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

[EddP]

I feel like I should appologise for getting involved here, after reading a post about storm chasing I now understand whackers a bit more. I didn't realise the problems you get over there. And therefor why the authorities take the stance they do.

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 4

 

[LtDoc]

EddP,
No apology required, but go ahead and consider it accepted. It isn't always easy to 'relate'/understand how something works in other places unless you ask questions or make assumptions that may be incorrect. (I ain't never! And hope I don't do it again, you know?)
This 'emergency situation' or 'SHTF' thingy is being carried way too far, in my opinion. Sure, it would be nice if you could cover all possible contingencies, but it's just not possible for the average person. And from the 'other side' of it, that 'extra' capability can be a huge liability for those who do that sort of thing every day. Sometimes, there are no viable alternatives, just deal with it. It's not easy to do by any means but the best thing to do in some situations is to just don't do anything. You can have too much 'help' at times...
- 'Doc

 

[Mikado]

Let's not forget there's another side of this discussion... out of band TX for use on MURS, GMRS, FRS, and CB.

These uses are not for emergencies and the "life or death" argument isn't applicable. The argument for life or death bas been beaten to death, but there's still a lot of confusion about casual out of band use. There shouldn't be any confusion, you only use a radio for the service/band it was approved and designed for. This means you can't take your Kenwood TS-2000 and have an all-in-one Amateur, CB, MURS, FRS/GMRS radio. You can modify it to do such things, but since it's not legal to do use those non-amateur services, why bother with the modification?

There's a small part of me that wishes all ham gear was made like my first amateur radio handheld. Radio Shack HTX 202. It TX/RX on only 144-148 MHz. Physically no possible way to modify it to receive, much less transmit, anywhere else. Then this out-of-band discussion would be a moot point

I have been researching this very topic recently. Currently I am studying to take both the Technician and General tests. I should be ready for the tests next month. I am considering buying either a Baofeng or Wouxun as my first ham radio. I already have a GMRS license. I guess I'm in the 1% who actually paid the fee to the FCC. I bought a used Kenwood that is certified under part 90 & 95, then programmed it for GMRS. It gives me better battery life and transmit power than the bubble pack GMRS radios.

Ideally, I would like to be able to legally transmit on GMRS and ham bands from a single radio. If I'm out camping / hiking / whatever, then I could carry just one radio. From what I'm reading, it's not approved by the FCC.

 

[mmckenna]

Ideally, I would like to be able to legally transmit on GMRS and ham bands from a single radio. If I'm out camping / hiking / whatever, then I could carry just one radio. From what I'm reading, it's not approved by the FCC.

Nope, you are OK with that set up. Amateur TRANSMITTERS do not require type acceptance. The only part of a mass produced amateur transceiver that requires type certification is the receiver, and that falls under Part 15.

Legally you can use a Part 90 and/or Part 95 radio on the ham bands, no issues there at all. It's not uncommon for commercial radios to be used on the amateur bands. In fact, a lot of repeaters on the air are made up from old commercial gear.

Since I work in radio, I have Part 90 accepted radios, in fact, I no longer own ANY amateur radios. Between Kenwood and Motorola, all my radios do double duty for work and for amateur use. Again, totally legal.

 

[Spankymedic7]

So, to elaborate on this, look at it this way:

One of your loved ones is having a medical emergency. You have the choice of calling 911 and waiting for an ambulance, or driving them to the hospital on your own.

Calling 911 will result in a trained professional answering the phone and asking you some questions. After answering a few questions, they'll prioritize your call and get you the right resources as quickly as possible. This works out best for everyone, especially someone who has a more serious medical issue and needs a higher priority.

Driving to the hospital you would no doubt be in a serious hurry, and none of us would blame you for that. But in the process, you've ignored the fact that there was an ambulance 2 blocks away at the Starbucks. In your rush to get to the hospital, you are driving faster and put others lives at risk.

Which way is the correct way?

It's hard to answer, as in an emergency you don't have all the info you need. That's sort of the definition of emergency.

