Discussion: FCC Advisory on Two-Way VHF/UHF Radios

[MTS2000des]

Put a ban on Chinese radios and the violators will figure out
a way to open the frequencies on the Motorolas, Kenwoods,
Icoms, etc.

Except that none of those manufacturers mass-market radios to consumers with part 90 frequencies loaded, and the ability to easily change them, with no modifications needed or technical skill.

And I guess while we're at it, remember that
Yaesu is imported and, at one time, they were considered
Cheap Chinese Crap!

And Yaesu (nor any other of the "big three" Japanese ham radio manufacturers) never their ham radio gear to CONSUMERS with the out of box capability to transmit on commercial frequencies, nor falsely submitted FCC equipment authorization documentation stating the gear is anything other than it was, part 97 AMATEUR gear with part 15 compliant receivers.

That IS the only issue the FCC has and the only one that matters. I could care less if someone wants to use a junk radio. I do care that they can potentially cause interference with that junk radio on unauthorized radio services.

 

[scanmanmi]

Anybody else here see the relationship between
the radio issue and the gun issue? Neither the radio
nor the gun are doing anything illegal. They just provide
a person with the right apparatus to USE it illegally.

It's actually like the drunk driver law. If you are intox and sitting in your car with the engine off your fate is determined by the keys. If the keys are out of the ignition you are ok. If your keys are in the ignition they can get you. This is the "likely to commit" mentality. You can't own or use a radio that is user capable of programming or transmitting because someday "you are likely to" do it.

 

[SpugEddy]

Over 5 years with 5 Baofengs and never once have
I transmitted on a Public Safety channel. Nor have
I wanted to. I haven't even transmitted on a ham freq.
Nor have I wanted to

 

[n1das]

Over 5 years with 5 Baofengs and never once have
I transmitted on a Public Safety channel. Nor have
I wanted to. I haven't even transmitted on a ham freq.
Nor have I wanted to

OK, so what frequencies HAVE you transmitted on or wanted to transmit on with them?


Sent from my XP8800 using Tapatalk

 

[SpugEddy]

Nothing other than GMRS. They're only used when
we go on vacation. Amusement parks, cruises, etc.
So far, two have been lost at Knoebel's Amusement
Park in PA. My reaction when I noticed them missing?
"Oh well. We'll get a new one to replace it"

 

[drielok]

It doesn't matter where the impetus came from. The problem needs to be fixed.

I think it does as it questions whether there is really a "problem" that needs fixing to begin with. This FCC letter opens a can of worms for Amateur Radio that I don't think people are wrapping their heads around. What's to stop the FCC from saying the radio you built from a kit or otherwise is illegal? Think about it.

 

[MTS2000des]

I think it does as it questions whether there is really a "problem" that needs fixing to begin with. This FCC letter opens a can of worms for Amateur Radio that I don't think people are wrapping their heads around. What's to stop the FCC from saying the radio you built from a kit or otherwise is illegal? Think about it.

The difference is vast. As amateur radio operations are concerned, homebrew equipment isn't sold commercially. If it is, than it must go through the FCC certification process, at least the receiver portion has to comply with Part 15.

Amateurs are solely responsible for the proper technical operating parameters of their equipment. Always been this way, if a ham radiates outside of their emission mask and outside the band itself, it's on him/her. Hams aren't considered "consumers" as a license is required to legally transmit (operate) ham equipment and at least in theory, one has to demonstrate a certain level of technical skill and understand responsibility they carry for operating said radio, whether it's homebrew or bought from HRO, the FCC is agnostic. The FCC isn't interested in hams operating on ham frequencies who's emissions don't venture outside their authorized spectrum. They are interested in stopping the marketing of these devices to the general public, which quite frankly should have been done a decade ago when they first started showing up here the way they have been, unlocked with no restrictions.

