Illegal Use or "Bootlegging" on Railroad Frequencies

RedLantern wrote:Just a quick extra mention, I've seen railfans with external speakers on their scanners with the volume cranked up to the point that when a train was passing by and the conductor keyed the mic, I could hear feedback. I've only seen this once first hand, but I've heard the feedback a bunch of times on my scanner from other parts of the system. That part on the back of your scanner where it says "This device must not cause harmful interference" doesn't just mean transmitting. Even if you only have a scanner, if it's up loud enough that the microphones on the crew members' radios can pick it up, that's as bad as broadcasting, since it essentially is.

When a 2-way radio (any 2-way radio, not just railroad issued ones) picks up the sound of itself while the microphone key is down, it will produce feedback, which is kind of a loud annoying whistling sound. EVERY receiver on that frequency within range (or over a repeater) will receive that sound, including other train crews in the area, and even the dispatcher. When the crew member is keying the mic, they won't hear it because they are broadcasting (assuming they don't notice it blasting from your car audio system or they assume it's something else like a flange on a curve), their message won't get through, and they won't know that it didn't get through. So keep your scanners at a reasonable volume, or point the speakers away from the tracks.

I wholeheartedly agree that railfans should be careful to not cause audio feedback, though please note that the FCC Part 15 Regulation quoted in part on the labels of many electronic devices including scanners applies only to "unintentional radiators" which means devices that emit radio frequency energy incidental to operation other than an intentional radio transmitter. (The local oscillator circuits in receivers such as scanners are actually very low power transmitters used in the reception of signals, but are not intentional radio transmitters.)So the warning on the back of the scanner does not apply to audio feedback. (Intentionally causing feedback may run afoul of other laws or regulations proscribing certain activities delaying or obstructing railroad operations, but that is outside the scope of the scanner warning label.)

See: http://www.fcc.gov/oet/info/rules/part1 ... -10-08.pdf for a copy of the regulation.

FCC regulations specifically control scanner operations:

(f) The manufacture or importation of scanning receivers, and frequency converters designed or marketed for use with scanning receivers, that do not comply with the provisions of § 15.121(a)(1) shall cease on or before April 26, 1994. Effective April 26, 1993, the Commission will not grant equipment authorization for receivers that do not comply with the provisions of § 15.121(a)(1). This paragraph does not prohibit the sale or use of authorized receivers manufactured in the United States, or imported into the United States, prior to April 26, 1994.

In addition, the use of auxiliary speakers that interfere with licensed operator radio transmissions is specifically prohibited.

If anyone 'cranks up the volume' and it causes feedback or interference with a radio transmission or reception, it is against the law. Interference in radio transmission for 'critical operations' could land you in jail for a long lonnnnnnnnnnng time. In other words, use a headset!

Are we sure this is a "scanner"? I honestly have not seen a portable scanner with a auxiliary speaker, which I believe to be a "external speaker mic" attached to the device by a jack Of course, the only two I ever owned are desktop models and sit at home.Are we sure we're not confusing these with a Ham radio, with a external speaker mic? Ham Radio operators are licensed and accepted by the FCC with their own guidelines. Im not particular on their requirements however. I do know when you purchase a Ham Radio, it is not capable of transmitting on commercial frequencies out of the box.

GP40MC 1116 wrote:Are we sure this is a "scanner"? I honestly have not seen a portable scanner with a auxiliary speaker, which I believe to be a "external speaker mic" attached to the device by a jack Of course, the only two I ever owned are desktop models and sit at home.Are we sure we're not confusing these with a Ham radio, with a external speaker mic? Ham Radio operators are licensed and accepted by the FCC with their own guidelines. Im not particular on their requirements however. I do know when you purchase a Ham Radio, it is not capable of transmitting on commercial frequencies out of the box.

No, it was a RadioShack handheld scanner with an amplified powerhorn plugged into the headphones jack. It was very effective and could be heard all over the area, and was especially useful for hearing communications over the sound of the locomotives. The vast majority of handheld scanners have an earphone jack, and mobile scanners usually have an external speaker jack which is already amplified.

My "scanner" is my 2m HT, which is a Yaesu Vertex VX-150. I always use my headset, because, not only can I hear what I want over external noise, I can also talk to other hams without having to put the radio right up to my head.
I guess the only reason to use amplified loudspeakers with a scanner is when there are a group of people all trying to listen to the same radio.
It only takes common sense, and a respect for others to know when the volume is too high.

Also, I agree in that this is not an FCC violation. It is probably a violation of local noise ordinances, or of some FRA law. After all, it can interfere with the operation of the railroad.

FW

I beg to differ. IF the RX transmission speaker is near enough to a TX radio in use, it can cause feedback and therefore is definitively in violation of FCC rules. If for example, someone has a scanner with external speakers 'cranked up' on a train and/or very near a railroad employee's radio in use, and it therefore causes feedback it will tie up the channel. Since I license radios with the FCC on a weekly basis, for years, I am quite well aware of the rules. I have many times filed violation complaints with the FCC which have resulted in fines of up to $11K per instance and even in some cases, confiscation of radio equipment. So, do or believe what you will, but the consequences if someone 'drops a dime' on you can be considerable. And if I witness it, I will do so!

