to a comment by : AG5Ton 2004-06-29

2 meters crowded? In Houston, Texas there are a ton of repeaters listed for both 2 meters and 440. Yet, in a city of nearly 4 million people, I can scan both bands and be lucky to come across 2 conversations on either band. We had better start using our local bands, yes, including 222, or we are going to lose them. Why are all the repeaters so silent in Houston? Well, many of them are from losing their site to businesses who want to charge outrageous fees for repeater site locations. Others are simply from lack of use. Apparently repeaters are not the rage in southeast Texas. Again, I stress, please use them or we are gonna lose them!

Reply to a comment by : DB2NK on 2004-06-29

You forgot to mention the elecraft XV 222 transverter for 349 $. MfG, Nicolas

VE7LGT2004-06-29
RE: Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
Can anyone tell me where all the traffic on repeaters is . It would appear that non of them are busy . Lets face it other than scheduled nets it is all but impossilble to find any one on the local repeaters . As i sayed above there are a lot of other modes that can be experimented with on these bands lets start pushing them. How boring is it to be limited to a local area talking to the same old people . We can do that with CB and FRS . I use to live in a small town surrounded by mountains . the repeater was seldome used but when itwas down it was amazing to see how far you could get on simplex . Lets face it most repeaters are the comercial side of ham radio they are installed ,opperated and repaired by a select group . and are there as toys for the rest of us to use . And that also goes for most new radio equipment . We must find ways to put the amateur back in Amateur Radio!!

Larry VE7LGT
Reply to a comment by : AG5Ton 2004-06-29

2 meters crowded? In Houston, Texas there are a ton of repeaters listed for both 2 meters and 440. Yet, in a city of nearly 4 million people, I can scan both bands and be lucky to come across 2 conversations on either band. We had better start using our local bands, yes, including 222, or we are going to lose them. Why are all the repeaters so silent in Houston? Well, many of them are from losing their site to businesses who want to charge outrageous fees for repeater site locations. Others are simply from lack of use. Apparently repeaters are not the rage in southeast Texas. Again, I stress, please use them or we are gonna lose them!

Reply to a comment by : DB2NK on 2004-06-29

You forgot to mention the elecraft XV 222 transverter for 349 $. MfG, Nicolas

AG5T2004-06-29
RE: Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
2 meters crowded? In Houston, Texas there are a ton of repeaters listed for both 2 meters and 440. Yet, in a city of nearly 4 million people, I can scan both bands and be lucky to come across 2 conversations on either band. We had better start using our local bands, yes, including 222, or we are going to lose them. Why are all the repeaters so silent in Houston? Well, many of them are from losing their site to businesses who want to charge outrageous fees for repeater site locations. Others are simply from lack of use. Apparently repeaters are not the rage in southeast Texas. Again, I stress, please use them or we are gonna lose them!

Reply to a comment by : DB2NK on 2004-06-29

You forgot to mention the elecraft XV 222 transverter for 349 $. MfG, Nicolas

DB2NK2004-06-29
Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
You forgot to mention the
elecraft XV 222 transverter for 349 $.

MfG,

Nicolas
K7IHC2004-06-29
RE: Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
I guess I'm not on the 222 MHZ band because I spend too much time on the 23 cm (1.2 gig) band... There's been a bit of sporadic-E on 6m lately, so I've been on that, too.
Here in Northern Calif (SF Bay Area/Sac Valley), there's quite a bit of useage on specific 2m, 440 MHZ, and 1200 MHz repeaters/linked systems. There are some good repeaters on 222 in the area, but I only know a few hams who use them.
I'm also looking for some used Kenwood TK-series 900 MHz equipment so I can get on the 32 cm (902) band.

I think the main reason for the lack of hams on 222 is the minimal availability of equipment. It's much easier to find lots of good used stuff for the *other* VHF/UHF bands.
Reply to a comment by : K6BBCon 2004-06-29

Sorry buddy, but 2m is not a wasteland. -- 1 : barren or uncultivated land <a desert wasteland> 2 : an ugly often devastated or barely inhabitable place or area 3 : something (as a way of life) that is spiritually and emotionally arid and unsatisfying Sounds like 2 meters to me. Buddy (K6BBC)

Reply to a comment by : K1QL on 2004-06-29

Hmm ... I live in RI about 10 miles or so from Shawn and am a little curious about some of the statements he has made concerning 2 meters. First of all, where are the crowded band conditions??? We have many 2m repeaters through out the state, and with the exception of one or two, most of them are pretty much dead most of the time. That's probably because many of us use simplex on 2 meters. Also, I've never encountered interference from commercial equipment either on simplex or the repeaters on 2m. And finally, I think most of the active hams around here are very professional and courteous operators. Shawn, you wrote "Here in Rhode Island, an increasing number of us have moved over to 222 MHz to escape the 144 MHz wasteland." HUH??? Sorry buddy, but 2m is not a wasteland. And although I don't operate on 222 (don't have the equipment), I do monitor it, and have a few friends that use it occasionally. Now THAT is the dead band around here in RI. Don't get me wrong, I don't think there's anything wrong in utilizing the 222 MHz band. I'd be on it myself if I had a radio that could transmitt on it. And I appreciate you writing this article encouraging people to use it. I'm just very surprised that two people who live so close could have such opposite impressions of a band. And for the record, I've not had the pleasure of talking with or meeting Shawn. But I must say that I have made some life long friends and have had many people help and guide me through my ham radio journey here on the two meter band. Some of the guys I talk to on a daily basis on 2m have been operating for 30, 40 or even 50 years! They certainly aren't CBers!

K6BBC2004-06-29
RE: Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
Sorry buddy, but 2m is not a wasteland. -- 1 : barren or uncultivated land <a desert wasteland>
2 : an ugly often devastated or barely inhabitable place or area
3 : something (as a way of life) that is spiritually and emotionally arid and unsatisfying

Sounds like 2 meters to me.

Buddy (K6BBC)

Reply to a comment by : K1QL on 2004-06-29

Hmm ... I live in RI about 10 miles or so from Shawn and am a little curious about some of the statements he has made concerning 2 meters. First of all, where are the crowded band conditions??? We have many 2m repeaters through out the state, and with the exception of one or two, most of them are pretty much dead most of the time. That's probably because many of us use simplex on 2 meters. Also, I've never encountered interference from commercial equipment either on simplex or the repeaters on 2m. And finally, I think most of the active hams around here are very professional and courteous operators. Shawn, you wrote "Here in Rhode Island, an increasing number of us have moved over to 222 MHz to escape the 144 MHz wasteland." HUH??? Sorry buddy, but 2m is not a wasteland. And although I don't operate on 222 (don't have the equipment), I do monitor it, and have a few friends that use it occasionally. Now THAT is the dead band around here in RI. Don't get me wrong, I don't think there's anything wrong in utilizing the 222 MHz band. I'd be on it myself if I had a radio that could transmitt on it. And I appreciate you writing this article encouraging people to use it. I'm just very surprised that two people who live so close could have such opposite impressions of a band. And for the record, I've not had the pleasure of talking with or meeting Shawn. But I must say that I have made some life long friends and have had many people help and guide me through my ham radio journey here on the two meter band. Some of the guys I talk to on a daily basis on 2m have been operating for 30, 40 or even 50 years! They certainly aren't CBers!

K1QL2004-06-29
Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
Hmm ... I live in RI about 10 miles or so from Shawn and am a little curious about some of the statements he has made concerning 2 meters. First of all, where are the crowded band conditions??? We have many 2m repeaters through out the state, and with the exception of one or two, most of them are pretty much dead most of the time. That's probably because many of us use simplex on 2 meters. Also, I've never encountered interference from commercial equipment either on simplex or the repeaters on 2m. And finally, I think most of the active hams around here are very professional and courteous operators. Shawn, you wrote "Here in Rhode Island, an increasing number of us have moved over to 222 MHz to escape the 144 MHz wasteland." HUH??? Sorry buddy, but 2m is not a wasteland. And although I don't operate on 222 (don't have the equipment), I do monitor it, and have a few friends that use it occasionally. Now THAT is the dead band around here in RI.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think there's anything wrong in utilizing the 222 MHz band. I'd be on it myself if I had a radio that could transmitt on it. And I appreciate you writing this article encouraging people to use it. I'm just very surprised that two people who live so close could have such opposite impressions of a band. And for the record, I've not had the pleasure of talking with or meeting Shawn. But I must say that I have made some life long friends and have had many people help and guide me through my ham radio journey here on the two meter band. Some of the guys I talk to on a daily basis on 2m have been operating for 30, 40 or even 50 years! They certainly aren't CBers!
KF6KDA2004-06-28
RE: Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
220mhz isn't dead everywhere.

Bottom line, use it or lose it.

