Bear in mind that the FCC doesn't test radios themselves. They certify independent labs to do the testing for them. If the lab decides to fudge the numbers a little, and I'm not saying that they do, how would the FCC know?
Why is out of band transmit illegal? (was: Stupid question)
- Thread starter sparks40
- Start date
- Status
mmckenna
I ♥ Ø
Under Part 15 is key there, and they are using it on amateur frequencies, or at least frequencies that have been specifically authorized for said use.
Like I said, this is about amateurs modifying their amateur radios to use in other services.
GMRS, as we've established, requires Part 95 acceptance. Amateur radios don't have that. Amateur radios require modification to do operate there, and that modification voids the radios existing Type 15 certifications. So in combination with the lack of Part 95 certs, amateurs are also voiding the radios part 15 certs of their radios. I know, some amateurs don't care, and they'll do whatever they want. Fine by me, I'm not going to stand in their way.
What concerns me is a new amateur, like KW7PTL, showing up and trying to convince other differently. It's one thing to express an opinion. It's another thing to spread bad information. Lack of knowledge isn't a good enough defense.
WB4CS
Member
Since this old thread has been resurrected, now might be a good time to revisit post #38, to where the FCC has said (paraphrasing here) that no matter what, you cannot use your ham gear outside of the ham bands, for any reason, at all. Ever. Period. No more. Done.
http://forums.radioreference.com/am...it-illegal-stupid-question-2.html#post1980253
That's not entirely correct. I have an NTIA license that covers HF through VHF and its legal for me to use my HF amateur gear on Govt frequencies to support the group that I belong to. The use of HF amateur gear is specifically mentioned for legal use, where we must use Part 90 radios on VHF frequencies.
prcguy
prcguy
Token
Member
Except I was not talking about amateurs building their own gear, I was talking about operations under Part 15, not Part 97.
No, I am not talking about amateur frequencies. I was specifically addressing the statement that modified ham gear can never be used outside ham frequencies, "NO exceptions". The Part 15 operation I was discussing is outside ham frequencies, frequencies such as 160-190 kHz, 13553 - 13567 kHz, 26.96 - 27.28 MHz, and 49.82 - 49.9 MHz. Such operation requires no licensing, no type acceptance, and no certification. There are SIGNIFICANT technical restrictions involved.
And I absolutely agree here. I was NOT saying it was OK for hams to use their equipment on Part 90 or Part 95 allocations. It is, as I understand it, absolutely NOT OK for such operations. All I was saying is that there are not "NO exceptions" to using ham gear outside of ham bands. I was addressing that one absolute statement only, I believe it to be incorrect.
T!
Token
Member
Keep in mind I did not resurrect this thread, not am I claiming you can use ham gear on Part 90 or 95 frequencies.
You quoted my post in its entirety, so I assume you are responding to something said in my post. Unfortunately what you posted does not apply to my post, although it does apply to the majority of people asking these questions. When someone said there are "NO exceptions" (without qualification) to using ham gear outside ham allocations I pointed out that there may be exceptions, although only one I could think of, there may be others. I specifically mentioned Part 15 operations, and the fact ANY gear, including home built, can be used under Part 15, assuming it meets the technical requirements. Section 15.23 specifically allows it. Operation under Part 15 does not require a license, and the equipment does not have to be certificated.
You have paraphrased the original post incorrectly. It does not say "you cannot use your ham gear outside of the ham bands, for any reason, at all. Ever. Period. No more. Done." It specifically addresses operation of ham gear in Part 90 and Part 95 allocations and the requirement for all Part 90 and 95 equipment to be certificated. It says you can't use uncertified or Part 97 certified ham gear for Part 90 or 95 operations. I don't see a question there at all, nor did my post, which you quoted, say anything contrary to that. I am in total agreement there, in general you cannot use ham gear on Part 90 or Part 95 frequencies, even if you are licensed for operation on such frequencies. I suppose the only exceptions to that would be the use of the Chinese ham gear that carries Part 90 or 95 Certification. The question of if those radios are really compliant with Part 90 or 95 is a different question.
T!
WB4CS
Member
Looking back, I'm not sure why I quoted your post Token. I may have clicked multi-quote by mistake, or at that time I might have had an idea in my head that is gone now 
I agree, this thread has specifically been about using modified ham gear for out-of-band transmit on Part 95 (CB/FRS/GMRS/MURS) and Part 90 specturm, and also applies to radio services such as Marine and Aviation. (Can't remember the Part ## for those services.)
To be honest, I've not done enough research on the subject of Part 15 compliance, so that is a valid discussion. I'm not even familiar with Part 15 enough to speak on the topic. I'm not sure if that's in the scope of this thread and may need it's own thread to be discussed, but definitely a topic worth looking into.
I agree, this thread has specifically been about using modified ham gear for out-of-band transmit on Part 95 (CB/FRS/GMRS/MURS) and Part 90 specturm, and also applies to radio services such as Marine and Aviation. (Can't remember the Part ## for those services.)
To be honest, I've not done enough research on the subject of Part 15 compliance, so that is a valid discussion. I'm not even familiar with Part 15 enough to speak on the topic. I'm not sure if that's in the scope of this thread and may need it's own thread to be discussed, but definitely a topic worth looking into.
Because they don't meet the requirements, just like Part 97 radios; FRS has a very low power requirement, as well as no removable antennas, and MURS has several frequencies that have an odd frequency bandwidth allowance. The reason Part 90 radios are allowed on Part 97 is that they generally easily meet the requirements for Part 97 and can be programmed for those frequencies.
