skipp025 wrote: > > >> What's sad is how much will likely go in the dumpster >> instead into some deserving ham's hands ;c} > > Or made available on/to the surplus market. > >> Actually, there is still a legal question as to >> whether equipment that was not type-accepted for >> narrow-band originally will still be legal if the >> transmitter is narrow-banded, ie, deviation turned >> down. The FCC has yet to clarify much of anything >> like that. > > A big can of worms and there seems to be a lot of people > on many groups who live to post various FCC rules along > with their interpretations. Bores me to tears to try and > read the legalese these folks spout. > > Some key points if I may... > > The narrow band physical mod is to the receiver. The > transmitter is not a mod, but typically a standard > deviation and audio level adjustment. > > It is the responsibility of the License Holder to > ensure the emissions are legal. I personally have been > told by more than one FCC Field Agent and a former Office > Chief... (still working at the FCC in a higher capacity) > they are not going to get excited about properly upgraded > equipment properly running within the limits of the > license requirements. > > The above has proven to be the case the few times I've > had site interactions with the FCC. I've never seen a > Field Agent walking around with a type acceptance list > or computer doing said look-ups. > > s.
Well, they can do that, but it needs to be clarified whether just turning down the deviation is enough. Many knowledgeable engineering types are saying that the filtering (splatter filters, etc) are not adequate in this case. And I can see that they are likely right.