'nuff said
Reply to a comment by : KF4VGXon 2004-06-28

LET'S TAKE BACK 220! I'm all for that. The question is where to get the equipment to setup repeaters and etc. I'm in the mood to per- say link a few Repeaters on 222 mhz and 900 mhz . If I had an option to buy said equipment. At a quantity price to increase the band use . I probably would give away a few HT's etc ,to get others involved. Why not help ! :) Its great for the Hobby .
Reply to a comment by : WA2DTWon 2004-06-28

"It’s probably time to shut down most of these useless repeaters that dot the ham landscape in favor of new, high-speed data modes of communication. " One or more of these repeaters could save hundreds of lives in an emergency. When the power and cell phones go down, emergency-powered repeaters can continue to work. And most mobile rigs can't read high-speed data modes of communication. LET'S TAKE BACK 220! 73 Steve WA2DTW
Reply to a comment by : K6BBCon 2004-06-27

It’s probably time to shut down most of these useless repeaters that dot the ham landscape in favor of new, high-speed data modes of communication. I might suggest hams use two meters and 220 and 440 for digital television broadcasting. As it is now, VHF and UHF is a near waste of space. I would also end the concept of closed repeaters. I mean, what kind of jerk puts up a repeater and tells his fellow hams they are not allowed on the machine. When I was first licensed in 1968, all this nonsense was not going on. Now there are so many closed repeaters, especially on 440, that are not being utilized, it’s criminal. I say, open them up or tear them down. And it’s time to make a 100 % effort to modernize out communication modes and yes, attract hams. Especially hams that are younger. The average age of an amateur is above 56, and that’s a tragedy for us all. I heard an old crotchety ham on 20 meters today complain because Field Day was interfering with his “medical net.” Now, what the heck is a “medical net.”? It sounds like a bunch of old goats complaining about their medical problem. Enough of that stuff. How are we to attract younger hams with that kind of conversation going on? K6BBC
Reply to a comment by : N5LBon 2004-06-27

I've never tried 220 but I recall when the only gear was either homebrew, or maybe surplus. As far as 2 meters is concerned, I don't hear any of the so called "CB" operators. The problem with 2 meters in this area is that I don't hear anyone. There are a lot of 2 meter repeaters in the area and no activity. I actually have more luck mobile on 52 in raising someone to chat with. Driving to Dayton this year my son and I used 52 much of the time and 3825 USB most of the way. 52 was great and we met a lot of good people. So was 3825, but thats another story. I suspect that most 2 meter repeaters are largely just robots now broadcasting a periodic ID. I many parts of the country I suspect that's the case. My son, a newly licensed no code tech from a few years ago has made a few contacts on 52 but none on any repeater unless it was with me. 220 might be fun to experiment with if there were others in range. Thanks for pointing out the commercial gear available. It does get one to thinking.
Reply to a comment by : W6EMRon 2004-06-27

Good topic; especially if you like 1.35M; otherwise the naysayers will abound. Unfortunately for Hams in other ITU regions, 222 Mhz is dedicated to public safety use........ Canadian Hams still have 220-222Mhz (IIRC) and are the primary users of the band. K7VO, good list of rigs...........some I have never heard of. There should be a mention made of ALL MODE rigs for this band........meteor scatter and SSB are used regularly by some op's. Personally, I have two TH-31BT's and a TH-31A (no PL) and an IC-37A mobile rig used as a base with a PC power supply fan running behind it to keep it cool. Five watts gets me almost 90 miles out to repeaters in the Bay area..........Even the little 1 watt TH-31's will make it; with a little white noise. It's a good band with good users..........most of the guys you find on there are Extra's........the Tech's stay pretty much with 2M and UHF.........Got to start somewhere! I think it is wrong to characterize 2 Meters as a place for "lids"............there are poor op's on any band............listen to 75 meters sometime; Riley could stay busy with those guys. I have met some great people on ALL of the bands I have operated, including 2M.............Just don't write off 222Mhz, it's a great alternative and it's NOT busy..........Use or lose...............
Reply to a comment by : K7VOon 2004-06-27

Hi, everyone, Here on the eastern fringe of the Raleigh/Durham, NC area I can get into nine 222MHz repeaters well. One, the 224.84 in Grifton, NC is as busy as any 2m repeater in the area. Two really local ones on the channel 47 tower near Louisburg (224.22 and 224.58) were, until recently, fairly quiet. An upsurge in interest in the band has made them moderately active repeaters with a good community of users. Another, 224.16, is probably the widest coverage repeater in the eastern half of the state on *any* band. No 2m or 70cm repeater can be used over such a wide area. Here is the key: if there are decent repeaters in your area that are hardly used, well... USE THEM! Get on, encourage friends to get on, and you'll be amazed how fast things pick up. I disagree about the Kenwood TH-F6A being a poor radio. Quite the contrary. Oh, and since when is 5W out of a handheld "miniscule"? Are you confusing the TH-F6A with the Yaesu VX-7R quad bander? That one only puts out 350mW on 222. I have a friend who has a VX-7R. The repeaters around here have such good coverage that he can hit them full queiting with his HT a dozen miles or more from the repeater site. His audio is excellent, too. There is no shortage of good HTs for 222. 222MHz is NOT only a U.S. band. The allocation is throughout region 2, meaning Canada, Mexico, and Latin/South America all have the band. Finally, you can pick up good, used, if somewhat older 222MHz mobile rigs for around $100. One friend found a KDK FM-4033R for all of $50 at a hamfest, so sometimes there can be incredibly cheap ways to get on the band. Here is some additional used equipment; 1. Late 80's to date, typically 25-35W out, with programmable CTCSS (PL) capability. Rigs are monoband mobiles unless otherwise specified: Azden PCS-7200 Icom IC-37A Icom IC-38A Icom IC-2330A (2m/222 dual bander) Icom IC-900 with UX-39 module (multibander) Icom IC-901A with UX-39 module (multibander) Icom IC-W21A (2m/222MHz dual band HT) Icom IC-u3A (HT) Kenwood TM-321A Kenwood TR-3530 Kenwood TM-621A (2m/222 dual bander) Kenwood TM-631A (2m/222 dual bander) Kenwood TH-31BT (HT) Ten Tec (T-Kit) 1230 Yaesu FT-33R (HT) Yaesu FT-311RM Here are some older rigs with single channel optional PL capability: Azden PCS-4200 Icom IC-03AT (HT) KDK FM-4033 Kenwood TH-31AT (HT) Yaesu FT-109R (HT) Here are some really old ones that should be quite inexpensive. No CTCSS (PL) capability unless you add an aftermarket board: Drake UV-3 (tribander) Icom IC-3A/IC-3AT (HT) Midland 13-513 Tempo S3 (HT) Yaesu FT-127R Memorizer Yaesu FT-103R (HT) Truly ancient crystal rigs, maybe worthwhile if they already have your local repeaters crystalled up. Assume no CTCSS (PL) and assume these should be dirt cheap: Clegg FM-76 Midland 13-509 Yaesu FT-127 I'm sure I'm forgetting a few. The point, though, is there is plenty of old, used equipment, some of it very expensive indeed. Lack of available equipment is a rather lame excuse, not a reality. Just look at eBay if you don't believe me. Plenty of 222 rigs there, though I often don't like the prices they fetch. True story: I go to a hamfest in South Carolina with my triband IC-901A in the car. I'm told there are no 222 repeaters in the area. I check the SERA Journal, find a few in the area, one with truly wide coverage, and proceed to talk to folks on 222 on the way home where there are supposedly no repeaters. This was an excellent article. If you don't have activity in your area create it. Get on the band! Don't post here discouraging people and claiming there are few equipment choices or that they are all expensive. You may not have been aware what was out there, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Don't spread misinformation if you really don't know. 73, Caity K7VO No, options are not limited.
Reply to a comment by : WA2DTWon 2004-06-27

A very good article. 220 is a great band and certainly deserves more use and activity. We've already lost the bottom 2 mhz, and the rest of the band is threatened. The problem is a dearth of equipment, since this is exclusively a US band. It is hard (or impossible?) to find a multimode 220 rig. About the TH-F6. It is an excellent HT which affords access to 2M, 220 and 440, and multimode general coverage. In the palm of the hand. What can beat that? 73 Steve WA2DTW
Reply to a comment by : W7DJMon 2004-06-27

Not only is the TH-F6 a damn poor radio generally, in my opinion, but the miniscule power it outputs on 222 (220, 222, whatever it takes) hardly qualifies it as a "true" 222 radio. The fact is, even though you tried to justify your own arguement by posting some current models, the list was pretty short. None of those radios is really a good candidate for stuff like link or repeater/hilltop use. What I'm trying to say, is things are pretty limited.
Reply to a comment by : KF4VGXon 2004-06-27

Most hams on the first introduction to their tickets will buy a 2 meter HT. Why price and convenience. There are a few 440 and one 222 mhz repeaters here in this area. with only a handful of guys using them. (The same handful that hangs on two meters . These repeaters were linked together just this year because of no activity ,to a two meter repeater. Skywarn Repeater at that and still not that much activity .The main reason ( In This Area ) no activity on the bands. Hams will not pay ex-sum amount of cash for a radio where there is no activity? I agree with the poster that it would be great to have different ideas to use 222 mhz . But how to get amateur's to buy these radios is the question? I would love to experiment with the 900 / 1240 band and have started looking for used equipment Good post 73

Reply to a comment by : WA2BOB on 2004-06-27

Hi just want to say that you are right the 222 Band is more fun, N2QOT and myself WA2ROB use it alot went we want to get away from 2 meter we use simplex 223.500 and sometime we use the repeater 224.820 but we stay on simplex all the time.So give us a call ones in wail to see if we can here you we are on the south side of Long Island so try it I like to send QSL card to the station I take to. From Robert PS I have three radio that work on 222 Band Two are Kenwood 742A 2M/440B/222B KW 631A 2M/222B and a ADI AR 247 222B. And if anybody know where I can get a 222B Modular for a Kenwood 790A PSE. let me know E-mail is [email protected] again thank you.

KF4VGX2004-06-28
RE: Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
LET'S TAKE BACK 220!

I'm all for that. The question is where to get the equipment to setup repeaters and etc. I'm in the mood to per- say link a few Repeaters on 222 mhz and 900 mhz . If I had an option to buy said equipment.
At a quantity price to increase the band use .
I probably would give away a few HT's etc ,to get others involved. Why not help ! :) Its great for the Hobby .