CarterB wrote:I beg to differ. IF the RX transmission speaker is near enough to a TX radio in use, it can cause feedback and therefore is definitively in violation of FCC rules. If for example, someone has a scanner with external speakers 'cranked up' on a train and/or very near a railroad employee's radio in use, and it therefore causes feedback it will tie up the channel. Since I license radios with the FCC on a weekly basis, for years, I am quite well aware of the rules. I have many times filed violation complaints with the FCC which have resulted in fines of up to $11K per instance and even in some cases, confiscation of radio equipment. So, do or believe what you will, but the consequences if someone 'drops a dime' on you can be considerable. And if I witness it, I will do so!

In my professional opinion, the issue of audio feedback being in violation is somewhere between the two views. The Federal Communications Act states that to be actionable, the act of interference with radio communications must be "willful and malicious." Thus, only if the individual operating the scanner caused the feedback with the intent to interfere with the communications would it be illegal. Just because a railroad employee happens to transmit in proximity to a radio receiver and audio feedback results does not per se indicate a violation. If the person controlling the receiver takes no action to mitigate the feedback at least until the railroad employee moves on in due course, there may be some basis for a violation. So a speaker near a rail line that may infrequently result in feedback appears to not run afoul of the Act, but one that resulted in frequent feedback arguably could be a violation, if "willful and malicious." Evidence of the willful and malicious elements of the offense might consist of the audio volume being excessive for the legitimate purpose (e.g., just loud enough for the nearby railfans to hear), or perhaps persistent refusal of requests by competent authority of the railroad to lower the receiver volume because of feedback issues.

The FCC's jurisdiction and hence the extent to which its rules can be legally enforceable is limited to radio frequency emissions, e.g., electromagnetic energy. The provision against interference to radio communications under the Act is more broad as it does not specify the means by which the interference must be caused to constitute a violation. However, that means the FCC would not have direct enforcement authority in the audio feedback situation, but rather would have to file a complaint (through the US Attorney's office) in the Federal District Court alleging a violation of the Act and thereafter FCC staff's role would be as a fact and/or expert witness.

In contradistinction, in RF interference matters, such as someone utilizing a conventional transmitter or a RF noise generator to interfere with RR radio, the FCC could on its own exercise it civil penalty jurisdiction or at its election, alternatively proceed through the Justice Department.

The bottom line advice I would give to a client is, (1) be reasonable in setting the volume level, and (2) cooperate with reasonable requests from railroad employees should feedback become an issue.

Ken,
Let me be stronger here then. Post 9/11, at least in the NY area, all of us in radio have taken FCC rules and violations quite seriously.
Among other things I have stopped dead in their tracks, was a school bus company and at another time a taxi cab company, keying up on a frequency shared by an airport operations situation at two of the Metro airports. Trust me, inadvertent or not, interfering with transportation frequencies will get you in a heap of trouble very quickly. I also turned in a potty mouth Govt housing authority individual. In that case there was a fine of $11K. I have personally witnessed the FCC investigators in my area aggressively going after interferers with transportation, infrastructure and other critical radio users.
As I said before, I witness it, you go down.

CarterB wrote:Ken,
Let me be stronger here then. Post 9/11, at least in the NY area, all of us in radio have taken FCC rules and violations quite seriously.
Among other things I have stopped dead in their tracks, was a school bus company and at another time a taxi cab company, keying up on a frequency shared by an airport operations situation at two of the Metro airports. Trust me, inadvertent or not, interfering with transportation frequencies will get you in a heap of trouble very quickly. I also turned in a potty mouth Govt housing authority individual. In that case there was a fine of $11K. I have personally witnessed the FCC investigators in my area aggressively going after interferers with transportation, infrastructure and other critical radio users.
As I said before, I witness it, you go down.

I can certainly understand the reason for your examples. Even some years before 911 there were a rash of small taxi companies in the Brooklyn, NY area, and other companies, that were utilizing non-type accepted ham radio equipment for dispatching, some on ham frequencies and others just chose a freq elsewhere. The FCC did take action, seizing the equipment and levying civil penalties. I guess my main point is that the FCC can (and should) take direct action for RF interference, but the audio feedback is a more gray area, and the FCC to not exceed its jurisdiction under federal law would need the cooperation of the Justice Department or federal law enforcement agency, with potential infractions of several laws. Certainly railfans should not make a nuisance of themselves in any manner, including the external amplified speaker example. But an occasional, unintentional incident of feedback is not a violation. Example I've seen a couple of time is someone listening to the railroad operations freq on Amtrak and NJT when a trainman happened to transmit in very close proximity. In both cases the handheld scanner audio was lowered and the individual apologized. Essentially no harm no foul.

