Pete,
It's untelling how hard they will try to enforce this. Even though the FCC has
made several large busts in the past I know about, stuff is still coming into
the US like illegal amps and transceivers. I think one manufacturer of
transceivers in Malaysia just pays the fine and keeps pluggin along, or their
government is keeping him shielded somehow. They busted him and several
so-called wholesalers at an underground convention in Las Vegas a few years
back, and they're all still in business!
I can also say what the FCC does when they hear about one building illegal
amps. I was in business to start with another guy in Kentucky. We received a
letter from the FCC saying they heard we were building amps, and they requested
a day they could visit us. Well of course you know everything was quickly hid,
and they were invited down. They NEVER showed up! I think all we had to do was
deny it in our letter and that was it. If it were me, I'd make an un-expected
visit! You know they surely could find us from the one who reported it.
Another long time manufacturer in Wawasee Indiana was busted not for amps, but
over his income tax. The IRS did show up, and that's what got him, not the 15+
years of amp manufacturing they did! One in Oklahoma took the FCC to court and
won! However they in turn sicked the IRS on him and he received an audit. The
others who were busted just stayed low for a few months and took up where they
left off. The fine must have not been that large evidently. Yup, the FCC is
really after them all righty.
Best,
Will
*********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********
On 10/12/06 at 3:54 PM Pete Smith wrote:
>Sure, but I suspect you're way above the threshold they considered
>"average". I remember one amp where all that was necessary was to clip a
>wire - but you had to know which one. Is that hard enough?
>
>Ultimately, I suspect nobody will know until they seek type acceptance for
>a new amplifier, and the FCC tells them whether their 26-28 MHz "blocker"
>is hard enough to defeat.
>
>One thing seems clear - it won't encourage entry of new manufacturers.
>
>73, Pete
>
> At 02:11 PM 10/12/2006, you wrote:
>>Pete,
>>
>>The thing is, I can make any of those operate on 11 meters. It takes a
>new plate choke, and screwing
>>with the tuning to get on 10 meters, but can be done. Are they now going
>to say that is an easy
>>modification? To me it's easy, and I'd say to a lot of others too. I'm
>wondering if the FCC will now say that
>>they all have to be redesigned as to not work from 26MHz to 28 MHz? I'm
>telling you, there's some really
>>dim light bulbs burning at the FCC. Either that or they're a few bricks
>shy of a load.
>>
>>Best,
>>
>>Will
>>
>>*********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********
>>
>>On 10/12/06 at 1:47 PM Pete Smith wrote:
>>
>>>Exactly! The whole thing strikes me as ill-considered. I imagine that
>>>the end-result will be that amps like the Ameritrons will continue to be
>>>sold just as they are now, with frequencies above 15 meters disabled.
>>>That's the ONLY way I can think of to achieve this short of an automated
>>>amp. A frequency-counter actuated cut-off would almost certainly be too
>>>easy to disconnect.
>>>
>>>73, Pete
>>>
>>>At 01:22 PM 10/12/2006, you wrote:
>>>>Pete,
>>>>
>>>>What do they consider "easy modification" do you think? Also, to stop
>one
>>>from transmitting in the range of 26-28 MHz, plus work okay just before
>>>and after those frequencies is pretty hard really as that's a large
>>>bandwidth. I doubt a person could use a notch filter without screwing up
>>>the frequencies before 26 MHz, and after 28 MHz. The dip couldn't be made
>>>that sharp I highly doubt. Before, they used plate chokes that would self
>>>resonante at 11 meters, but that wouldn't cover that wide of a
>bandspread.
>>>Not all amps have programmable interfaces either, so do they expect
>>>manufacturers to add one to ones operating on 10 meters? Amps are getting
>>>more expensive now, wait until they have to start adding more junk, and
>in
>>>the process making them less reliable. Every extra tooth in the gear
>>>raises the odds that it's more prone to break.
>>>>
>>>>Best,
>>>>
>>>>Will
>>>>
>>>>*********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********
>>>>
>>>>On 10/12/06 at 8:09 AM Pete Smith wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>The FCC Omnibus R&O released yesterday requires:
>>>>>
>>>>>§ 2.815 External radio frequency power amplifiers.
>>>>>...
>>>>>(1) The external radio frequency power amplifier shall not be capable
>of
>>>>>amplification in the frequency band 26-28 MHz.
>>>>>
>>>>>(2) The amplifier shall not be capable of easy modification to permit
>>>its
>>>>>use as an amplifier in the frequency band 26-28 MHz.
>>>>>
>>>>>This is intended as a less-onerous replacement for the old rule, but it
>>>>>strikes me as not well thought out. How could you inexpensively
>disable
>>>>>an amplifier between 26 and 28 MHz while permitting full gain on 28.001
>>>>>MHz, particularly if the limitation had to be hard to disable? I guess
>it
>>>>>would be easy enough in highly-automated amplifiers through firmware,
>but
>>>>>would it effectively doom simple manual amps?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>73, Pete N4ZR
>>>>>The World HF Contest Station Database
>>>>>Full details on 3226 contest stations
>>>>>just updated at http://www.pvrc.org/WCSD/WCSDsearch.htm
>>>>>
>>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>>Amps mailing list
>>>>>Amps@contesting.com
>>>>>http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps
_______________________________________________
Amps mailing list
Amps@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps
|