WB4CS: Maritime is Part 80, Aviation is Part 87.
eCFR — Code of Federal Regulations
n5ims
Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2004
- Messages
- 3,993
The reason is quite simple if you think about it. Part 90 rules and regulations require radios to be certified for use on Part 90 frequencies. Part 95 rules and regulations require radios to be certified for use on the sub-sections they're used on (FRS, GMRS, MURS, and CB all have their own certification so a radio certified for use on CB can't be used on MURS, etc. - not that their design would allow it anyway due to emission mode and frequency range).
Part 97 doesn't require any certification for a radio to be used on the Part 97 frequencies (although they do require they have certain minimum standards of stability, emission, etc. So long as the operator can restrict their station to only have emissions on the ham band(s), operate with no more than legal power levels, transmit with only valid emission modes, etc., they can operate any transmitter that they want to. It can be a home built radio using their own design (many folks did this back in the day using standard parts they found in junk radios or at their local parts store), it can be an old police radio modified to work on the ham bands (note that this modification may break the Part 90 certification so it's possible it could be no longer legal for use back on the PD frequency), an old AM broadcast transmitter (these are common on the 160 meter band), or even a commercially built ham transceiver from one of the major manufacturers.
It may be that the design of the Part 90 radio makes it work fine on the Part 90 frequencies, but cause spurs when operated on the Part 90 frequencies. It's also likely that your Part 90 radio includes a removable antenna that's illegal on Part 95 (as in MURS and FRS rules).
It's quite likely that a Part 90 radio may work fine and could be certified on Part 95 if the manufacturer did the necessary testing and submitted it to the FCC. The manufacturer may have agreements with other divisions or companies they work with that state that their Part 90 business will not compete with the Part 95 business. It may be that the company just doesn't want to add lots of checks to enable/disable features or restrict settings depending on the frequency the radio is programmed to work at (to follow the Part 95 restrictions mostly). It may also be that they simply don't want to "play" in that market to make it easier on themselves.
It's because many Part 90 radios exceed allowable parameters required for Part 95. In example, you can get 110 watt UHF transceivers certified for Part 90. That same radio would not be allowed on Part 95 due to the Part 95 power limitation of 50 watts. A 40 watt version of that same radio might actually be on the FCC Part 95 list.
So, a blanket authorization of Part 90 radios to be used in Part 95 service simply doesn't make sense.
The main reason that Part 97 radios can`t be used in other services is frequency agility. Any service that allows frequency agile radios requires an operator's license as well as a station license. The threat of harmful interference of a Part 97 radio is not due to poor design of the radio but an untrained operator transmitting on unauthorized frequencies. There`s been more than one occasion when a manufacturer marketed the same radio as Part 97 and 90 the only difference is the Part 90 radio didn't have a VFO.
Last edited:
teufler
Member
Something to ponder, in China, there are restrictions for hams and their radios. Most are :"club radios". China probably figures make the radio wide open, part 90, and hams around the world will police them selves to their operating limits. Rather than make a radio ham only and another door makes the part 90 radios. Possibly our ham radios years ago would have been less expensive if the Yaecomwood radios had taken the same production steps.
I am just pointing out that the radio can change back and forth between locked and unlocked mode as opposed to always being locked, even in Ham bands.
What would be real nice is if it had an automatic mode that was always unlocked on Ham bands and always locked on Commercial.
What would be real nice is if it had an automatic mode that was always unlocked on Ham bands and always locked on Commercial.
teufler
Member
W4BCS: Yes you can transmit anywhere BUT YOU BETTER BE ABLE TO PROVE THE FACT THAT NO OTHER COMMUNICATIONS WAS AVAILABLE. No cell phone, nothing on you ham bands, you had no flashlight you could signal with. A couple of times, I have talked on the local sheriff frequencies, just could not raise anyone, passed the traffic, and then stood by. I have never had any complaints. I was not told to cease and get off the frequency. Those were the times I didn't have a cell handy. The dispatchers wre alittle confused but as soon as I told them who, what, and where, they said thanks and that was the end of it. Almost every other time, a ham was awake somewhere or I was in a cell phone coverage area. Fact it has been years since I have talked to someone out of band. Once I talked out of band by accident. I was mobile using a swan 100mx. I though I was on 15 meters so I was abgout , what I though was 21.410. Well I was on 14.410. Dah... out of band, I called CQ, had somebody come back to me, we talked then as traffic lighted up, I looked closer and said, well I said something to myself, and cleared off..
You got lucky. There is case law that a California ham came across a biker who took a 'dive' face first off a cliff (obvious life-or-death case), could not raise help on the ham band, had no cell service, and was found guilty of transmitting on a SO administrative channel to summon help. It's a case that was never challenged, so it sets precedent. Is that a very bad ruling? Yes, it is. The books are full of bad rulings. Yet, they are used to convict others all the time.
rapidcharger
Member
Why? What does that have to do with anything?
What was the nature of your calls on the sheriff frequency?
teufler
Member
i THINK IT Was a traffic accident or two. Remote areas, years ago before cell towers were in vogue. Made the calls, they took them down, said thanks, and they dispatched from my calls. The choices I had were to wait till someone came along,then left to go find a phone, leave the scene and go find the phone myself, leave the scene and hope a deputy came along. There were no consequences. Now there are more cell towers, and the police have gone more to digital p25 or trunking and the option really is not available. At least not around here.
- Status
