Let the Hams in ?

[fairbank56]

Originally Posted by denverd0n

Actually, there are no specs for ham radios. .

Yes, there are. Title 47 CFR part 97 subpart D, Technical Standards. You must also comply with part 15, Radio Frequency Devices, and part 2, General Rules and Regulations.

Eric

[SoonerSailor]

I think there are minimum specs for complete radios sold commercially for ham use, but you can still build one yourself and use it without having to show it meets any particular spec. You can also modify a ham radio to your hearts content. How it is operated is still subject to some regulation, even within the ham bands.

[fairbank56]

Yes, but you are expected to operate it within the technical standards as outlined in part 97 CFR. I believe the part 15 requirement for commercially sold ham radio's is to show the radio's scanning receiver cannot operate on cellphone frequencies. It is illegal to modify a ham radio to be able to transmit outside of the authorized ham bands.

Eric

[denverd0n]

Well, okay, there are some restrictions concerning how much bandwidth you can take up. Big deal. The restrictions are so broad that you'd practically have to be TRYING to exceed them when it comes to SSB transmissions. Besides, that is a restriction on the USE of the radio, not a restriction on the sort of radio that you can build.

So, technically speaking you could say I was wrong. My apologies. For all practical purposes, though, the point remains that any ham can build any sort of radio they'd like, using any sort of bits and pieces they'd like. The restrictions place no specifications on the radio itself, only on its ultimate use.

[fairbank56]

Originally Posted by denverd0n

The restrictions place no specifications on the radio itself, only on its ultimate use.

There are very specific requirements as to spurious emissions from transmitters in part 97 technical standards. Only transmitters built before 1977 are exempt.

Eric

[Penceler]

Thanks for all the comments – there was some really good information given. Here’s what we’re left with….

The HF performance of the best selling ham radio (Icom 706 and now out of production) is essentially equivalent to a popular marine HF unit. The practical differences in performance will likely come down to the quality of individual installations

We’re worried that some ham operator will build his own set and transmit out of frequency. No concerns however on the person buying a 15 year old, 6th hand Icom 700 on e-bay. Lets not even think about what is being used in developing countries.

We can’t allow ham radios as they don’t have a DSC function. In the event of an actual emergency you should feel free to transmit on your radio which is not equipped with an “emergency button”.

We can’t allow ham radios because they don’t have channel buttons and we can't trust the operator to program a few soft keys for occasional use

If we allow hams on the marine bands they will clutter the frequency in the event of a real emergency at sea. If we don’t allow hams, the use of marine HF will likely increase among cruisers moving traffic (and nets) off the amateur band and onto the marine bands where they will clutter the frequency in the event of an actual emergency.

If you want to use both HAM and Marine HF go buy two radios or live with the clumsy (more efficient with channel buttons) interface

Frustrating that there seems to be no practical solution.

Keep in mind that this is all in the context of cruising yachts.

[Jim Cate]

G'Day all,

This discussion is long overdue, and thanks to Penceler for starting it.

I'm curious -- has anyone a documented case of use of a modern ham rig (the sort of thing that appears on our cruising yachts, where I've never seen a home-brew rig installed...NEVER!) causing the oft mentioned disruption of Marine SSB traffic?

We seem to use that argument as our primary reason for excluding these rigs from the Marine frequencies, yet the incidence is very small, or even non-existent.

73 de Jim N9GFT/VK4GFT

[btrayfors]

You can buy a good used marine SSB transceiver AND a good used ham rig for less than the cost of an Icom M-802.

With one marine radio and one ham radio, you have the best of both worlds.

While there are many reasons for NOT permitting amateur operators to operate on the marine SSB channels using their ham radios -- and many of these are very good reasons -- the bottom line IMHO is that there's absolutely no need to do so.

Both services, marine and amateur, work just fine at the moment.

Wayne is right about clueless owners, though. I've seen lots of them as well...i.e., those with installed HF radios (both ham and marine) who hardly know how to turn them on. However, there are many, many cruisers who DO know how to work their radios, and who participate actively in the daily maritime mobile nets all 'round the world.

Newbies often get help from more experienced users, and overall I'd say the situation is improving in terms of boats with good installations and with operators who actually use their HF radios. This is true both of hams and non-ham marine operators.

Bill
WA6CCA

[btrayfors]

Originally Posted by Jim Cate

G'Day all,

This discussion is long overdue, and thanks to Penceler for starting it.

I'm curious -- has anyone a documented case of use of a modern ham rig (the sort of thing that appears on our cruising yachts, where I've never seen a home-brew rig installed...NEVER!) causing the oft mentioned disruption of Marine SSB traffic?

We seem to use that argument as our primary reason for excluding these rigs from the Marine frequencies, yet the incidence is very small, or even non-existent.

73 de Jim N9GFT/VK4GFT

Jim,

Happens all the time. That's why you often hear the various marine nets advising those who want to move off frequency to have a chat with another boat to use another band, e.g., move from 8mHz to 6mHz or 4mHz rather than just to another channel in the same band.

And, there are some irascible types who, in addition to using ham radios on the marine bands, insist on intentionally tuning off frequency "to make their voices sound deeper". This is not only flaunting the regulations but is grating on the nerves of experienced radio operators. You can't do this with a marine radio.

As Erik said, there may be some ham radios which could pass the more rigid marine type-acceptance standards, but not many. And, the 706 certainly isn't one of them....until the latest version it was a very dirty radio (you can't just cite one published spurious emission figure and see the whole picture).

