7 ms·

Militia Radio Frequencies

109 points by roycoding 11y ago

tzs 11y ago
> MURS is the longest range VHF radio service that can be legally utilized by anyone without the need for a radio license. The operator does not need a license, but I believe that the radio must be certified for MURS operation. The Baofeng UV-5R is not [1]. It is certified under Part 90. MURS requires certification under Part 95. [1] http://www.gordonwestradioschool.com/attachments/FCC_Part_90_Certification_Baofeng_UV5R.pdf http://www.gordonwestradioschool.com/attachments/FCC_Part_90...
- apaprocki 11y ago
  In addition, GMRS requires an FCC license.[1] Just because the Baofeng allows you to access the frequencies doesn't mean that you can legally transmit on them. I wonder if this is their Capone-tax-evasion-style Achilles' heel. Enforce those FCC regs! :P [1]: https://www.fcc.gov/general/general-mobile-radio-service-gmrs https://www.fcc.gov/general/general-mobile-radio-service-gmr...
  - rtkwe 11y ago
    FCC violations are generally fines instead of prison time. It'd be somewhat effective but not nearly as powerful as the tax evasion charges.
    - Aloha 11y ago
      People have been jailed for violating the ham radio rules.
      - hatsunearu 11y ago
        Any sources? The crazy 14.313 guys just got fined a buttload but not jailed, IIRC.
        hga 11y ago
        And that was after a warning (14.313 is a wonderful search term): http://www.arrl.org/news/fcc-fines-pennsylvania-ham-11-500-for-causing-intentional-interference http://www.arrl.org/news/fcc-fines-pennsylvania-ham-11-500-f... Searching on the term linear amplifier, this was the only example of jail time I was able to find, and that after many previous enforcement actions including revoking his license 20 years earlier: http://www.eham.net/articles/1744 http://www.eham.net/articles/1744
- sliverstorm 11y ago
  To my knowledge you are correct. Although I kind of hope the rules get reworked a little. As a public service volunteer, it would be beneficial to be able to operate on many services with one radio, and many modern radios are capable of being "good citizens" on multiple services simultaneously. (For example, we operate on Part 90, but may interact with members of the public who are carrying a Part 95 radio. Luckily as a ham, I believe I can at least operate my Part 90 radio on Part 97 bands.)
  - tzs 11y ago
    > Luckily as a ham, I believe I can at least operate my Part 90 radio on Part 97 bands. I believe that is correct (also a ham). For curious non-hams, here is how it works. In the US, generally there are three ways radio bands are licensed. 1. No license is required for the operator to use the band, but the equipment used must be certified for operation in that band. 2. The operator has to have a license to use the band and the equipment must be certified for operation in that band. 3. The operator has to have a license to use the band, but can use any equipment as long as what is actually transmitted meets the legal technical requirements for operation on that band (power levels, modulation types, and so on). An example of the first method is the Family Radio Service (FRS) bands. An example of the second method is the General Mobile Radio Service (GMRS). When I say that the operator has to have a license, that does not necessarily mean that the person actually operating the radio has to have a license. With GMRS, for instance, a business can get a license and that covers employee use without the individual employees needing to get licenses. Ham radio falls under the third method, and offhand I can't think of anything else that does. When a licensed ham is operating a radio all the FCC cares about is what comes out of the antenna, not what equipment produced it. The way hams get licensed is also quite different. The FCC takes a very hands off approach to ham licensing. To get a ham license, you have to pass an exam. For the entry level license, that is a 35 question multiple-choice exam that almost anyone here on HN could learn enough to pass in a couple weekends. There is a license level above that which gives you access to more ham bands, which you get by passing another 35 question exam which is a little harder. There is a third license level above that which allows you full access to everything hams are allowed to do. That one is a 50 question exam and is quite a bit harder than the other two. The FCC neither makes the exams nor administers them. They have authorized 14 organizations as "Volunteer Exam Coordinators" (VECs), and the VECs are responsible for maintaining the pool of exam questions, constructing exams from the question pool, training and certifying people to give the exams, giving the exams, grading them, and reporting the results back to the FCC so the FCC can issue the licenses.