Reply to a comment by : WA2DTWon 2004-06-28

"It’s probably time to shut down most of these useless repeaters that dot the ham landscape in favor of new, high-speed data modes of communication. " One or more of these repeaters could save hundreds of lives in an emergency. When the power and cell phones go down, emergency-powered repeaters can continue to work. And most mobile rigs can't read high-speed data modes of communication. LET'S TAKE BACK 220! 73 Steve WA2DTW
Reply to a comment by : K6BBCon 2004-06-27

It’s probably time to shut down most of these useless repeaters that dot the ham landscape in favor of new, high-speed data modes of communication. I might suggest hams use two meters and 220 and 440 for digital television broadcasting. As it is now, VHF and UHF is a near waste of space. I would also end the concept of closed repeaters. I mean, what kind of jerk puts up a repeater and tells his fellow hams they are not allowed on the machine. When I was first licensed in 1968, all this nonsense was not going on. Now there are so many closed repeaters, especially on 440, that are not being utilized, it’s criminal. I say, open them up or tear them down. And it’s time to make a 100 % effort to modernize out communication modes and yes, attract hams. Especially hams that are younger. The average age of an amateur is above 56, and that’s a tragedy for us all. I heard an old crotchety ham on 20 meters today complain because Field Day was interfering with his “medical net.” Now, what the heck is a “medical net.”? It sounds like a bunch of old goats complaining about their medical problem. Enough of that stuff. How are we to attract younger hams with that kind of conversation going on? K6BBC
Reply to a comment by : N5LBon 2004-06-27

I've never tried 220 but I recall when the only gear was either homebrew, or maybe surplus. As far as 2 meters is concerned, I don't hear any of the so called "CB" operators. The problem with 2 meters in this area is that I don't hear anyone. There are a lot of 2 meter repeaters in the area and no activity. I actually have more luck mobile on 52 in raising someone to chat with. Driving to Dayton this year my son and I used 52 much of the time and 3825 USB most of the way. 52 was great and we met a lot of good people. So was 3825, but thats another story. I suspect that most 2 meter repeaters are largely just robots now broadcasting a periodic ID. I many parts of the country I suspect that's the case. My son, a newly licensed no code tech from a few years ago has made a few contacts on 52 but none on any repeater unless it was with me. 220 might be fun to experiment with if there were others in range. Thanks for pointing out the commercial gear available. It does get one to thinking.
Reply to a comment by : W6EMRon 2004-06-27

Good topic; especially if you like 1.35M; otherwise the naysayers will abound. Unfortunately for Hams in other ITU regions, 222 Mhz is dedicated to public safety use........ Canadian Hams still have 220-222Mhz (IIRC) and are the primary users of the band. K7VO, good list of rigs...........some I have never heard of. There should be a mention made of ALL MODE rigs for this band........meteor scatter and SSB are used regularly by some op's. Personally, I have two TH-31BT's and a TH-31A (no PL) and an IC-37A mobile rig used as a base with a PC power supply fan running behind it to keep it cool. Five watts gets me almost 90 miles out to repeaters in the Bay area..........Even the little 1 watt TH-31's will make it; with a little white noise. It's a good band with good users..........most of the guys you find on there are Extra's........the Tech's stay pretty much with 2M and UHF.........Got to start somewhere! I think it is wrong to characterize 2 Meters as a place for "lids"............there are poor op's on any band............listen to 75 meters sometime; Riley could stay busy with those guys. I have met some great people on ALL of the bands I have operated, including 2M.............Just don't write off 222Mhz, it's a great alternative and it's NOT busy..........Use or lose...............
Reply to a comment by : K7VOon 2004-06-27

Hi, everyone, Here on the eastern fringe of the Raleigh/Durham, NC area I can get into nine 222MHz repeaters well. One, the 224.84 in Grifton, NC is as busy as any 2m repeater in the area. Two really local ones on the channel 47 tower near Louisburg (224.22 and 224.58) were, until recently, fairly quiet. An upsurge in interest in the band has made them moderately active repeaters with a good community of users. Another, 224.16, is probably the widest coverage repeater in the eastern half of the state on *any* band. No 2m or 70cm repeater can be used over such a wide area. Here is the key: if there are decent repeaters in your area that are hardly used, well... USE THEM! Get on, encourage friends to get on, and you'll be amazed how fast things pick up. I disagree about the Kenwood TH-F6A being a poor radio. Quite the contrary. Oh, and since when is 5W out of a handheld "miniscule"? Are you confusing the TH-F6A with the Yaesu VX-7R quad bander? That one only puts out 350mW on 222. I have a friend who has a VX-7R. The repeaters around here have such good coverage that he can hit them full queiting with his HT a dozen miles or more from the repeater site. His audio is excellent, too. There is no shortage of good HTs for 222. 222MHz is NOT only a U.S. band. The allocation is throughout region 2, meaning Canada, Mexico, and Latin/South America all have the band. Finally, you can pick up good, used, if somewhat older 222MHz mobile rigs for around $100. One friend found a KDK FM-4033R for all of $50 at a hamfest, so sometimes there can be incredibly cheap ways to get on the band. Here is some additional used equipment; 1. Late 80's to date, typically 25-35W out, with programmable CTCSS (PL) capability. Rigs are monoband mobiles unless otherwise specified: Azden PCS-7200 Icom IC-37A Icom IC-38A Icom IC-2330A (2m/222 dual bander) Icom IC-900 with UX-39 module (multibander) Icom IC-901A with UX-39 module (multibander) Icom IC-W21A (2m/222MHz dual band HT) Icom IC-u3A (HT) Kenwood TM-321A Kenwood TR-3530 Kenwood TM-621A (2m/222 dual bander) Kenwood TM-631A (2m/222 dual bander) Kenwood TH-31BT (HT) Ten Tec (T-Kit) 1230 Yaesu FT-33R (HT) Yaesu FT-311RM Here are some older rigs with single channel optional PL capability: Azden PCS-4200 Icom IC-03AT (HT) KDK FM-4033 Kenwood TH-31AT (HT) Yaesu FT-109R (HT) Here are some really old ones that should be quite inexpensive. No CTCSS (PL) capability unless you add an aftermarket board: Drake UV-3 (tribander) Icom IC-3A/IC-3AT (HT) Midland 13-513 Tempo S3 (HT) Yaesu FT-127R Memorizer Yaesu FT-103R (HT) Truly ancient crystal rigs, maybe worthwhile if they already have your local repeaters crystalled up. Assume no CTCSS (PL) and assume these should be dirt cheap: Clegg FM-76 Midland 13-509 Yaesu FT-127 I'm sure I'm forgetting a few. The point, though, is there is plenty of old, used equipment, some of it very expensive indeed. Lack of available equipment is a rather lame excuse, not a reality. Just look at eBay if you don't believe me. Plenty of 222 rigs there, though I often don't like the prices they fetch. True story: I go to a hamfest in South Carolina with my triband IC-901A in the car. I'm told there are no 222 repeaters in the area. I check the SERA Journal, find a few in the area, one with truly wide coverage, and proceed to talk to folks on 222 on the way home where there are supposedly no repeaters. This was an excellent article. If you don't have activity in your area create it. Get on the band! Don't post here discouraging people and claiming there are few equipment choices or that they are all expensive. You may not have been aware what was out there, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Don't spread misinformation if you really don't know. 73, Caity K7VO No, options are not limited.
Reply to a comment by : WA2DTWon 2004-06-27

A very good article. 220 is a great band and certainly deserves more use and activity. We've already lost the bottom 2 mhz, and the rest of the band is threatened. The problem is a dearth of equipment, since this is exclusively a US band. It is hard (or impossible?) to find a multimode 220 rig. About the TH-F6. It is an excellent HT which affords access to 2M, 220 and 440, and multimode general coverage. In the palm of the hand. What can beat that? 73 Steve WA2DTW
Reply to a comment by : W7DJMon 2004-06-27

Not only is the TH-F6 a damn poor radio generally, in my opinion, but the miniscule power it outputs on 222 (220, 222, whatever it takes) hardly qualifies it as a "true" 222 radio. The fact is, even though you tried to justify your own arguement by posting some current models, the list was pretty short. None of those radios is really a good candidate for stuff like link or repeater/hilltop use. What I'm trying to say, is things are pretty limited.
Reply to a comment by : KF4VGXon 2004-06-27

Most hams on the first introduction to their tickets will buy a 2 meter HT. Why price and convenience. There are a few 440 and one 222 mhz repeaters here in this area. with only a handful of guys using them. (The same handful that hangs on two meters . These repeaters were linked together just this year because of no activity ,to a two meter repeater. Skywarn Repeater at that and still not that much activity .The main reason ( In This Area ) no activity on the bands. Hams will not pay ex-sum amount of cash for a radio where there is no activity? I agree with the poster that it would be great to have different ideas to use 222 mhz . But how to get amateur's to buy these radios is the question? I would love to experiment with the 900 / 1240 band and have started looking for used equipment Good post 73

Reply to a comment by : WA2BOB on 2004-06-27

Hi just want to say that you are right the 222 Band is more fun, N2QOT and myself WA2ROB use it alot went we want to get away from 2 meter we use simplex 223.500 and sometime we use the repeater 224.820 but we stay on simplex all the time.So give us a call ones in wail to see if we can here you we are on the south side of Long Island so try it I like to send QSL card to the station I take to. From Robert PS I have three radio that work on 222 Band Two are Kenwood 742A 2M/440B/222B KW 631A 2M/222B and a ADI AR 247 222B. And if anybody know where I can get a 222B Modular for a Kenwood 790A PSE. let me know E-mail is [email protected] again thank you.