The benefit of working within the system is that you get professionals involved that are trained to work under stress, have training to handle the types of calls they get, and know how to get the proper resources to you as quickly as possible. Doesn't matter if it's a phone call, cell phone, PLB, flag down, whatever.

Using a radio to talk directly into the system bypasses the call prioritization, it bypasses the ability for a dispatcher to explain to you what you need to do to help that person. It can interrupt other active emergencies.

Worst of all, it screams "HOAX". While no doubt you will get attention, you are bypassing the systems that are in place.

Yes, if that radio is your ONLY option, and you were not intelligent enough to venture out into the woods properly equipped, then it's your only option.

What some of us are trying to explain here is that the lack of being prepared, equipped and trained for whatever you might run into on your adventures isn't a good enough reason to bypass the 911 system, or whatever other systems are in place to get help.

With the training I have, as well as a properly set up part 90 radio, and I've done all that I can and that radio is my last option, YES, I'm going to use it. It isn't going to be my first choice. It also isn't going to be a hacked amateur radio.

If you venture into places where your cell phone won't work, and you or others safety is at risk, then you need to take the responsibility to go into those situations properly equipped. Hacked hobby radios are not being properly equipped.

I have to agree, this is very well said, and is quite logical. My wife and I are medics, we serve on a local Fire/EMS agency. We have worked in EMS for a combined 36 years. We've had the occasional person who thought they'd try to circumvent the system, and all it does is reset the clock, so to speak. It prolongs the process because, whatever info was received by whatever means (let's say direct radio communications) now has to be analyzed for legitimacy/accuracy, then assigned a priority, and then dispatched. Mmckenna also makes a good point when he mentioned "HOAX". There have been instances locally where an individual with a radio "pirated" a public safety system, and his transmission(s) were met with silence. Not the response you'd want if you have a legit crisis on your hands. That's the typical response that most agencies will have, just like a jammer in Amateur Radio or GMRS. The more attention that is given to the person in question, the worse the person acts.

As medics, my wife and I have properly FCC-certified radios that are designed to work on our county's public safety radio system. Would we use them in an emergency? Sure, but there are some things to consider. 1) Is what we have a TRUE emergency? 2) Does our emergency ABSOLUTELY need to be called in by radio? 3) Is the emergency within our jurisdiction? My wife and I have stumbled across quite a few incidents, and we have yet to call any of them in by radio.

Mmckenna also makes a good point in saying that, in order to really make a difference on any kind of scene, go and get proper training/education. I couldn't agree more. Take a first aid/CPR class, take the Medical First Responder course, go to school to become an EMT...a FireFighter...a Police Officer. With as may times as we've come across medical emergencies, I can say from experience that the experience/education/training that we have was/is invaluable...

Anyway, this is my $0.02.

 

[Spankymedic7]

only[/I] 144-148 MHz. Physically no possible way to modify it to receive, much less transmit, anywhere else. Then this out-of-band discussion would be a moot point

I remember those radios. Bullet proof, tight receive...all-around great radio. I have to admit that extended Rx would be nice to have, but it didn't affect my opinion of that radio.

 

[Spankymedic7]

Oh, boy....
The ARRL is a representative group for amateur radio operators. Key word: AMATEUR. The ARRL does NOT hold authority over the FCC. The FCC has made it clear what the rules are, over and over again, yet some amateurs still have a bad case of whackeritis and will look for any excuse to pretend to be something they are not. Trust me, the last thing that public safety professionals need is a wannabee with his hammy radio. Work within the rules and the system. Amateurs have no authority to decide that their perceived emergency is more important than the real emergencies that REAL (not amateur) public safety professionals are working on. Jumping into the middle of their work puts others lives at risk.

Get over it. Don't confuse your hobby with being a -real- public safety professional. Stay the heck out of the way of the professionals and let them do their jobs.

You go boy!!!

 

[Spankymedic7]

You most certainly can...