- jameshart 11y ago
  It seems like FCC-regulatory compliance would not be a top priority for people who believe that the federal government has no authority....
- Aloha 11y ago
  So long as you're fitting within the spectral emissions and power limits expected by the FCC - its highly unlikely that anyone would notice, or much less bother to enforce the rules.
- hatsunearu 11y ago
  One more thing that the average hacker should know about radio regulation: You can homebrew a radio yourself and it doesn't need FCC approval if you're a ham operating on ham bands with all the appropriate standards. You are however not allowed to sell radios at a commercial scale unless it's FCC approved, even if it's for hams. But I think (IANAL) you're allowed to sell homebrew gear in like garage sale-type deals.
davidw 11y ago
I've been following the latest standoff pretty closely, as it's only a couple of hours east of Bend. It's pretty interesting to see the different subsets of people involved, including the lot this article kind of touches on, who seem to like to play "army guys". Scary, too. I like the quote at the end: “Patriot: the person who can holler the loudest without knowing what he is hollering about.” -Mark Twain
unethical_ban 11y ago
For SHTF or remote rural use, I would use the FRS frequencies. No license required, but the Baofengs do transmit above the .25W power max. Oh well.
- legulere 11y ago
  I guess in case of SHTF radio frequency legality won't matter anymore.
- Aloha 11y ago
  the power limit is 1/2 watt.
legulere 11y ago
Why call them militia-patriots when they're domestic terrorists?
- rtkwe 11y ago
  Because until a group does or plans/encourages something like the Oregon takeover or the Nevada standoff they aren't really much more than a particularly pessimistic neighborhood watch with a penchant for guns and a bit of dress up.
- golergka 11y ago
  Nobody is a terrorist until he plans or engages in terrorist activity. Do you have evidence that they did something like that?
  - smacktoward 11y ago
    Seizure of government property at gunpoint is certainly something. (Though I'm not sure it really tracks with the definition of a "terrorist," since a terrorist is an armed combatant who explicitly strikes at civilians instead of at their government. A better term here might be more 19th-century-flavored words like insurrectionary or seditionist, though terms like those fell out of use as rebel and guerrilla groups abandoned direct attacks on governments in favor of terroristic tactics.)
    - golergka 11y ago
      > terrorist is an armed combatant who explicitly strikes at civilians instead of at their government Uhm, no. This is closer to the definition of terrorism, but it's still not it. Drug store robbery gone violent involves armed people who may explicitly strike a civilian shop owner who turned out to have a gun under the counter. Terrorism is about intent: to spread terror. If you're blowing a bomb up just to see the bodies fly, you're not a terrorist. But if you're conjuring an alien monster abomination to prevent a nuclear war between two super-powers through _terror_ against an imaginary alien adversary, you are a terrorist (although in this case one could argue that you indeed do it for the greater good).
jff 11y ago
> (obscured by the upper receiver of the assault weapon) You mean the stock of the semi-automatic rifle which happens to be scary and black?
- seangrant 11y ago
  Let's not forget these people had every intention to use those weapons against humans. This isn't some guns club hanging out.
