Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Down

Author Topic: NTIA COMPLIANT BY 2008?  (Read 24246 times)

WA4MJF

  • Member
  • Posts: 1003
NTIA COMPLIANT BY 2008?
« Reply #15 on: July 28, 2005, 08:51:40 AM »

Very interesting...I guess that means
many more newer green radios will be
available for us green radio fans.

The newer ones are quite expensive now as
few are surplussed.

With that short a date, I'm sure the
R&D will be working overtime to come up
with new stuff.  The biggest problem I see
will be the backwards compatability to
the last  tactical radios, that heretofore
have driven R&D on new green radios. NSA
will have to work on new crypto techniques to
fit the narrow emissions, also.

Of course, with the ole ones not being compliant,
they may have to field them to the active and
reserve components simultaneously at the same
time and not have to worry about backwards
compatability, except they'll still need
the 53.30 MHz New Squelch to communicate with
RACES.  Of coure, the FCC could change that
frequency to another one that is compatable with
the new radios that come out.

This would mean even more showing up surplus!

Good news for MARS members (screeners, man
your DRMOs) and surplus buyers.

73 de Ronnie
Logged

AA4PB

  • Member
  • Posts: 15504
NTIA COMPLIANT BY 2008?
« Reply #16 on: July 28, 2005, 08:54:13 AM »

How do they intend to enforce it? Who's going to go around to the homes of volunteer MARS members and inspect their stations for NTIA compliance? I expect all they can do is to create a list of NTIA compiant equipment and make you sign a statement that you are only using that equipment.
Logged
Bob  AA4PB
Garrisonville, VA

N3ZKP

  • Member
  • Posts: 2008
NTIA COMPLIANT BY 2008?
« Reply #17 on: July 29, 2005, 09:46:04 AM »

Bob,

I agree with you that the rule is basically unenforcable on individual MARS members. I can't imagine any State MARS Director going around, or sending someone around to physically inspect each member's radio equipment.

Lon - NNN0OOR / NNN0GAW ONE
MDE Navy-Marine Corps MARS
Proudly Serving Those Who Serve
Logged

CPLRADAR

  • Member
  • Posts: 10
NTIA COMPLIANT BY 2008?
« Reply #18 on: July 31, 2005, 12:41:40 AM »

I think whats happening here is that people are not fully understanding whats going on.  Think about when MARS actually gets used in the States, usually for emergencies if I'm not mistaken, as all the time I spent as a Army radio operator Stateside, I've never seen anyone use MARS. Both the FCC and NTIA and all other government communications orginizations all have a written statement somewhere that usually says something to the effect "unless otherwise directed in case of emergencies."  It was probably a message sent out because some pin-head somewhere realized there was a part of the government they could not control directly, so they blew the whistle that all these MARS guys weren't playing by the rules. It won't be enforced because some oversight commitee will realize that it would cost too much money, the conservatives wanting to buy a fighter plane that doesn't fly with the money, and the liberals wanting to give the money to France.  And everyone will forget about it.
Logged

K3HVG

  • Member
  • Posts: 149
NTIA COMPLIANT BY 2008?
« Reply #19 on: August 01, 2005, 08:15:28 AM »

Action will be taken by the cognizant agency at such time as a MARS, or whatever entity, causes a problem to an adjacent service and they, in turn, file a complaint.  Until that occurs, the FED does not have the time, desire, nor the facility to police the day to day minutia.  Your KWM-2 or your KDK FM will be just fine until it affects someone outside.  That, and maybe if your agency has zealots within!!!
Logged

N3ZKP

  • Member
  • Posts: 2008
NTIA COMPLIANT BY 2008?
« Reply #20 on: August 03, 2005, 10:02:44 AM »

Chief, NAVMARCORMARS just sent out an ALL on this subject. The gist of it is that the only real impact on us is the requirement for a 20Hz stability in XMIT.