WA2DTW2004-06-28
RE: Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
"It’s probably time to shut down most of these useless repeaters that dot the ham landscape in favor of new, high-speed data modes of communication. "
One or more of these repeaters could save hundreds of lives in an emergency. When the power and cell phones go down, emergency-powered repeaters can continue to work. And most mobile rigs can't read high-speed data modes of communication.
LET'S TAKE BACK 220!
73
Steve
WA2DTW
Reply to a comment by : K6BBCon 2004-06-27

It’s probably time to shut down most of these useless repeaters that dot the ham landscape in favor of new, high-speed data modes of communication. I might suggest hams use two meters and 220 and 440 for digital television broadcasting. As it is now, VHF and UHF is a near waste of space. I would also end the concept of closed repeaters. I mean, what kind of jerk puts up a repeater and tells his fellow hams they are not allowed on the machine. When I was first licensed in 1968, all this nonsense was not going on. Now there are so many closed repeaters, especially on 440, that are not being utilized, it’s criminal. I say, open them up or tear them down. And it’s time to make a 100 % effort to modernize out communication modes and yes, attract hams. Especially hams that are younger. The average age of an amateur is above 56, and that’s a tragedy for us all. I heard an old crotchety ham on 20 meters today complain because Field Day was interfering with his “medical net.” Now, what the heck is a “medical net.”? It sounds like a bunch of old goats complaining about their medical problem. Enough of that stuff. How are we to attract younger hams with that kind of conversation going on? K6BBC
Reply to a comment by : N5LBon 2004-06-27

I've never tried 220 but I recall when the only gear was either homebrew, or maybe surplus. As far as 2 meters is concerned, I don't hear any of the so called "CB" operators. The problem with 2 meters in this area is that I don't hear anyone. There are a lot of 2 meter repeaters in the area and no activity. I actually have more luck mobile on 52 in raising someone to chat with. Driving to Dayton this year my son and I used 52 much of the time and 3825 USB most of the way. 52 was great and we met a lot of good people. So was 3825, but thats another story. I suspect that most 2 meter repeaters are largely just robots now broadcasting a periodic ID. I many parts of the country I suspect that's the case. My son, a newly licensed no code tech from a few years ago has made a few contacts on 52 but none on any repeater unless it was with me. 220 might be fun to experiment with if there were others in range. Thanks for pointing out the commercial gear available. It does get one to thinking.
Reply to a comment by : W6EMRon 2004-06-27

Good topic; especially if you like 1.35M; otherwise the naysayers will abound. Unfortunately for Hams in other ITU regions, 222 Mhz is dedicated to public safety use........ Canadian Hams still have 220-222Mhz (IIRC) and are the primary users of the band. K7VO, good list of rigs...........some I have never heard of. There should be a mention made of ALL MODE rigs for this band........meteor scatter and SSB are used regularly by some op's. Personally, I have two TH-31BT's and a TH-31A (no PL) and an IC-37A mobile rig used as a base with a PC power supply fan running behind it to keep it cool. Five watts gets me almost 90 miles out to repeaters in the Bay area..........Even the little 1 watt TH-31's will make it; with a little white noise. It's a good band with good users..........most of the guys you find on there are Extra's........the Tech's stay pretty much with 2M and UHF.........Got to start somewhere! I think it is wrong to characterize 2 Meters as a place for "lids"............there are poor op's on any band............listen to 75 meters sometime; Riley could stay busy with those guys. I have met some great people on ALL of the bands I have operated, including 2M.............Just don't write off 222Mhz, it's a great alternative and it's NOT busy..........Use or lose...............
Reply to a comment by : K7VOon 2004-06-27

Hi, everyone, Here on the eastern fringe of the Raleigh/Durham, NC area I can get into nine 222MHz repeaters well. One, the 224.84 in Grifton, NC is as busy as any 2m repeater in the area. Two really local ones on the channel 47 tower near Louisburg (224.22 and 224.58) were, until recently, fairly quiet. An upsurge in interest in the band has made them moderately active repeaters with a good community of users. Another, 224.16, is probably the widest coverage repeater in the eastern half of the state on *any* band. No 2m or 70cm repeater can be used over such a wide area. Here is the key: if there are decent repeaters in your area that are hardly used, well... USE THEM! Get on, encourage friends to get on, and you'll be amazed how fast things pick up. I disagree about the Kenwood TH-F6A being a poor radio. Quite the contrary. Oh, and since when is 5W out of a handheld "miniscule"? Are you confusing the TH-F6A with the Yaesu VX-7R quad bander? That one only puts out 350mW on 222. I have a friend who has a VX-7R. The repeaters around here have such good coverage that he can hit them full queiting with his HT a dozen miles or more from the repeater site. His audio is excellent, too. There is no shortage of good HTs for 222. 222MHz is NOT only a U.S. band. The allocation is throughout region 2, meaning Canada, Mexico, and Latin/South America all have the band. Finally, you can pick up good, used, if somewhat older 222MHz mobile rigs for around $100. One friend found a KDK FM-4033R for all of $50 at a hamfest, so sometimes there can be incredibly cheap ways to get on the band. Here is some additional used equipment; 1. Late 80's to date, typically 25-35W out, with programmable CTCSS (PL) capability. Rigs are monoband mobiles unless otherwise specified: Azden PCS-7200 Icom IC-37A Icom IC-38A Icom IC-2330A (2m/222 dual bander) Icom IC-900 with UX-39 module (multibander) Icom IC-901A with UX-39 module (multibander) Icom IC-W21A (2m/222MHz dual band HT) Icom IC-u3A (HT) Kenwood TM-321A Kenwood TR-3530 Kenwood TM-621A (2m/222 dual bander) Kenwood TM-631A (2m/222 dual bander) Kenwood TH-31BT (HT) Ten Tec (T-Kit) 1230 Yaesu FT-33R (HT) Yaesu FT-311RM Here are some older rigs with single channel optional PL capability: Azden PCS-4200 Icom IC-03AT (HT) KDK FM-4033 Kenwood TH-31AT (HT) Yaesu FT-109R (HT) Here are some really old ones that should be quite inexpensive. No CTCSS (PL) capability unless you add an aftermarket board: Drake UV-3 (tribander) Icom IC-3A/IC-3AT (HT) Midland 13-513 Tempo S3 (HT) Yaesu FT-127R Memorizer Yaesu FT-103R (HT) Truly ancient crystal rigs, maybe worthwhile if they already have your local repeaters crystalled up. Assume no CTCSS (PL) and assume these should be dirt cheap: Clegg FM-76 Midland 13-509 Yaesu FT-127 I'm sure I'm forgetting a few. The point, though, is there is plenty of old, used equipment, some of it very expensive indeed. Lack of available equipment is a rather lame excuse, not a reality. Just look at eBay if you don't believe me. Plenty of 222 rigs there, though I often don't like the prices they fetch. True story: I go to a hamfest in South Carolina with my triband IC-901A in the car. I'm told there are no 222 repeaters in the area. I check the SERA Journal, find a few in the area, one with truly wide coverage, and proceed to talk to folks on 222 on the way home where there are supposedly no repeaters. This was an excellent article. If you don't have activity in your area create it. Get on the band! Don't post here discouraging people and claiming there are few equipment choices or that they are all expensive. You may not have been aware what was out there, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Don't spread misinformation if you really don't know. 73, Caity K7VO No, options are not limited.
Reply to a comment by : WA2DTWon 2004-06-27

A very good article. 220 is a great band and certainly deserves more use and activity. We've already lost the bottom 2 mhz, and the rest of the band is threatened. The problem is a dearth of equipment, since this is exclusively a US band. It is hard (or impossible?) to find a multimode 220 rig. About the TH-F6. It is an excellent HT which affords access to 2M, 220 and 440, and multimode general coverage. In the palm of the hand. What can beat that? 73 Steve WA2DTW
Reply to a comment by : W7DJMon 2004-06-27

Not only is the TH-F6 a damn poor radio generally, in my opinion, but the miniscule power it outputs on 222 (220, 222, whatever it takes) hardly qualifies it as a "true" 222 radio. The fact is, even though you tried to justify your own arguement by posting some current models, the list was pretty short. None of those radios is really a good candidate for stuff like link or repeater/hilltop use. What I'm trying to say, is things are pretty limited.
Reply to a comment by : KF4VGXon 2004-06-27

Most hams on the first introduction to their tickets will buy a 2 meter HT. Why price and convenience. There are a few 440 and one 222 mhz repeaters here in this area. with only a handful of guys using them. (The same handful that hangs on two meters . These repeaters were linked together just this year because of no activity ,to a two meter repeater. Skywarn Repeater at that and still not that much activity .The main reason ( In This Area ) no activity on the bands. Hams will not pay ex-sum amount of cash for a radio where there is no activity? I agree with the poster that it would be great to have different ideas to use 222 mhz . But how to get amateur's to buy these radios is the question? I would love to experiment with the 900 / 1240 band and have started looking for used equipment Good post 73

Reply to a comment by : WA2BOB on 2004-06-27

Hi just want to say that you are right the 222 Band is more fun, N2QOT and myself WA2ROB use it alot went we want to get away from 2 meter we use simplex 223.500 and sometime we use the repeater 224.820 but we stay on simplex all the time.So give us a call ones in wail to see if we can here you we are on the south side of Long Island so try it I like to send QSL card to the station I take to. From Robert PS I have three radio that work on 222 Band Two are Kenwood 742A 2M/440B/222B KW 631A 2M/222B and a ADI AR 247 222B. And if anybody know where I can get a 222B Modular for a Kenwood 790A PSE. let me know E-mail is [email protected] again thank you.