  - ocdtrekkie 11y ago
    Arguably, they intended to use them to defend themselves if they were attacked. (By humans, yes.) They were not hunting people down and assaulting them. That being said, they were looking to defend themselves while illegally occupying a federal facility... but the particulars of that situation don't really reflect on the choice of weapon.
    - twothamendment 11y ago
      I prefer to call mine an anti-assault weapon. I don't have any need or plans to assault anyone, but I may have a need to defend against someone who'd like to assault me.
    - davidw 11y ago
      > They were not hunting people down and assaulting them. Not with the guns, and not physically, much. But they most certainly were threatening people, according to the FBI complaint against them: "The person with Ritzheimer told the woman he knows what kind of car she drives and he was going to follow her home and burn her house down, according to the complaint."
    - seangrant 11y ago
      You don't have to assault someone for your weapon to become an "assault weapon". A semi-auto pistol grip rifle is an assault weapon. Especially when the clear purpose of them having these weapons are to be used in combat. No it is not a defense to say that they are defending themselves. These people illegally encroached property that was not theirs.
zekevermillion 11y ago
These photos remind me of William Gibson's observations on tactical fashion -- if you are really a militant, then the last thing you'd want to do is look all tactical and stuff. The Army surplus look, radios with whip antennae, etc., is fun. But in any scenario where militia were up against organized force, I would think they should try to blend into the population. But I guess it's hard to keep morale up if you just go to meetings where you practice blending into population. Like, an organized concealed carry sit-in at Starbucks where you don't tell anyone you're carrying and try not to be noticed? Or, have radio conversations where you discuss nothing of substance and avoid transmitting any coded messages?
- sevensor 11y ago
  > Or, have radio conversations where you discuss nothing of substance and avoid transmitting any coded messages This is a requirement for operating an amateur radio in most jusisdictions. Ham radio is the concealed-carry of communications technology.
- golergka 11y ago
  > But in any scenario where militia were up against organized force, I would think they should try to blend into the population. It's very effective indeed, if you disregard all problems with international law and basic human morals. It's a tactic that have been very successful for Hamas in recent years, for example. Fighting in civilian clothing means that (1) your adversaries will kill much more civilians, honestly mistaking them for you and (2) all your losses can be easily counted as "civilians" by even slightly biased observers. Next step in effectivety is just keeping a couple of children around you in a firefight. Idealist militants, on the other hand, who are concerned with well-being of civilians they are fighting against always assume some form of uniform, because among other things, it helps to keep at least some rules of engagement in place and protect innocents to some extent.
  - gaius 11y ago
    Hence the orange jumpsuits of the Rebel Alliance.
  - deleted 11y ago
pythia__ 11y ago
What this makes me wonder is, could they use a cell phone Wi-Fi mesh network at least for a significant part of their communications?
- itgoon 11y ago
  I was thinking RPis with nrf24l01 chips. You could do everything with custom encryption.
  - BWStearns 11y ago
    This settles it. HN needs to conduct our own takeover of a federal building to show these guys how it's done :p /sarcasm please god let this line have been unneeded
    - itgoon 11y ago
      I'll be sure and pack snacks. /yea, me too
twothamendment 11y ago
