雀爺&YC懷舊篇下集第四章

上一章提及過的1995年5月10日的一次 OFTA 頻譜咨詢委員會會議 RSAC 05/1995 中有關 27MHz 市民波段合法化的議程紀錄撮要，因當年之文件亦是只有英文版，故這裡再為各股東撮要翻譯如下。

• Agenda item 4: Legalization of 27 MHz Citizen Band Radios on Land
  (RSAC Paper No. 4/1995)

  議程第四項 : 陸上使用 27MHz 市民波段的合法化 (頻譜咨詢委員會文件第 4/1995號)

• Mr Danny Lau introduced the paper and explained the reasons for proposing the legalization of 27 MHz Citizen Band (CB) radios on land, following the legalization of CB radio for use by fishermen in 1994. One reason was that there had been public requests and enquiries expressing their interests in using CB radios on land. It could be used during emergencies and for recreational purpose. Furthermore, the introduction of CB radio would help to relieve the demand for additional open channels for mobile to mobile communications. Legalization of CB radios could also discourage users from using illegal radio stations, and therefore reduce the number of complaints on radio interference caused by illegal radio stations. Studies and trials had also been carried out and interference with TV reception due to direct break-in was found to be undetectable provided that the separation distance between the CB radio and the TV sets was over 2 metres. Interference due to CB spurious emissions would only occur if they fell on the most sensitive part of the receiver passband of a TV channel, but OFTA considered that the probability of such occurrence to be very small. OFTA's proposal was therefore to exempt portable and mobile CB radio from licensing. It was also proposed that type approval of equipment would be enforced by requiring dealers to stick labels on approved radios.

  劉先生在席上介紹了咨詢文件的內容及解釋了建議跟隨1994年水上魚船後將陸上使用 27MHz CB 合法化的背景及原因. 其中一個原因是有公眾表達出在陸地上使用 CB 的意願. 它可被用在危急事件及文康事務上. 再者, 引入 CB 可減輕對要再開放多些公開頻道給流動使用者的壓力. 它同時亦可發揮減低迫使公眾使用其他非法頻道電台的誘因, 從而大大減低因那些非法電台而起干擾的投訴.. 有閞由CB基頻直接破入電視接收的干擾實驗及測試, 在過程中証明了兩者在超過兩米或以上的距離時是不會造成干擾. 至於諧波干擾方面則只會發生在該諧波剛好落在電視的接收頻道頻寬的最敏感部份時才會發生而 OFTA 則覺得這個情況出現的機會很低. 故此 OFTA 在此建議豁免 27MHz 市民波段的手提及流動操作的領牌需要. 同時亦建議當中所使用的器材要是經過核准的型號及由供應商在有關器材上貼上識別標籤才可.

• The Chairman then invited Members to advise on the following three aspects of the proposals:

  主席隨即邀請各委員就著下列三個方面作出建議 :

  • whether it was correct in principle to legalize CB radios on land;

    原則上應否把陸上使用市民波段合法化

  • whether fixed CB installations should be banned and only to lift the restriction on mobile and portable CB radios; and

    是否只禁止固定CB電台而開放流動及手提CB無線電的使用

  • whether the proposed simple regulatory procedure was acceptable.

    建議中的簡單豁免領牌是否可接受

• In response to Mr R Stather, the Chairman said that the CB radio users would not be given call-signs for identification purpose since they were exempted from licensing. It would be difficult to enforce even if they were required to precede their messages by call-signs. Mr Danny Lau said that guidelines would be issued to advise on the proper use of the CB radios.

  作為回應 Mr. R Stather, 主席表示既然是豁免領牌的話, CB 使用者將不會獲發固定呼號. 即使發給呼號也難以執行. 劉先生表示將會用指引的形式去規範 CB 的正確使用方法.

• Mr Paul Berriman asked if the proposed liberalization of CB radio would be effective in discouraging the illegal use of radios installed at fixed locations. The Chairman said that it was easier to track down radio stations at fixed locations. The concern at present was mainly on illegal radio equipment which was mobile.

  Mr. Paul Berriman 質疑 CB 的合法化是否可以有效減低固定的非法電台. 主席回應說非法的固定電台比較容易緝獲. 而今次主要考慮的關注是的流動無線電使用.

• As regards whether the CB channels would cause interference across the border into China, the Chairman said that this would be raised informally with the Guangdong authority as the current coordination agreement did not cover frequencies below 30 MHz. He understood that the use of CB radio was probably not permitted in China but the CB channels were used internationally and the frequencies would be subject to interference by the transmissions from other countries anyway.