N2NZJ2004-06-28
RE: Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
I BELIEVE 222 MHZ IS A REAL GOOD BAND BUT IT IS JUST ANOTHER BAND THAT GOT FORGOTTEN IN THE SCHEME OF THINGS. I used to work it years ago it was really a great band i only wish more people kept up the interest in this band. and the equipment as well. IT NEEDS TO BE BROUGHT BACK TO LIFE. only interested hams all over the country can try and bring it back to life. I AM GOING TO GET SOME 222 MHZ GEAR AND DO THIS BAND AGAIN IN MY AREA. so hope to work some of you on 222 mhz. TOM 73
Reply to a comment by : WB4QNGon 2004-06-28

I thought when they gave novice voice on 222 it would really take off. I thought 2 meters would die and 220 would take over. How I was wrong. I guess the Novies either upgraded or moved on to something else. I am like a lot of the rest of the hams. Why spend the money. I have a 2 meter rig that is on right now. It has 20 repeaters in the memories plus 5 on simplex. The only thing I have heard in the last 30 minutes was the repeater ID's. With all this open space for local communication why do I want or need anymore. I noticed in the repeater direcctory that there are two 222 repeaters and 10 440 repeaters in my area but I think about 1/2 of the 440 repeaters are linked to two meters. My 2 cents worth. Terry WB4QNG

Reply to a comment by : VE7LGT on 2004-06-28

As far as Im concernered FM stands for Frequently Mundane. Lets face it 4 hours of working HF on field day was far more exiting than trying to find someone to ramble on about nothing on a VHF or UHF repeater. Now 2 meter & 440 SSB sporadic E , meteor or even moonbounce now that is where we should be puting our energy as far as FM repeaters on the 222 mhz band who needs them. There are too many repeaters siting idle on UHF and VHF already!! Larry VE7LGT

WB4QNG2004-06-28
RE: Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
I thought when they gave novice voice on 222 it would really take off. I thought 2 meters would die and 220 would take over. How I was wrong. I guess the Novies either upgraded or moved on to something else. I am like a lot of the rest of the hams. Why spend the money. I have a 2 meter rig that is on right now. It has 20 repeaters in the memories plus 5 on simplex. The only thing I have heard in the last 30 minutes was the repeater ID's. With all this open space for local communication why do I want or need anymore. I noticed in the repeater direcctory that there are two 222 repeaters and 10 440 repeaters in my area but I think about 1/2 of the 440 repeaters are linked to two meters. My 2 cents worth.
Terry
WB4QNG

Reply to a comment by : VE7LGT on 2004-06-28

As far as Im concernered FM stands for Frequently Mundane. Lets face it 4 hours of working HF on field day was far more exiting than trying to find someone to ramble on about nothing on a VHF or UHF repeater. Now 2 meter & 440 SSB sporadic E , meteor or even moonbounce now that is where we should be puting our energy as far as FM repeaters on the 222 mhz band who needs them. There are too many repeaters siting idle on UHF and VHF already!! Larry VE7LGT

WPE9JRL2004-06-28
Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
All this arguing over nothing.

I hardly hear any usage of 2M and 440 around here. So many repeaters and so little usage. And now we need to use 222?

Hey, wake up and smell the coffee....

Ham radio is a dying hobby with waning usage of all frequencies. Get real.

SideBandPat has spoken.
VE7LGT2004-06-28
Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
As far as Im concernered FM stands for Frequently Mundane. Lets face it 4 hours of working HF on field day was far more exiting than trying to find someone to ramble on about nothing on a VHF or UHF repeater. Now 2 meter & 440 SSB sporadic E , meteor or even moonbounce now that is where we should be puting our energy as far as FM repeaters on the 222 mhz band who needs them. There are too many repeaters siting idle on UHF and VHF already!!

Larry
VE7LGT
KJ7XJ2004-06-28
RE: Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
K6BBC wrote - "KJ7XJ, were did I compare 2 meters to CB?"

You didnt say that. Your quote was, " Two meters is not garbage. It’s a wasteland."

I took this as your response to K1VSR's quote, "I never go on 2 meters anymore. It's nothing but CBers. It's garbage."

Thus, I thought there was a comparison being made between the two. I applogize for any confusion.

Eric

Reply to a comment by : G7HEU on 2004-06-27

Shawn That interesting - even though we don't a have 222Mhz allocation here. If you can get a group of purchasers together it might might be worth contacting this company in the U.K. ( see bottom of page): http://www.garex.co.uk/pmr/pmr.htm And no, I have no connection with them. Best wishes Steve M0HEU / G7HEU.

KB3KHW2004-06-28
Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
Shawn has written a good article. At a personal level, I have a straightforward answer.

I don't use 222MHz because every time I tune 222MHz I hear nothing, even in frequencies where there's supposed to be a repeater. My HT covers 222MHz and I will not spend a penny more on 222MHz gear until I hear more activity in my area, or somebody proves that my HT's 1.25m RX is dead (it works well for three other bands though).

Mario
KB3KHW
K0RGR2004-06-28
Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
I would go along with the argument that there are too many repeaters on the air. I think this is a big part of the 'malaise' that's sunk in on the band in the last 20 years.

Too many repeaters means co-channel interference, which dictates that everybody use PL, which in turn makes it difficult for travellers. This leads to fewer people using 2 meters on the road. In this area, you can put up a co-channel repeater as long as it is 75 miles from the next one! It would be great if we could change the coordination rules to only allow one repeater within a given grid square on the same channel, at least here in flat country. Then, we could stipulate that all repeaters in the grid square will use a certain PL tone, which would be easy to look up.

Too many repeaters means that our meager ham population is spread too thinly across many machines - which also results in less activity. Maybe ARRL could start a program for clubs and individuals to donate their unused repeaters? These machines could then be shipped overseas to groups actually needing
the equipment. (Yes, the duplexers are too heavy to ship, but that problem can be overcome). Or, they could be offered at a low price to domestic clubs in areas where there are no repeaters today, or as backups for existing high level machines.

K6VHP2004-06-28
Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
You said: "An even bigger bonus is that you don't have digital paging systems and endless other commercial transmitters spewing spurious garbage into the ham band like you do on 144 MHz in a lot of areas."

What many folks don't realize, is that probably 99% of the commercial interference that people hear on the 2 meter band, is not a problem with the commercial folks, but is in fact a problem with the *CRAP* receivers in most amateur-grade 2 meter rigs available. It's called front-end overload! Try programming up a motorola VHF commercial rig on your 2 meter frequencies with the same antenna setup, and you will see what I'm talking about. The typical 2 meter rig has no front end selectivity in the receiver. This problem can vary widely between rigs and manaufacturers, but it is a problem. The commercial versions of the same brands of equipment that we buy for ham use have much better front ends than the amateur equivelents. I'd gladly pay more bucks for a better front end. 2 meter gear is pretty cheap these days, so whats another 10 or 20 percent or so for much higher grade stuff? My 2 bits worth.. 73

NE0P2004-06-28
Weak signal rigs
There have been 2 rigs that included 222 ssb/cw. One is the Icom 375A which is a 222 all mode monobander. It is difficult to find and commands a good price.

The other is a Yaesu FT736R which has a 222 module as an option. Puts out 25 watts. Used to have one, and it is a great radio to do VHF/UHF on. You can also get a 1.2ghz module for it. Yaesu really dropped the ball with the FT847. Terrible performance, and no optional modules. Bad replacement for the FT736.

The Kenwood TS2000X will do 1.2g out of the box. The 910H will do 1.2Ghz with the optional module.

You can also find used Microwave MOdules 222mhz transverters from time to time. Downeast Microwave makes a radio/transverter interface that makes it very easy to hook up a transverter to any 10 meter rig.

AE6OX2004-06-28
RE: Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
I doubt we'll ever see Icom/Kenwood/Yaesu produce a new 222 MHz transceiver. Perhaps TenTec or Elecraft (or someone) might see the potential in a low power multimode transceiver for 222, either a monobander or incorporated into a multibander.
Reply to a comment by : KC8VWMon 2004-06-28

Many postings here indicate the idea that we have many underutilized bands. I have 220 capability but I never seem to hear anything happening on the popular 2 meter band, never mind the 440 and 220 bands. 440 seems to be nothing more than an array of various "privatized" links for cross band 2 meter repeater operation in my area. We used to have a 440 echolink repeater there, but after the owner became a SK,(WB8ONA)- it went down never to return. I was considering the idea of "carrying the flame" by creating a new echolink repeater on that same frequency but there seems to be alot of unclear questions and legalities about cross linking - running repeater equipment in any unattended capacity or modes. I have scanned 220 regularly with zero results and not a single voice is ever heard in my area. In fact, I have yet to actually carry on an actual conversation with another amateur on 220. There simply are no 220 repeaters to be had in my area. My ARRL repeater directory says they are there, but they are no longer in operation. This also holds true for the 6 meter band listings. However, at least 6 meter band openings provide the opportunity to hear some from time to time. I have considered putting up a repeater myself. I think the last thing I would want to do is consider putting up yet another 2 meter "ID Beacon" repeater with no activity on it. We have some 2 meter repeaters in my area that have never had any activity on them at all. Makes for a rather expensive 2 meter beacon ID'er if you ask me !? I think we need to stop putting up more 2 meter repeaters and shift our focus on some of the other bands. 2 meters is simply maxed out as far as repeaters are concerned. Anyone out there considering putting up a new repeater in their area should seriously consider doing this on 6 /220/ or 440 instead (myself included) 73 Charles - KC8VWM
Reply to a comment by : NJ0Eon 2004-06-28

my experience on 2m in central texas is that the operators are fine generally, but the level of activity is lower than it was in the late 70's & early 80's. 73 scott nj0e
Reply to a comment by : N3QTon 2004-06-28

Hello: VHF-UHF FM: 10m 6m 2m 1.25m 70cm 33cm I have essentially talked to myself on each of these bands while mobile. 2m "FM" is the most frequently used and monitored. SSB: When I want to feel even more lonely, I switch to SSB. I have had the most luck with 10m SSB. My observation has been that the conversation topics monitored never seem to change. I blame myself for my inability to assertatively direct the conversation to new and interesting topics. Bad operators: We are all amateurs involved in technology. I suspect the introverted, non-people skill sterotype is true in my case. Lead by example and "TOASTMASTERS" for everyone!!! I digress, turning the HAM radio off seems to be the easy way out. Unfortunately, that leads to the environment where the most experienced elmers are listening to public radio on the way to work. ..or moving to 222MHz. The fine examples of radio operation move on, and the skills are not transferred to the new folks. Skills are perishable. Preserve the legacy.