Interesting read, but it almost paints anyone who owns a Baofeng as a terrorist. It does do a great job of showing how lame it is to think that those radios will help in a standoff like that. If the government was going to go in, you can bet the first thing they'd do is jam those cheap radios. For anyone interested in ham radio, there isn't a better place to start. Without these cheap, not-as-good-as-something-that-costs-10x-as much radios you can get into the hobby for under $50 including your license. I'd spend a tad bit more and go for the UV-82hp and a new antenna, but $75 to get going isn't bad. Without these I don't think there would be many younger people getting started. In my area there is a very active repeater of normal people (many of them software guys, so maybe not all that normal) chatting about all kinds of topics and there is always someone to answer a question. Passing the test isn't bad - checkout the mobile friendly http://www.hamstudy.org http://www.hamstudy.org (no, affiliated, just a happy user).
- Aloha 11y ago
  In my opinion the Baofeng isn't a very good radio (poor build quality, poor performing RF deck, bad documentation and software support), and there are better inexpensive options out there - most surplus commercial radio gear is around the same price with a better build quality - and for those with some money to spend, you can pick up surplus XTS3000 with DES-XL (or DES-OFB) for under 250 bucks ea, add another 3-800 for a KVL and you have a somewhat hard to crack Digital (P25) encrypted radio system. The Motorola iDEN handset DirecTalk feature is also a great option for comms up to about a mile, no encryption, so its more of a security thru obscurity system (same with the Motorola DTR series of radios, which are conceptually identical to the iDEN handset feature - down to power output even - I think the difference is message format and codec IMBE vs VSLEP or AMBE), because of the nature of the beast unless you know its DirecTalk, its unlikely you would be able to figure out and find it either. I've long used surplus Motorola or Kenwood gear in my car and for handhelds - GP300's, XTS's, Spectra (for the car) and before that a Syntor X (which had one of the hottest receivers I've ever seen in a mobile) - I myself have been licensed since 1996.
  - cdjk 11y ago
    I've tried using commercial radios before, but the biggest annoyance is the difficulty in either 1) getting programming software and 2) actually using the software, which usually has an atrocious UI. At least with a purpose-built ham radio you can enter frequencies directly on the handset, even if it's a pain. Although the programming software for them is almost as bad.
arca_vorago 11y ago
I find it unusual that there is only passing mention of Frequency Hopping Spread Spectrum (FHSS) and frequency-hopping code division multiple access (FH-CDMA), which by themselves do have some issues, but combined with encryption like KY-57 or KY-58+ they can be pretty hard. Since that is some of what the US military uses, and militias are largely comprised of former military, I would expect to see more PRC119's and similar in the article, but don't. I wonder why? edit: found my own answer in the article. "The average militia individual can’t afford the $7,500+ price tag of a 5 watt VHF HT radio that has high levels of encryption combined with frequency hopping capability; anything less than that (such as DMR or P25) is easily intercepted and decrypted in realtime."
VLM 11y ago
Its interesting that the article has nothing specifically militia related. In that its just a list of point to point radios anyone can use. There probably are characteristics or features that would appeal to anti-government activists on either the left or the right, but the article didn't mention them. For example, if you want communications in the deep mountains for hiking or camping, its not a bad "buyers guide". Interestingly it does side step using actual military surplus radios. Probably because the mil-surp radios us Ham Radio guys use are either too expensive or too antique to be of use. I have a nice R-392 (a "mobile" R-390). Its not exactly tacti-cool, LOL. For about a quarter century I've been planning on buying a PRC-77 to work ham radio 6 meter FM... in my infinite spare time. I like the 6m band although I've almost exclusively worked weak signal SSB.
hackuser 11y ago
Isn't the FCC auctioning off some spectrum soon in former TV frequencies? Perhaps the militia groups could bid on some ...

