Legal?

Ah yeah. I'm not sure what these are allocated to in the US, either, but would be worth throwing on to my scan list for my 2m mobile. I agree though. It's not the 70s anymore, it would make sense to have a more modern cb type band, with limits a little more liberal that four measly watts.

 

An interesting list, Snow Crab.

However, that "Onlog 6" must be incorrect, as according to TAFL there are no Canadian licensees assigned to that frequency. Perhaps you meant 163.170 which is assigned to some Ontario and Quebec forestry-related enterprises such as Tembec and Foremgi.

Both large and small Ontario and Quebec forestry-related companies--including Tembec and Forex--share these frequencies:

162.210
163.170
164.385
165.180
165.330
166.110
167.880
168.180
171.750

Please note that in the Montreal area, the LAD-4 (Logging Administration) frequency of 170.370 MHz is licensed to Champlain Taxi, so kindly refrain from transmitting on it when passing through.

As far as I know, there are no current plans to create a BC-type "Road Resource" network of radio channels for use in Quebec and/or Ontario, although obviously it would be very convenient.

Imagine a Canada-wide, VHF 40 channel band segment available to cross-country truckers.

If and when the need arises, a petition to Industry Canada could be initiated to influence the powers-that-be to create a such a service.

As it stands, GMRS, FRS, MURS, and CB will have to do, despite their relative power and range limitations.

Safe driving.

 

What was the guys name? I know the guy that works on all my stuff when he has a base antenna setup people hear him all over the country and it does draw business in for him from all over the country because when people hear him they want their radios to sound like his and to perform like his so they willingly packed their radios and send them in the mail to him to have him repair and align their radios. So yes it does draw business in even if it is skip unfortunately it's a false sense of security if you can't even hear the guy 30 miles away but you can hear him 3000 miles away via skip. As is the case with most technicians.

 

Unfortunately, too much of the information (or more likely disinformation!) passed around from end-user-to end-user ends up confusing everyone.

First of all, if you are NOT LICENSED TO OPERATE on any frequency that is NOT ASSIGNED TO YOU or the trucking company with which you are employed, it can get you into trouble--particularly when driving cross-border. Paranoia notwithstanding, radio traffic can be and presumably is recorded as potential evidence.

While it may seem "cool" and convenient to have your two-way radios programmed to every imaginable trucker frequency, it only becomes more and more cumbersome, not to mention confusing when attempting to discover exactly "where everyone else is talking".

This becomes even more problematic when the tendency may be for many drivers to seek out "personal, secret channels" on which to communicate in order not to become interfered with or eavesdropped on (futile, of course); such channels which may very well be assigned to emergency services or other companies not related to trucking. You would have to be running very low power not to be discovered, in which case you might just as well use inexpensive, low-power GMRS or FRS handhelds.

Under such circumstances, you can well imagine why the authorities would be determined to clamp down on unauthorized frequency use.

Incidentally, for those who may not have noticed, skip noise has virtually disappeared from the CB band due to the current downturn in the solar cycle, thereby making the Citizen's Band the obvious choice for those who want to communicate truck-to-truck within a reasonable distance--as has been the tradition for decades. The recent tendency for truckers to "abandon" CB is, in my opinion at least, without merit. Are trucking schools discouraging CB usage? Unlike cellphones and texting, two-way radios do NOT come under the purview of "distracted driving".

How many in the trucking industry actually NEED to communicate with each other over a 50-mile distance--something which is NOT always GUARANTEED when using VHF in any case. What did truck drivers do in the years before discovering the LAD and other VHF frequencies?

Unauthorized frequency usage can only generate more interference complaints; a situation which does harm to the trucking industry. Nobody respects pirates and trespassers. Would YOU?

As I have advocated elsewhere in this website, there ought to be a cross-Canada and even a cross-border VHF or UHF BAND exclusive and legally assigned to the trucking industry much like British Columbia's existing Road Resource network.

This would put an end to the confusion, misinformation, and interference such as frequently occurs with the unauthorized usage of ham radio and marine radio equipment.