RadioReference on Facebook   RadioReference on Twitter   RadioReference Blog
 

Go Back   The RadioReference.com Forums > Amateur Radio > Amateur Radio General Discussion

Amateur Radio General Discussion General discussion forum for amateur radio topics not covered by the above forums.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #141 (permalink)  
Old 08-29-2014, 11:29 AM
W9BU's Avatar
Lead Wiki Manager
  RadioReference Database Admininstrator
Database Admin
Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Brownsburg, Indiana
Posts: 2,942
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WB4CS View Post
I'll agree with the fact that it's inconceivable how the cheap China crap radios receive Part 90 certification.
Bear in mind that the FCC doesn't test radios themselves. They certify independent labs to do the testing for them. If the lab decides to fudge the numbers a little, and I'm not saying that they do, how would the FCC know?
__________________
Lead Wiki Manager and Moderator for the Radio Reference Amateur Radio Forums.

"The whole world's living in a digital dream. It's not really there, it's all on the screen." -- Joe Walsh WB6ACU
Reply With Quote
Sponsored links
  #142 (permalink)  
Old 08-29-2014, 11:30 AM
mmckenna's Avatar
Member
   
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SNCZCA01
Posts: 2,750
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Token View Post
There are no "type accepted" devices for this type of operation, although anything sold commercially for such service must be "authorize" by the FCC, and as far as I know it is legal to build your own gear for it as long as you meet the technical requirements (Section 15.23). Such built gear does not require FCC authorization. So I see no reason you could not use modified ham gear.
Under Part 15 is key there, and they are using it on amateur frequencies, or at least frequencies that have been specifically authorized for said use.

Like I said, this is about amateurs modifying their amateur radios to use in other services.
GMRS, as we've established, requires Part 95 acceptance. Amateur radios don't have that. Amateur radios require modification to do operate there, and that modification voids the radios existing Type 15 certifications. So in combination with the lack of Part 95 certs, amateurs are also voiding the radios part 15 certs of their radios. I know, some amateurs don't care, and they'll do whatever they want. Fine by me, I'm not going to stand in their way.
What concerns me is a new amateur, like KW7PTL, showing up and trying to convince other differently. It's one thing to express an opinion. It's another thing to spread bad information. Lack of knowledge isn't a good enough defense.
Reply With Quote
  #143 (permalink)  
Old 08-29-2014, 11:38 AM
WB4CS's Avatar
Member
  Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Northern Alabama
Posts: 871
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Token View Post
Small nit to pick here. Yes, I understand what you are saying, and no in general I do not disagree with most of it. However the "NO exception" part might not be 100% accurate.

It would likely be legal to use modified ham gear in some other services, which do not require what used to be called Type Acceptance, assuming you met the technical requirements. For example, (and the only one I can think of off the top of my head) many folks are now running Part 15 legal beacons and related transmissions for experimentation in various bands, VLF to UHF. There are no "type accepted" devices for this type of operation, although anything sold commercially for such service must be "authorize" by the FCC, and as far as I know it is legal to build your own gear for it as long as you meet the technical requirements (Section 15.23). Such built gear does not require FCC authorization. So I see no reason you could not use modified ham gear.

And yes, I do realize that is not the type of operation people who frequently ask this question have in mind.

T!
Since this old thread has been resurrected, now might be a good time to revisit post #38, to where the FCC has said (paraphrasing here) that no matter what, you cannot use your ham gear outside of the ham bands, for any reason, at all. Ever. Period. No more. Done.

Why is out of band transmit illegal? (was: Stupid question)

Quote:
Brandon,



Your question was referred to me because it concerns the Commission’s amateur radio rules.



Section 97.105(b) answers your question: “A station may only be operated in the manner and to the extent permitted by the privileges authorized for the class of operator license held by the control operator.” Control operator privileges are specified in Section 97.301.



Part 97 does not contain any “privileges authorized” for amateur radio operators that include Part 90 or Part 95 frequencies. Part 90 and 95 both require the use of certificated equipment. See Section 90.203 and 95.409. Use of modified amateur radio transceivers on Part 90 or 95 frequencies violate the rules because modified amateur radio equipment is not certified for either Part 90 or 95 radio services.



As you note, “The rules are clear that in order to use Part 90 or 95 spectrum, the operator must have the correct licensing and certified radios to use those services.” The debate you are referring to, therefore, comes down to “How can we get around the rules?” The answer is, “You can’t.” We will be happy to relieve you of thousands or tens of thousands of dollars and your amateur radio license if you transmit on channels you are not licensed to transmit on.