Interestingly enough, the published specs on my TS-570 and Alinco DX-70TH are both for +/- 10ppm and that meets specs. Virtually all rigs within the last 10 years will meet this spec. KWM2s and other tube rigs will not. The indication is nothing will be said on the older rigs UNLESS there is interference to another agency.

I think it's a good bet that anyone filling the NECOS or TREP slots will need to make sure they are compliant and retire the boat anchors.

Lon NNN0OOR / NNN0GAW ONE
MDE Navy-Marine Corps MARS
Proudly Serving Those Who Serve
Logged

K3HVG

  • Member
  • Posts: 149
NTIA COMPLIANT BY 2008?
« Reply #21 on: August 04, 2005, 06:09:13 AM »

I might advise a quick check of the math on your assumptions. The spec calls for less than 20Hz on any given frequency. The formula for required ppm is 20/freq (MHz).  To be compliant for the HF spectrum, you'll need something in the order of .67ppm (to get to 30 MHz).  At 10 MHz, one needs 2ppm to be compliant, and at 4 MHz you'd need 5ppm.  So, 10ppm won't really get it.  A note of interest might be that the CAP-NTC has agreed to allow some otherwise non-compliant xtal-controlled radios to be included in their approved list by limiting use to frequencies below 10 or 15 MHz, as appropriate. I'm sure MARS could be that creative or even simply state that a given radio type must not be operated above a certain frequency.  
Logged

N3ZKP

  • Member
  • Posts: 2008
NTIA COMPLIANT BY 2008?
« Reply #22 on: August 04, 2005, 06:24:48 AM »

You are right, my math is faulty!

That's what comes from trying to use the brain when it isn't plugged in! :)

Lon
Logged

K3WVU

  • Member
  • Posts: 504
NTIA COMPLIANT BY 2008?
« Reply #23 on: August 04, 2005, 08:26:41 AM »

The whole thing is really nothing to lose sleep over.  As pointed out in the Chief, NAVMARCORMARS message, there is no requirement to run out and buy a new radio.  Only federal agencies procuring new radios are directly affected by the new requirement.  Of course, if your rig is causing interference, you would have to cease operations until the problem is resolved, but that's unlikely in the extreme with any modern transceiver.

73

Dwight NNN0TPR/NNN0ASI EIGHT
Logged

WA4MJF

  • Member
  • Posts: 1003
NTIA COMPLIANT BY 2008?
« Reply #24 on: August 14, 2005, 12:30:25 PM »

USAF MARS Phone Patch Nets now add
.100 MHz to their frequencies to comply
with some directive from NTIA.  Just
became aware last week.

73 de Ronnie
AAR4LG
Logged

WI9NDY

  • Member
  • Posts: 18
NTIA COMPLIANT BY 2008?
« Reply #25 on: September 07, 2005, 11:59:39 AM »

From the AF MARS Region One web site www.marsregionone.org

www.marsregionone.org/Tech/NTIA.html

National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA)
The following is from the NTIA Web Site (http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/aboutntia/aboutntia.htm) and explains what NTIA is:

"The National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) is the President's principal adviser on telecommunications and information policy issues, and in this role frequently works with other Executive Branch agencies to develop and present the Administration's position on these issues. Since its creation in 1978, NTIA has been at the cutting edge of critical issues. In addition to representing the Executive Branch in both domestic and international telecommunications and information policy activities, NTIA also manages the Federal use of spectrum; performs cutting-edge telecommunications research and engineering, including resolving technical telecommunications issues for the Federal government and private sector; and administers infrastructure and public telecommunications facilities grants."

One of NTIA's directives concerns reducing the bandwidth of RF signals across the spectrum. The bandwidth for HF SSB is 2.8KHz instead of the 3KHz we are used to. This means 1.4KHz above and below the designated frequency. Most modern amateur radios come from the factory as upgradeable to NTIA compliance. MARS members must have their equipment compliant by 2008. The "sunset compliance rule" actually applies to VHF/UHF equipment, but MARS received a waiver from the NTIA to be in compliance by January 2008. Unfortunately the vast majority of amateur radios in use are not compliant but are "compliant ready."

