Recommend a dual/band with easy extended transmit mod

[wrath]

Dual band extended with an off switch sounds to me like a keneood 710ga ,it's almost the same as the v71a , however it has five independent profiles profile one could be standard , profile 2 could be expanded profile 3 could be fully expanded, four & 5 could be choice , it also has the ability to password protect the radio as well as inhibit transmit with a password as well as inhibit TX and keypad use, gives you lots of flexibility ,in the profiles you can even store completely different frequencies organized completely different from any other profile, if you add the 74a with a chosen matching secret code you can remotely control it from the keypad of the HT , they are full of surprises as to what they can do, the 710ga is like batman's belt except you know what's in it , and what it can do. I highly recommend the rt systems software for the 710, makes customizing it a breeze , including those five different profiles ( each one can say hello with a different gif file depending on the profile ) it's my favorite radio and does APRS also for added fun. Remote head included so it's a pretty formidable beast of a radio.

It also has a very cool extended receive out of the box .
Sent from my SM-T810 using Tapatalk

 

[mmckenna]

Your response was “People keep saying this, and in the USA at least, it is still wrong. Part 90 prohibits "any person" from possessing a transmitter that is able to transmit on frequencies for which they are not licensed or authorized to transmit by a licensee.”

Part 90 rules ONLY apply on Part 90 frequencies. An amateur radio operator transmitting on amateur radio frequencies has nothing to do with Part 90. Part 97 rules are the only ones that apply to amateur radio operators operating on amateur radio frequencies.

 

[Token]

<<<<snip>>>>
Possession of a radio -capable- of transmitting on part 90 frequencies isn't an issue. What the quoted rule part say is that "no person shall program into a transmitter frequencies for which the licensee using the transmitter is not authorized."

Remember, this is Part 90 rules and those rules ONLY apply on Part 90 frequencies. You cannot take a Part 90 radio and PROGRAM in Part 90 frequencies (for transmitting) that you are not licensed for.
<<<<snip>>>>

You and I are on the same page here (and have been all along), and you have stated it is as I thought I understood things. A ham can use pretty much anything he wants on Part 97 freqs as long as he makes sure he is meeting the requirements of spectral purity, power, modulation bandwidths, etc. Further, ownership of any radio transmitter gear, regardless of intended service, is not, by itself, a violation, although certainly using it if you are not appropriately licensed for that service is a violation. Regardless of what kind of radio it is, opened up ham gear or originally Part 90, you cannot program in Part 90 frequencies for which you are not licensed, and license or not you generally can&#8217;t repurpose non-Part-90 gear to Part 90 operation.

What I was trying to get clarification on was Dave&#8217;s statement that &#8220;Part 90 prohibits &#8220;any person&#8221; from possessing a transmitter that is able to transmit on frequencies for which they are not licensed or authorized to transmit by the licensee&#8221;, specifically in response to another users statement that ownership of modified gear was not illegal, but using it on other services was. Dave&#8217;s response implied to me that mere possession a Part-90 transmitter was not legal unless you were Part-90 licensed, and that potentially opens a lot of cans of worms, such as the legality of reutilization of Part 90 gear on ham bands.

That part, that Part 90 prohibits possession, was what I was trying to get more information on, since it was essentially a foreign concept to me.

T!

 

[nd5y]

That part, that Part 90 prohibits possession, was what I was trying to get more information on, since it was essentially a foreign concept to me.

Because it doesn't exist.
Here is all of Part 90 all in one page:
http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?&mc=true&node=pt47.5.90&rgn=div5
Searching for possess or possession on the page doesn't show anything about possessing equipment.

 

[mmckenna]

...that mere possession a Part-90 transmitter was not legal unless you were Part-90 licensed, and that potentially opens a lot of cans of worms, such as the legality of reutilization of Part 90 gear on ham bands.

Yep, and there are a lot of GMRS users using radios that have type certification for Part 90, as well as Part 95.

Pretty sure, however, the FCC is doing their best to keep us confused. Then again, I'm not sure there is any way to write the rules that would not result in someone claiming a loop hole for their own intended purpose (coincidentally).

 

[KD8DVR]

Part 90 rules ONLY apply on Part 90 frequencies. An amateur radio operator transmitting on amateur radio frequencies has nothing to do with Part 90. Part 97 rules are the only ones that apply to amateur radio operators operating on amateur radio frequencies.

I just can't understand why some people just don't get this. There are some rule parts that can cross across radio services, such as Part 25; but the specific rule parts for specific radio services cannot.

AntiSquid Disclaimer: All posted content is personal opinion only and may not imply fact or accusation.

 

[mmckenna]

I just can't understand why some people just don't get this. There are some rule parts that can cross across radio services, such as Part 25; but the specific rule parts for specific radio services cannot.

AntiSquid Disclaimer: All posted content is personal opinion only and may not imply fact or accusation.

Yeah. To be fair, there are other rules that do apply:
Part 1
Part 2
Part 15

Amateurs should be required to read and understand these. Unfortunately from what I've experienced, most of them don't even understand Part 97.

