首先
本人並不反對使用 Echolink.
但是 Echolink 的某一方,將通信接上repeater,問題就立刻出現
1. Repeater:
不可以被利用來越過本部/土的可用頻譜
2. Licensing:
Repeater通訊等同Local(本地)通訊, 閣下的牌照可否在本/當地使用?
所以在此提醒各位Echolink的用家,留意以上兩點,在QSO的同時,不但要守自己本地的法律,更重要是當閣下遠程登錄的時候,要守當地的法律。
以下的問題,在使用 Echolink之 前/中/後, 應該時常地,不斷地,在綫或自問
1. 為何要使用這平台
2. 自已的呼號可否在當地使用, 如要申請,有何手續, 通聯之前,offline尋找答案
3. 對方有否接上Repeater
4. Repeater的使用頻率,知道後立刻比對自己的可用頻譜,如果超出自己可用頻譜,在通聯中應立刻終止對話, 未通聯就保持冷靜地離開
祝各位火腿身體健康,做個精明的火腿,守法的火腿,不做人云亦云的火腿
有人做不等於你可以做
-------------------------------------
以下是加拿大政府回覆關於海外HAM在加國操作無線電,以供參考
強調重點
Subject: Re Re: Question regarding Ham operation
From: Alan.McLean@ic.gc.ca
To: valensc@yahoo.com
CC: Spectrum.Amateur@ic.gc.ca
Valens Chu, VE3XRE
Markham, ON
valensc@yahoo.com
Mr. Chu,
Thank you for your query regarding the operation of Amateur Radio stations within Canada, by operators possessing Amateur Radio operator certificates issued by other administrations, the remote operation of Canadian Amateur Stations by foreign Amateurs from locations outside of Canada and the policies governing the assignment of Two-Letter Amateur Radio Call Signs in Canada.
The operation of foreign Amateur Radio stations within Canada, may be authorized on a short-term basis.
Amateur Radio operators wishing to obtain authority to operate their stations while visiting Canada, must either obtain the appropriate international permit under CEPT, IARP through their home administration or submit a written request to Industry Canada for temporary operating authority.
Amateur Radio operators, visiting from Hong Kong or China, must submit a request.
The request should specify the area(s) of operation, the anticipated duration of the visit and must include a copy of the operator's Amateur Radio certificate issued by their administration.
Foreign Amateur Radio stations, approved for temporary operation in Canada may operate within the frequency bands set out in Schedules I, II and III of Industry Canada document, RBR-4, (available at our website, http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/smt-gst.nsf/eng/sf01226.html , and subject to any restrictions imposed by their operator's certificate.
The document "T/R 61-01" , applies only to countries who have signed or chosen to participate in the CEPT licensing initiative.
The remote operation of Canadian Amateur radio stations by foreign Amateur Radio operators from locations outside of Canada is subject to the rules and regulations governing the Canadian Amateur Radio Service, policies imposed by the home administration of the foreign station and/the country from which control is being established from. Controlling operators shall be Identified both, by means of the call sign, issued by their administration, and the call sign associated with the operations of the Canadian station being controlled.All communications shall be by means of the English or French language and may not include the use of any secret code or cipher.
I trust that this has provided an answer to your query.
Sincerely,
Alan McLean
Spectrum Management Officer
Agent, Gestion du spectre
Spectrum Management Operations Branch
Direction générale des opérations de la gestion du spectre
Spectrum, Information Technologies and Telecommunications Sector
Secteur du Spectre, des technologies de l'information et des télécommunications
Industry Canada
Industrie Canada
2 Queen Street East, Sault Ste Marie ON P6A 1Y3
2, rue Queen Est, Sault Ste Marie ON P6A 1Y3
Alan.McLean@ic.gc.ca
-------------------------------------------------------------
這是個具爭議性和複雜的話題,情況有些同phone patch相似,不論是phone patch或是echo link也好,都是利用技術把兩個綱絡互聯。主要問題在於on air 時相方是否合法? 互聯是否合法? 可以用一些實例會比較容易明白。
可用和香港相鄰的深圳作實例。
香港 VR2 牌照 可以在 430至431Mhz和435至440Mhz操作而深圳 HAM可以在 430 至 440Mhz操作。
實例一
香港 HAM 跑到深圳用 VR2 Callsign 作QSO是否合法呢?
答案這是否定的,因為牌照只容許 VR2 Callsign 在香港區內操作。
實例二
香港 HAM在香港用 433Mhz uplink 上深圳在438Mhz (-5Mhz) 的中繼作QSO是否合法呢?
答案這是否定的,因為牌照不容許在香港區內操作(發射) 433Mhz。
實例三
香港HAM用電話或互聯綱遙控在香港home base的收發機, 用438Mhz直頻在深圳中繼的downlink作QSO是否合法呢?
