Keeping up just fine. Thanks for checking. I was pointing out the error in your blanket statement regarding certification under Part 97. It exists, even if it doesn't apply to transceivers.
Too bad the government can't stop the flood of illegal Homo sapiens from the border and ports of entry. P.s. I love my MD380 & Baofeng. It works fine. I drop it many times and it still works, case still intact. Drop your FT, IC or Kenmore radio and watch the parts splatter. DMR would still be a fantasy were it not for the imports and new licensees would plummet due to perceived costs. Oh, I forgot, the big name commercial and amateur provisioners also make their goods in China, often in them same factories? Now, if they started making them in the U.S., I might have more sympathy for them, but even the Japanese workers are getting stiffed here. Just MHO, YMMV.
A couple of points: - Countries do not have "friends", they have "interests". [I did not originate this comment, but don't recall where I saw it first many years ago.] When they are common interests people mistake it for friendship. - I just looked at the FCC label in my Yaesu FT-60R, made in Japan. Then I noticed that the battery that came with it is made in China. Bad no doubt! - My AnyTone AT-868UV and BTech MURS-1 (non Ham, but Wife has no interest in a license) - both made in China and have FCC labels. - Almost all consumer electronics is made in China because labor is cheap, that's reality. - China has bought so much real estate in the US that if we "threw them out" and they decided to sell it all off, this country would become a third-world country. We were probably unwise to allow this to happen but that ship sailed a long time ago. - I worked for a company known as Digital Equipment Corp, in product safety (evaluating, testing and getting agency approvals). DEC had a plant in Mainland China and once sent one of their engineers for us to train to do product safety work. A few years later and over another few years our group was decimated and all work went overseas. So I have some sensitivity to the issue that some vehemently discuss in this thread. But I'm a realist, and realize that industrial espionage (copy-cats, theft of patents, knock-off goods, etc.) exist and will continue to exist. Our society now does the engineering with all manufacturing overseas. Only service industries are mostly protected from extinction in the US these days. The bottom line is that Baofeng, etc. must modify their products to work only within legal parameters in the US and marketing needs to reflect only that. I'm not sure that this is only country specific to China.
sorry i hurt your feelings with the truth wise one.. people like you are crying just like people who want to ban guns.. there are already millions out there .. good luck with your laws that mean nothing at this point.. i find you amusing at this point..
wow it is so funny how you judge people who use c.b. radio as being low class but yet people make fun in society of hams being fat geeky guys that live in their momma's basement.. honestly you are not above anyone else that uses a c.b. radio, people still laugh at you..
To the OP, if XYZ Chinese brand radio were to double it's price to $50, or $75 or even $100 - and comply with the FCC rules on advertising, and limit the programability (which seems to be the issue), would you by OK then? Using the UV5R as the example, if fixed to the ham frequencies, for example (since we're hams) and was sold for $50, would that be OK? Because, that looks pretty easy to do... Or even be a Part 90 radio (which it is)? Or is the issue because it's from China, and $25?
Really? Are we seriously celebrating a blow to the accessibility of the hobby? If it wasn't for my BaoFeng I wouldn't be in this hobby - us folks on the younger end of the ham radio community can't exactly afford to drop hundreds of dollars on HTs from the Big Five when we're still trying to pay off student loans and catch up to 'where we are supposed to be' in a world that refuses to pay us a wage that lets us live and accrue savings. To me the bigger thing is the ban on operation of existing radios. I know why its there legally, but at the same time this basically just locks any of us who are only using these radios out of the hobby. So congratulations, you're celebrating my inability to turn on my HT.
Hmm. I have a question. How long has the FCC and Customs allowed these radios which the FCC says is non-compliant into the U.S. ? Aren't they responsible ? I remember when the Apple ][+ was cloned and the computer was called the Orange. Such machines were stopped at port of entry, confiscated, and destroyed by Customs. Why didn't the FCC ask Customs to do the same with these non-compliant radios ?
Keep laughing!I promise you I'll lose sleep over it! (I've also got this bridge over the rainbow I'd like to sell ya! And in Arizona, too!)
Is the UV5R capable of narrow-band modulation? If not, I highly suspect *that* is the reason it is not Part 90 compliant ...
Our 'border guards' apparently *not* as efficient as old DDR (German Democratic Republic) or Soviet border guards for that matter ... . . /only mild sarc this time
I'm thinking the prohibition is on the use of non-compliant radio equipment in Part 90, etc. (land mobile, etc.) apps and not the use of Boefangs in Part 97 (amateur radio) "service".
Dan KI4AX Nailed it!!! We are undermining our own country, But I must say it's hard not too do so. I am sure over half the electronics in my home are made in China
The UV-5R is capable of narrowband operation. The FCC citation to Amcrest in August mentioned its ability to operate on restricted frequencies, being able to transmit at 4W instead of what appeared in the FCC certification grant for that radio, the ability to transmit on land-mobile frequencies using external control (i.e., front-panel programming, or VFO), and how the radio was marketed by Amcrest.
