In message 23 Apr 1998 10:08:24 -0500,
"rohre" <rohre@arlut.utexas.edu> writes:
> The cited Palomar amplifier was not stated to be a current product. If
> produced before the FCC amplifier rule, it is not a violation.
>
Since I helped to get this started I'll try to answer a few questions.
The above statement is correct. If the amplifier was built before April 28,
1978 then it's legal. However, if it's a "BRICK" type amplifier it's
doubtful that it's at least 20 years old.
> It might be a violation to use now on CB, but this is not what the post
> said.
True enough BUT--
> If you modify something to work on the ham bands, then it is certainly
> partly homebuilt, and not what it was originally.
the amplifier used as an example would be, and from what I concluded was,
able to operate on any frequency from about 2 Mhz to 30 Mhz or more with NO
MODIFICATIONS and in fact was being operated that way. This would be illegal.
> Hams are allowed to
> build or modify amplifiers for ham use.
And here is where the FCC rules are vague. The rules state part 97.315
(3)(ii) Type acceptance not required when the amplifier is "modified by the
licensee for use at the licensee's station"
Does this mean that we may start with an illegal (CB) amplifier and by
adding proper Low-Pass filters it will be legal. OR does it mean that we
must start with a type accepted amplifier either for commerical use or Ham
use and modify it to produce full output with 5 watts drive. I don't know
the answer to this question. I will try to find out if time permits.
But it does mean that the amplifier in question MUST be modified and used by
the one operating it. You can't have a friend do it for you.
Anything you did to make it work on the ham
> bands would imply installing filters that would make it not operate on
> CB.
I don't really agree with this. If you modify any amp to work with 5w input
and to work on 10 meters then it will work on CB.
That, together with the practical limit today on FCC resources,
> means you are not likely to visited by the FCC over this.
>
This I agree with BUT you are still doing something illegal. There is enough
things done now that are illegal do we want to be a part of that.
73 Jim K4CGY
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/tentecfaq.htm
Submissions: tentec@contesting.com
Administrative requests: tentec-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-tentec@contesting.com
Search: http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search.htm
|