Reply to a comment by : G7HEU on 2004-06-27

Shawn That interesting - even though we don't a have 222Mhz allocation here. If you can get a group of purchasers together it might might be worth contacting this company in the U.K. ( see bottom of page): http://www.garex.co.uk/pmr/pmr.htm And no, I have no connection with them. Best wishes Steve M0HEU / G7HEU.

KC8VWM2004-06-28
RE: Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?

Many postings here indicate the idea that we have many underutilized bands.

I have 220 capability but I never seem to hear anything happening on the popular 2 meter band, never mind the 440 and 220 bands.

440 seems to be nothing more than an array of various "privatized" links for cross band 2 meter repeater operation in my area. We used to have a 440 echolink repeater there, but after the owner became a SK,(WB8ONA)- it went down never to return.

I was considering the idea of "carrying the flame" by creating a new echolink repeater on that same frequency but there seems to be alot of unclear questions and legalities about cross linking - running repeater equipment in any unattended capacity or modes.

I have scanned 220 regularly with zero results and not a single voice is ever heard in my area.

In fact, I have yet to actually carry on an actual conversation with another amateur on 220.

There simply are no 220 repeaters to be had in my area. My ARRL repeater directory says they are there, but they are no longer in operation. This also holds true for the 6 meter band listings. However, at least 6 meter band openings provide the opportunity to hear some from time to time.

I have considered putting up a repeater myself. I think the last thing I would want to do is consider putting up yet another 2 meter "ID Beacon" repeater with no activity on it. We have some 2 meter repeaters in my area that have never had any activity on them at all. Makes for a rather expensive 2 meter beacon ID'er if you ask me !?

I think we need to stop putting up more 2 meter repeaters and shift our focus on some of the other bands. 2 meters is simply maxed out as far as repeaters are concerned.

Anyone out there considering putting up a new repeater in their area should seriously consider doing this on 6 /220/ or 440 instead (myself included)

73

Charles - KC8VWM


Reply to a comment by : NJ0Eon 2004-06-28

my experience on 2m in central texas is that the operators are fine generally, but the level of activity is lower than it was in the late 70's & early 80's. 73 scott nj0e
Reply to a comment by : N3QTon 2004-06-28

Hello: VHF-UHF FM: 10m 6m 2m 1.25m 70cm 33cm I have essentially talked to myself on each of these bands while mobile. 2m "FM" is the most frequently used and monitored. SSB: When I want to feel even more lonely, I switch to SSB. I have had the most luck with 10m SSB. My observation has been that the conversation topics monitored never seem to change. I blame myself for my inability to assertatively direct the conversation to new and interesting topics. Bad operators: We are all amateurs involved in technology. I suspect the introverted, non-people skill sterotype is true in my case. Lead by example and "TOASTMASTERS" for everyone!!! I digress, turning the HAM radio off seems to be the easy way out. Unfortunately, that leads to the environment where the most experienced elmers are listening to public radio on the way to work. ..or moving to 222MHz. The fine examples of radio operation move on, and the skills are not transferred to the new folks. Skills are perishable. Preserve the legacy.

Reply to a comment by : G7HEU on 2004-06-27

Shawn That interesting - even though we don't a have 222Mhz allocation here. If you can get a group of purchasers together it might might be worth contacting this company in the U.K. ( see bottom of page): http://www.garex.co.uk/pmr/pmr.htm And no, I have no connection with them. Best wishes Steve M0HEU / G7HEU.

K6BBC2004-06-28
RE: Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
KJ7XJ, were did I compare 2 meters to CB? With all of Amateur Radio's current challenges, there is absolutely no comparison of the two.
Reply to a comment by : K6BBCon 2004-06-28

The technology exist to link repeaters cross-country. Where are these repeaters? In Southern California I can find no cross-country linked repeaters. Are there any? If there were, I’d try them out. Does anybody know? And I’m not talking about regional linked repeater – I’m talking cross-country. I have used two linked systems in So. Cal; the Condor system on 220 and the CARS system on 6 meters. Both are great systems and both are useless as nobody talks. I got so frustrated one evening on CARS that I did a rant on the subject of this great system where nobody talks. That said, most time when hams talk on the world above 50 they sound like stupid jerks. Well, after my rant, a very nice chap came back to me. He was quite happy to chat and had been thinking the same thing. The history of VHF and UHF has always been checkered. In the early days, before the influx with commercial gear, those bands were populated by techie, wannabe police/safety monitor types. These “folks” had the worse people skills one could imagine. Very often, the new entry on to the band would be ignored. Unfortunately, this lineage still exists in some genetic code that has been carried through generation to generation. Many new hams are infected with this attitude without the slightest awareness what dark past it slithered from. What many don’t realize, the 10 code was predominantly used in those days. This was not due to converted cbers, but rather the desire to talk like a policeman. So, the next time you hear the 10 code on 2 meters, remember where the origin springs from.
Reply to a comment by : NJ0Eon 2004-06-28

my experience on 2m in central texas is that the operators are fine generally, but the level of activity is lower than it was in the late 70's & early 80's. 73 scott nj0e
Reply to a comment by : N3QTon 2004-06-28

Hello: VHF-UHF FM: 10m 6m 2m 1.25m 70cm 33cm I have essentially talked to myself on each of these bands while mobile. 2m "FM" is the most frequently used and monitored. SSB: When I want to feel even more lonely, I switch to SSB. I have had the most luck with 10m SSB. My observation has been that the conversation topics monitored never seem to change. I blame myself for my inability to assertatively direct the conversation to new and interesting topics. Bad operators: We are all amateurs involved in technology. I suspect the introverted, non-people skill sterotype is true in my case. Lead by example and "TOASTMASTERS" for everyone!!! I digress, turning the HAM radio off seems to be the easy way out. Unfortunately, that leads to the environment where the most experienced elmers are listening to public radio on the way to work. ..or moving to 222MHz. The fine examples of radio operation move on, and the skills are not transferred to the new folks. Skills are perishable. Preserve the legacy.

Reply to a comment by : G7HEU on 2004-06-27

Shawn That interesting - even though we don't a have 222Mhz allocation here. If you can get a group of purchasers together it might might be worth contacting this company in the U.K. ( see bottom of page): http://www.garex.co.uk/pmr/pmr.htm And no, I have no connection with them. Best wishes Steve M0HEU / G7HEU.

K6BBC2004-06-28
RE: Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
The technology exist to link repeaters cross-country. Where are these repeaters? In Southern California I can find no cross-country linked repeaters. Are there any? If there were, I’d try them out. Does anybody know? And I’m not talking about regional linked repeater – I’m talking cross-country.

I have used two linked systems in So. Cal; the Condor system on 220 and the CARS system on 6 meters. Both are great systems and both are useless as nobody talks. I got so frustrated one evening on CARS that I did a rant on the subject of this great system where nobody talks. That said, most time when hams talk on the world above 50 they sound like stupid jerks. Well, after my rant, a very nice chap came back to me. He was quite happy to chat and had been thinking the same thing.

The history of VHF and UHF has always been checkered. In the early days, before the influx with commercial gear, those bands were populated by techie, wannabe police/safety monitor types. These “folks” had the worse people skills one could imagine. Very often, the new entry on to the band would be ignored. Unfortunately, this lineage still exists in some genetic code that has been carried through generation to generation. Many new hams are infected with this attitude without the slightest awareness what dark past it slithered from. What many don’t realize, the 10 code was predominantly used in those days. This was not due to converted cbers, but rather the desire to talk like a policeman. So, the next time you hear the 10 code on 2 meters, remember where the origin springs from.
Reply to a comment by : NJ0Eon 2004-06-28

my experience on 2m in central texas is that the operators are fine generally, but the level of activity is lower than it was in the late 70's & early 80's. 73 scott nj0e
Reply to a comment by : N3QTon 2004-06-28

Hello: VHF-UHF FM: 10m 6m 2m 1.25m 70cm 33cm I have essentially talked to myself on each of these bands while mobile. 2m "FM" is the most frequently used and monitored. SSB: When I want to feel even more lonely, I switch to SSB. I have had the most luck with 10m SSB. My observation has been that the conversation topics monitored never seem to change. I blame myself for my inability to assertatively direct the conversation to new and interesting topics. Bad operators: We are all amateurs involved in technology. I suspect the introverted, non-people skill sterotype is true in my case. Lead by example and "TOASTMASTERS" for everyone!!! I digress, turning the HAM radio off seems to be the easy way out. Unfortunately, that leads to the environment where the most experienced elmers are listening to public radio on the way to work. ..or moving to 222MHz. The fine examples of radio operation move on, and the skills are not transferred to the new folks. Skills are perishable. Preserve the legacy.

Reply to a comment by : G7HEU on 2004-06-27

Shawn That interesting - even though we don't a have 222Mhz allocation here. If you can get a group of purchasers together it might might be worth contacting this company in the U.K. ( see bottom of page): http://www.garex.co.uk/pmr/pmr.htm And no, I have no connection with them. Best wishes Steve M0HEU / G7HEU.

KJ7XJ2004-06-28
Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
I was was licensed in the mid 80s and lived in So. Cal. K6BBC has valid points when he mentions 2m being much like CB. I found that true in LA, but not so much after I moved out of the area.
Becasue of this, I migrated to 220Mhz and in 1987 started talking on 223.78 which was a repeater in a garage in Palos Verdes. Today,that same system has many linked repeaters throughout Southern/Northern California and Nevada. The WALA system is a perfect example of what a system can be if enough people show the intrest (and finances) to get a system, or in this case, multi-linked system operational.
I also sold my 220Mhz eqpt in the early 90s when I moved out of state and found no activity. I wish I still had it now as the Seattle area is slowly becoming active.
Eric
K3UD2004-06-28
RE: Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
In my almost 40 years as a ham I have often either heard or seen in print the phrase "220...Usit It Or Lose It". The truth is, except for some pockets of use around the country, we do not really use it.