Check this URL and see if your radio is compliant: https://ntc.cap.af.mil/comm/equipment/hf_summary.cfm. As you see most of the radios listed have the note: "Compliant only with XXXXXX installed." It's my understanding that all government radios sold/issued since the early or mid 1990's are NTIA compliant, such as the Harris series. What that is referring to is increasing the frequency stability of the transmitter by installing a Temperature Controlled Crystal Oscillator or TCXO. Very few, if any, off the shelf amateur radios come stock with a TCXO, they are nearly all add-on features. Nearly all of the solid state amateur transmitters manufatured since the late 70's or early 80's claim a frequency stability and accuracy of plus or minus 10 ppm. One would think that should satisify the NTIA requirement of +/- 20Hz, but if we examine "+/- 10ppm," 10 ppm is ten parts per million, equal to 10 Hz at 1 mHz or 100 Hz at 10 mHz, 300 Hz at 30 mHz. Clearly, a 10 ppm accuracy is inadequate to meet NTIA standards (+/- 20 Hz) except below 2 mHz (not very useful). Our lowest frequency RA, would only guarentee +/- 33 hz and RC is +/- 73 Hz, both clearly out of tolerance. What is most distressing is that the older equipment, such as the IC-706 (not the MKII-G) no longer have TCXO's available, so they will have to be replaced for MARS frequency operation. TCXO's that are available run in the neighborhood of $100 to $300, depending on the radio, for instance the IC-736 TCXO module runs $129. Some radios require only that the TCXO be plugged into a socket already in place and others, like the IC-736, require the oscillator that is currently installed be replaced with the TCXO. So unless you are going to chance installing the unit yourself, you have to add the installation cost at some point. The long and short of this is you have two choices: replace your current rig or upgrade it, if it's not already compliant. If you upgrade don't wait to long because the TCXO may not be available later. If you replace be ready to spend more than a few dollars for a compliant radio. There is one other choice, start looking for an issue compliant radio from DoD resources. They are out there, presistance might pay big dividends.

Rich WI9NDY / AFA1CY
Logged

KA5S

  • Member
  • Posts: 229
NTIA COMPLIANT BY 2008?
« Reply #26 on: September 16, 2005, 09:50:28 PM »


The main requirement our rigs are being tasked to meet is frequency stability.  The NTIA document that tells us what stability standard we must meet is Part 5 of the NTIA Manual of Regulations & Procedures for Federal Radio Frequency Management (May 2003 Edition, January 2005 Revisions) at
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/osmhome/redbook/redbook.html (~39 MB). Part 5 alone is at
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/osmhome/redbook/5.pdf

For SSB at 1.605 - 4000 KHz and 4 - 29.7 MHz, the center of our maximum emitted bandwidth must be within +/-20 Hz of the assigned center frequency.   For F1B it must be within +/-10 Hz of the authorized frequency. (An aside: a lot of us still set mark and space off more than this.)

This is for fixed operation. For (land) mobile operation the SSB radiotelephone requirement is +/-20 Hz and for all other modes, 30 ppm.  

Many radios not on the approved list can in fact meet the requirements for fixed service within a limited temperature range -- or below some limiting frequency. For example, my non-TCXO FT-920 has in several long tests over three months now, using WWV and WWVH as standards (and after warmup), drifted +0.85 and -0.8 ppm between 55 and 81 degrees F.  It would meet the mode F1B +/-10 Hz  requirement through 11.75 MHz and the +/-20 Hz SSB radiotelephone requirement through 23.5 MHz if used at room temperature or slightly below.  (Lower temperature tests must wait on cooler nights and a thick sweater.) This rig is specified at 10 ppm over 14-122 degrees F and with a TCXO, 5 ppm.   If used for any mode other than SSB radiotelephone or F1B, the Part 5 stability requirement is 20 parts per million and the rig IS compliant for those modes at any HF frequency and temperature within its specified operating range. This could possibly include complex modes such as MFSK, Clover, combined phase and amplitude modulation, FAX, etc.

