| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
Censored post ...
If you ever think about posting to the moderated group, don't ... Here is an example of a censored post, of mine: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 A 5 KW amplifier is not lawful for use under Part 97. Please strike reference on any resubmit. - K3FU I'm pretty sure a ham CAN use a 5KW PA, as long as he limits the power out to the maximum allowed under our FCC rules. Its not the hardware that is not permited, its the actual power out that counts. Ed K7AAT |
Censored post ...
Ed wrote:
... I'm pretty sure a ham CAN use a 5KW PA, as long as he limits the power out to the maximum allowed under our FCC rules. Its not the hardware that is not permited, its the actual power out that counts. Ed K7AAT I am fairly confident that is true, and running such a rig at an "idle" would certainly guarantee a loooooong lifetime for the finals! ... but, with lawyers, you never know. Anyway, a paranoid ham can certainly keep one in the basement for "The Big One!" But, my post which started this thread was rather cryptic in its' intent; and, in my haste I failed to make that intent obvious. I meant to show what can be accomplished with censorship and why it is a most diabolical and evil weapon. Especially since the censor can "load the dice." A bully, a biased media, a pseudo-government entity--such as the arrl, etc., when, in the background, attempts to influence the public, that publics' options and access to ideas, well, this has always managed to get my blood to heat. One thing I like about the r.r.a.antenna news thread is that we have "nuts" here, and sometimes that is exactly what is needed to seed new ideas, designs, etc. Or, to go where no mind has gone before (or is that StarTrek? grin) Someone, somewhere, quite possibly from this group, will go to bed one night, much like John Kanzius. That someone will awake during the night, perhaps, and end up constructing the "new antenna" from his wifes pie plates. It may "change things." Well, at least I think that much more plausible then someone from r.r.a.m (hey, is that a pseudonym for arrl? wink) awaking and saving the world with their rig and moderated newsgroup! ;-) Regards, JS |
Censored post ...
John Smith quoted someone:
"A 5 KW amplifier is not lawful for use under Part 97." Back in the 60's, a ham friend of mine ran a surplus AM transmitter capable of 10KW output. However, he never adjusted his input power to more than the legal 1KW limit. -- 73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com |
Censored post ...
The rules stipulate how much power can be run. They do not stipulate
how much power could -possibly- be run. It's up to the user to stay legal. Simple as that. - 'Doc |
Censored post ...
"Ed" wrote in message . 192.196... If you ever think about posting to the moderated group, don't ... Here is an example of a censored post, of mine: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 A 5 KW amplifier is not lawful for use under Part 97. Please strike reference on any resubmit. - K3FU I'm pretty sure a ham CAN use a 5KW PA, as long as he limits the power out to the maximum allowed under our FCC rules. Its not the hardware that is not permited, its the actual power out that counts. Ed K7AAT -------------- Yep, you are right. We are regulated by emission standards. Not equipment standards. Ed, NM2K |
Censored post ...
Ed Cregger wrote:
... Yep, you are right. We are regulated by emission standards. Not equipment standards. Ed, NM2K But, we here, in r.r.a.a, can "cheat" that quite legally! It is called high gain antennas ... (or, ERP) However, those get more difficult with "distance" (i.e, meters) ... and age. :-( (not to mention rules/regulations.) Regards, JS |
Censored post ...
Cecil Moore wrote:
John Smith quoted someone: "A 5 KW amplifier is not lawful for use under Part 97." Back in the 60's, a ham friend of mine ran a surplus AM transmitter capable of 10KW output. However, he never adjusted his input power to more than the legal 1KW limit. Recently, over in r.r.a.m, the following exchange took place between me and another: EXCERPT FROM MY POST: " These freqs, being opened up for the net, is a very exciting development ... I believe the opportunities and access provided will greatly expand the availability to the net under adverse circumstances, and make greater speeds available to those who were lacking the same ..." HIS RESPONSE: "I do believe that the thrust of this group is to further Amateur Radio, not "the 'net". Then there are those of us who are professionals in spectrum regulatory management who believe that this is a harebrained idea from the get-go that violates good professional practice." My NSHPO." [Not So Humble Personal Opinion? -- by JS] MY ANALYSIS OF THE ABOVE EXCHANGE: This individual, apparently/obviously, has no real respect for the Scientific Method (i.e., Scientific Thinking.) He would have the citizens suffer the will(s) of "us who are professionals." snicker (Is that like alcoholics, they are, when they say they are one? grin) And, I feel I could easily make a 1:1 replacement of "regulatory management" with "religious devotion/doctorine." And, his use of, "... from the get-go that violates good professional practice" simply restates his preference to a "religious devotion" to "arrl doctorine" over any REAL use of the scientific methods/thinking. The "Coup De Grace" of his "thrust" being "NSHPO", indications of a rather large ego, and usually held by an ego-manic! Anyway, this "mans'" complete ramblings can be read over in r.r.a.m ... it is well worth your trouble--if you need a laugh today; they are, now, a matter of public record. ;-) Regards, JS |
Censored post ...
