Unfortunately until the FCC changes the rules and eliminates the requirements that hams both positively control their transmit frequency and monitor before transmitting Trunking is not a legal option for ham radio in the US.? These days so many repeaters (including my own) sit idle much of the time so there is no real need.
One slight exception is you technically could run LTR talkgroups on a single-channel LTR trunk or P25 conventional talkgroups on a P25 repeater to get some benefits - but you cannot legally have the trunking controller assign your transmit frequency under the current rules.
On Wed, Dec 30, 2020, 12:46 AM Jim Aspinwall <Jim.No1pc@...> wrote:
Alan,
HF is an option/opportunity for many but not all.? Maybe because few are aware, or too many are unaware of leveraging 'X'-band/implementation beyond the local 144 and 440 repeaters, or that there is actual meaningful RF beyond a $100 hotspot with Interwebs dependance in mom's basement... :O
NVIS is a terrific option if folks understand how "it exists".? A 'typical' FT-something plus ATAS-120 user barely has a viable/effective HF platform (counterpoise, grounding, bonding, etc. 'challenges') much less awareness/effectiveness of folding over a mere 3-4 foot whip to maybe establish NVIS pattern.
Many don't realize, amid their challenge to work "great DX" that their dipoles, inverted-Vs, G5RVs, etc. are so low that most of what they get is near-NVIS radiation pattern = DX fail.
CalOES' limited CESN (California Emergency Services Net) HF participation is indeed mostly 40/80 NVIS and has only maybe a dozen random entities on the rolls.
Amid this, unlike CHP's 'devotion' to VHF-Lo 42-48 MHz... we seem rare/vacuum about 29 and 52 MHz VHF operations.? ?I can only wish I'd hear something, someone on 52.525.
