Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


kc9pke last won the day on June 5

kc9pke had the most liked content!

Recent Profile Visitors

272 profile views

kc9pke's Achievements

  1. Dismissed, because of course it was Reason given is because a formal process doesn't exist to allow it
  2. Yeah, and it’d be relatively simple if they were simplex only. They could make it even easier if they used those DTR 900 MHz units if they want no license for simplex only, I’m sure any number of dealers would be willing to sell a pallet of those to them. Lots of good options out there really
  3. Yeah it’s channel 17 on the bubble packs, shared with GMRS, treated as FRS if under 2 watts
  4. Personally (and I emphasize that) I’d call their IT director and tell them to man up and apply for a Part 90 license but that’s just me
  5. I understand you're opposed to a PFR, which honestly, now that I consider it, seems doomed to go nowhere as do most - in the ham service, it wasn't a PFR that got them access to vanities, it was straight up Congressional intervention, shoehorned into a budget bill (because of course it was!). I can live with saving the PFRs for other matters like you mention, maybe I could use Congressional assistance for this specifically Codified at 47 CFR 2.302 is a table listing ranges of call signs assignable to licenses in each service. It's woefully out of date, but one row allocates the ranges of KAA0001 to KZZ9999, WAA0001 to WPZ9999, and KAAA0001 to KZZZ9999 to licenses in the personal radio services. As far as other services, a GMRS callsign is the same format as my Upper Microwave Flexible Use Service auctioned licenses (WREV459, 460, and 461) and my 3.5 GHz (also auctioned). I'd have to double check, but I think the only call signs that don't follow what GMRS and Part 90 do are ship and aircraft licenses
  6. Got a voicemail from a WTB staff saying they can’t do it because the process doesn’t formally permit it. Kind of what I expected, but they asked for me to withdraw the application myself so they could process a refund. Not really interested in the money lol Anyone aside me interested in crafting a petition for rulemaking on this?
  7. Over the last week I dumped all the GMRS application data and sifted through it to see if anyone else has tried what I'm aiming at here I found a guy who filed a Renewal Only with the Waiver question answered "yes" wherein he informally asks the FCC for a "waiver to allow him to use his old call sign," and the attachment doesn't identify the supposed rule he was asking for a waiver of (hint: it's none of them. A waiver isn't the appropriate mechanism for this) The FCC denied the waiver, misinterpreting it as a request for the waiver of the requirement to ID Aside that RO app, I found less than a dozen others who submitted AU apps with attachments like mine that predictably auto-granted, of course those never got manual attention I also got this letter in response to my PFR yesterday, so WTB staff absolutely understand what I'm going after... let's pray they grant it
  8. It’s been pending since 5/19. Wonder how long it’ll take for them to grant or deny… usually see anywhere from a week to a couple months on applications with waiver requests attached
  9. If they dismiss it, they dismiss it... There's nothing saying they can or can't do this at their discretion
  10. For a while I've looked at the call sign the FCC gave me for my GMRS license and thought "eh, it's a mouthful, I'll deal with it" Regardless, I figured I'd try something to see the disposition I'd get from the FCC. Turns out, you can force the ULS to allow you to submit a modification (MD) app simply by using Inspect Element and changing the AU to MD in the Update link off to the right. I did this, changed none of the name and address data on the license, and attached a PDF where I state my case for a vanity call.. Initially the system auto-granted the application 2 days later, but I filed a petition for reconsideration specifically asking for the grant to be reversed and the application be returned to pending status for review. They did! My argument is paper thin, but we'll see what happens...
  11. Just tried keying in a "New" application in just to see what number it'd spit it out. It's still showing $70 as of 10 minutes ago
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Guidelines.