In article ,
Cecil Moore wrote: John Smith quoted someone: "A 5 KW amplifier is not lawful for use under Part 97." Back in the 60's, a ham friend of mine ran a surplus AM transmitter capable of 10KW output. However, he never adjusted his input power to more than the legal 1KW limit. Whom, ever "Someone" is, he isn't versed in 47CFR97, and doesn't understand, or can't comprehend, the actual Rule that Part 97 operations are REQUIRED to operate under. Specifically Part 97.313. I wonder if "Said Person" has ever actually READ 47CFR90.313? Apparently NOT...... -- Bruce in alaska add path after fast to reply |
Censored post ...
Bruce in alaska wrote:
... Whom, ever "Someone" is, he isn't versed in 47CFR97, and doesn't understand, or can't comprehend, the actual Rule that Part 97 operations are REQUIRED to operate under. Specifically Part 97.313. I wonder if "Said Person" has ever actually READ 47CFR90.313? Apparently NOT...... Your post is inspiring, and immediately brings a hypothetical question to mind: If an amateur is near a QRP'er on a field-day, they both have made contact with the same ham, on the same freq/mode and within seconds of ones' QSO ending, the other began ... and the QRP'er did it with 5w the other ham with 100w ... Is the 100w'er in violation of the law? grin Or, and perhaps more importantly, do you know of any amateurs who would "turn him in?" Or, call for his license to be revoked? -- I mean other than those in r.r.a.m, apparently? Or, who really enjoys contacts barely above the noise floor? Well, sometimes ... ROFLOL! Regards, JS |
Censored post ...
"Bruce in alaska" wrote in message ... In article , Cecil Moore wrote: John Smith quoted someone: "A 5 KW amplifier is not lawful for use under Part 97." Back in the 60's, a ham friend of mine ran a surplus AM transmitter capable of 10KW output. However, he never adjusted his input power to more than the legal 1KW limit. Whom, ever "Someone" is, he isn't versed in 47CFR97, and doesn't understand, or can't comprehend, the actual Rule that Part 97 operations are REQUIRED to operate under. Specifically Part 97.313. I wonder if "Said Person" has ever actually READ 47CFR90.313? Apparently NOT...... and how would you know that from the information stated? |
Censored post ...
On Jul 28, 9:10*pm, John Smith wrote:
If you ever think about posting to the moderated group, don't ... Here is an example of a censored post, of mine: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 * A 5 KW amplifier is not lawful for use under Part 97. Please strike reference on any resubmit. - K3FU Your message has been rejected because it describes or advocates activities that we reasonably believe to be in violation of United States Law or Federal Communications Commission Regulations (or similar laws and regulations in other countries, if you are not a U.S. person). Please read the charter of rec.radio.amateur.moderated at: * * * *http://www.panix.com/~rram/usenet/rram/index.html Please direct any queries to . Thank you, * * * * - Moderation Team. It is none of K3FUs' business what equipment I own, or who I tell ... That man, and I use that title VERY LIGHTLY, is beyond an idiot ... JS What they are doing over there is a blatent attempt to keep bozos off the bus! It should be viewed as an affront to all bozos, and you are well within your rights to be good and mad about it. ac6xg (actual callsign) |
Censored post ...
Dave wrote:
... and how would you know that from the information stated? Oh now, imagine that; why didn't we/I think of that! There are "other possibilities" to his intentions/actions/words! However, the alternatives bode poorly of the mans motives, intellect, reading comprehension abilities, trustworthiness, fitness for public position, etc. -- pick one or more at your own/his risk ... perhaps "manipulator" would be a compromise one could seek? Regards, JS |
Censored post ...