Ideally, I would like to be able to legally transmit on GMRS and ham bands from a single radio. If I'm out camping / hiking / whatever, then I could carry just one radio. From what I'm reading, it's not approved by the FCC.

You can absolutely use one radio on both GMRS and HAM bands, I own quite a few Motorola and Kenwood radios that I use on both GMRS and Amateur Radio. As Mmckenna said, I have liquidated most of my "amateur" gear and have decided to go with commercial equipment. I use them for Fire/EMS, HAM, and GMRS. It works out great.

Hope this helps.

 

[Token]

I hear what you are saying, but the issue is the definition of "life or death". In a -real- life or death situation, I can agree with you. There are many options, however, and some of them would be totally legal and appropriate. Some folks have a hard time understanding what is life threatening and what isn't. This is the job of the public safety dispatcher. You should really let them do their job. In every situation your first choice should be to call 911 and use the system as it is designed. Last choice should be to have that hacked amateur radio. Ideally everyone would be better off if you went through a local repeater and had someone call 911 for you.

The issue can be argued to death, and everyone is going to do whatever the he77 they want to do in the end. What some of us are trying to get across is that there is a system set up to handle emergencies. The public, amateur radio operators included, need to use that system as it is designed. The system works. Bypassing that system puts others lives at risk. It is not my place to decide that, and it isn't yours. Assuming that your emergency is more important that others is a pretty egotistical thing to do, and for someone who is an amateur radio operator, a hobby that is supposed to be about helping the public, this attitude is very disturbing.

In general I agree with you, and really hate to see these threads repeatedly pop up. It is impossible for everyone to come to the same point, and there are far to many instances that “might” come up.

Where I live in the desert and my route to work takes me through fairly large remote areas with no cell coverage and no or limited ham radio repeater coverage, in a few (but not all, not even most) of these areas there is public service radio coverage that exceed ham repeaters. Needless to say there are no landlines in large portions of this area either, it is not hard to be more than 10 miles from the closest landline. In fact I can drive less than an hour from my house and be at a location where the nearest landline is more than 25 miles away.

In the past 30 years of exploring this area on weekends and driving my daily route to work I have had the unenviable opportunity to be first on the scene at more than a few accidents, 3 of them with truly life threatening injuries and two others with fatalities. In addition to normal accidents for some reason a few people think wide open desert roads are great public race tracks.

I have had to use a radio to notify authorities / get help in several of these accidents. So far I have always managed to do it without resorting to out of band operations (my wife and I use 80 meters for local talk around during the day, and it gets over hills surprisingly well, as does 160). In the case of one of the accidents with a fatality and also major injuries I had to drive 5 or 6 miles before I could make contact with anyone (no HF in that vehicle at the time, only VHF/UHF, now it has 160 meters to 70 cm, plus 23 cm), that 5 or 6 miles was off road, and took well over 15 minutes to drive to that point and another 15 or more to get back to the accident. There was no public service coverage in that area or I would have probably tried that and found out first hand if that is a problem or not

All this “what if” and “when could” comes down to a couple simple matters. “Back in the day” most ham radios allowed out of band operation. Before CPUs and the like there was nothing to stop a radio from working out of band, other than the limitations of its VFO or synthesizer or the installed crystals (some where quite wide, others not so much). The fact that a radio could operate out of band was a non-issue. Hams knew that you simply did not operate out of band, unless there were NO other communications options and someone was bleeding out or in similar shape.

So, what do I do today? My radios, many of them, are indeed modified for or originally capable of out of band use. I don’t particularly care if other people do or do not like that fact, they are my radios and they are my actions, and as far as I know the possession of such a modified or originally capable radio is not in the slightest a violation of anything at all. I have public service frequencies programmed into several of them for receive only, the TX side of those channels are either programmed to an out of the way freq in the nearest ham band or programmed to a freq that is outside the modified TX bandwidth (preferred when possible, so the rig wont actually TX if keyed). I don’t do this out of fear of a regulation that I have not seen enforced for its own sake, I do this so there is no way I, or anyone else, can grab the wrong mike on the wrong freq and key up something on public service. I also keep a list of freqs in the vehicles, public service repeater inputs, PLs, etc. In the vanishingly small possibility that I ever make the decision that out of band TX on something like public service is the only remaining option, having exhausted every other possibility, then I can punch in the TX information.