實例四
香港HAM用電話或互聯綱遙控深圳HAM的收發機, 用433Mhz uplink上深圳的中繼作QSO是否合法呢?
實例三和四的答案是留給大家討論的。
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
實例三和四,將加拿大法律代入這裏-如果433不能發射,那就是不合法
頻率是包括收與發,沒有一個頻率只可收或發
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
嘗試作答實例三，如有不當，請賜教。
在香港，除開放頻率外，任何電台都需要領有牌照才可操作，如實例三描述的組合，明顯是一個無人操作的遙控電台，相信要申領類似中繼站的相關牌照，如果獲發牌，自然可以合法運作，否則便是違法。
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VR2IP,
很同意你的見解。也同意VR2UBR的作答。
這些是爭議性的討論。我想帶出的一個現在加拿大HAM有可能違規的陷阱。全程在互聯網，3G或電話（在電話供應商服務條款準許下）做EchoLink通訊，是沒有違規。但如果加拿大HAM利用手持電台/流動電台/基地電台直頻或經中繼站再經互聯網到香港，這樣他們便違當地規例了。因為他們在當地發射通訊是應該用英語(English)或法語(French) 的。但他們是用粵語！這個違規是很明顯的。
我層經在EchoLink上建議VR2XJN兩個問題：
1/ 在EchoLink上最好不用"Cantonese Only"，免被別人有誤會歧視，後來改了"Cantonese Preferred".
2/ 細讀電訊規例準許的通訊語言，是English (或其它語言) 或是"plain language". 如果是English便要用英語了。如果是plain language便可以用任何一種語言，那加拿大HAM可以在EchoLink用中文通訊了。後來他也回答“中文也可以” 。看來他給我的回覆是不對的。
建議香港的HAM也應該看看電訊規例的準許通訊語言是English (or other language) 或是"plain language",以免違規（不是違法）。
VS6LDK
--------------------------------------------------------------------
LDK你有冇玩過 outband？ 答有定冇。唔好阿支阿左呀哪。
--------------------------------------------------------------------
WellSee巴打CHing大大，
俺當然有玩過outband啦。俺無需要扮野坑爹，俺又唔係由北極至南極；東岸到西岸既神台貓屎。
CHing，俺提出的疑問/建議儂木有給意見就揭俺的瘡疤唄！儂替俺看看香港的電訊規例的准許通訊語言是English, Chinese, plain language還是...... 可以嗎？俺唔想係in band用錯通訊語言。謝謝。
VS6LDK
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
有種，果然食得咸魚扺得渴。唔好好似D飛皇騰達左既神台貓屎咁扮曬大支野咁阿支阿左撹寸曬就好囉。你知啦，要南北都唔妥，東西岸都討厭既己經所淨無幾。連你都冇埋到時要係某花擋叫某人買花先掂。
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
強調D乜野重點?
Please note that this so-called supporting material has nothing to do with digital linking operation like IRLP and/or Echolink. To see why, let's list what the 3 things this letter covers:
(1) Operation of Amateur Radio stations within Canada, by operators possessing Amateur Radio operator certificates issued by other administrations
(2) Remote operation of Canadian Amateur Stations by foreign Amateurs from locations outside of Canada
(3) The policies governing the assignment of Two-Letter Amateur Radio Call Signs in Canada
Exhibit below illustrates items (1) and (3):
Yada, yada, yada... These 6 paragraphs address __ABSOLUTELY NOTHING__ about digital linking licensing condition and/or its operating guideline. They only tell of those basic terms of operating authorization governed by an international permit. Granted, the term "temporary operation in Canada", is referred to as the operation in which the person is present within the territory of the commonwealth.
To be very specific, the temporary operating permits are only granted to those foreign nationals whose countries have chosen to participate the CEPT licensing initiative. In addition, one may or maynot be getting an operating permit, even he/she applies.
What does this mumble jumble have to do with digital linking?(End of Part I of II)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Part II of II)
Exhibit below illustrates item (2):
Now put your reading glasses on if you cannot read. It won't surprise me that you cannot understand the essence of this paragraph.
Remote operation herein refers to operating a Canadian Amateur radio station remotely by foreign Amateur Radio operators from locations outside of Canada. Excuse me, here Mr. Alan McLean is talking about remote base station, or remote controlling a station, but not digital links in which a pathway for voice or data is created.
In case you don't understand what a remote base station is, a remote base station is a station controlled by radio, like DTMF or Telecommand. It resembles a repeater with additional features that is installed at a remote location. A remote base station is a type of station where the primary control point is not at the current station location. To operate a remote base, you "remote control" it.