Jim Kelley wrote:
... What they are doing over there is a blatent attempt to keep bozos off the bus! It should be viewed as an affront to all bozos, and you are well within your rights to be good and mad about it. ac6xg (actual callsign) If your appraisal of "their intentions/wishes" is correct, and you are a friend, would not it be appropriate to inform them they have failed? Indeed, apparently, while "their" attention(s) were elsewhere, the bozos snuck on that bus and now guide that "vehicles" direction ... frown But you do have a point! Their inability to recognize their plight and what has happened to them is rather strange; do you believe anyone is home? ... Or, you think it might be something in the water they are drinking? :-( Regards, JS |
Censored post ...
On Jul 29, 1:51*pm, John Smith wrote:
Jim Kelley wrote: ... What they are doing over there is a blatent attempt to keep bozos off the bus! *It should be viewed as an affront to all bozos, and you are well within your rights to be good and mad about it. ac6xg (actual callsign) If your appraisal of "their intentions/wishes" is correct, and you are a friend, would not it be appropriate to inform them they have failed? With all due respect, I wouldn't be surprised if your posts were used as the calibration standard, "John". ac6xg (actual callsign) |
Censored post ...
Jim Kelley wrote:
... With all due respect, I wouldn't be surprised if your posts were used as the calibration standard, "John". ac6xg (actual callsign) Why Jim, and certainly with all due respect intended, I most willingly accept that as your NSHPO! (Yanno, that acronym is growing on me--at first I wasn't so taken with it!) ;-) Regards, JS |
Censored post ...
Bruce in alaska wrote:
Whom, ever "Someone" is, he isn't versed in 47CFR97, and doesn't understand, or can't comprehend, the actual Rule that Part 97 operations are REQUIRED to operate under. Specifically Part 97.313. I wonder if "Said Person" has ever actually READ 47CFR90.313? Apparently NOT...... I fail to see how "never adjusting his input power to more than the legal 1KW limit" violated 97.313. -- 73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com |
Censored post ...
On Jul 29, 6:34*am, Cecil Moore wrote:
John Smith quoted someone: *"A 5 KW amplifier is not lawful for use under Part 97." Back in the 60's, a ham friend of mine ran a surplus AM transmitter capable of 10KW output. However, he never adjusted his input power to more than the legal 1KW limit. -- 73, Cecil *http://www.w5dxp.com Like you, I'm just an observer in all this, but it appears that Phil Kane (the gentleman to whom "Mr. Smith" was lecturing) must have been referring to the practice of using a 5 KW amp at its rated output on the ham bands as being unlawful. You probably remember Phil from r.r.a.p. He made his living as a practicing communications attorney IIRC. ac6xg |
Censored post ...
Jim Kelley wrote:
On Jul 29, 6:34 am, Cecil Moore wrote: ... 73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com Like you, I'm just an observer in all this, but it appears that Phil Kane (the gentleman to whom "Mr. Smith" was lecturing) must have been referring to the practice of using a 5 KW amp at its rated output on the ham bands as being unlawful. You probably remember Phil from r.r.a.p. He made his living as a practicing communications attorney IIRC. ac6xg Jim, I can possibly help clarify the situation, at this point. The "gentleman" who took, apparently/NSHPO, responsibility for the censorship was Paul Schleck/K3FU (none other than a major player in the arrl wannabe political league) ... and, in my NSHPO, was stepping up to assist a friend (aiding an accomplice would just be too harsh of language) ... Regards, JS |
Censored post ...
On Jul 29, 4:20*pm, John Smith wrote:
The "gentleman" who took, apparently/NSHPO, responsibility for the censorship was Paul Schleck/K3FU (none other than a major player in the arrl wannabe political league) ... and, in my NSHPO, was stepping up to assist a friend (aiding an accomplice would just be too harsh of language) ... You bet. But here's what I really need to know: how can I turn on a message filter in google groups? That would really help a lot. ac6xg (actual callsign) |
Censored post ...
Jim Kelley wrote:
... You bet. But here's what I really need to know: how can I turn on a message filter in google groups? That would really help a lot. ac6xg (actual callsign) Well, I am not familiar with google groups; so, I posed the question to my son, who in turn, posed the question to a friend ... Short answer is: "NewsProxy", possibly used in conjunction with "Hampster." (will give you "God-like powers on filtering.") However, their long answer included the fact that it would be much easier to set up a real newsreader through a free news server ... Sorry, best I could do ... I really didn't really understand all they were willing to explain ... you will excuse me for now wishing to ... However, to the best of, even, their knowledge, there is "no easy way" to do what you want. Regards, JS |
Censored post ...