109 points by roycoding 11y ago

tzs 11y ago

> MURS is the longest range VHF radio service that can be legally utilized by anyone without the need for a radio license. The operator does not need a license, but I believe that the radio must be certified for MURS operation. The Baofeng UV-5R is not [1]. It is certified under Part 90. MURS requires certification under Part 95. [1] http://www.gordonwestradioschool.com/attachments/FCC_Part_90_Certification_Baofeng_UV5R.pdf http://www.gordonwestradioschool.com/attachments/FCC_Part_90...

apaprocki 11y ago
In addition, GMRS requires an FCC license.[1] Just because the Baofeng allows you to access the frequencies doesn't mean that you can legally transmit on them. I wonder if this is their Capone-tax-evasion-style Achilles' heel. Enforce those FCC regs! :P [1]: https://www.fcc.gov/general/general-mobile-radio-service-gmrs https://www.fcc.gov/general/general-mobile-radio-service-gmr...
- rtkwe 11y ago
  FCC violations are generally fines instead of prison time. It'd be somewhat effective but not nearly as powerful as the tax evasion charges.
  - Aloha 11y ago
    People have been jailed for violating the ham radio rules.
    - hatsunearu 11y ago
      Any sources? The crazy 14.313 guys just got fined a buttload but not jailed, IIRC.
      - hga 11y ago
        And that was after a warning (14.313 is a wonderful search term): http://www.arrl.org/news/fcc-fines-pennsylvania-ham-11-500-for-causing-intentional-interference http://www.arrl.org/news/fcc-fines-pennsylvania-ham-11-500-f... Searching on the term linear amplifier, this was the only example of jail time I was able to find, and that after many previous enforcement actions including revoking his license 20 years earlier: http://www.eham.net/articles/1744 http://www.eham.net/articles/1744
sliverstorm 11y ago
To my knowledge you are correct. Although I kind of hope the rules get reworked a little. As a public service volunteer, it would be beneficial to be able to operate on many services with one radio, and many modern radios are capable of being "good citizens" on multiple services simultaneously. (For example, we operate on Part 90, but may interact with members of the public who are carrying a Part 95 radio. Luckily as a ham, I believe I can at least operate my Part 90 radio on Part 97 bands.)
- tzs 11y ago
  > Luckily as a ham, I believe I can at least operate my Part 90 radio on Part 97 bands. I believe that is correct (also a ham). For curious non-hams, here is how it works. In the US, generally there are three ways radio bands are licensed. 1. No license is required for the operator to use the band, but the equipment used must be certified for operation in that band. 2. The operator has to have a license to use the band and the equipment must be certified for operation in that band. 3. The operator has to have a license to use the band, but can use any equipment as long as what is actually transmitted meets the legal technical requirements for operation on that band (power levels, modulation types, and so on). An example of the first method is the Family Radio Service (FRS) bands. An example of the second method is the General Mobile Radio Service (GMRS). When I say that the operator has to have a license, that does not necessarily mean that the person actually operating the radio has to have a license. With GMRS, for instance, a business can get a license and that covers employee use without the individual employees needing to get licenses. Ham radio falls under the third method, and offhand I can't think of anything else that does. When a licensed ham is operating a radio all the FCC cares about is what comes out of the antenna, not what equipment produced it. The way hams get licensed is also quite different. The FCC takes a very hands off approach to ham licensing. To get a ham license, you have to pass an exam. For the entry level license, that is a 35 question multiple-choice exam that almost anyone here on HN could learn enough to pass in a couple weekends. There is a license level above that which gives you access to more ham bands, which you get by passing another 35 question exam which is a little harder. There is a third license level above that which allows you full access to everything hams are allowed to do. That one is a 50 question exam and is quite a bit harder than the other two. The FCC neither makes the exams nor administers them. They have authorized 14 organizations as "Volunteer Exam Coordinators" (VECs), and the VECs are responsible for maintaining the pool of exam questions, constructing exams from the question pool, training and certifying people to give the exams, giving the exams, grading them, and reporting the results back to the FCC so the FCC can issue the licenses.
jameshart 11y ago
It seems like FCC-regulatory compliance would not be a top priority for people who believe that the federal government has no authority....
Aloha 11y ago
So long as you're fitting within the spectral emissions and power limits expected by the FCC - its highly unlikely that anyone would notice, or much less bother to enforce the rules.
hatsunearu 11y ago
One more thing that the average hacker should know about radio regulation: You can homebrew a radio yourself and it doesn't need FCC approval if you're a ham operating on ham bands with all the appropriate standards. You are however not allowed to sell radios at a commercial scale unless it's FCC approved, even if it's for hams. But I think (IANAL) you're allowed to sell homebrew gear in like garage sale-type deals.

davidw 11y ago

I've been following the latest standoff pretty closely, as it's only a couple of hours east of Bend. It's pretty interesting to see the different subsets of people involved, including the lot this article kind of touches on, who seem to like to play "army guys". Scary, too. I like the quote at the end: “Patriot: the person who can holler the loudest without knowing what he is hollering about.” -Mark Twain

unethical_ban 11y ago

For SHTF or remote rural use, I would use the FRS frequencies. No license required, but the Baofengs do transmit above the .25W power max. Oh well.

legulere 11y ago
I guess in case of SHTF radio frequency legality won't matter anymore.
Aloha 11y ago
the power limit is 1/2 watt.

legulere 11y ago

Why call them militia-patriots when they're domestic terrorists?