So what is your point here quoting remote base station operating guideline as a reference for digital linking operations? What are you trying to imply?
During remote base operation, a person (call sign A) remote controls a stations (call sign B). The person (call sign A) is the controlling operator who must identify both (call sign A and call sign B). Again, this is written very clearly that nothing herein has anything to do with digital linking.
Don't you think by just throwing a bunch of English words at people and expect that you can fool any of us! The subject matters in which the letter indicates are regarding to issuance of temporary operating permits and remote base operating guidelines by foreign nationals who want to carry out amateur radio activities within the boundary of the commonwealth. As a result, what is your point using this TRASH to support your opinion on Echolink or other digital linking operation?
What is your hidden agenda?
(End of Part II of II)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WellSee巴打CHing大大，
感謝儂分析及指出加拿大咸友VE3XRE貼子的問題及他個人對哪貼子內容的看法。現在俺很清楚明白了，俺不會被混淆視聽了。謝謝儂。
俺有個不情之請，儂可否把加拿大咸友VE3XRE的貼子和儂的回覆翻譯成中文呢？好等咱們看得明明白白，看看是否儂在扮代表，行嗎？（註：咱們不要谷哥翻譯噃。）
儂address完儂個瓣了，儂還木有替俺看看香港電訊局的准許通訊語言。儂都唔想俺跌落陷阱吧，也不想俺被插背吧，求求儂。
俺希望儂以後能替HAM界多做些有實質的事啊，多些分享香港及海外HAM界的事。
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
俺錯了。俺向各位看官道歉。
俺在貼子#7的第二段“.............但他們是用'粤語'...............” 的用辭“粵語” 有些誤導。跟“language” 的意思是有沖突。
俺在貼子#7的第二段的意思應該是“如果加拿大HAM利用手持電台/流動電台/基地電台直頻或經中繼站再經互聯網到香港，這樣他們便違當地規例。”............ 違規的理由是:
1/ 當地發射通訊的准許語言是英語或法語；但他們用了准許語言以外的語言。
如果准許語言是“plain language” 的話，他們用“粵語” 也是違規。
“中文” 語言（language）只得一種，就是“普通話” ，其它如“京話” ，“上海話” ，“廣州話”........ 都是“方言” （dialect），不是“中文” 語言。
所以俺希望知道香港電訊規例的准許通訊語言是啥？現時香港HAM友在in-band又是用啥語言通訊呢？
VS6LDK
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
中文板：
妖言或眾
知少少扮代表
----------------------------------
Please answer the following questions
1. What's Hong Kong Ham's VHF frequency range?
2. What's Hong Hong Ham's UHF frequency range?
--------------------------------------------------------------------
How stupid?
You don't answer questions with a couple of moronic questions. You cannot dance around your liability on having to explain yourselves by asking two stupidly obvious questions to get to your point.
You are supposed to explain why you are posting trash here in the first place. Are you trying to deceive people?
Answer these questions (per my response to your so-called 重點 email) and explain your intention!
What does reciprocal license application have to do with digital linking?
What is your point quoting remote base station operating guideline as a reference for digital linking operations?
What are you trying to imply?
What is your point using this TRASH to support your opinion on Echolink or other digital linking operation?
What is your hidden agenda?
Until you can answer these question, I'll tell you what the V/U band plan is in Hong Kong. By the way, anyone can Google that so your question is pointless. Perhaps you should answer that yourselves.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A question is a question. You don't answer mine why should I answer yours? Who is stupid here? You are!!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
妖言或眾，哇眾取寵，危言聳聽，冇憑冇據，口出狂言，大言不攙，一知半解，知少少扮代表！
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
這是爭議性的討論的原因喺因為有D類似VE3XRE一樣嘅毫無信用嘅滋事者，喺一知半解，個人原因，同冇憑冇據之下做謠生事，趁虛而入製做假象嚇人而已。點解VE3XRE要禁做？看官門要問問拒至知道啦。看官門更要問問VE3XRE嘅喺，拒憑邊條法律條文去解釋EchoLink, IRLP, 同其他internet repeater linking嘅非法性。淨喺憑拒個人意見？雖然，道不同不相為謀，我明白每一個人都有自己嘅意見，但係VE3XRE又擺出一D似是而非嘅所謂重點文章來製做假象，但係，經點出又堅決唔去解釋重點文章中嘅漏洞同重點性，究竟居心何再？看官門就算冇玩internet linking，又有冇覺得整件事好似冇中生有？我個人洞察到此人跟此事有極不沈常之背後動機，道義上懇請hkcq.net辦事人對此人此事作出子細的背景調查同行動，企令hkcq.net能保持一貫中立無偏之政策，服務大眾。
