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

[RFI-EMI-GUY]

The problem with that is that it isn't a CCR issue. It's a licensee transmitting on unauthorized frequencies...nothing more, nothing less. The same could be done with a Moto or Kenwood or anything else.

In fact, no CCR I have ever seen has a default offset. I'm sure some exist, but none of the ones I have used do. RX and TX frequencies have to be programmed separately. Chirp has auto offset, but the actual radios themselves usually don't, as they were never originally intended to be ham radios. And all of the default frequencies I have seen are set up for simplex. So it is potentially a CHIRP issue. But then again, an offset can also be programmed using the Motorola CPS.

It's indeed a CCR issue. Companies buying the cheapest POS radio and circumventing the usual safeguards. Did they bring them to an established radio shop to have an FCC licensed technician program them? No. Did they download CHIRP from the internet and hack away at it. Yup.

Sent from my SM-T350 using Tapatalk

 

[Hans13]

It's indeed a CCR issue. Companies buying the cheapest POS radio and circumventing the usual safeguards. Did they bring them to an established radio shop to have an FCC licensed technician program them? No. Did they download CHIRP from the internet and hack away at it. Yup.

Freedom in a free country. Imagine that.

 

[alcahuete]

It's indeed a CCR issue. Companies buying the cheapest POS radio and circumventing the usual safeguards. Did they bring them to an established radio shop to have an FCC licensed technician program them? No. Did they download CHIRP from the internet and hack away at it. Yup.

Sent from my SM-T350 using Tapatalk

There's not even any proof that it actually is a CCR in the first place. There is ZERO proof of that. The same exact thing could be done with a Motorola, like I said. Is it possibly a CCR that was programmed with CHIRP? Sure. Is it possibly a Motorola that was programmed by somebody who doesn't know what they're doing? Sure.

Either way, it's an issue with the operator or whomever programmed it, not with the radio. Did the radio program itself to operate on the incorrect frequency? Not a CCR issue.

 

[n1das]

Was out doing some Christmas shopping today at Wal-Mart when what to my wandering eyes should appear? A crapload of Baofengs, and no Moto gear.

Yep! My Wal-Mart is in the process of making the switch from the /\/\oto MURS radios to dual band BaoFengs. I talked to the Assistant GM out of pure curiosity, and he said it is a system-wide initiative, not just at this store. Previously, about 1 in 5 associates at my store had a radio, due to cost. The rest were paged via the PA as needed. Now, every single associate has a radio, right down to the folks in the back unpacking boxes. He said the only time the PA is ever used now is for paging customers, i.e. to Automotive or such, and they are even trying to eliminate that. System-wide initiative......

Bye bye Moto custom radio contract!

And to think, there are still people here who want to bury their heads in the sand and believe this is all about spectral impurity and not Mother /\/\ losing a ton of money. Time to wake up.

I have spotted a few Baofeng UV-5R radios in use at one of the Walmart* stores in my area. Maybe it's time to throw Walmart* under the bus by complaining to the FCC to help combat the CCR problem. If Walmart*'s use of CCRs is a company-wide thing, that's a lot of CCRs in use nationwide.

 

[needairtime]

For the heck of it, on my CCR (Baofeng UV82) I tried this experiment:

- High power
- Set VHF frequency to exactly 1/3 of that of the local (about 7 miles LOS) repeater's input UHF frequency.
- Correct CTCSS tone
- TRANSMIT!

Theoretically this tests the third harmonic content of the cheap chinese radio...

... I could not get the repeater to key up!

I tried the same with my Kenwood TK-810L receiver 15 ft away, set to the same input frequency... now this it did clearly broke carrier squelch, and I could actually hear myself as I spoke into the microphone, using a VHF transmission to a UHF only transceiver. Even with it set at low power.

Then I tried my Kenwood TR2500 (VHF only transceiver) with the same experiment ... behaves exactly the same as the Baofeng, the UHF receiver broke squelch on my TK-810L and I could hear my voice just fine. Too bad I couldn't go the other way around

I suppose this is not very scientific and no qualitative analysis like if I had a spectrum analyzer, but interesting, though I wonder how much of it is third harmonic and how much is due to other reasons.

 

[bill4long]

Needairtime, UV-82 is a Part 90 certified radio (actually the UV-82C is certified, but it is the exact same radio, and they charge a little more for the C designation and the Part 90 cert notice inside the radio.) So its spurious emissions profile should be quite decent. But even the UV-5A radios that I've seen on a spectrum scope show third order down 30db or more, which for a four watt radio that would be 4 milliwatts, and you're not going to affect anything 7 miles away with that. The spurious emission issue is really a nothingburger because the FCC doesn't get any significant complains from CCRs causing unintentional interference. The problem has been illegal use of frequencies, and intentional interference.