I think it's tragic that we are left with only the 802 as a "modern" HF radio which is convenient for ham as well as marine use, which has a remote head for space-constrained installation, and which has a HF/DSC capability.

IMHO, the 802 suffers from many design and operational flaws, quite aside from being very expensive and a bear to operate due to a non-intuitive user interface and maybe the worst instruction manual in existence.

Clipping? Water or splash proof -- now, who'd expect that in a $2,000 radio? Talk power? Can't turn the speech processor on without voiding the type acceptance? For shame!

If the market were larger maybe Motorola/Vertex Standard/Yaesu would come out with a better radio -- perhaps an upgrade to their little known but wonderful TKM-707 -- but I'm not holding my breath.

Bill
WA6CCA

[goboatingnow]

I think it's tragic that we are left with only the 802 as a "modern" HF radio which is convenient for ham as well as marine use, which has a remote head for space-constrained installation, and which has a HF/DSC capability.

huh


how about Furuno 1503 , sailor 6300 , JRC JSS2150

Dave

[btrayfors]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

huh


how about Furuno 1503 , sailor 6300 , JRC JSS2150

Dave

Good question, Dave.

The Furuno 1503 is an earlier design which does not have DSC, nor does it have a removable control head. However, it's pretty small and is popular with the fishing fleet in the Pacific Northwest. And, it's less than half the price of the other two....about the same price as the Icom 802 with an AT140 tuner. While it's a pretty good radio, I don't much like it. I don't like the small knobs or the user interface. I had one in the shop a couple of years ago and had plenty of time to test it and play with it. While I generally love Furuno stuff -- and have lots of Furuno equipment on my own boat -- I don't like this radio. And, god forbid you have a problem with it. Furuno charges an arm and a leg for repair. Make that two legs!

The Sailor 6300 and JRC 2150 are two of the new breed of MF/HF SSB marine radios, with separate control heads, DSC, GMDSS, and other features. I particularly like the radios made by JRC (and I have a new Ray 152 w/tuner in stock, which was made by JRC). HOWEVER, both of these radios are very pricey...well over $5,000 plus, plus. Wish I could afford either one, but I'm afraid they're not really for the recreational market.

So, come on Motorola or Kenwood....there's still plenty of room for a modestly priced MF/HF SSB marine radio with a separate control head, DSC, and a decent VFO for ham use as well as marine band use.

Bill

[btrayfors]

Originally Posted by btrayfors

............

If the market were larger maybe Motorola/Vertex Standard/Yaesu would come out with a better radio -- perhaps an upgrade to their little known but wonderful TKM-707 -- but I'm not holding my breath.

Bill
WA6CCA

Oops....I meant to say Kenwood TKM-707, not Yaesu. Yaesu makes a wonderful little radio...the System 600...which I have on my boat. This could be upgraded, too, with a removable control head and DSC.

The System 600 is shown here, to the right of the Yaesu FT900AT ham radio.

http://wdsg.com/gallery/main.php?g2_...geViewsIndex=1

Bill

[goboatingnow]

while I wait with baited breath, I think the opposite is going to happen, Non compulsory fit DSC equipped units are going to die as there is no traffic on marine HF.I suspect the ICOM unit is only kept going because they now have a GMDSS certified unit.

Dave

[btrayfors]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

while I wait with baited breath, I think the opposite is going to happen, Non compulsory fit DSC equipped units are going to die as there is no traffic on marine HF.I suspect the ICOM unit is only kept going because they now have a GMDSS certified unit.

Dave

Dave,

You may be right. But, that's not what I'm seeing.

There's plenty of traffic on the marine HF frequencies, but it tends to be centered around either nets or marine weather/safety. HF email is also quite popular (e.g., Sailmail). The marine operator station in Mobile, AL (WLO) is very active on a number of frequencies, runs stations on the west coast as well which cover the Pacific. They broadcast HF weather on the hour, and run traffic lists and phone traffic. The stations are owned and operated by Shipcom, and their business is growing rapidly as they expand into emergency preparedness operations.

I also see lots of customers who just want a decent HF marine radio. They don't care about DSC or GMDSS or even HF email sometimes. The more discerning cruisers are coming to understand that even a satphone is not a substitute for a good HF marine radio. We just had a situation involving a vessel in distress enroute to the Bahamas which had only an Iridium satphone....no HF radio...and which had great difficulty communicating because of the poor quality of the signal. As it happened, help for that vessel was arranged via HF ham and HF marine radio over a 3-day period, and he made it safely into port.

[Penceler]

Originally Posted by btrayfors

Good question, Dave.

So, come on Motorola or Kenwood....there's still plenty of room for a modestly priced MF/HF SSB marine radio with a separate control head, DSC, and a decent VFO for ham use as well as marine band use.

Bill

From your mouth to god's ear. I'm sorry, I simply hate the interface of the 802.

You are correct in the stability of the earlier 706's and to a lesser extent the mkii's. At the risk of degrading this to a ham type discussion I will freely admit that even in the numbers I originally stated I used a low mhz and a "warmed up" ppm. Having said that things improve significantly on the 706 when you add the optional crystal unit. These numbers seem to be consistent regardless of who is doing the testing.

All said, I would love to see a viable reasonably priced option. Until then I live in the ham only world and simply monitor marine HF.

John