John Smith wrote:
... you will excuse me for now wishing to ... In the above, change now to not ... you probably already caught that ... Regards, JS |
Censored post ...
"Ed" wrote in message . 192.196... If you ever think about posting to the moderated group, don't ... Here is an example of a censored post, of mine: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 A 5 KW amplifier is not lawful for use under Part 97. Please strike reference on any resubmit. - K3FU I'm pretty sure a ham CAN use a 5KW PA, as long as he limits the power out to the maximum allowed under our FCC rules. Its not the hardware that is not permited, its the actual power out that counts. Ed K7AAT Ought to be obvious: An HF radio can transmit on all parts of its design bands. License class determines the legality (or not) of the band segment(s) the licensee accesses. Most hams elect to be straight-shooters in this regard. Power should be the same. |
Censored post ...
John Smith wrote:
Jim Kelley wrote: On Jul 29, 6:34 am, Cecil Moore wrote: ... 73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com Like you, I'm just an observer in all this, but it appears that Phil Kane (the gentleman to whom "Mr. Smith" was lecturing) must have been referring to the practice of using a 5 KW amp at its rated output on the ham bands as being unlawful. You probably remember Phil from r.r.a.p. He made his living as a practicing communications attorney IIRC. ac6xg Jim, I can possibly help clarify the situation, at this point. The "gentleman" who took, apparently/NSHPO, responsibility for the censorship was Paul Schleck/K3FU (none other than a major player in the arrl wannabe political league) ... and, in my NSHPO, was stepping up to assist a friend (aiding an accomplice would just be too harsh of language) ... Regards, JS You're too modest, "John". I've included a couple of your quotes for balance. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- From rec.radio.cb Dec. 19, 2006 When I go shopping in walmart, I use maxon 49mhz headsets to communicate with the wife. I use 5 watt cobra chicken band sets when camping. I use a 1KW (1.5kw pep) rig for casual world chat. 5KW is just when I get serious ... JS ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- From rec.radio.cb Dec. 20, 2006 Jim: Whether you are impressed or not is no concern of mine. Trash CB'ers? Naaa mate! My amateur equip covers the cb band quite nicely, don't mind chatting up truckers at all! I was just asking you all if you would be joining me on the ham freqs, now that the CW requirement in the USA is being dropped ... Regards, JS ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ From rec.radio.cb May 26, 2005 If one is smart enough to call it an "amateur amplifier" don't they let it be sold? Certainly every cb'er in the world is smart enough to know an amateur linear can be used on 11 meters with very little modification... Also, check out pages on russian linears, they have 3.5KW rigs which are very affordable... a friend going/living in canada can possibly grab one for you easily too... there are many ways around any roadblock they can throw up--retired engineers routinely build linears in their garages for "beer money." Warmest regards, John ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From rec.radio.cb May 26, 2005 Here is a guy which can help you out, or you can at least get ideas from his page... A good 4KW to 5KW russian tube in a homebrew linear is just the ticket, especially if you just "idle" the tube at a 3.5 KW input... last you a lifetime and all the power you will ever need... someone should set up a home business building them... Warmest regards, John ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ From rec.radio.amateur.misc May 25, 2005 I have a single russian tube (two tube in push-pull driving it--in the amp) which is outputting approx. 4.5KW... can you imagine what the transistor (mosfet) amp which could match it would look like--or cost!!!! Warmest regards, John ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I'm certain that you're honest as the day is long and would never consider running illegal power. Dave K8MN |
Censored post ...
Dave Heil wrote:
... Dave K8MN Ohh Dave, I am a real dangerous scoundrel alright--you sure have me pegged! Got a "toy car" with the old 454 engine, and a 3/4 race cam, and various "mods", which can do 200+ mph ... I have only had it up to ~150mph on the freeway--2, maybe 3 times ... seems I value my life too much, at least these days, to really enjoy it as much as I had first thought. Can't really enjoy 'em now that I can freely afford 'em, a shame, really .... (well, afford 'em without dipping into the kids college monies.) "Toys" are that way ... can you imagine the cost of the ticket--if I'd been caught? :-( Someone like you just can't understand that, I'd imagine ... But, look on the bright side, someday you can "replay" this post to me! That would probably you a much bigger "jolt" than any of my "my notorious exploits!" -- To each his own ... Someday I'll tell 'ya about some of my "college exploits", but then, that would probably bore you smirk ... really just did 'em to keep the girls attention ... ;-) ROFLOL!!! Regards, JS |
Censored post ...
