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

donate to eham
   Home   Help Search  
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: (Article link) FCC states can't use non-certified radios on amateur bands?  (Read 5350 times)
KB2CRK
Member

Posts: 154


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #90 on: December 01, 2018, 06:10:41 AM »

It's even worse than I thought the FCC is saying if your home brew radio could operate outside of amateur bands you need to have your radio tested for type certification. (Though sounds like a catch 22 as once type certified it becomes uncertified if it can operate on ham bands.) So basically making any radios that could illegal with no workaround.


In the first link I posted in this forum thread,  the blogger posted an update with an actual youtube recording of a call with the FCC where the rep actually states that.

So by that ubitx is illegal to use without certification.
Any radio modified from another band to work in an amateur band is apparently also illegal.


I think the arrl really needs to get more involved here to get this clarified.  Most homebrew radios would likely all be illegal without certification by the FCC.

Here is the original link:
https://medium.com/@lucky225/fcc-back-peddles-all-transceivers-capable-of-transmitting-on-frequencies-that-require-40377a3722c5

Here is the call within that page:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=479&v=i248EzJtNlE



It seems FCC does not understand that almost by the very nature of a home brew radio can be operated out of band.

Here is a sort of summary of what the FCC rep states in that call:
Home brew radio’s are only exempt from certification if they can only operate in the amateur radio bands.
If home brew can go beyond amateur bands they must be type certified.
It is illegal to import, sell, manufacture and USE radio’s like the Chinese radio’s that can be used out of band. 
That is in Section 302 of the communications act.
Home brew radio’s are only exempt from certification if they can only operate in the amateur radio bands.
  If they can go beyond amateur bands they must be type certified.
Section 97-101 says amateurs are responsible for being in compliance of “ALL” commission rules (which includes the rules that say anything that can transmit out of band is illegal to operate without being type certified.) Also includes part 2 that deals with certification.
You should use radio’s that can only operate in amateur radio bands.
There is no exemption in the rules for an amateur modifying a radio that can operate in other bands.
Part 95 radio’s modified to work on other bands, would lose their certification


According to that description there are very few radios that are legal for use in ham radio. Many of them will transmit out of band right out of the box. I guess MARS will have to be shut down because it requires amateur equipment capable of transmitting out of band.
Logged

some people are like slinky's. not really good for anything but still bring a smile to your face when you push them down a flight of stairs.
WXSHAM
Member

Posts: 77




Ignore
« Reply #91 on: December 01, 2018, 07:52:03 AM »

It's even worse than I thought the FCC is saying if your home brew radio could operate outside of amateur bands you need to have your radio tested for type certification. (Though sounds like a catch 22 as once type certified it becomes uncertified if it can operate on ham bands.) So basically making any radios that could illegal with no workaround.


In the first link I posted in this forum thread,  the blogger posted an update with an actual youtube recording of a call with the FCC where the rep actually states that.

So by that ubitx is illegal to use without certification.
Any radio modified from another band to work in an amateur band is apparently also illegal.


I think the arrl really needs to get more involved here to get this clarified.  Most homebrew radios would likely all be illegal without certification by the FCC.

Here is the original link:
https://medium.com/@lucky225/fcc-back-peddles-all-transceivers-capable-of-transmitting-on-frequencies-that-require-40377a3722c5

Here is the call within that page:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=479&v=i248EzJtNlE



It seems FCC does not understand that almost by the very nature of a home brew radio can be operated out of band.

Here is a sort of summary of what the FCC rep states in that call:
Home brew radio’s are only exempt from certification if they can only operate in the amateur radio bands.
If home brew can go beyond amateur bands they must be type certified.
It is illegal to import, sell, manufacture and USE radio’s like the Chinese radio’s that can be used out of band. 
That is in Section 302 of the communications act.
Home brew radio’s are only exempt from certification if they can only operate in the amateur radio bands.
  If they can go beyond amateur bands they must be type certified.
Section 97-101 says amateurs are responsible for being in compliance of “ALL” commission rules (which includes the rules that say anything that can transmit out of band is illegal to operate without being type certified.) Also includes part 2 that deals with certification.
You should use radio’s that can only operate in amateur radio bands.
There is no exemption in the rules for an amateur modifying a radio that can operate in other bands.
Part 95 radio’s modified to work on other bands, would lose their certification


According to that description there are very few radios that are legal for use in ham radio. Many of them will transmit out of band right out of the box. I guess MARS will have to be shut down because it requires amateur equipment capable of transmitting out of band.

You bring up a great point about MARS that is an excellent argument that could be used with the FCC to argue against this advisory/rule.
Logged
W9IQ
Member

Posts: 3388




Ignore
« Reply #92 on: December 01, 2018, 10:05:11 AM »

Since the FCC lacks the regulations to enforce their over reaching notice as it relates to amateur radio, there is no need to be concerned about viable enforcement actions. We should, however, be diligent with regard to changes in the regulations to support their premise.

- Glenn W9IQ
Logged

- Glenn W9IQ

I never make a mistake. I thought I did once but I was wrong.
WXSHAM
Member

Posts: 77




Ignore
« Reply #93 on: December 01, 2018, 10:34:21 AM »

Since the FCC lacks the regulations to enforce their over reaching notice as it relates to amateur radio, there is no need to be concerned about viable enforcement actions. We should, however, be diligent with regard to changes in the regulations to support their premise.

- Glenn W9IQ

Granted it was just one rep in that call, but if you listen to the call she seems pretty certain that they do have the regulations to enforce this (and she cites the regs on the call). I'm not a lawyer so I have no idea if that would actually hold up in court but actions happen before things make it to court. Just seems the whole thing spells trouble if we don't get it cleared up.

« Last Edit: December 01, 2018, 10:38:44 AM by WXSHAM » Logged
W9IQ
Member

Posts: 3388




Ignore
« Reply #94 on: December 01, 2018, 10:42:09 AM »

That call is completely meaningless. The FCC has repeatedly cautioned, and cited, persons that have relied on the advice of FCC staffers. FCC staffer's comments, interpretations, and guidance are not suitable as an assertive defense.

- Glenn W9IQ
Logged

- Glenn W9IQ

I never make a mistake. I thought I did once but I was wrong.
WXSHAM
Member

Posts: 77




Ignore
« Reply #95 on: December 01, 2018, 11:02:45 AM »

That call is completely meaningless. The FCC has repeatedly cautioned, and cited, persons that have relied on the advice of FCC staffers. FCC staffer's comments, interpretations, and guidance are not suitable as an assertive defense.

- Glenn W9IQ

Yep that is typical with most government agencies.  Lucky said in the comments on his site Laura is "Special Counsel for the Enforcement Bureau, her name appears on every Notice of Apparent Liability sent out in the last few years.."
Logged
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7]   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!