 

[needairtime]

I thought I saw someone mentioning that the UV82 (not UV82C) was one of the dirty ones, and the circuitry looked very similar to the UV-5R so I would assume that the spurious emissions would be similar. But I do not have access to a spectrum analyzer and have to measure in a different way, and it seems to agree that even if it's not the -60db desired, most people still won't notice -- at least I have yet to hear someone explicitly complaining about it, versus saying it's clearly bad because a spectrum analyzer says so. This is not to say that it shouldn't hit that spec, I was just curious about how many people actually complained about the spurs generating real interference... which is real because I can demonstrate it at 15 feet! But so far it seems no worse than the TR2500...

But indeed the preprogrammed frequencies and the ease of going to VFO mode, at least specifically the UV82 and likely other CCRs, bars it from being part 90 certified - and hence it is not.

 

[AK9R]

I've tested a UV-82HP that spurs above -16 dBm starting at approximately 72 MHz and at every harmonic out to the 12th harmonic and a UV-82X that had spurs above -16 dBm starting at approximately 36 MHz and at every harmonic out to the 7th plus the 12th harmonic. Both were transmitting at their full rated power in the 2m amateur radio band. I have not tested a UV-82C.

I own a UV-5R, purchased last summer, that has spurs above -16 dBm at the 2nd and 3rd harmonic of 146 MHz.

-16 dBM is the limit stated in §97.307(e) which obviously pertains to amateur radio use. Part 90 isn't my focus so I do not test for Part 90 compliance.

Spurious emissions and front-panel programmability are two different issues. If these so-called Part 90 compliant radios are easily front-panel programmable out of the box, I do not see how they can be Part 90 compliant and I think that's the main thrust of the FCC's advisory.

 

[nd5y]

...
- Set VHF frequency to exactly 1/3 of that of the local (about 7 miles LOS) repeater's input UHF frequency.
- Correct CTCSS tone
... I could not get the repeater to key up!

When you do this with an FM transmitter your third harmonic will have 3 times the deviation. That could affect how well any tones are decoded at the other end. You could be putting out a strong signal but not key up the repeater if it can't tolerate overdeviated or distorted tones.

 

[needairtime]

When you do this with an FM transmitter your third harmonic will have 3 times the deviation. That could affect how well any tones are decoded at the other end. You could be putting out a strong signal but not key up the repeater if it can't tolerate overdeviated or distorted tones.

While it's true that the decode can be affected by deviation, I've noticed that at least the TKR-750 is very lax with decoding CTCSS. I was experimenting with external tone generation on a TR-2500. One experiment was using a square wave generator using so much power that I didn't even need to have the tone output connected to the audio path, and the TKR-750 still decoded the tone and happily repeated the signal. Needless to say the voice quality transmitted was heavily distorted, at least that's the signal report reply I got over the radio.

 

[bill4long]

Spurious emissions and front-panel programmability are two different issues

UV-82 and it's variants allow you to disable the menu in channel mode, and disable VFO mode, which disables field programming, at least the ones I have. I don't have a UV-82HP.

 

[needairtime]

I haven't actually tried flipping the option but in CHIRP there's an additional checkbox

"VFO/MR Switching (UV-82C only) [ ] Enabled"

that shows up with a UV82 profile. I have it unchecked due to it being default, and yet I can still switch to VFO mode. Perhaps there's another option somewhere, but it seems the UV82 at least can't be VFO disabled the same way as the UV82C.

 

[nd5y]

I haven't actually tried flipping the option but in CHIRP there's an additional checkbox

"VFO/MR Switching (UV-82C only) [ ] Enabled"

that shows up with a UV82 profile. I have it unchecked due to it being default, and yet I can still switch to VFO mode. Perhaps there's another option somewhere, but it seems the UV82 at least can't be VFO disabled the same way as the UV82C.

It doesn't do anything on a regular 82. Neither does Single PTT, VHF TX Enable , or UHF TX Enable. Disabling menus only works in Memory Mode. If you go to VFO mode the MENU key works, so you can then do a full reset and be able to program everything again

 

[alcahuete]

And so it begins, ladies and gentlemen...

