Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net

   Home   Help Search  
Pages: [1] 2 Next   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: new Part 90 cert. Ht's and GMRS  (Read 6855 times)
KT0DD
Member

Posts: 277




Ignore
« on: November 16, 2012, 10:19:58 AM »

Hello, I have seen the new chinese Ht's with the part 90 commercial cert. (yes, it's genuine!) and was wondering if these rigs are also allowed on the GMRS service? I know motorola type gear is used on GMRS. Any info is appreciated.

73. Todd - KT0DD
Logged
KCJ9091
Member

Posts: 0




Ignore
« Reply #1 on: November 16, 2012, 02:31:00 PM »

GMRS requires Part 95 certification not part 90.  So no, they are not legal on GMRS, FRS, or MURS.
Logged
KT0DD
Member

Posts: 277




Ignore
« Reply #2 on: November 17, 2012, 10:50:42 AM »

Hmmm...

It's weird that a Part 90 rig with tight commercial specs can legally be used on amateur radio Part 97 frequencies, but a part 90 rig cannot be used on  part 95 (same class as 11m CB) frequencies.

Also, I understand that it's commercial grade (motorola type) 50 watt rigs that are used for GMRS repeaters and 50 watt mobiles. I don't know of any repeaters / 50 watt mobiles strictly made for GMRS, just the cheap handheds like at Cabelas. I've always seen someone buy a Motorola type commercial rig and have it programmed for GMRS 50 watt repeater / mobile use.

Seems like some standardization of regs would be nice.

73. Todd - KT0DD
Logged
KCJ9091
Member

Posts: 0




Ignore
« Reply #3 on: November 17, 2012, 11:00:43 AM »

The older /\/\ radios were type accepted for both 90 and 95 and are grandfathered.  The new ones are not certified for both parts (cost savings).  Part 97 does not require certification for the transmitter only requiring it meets standards.

Some would tell you to go ahead and use it, the chances of getting caught are almost nonexistent.  It is up to you and the standards you set as to what you decide to do.
Logged
KS4VT
Member

Posts: 141




Ignore
« Reply #4 on: November 17, 2012, 03:49:38 PM »

The older /\/\ radios were type accepted for both 90 and 95 and are grandfathered.  The new ones are not certified for both parts (cost savings).  Part 97 does not require certification for the transmitter only requiring it meets standards.

Some would tell you to go ahead and use it, the chances of getting caught are almost nonexistent.  It is up to you and the standards you set as to what you decide to do.

Interesting though that Motorola with older XTS models and with their new line of APX radios have been receiving type acceptance for Marine (Part 80).
Logged
WQCC256
Member

Posts: 23




Ignore
« Reply #5 on: November 20, 2012, 03:49:32 PM »

Technically , what is the difference between part 90 and part 95 specifications?
Logged
KT0DD
Member

Posts: 277




Ignore
« Reply #6 on: November 24, 2012, 09:18:14 AM »

I guess I found the reason for special GMRS type acceptance...the TX deviation on GMRS is limited to 5khz where other rigs deviate TX at 25.0 and 12.5khz. I assume this is due to narrow channel spacing and trying to crowd as many users as possible within the 22 GMRS / FRS channels. I guess the motorola rigs can be programmed this way.

it would be nice if a "swiss-army knife" solution could be found for multiple band use, so I don't have to have 3+ radios hanging from my belt to be legal..hi hi.

73.  Todd - KT0DD
Logged
KS4VT
Member

Posts: 141




Ignore
« Reply #7 on: November 24, 2012, 07:26:32 PM »

I guess I found the reason for special GMRS type acceptance...the TX deviation on GMRS is limited to 5khz where other rigs deviate TX at 25.0 and 12.5khz. I assume this is due to narrow channel spacing and trying to crowd as many users as possible within the 22 GMRS / FRS channels. I guess the motorola rigs can be programmed this way.

it would be nice if a "swiss-army knife" solution could be found for multiple band use, so I don't have to have 3+ radios hanging from my belt to be legal..hi hi.

73.  Todd - KT0DD

Your getting the occupied bandwidth confused with the maximum allowable deviation.  GMRS can utilize the current standard 5.0 KHz or the 2.5 KHz narrowband deviation setting for both the users and repeaters.  There is no narrowband requirement at this time and FRS is narrowband by Rule.