rtkwe 11y ago
Because until a group does or plans/encourages something like the Oregon takeover or the Nevada standoff they aren't really much more than a particularly pessimistic neighborhood watch with a penchant for guns and a bit of dress up.
golergka 11y ago
Nobody is a terrorist until he plans or engages in terrorist activity. Do you have evidence that they did something like that?
- smacktoward 11y ago
  Seizure of government property at gunpoint is certainly something. (Though I'm not sure it really tracks with the definition of a "terrorist," since a terrorist is an armed combatant who explicitly strikes at civilians instead of at their government. A better term here might be more 19th-century-flavored words like insurrectionary or seditionist, though terms like those fell out of use as rebel and guerrilla groups abandoned direct attacks on governments in favor of terroristic tactics.)
  - golergka 11y ago
    > terrorist is an armed combatant who explicitly strikes at civilians instead of at their government Uhm, no. This is closer to the definition of terrorism, but it's still not it. Drug store robbery gone violent involves armed people who may explicitly strike a civilian shop owner who turned out to have a gun under the counter. Terrorism is about intent: to spread terror. If you're blowing a bomb up just to see the bodies fly, you're not a terrorist. But if you're conjuring an alien monster abomination to prevent a nuclear war between two super-powers through _terror_ against an imaginary alien adversary, you are a terrorist (although in this case one could argue that you indeed do it for the greater good).

jff 11y ago

> (obscured by the upper receiver of the assault weapon) You mean the stock of the semi-automatic rifle which happens to be scary and black?

seangrant 11y ago
Let's not forget these people had every intention to use those weapons against humans. This isn't some guns club hanging out.
- ocdtrekkie 11y ago
  Arguably, they intended to use them to defend themselves if they were attacked. (By humans, yes.) They were not hunting people down and assaulting them. That being said, they were looking to defend themselves while illegally occupying a federal facility... but the particulars of that situation don't really reflect on the choice of weapon.
  - twothamendment 11y ago
    I prefer to call mine an anti-assault weapon. I don't have any need or plans to assault anyone, but I may have a need to defend against someone who'd like to assault me.
  - davidw 11y ago
    > They were not hunting people down and assaulting them. Not with the guns, and not physically, much. But they most certainly were threatening people, according to the FBI complaint against them: "The person with Ritzheimer told the woman he knows what kind of car she drives and he was going to follow her home and burn her house down, according to the complaint."
  - seangrant 11y ago
    You don't have to assault someone for your weapon to become an "assault weapon". A semi-auto pistol grip rifle is an assault weapon. Especially when the clear purpose of them having these weapons are to be used in combat. No it is not a defense to say that they are defending themselves. These people illegally encroached property that was not theirs.

zekevermillion 11y ago

These photos remind me of William Gibson's observations on tactical fashion -- if you are really a militant, then the last thing you'd want to do is look all tactical and stuff. The Army surplus look, radios with whip antennae, etc., is fun. But in any scenario where militia were up against organized force, I would think they should try to blend into the population. But I guess it's hard to keep morale up if you just go to meetings where you practice blending into population. Like, an organized concealed carry sit-in at Starbucks where you don't tell anyone you're carrying and try not to be noticed? Or, have radio conversations where you discuss nothing of substance and avoid transmitting any coded messages?

sevensor 11y ago
> Or, have radio conversations where you discuss nothing of substance and avoid transmitting any coded messages This is a requirement for operating an amateur radio in most jusisdictions. Ham radio is the concealed-carry of communications technology.
golergka 11y ago
> But in any scenario where militia were up against organized force, I would think they should try to blend into the population. It's very effective indeed, if you disregard all problems with international law and basic human morals. It's a tactic that have been very successful for Hamas in recent years, for example. Fighting in civilian clothing means that (1) your adversaries will kill much more civilians, honestly mistaking them for you and (2) all your losses can be easily counted as "civilians" by even slightly biased observers. Next step in effectivety is just keeping a couple of children around you in a firefight. Idealist militants, on the other hand, who are concerned with well-being of civilians they are fighting against always assume some form of uniform, because among other things, it helps to keep at least some rules of engagement in place and protect innocents to some extent.
- gaius 11y ago
  Hence the orange jumpsuits of the Rebel Alliance.
- deleted 11y ago

pythia__ 11y ago

What this makes me wonder is, could they use a cell phone Wi-Fi mesh network at least for a significant part of their communications?