The closest we ever got was in the 70s when 2 meter repeater frequency pairs were in short supply in many areas of the country, and again for a short time after Novices received 220 privileges which sparked the installation of a number of repeaters.

By and large, the manufacturers have largely ignored this band or have made it so expensive to get on it that most hams just balked. The most popular rig today may well be the Icom 706 MKIIG and it does not have the band on it. I guess the addition of 220 really would not have been a strong selling point.

I had a piece of converted surplus that I used on the band in the mid 60s running AM. The Mt. Airy VHF Society used to run regular AM nets on 220 (and may still) and a number of hams around the Philadelphia were active.

There was also quite a bit of VHF contest activity from the east coast on 220 back then, most times eclipsing 432 activity. Much of the 220 activity seemed to go away in the 70s with advent of 2 meter repeaters and the decline of AM on VHF.

I think 220 will reamin a "niche" band as there is not enough support infastructure and lets face it, interest, to keep it populated.

73
George
K3UD
Reply to a comment by : NJ0Eon 2004-06-28

my experience on 2m in central texas is that the operators are fine generally, but the level of activity is lower than it was in the late 70's & early 80's. 73 scott nj0e
Reply to a comment by : N3QTon 2004-06-28

Hello: VHF-UHF FM: 10m 6m 2m 1.25m 70cm 33cm I have essentially talked to myself on each of these bands while mobile. 2m "FM" is the most frequently used and monitored. SSB: When I want to feel even more lonely, I switch to SSB. I have had the most luck with 10m SSB. My observation has been that the conversation topics monitored never seem to change. I blame myself for my inability to assertatively direct the conversation to new and interesting topics. Bad operators: We are all amateurs involved in technology. I suspect the introverted, non-people skill sterotype is true in my case. Lead by example and "TOASTMASTERS" for everyone!!! I digress, turning the HAM radio off seems to be the easy way out. Unfortunately, that leads to the environment where the most experienced elmers are listening to public radio on the way to work. ..or moving to 222MHz. The fine examples of radio operation move on, and the skills are not transferred to the new folks. Skills are perishable. Preserve the legacy.

Reply to a comment by : G7HEU on 2004-06-27

Shawn That interesting - even though we don't a have 222Mhz allocation here. If you can get a group of purchasers together it might might be worth contacting this company in the U.K. ( see bottom of page): http://www.garex.co.uk/pmr/pmr.htm And no, I have no connection with them. Best wishes Steve M0HEU / G7HEU.

NJ0E2004-06-28
RE: Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
my experience on 2m in central texas is that the
operators are fine generally, but the level of
activity is lower than it was in the late 70's &
early 80's.

73
scott nj0e
Reply to a comment by : N3QTon 2004-06-28

Hello: VHF-UHF FM: 10m 6m 2m 1.25m 70cm 33cm I have essentially talked to myself on each of these bands while mobile. 2m "FM" is the most frequently used and monitored. SSB: When I want to feel even more lonely, I switch to SSB. I have had the most luck with 10m SSB. My observation has been that the conversation topics monitored never seem to change. I blame myself for my inability to assertatively direct the conversation to new and interesting topics. Bad operators: We are all amateurs involved in technology. I suspect the introverted, non-people skill sterotype is true in my case. Lead by example and "TOASTMASTERS" for everyone!!! I digress, turning the HAM radio off seems to be the easy way out. Unfortunately, that leads to the environment where the most experienced elmers are listening to public radio on the way to work. ..or moving to 222MHz. The fine examples of radio operation move on, and the skills are not transferred to the new folks. Skills are perishable. Preserve the legacy.

Reply to a comment by : G7HEU on 2004-06-27

Shawn That interesting - even though we don't a have 222Mhz allocation here. If you can get a group of purchasers together it might might be worth contacting this company in the U.K. ( see bottom of page): http://www.garex.co.uk/pmr/pmr.htm And no, I have no connection with them. Best wishes Steve M0HEU / G7HEU.

K0RGR2004-06-28
Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
I think it's all been said here.

When I lived in the Bay Area, our radio club got a special deal on 220 rigs and a repeater, so most of us had them. 220 became our primary ARES frequency, in part because more of our members had the 220 rigs than 2 meter rigs, and partly due to the inherent privacy of this band (no scanners).

Midland, Regency, Clegg and ICOM IC3-AT HT's were very popular. All of the available 220 repeater slots were taken out there, and some of the repeaters were very active. This was the band where the most far-out, innovative things were done.

Someone else mentioned the Condor Connection wide-area link. The most active repeater in our area got occasional use of a satellite 'wormhole' which they used to link us to busy systems in other parts of the country - in other words, Echolink without the Internet. It was cool walking around with an HT talking to people thousands of miles away particulalary in 1973!

We had a 220 repeater co-located on the same tower with 2 meter and 440 repeaters, all of comparable power and antennas. We found that 220 had a substantial advantage in penetrating the canyons out there in California.

Hamtronics still sells 222 Mhz. transmitter and receiver kits. Sadly, they no longer offer their newer synthesized rigs as kits, only the older crystal controlled models. The synthesized rigs will run you about $400 for the receiver and transmitter boards assembled and tested. The crystal rigs are cheaper, but the cost of a set of crystals pretty well eats up the difference. And they have stopped selling the 220 version of their transverter, too.

There isn't much activity here in the Upper Midwest. I had a 222 SSB rig (FT-736R) which I used to make distant contacts in contests, but I never worked my own grid square! I found that when 2 was open for tropo scatter, 222 was usually better over the same path.
N3QT2004-06-28
RE: Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
Hello:

VHF-UHF

FM: 10m 6m 2m 1.25m 70cm 33cm

I have essentially talked to myself on each of these bands while mobile. 2m "FM" is the most frequently used and monitored.

SSB:
When I want to feel even more lonely, I switch to SSB. I have had the most luck with 10m SSB.

My observation has been that the conversation topics monitored never seem to change. I blame myself for my inability to assertatively direct the conversation to new and interesting topics.

Bad operators: We are all amateurs involved in technology. I suspect the introverted, non-people skill sterotype is true in my case. Lead by example and "TOASTMASTERS" for everyone!!!

I digress, turning the HAM radio off seems to be the easy way out. Unfortunately, that leads to the environment where the most experienced elmers are listening to public radio on the way to work. ..or moving to 222MHz. The fine examples of radio operation move on, and the skills are not transferred to the new folks.

Skills are perishable. Preserve the legacy.

Reply to a comment by : G7HEU on 2004-06-27

Shawn That interesting - even though we don't a have 222Mhz allocation here. If you can get a group of purchasers together it might might be worth contacting this company in the U.K. ( see bottom of page): http://www.garex.co.uk/pmr/pmr.htm And no, I have no connection with them. Best wishes Steve M0HEU / G7HEU.

W3RAZ2004-06-28
Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
The VX-7R also has 222, even if it's only 300 mW.
UT7UX2004-06-28
Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
We have not 222MHz band in Europe so 70cm is the only one way to escape. On 144 same problems: intermods, CBiers and other LIDs...
KR4BD2004-06-28
RE: Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
The 222 band is NOT just a US band. It IS available in Canada and most of North, Central and South America. True, it is not available in Asia (Japan) where most of the radios are made. This is probably why the band is generally not included in all the Mega-band radios now available.

I've been on the band since 1977 and back then, rigs were available at reasonable prices. A club I belonged to at the time bought a dozen or so Clegg FM-76 rigs direct from Clegg for $99 (in bulk) plus the crystals. It was part of a promotion where we also got a repeater for a very reasonable price. I still have mine and it still works.

Tom, KR4BD
Reply to a comment by : K6BBCon 2004-06-27

I have driven most of the UD west of the Mississippi. 6 and 2 meters is vastly underutilized. That is just a fact. And, it’s getting worse. K6BBC
Reply to a comment by : KF4VGXon 2004-06-27

I live in So. Cal. Two meters is as dead as everywhere else. In fact, I have never read a post where anyone stepped forward and complained 2 was crowded. Never. Not once. K6BBC Thank you, K6BBC, for your willingness to give away the bands I use and enjoy most. I am an Extra class operator. I've been licensed for 20 years this summer,. I am active on all bands from 40m to 70cm plus 23cm. Who are you to, based on your view from Southern California, to judge activity in the rest of the country? 6m, 2m, and 222 are all very active here, thankyouverymuch. You don't like a band? That's fine. Don't use it. Don't assume nobody else is using it. No activity in your area? Well... START SOME! You and your friends have a wide open 2m band. Use it! 73, Caity K7VO The man made an observation in Southern Cal. No where near your area .How did you read so much into his statement. GeZZZZZ ! Take a chill pill.
Reply to a comment by : K7VOon 2004-06-27

Thank you, K6BBC, for your willingness to give away the bands I use and enjoy most. I am an Extra class operator. I've been licensed for 20 years this summer,. I am active on all bands from 40m to 70cm plus 23cm. Who are you to, based on your view from Southern California, to judge activity in the rest of the country? 6m, 2m, and 222 are all very active here, thankyouverymuch. You don't like a band? That's fine. Don't use it. Don't assume nobody else is using it. No activity in your area? Well... START SOME! You and your friends have a wide open 2m band. Use it! 73, Caity K7VO
Reply to a comment by : K6BBCon 2004-06-27

Thank you KG5JJ – you have proven might point marvelously. K6BBC

Reply to a comment by : AC5CH on 2004-06-27

Great article! 222 is a great band - Especially on SSB!

K6BBC2004-06-27
RE: Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
I have driven most of the UD west of the Mississippi. 6 and 2 meters is vastly underutilized. That is just a fact. And, it’s getting worse.

