Marine antenna

Doug wrote:



From what I have heard the FCC isn't going to permit an aviation/marine
handheld to be manufactured. Just not in the cards from what I have
heard as Oshkosh.

Can't imagine why not. I have the Vertex VXA-700 which is a regular
aviation handheld that also includes the 2 meter ham band, which is FM.
It also receives the FM broadcast band and the business radio band.

Well, that was what I was told at Oshkosh where EVERYONE was asking for
it. But it's really just a rumor. However, you don't see any of them.
Of course the FCC could change their mind.

Doug wrote:
Well, that was what I was told at Oshkosh where EVERYONE was asking for
it. But it's really just a rumor. However, you don't see any of them.
Of course the FCC could change their mind.

I would think it more likely the market to too limited for a company
to justify spending the money it would take to get something like
that through the FCC certification process.

A read through the FCC aviation and marine regs would confirm or deny
if there is any regulatory restriction to such a dual radio.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

Those two sections are my bible. I can guarantee you that there is no such
prohibition. HOWEVER, the misinterpretation of the part that prohibits
SIMULTANEOUS AM and FM modulation may be causing the confusion. So long as
it is AM on the aircraft band and FM on the marine band, there is no
prohibition.

Jim



A read through the FCC aviation and marine regs would confirm or deny
if there is any regulatory restriction to such a dual radio.

Doug wrote:
Well, that was what I was told at Oshkosh where EVERYONE was asking for
it. But it's really just a rumor. However, you don't see any of them.
Of course the FCC could change their mind.

The FCC doesn't have anything to say about it.

Newps wrote:


Doug wrote:
Well, that was what I was told at Oshkosh where EVERYONE was asking for
it. But it's really just a rumor. However, you don't see any of them.
Of course the FCC could change their mind.

The FCC doesn't have anything to say about it.

Other than to mandate the radio meet stringent technical standards and
that the manufacturer spend a bundle formally proving compliance before
the radio can be legally sold and that's not going to change...

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

On Fri, 19 May 2006 23:55:02 GMT, wrote:

Newps wrote:


Doug wrote:
Well, that was what I was told at Oshkosh where EVERYONE was asking for
it. But it's really just a rumor. However, you don't see any of them.
Of course the FCC could change their mind.

The FCC doesn't have anything to say about it.

Other than to mandate the radio meet stringent technical standards and
that the manufacturer spend a bundle formally proving compliance before
the radio can be legally sold and that's not going to change...

My impression was that the Japanese designed as few universal
platforms as possible, each with a multitude of features, qual'd the
platforms with the various PTTs, of which the FCC is just one, and
then disabled features in order to create application/country-specific
models. Hence the dozens of Web pages of simple
cut-the-jumper-and-tweak the-capacitor hacks.

Don

Don Tuite wrote:
On Fri, 19 May 2006 23:55:02 GMT, wrote:

Newps wrote:


Doug wrote:
Well, that was what I was told at Oshkosh where EVERYONE was asking for
it. But it's really just a rumor. However, you don't see any of them.
Of course the FCC could change their mind.

The FCC doesn't have anything to say about it.

Other than to mandate the radio meet stringent technical standards and
that the manufacturer spend a bundle formally proving compliance before
the radio can be legally sold and that's not going to change...

My impression was that the Japanese designed as few universal
platforms as possible, each with a multitude of features, qual'd the
platforms with the various PTTs, of which the FCC is just one, and
then disabled features in order to create application/country-specific
models. Hence the dozens of Web pages of simple
cut-the-jumper-and-tweak the-capacitor hacks.

Don

When done, it is usually to meet country specific nits.

For example, the Amateur frequency allocations are not 100% the same
throughout the world (close, but not 100%), so such things are common
there.

The FCC is getting anal about designs that allow jumper changes for
operation outside the original certification for non-Amateur equipment.

Besides, if a company went through all the hoops, why wouldn't it just
sell the equipment with the certified capability enabled?

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.