William

Wireless Telecommunications Bureau
__________________
Brandon, WB4CS
Kenwood TM-V71A, TM-281A, TH-K20A. Yaesu FT-60R
Amateur radio is a hobby. We supplement emergency communications, not replace them.
Reply With Quote
  #144 (permalink)  
Old 08-29-2014, 2:32 PM
Member
  Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 3,586
Default

That's not entirely correct. I have an NTIA license that covers HF through VHF and its legal for me to use my HF amateur gear on Govt frequencies to support the group that I belong to. The use of HF amateur gear is specifically mentioned for legal use, where we must use Part 90 radios on VHF frequencies.
prcguy

Quote:
Originally Posted by WB4CS View Post
Since this old thread has been resurrected, now might be a good time to revisit post #38, to where the FCC has said (paraphrasing here) that no matter what, you cannot use your ham gear outside of the ham bands, for any reason, at all. Ever. Period. No more. Done.

Why is out of band transmit illegal? (was: Stupid question)
Reply With Quote
  #145 (permalink)  
Old 08-29-2014, 2:48 PM
Member
   
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Mojave Desert, California, USA
Posts: 1,456
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mmckenna View Post
Yes, you are correct about amateurs being allowed to build their own gear.
Except I was not talking about amateurs building their own gear, I was talking about operations under Part 15, not Part 97.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mmckenna View Post
Under Part 15 is key there, and they are using it on amateur frequencies, or at least frequencies that have been specifically authorized for said use.
No, I am not talking about amateur frequencies. I was specifically addressing the statement that modified ham gear can never be used outside ham frequencies, "NO exceptions". The Part 15 operation I was discussing is outside ham frequencies, frequencies such as 160-190 kHz, 13553 - 13567 kHz, 26.96 - 27.28 MHz, and 49.82 - 49.9 MHz. Such operation requires no licensing, no type acceptance, and no certification. There are SIGNIFICANT technical restrictions involved.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mmckenna View Post
What concerns me is a new amateur, like KW7PTL, showing up and trying to convince other differently. It's one thing to express an opinion. It's another thing to spread bad information. Lack of knowledge isn't a good enough defense.
And I absolutely agree here. I was NOT saying it was OK for hams to use their equipment on Part 90 or Part 95 allocations. It is, as I understand it, absolutely NOT OK for such operations. All I was saying is that there are not "NO exceptions" to using ham gear outside of ham bands. I was addressing that one absolute statement only, I believe it to be incorrect.

T!
Reply With Quote
Sponsored links
  #146 (permalink)  
Old 08-29-2014, 2:49 PM
Member
   
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Mojave Desert, California, USA
Posts: 1,456
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WB4CS View Post
Since this old thread has been resurrected, now might be a good time to revisit post #38, to where the FCC has said (paraphrasing here) that no matter what, you cannot use your ham gear outside of the ham bands, for any reason, at all. Ever. Period. No more. Done.

Why is out of band transmit illegal? (was: Stupid question)
Keep in mind I did not resurrect this thread, not am I claiming you can use ham gear on Part 90 or 95 frequencies.

You quoted my post in its entirety, so I assume you are responding to something said in my post. Unfortunately what you posted does not apply to my post, although it does apply to the majority of people asking these questions. When someone said there are "NO exceptions" (without qualification) to using ham gear outside ham allocations I pointed out that there may be exceptions, although only one I could think of, there may be others. I specifically mentioned Part 15 operations, and the fact ANY gear, including home built, can be used under Part 15, assuming it meets the technical requirements. Section 15.23 specifically allows it. Operation under Part 15 does not require a license, and the equipment does not have to be certificated.

You have paraphrased the original post incorrectly. It does not say "you cannot use your ham gear outside of the ham bands, for any reason, at all. Ever. Period. No more. Done." It specifically addresses operation of ham gear in Part 90 and Part 95 allocations and the requirement for all Part 90 and 95 equipment to be certificated. It says you can't use uncertified or Part 97 certified ham gear for Part 90 or 95 operations. I don't see a question there at all, nor did my post, which you quoted, say anything contrary to that. I am in total agreement there, in general you cannot use ham gear on Part 90 or Part 95 frequencies, even if you are licensed for operation on such frequencies. I suppose the only exceptions to that would be the use of the Chinese ham gear that carries Part 90 or 95 Certification. The question of if those radios are really compliant with Part 90 or 95 is a different question.


T!
Reply With Quote
  #147 (permalink)  
Old 08-29-2014, 3:08 PM
WB4CS's Avatar
Member
  Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Northern Alabama
Posts: 871
Default

Looking back, I'm not sure why I quoted your post Token. I may have clicked multi-quote by mistake, or at that time I might have had an idea in my head that is gone now

I agree, this thread has specifically been about using modified ham gear for out-of-band transmit on Part 95 (CB/FRS/GMRS/MURS) and Part 90 specturm, and also applies to radio services such as Marine and Aviation. (Can't remember the Part ## for those services.)