  由於目前與大陸方面未有就低過 30MHz 以下的頻譜有任何協議, 主席提出無論 CB 會否造成跨境的干擾問題也好, 也將會在與廣東有關當局的溝通上非正式地提出. 主席亦知悉在中國境內, CB 有可能並不合法, 但 CB 所使用的頻道已經是國際性地存在而射頻干擾的出現亦有由其他國家而來的主觀性事實.

  However, on balance, taking into consideration the administrative workload created by licensing and the inconvenience caused by licensing to potential users, it was considered appropriate to adopt the approach of exemption from licensing. In response to a question on whether exemption from licensing could lead to an uncontrolled situation, the Chairman said that safety standards could be compiled and specified as some of the conditions of exemption and in any case any health hazard caused to neighbours would entail civil liability for negligence and nuisance.

• 有閞豁免領牌方面, 主席明白到可能引起一些濫用或者假冒的標籤出現. 但是, 在考慮到因發牌而增加的工作量與及對有志熱心合法使用市民波段的公眾人士所造成的負面影響, 局方仍然覺得採用豁免領牌的制度比較合適. 在回應問到豁免領牌是否會導致失控的局面時, 主席表示安全標準方面可以編纂出一套作為豁免的準則來, 而任何可引起鄰近人士健康上的潛在危險, 滋擾, 疏忽等等都會是有關人等的責任及

以上文件的原文可在 OFTA 網站內一份編號 RSAC 05/1995 的議程紀錄文件內找到.

至此大家可知在香港確曾出現過一次 Citizen Band 市民波段的懷孕期, 只是最後亦都因種種原因而流產了而已. 而最值得慶幸的竟是由 OFTA 有關的行政部門在收到有市民的要求時主動對 CB 這件事作出了積極及正面的回應. 縱觀在前一章的咨詢文件內容裡, 可知當時負責草擬該份文件的官員確實很用心及落力地為事件付出了精神. 這個可從他們未把文件提交上咨詢委員會前已主動作出對 CB 的多種測試及探討便得知一二, 需知該等測試及研究確也曾需要多番功夫及時間才能獲得一個客觀及準確的結果. 在前一章中的咨詢文件內, 大家可以由 OFTA 的技術部門對 CB 的測試結果中看得出他們已把 CB 過往的廿多卅年的壞形象一掃而空. 在此亦不得不向該部門之各相關人員致以尊崇的敬禮.

其實 CB 這回事在世界多個國家都已是家常便飯的一個運作. 當中當然有它好及不好的各個方面. 這就等於現今的手提電話一般. 有人用它作奸犯科, 但亦有人用它作慈善用途, 完全端視操作它的人而定. 決沒有因為有人將會用它來作奸犯科就要把它禁止的道理來的. 要犯科的人並不會因為社會禁止而不去犯科, 於是乎這個禁令卻只對另外那守法的一部份人起了作用. 這個可從今天在 VHF 頻段內的非法電台的氾濫便不難得出結論. 法令不是禁止非法設立電台及佔用別人的頻道的嗎 ? 可當你在 144-146 這兩 MHz 內所聽到的訊息中, 有多少個是屬於非法佔用的呢 ? 公道一點來說, 他們如果有頭髮, 你猜他們會願意當瘌痢嗎 ? 大家撫心自問一個假設性的問題, 假如本地的政府是明令禁止業餘電台操作的. 我們有多少個會唯有乖乖的放棄這個興趣還是會偷偷地玩呢 ? 我們能考取到業餘電台執照當然是我們努力的成果, 但為何社會總不能對另一部份有興趣玩無線電而卻沒有能力考取執照的人開放一些呢 ?

大家都知道無線電這個範疇有著多方面的技術, 知識及樂趣. 此等技術及知識大家亦知道是一點一滴地在實踐中積累回來, 當中會經過很多失敗, 挫折及提點才能有成果. 在一個有興趣的人來說, 不給予機會他在實踐中學習, 他又如何能確切地去考執照呢 ? 正如士兵學習戰術一般, 只給予他在軍校中的理論訓練而不准他到叢林裡去和其他士兵作模擬戰爭的實習, 那他會在考完軍校的畢業試後就會成為一個合格的士兵來了嗎 ? 難道真的只背誦幾本考牌秘訣及法例就真能成為一個合格的火腿 ?

以下為新雀的相簿下集