I can think of a couple of ham specific reason to modify a radio for out of band operation, and pretty valid reasons at that. Use with a transverter. The new, and then changed, 60 meter allocations. Going back further than that the WARC bands.

This entire argument is, as always, inane. Owning a ham radio capable of out of band transmission is not in any way illegal, shady, or immoral. If it is then my KWM2 and my Drake T4X (along with a couple dozen other radios in the collection) are illegal, shady, and immoral. And having a radio so modified or capable does not make one a whacker. Programming a radio to transmit on out of band frequencies might indeed be illegal, but I don’t know if anyone has ever been cited for only that action or if that regulation has ever been enforced without other things initiating the enforcement action. The decision to ever transmit on out of band frequencies is up to the individual, but particularly with regards to public service frequencies this being the only possible solution is going to be an extremely rare event. In the extremely unlikely event that transmitting out of band is the ONLY option then the individual has to decide if the conditions warrant such a drastic decision.

The key, in my mind, is such an action should be the last thing an operator wants to do, and no one should ever look for a reason to do so. But by the same token, having the ability to do so should not be taken (by itself) to indicate the operator is looking for an excuse to use it.

T!

(edit) Sorry mmckenna, I just realized it almost sounded like I was aiming most of what I said at your post. I was not, only my first paragraph was in response to your post, the rest was a general comment on this thread and the many threads that have come before it....and will probably come after.

 

[robertmac]

Yes there has been enforcement of transmitting out of band with amateur radio. No use slogging a dead horse as they are posted on other threads and Google search will bring them out.

 

[mmckenna]

No problem. I like what you said and how you said it.

There is no law against owning an out of band modified amateur radio. The law is against actually using it.
There is a subpart of part 90 that says you can't have channels programmed into a radio that you are not licensed or authorized to use. But, that's part 90, not part 97.

And you are entirely correct. Owning or modifying an amateur transceiver is a personal choice and up to the individual. What some of us have the issue with is the intent that some amateurs have about transmitting on public safety channels for some really stupid reasons. Whackerism is a disease. Confusing a hobby with being a true public safety professional is a dangerous and slippery slope.

I've worked in telecommunications and LMR radio for a long time, and I've also been a licensed amateur as well as GMRS user for a long time also. I've run into some people that get into the radio hobbies to satisfy some inner desire to be a "hero", a cop, a fireman, etc. Truth is, most of them aren't, and don't want to put the work into learning those trades. What I see that annoys me is that some amateurs see the radio as a license to act like a jerk, a reason to act like a cop, or to drive around with emergency lights on a car. It is important to not confuse a hobby with being a public safety professional. Amateur radio is a hobby. The radio in the car or in your hand is a tool. A good craftsman has many tools, just like a fireman, paramedic/EMT or police officer will have many tools in "box". The idea that a two way radio suddenly gives someone the authority and/or duty to transmit on public safety frequencies is completely wrong.
If someone is really concerned about being out of cell phone coverage, then maybe they should stay home. If they are concerned about an emergency when they are out of cell range, then they need to learn how to handle those emergencies properly. That is actually pretty easy to do, and more people should be doing it.

 

[Token]

Yes there has been enforcement of transmitting out of band with amateur radio. No use slogging a dead horse as they are posted on other threads and Google search will bring them out.

It appears in threaded view as if this response is to my post, so I assume it is.

I never questioned if there had been enforcement for transmitting out of band with a ham radio, if you think I said there had been none you might want to look again at what I wrote.