To be honest, I've not done enough research on the subject of Part 15 compliance, so that is a valid discussion. I'm not even familiar with Part 15 enough to speak on the topic. I'm not sure if that's in the scope of this thread and may need it's own thread to be discussed, but definitely a topic worth looking into.
__________________
Brandon, WB4CS
Kenwood TM-V71A, TM-281A, TH-K20A. Yaesu FT-60R
Amateur radio is a hobby. We supplement emergency communications, not replace them.
Reply With Quote
  #148 (permalink)  
Old 09-08-2014, 6:22 PM
Member
   
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: TX
Posts: 58
Default

I completely understand not allowing Part 97 radios on Part 95 and Part 90 but I do not understand why Part 90 can not be used on Part 95 while Part 90 can be used on Part 97.
Reply With Quote
  #149 (permalink)  
Old 09-08-2014, 6:44 PM
Member
  Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 229
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by techguru View Post
I completely understand not allowing Part 97 radios on Part 95 and Part 90 but I do not understand why Part 90 can not be used on Part 95 while Part 90 can be used on Part 97.
Because they don't meet the requirements, just like Part 97 radios; FRS has a very low power requirement, as well as no removable antennas, and MURS has several frequencies that have an odd frequency bandwidth allowance. The reason Part 90 radios are allowed on Part 97 is that they generally easily meet the requirements for Part 97 and can be programmed for those frequencies.

WB4CS: Maritime is Part 80, Aviation is Part 87.

eCFR — Code of Federal Regulations
Reply With Quote
Sponsored links
  #150 (permalink)  
Old 09-08-2014, 6:52 PM
n5ims's Avatar
Member
  Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 2,953
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by techguru View Post
I completely understand not allowing Part 97 radios on Part 95 and Part 90 but I do not understand why Part 90 can not be used on Part 95 while Part 90 can be used on Part 97.
The reason is quite simple if you think about it. Part 90 rules and regulations require radios to be certified for use on Part 90 frequencies. Part 95 rules and regulations require radios to be certified for use on the sub-sections they're used on (FRS, GMRS, MURS, and CB all have their own certification so a radio certified for use on CB can't be used on MURS, etc. - not that their design would allow it anyway due to emission mode and frequency range).

Part 97 doesn't require any certification for a radio to be used on the Part 97 frequencies (although they do require they have certain minimum standards of stability, emission, etc. So long as the operator can restrict their station to only have emissions on the ham band(s), operate with no more than legal power levels, transmit with only valid emission modes, etc., they can operate any transmitter that they want to. It can be a home built radio using their own design (many folks did this back in the day using standard parts they found in junk radios or at their local parts store), it can be an old police radio modified to work on the ham bands (note that this modification may break the Part 90 certification so it's possible it could be no longer legal for use back on the PD frequency), an old AM broadcast transmitter (these are common on the 160 meter band), or even a commercially built ham transceiver from one of the major manufacturers.

It may be that the design of the Part 90 radio makes it work fine on the Part 90 frequencies, but cause spurs when operated on the Part 90 frequencies. It's also likely that your Part 90 radio includes a removable antenna that's illegal on Part 95 (as in MURS and FRS rules).

It's quite likely that a Part 90 radio may work fine and could be certified on Part 95 if the manufacturer did the necessary testing and submitted it to the FCC. The manufacturer may have agreements with other divisions or companies they work with that state that their Part 90 business will not compete with the Part 95 business. It may be that the company just doesn't want to add lots of checks to enable/disable features or restrict settings depending on the frequency the radio is programmed to work at (to follow the Part 95 restrictions mostly). It may also be that they simply don't want to "play" in that market to make it easier on themselves.
Reply With Quote
  #151 (permalink)  
Old 09-09-2014, 1:46 AM
Member
   
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: California
Posts: 4,648
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by techguru View Post
I completely understand not allowing Part 97 radios on Part 95 and Part 90 but I do not understand why Part 90 can not be used on Part 95 while Part 90 can be used on Part 97.
It's because many Part 90 radios exceed allowable parameters required for Part 95. In example, you can get 110 watt UHF transceivers certified for Part 90. That same radio would not be allowed on Part 95 due to the Part 95 power limitation of 50 watts. A 40 watt version of that same radio might actually be on the FCC Part 95 list.

So, a blanket authorization of Part 90 radios to be used in Part 95 service simply doesn't make sense.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 5:48 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
All information here is Copyright 2012 by RadioReference.com LLC and Lindsay C. Blanton III.Ad Management by RedTyger
Copyright 2011 by RadioReference.com LLC Privacy Policy  |  Terms and Conditions