John Smith wrote:
Dave Heil wrote: ... Regards, JS Oh, and those 49mhz rigs--I gave 'em away and went to some ~460 FRS by Cobra--remember that corp. from the 70's? Used to manufacture CB equip? The preformance on the high power freqs is amazing ... and the roger beep works well. grin Regards, JS |
Censored post ...
John Smith wrote:
John Smith wrote: Dave Heil wrote: ... Regards, JS Oh, and those 49mhz rigs--I gave 'em away and went to some ~460 FRS by Cobra--remember that corp. from the 70's? Used to manufacture CB equip? The preformance on the high power freqs is amazing ... and the roger beep works well. grin Regards, JS Yanno, I really regret this last post of mine, above, the XYL made me throw it in ... after she read your post. :-( Regards, JS |
Censored post ...
Bruce in alaska wrote:
In article , Cecil Moore wrote: John Smith quoted someone: "A 5 KW amplifier is not lawful for use under Part 97." Back in the 60's, a ham friend of mine ran a surplus AM transmitter capable of 10KW output. However, he never adjusted his input power to more than the legal 1KW limit. Whom, ever "Someone" is, he isn't versed in 47CFR97, and doesn't understand, or can't comprehend, the actual Rule that Part 97 operations are REQUIRED to operate under. Specifically Part 97.313. I wonder if "Said Person" has ever actually READ 47CFR90.313? Apparently NOT...... Why stop at 97.313? Try 97.315 and 97.317 as well. Unless "John Smith" has a "certificated for use in the amateur service" 5 kW amp (highly unlikely that one could find such a critter) or "constructed or modified" the 5 kW amp then it is not legal for amateur use at any power setting. 73, Gene W4SZ |
Censored post ...
"Gene Fuller" wrote in message ... Bruce in alaska wrote: In article , Cecil Moore wrote: John Smith quoted someone: "A 5 KW amplifier is not lawful for use under Part 97." Back in the 60's, a ham friend of mine ran a surplus AM transmitter capable of 10KW output. However, he never adjusted his input power to more than the legal 1KW limit. Whom, ever "Someone" is, he isn't versed in 47CFR97, and doesn't understand, or can't comprehend, the actual Rule that Part 97 operations are REQUIRED to operate under. Specifically Part 97.313. I wonder if "Said Person" has ever actually READ 47CFR90.313? Apparently NOT...... Why stop at 97.313? Try 97.315 and 97.317 as well. Unless "John Smith" has a "certificated for use in the amateur service" 5 kW amp (highly unlikely that one could find such a critter) or "constructed or modified" the 5 kW amp then it is not legal for amateur use at any power setting. 73, Gene W4SZ No, friend Gene. It doesn't work that way. You do not have to have type certification for legal operation in the amateur bands. You only have to have it if you SELL new amateur equipment in the USA. Home made gear, or converted gear from other services, is completely legal in the USA. Always has been, hopefully always will be. CB gear must be type certified for selling and for usage. Again, amateurs are responsible for their RF emissions. The FCC could care less about the type of gear you are using. In fact, if brand new amateur gear that was compliant to type acceptance malfunctions and issues an out of spec emission, YOU as a duly licensed amateur radio operator are held responsible. Not the manufacturer. Ed, NM2K |
Censored post ...
Gene Fuller wrote:
Unless "John Smith" has a "certificated for use in the amateur service" 5 kW amp (highly unlikely that one could find such a critter) or "constructed or modified" the 5 kW amp then it is not legal for amateur use at any power setting. "Modifications" are trivially easy. -- 73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com |
Censored post ...