When I said “I don’t do this out of fear of a regulation that I have not seen enforced for its own sake” and “Programming a radio to transmit on out of band frequencies might indeed be illegal, but I don’t know if anyone has ever been cited for only that action or if that regulation has ever been enforced without other things initiating the enforcement action” I was specifically talking about programming a transmitter for a frequency that you are not licensed for. This action is often put forth in these conversations as an illegal, citable, action all of its own. However every time I have seen it used, and I do not pretend to know every instance, I am just talking about the ones I have found in searches, this violation has always been a part of a larger problem. Intentional interference, etc.

I was not talking about actually transmitting out of band, of course that is a violation that has been enforced many times. Like every potential violation from failing to ID, bad language on the air, or from jay walking to killing another human being it (transmitting out of band), even if noticed, might, or might not, be enforced, depending on the specifics of the situation. Today, in this litigious World we live in, the probability of enforcement appears much higher than in times past.

T!

 

[zz0468]

Where I live in the desert and my route to work takes me through fairly large remote areas with no cell coverage and no or limited ham radio repeater coverage, in a few (but not all, not even most) of these areas there is public service radio coverage that exceed ham repeaters.

I'm curious what part of the desert you travel. Having spent the last 30+ years working and playing in the high and low deserts, I've found it difficult to find places where there wasn't some sort of ham coverage available, unless you get deep within either China Lake or Ft. Irwin. There are lots of holes, but not to many large areas where there's absolutely nothing.

I have had to use a radio to notify authorities / get help in several of these accidents. So far I have always managed to do it without resorting to out of band operations (my wife and I use 80 meters for local talk around during the day, and it gets over hills surprisingly well, as does 160).

Having HF along in the vehicle is a comfort out there.



All this “what if” and “when could” comes down to a couple simple matters. “Back in the day” most ham radios allowed out of band operation. Before CPUs and the like there was nothing to stop a radio from working out of band, other than the limitations of its VFO or synthesizer or the installed crystals (some where quite wide, others not so much). The fact that a radio could operate out of band was a non-issue. Hams knew that you simply did not operate out of band, unless there were NO other communications options and someone was bleeding out or in similar shape.

I can think of a couple of ham specific reason to modify a radio for out of band operation, and pretty valid reasons at that. Use with a transverter. The new, and then changed, 60 meter allocations. Going back further than that the WARC bands.

An excellent point. I've built transverters using available junque box parts that required the radio to operate outside the ham bands.

The key, in my mind, is such an action should be the last thing an operator wants to do, and no one should ever look for a reason to do so. But by the same token, having the ability to do so should not be taken (by itself) to indicate the operator is looking for an excuse to use it.

If you never use it, having the capability is not going to bother anyone other than the pedantic simpletons who occupy internet forums. On the other hand, if you chose to use the tactics used in the KJ6CEY case, and similar cases, your radio programming can and will be used against you.

 

[zz0468]

There is no law against owning an out of band modified amateur radio. The law is against actually using it.
There is a subpart of part 90 that says you can't have channels programmed into a radio that you are not licensed or authorized to use. But, that's part 90, not part 97.

But that part 90 law applies to everyone, not just part 90 licensees. And "everyone" would include part 97 licensees.

If someone is really concerned about being out of cell phone coverage, then maybe they should stay home. If they are concerned about an emergency when they are out of cell range, then they need to learn how to handle those emergencies properly. That is actually pretty easy to do, and more people should be doing it.

Interesting point... A recent event in the California desert had some 150 vehicles off road trying to take a short cut around a major traffic accident. Many vehicles got stuck and/or lost well outside of cellphone coverage. Clearly, there are people who should stick to civilization and don't venture too far from home. But for those who feel adequately equipped, and plan accordingly, there is no real rational reason that the planning needs to include illegal programming in a radio. There are just too many other options that would probably work better.

 

[jparks29]

RE: How things work in the US. Read the entire thread, that spells it out fairly clearly.

To recap (In the US):

• The "life or death" emergency clause only pertains to the service that one is licensed for. An FCC licensed Amateur Radio operator can use any Amateur Radio frequency in an emergency, however an Amateur Radio license does not grant the use of non-Amateur Radio frequencies in any event or emergency. (See post in this thread where this is confirmed by FCC Enforcement Officer.)