Also to note, the only way for a person to be transmitting on a RR freq is the actual doing of a person programing that frequency for transition's on the radio. You can have a two way?VHF radio all you want, but to properly program it, you need the proper program for a computer and at least the connection cord (for Motorola at least) I don't know the particulars, but I would think a Motorola dealer would not sell the programing cable and software for a radio model unless their was a granted reason. All a person needs is the proper receive and transmit frequency as well as the PL if that is applicable and they are good to go. E-Bay is a different story, however alot of burden rests on the dealer's and sellers of the programming capable equipment.

My Motorola VHF radio can handle railroad frequency's, however the only railroad channels I do have able to transmit on my radio are for the Trolley Museum I volunteer for. In turn they (my museum) make me write down all the important info for their record of the radio (my name, address, phone, the radio dealer,model, serial number and wats of the unit. The other channels I have on the radio are set strictly to a receive only and if one was to push the transmit button a long and continuous BEEP would be heard over the speaker, disabling the talk feature.

GP40MC 1116 wrote: All a person needs is the proper receive and transmit frequency as well as the PL if that is applicable and they are good to go.

Another misstruth. ALL two way radios users MUST be licensed by the FCC to make ANY radio transmissions. The only exceptions may be some FRS low wattage (less than 1/2 watt) "toy" radios. You cannot just tune up a radio to a frequency without being specifically, by name and location, licensed to do so.

CarterB wrote:

GP40MC 1116 wrote: All a person needs is the proper receive and transmit frequency as well as the PL if that is applicable and they are good to go.

Another misstruth. ALL two way radios users MUST be licensed by the FCC to make ANY radio transmissions. The only exceptions may be some FRS low wattage (less than 1/2 watt) "toy" radios. You cannot just tune up a radio to a frequency without being specifically, by name and location, licensed to do so.

Correct. The FRS channels 1-14 are the ONLY channels you can operate on without a license, and this is only with the low range radios. They have exact regulations but I'm not going to dig up a link. Channels 15-22 are commonly provided on walmart radios, but if you read the manual, you will see that you are required to have a license in order to operate on these GMRS frequencies.

CarterB wrote:

GP40MC 1116 wrote: All a person needs is the proper receive and transmit frequency as well as the PL if that is applicable and they are good to go.

Another misstruth. ALL two way radios users MUST be licensed by the FCC to make ANY radio transmissions. The only exceptions may be some FRS low wattage (less than 1/2 watt) "toy" radios. You cannot just tune up a radio to a frequency without being specifically, by name and location, licensed to do so.

There is a difference between being POSSIBLE and being legal. The equipment doesn't magically work or not work based on the operator having a license.
You CAN do a lot of things ... what you should do is a different matter.

BTW: I'd love to see an FCC fine for blowing an air horn near the tracks when a crew was trying to talk on the radio. That is basically what is going on with the feedback issue. The examples you give of people actually being caught and fined for illegal use/interfering had transmitting equipment. Please link to the NAL and/or forfeiture for any person who was "transmitting" only audio (eg: causing feedback by having a speaker too loud). That is the threat you have made ... I'm sure you can back up a claim of fines/forfeiture based on transmitting via RF. Please back up the claim of FCC fines/forfeiture based on having a loud speaker.

Against local noise ordinances? Possibly ... Impolite? Certainly. But against FCC rules? That is a stretch. The "noisemaker" isn't keying the mic.

justalurker66 wrote:Against local noise ordinances? Possibly ... Impolite? Certainly. But against FCC rules? That is a stretch. The "noisemaker" isn't keying the mic.

I agree that there is no FCC jurisdiction since the audio is not RF. But the Federal Communications Act provision prohibiting willful and malicious interference with communications does not have a limitation as to what form that interference must take to be actionable, so CarterB is certainly correct in that regard that an offense can be properly charged iwith the right facts and circumstances. Therefore, so long as the elements of the crime - "willful" and "malicious" can be proven to the criminal standard, a conviction may be obtained. For inadvertent occasional non-intentional audio feedback interference, a conviction would not be likely, but for a persistent individual straying beyond those bounds, it is quite possible. One would not find these in the FCC records as it would have been processed through complaint in the Federal District Court, not through the FCC administrative process, and likely bargained, and/or no published opinion to find in researching the federal reporters.

justalurker66 wrote: That is the threat you have made ... I'm sure you can back up a claim of fines/forfeiture based on transmitting via RF. Please back up the claim of FCC fines/forfeiture based on having a loud speaker.

Threat?? No...reality. And yes, as an authorized two-way radio dealer, and FCC/FAA license facilitator, I can back up what I state. As far as loud speaker per se, no instances that I have been involved with. I have, however, been either a complainant on behalf of a licensed radio operator, or as an individual, in many instances where unauthorized or improper use of radio has occurred, and have indeed seen fines/confiscation occur. Like I said before, don't do it.