The issue is we aren't talking about ham gear, we're talking about radio transceivers that are marketed to the general public in a misleading manner specifically dubious claims of FCC compliance when the FCC's own part 90 rules have always prohibited the user from (easily) changing the operating frequency/transmit parameters from the user interface by default. These manufacturers aren't marketing these "wide open" radios to hams, they're being sold and operated by consumers who often don't know that they could be potentially interfering with licensed users, some of which could be public safety users in their area. The often false claims of "part 90" compliance mislead legit purchasers who think they're buying a properly vetted commercial radio when, in fact, it isn't.

These devices aren't FRS radios on license free frequencies set aside for consumer use that can't be changed. These radios are wide open out of the box often set to frequencies in use and thus, any consumer who transmits with one commits a Federal crime, and maybe a state crime. I'll say this, zero punches are pulled with those who use Chinese radios (or APX8000s for that matter) who are unauthorized and make transmissions on public safety systems. Case in point (who was, in fact, using a BaoFeng).

 

[RFI-EMI-GUY]

I think it does as it questions whether there is really a "problem" that needs fixing to begin with. This FCC letter opens a can of worms for Amateur Radio that I don't think people are wrapping their heads around. What's to stop the FCC from saying the radio you built from a kit or otherwise is illegal? Think about it.

I think the FCC is pretty clear in the rules as to what constitutes a kit radio and many manufacturers sell kits commercially. A kit radio requires no certification. The amateur is indeed responsible for it operating within limits of Part 97.

The cheap Chinese radios are not kits, cannot be construed as kits. Unless they have only ham radio frequencies and meet part 15 and part 97 they cannot be sold as ham radios.

The cheap Chinese radios are unicorns. They operated DC to light (Yes they have a flashlight) and defy all manner of regulation and performance certification. On the plus side they have been effective at reducing alcoholism because good beer money is wasted on them.

 

[KF6ORX]

Just got one. May have to return it.

My offer still stands. If anyone has a BaoFunk needing a tuneup, send it my way, I have a shiny new 15 LB sledge hammer.

Sent from my SM-T350 using Tapatalk

ROFL

 

[W8RMH]

Even if they've already crossed the pond, it may still be too late. The advisory said they can't be sold, either.

They can't be operated either. Operated could also mean listen only. There are hundreds of thousands of them out there. Stopping more from coming into the country won't do much good.

 

[prcguy]

I think there are many caveats to this discussion and here is what I think is the core problem.

Some Baofeng and similar radios were FCC certified for Part 90 use at some point early on. The original UV-5Rs that I purchased from a legit dealer arrived with VFO enabled for the 2m and 70cm bands only and any other frequencies needed to be programmed via a computer with software, there was no way to go out of the amateur bands without programming it like you would with a Motorola or Kenwood commercial radio. In this mode the radio should be Part 97 and Part 90 compliant.

The rest of the world has access to wide open VFO mode UV-5Rs and competing models that do not meet US specs and with no legitimate FCC Part 90 certification due to the live VFO mode. These have made their way to the US via offshore distributors and greedy or unknowing US sellers trying to make $$ and these wide open radios have flooded the US market and spoiled the pool of otherwise legit radios. Now we have a mix of legal and illegal radios and its impossible to tell the difference without turning them all on and testing.

Now what to do? Weed out all the grey market radios with live VFO mode and let the legit Part 90 radios live on or ban them all?

 

[MTS2000des]

Now what to do? Weed out all the grey market radios with live VFO mode and let the legit Part 90 radios live on or ban them all?

The issue is that the certification is a nothing more than a number and the fact is, so long as the bogus "freeband" versions are marketed to consumers, the FCC has to make a decision to revoke the certification across the board as they did with the famous bogus AnyToneTech TERMIN8R 3 years ago, or allow these devices to continue to be sold at the risk of more radio spectrum pollution in the form of interference and unlicensed operation.

 

[bill4long]

Now what to do? Weed out all the grey market radios with live VFO mode and let the legit Part 90 radios live on or ban them all?

For ham operators, any radio that transmits within the emissions specs as specified in Part 97 is fine, whether it was marketed properly or not. If they transmit using radios that violate the emissions standards and cause harmful interference they may get caught and warned/fined. Otherwise nothing will happen.