Why aren't such rigs on the list *with conditions*? No time, no resources -- and often, no cooperation from manufacturers.  In many cases, NTIA has no manufacturer documentation, and can't evaluate radios for compliance even by a marketing department's brag sheet.  In other cases, documentation is insufficient. For example, the very popular FT-817/857/897 are specified at +/-0.5 ppm with TCXO, which is OK -- but Yaesu rates the TXCO as within 0.5 ppm/hr (84 ppm in a week, which is unbelievable) and ONLY at 68 degrees F (which is stupid) and no one, not even NTIA, can make sense of that in a radio with an operating temperature range of 14 to 140 degrees F!  

Why can't we test our own rigs? Well, NTIA has no way to assess the testing facility.  It doesn't know how we are trained, what test equipment we have, how often (if ever!) it's calibrated... it CAN'T accept our results. However, the Tri-Service MARS program *might* be talked into standing in for a certifying authority if we can show compliance _somehow_ -- and prevent our really good equipment from turning into NTIA-junk-grade sets.

Actual junk however, can be OK. I have a decrepit old Marine SSB that is on the list, just in case.


Cortland
KA5S
AAR9UT
Logged

K6WHP

  • Member
  • Posts: 17
NTIA COMPLIANT BY 2008?
« Reply #27 on: September 29, 2005, 01:11:20 PM »

..at the risk of a waggish observation from a member of CAP, the compliance of a radio to NTIA standards seems to be determined by one question:

(1) Will the purchase price of this radio effectively and (near) permanently evacuate the monetary contents of the participant's wallet?

If the answer is "yes", then the radio is deemed compliant.

Logged

N9NWO

  • Member
  • Posts: 18
NTIA COMPLIANT BY 2008?
« Reply #28 on: October 18, 2005, 11:09:24 AM »

Army MARS was notified on 2005.08.04

CAM 40B-05 (NTIA STANDARDS) (UNCLASSIFIED)MARS Announce List on behalf of Sutton, Robert L Mr NETCOM
Classification:  UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE


 All,
   It is our understanding that the MARS-L list has been restored. The following is a retransmission of a CAM that was previously sent via the radio system.

 73's

 Bob S.
 Robert L. Sutton
 Chief, Army MARS, AAA9A
 DSN: 879-8286
 COM: (520) 538-8286

  -----Original Message-----
 From:         Sutton, Robert L Mr NETCOM
 Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 4:15 PM
 To:   'EA AREA GW (AAA3E) '; 'Solarczyk, Larry (EA GW CHIEF (E-mail)'; 'WA GATEWAY (AAA9USA)'; 'Wolf, Daniel (E-mail)'
 Cc:   Army MARS-L Email List (2004) (E-mail); 'James Banks (Akima) (wk) (E-mail)'; 'Robert Hollister (AKIMA) (E-mail)'; 'Chief, AF MARS CHIEF (Mr. Collins)'; Chief, Navy-Marine Corps (MARS) (E-mail); 'Collins, Ray  (C, AF MARS - HM)'

 Subject:      CAM 40B-05 (NTIA STANDARDS) (UNCLASSIFIED)