 

[Rred]

Tony-
"Why would anyone want to transmit "out of band" if even for a second on a HAM radio?"
That's easy. I know plenty of folks who have freebanded ham VHF radios because those radios are often taken on BOATS, and I nthe event of a true emergency situation, where the normal marine VHF radio is inaccessible (fire below) or out of commission (dismasted, dead batteries, or simply died) they want to be able to just grab the handheld ham VHF and very intentionally use it for a MAYDAY call on the marine frequencies.
And no one, not the FCC, the USCG, or the Queen of England, is going to complain about how and why they did that. The bona fide MAYDAY card trumps them all, in real life.

Now of course, the OP won't even hint at what he's cooking up, which can only mean it will be illegal, and it won't be able to even claim it is "under the color of law" that way. Maybe we shouldn't tell him, that radios which can be freebanded, often perform quite poorly when you get far enough from their INTENDED frequency limits. (Shh!)

 

[kayn1n32008]

Ham gear does quite poorly OOB. I put a modified icom 2m mobile on a service monitor years ago. At 173.370MHz it put out 17w(rated at 50w) and still drew well over 10a. It did just as poorly at the other end too.

 

[Project25_MASTR]

Ham gear does quite poorly OOB. I put a modified icom 2m mobile on a service monitor years ago. At 173.370MHz it put out 17w(rated at 50w) and still drew well over 10a. It did just as poorly at the other end too.

Reminds me of a 7000 that only puts out 3W at 467 MHz. Didn't check current draw.

Sent from my SM-T350 using Tapatalk

 

[kayn1n32008]

Reminds me of a 7000 that only puts out 3W at 467 MHz. Didn't check current draw.

Sent from my SM-T350 using Tapatalk

Just a guess, but LOTS!

 

[Reflex439]

Now of course, the OP won't even hint at what he's cooking up, which can only mean it will be illegal, and it won't be able to even claim it is "under the color of law" that way. Maybe we shouldn't tell him, that radios which can be freebanded, often perform quite poorly when you get far enough from their INTENDED frequency limits. (Shh!)

If you read back, the OP clearly hinted at what he&#8217;s cooking up. He clearly stated it was not illegal, not related to freebanding, FRS/MURS/GMRS, prepping, apocalypse, et al. So if it&#8217;s not illegal, any good amateur radio operator can figure out what situations would allow for OOB transmissions legally if they read the regulations.

Rather than get into endless discussions on the &#8216;why&#8217;, legality of OOB transmissions, or sinking down the Part 90 Part 97 regulations sink hole, the OP kindly asked to focus on the &#8216;how&#8217; to accomplish the task, as he had already hashed out the &#8216;why&#8217; and is comfortable with the legality of its use. So why revisit.

Unfortunately the OP tried his best, but failed. Luckily, the OP was able to get some good solutions here from a few helpful people, but has had much more success in another ham forum. Since the thread was hijacked into a &#8220;Rules and Regulations discussion on Part 90, Part 95, Part 97&#8221; thread despite his best efforts, its time to unsubscribe from this thread as it no longer serves the intent of the OPs original post.

Thanks to those with helpful suggestions and ideas, and trying to keep the thread on topic. Good karma coming your way I&#8217;m sure!

 

[DaveNF2G]

I guess people will continue misreading the rules to serve their own purposes. If/when you are caught, then you might finally be persuaded by the FCC as to what they actually mean.

 

[mmckenna]

If you read back, the OP clearly hinted at what he&#8217;s cooking up. He clearly stated it was not illegal, not related to freebanding, FRS/MURS/GMRS, prepping, apocalypse, et al. So if it&#8217;s not illegal, any good amateur radio operator can figure out what situations would allow for OOB transmissions legally if they read the regulations.

So, what "regulations" would that be?

You said you didn't think this should be a legality discussion, but you are claiming that what he was going to do was "legal". If you gleaned information from one of his other discussions about this, I'd love to know what it is.

Amateur radio operators claiming that it's "not illegal" is the issue. I've had people at work use modified amateur radios on my systems at work, under licenses I'm responsible for. There are several rules that clearly work in my favor.

If you know of some magic loophole, I'd love to hear it.

 

[kayn1n32008]

If you read back, the OP clearly hinted at what he’s cooking up. He clearly stated it was not illegal, not related to freebanding, FRS/MURS/GMRS, prepping, apocalypse, et al.

Uhhh ok. What ever

So if it’s not illegal, any good amateur radio operator can figure out what situations would allow for OOB transmissions legally if they read the regulations...

There is no situation that allows a ham operator to operate outside the amatuer service.

Unfortunately the OP tried his best, but failed. Luckily, the OP was able to get some good solutions here from a few helpful people, but has had much more success in another ham forum. Since the thread was hijacked into a “Rules and Regulations discussion on Part 90, Part 95, Part 97” thread despite his best efforts, its time to unsubscribe from this thread as it no longer serves the intent of the OPs original post.

Why are you refering to yourself in the third person?

As to using the modified radio, if used on frequencies outside of the ham band, it is not legal. Period.

Not legal on MURS, FRS, GMRS, or ANY Part 22, 80, 90 or 95 frequencies.

The fact you will not specify why you 'need' a modified radio speaks volumes. Use the right radios for the intended services you want to operate in.

 

[AK9R]

Unfortunately the OP tried his best, but failed. Luckily, the OP was able to get some good solutions here from a few helpful people...

If the OP has gotten "some good solutions" then I guess we are done here.