For land-mobile users, the radio needs to be genuinely Part 90 certified, and operated within specs and rules specified in Part 90. If they are operated illegally and cause harmful interferes they may get caught and warned/fined. Otherwise nothing will happen.

People buying uncertified and illegally marketed CCRs for GMRS and FRS are operating illegally, and probably will continue to do so. If they cause harmful interference they may get caught and warned/fined. Otherwise nothing will happen.

The only class of people the Advisory is likely to affect in any significant measure is the Amazon and Ebay sellers. That's the choke point and primary intended target. Individuals who illegally use any radio, and causes harmful interference, is likely to get reported by the affected party, and the FCC will investigate, and issue warning or fine. Otherwise nothing will happen. The FCC has complaint-driven enforcement for ham radio, land mobile, and most two-way radio communication. They are not out scouring the streets looking for illegal operators.

 

[prcguy]

Assuming a CCR is not type accepted for anything, you can legally import one for your personal use in the amateur bands if it meets basic emission criteria for Part 97 as you mention. But for it to be offered for sale in the US in qty for amateur use, it must be part 15 and Part 97 type accepted and it appears the majority of the CCRs are offered for sale with commercial freqs available via FPP right out of the box and that is now a big problem.

At least the importing thing I mentioned used to be the case until the FCC lady claimed a wide open FPP radio is not legal to use on amateur. Its hard to be legal and compliant when you are dealing with a moving target, which is apparently what the FCC has become.

For ham operators, any radio that transmits within the emissions specs as specified in Part 97 is fine, whether it was marketed properly or not. If they transmit using radios that violate the emissions standards and cause harmful interference they may get caught and warned/fined. Otherwise nothing will happen.

For land-mobile users, the radio needs to be genuinely Part 90 certified, and operated within specs and rules specified in Part 90. If they are operated illegally and cause harmful interferes they may get caught and warned/fined. Otherwise nothing will happen.

People buying uncertified and illegally marketed CCRs for GMRS and FRS are operating illegally, and probably will continue to do so. If they cause harmful interference they may get caught and warned/fined. Otherwise nothing will happen.

The only class of people the Advisory is likely to affect in any significant measure is the Amazon and Ebay sellers. That's the choke point and primary intended target. Individuals who illegally use any radio, and causes harmful interference, is likely to get reported by the affected party, and the FCC will investigate, and issue warning or fine. Otherwise nothing will happen. The FCC has complaint-driven enforcement for ham radio, land mobile, and most two-way radio communication. They are not out scouring the streets looking for illegal operators.

 

[AK9R]

But for it to be offered for sale in the US in qty for amateur use, it must be part 15 and Part 97 type accepted...

There is no Part 97 certification except for HF amplifiers that could be used on the 10m and 12m bands.

Part 15 certification of amateur radio transceivers primarily addresses memory channel scanning and possible reception of cordless phone and cell phone frequencies prohibited by the ECPA.

That said, amateur radio operators are bound by 97.307 to not emit spurious emissions from their transmitters.

 

[ipfd320]

Im Really Getting Confused Here on this Order--Does Anyone Know How to Read--All I Keep Hearing is Spectral Purity / Spurious Emissions and All this Other Garbage from the Bao Haters

The Order Clearly States Programming Out of Band Radios----Nothing More--So Stop with the Emissions Crap--Its Not Relivant to the FCC Order

I Posted the Footnotes on the Order on Who Started this Whole Mess--Here it is Again from Post 196 and then kevin gets Shot down on post 199

{4}-- See, e.g., Letter from David Smith, President, and Mark Crosby, Secretary/Treasurer, Land Mobile
Communications Council, to Michael O’Rielly, Commissioner, FCC at 2 (June 7, 2018) (stating that the
“distribution of non-compliant radio devices . . . reaches 1,000,000 units annually.&#8221,
http://lmcc.org/wpcontent/uploads/20...Dev-060718.pdf.