K6BBC
Reply to a comment by : KF4VGXon 2004-06-27

I live in So. Cal. Two meters is as dead as everywhere else. In fact, I have never read a post where anyone stepped forward and complained 2 was crowded. Never. Not once. K6BBC Thank you, K6BBC, for your willingness to give away the bands I use and enjoy most. I am an Extra class operator. I've been licensed for 20 years this summer,. I am active on all bands from 40m to 70cm plus 23cm. Who are you to, based on your view from Southern California, to judge activity in the rest of the country? 6m, 2m, and 222 are all very active here, thankyouverymuch. You don't like a band? That's fine. Don't use it. Don't assume nobody else is using it. No activity in your area? Well... START SOME! You and your friends have a wide open 2m band. Use it! 73, Caity K7VO The man made an observation in Southern Cal. No where near your area .How did you read so much into his statement. GeZZZZZ ! Take a chill pill.
Reply to a comment by : K7VOon 2004-06-27

Thank you, K6BBC, for your willingness to give away the bands I use and enjoy most. I am an Extra class operator. I've been licensed for 20 years this summer,. I am active on all bands from 40m to 70cm plus 23cm. Who are you to, based on your view from Southern California, to judge activity in the rest of the country? 6m, 2m, and 222 are all very active here, thankyouverymuch. You don't like a band? That's fine. Don't use it. Don't assume nobody else is using it. No activity in your area? Well... START SOME! You and your friends have a wide open 2m band. Use it! 73, Caity K7VO
Reply to a comment by : K6BBCon 2004-06-27

Thank you KG5JJ – you have proven might point marvelously. K6BBC

Reply to a comment by : AC5CH on 2004-06-27

Great article! 222 is a great band - Especially on SSB!

KF4VGX2004-06-27
RE: Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
I live in So. Cal. Two meters is as dead as everywhere else. In fact, I have never read a post where anyone stepped forward and complained 2 was crowded. Never. Not once.

K6BBC



Thank you, K6BBC, for your willingness to give away the bands I use and enjoy most. I am an Extra class operator. I've been licensed for 20 years this summer,. I am active on all bands from 40m to 70cm plus 23cm. Who are you to, based on your view from Southern California, to judge activity in the rest of the country? 6m, 2m, and 222 are all very active here, thankyouverymuch.

You don't like a band? That's fine. Don't use it. Don't assume nobody else is using it.

No activity in your area? Well... START SOME! You and your friends have a wide open 2m band. Use it!

73,
Caity
K7VO

The man made an observation in Southern Cal. No where near your area .How did you read so much into his statement. GeZZZZZ ! Take a chill pill.
Reply to a comment by : K7VOon 2004-06-27

Thank you, K6BBC, for your willingness to give away the bands I use and enjoy most. I am an Extra class operator. I've been licensed for 20 years this summer,. I am active on all bands from 40m to 70cm plus 23cm. Who are you to, based on your view from Southern California, to judge activity in the rest of the country? 6m, 2m, and 222 are all very active here, thankyouverymuch. You don't like a band? That's fine. Don't use it. Don't assume nobody else is using it. No activity in your area? Well... START SOME! You and your friends have a wide open 2m band. Use it! 73, Caity K7VO
Reply to a comment by : K6BBCon 2004-06-27

Thank you KG5JJ – you have proven might point marvelously. K6BBC

Reply to a comment by : AC5CH on 2004-06-27

Great article! 222 is a great band - Especially on SSB!

K7VO2004-06-27
RE: Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
Why no 222 SSB/CW gear? Well... it simply didn't sell when it was available. I remember HRO closing out the IC-375A for $795 and getting no takers for a very long time. Japan alone has more than twice the ham population of the U.S. and a much lower drop out rate for new hams. The U.S. and Canadian market alone cannot make such a rig profitable.

Having said that... transverters by Down East Microwave and SSB Electronics are made in the USA and are very readily available... but they are expensive. Used Microwave Modules transverters also turn up from time to time. The Yaesu FT-736R with the 222 module turns up regularly. Ask the folks who run 222 SSB on the VHF reflector out of Stanford University about it. They'll be a great source of information.

The point is... if there is a will there is a way. For under $100, as I and others have pointed out, you can get on 222 with a used FM rig.

I am also amazed how those who have never used a given band feel they have enough knowledge to dismiss it.

73,
Caity
K7VO

Reply to a comment by : G7HEU on 2004-06-27

Shawn That interesting - even though we don't a have 222Mhz allocation here. If you can get a group of purchasers together it might might be worth contacting this company in the U.K. ( see bottom of page): http://www.garex.co.uk/pmr/pmr.htm And no, I have no connection with them. Best wishes Steve M0HEU / G7HEU.

K7VO2004-06-27
RE: Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
Thank you, K6BBC, for your willingness to give away the bands I use and enjoy most. I am an Extra class operator. I've been licensed for 20 years this summer,. I am active on all bands from 40m to 70cm plus 23cm. Who are you to, based on your view from Southern California, to judge activity in the rest of the country? 6m, 2m, and 222 are all very active here, thankyouverymuch.

You don't like a band? That's fine. Don't use it. Don't assume nobody else is using it.

No activity in your area? Well... START SOME! You and your friends have a wide open 2m band. Use it!

73,
Caity
K7VO
Reply to a comment by : K6BBCon 2004-06-27

Thank you KG5JJ – you have proven might point marvelously. K6BBC

Reply to a comment by : AC5CH on 2004-06-27

Great article! 222 is a great band - Especially on SSB!

W9GRN2004-06-27
RE: Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
Great band to play with.Use it a lot around my area.

Reply to a comment by : AC5CH on 2004-06-27

Great article! 222 is a great band - Especially on SSB!

K6BBC2004-06-27
RE: Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
Thank you KG5JJ – you have proven might point marvelously.

K6BBC

Reply to a comment by : AC5CH on 2004-06-27

Great article! 222 is a great band - Especially on SSB!

AC5CH2004-06-27
Why Aren't More of Us Using 222 MHz?
Great article! 222 is a great band - Especially on SSB!

Sours: https://www.eham.net/article/8625
222 MHz Low Noise Preamplifier

Select Spectrum offers licensed spectrum in the 220-222 MHz band. The band is ideal for Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA), Internet of Thing (IoT) / Machine-to-Machine (M2M), and Positive Train Control (PTC) applications and is predominantly used by passenger & freight rail lines, IoT/M2M operators and electric utilities.

Please see the information below and review our 220-222 MHz band Spectrum Summary to learn more about the availability of this spectrum and further details regarding compatible equipment and technical specifications. To view our Spectrum Summary, please click the link below to view and download (PDF).

Spectrum SummaryUtilities SummaryRail Summary

  1. Executive Summary

    For an Executive Summary overview of opportunities available in the 220-222 MHz band, including more information on the markets covered by the portfolio, please click the link below to view and download our 220 MHz Spectrum Information Memorandum (PDF).

    Spectrum Information Memorandum

  2. Regional Market Offering Summary

    For a Regional Market Offering Summary of opportunities available in the 220-222 MHz band, please click the link(s) below for the market area(s) of interest to view and download our Regional SIMs (PDF).

More Information

VIE Technologies’ innovative piece of Intellectual Property (IP), Enhanced Range Intelligent Communications Architecture (ERICA), is designed for industrial, critical infrastructure, and agricultural Internet of Things (IoT) applications that can significantly benefit from a long range, low cost, and scalable low data rate solution. ERICA is tailored to leverage 5-kHz wide channels within the 220-222 MHz band, which is the optimal choice to implement these very long communication ranges due to the band’s superior propagation and penetration characteristics. Overall, this is a simple, stable and capacity-efficient approach to the Low Power Wide Area Network (LP-WAN) IoT network model.

ERICA-Enhanced Range Intelligent Communications ArchitectureERICA 220 MHz Band Technology Prospectus

Request a Quote

Sours: https://www.selectspectrum.com/available-spectrum/narrowband/220-222mhz

Mhz 222

ARRL

Objective:  Work as many stationsas possible on the 222 MHz through 241 GHz bands using any allowable mode. A station in a specific grid locator may be contacted from the same location only once on each band, regardless of mode.

Dates:  The first full weekend of August, (August 7-8, 2021)

Contest Period:  Begins at 1800 UTC Saturday and ending at 1759 UTC Sunday.

Contest Rules are now maintained as a single downloadable document (See "Full Contest Rules" below).

For contest information contact[email protected]or (860) 594-0232


Log Submission Deadline

Logs are due within FOURTEEN (14) days after the event is over. Logs must be submitted online our web app atcontest-log-submission.arrl.org/

Logs that have beensubmitted electronicallyare listed on theLogs Receivedpage. Click the contest name to see a list of submitted logs sorted by call sign and club name.

Online Log Submission-Logs must be submitted in the Cabrillo format via our web app atcontest-log-submission.arrl.org.

If you wish to convert your log into a Cabrillo formatted log for electronic submission, visitwww.b4h.net/cabforms/and select the event of interest. You can input your log data which will be converted to a Cabrillo formatted log for you (it will generate a log and return it to you), and then you can in turn submit your Cabrillo log online via the web app atcontest-log-submission.arrl.org/.


Awards:

Downloadable Certificates will be awarded in the following categories athttps://contests.arrl.org/certificates.php

Top Single-operator, Fixed score in each222 MHz and Up Distance ContestRegion.

Top Multi-operator, Fixed score in each222 MHz and Up Distance ContestRegion where significant effort or competition exists.

Top Rover score in each222 MHz and Up Distance ContestRegion

Top Club score in each222 MHz and Up Distance ContestRegion

Top Small Team score in each222 MHz and Up Distance ContestRegion

Top Large Team score in each222 MHz and Up Distance ContestRegion

Sours: http://www.arrl.org/222-mhz-and-up-distance-contest
CDM1550ls+ 216-222 MHz with GPS

.

Similar news:

.



1172 1173 1174 1175 1176