There are emmission mask differences between the two and there is no ability to do digital or encryption in Part 95, which are becoming quite popular with APCO25 and their ability to do encryption (ADP, AES, and DES) in Part 90.
Logged
KT0DD
Member

Posts: 277




Ignore
« Reply #8 on: November 25, 2012, 08:49:48 AM »

I admit I don't remember everything from my tech exam and I got my info from another website. Apparently, he was listing confusing info on his site.

I guess I'll just carry 3 rigs with me and look like a "yellow bubble light emmcom geek" at our next public safety exercise...hi hi.

73.
Logged
AA4HA
Member

Posts: 1386




Ignore
« Reply #9 on: December 13, 2012, 08:17:54 AM »

It may sound frustrating but there are valid reasons for the different equipment type certifications. Many authorizations do not allow for the equipment to have the frequencies user programmable. You can imagine the havoc if GMRS allowed folks to attach external antennas, amplifiers or change frequencies. Maritime service radios that did not meet frequency stability or emission mask. Amateur radios with occupied bandwidth, emission mask or frequency stability.

We have the most lenient requirements on our gear but the trade-off is that our equipment usually is not type certified for other services like public safety, maritime or GMRS. The restriction upon us is supposed to be that we are given these freedoms but restricted to our own spectrum.

If you went digging to the equipment approved for use in the MARS service you would be surprised to see that most amateur radios do not meet the requirements for frequency stability or transmitter occupied bandwidth. Folks asking for mods and who toss out the MARS/CAP herring have never read the list of authorized equipment.
Logged

Ms. Tisha Hayes, AA4HA
Lookout Mountain, Alabama
RFDOG
Member

Posts: 18




Ignore
« Reply #10 on: December 31, 2012, 04:53:43 AM »

Go ahead and use what you want.  The last time an FCC vehicle lit me up and pulled me over, I begged for mercy and they let me go.   Then of course are the random FCC radio spot checks on the street....
Logged
K1CJS
Member

Posts: 5982




Ignore
« Reply #11 on: December 31, 2012, 10:44:42 AM »

Amateur radio operators are supposed to police themselves and follow the regs.  They agreed to do that when they signed the papers at their testing session.  Answers like the last one show the purposeful ignorance of that one regulation that should be foremost in an amateur operators mind.

And some people on here ask why others think the amateur service is going to the dogs...
Logged
N1EN
Member

Posts: 24




Ignore
« Reply #12 on: December 31, 2012, 01:33:59 PM »

For whatever it's worth -- the Part 95 regs explicitly say that, while transceivers can be cross-certificated for use in other radio services, if a transceiver is capable of transmitting on Part 97 frequencies, it cannot be certificated for Part 95 use.

There does seem to be some indication that the FCC tolerates Part 90 radios in GMRS use because the technical requirements are essentially the same....but I don't think there's been clear guidance about whether they tolerate the Chinese HT's.

And of course, if the antenna is detachable, it certainly is NOT legal for FRS use.

So, if you are thinking of using a Chinese HT for GMRS and you have a GMRS license, you're in an extremely murky area.

If you are using a Chinese HT on GMRS frequencies and you don't have a GMRS license, or if you're using a Chinese HT on an FRS-only frequency, you're just a pirate.
Logged
KCJ9091
Member

Posts: 0




Ignore
« Reply #13 on: December 31, 2012, 03:42:20 PM »

For whatever it's worth -- the Part 95 regs explicitly say that, while transceivers can be cross-certificated for use in other radio services, if a transceiver is capable of transmitting on Part 97 frequencies, it cannot be certificated for Part 95 use.

Mind citing the rule number?
Logged
KS4VT
Member

Posts: 141




Ignore
« Reply #14 on: January 01, 2013, 06:08:19 AM »

For whatever it's worth -- the Part 95 regs explicitly say that, while transceivers can be cross-certificated for use in other radio services, if a transceiver is capable of transmitting on Part 97 frequencies, it cannot be certificated for Part 95 use.

Mind citing the rule number?

I believe this is what N1EN was referencing...

§ 95.655 Frequency capability.
(a) No transmitter will be certificated
for use in the CB service if it is
equipped with a frequency capability
not listed in § 95.625, and no transmitter
will be certificated for use in the
GMRS if it is equipped with a frequency
capability not listed in § 95.621,
unless such transmitter is also certificated
for use in another radio service
for which the frequency is authorized
and for which certification is also required.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 Next   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!