Remember months ago when I said that the only thing this is going to do is drive unlicensed users to the ham bands when manufacturers start manufacturing these radios as ham radios? People thought I was crazy. Well, many of these radios are now firmware restricted from the factory to only operate in the ham bands, instead of seeking Part 90 compliance.

For the past week, I've been listening to (and trying to track) a security firm here in SoCal who is operating illegally on the output of a high level ham repeater. I'm sure they're using a tone of some sort, because the repeater doesn't seem to bother them, and I can't contact them using CSQ. Sure, maybe it's better than being on public service frequencies, but I argued for FRS frequencies being pre-programmed, since FRS is a wasteland anyway.

Nope, let's barrage the FCC with requests to get rid of the Baofengs. LOL! Well...here we are again hams. We reap what we sow. This is just the start of the influx of these radios on ham bands.

Have fun!

 

[Hans13]

but I argued for FRS frequencies being pre-programmed, since FRS is a wasteland anyway.

I agree with your post except this part. Those of us who have GMRS licenses have spent significant time and money setting up and maintaining repeaters as well as growing our local GMRS communities. Shifting them off to us is no different than us shifting them off to you (I am an amateur operator as well). Amateur has more frequencies available than GMRS and probably has more actual wasteland because of it than GMRS, but I still wouldn't advocate for amateur frequencies to be pre-programmed.

 

[alcahuete]

I agree with your post except this part. Those of us who have GMRS licenses have spent significant time and money setting up and maintaining repeaters as well as growing our local GMRS communities. Shifting them off to us is no different than us shifting them off to you (I am an amateur operator as well). Amateur has more frequencies available than GMRS and probably has more actual wasteland because of it than GMRS, but I still wouldn't advocate for amateur frequencies to be pre-programmed.

We (I actually have my GMRS license too) can already be interfered with by the FRS bubble pack radios, etc., which of course require no license. Throwing these folks to an unlicensed service is way better than putting them on a service where a license is 100% required, IMO. Keep them off the business/public safety bands, keep them off the amateur radio bands. FRS? You'd never know the difference.

 

[needairtime]

What if they just left the programming blank?
Then it truly would be the person programming's fault for any interference they make?

 

[mmckenna]

What if they just left the programming blank?
Then it truly would be the person programming's fault for any interference they make?

Most Commercial/LMR/Public safety radios come from the factory blank.

As for "test" frequencies, the Kenwood software keeps that separate from the channel programming. When the radio is put into test mode, it uses a separate list of frequencies for that. They are preprogrammed, changeable by the person with the software, and only accessible when the radio is in "test" mode.

Would be an easy solution. And I agree, leave the radios blank from the factory.

 

[alcahuete]

The problem with leaving them blank is that people are likely to just program in anything they want (whatever works) and go with that. They could potentially still end up on public service and ham bands.

Secondly, they are now locking many/most of them up to the ham bands via firmware, to avoid Part 90 certification. Even if they are blank, people are still going to program them to the ham bands when they get programmed, since many no longer cover the entire 136-174, etc. spectrum out of the box, for example.

And finally, no company in their right mind would ever ship a consumer radio blanked out, and leave it up to the consumer to program. It's way too difficult. Imagine getting a pair of bubble pack FRS radios for instance at WalMart, but having to hook them up to the computer, install programming software, and program the things manually before using them. Uniden and friends would go out of business. The commercial manufacturers can get away with it because every radio is going to the radio shop to be programmed by people who actually know what they're doing.

I do agree though, that blank radios would be the most ideal scenario, but it's just not going to happen.

 

[mmckenna]

Yeah, probably not, but it works on the LMR and Amateur side.

If they are being sold as Part 90, then it should be blank, and the user would need to program, just like any other Part 90 radio. At least the fault would be on them, not the manufacturer (who has made it plain that they don't give a flying *&^%). Dealers would need to figure out how to handle that, just like they do with the other radios.

Or, program for the "itinerant" channels, and let the owners get licensed. Back in the 1990's Home Depot used to sell some of the low tier Motorola business radios that were set up for the UHF itinerants, 464.550, 464.500, etc. Those itinerants are mostly a free for all anyway, never figured out why FCC never "MURS'ified" them.

For the ones sold as amateur radios, they could be blank, too. Back when I used to buy amateur radios, they were all blank from the factory.

If they meet Part 95, then FRS if non-removable antenna and under 2 watts. If GMRS, then GMRS channels, 5 watts, removable antenna.

Ideally the FCC needs to crack down on this. But we all know that will never happen.