Cecil Moore wrote:
Gene Fuller wrote: Unless "John Smith" has a "certificated for use in the amateur service" 5 kW amp (highly unlikely that one could find such a critter) or "constructed or modified" the 5 kW amp then it is not legal for amateur use at any power setting. "Modifications" are trivially easy. Like.. The front panel has been modified to add a placard indicating that operation at more than XXX plate current is not permitted when operating in amateur bands. And that whole "offered for sale" kind of thing is a huge regulatory morass, with a lot of "guidance" from local FCC officials on what might or might not prompt more attention. It's one thing to have an obscure ham oriented website and sell widgets obviously intended only for hams.. another to have a big online-store and sell obviously commercial products with a "wink, wink" disclaimer about only selling to hams, when in actuality, anyone with a credit card can get it. The FCC enforcement logs are full of things like folks are selling "experimenter" video transmitters, but doing no substantive validation of the buyer. Ditto the stores selling various and sundry CB equipment. |
Censored post ...
Cecil Moore wrote:
Gene Fuller wrote: Unless "John Smith" has a "certificated for use in the amateur service" 5 kW amp (highly unlikely that one could find such a critter) or "constructed or modified" the 5 kW amp then it is not legal for amateur use at any power setting. "Modifications" are trivially easy. Like.. The front panel has been modified to add a placard indicating that operation at more than XXX plate current is not permitted when operating in amateur bands. And that whole "offered for sale" kind of thing is a huge regulatory morass, with a lot of "guidance" from local FCC officials on what might or might not prompt more attention. It's one thing to have an obscure ham oriented website and sell widgets obviously intended only for hams.. another to have a big online-store and sell obviously commercial products with a "wink, wink" disclaimer about only selling to hams, when in actuality, anyone with a credit card can get it. The FCC enforcement logs are full of things like folks are selling "experimenter" video transmitters, but doing no substantive validation of the buyer. Ditto the stores selling various and sundry CB equipment. |
Censored post ...
Gene Fuller wrote:
... Why stop at 97.313? Try 97.315 and 97.317 as well. Unless "John Smith" has a "certificated for use in the amateur service" 5 kW amp (highly unlikely that one could find such a critter) or "constructed or modified" the 5 kW amp then it is not legal for amateur use at any power setting. 73, Gene W4SZ Gene: Skeptical, confused ... Perhaps I can help with this link: http://www.assemblywizard.fr33webhost.com/ Those 8 x QB4/1100GA "JUGS" at ~5.6KV @ 1.6 AMPS, 200 Watts DRIVE, OUTPUT = ~5KW That is not max output, the amp could have an increase in PV and Drive to a theortical max output of ~7KW ... I have tapped down on the PV, drive and even the current to the filaments which are at about 85-90% of specs ... this amp is not in everyday use--but then, you already knew that. My son now has the 5KW "factory made" russian amp I used to keep. At a later date I may have him take some .jpg pictures and send them to me to load up to the URL ... Now, off to the doctor ... Regards, JS |
Censored post ...
Jim Lux wrote:
... It's one thing to have an obscure ham oriented website and sell widgets obviously intended only for hams.. another to have a big online-store and sell obviously commercial products with a "wink, wink" disclaimer about only selling to hams, when in actuality, anyone with a credit card can get it. The FCC enforcement logs are full of things like folks are selling "experimenter" video transmitters, but doing no substantive validation of the buyer. Ditto the stores selling various and sundry CB equipment. You forgot to mention purchasing it from outside our borders, perhaps Russia, for example. You forgot purchasing the parts and constructing it yourself, again, Russian parts/plans are the cheapest ... (my city has the furtherest inland seaport, yanno ...) Now, what am I forgetting? Really, I have a doctors appt. at 11 am ... gotta go ... bbl Regards, JS |
Censored post ...
