I'm curious if I take a baofeng to a free country outside the FCC's domain, will it be seized by the US Empire at the border? CEPT nations use slightly different bands, requiring the use of a boaofeng or marsmod radio.
It doesn't say what kind of radio this guy used. https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-18-140A1.pdf https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-18-140A1.pdf
SO? SO? SO??? Gimme a break OB, in that THE CHINEE RADIOS are not playing by the "type acceptance RULES", they're NOT SUPPOSE TO HAVE BROADBAND CAPABILITIES, PERIOD!!! I guess YOU DON'T CARE??? I do!!! It's BAD ENOUGH THAT ANYBODY CAN "PURCHASE" A HAM RIG WITHOUT "PROOF of LICENSE"!!! Heck!!! Go to AMAZON or ANY OTHER ONLINE STORE, they're SELLING HAM RIGS TO ANYBODY who's got the $$$
*********************************************************************************************************************************************************************************** I GUESS you need a "MEMORY REFRESHER" !!! As had been posted by (W5TXR): The FCC just released Public Notice DA 18-980, Enforcement Advisory No. 2018-03 Dated 24 SEP 18 that states: TWO-WAY VHF/UHF RADIOS MAY NOT BE IMPORTED, ADVERTISED, OR SOLD IN THE UNITED STATES UNLESS THEY COMPLY WITH THE COMMISSION’S RULES.
I bought my Baofeng UV-5R from Amazon on July 5th, 2013, over 5 years ago, for $54. Still works great. It IS Part 90 type accepted - https://apps.fcc.gov/oetcf/tcb/repo...n_id=n+gY1ooaqEevhls5IkVd1g==&fcc_id=ZP5BF-5R And like my APX7000, it can transmit on services that it is not allowed - MURS, for example. So, tell me what's wrong here?
re: "I bought my Baofeng UV-5R from Amazon on July 5th, 2013, over 5 years ago, for $54. Still works great. It IS Part 90 type accepted -https://apps.fcc.gov/oetcf/tcb/repo...n_id=n+gY1ooaqEevhls5IkVd1g==&fcc_id=ZP5BF-5R" Simply being Part 90 compliant isn't sufficient; have you seen the documentation Motorola supplied to the FCC in getting the APX7000 type accepted?
Oh? What regulations are you referring to? I can transmit on my APX, or my UV-5R on a Part 90 frequency legally (so long that I am licensed to do so). Motorola submitted and obtained other type acceptances, but it's not relevant to Part 90. Both radios are compliant. What other documentation is needed and missing?
Repeating, have you seen the documentation Motorola supplied to the FCC in getting the APX7000 type accepted?
The SPECIFIC document I'm referring to is this: https://fccid.io/AZ489FT7036/Letter/Frequency-Justification-Letter-3356914 It is the document that Motorola supplied to the FCC (and that BAOFENG did not) to justify getting type acceptance across the w-i-d-e frequency range of 136-174 MHz. I think I made reference to that wide freq range in another post, maybe not in this thread. Emphasizing: Baofeng did not file seek to gain type acceptance for additional FCC 'Parts' nor qualify for use their radio's use on a variety of Federal frequencies AS Motorola has done for the APX7000 and the FCC is objecting to Boafang's sale of product on that basis.
The letter is just that, it doesn't grant Motorola anything. Part 90 is still Part 90. The FCC STILL lists the grant, and has made no move (that I am aware of) to rescind it. The Kenwood NX-3220 does 136-174Mhz, as does the Icom F3011 and countless other Part 90 radios. Motorola's own letter - that you posted - acknowledges that it is "a violation of FCC rules if this device operates on unauthorized frequencies". Again, BOTH the APX and the VU-5R can transmit on Part 95 MURS frequencies, NEITHER of which are type accepted. It is either a violation to have this "wide" frequency range, or it isn't. If you make it illegal for one, you make it illegal for all.
Actually Baofeng did submit a frequency justification letter... https://fccid.io/ZP5BF-5R/Letter/Justification-Letter-1684287
Then you tell us WHY it worked* for Motorola BUT did not work for Baofeng ... . . * Staying out of FCC hell.