So, if you need a license to operate on those frequencies, why would they say 'In case of emergency, and no other alternative exists, license be damned, send the message' ?


That'd be like making a law saying 'If you're running low on fuel, it's OK to exit the highway to get to a gas station'.....

Well, nothing said you COULDN'T exit the highway..........So why articulate that you can?

We run off the british common law system, where something is legal unless it's specified as illegal. Why would they legalize something that wasn't illegal in the first place?

If I'm stuck somewhere with no cell service, and in need of medical assistance (hiking,boating,etc), you're damn skippy I'm gonna get help any way I can..... Cell - repeaters - simplex - marine Ch 16/22, etc. use 'normal' means to send the message, if you can't get through, do what you gotta do to survive.

Remember the common law defense of 'necessity', the actions taken, while unlawful, were reasonable at the time, where no lawful option existed.

To the jagoffs that think they can get on their rigs and call PD on their frequency because they came across a dead deer in the road, god help you.

I do recall a situation happening quite a number of years ago, in the west... A man came upon an accident that had occurred, no cell service, middle of nowhere, couldn't get through on an amateur repeater, ended up getting on the Sheriffs VHF repeater and summoning help directly, and ended up getting a commendation from the Sheriff for saving the persons life.

I also recall a similar situation, where a guy did the same thing as above, in a NON-LIFE THREATENING accident, where others had already called 911, and he got put through the ringer..

I'll have to find those stories, so I can cite them.

 

[DaveNF2G]

Some people are looking for excuses to break the law, and nothing anyone can say will talk them out of their rationalizations.

 

[T04KLH9PW7AN]

So, if you need a license to operate on those frequencies, why would they say 'In case of emergency, and no other alternative exists, license be damned, send the message' ?

Go actually read the post referenced above that gave the reply from an FCC agent. A quick summary is that rule allows a licensee to exceed the limits of his license IN THE HAM BANDS. For example, a Technician using 20 meters if out of range of a repeater.

I do recall a situation happening quite a number of years ago, in the west... A man came upon an accident that had occurred, no cell service, middle of nowhere, couldn't get through on an amateur repeater, ended up getting on the Sheriffs VHF repeater and summoning help directly, and ended up getting a commendation from the Sheriff for saving the persons life.

And I've seen someone use a modified radio on LE frequencies get handed an award and a summons at the same time. Award for doing CPR which saved the other person, summons for using an illegal transmitting device and interfering with public safety communications. The jury acquitted, leaving him owing the law firm about $20K.

Remember two old sayings:
"You may beat the rap but you won't beat the ride."
"No good deed goes unpunished."

 

[N4DES]

No problem. I like what you said and how you said it.

There is no law against owning an out of band modified amateur radio. The law is against actually using it. There is a subpart of part 90 that says you can't have channels programmed into a radio that you are not licensed or authorized to use. But, that's part 90, not part 97.

But once you transmit with a certified Part 97 radio in the Part 90 spectrum you MUST conform to the rules of the spectrum you are operating in. If someone does this there are two (2) illegal actions that I see:

1. Operation of a transmitter without a valid license because the operator does not have the authority to operate in that specific area of the spectrum (http://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/47/1.903) "(b) Restrictions. The holding of an authorization does not create any rights beyond the terms, conditions and period specified in the authorization.", and

2. Illegal operation of a non-certified radio device in an area of the spectrum that it is not certificated to operate in.

Just because you have a license in one area of the spectrum it does not give you unrestricted access to the whole spectrum from DC to daylight.

Mark

 

[N4DES]

Some people are looking for excuses to break the law, and nothing anyone can say will talk them out of their rationalizations.

Yep...can't confuse them with the facts from a higher authority because their minds are already made up.

 

[MTS2000des]

I can't believe this thread is 5 pages long. There really is no debate. The FCC has spoken and it's clear as day to anyone with an IQ higher than their shoe size.