 Classification:  UNCLASSIFIED
 Caveats: NONE

 DE AAA9A NR 041
 R 262314Z JUL 2005
 FM CHIEF ARMY MARS/AAA9A AZ
 TO ALL ARMY MARS MEMBERS AND STATIONS
 INFO ZEN CMD DIRECTORS/AREA COORDINATORS
 ZEN CHIEF AIR FORCE MARS
 ZEN CHIEF NAVY-MARINE CORPS MARS
 BT
 SUBJECT: CAM 40B-05 (NTIA STANDARDS)
 SECTION TWO OF TWO SECTIONS
 YOU MAY REMEMBER THAT MARS MEMBERS WERE
 REQUIRED TO MEET THIS STANDARD TO OPERATE ON FEMA
 OR SHARES CHANNELS IN 2002. ALL MARS MEMBERS
 SHOULD CONSIDER THIS STANDARD WHEN PURCHASING
 NEW EQUIPMENT AND SHOULD MEET THIS STANDARD NO
 LATER THAN 1 JANUARY 2008. YOU MAY GO TO THE
 FOLLOWING WEB SITE TO DETERMINE IF YOUR CURRENT OR
 PROPOSED REPLACEMENT EQUIPMENT MEETS THIS
 STANDARD: (ALL LOWER CASE)
 http://HTTPS://NTC.CAP.AF.MIL/INDEX.CFM
5. ALSO EFFECTIVE 1 SEP 2005, MEMBERS WILL NOT BE
 PERMITTED TO WITHDRAW ANY HF RADIO EQUIPMENT FROM
 DRMO THAT DOES NOT MEET NTIA STANDARDS.
 4. VHF OPERATIONS:
 A. VHF CHANGES/STANDARDS - IN OCTOBER OF LAST YEAR
 WE WERE ADVISED BY THE ARMY FREQUENCY
 MANAGEMENT OFFICE THAT THE EXISTING DOD VHF
 CHANNEL PLAN WILL BE CHANGING TO A NARROW BAND
 STANDARD (12.5 KHZ VS 25 KHZ CHANNEL SPACING)
 B. EFFECTIVE NO LATER THAN 1 JANUARY 2008. THE
 PURPOSE OF THIS CHANGE IS TO PROVIDE MORE
 CHANNELS IN AN ALREADY CONGESTED SPECTRUM. THAT
 INFORMATION WAS PROVIDED TO STATE DIRECTORS FOR
 PLANNING PURPOSES AND ALL NEW VHF SITE LICENSES OR
 RENEWALS WILL BE REQUIRED TO MEET THE NEW
 STANDARD.  SEVERAL STATES HAVE ALREADY BEGUN
 SHIFTING THEIR REPEATER FREQUENCIES TO MEET THIS
 PLAN AND ARE PLANNING TO PURCHASE NEW REPEATERS
 CAPABLE OF MEETING THIS NARROW BAND REQUIREMENT.
 MANY OF THE NEWER VHF AMATEUR RADIOS ARE ALREADY
 CAPABLE OF OPERATING IN A NARROW FM MODE.
 5. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION WILL BE PROVIDED AS IT
 BECOMES AVAILABLE. REQUEST WIDEST DISSEMINATION OF
 THIS MESSAGE.
 SGD BOB SUTTON, CHIEF ARMY MARS,
 PROUD PROFESSIONAL AND READY
 END OF SECTION TWO OF TWO SECTIONS
 BT



 NNNN
 /EX

 Classification:  UNCLASSIFIED
 Caveats: NONE

 
Logged

AI4KK

  • Member
  • Posts: 107
NTIA COMPLIANT BY 2008?
« Reply #29 on: October 24, 2005, 11:34:23 AM »

As a CAP member with 5 children in the house (we were both single parents when we met),I can say that it's not really that great of a financial cross to bear especially if you are buying or upgrading equipment anyway, and would be even easier if you sold your non-compliant ham equipment to defray any expenses. Both of my HF rigs are compliant - a SGC2000 and an Icom IC-703 as are my handheld radios (2 VX-150s and 2 PRC-127s) and my mobile VHF radio (a Kenwood TK-730G). I've probably spent less than $1,500.00 total over a period of several years accumulating this junk..er I mean collection. Granted, I was fortunate enough to start in HF from scratch so I had to buy a rifg anyway, but it's really not that much more expensive than any other ham gear.

As for how it could be enforced, yes I have heard on-air warnings about unstable radios (he was on every frequency except the net freq), and if someone were cited, they could have to submit their radio for a standards test, but I have yet to hear of anything going that far.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Up