RadioBanter - View Single Post

July 14th 03, 11:44 PM

(K0HB) wrote in message . com...
I was under the impression (apparently mistaken?) that a licensed
amateur could possess any sort of equipment (commercial, homebrew,
converted surplus) or whatever. I know of no rule against MODIFICATION
of equipment, even if that modification permits operation outside the
amateur bands. The rules properly speak to signal purity, staying
inside the assigned bands, etc., etc., but do NOT seem to prohibit
modifications of factory-built equipment. (In fact, I could probably
make an argument that the FCC rules ENCOURAGE tinkering and
experimentation of this sort!)

However I note the FCC has required at least one licensed ham, Michael
V. Swift, KG6QOB, to restore a rig to "original manufacturer's
specifications".

("You are directed to have the transceiver returned to the original
manufacturer's specifications by reinstalling the jumper wire which
the cutting or removal of permits operation outside the amateur bands.
The jumper wire must be repaired or installed, and encapsulated with
epoxy or similar material to preclude future modification. After the
repair is completed you are directed to bring the transceiver to this
office so that the repair can be confirmed and related technical
measurements can be made.

You have until July 7, 2003 to respond to this inquiry and to provide
the repaired transceiver for inspection.")

While I understand the reason for the action (malicious interference
and false distress signals on marine frequencies), it strikes me that
this particular remedy is not supported by the law, and might set a
precedent for de facto "type acceptance" in the Amateur Radio service.

What say, ye lawyerly types?

Well, I'm no lawyer, but here goes.

Check QRZ.com - the not-too-swift Mr. Swift is a raw newbie. His
Technician license is dated May 1, and the violations cited are for
May 15. Couldn't keep his nose clean for two weeks.

Sounds like The Commission decided to go a easy because he's a newbie,
and to save themselves a lot of work. We have almost no info on this
person - young, old, rich, poor, whatever. Maybe there was a plea
bargain, such as 'fix the radio so it won't go out of band and we'll
let you keep the radio and your license.' Maybe it wasn't his radio,
but on loan from someone else.

Or maybe he's an engineer working on Broadband over Power
Lines......;-)

There are precedents for all kinds of things if the licensee and FCC
'voluntarily' agree to them. For example, some time back a ham under
investigation for interference had his license (General, as I recall)
'modified' by FCC so that he was only allowed to operate on HF CW! I
think this compromise was worked out because it would be a lot easier
for the FCC than the full revocation/nonrenewal game. Plus the guy had
never committed any violations while using CW. (Yes, he did use the
mode!)

Of course most of the above is speculation as to FCC's actions.

--

As far as I'm concerned, false distress calls should not be treated
lightly. If it were up to me, and the charges could be proved, the
person(s) responsible would have no license, no radios, and much
thinner wallets. But it's not up to me.

73 de Jim, N2EY