Ed Cregger wrote:
"Gene Fuller" wrote in message ... Bruce in alaska wrote: In article , Cecil Moore wrote: John Smith quoted someone: "A 5 KW amplifier is not lawful for use under Part 97." Back in the 60's, a ham friend of mine ran a surplus AM transmitter capable of 10KW output. However, he never adjusted his input power to more than the legal 1KW limit. Whom, ever "Someone" is, he isn't versed in 47CFR97, and doesn't understand, or can't comprehend, the actual Rule that Part 97 operations are REQUIRED to operate under. Specifically Part 97.313. I wonder if "Said Person" has ever actually READ 47CFR90.313? Apparently NOT...... Why stop at 97.313? Try 97.315 and 97.317 as well. Unless "John Smith" has a "certificated for use in the amateur service" 5 kW amp (highly unlikely that one could find such a critter) or "constructed or modified" the 5 kW amp then it is not legal for amateur use at any power setting. 73, Gene W4SZ No, friend Gene. It doesn't work that way. You do not have to have type certification for legal operation in the amateur bands. You only have to have it if you SELL new amateur equipment in the USA. Home made gear, or converted gear from other services, is completely legal in the USA. Always has been, hopefully always will be. CB gear must be type certified for selling and for usage. Again, amateurs are responsible for their RF emissions. The FCC could care less about the type of gear you are using. In fact, if brand new amateur gear that was compliant to type acceptance malfunctions and issues an out of spec emission, YOU as a duly licensed amateur radio operator are held responsible. Not the manufacturer. Ed, NM2K Ed, Sorry you have such a problem with basic literacy. I stand by exactly what I said. An unmodified manufactured amp that is not "certificated" is not legal for use in the US Amateur Service, regardless of where it was manufactured. A constructed or modified amp is potentially legal if operated within the output power rules. Did you read something else? 73, Gene W4SZ |
Censored post ...
In article
, Jim Kelley wrote: On Jul 29, 6:34*am, Cecil Moore wrote: John Smith quoted someone: *"A 5 KW amplifier is not lawful for use under Part 97." Back in the 60's, a ham friend of mine ran a surplus AM transmitter capable of 10KW output. However, he never adjusted his input power to more than the legal 1KW limit. -- 73, Cecil *http://www.w5dxp.com Like you, I'm just an observer in all this, but it appears that Phil Kane (the gentleman to whom "Mr. Smith" was lecturing) must have been referring to the practice of using a 5 KW amp at its rated output on the ham bands as being unlawful. You probably remember Phil from r.r.a.p. He made his living as a practicing communications attorney IIRC. ac6xg Phil Kane is a reTired FCC Attorney, that worked out of one of the California Field Offices. -- Bruce in alaska add path after fast to reply |
Censored post ...
In article
, Gene Fuller wrote: Ed Cregger wrote: "Gene Fuller" wrote in message ... Bruce in alaska wrote: In article , Cecil Moore wrote: John Smith quoted someone: "A 5 KW amplifier is not lawful for use under Part 97." Back in the 60's, a ham friend of mine ran a surplus AM transmitter capable of 10KW output. However, he never adjusted his input power to more than the legal 1KW limit. Whom, ever "Someone" is, he isn't versed in 47CFR97, and doesn't understand, or can't comprehend, the actual Rule that Part 97 operations are REQUIRED to operate under. Specifically Part 97.313. I wonder if "Said Person" has ever actually READ 47CFR90.313? Apparently NOT...... Why stop at 97.313? Try 97.315 and 97.317 as well. Unless "John Smith" has a "certificated for use in the amateur service" 5 kW amp (highly unlikely that one could find such a critter) or "constructed or modified" the 5 kW amp then it is not legal for amateur use at any power setting. 73, Gene W4SZ No, friend Gene. It doesn't work that way. You do not have to have type certification for legal operation in the amateur bands. You only have to have it if you SELL new amateur equipment in the USA. Home made gear, or converted gear from other services, is completely legal in the USA. Always has been, hopefully always will be. CB gear must be type certified for selling and for usage. Again, amateurs are responsible for their RF emissions. The FCC could care less about the type of gear you are using. In fact, if brand new amateur gear that was compliant to type acceptance malfunctions and issues an out of spec emission, YOU as a duly licensed amateur radio operator are held responsible. Not the manufacturer. Ed, NM2K Ed, Sorry you have such a problem with basic literacy. I stand by exactly what I said. An unmodified manufactured amp that is not "certificated" is not legal for use in the US Amateur Service, regardless of where it was manufactured. A constructed or modified amp is potentially legal if operated within the output power rules. Did you read something else? 73, Gene W4SZ Gene, It would depend on who you purchased your AMP from, and if it was NEW at the time of purchase. If it was not "NEW" at the time of your purchase, and you purchased it from another HAM, or another Ham owned it at some previous time, then it is waived under 47CFRPart97.315(b)4,& 5, and if you Modify your "NEW" Purchase, by drilling a hole somewhere in the AMP, to add it to YOUR Station (Modification) they it is waived under 47CFR97.315(b)3(ii), as long as you don't "Modify" more than one AMP per year, for your personal use. (47CFRPart97.315(a). -- Bruce in alaska add path after fast to reply |
Censored post ...
