开云体育

I assume ETCC is a coordination body. One of the issues we have in the states is that Icom calling them Data Repeaters doesn't actually make them repeaters (defined as simultaneous transmit and receive). Technically, they're access points and only require a single frequency.

Most repeater coordination bodies will only coordinate actual repeaters using frequency pairs. The FCC rules specifically allow for only coordination of repeaters and auxiliary stations. This has been fine historically because packet digipeaters need to be on the same frequency as the rest of the network so need no protection from interference.

Without FCC authority to "coordinate" these access points, we still have the ability to "register" them. This allows them to be published in the ARRL directory and be organized locally to minimize the interference potential.

I don't know of many coordination bodies who have taken any steps to address coordination of these systems. Some may just go along with the repeater nomenclature and ignore the technical design.

I was never sure what the issue was with our group. There seemed to be some anti-DSTAR sentiment that could have just been resistance to anything new. It could also have been that this would require they actually had to do something with the 23cm band if these systems became popular. My solution was to become the 23cm band chair for the group and push these issues from the inside. It may be the only solution.

Scott N7SS