Ah that makes perfect sense and makes me feel a whole lot better. Going to re-read the notification and Part 90. Really appreciate the nice response.
https://qrpblog.com/2018/09/yaesu-ft-4x-review-it-is-after-all-a-baofeng I have heard that some newer Alinco HTs also have it but I have not seen high res photos of the boards.
I noticed this part of the advisory notice too: Anyone ... noncompliant devices should stop immediately, and anyone owning such devices should not use them. Violators may be subject to substantial monetary penalties. I wonder if a 90-day amnesty program will be announced, when noncompliant devices can be turned in, no questions asked ... /sarc
From Motorola's data sheet for the AXP8000 (https://www.motorolasolutions.com/content/dam/msi/docs/products/apx/APX_8000_NA_Datasheet.pdf) TRANSMITTER - TYPICAL PERFORMANCE SPECIFICATIONS 700/800 VHF UHF Range 1 UHF Range 2 Frequency Range/Bandsplits 764-776, 794-806 MHz 806-825, 851-870 MHz 136-174 MHz 380-470 MHz 450-520 MHz This radio also covers multiple services - should it be banned?
Actually, there is - but not for transceivers. Commercially-made external RF power amplifiers operating below 144 MHz are required to be certified under Part 97. See 97.315 and 97.317 for the details.
Does it meet FCC technical requirements in each of the service categories for which it is advertised and spec'd? If yes, then no.
So does this mean that any amateur operator using a "noncompliant device" only on amateur frequencies, and complying with amateur service laws/regulations while doing so, is in violation of the law? Is a person using a Baofeng to talk on a local repeater violating the law because he is using a device capable of operating on other frequencies outside those assigned to amateurs? It sounds like it to me, based on the quotations from the advisory below. Of course, there is rather poor wording in this circular that might get a defendant off in a court case (such as the use of the word "should" rather than "shall", "cannot" instead of "may not", etc.) - remember back in the '90's when Bill Clinton said it all depends on what the meaning of the word "is" is. Of course, no one will ever know what transceiver an amateur is using on the air unless he/she says what it is, but a situation could arise where someone gets arrested for using a Baofeng (or other "freeband" radio transceiver) under certain conditions (e.g., a crime committed in addition to or connected to the radio use). Here are some quotes from the DA18-980 FCC advisory: "If a two-way VHF/UHF radio is capable of operating outside of the amateur frequency bands, it cannot be imported, advertised, sold, or operated within the United States without an FCC equipment certification." "Anyone importing, advertising or selling such noncompliant devices should stop immediately, and anyone owning such devices should not use them. Violators may be subject to substantial monetary penalties." There are many thousands of Baofeng and other two way radios capable of operating in the amateur 2m and 70cm bands that would violate the law according to the statements in this advisory. They've been imported for many years, apparently in violation of the law, but the FCC has never enforced it. That is probably due to political reasons, as previous presidential administrations have supported trade between the USA and China while the current presidential administration is not so much in favor of such trade between the two countries. Some amateurs cannot afford the more expensive handheld transceivers produced by Yaesu, Icom, Kenwood, Alinco, etc., and so use the cheap $25 or so transceivers made by Baofeng and others. Where does all this leave them?
I also wish hamfests would be a bit more vigilant WRT all those CB amps and so-called "10 Meter 'amateur' radios". The simple presentation of one's license, or call sign. (Sigh) I know that won't happen; they might lose a couple of bucks from one of those buck-toothed, smelly CB vendors. You know---those "Varmint, and Elkin" 'leenyars' an' fake 10 Meter reddios on those tables out there!
Ya know, we may have to get a clarification by the FCC by way of another advisory circular ... while we are at it, just how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?
Well, it does not. It is Type accepted for parts 22, 74, 80 and 90. Not 95, or 95E, which it covers. I doubt they advertise it as a FRS radio, however... My point is a Baofeng UV5R+ is type accepted in Part 90, and using such a radio in Part 97 is fine, as has been the case with many commercial Part 90 radios over the years. If you buy an APX8000 and legally use it on the ham bands, you can do the same with a UV5R. Marketing and selling them them to do things they are not accepted for is illegal, and what the FCC is going after various marketeers for. I saw nothing indicating these Part 90 radios are now illegal for ham use.
Just read the FCC/Amcrest complaint here: https://transition.fcc.gov/eb/Orders/2018/DA-18-801A1.html It does involve the UV5R, and it looks like they need to make some programming changes to bring it into compliance to be sold as a Part 90 radio. If they do, I suspect we'll still have $35 radios on the market.
