TYT GMRS mobile and FRS handheld radios submitted to FCC certification

[Hans13]

GMRS mobile 5W/25W:
FCC ID POD-GMRS25 Analog Transceiver by TYT ELECTRONICS CO., LTD
FCC - OET TCB Form 731 Grant of Equipment Authorization

FRS handheld 2W:
FCC ID POD-FRS Analog Transceiver by TYT ELECTRONICS CO., LTD

 

[cmdrwill]

Emission
Designator 14K4F3E is NOT listed. Some weird number to falsely pass for FCC Certification.

 

[n1das]

14K4F3E should have been flagged by the system and rejected. Part of the problem with the CCRs and FCC non-compliance is nobody is checking. Errors whether accidental or intentional end up falling through the cracks.


Sent from my XP8800 using Tapatalk

 

[Hans13]

Emission
Designator 14K4F3E is NOT listed. Some weird number to falsely pass for FCC Certification.

No surprise there. It's SOP for CCR manufacturers these days it seems.

 

[RFI-EMI-GUY]

14K4F3E is a wee bit better that Midland and the other CCR's including BaoFeng-Shui

 

[cmdrwill]

"No surprise there. It's SOP for CCR manufacturers these days it seems." Hans13

So these supposed certified radios do NOT meet the FCC Regulations that cover 99% of use.
And these CCR manufactures LIED on the FCC Certification applications.

"14K4F3E is a wee bit better that Midland and the other CCR's including BaoFeng-Shui" RFI-EMI-GUY

So these radios do NOT meet the regulations even for import or sale in the US.

 

[nd5y]

GMRS radios are allowed up to 20 kHz bandwidth (on ch 1-7, 15-22 and the repeater inputs). If some manufacturer decides to use 14 kHz bandwidth then there is no rule preventing that.

 

[Hans13]

"No surprise there. It's SOP for CCR manufacturers these days it seems." Hans13

So these supposed certified radios do NOT meet the FCC Regulations that cover 99% of use.
And these CCR manufactures LIED on the FCC Certification applications.

"14K4F3E is a wee bit better that Midland and the other CCR's including BaoFeng-Shui" RFI-EMI-GUY

So these radios do NOT meet the regulations even for import or sale in the US.

*Shrugs shoulders* Not my circus, not my monkeys. I'm an anarchist.

 

[RFI-EMI-GUY]

GMRS radios are allowed up to 20 kHz bandwidth (on ch 1-7, 15-22 and the repeater inputs). If some manufacturer decides to use 14 kHz bandwidth then there is no rule preventing that.

No there is no law preventing that because the weak modulation will fit into the emission mask. But it is deceptive. Midland and Baofeng play this game. Midland sells FRS radios marketed as GMRS by adding some channels. They are narrow band 11K and the folks that shop Wal-Mart don't know the difference. Baofeng is worse, the radios are in the range 5K7 to 10K7. The folks who shop Amazon don't care at all as long as it is the cheapest possible way to get something shiny.

Now TYT is specd at 14K4. Are they trying to split the difference? Make a radio that won't be too loud and distorted for FRS and not too weak for GMRS?

It's like sending the wife out to buy a case of beer and she brings back a couple 6 packs. Or worse yet a case of near beer.


Sent from my SM-T350 using Tapatalk

 

[Hans13]

Now TYT is specd at 14K4. Are they trying to split the difference? Make a radio that won't be too loud and distorted for FRS and not too weak for GMRS?

That's a good question. It would be nice if they were actually thinking along those lines.

n00b question from me... Given that they certified with reduced power, presumably to fit within the allowable ppm, could they also have reduced the bandwidth because it would get ugly and not pass certification if they drove the design all the way to 20 kHz?

 

[mmckenna]

That's a good question. It would be nice if they were actually thinking along those lines.

n00b question from me... Given that they certified with reduced power, presumably to fit within the allowable ppm, could they also have reduced the bandwidth because it would get ugly and not pass certification if they drove the design all the way to 20 kHz?

Very likely.

Another reason is that it takes more labor to adjust radios as they go down the assembly line. If you just get them "close enough" but not over, you can crank out more radios for less Yen.

 

[RFI-EMI-GUY]

That's a good question. It would be nice if they were actually thinking along those lines.

n00b question from me... Given that they certified with reduced power, presumably to fit within the allowable ppm, could they also have reduced the bandwidth because it would get ugly and not pass certification if they drove the design all the way to 20 kHz?

I think that some of the low parts count radios from China, the radios that are based on a common transceiver on a chip, cannot possibly do wide band, or even fit the mask for narrow band. These radios I am sure have the deviation constrained because they have no modulation limiter and outboard modulation filtering.

It will be interesting to get a sample of the new TYT radio to see if it has adjustable deviation and what the design is based upon.

Sent from my SM-T350 using Tapatalk

 

[Hans13]

Another reason is that it takes more labor to adjust radios as they go down the assembly line. If you just get them "close enough" but not over, you can crank out more radios for less Yen.

That makes a lot of sense. Thanks.

 

[RFI-EMI-GUY]

14K4F3E should have been flagged by the system and rejected. Part of the problem with the CCRs and FCC non-compliance is nobody is checking. Errors whether accidental or intentional end up falling through the cracks.


Sent from my XP8800 using Tapatalk

Sadly there is no mechanism. The EIA and TIA published a spec many years back called EIA/TIA603D. No self respecting radio manufacturer would design a radio unless it met the MINIMUM requirements of this document. You could be relatively sure the radio would be a radio if tested to these specs. Now the manufacturers could design a better radio and sell it at a premium and they did. So you coukd have three tiers of Motorola , Harris, EfJohnson , Kenwood, ICOM or Vertex radios and you coukd be assured that they would perform to their advertised specs. Mostly the price differences were in the receiver specs, but they had to meet the FCC emission masks so you saw a few common emission designators, nobody played games with deviation or filtering because EIA/TIA603D spelled out exactly how to test and what the result should be.

These cheap radios don't comply to any standards other than fitting into FCC masks which are strictly to limit interference. The FCC does not care about suitability. They should.

Sent from my SM-T350 using Tapatalk

 

[Hans13]

I think that some of the low parts count radios from China, the radios that are based on a common transceiver on a chip, cannot possibly do wide band, or even fit the mask for narrow band. These radios I am sure have the deviation constrained because they have no modulation limiter and outboard modulation filtering.

Without the technical specifics in mind, that's generally what I was guessing as possible. Thanks.

 

[RFI-EMI-GUY]

Very likely.

Another reason is that it takes more labor to adjust radios as they go down the assembly line. If you just get them "close enough" but not over, you can crank out more radios for less Yen.

That is a good point, and exactly why you can have a tolerable abount of rat feces in your food.

Sent from my SM-T350 using Tapatalk

 

[WRCM]

Very likely.

Another reason is that it takes more labor to adjust radios as they go down the assembly line. If you just get them "close enough" but not over, you can crank out more radios for less Yen.

Oh, they're making them in Japan now?