This All has to do with Sales on Radios as Stated Above in the Footnote--They Cried to the FCC and Now we Have the Order

Yes Most of You Have Valid Points Here and There--But Stop Shoving the Emissions Crap Down Our Throats-14 Pages is Enough--You All Got the Point Across the Board

Face it the FCC Had Plenty of Time and Oppertunity to Clear this Up--But they Were to Busy Hanging with the Cell Boys and the Money they are Getting--(does First Net sound familiar)

 

[kayn1n32008]

Im Really Getting Confused Here on this Order--Does Anyone Know How to Read--All I Keep Hearing is Spectral Purity / Spurious Emissions and All this Other Garbage from the Bao Haters

The Order Clearly States Programming Out of Band Radios----Nothing More--So Stop with the Emissions Crap--Its Not Relivant to the FCC Order

I Posted the Footnotes on the Order on Who Started this Whole Mess--Here it is Again from Post 196 and then kevin gets Shot down on post 199

{4}-- See, e.g., Letter from David Smith, President, and Mark Crosby, Secretary/Treasurer, Land Mobile
Communications Council, to Michael O’Rielly, Commissioner, FCC at 2 (June 7, 2018) (stating that the
“distribution of non-compliant radio devices . . . reaches 1,000,000 units annually.”),
http://lmcc.org/wpcontent/uploads/20...Dev-060718.pdf.

This All has to do with Sales on Radios as Stated Above in the Footnote--They Cried to the FCC and Now we Have the Order

Yes Most of You Have Valid Points Here and There--But Stop Shoving the Emissions Crap Down Our Throats-14 Pages is Enough--You All Got the Point Across the Board

Face it the FCC Had Plenty of Time and Oppertunity to Clear this Up--But they Were to Busy Hanging with the Cell Boys and the Money they are Getting--(does First Net sound familiar)

But The EmMissioNs CrAp Is As ImpOrTaNt As The AbIlItY To Be ProGrMmed OuT oF ThE BoX To AnY FrEqUenCy aS wELl.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[kayn1n32008]

The issue is that the certification is a nothing more than a number and the fact is, so long as the bogus "freeband" versions are marketed to consumers, the FCC has to make a decision to revoke the certification across the board as they did with the famous bogus AnyToneTech TERMIN8R 3 years ago, or allow these devices to continue to be sold at the risk of more radio spectrum pollution in the form of interference and unlicensed operation.

I saw first hand the mayhem these garbage radios can cause.

I was getting my CLAWR access card renewed today to do some work on the Cold Lake Air Weapons Range. While waiting for the ladies to process my paper work, a guy came in with a Baofeng hand held. In order to work off of the ‘high grade’ you must have a VHF-FM radio with 5 repeaters programmes, or have a UHF Capacity Plus mobile(Cenovus is in the process of moving all users, except for helicopters to their DMR system) He was asking for the frequencies so he could program his radio. Well it seems he had the frequencies but not the PL tones for the repeaters. While not life and death, this guy had zero business programming a radio to operate on a LMR system, and was told to contact one of two local radio companies for help.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[RFI-EMI-GUY]

WAAaaAaAaa I wAAAAAAnt my cHeap ChINeesee rADiO!!!!

Sent from my SM-T350 using Tapatalk

 

[12dbsinad]

Im Really Getting Confused Here on this Order--Does Anyone Know How to Read--All I Keep Hearing is Spectral Purity / Spurious Emissions and All this Other Garbage from the Bao Haters

Because it needs to meet FCC part 90 spec, that's why you keep hearing about it, among other things like FPP out of the box.

Part of part 90 testing is emissions. It is important. Not to a scanner jockey, but to a radio tech, and there are plenty of them right here who understands RF. Part 90 spectrum is regulated to keep it as clean as possible. It is already a disaster with things like unpaired VHF, adding dirty transmitters like a turdfeng isn't a good idea. Spurious emission IS a big deal considering it can dump loads of power on to adjacent frequencies, frequencies that may be used by police and fire.

Trust me, it IS important and WHY testing is done.