Sorry you have such a problem with basic literacy. I stand by exactly what I said. An unmodified manufactured amp that is not "certificated" is not legal for use in the US Amateur Service, regardless of where it was manufactured. A constructed or modified amp is potentially legal if operated within the output power rules. Did you read something else? There might be some wiggle room here... the relevant regulation: 97.315(a) Any external RF power amplifier (see § 2.815 of the FCC Rules) manufactured or imported for use at an amateur radio station must be certificated for use in the amateur service in accordance with subpart J of part 2 of the FCC Rules. No amplifier capable of operation below 144 MHz may be constructed or modified by a non-amateur service licensee without a grant of certification from the FCC. OK.. parse it out.. "manufactured or imported for use at an amateur radio station" must This means that it only applies for amplifiers intended for use at an amateur station. If one manufactured an amplifier for use, say, in a RF induction heating system, one wouldn't need to be certificated for that use. (one might need certification for other reasons...) See, e.g., http://www.manitousys.com/media/pb3_manual.pdf.. They have a photo of the back panel, and I don't see a FCC registration number there. (nor does manitou show up in the FCC databases for authorization or grantee) But, it's pretty clear that if that amp has a switch on the front labeled, for instance, "80m band", then it has to be certificated for use in amateur service. (and, it's mighty tough to get a "certification for amateur service" if it can do other things. If one went to Amplifier Research (http://www.amplifiers.com/, for instance, one could buy a general purpose RF amplifier. That wouldn't be "manufactured or imported for use at an amateur station" so it wouldn't need to be "certificated foruse in the amateur service". here's a nice little room heater for you http://www.arww-rfmicro.com/post/2500L.pdf |
Censored post ...
Bruce in alaska wrote:
Gene, It would depend on who you purchased your AMP from, and if it was NEW at the time of purchase. If it was not "NEW" at the time of your purchase, and you purchased it from another HAM, or another Ham owned it at some previous time, then it is waived under 47CFRPart97.315(b)4,& 5, and if you Modify your "NEW" Purchase, by drilling a hole somewhere in the AMP, to add it to YOUR Station (Modification) they it is waived under 47CFR97.315(b)3(ii), as long as you don't "Modify" more than one AMP per year, for your personal use. (47CFRPart97.315(a). Bruce, Yes, I understand that. My initial comment was directed at the growing theme in the messages, not specifically expressed by you, that amateurs could legally use *any* transmitter as long as output power rules were not violated. It ain't necessarily so. 73, Gene W4SZ |
Censored post ...
"Jim Lux" wrote in message ... Sorry you have such a problem with basic literacy. I stand by exactly what I said. An unmodified manufactured amp that is not "certificated" is not legal for use in the US Amateur Service, regardless of where it was manufactured. A constructed or modified amp is potentially legal if operated within the output power rules. Did you read something else? There might be some wiggle room here... the relevant regulation: 97.315(a) Any external RF power amplifier (see § 2.815 of the FCC Rules) manufactured or imported for use at an amateur radio station must be certificated for use in the amateur service in accordance with subpart J of part 2 of the FCC Rules. No amplifier capable of operation below 144 MHz may be constructed or modified by a non-amateur service licensee without a grant of certification from the FCC. OK.. parse it out.. "manufactured or imported for use at an amateur radio station" must This means that it only applies for amplifiers intended for use at an amateur station. If one manufactured an amplifier for use, say, in a RF induction heating system, one wouldn't need to be certificated for that use. (one might need certification for other reasons...) See, e.g., http://www.manitousys.com/media/pb3_manual.pdf.. They have a photo of the back panel, and I don't see a FCC registration number there. (nor does manitou show up in the FCC databases for authorization or grantee) But, it's pretty clear that if that amp has a switch on the front labeled, for instance, "80m band", then it has to be certificated for use in amateur service. (and, it's mighty tough to get a "certification for amateur service" if it can do other things. If one went to Amplifier Research (http://www.amplifiers.com/, for instance, one could buy a general purpose RF amplifier. That wouldn't be "manufactured or imported for use at an amateur station" so it wouldn't need to be "certificated foruse in the amateur service". here's a nice little room heater for you http://www.arww-rfmicro.com/post/2500L.pdf want something to warm up your car... check out these little gems. http://www.davemade.com/mobile.htm |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:00 PM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com