itgoon 11y ago
I was thinking RPis with nrf24l01 chips. You could do everything with custom encryption.
- BWStearns 11y ago
  This settles it. HN needs to conduct our own takeover of a federal building to show these guys how it's done :p /sarcasm please god let this line have been unneeded
  - itgoon 11y ago
    I'll be sure and pack snacks. /yea, me too

twothamendment 11y ago

Interesting read, but it almost paints anyone who owns a Baofeng as a terrorist. It does do a great job of showing how lame it is to think that those radios will help in a standoff like that. If the government was going to go in, you can bet the first thing they'd do is jam those cheap radios. For anyone interested in ham radio, there isn't a better place to start. Without these cheap, not-as-good-as-something-that-costs-10x-as much radios you can get into the hobby for under $50 including your license. I'd spend a tad bit more and go for the UV-82hp and a new antenna, but $75 to get going isn't bad. Without these I don't think there would be many younger people getting started. In my area there is a very active repeater of normal people (many of them software guys, so maybe not all that normal) chatting about all kinds of topics and there is always someone to answer a question. Passing the test isn't bad - checkout the mobile friendly http://www.hamstudy.org http://www.hamstudy.org (no, affiliated, just a happy user).

Aloha 11y ago
In my opinion the Baofeng isn't a very good radio (poor build quality, poor performing RF deck, bad documentation and software support), and there are better inexpensive options out there - most surplus commercial radio gear is around the same price with a better build quality - and for those with some money to spend, you can pick up surplus XTS3000 with DES-XL (or DES-OFB) for under 250 bucks ea, add another 3-800 for a KVL and you have a somewhat hard to crack Digital (P25) encrypted radio system. The Motorola iDEN handset DirecTalk feature is also a great option for comms up to about a mile, no encryption, so its more of a security thru obscurity system (same with the Motorola DTR series of radios, which are conceptually identical to the iDEN handset feature - down to power output even - I think the difference is message format and codec IMBE vs VSLEP or AMBE), because of the nature of the beast unless you know its DirecTalk, its unlikely you would be able to figure out and find it either. I've long used surplus Motorola or Kenwood gear in my car and for handhelds - GP300's, XTS's, Spectra (for the car) and before that a Syntor X (which had one of the hottest receivers I've ever seen in a mobile) - I myself have been licensed since 1996.
- cdjk 11y ago
  I've tried using commercial radios before, but the biggest annoyance is the difficulty in either 1) getting programming software and 2) actually using the software, which usually has an atrocious UI. At least with a purpose-built ham radio you can enter frequencies directly on the handset, even if it's a pain. Although the programming software for them is almost as bad.

arca_vorago 11y ago

I find it unusual that there is only passing mention of Frequency Hopping Spread Spectrum (FHSS) and frequency-hopping code division multiple access (FH-CDMA), which by themselves do have some issues, but combined with encryption like KY-57 or KY-58+ they can be pretty hard. Since that is some of what the US military uses, and militias are largely comprised of former military, I would expect to see more PRC119's and similar in the article, but don't. I wonder why? edit: found my own answer in the article. "The average militia individual can’t afford the $7,500+ price tag of a 5 watt VHF HT radio that has high levels of encryption combined with frequency hopping capability; anything less than that (such as DMR or P25) is easily intercepted and decrypted in realtime."

VLM 11y ago

Its interesting that the article has nothing specifically militia related. In that its just a list of point to point radios anyone can use. There probably are characteristics or features that would appeal to anti-government activists on either the left or the right, but the article didn't mention them. For example, if you want communications in the deep mountains for hiking or camping, its not a bad "buyers guide". Interestingly it does side step using actual military surplus radios. Probably because the mil-surp radios us Ham Radio guys use are either too expensive or too antique to be of use. I have a nice R-392 (a "mobile" R-390). Its not exactly tacti-cool, LOL. For about a quarter century I've been planning on buying a PRC-77 to work ham radio 6 meter FM... in my infinite spare time. I like the 6m band although I've almost exclusively worked weak signal SSB.

hackuser 11y ago

Isn't the FCC auctioning off some spectrum soon in former TV frequencies? Perhaps the militia groups could bid on some ...