[ICOM] PRO III

Mon Mar 5 15:24:54 EST 2007

Adam Farson <farson at shaw.ca> wrote: Hi Dave,

I live "north of the border", so none of this affects me. But it seems that
the new NTIA specs are much more stringent than ITU-R Recommendation
SM328-10 (Spectra and Bandwidth of Emissions). I shall have to look into
this when time permits. For example: It is interesting that the IC-M802,
which is fully compliant with FCC Part 90 and ITU-R, is now no longer
NTIA-compliant.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My supposition as to the requirements is that NTIA has to put 2KG in a 1KG bag due to Congress selling off government spectrum.
As to NTIA being more stringent than the ITU, they can.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have some additional comments:

1. Surely, hams who are also MARS or CAP R/O's will not necessarily dispose
of their amateur HF transceivers, as they can still use these on the amateur
bands.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No one has said that. I have 5 HF radios that I used for CAP. Only one is currently usable and that is at 5 watts output.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. I tend to agree with Mac's observation that many MARS/CAP and USCGA
members will "vote with their feet" on this change.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
They will be missed but remember they are volunteers not inducted members and can come and go as they please. 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Perhaps the motive is something other than spectrum refarming. To my
knowledge, there has not been any spectrum auction activity in the bands
below 30 MHz. Due to the potential impact on international allocations,
reassignment of HF spectrum is not all that simple.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Whether or not the NTIA is still bound to enforce these requirements as set by Congress
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To get back on topic: A recent check on major dealers' used-equipment pages
did not turn up a single used 756Pro3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'd still like one but can't afford one, even a used one. HI HI.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cheers for now, 73,
Adam VA7OJ/AB4OJ

-----Original Message-----
From: icom-bounces at mailman.qth.net [mailto:icom-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On
Behalf Of David Nagel
Sent: 05 March 2007 06:27
To: ICOM Reflector
Subject: RE: [ICOM] PRO III

Adam;

If you go to < https://ntc.cap.af.mil/comm/equipment/equipment.cfm > you can
view all the compliant radios useable in CAP and the reason for the
noncompliance of the formerly compliant ones.
. 
Basically the change that killed ham radio in CAP was the "TX unwanted
emissions". 
The new specification is: 43+10log(Px) or 5 watts = 49.98dB, 50 w = 59.98dB,
100 w = 63dB, 125 w = 63.9dB

Icom specifies 40dB at 100 watts. However if you limit the TX to 5 watts the
radio is in compliance. The limitation is most likely of no consequence but
still a limitation and places the radios in the noncompliant box.

If you are in CAP you will have to wait until next year (2008) when e are
scheduled to receive Motorola Micom II HF stations in quantity. Until then
good luck.

Dave Nagel
INWG/Group North DC
RF 41

Adam Farson  wrote: Hi Dave,

What was the nature of the spec change?

Cheers for now, 73,
Adam VA7OJ/AB4OJ

-----Original Message-----
From: icom-bounces at mailman.qth.net [mailto:icom-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On
Behalf Of David Nagel
Sent: 04 March 2007 19:35
To: ICOM Reflector
Subject: Re: [ICOM] PRO III

Bob;

A lot of the rigs most likely were used in CAP/MARS service. A recent change
in specifications by NTIA removed almost all ham rigs from use by those
groups. About the only rig still valid is the Yeasu FT-817/ND. Then only
because they are 5 watt rigs.

Dave WD9BDZ

AD5VJ  Bob  wrote: Why am I seeing so many ProIII's up
for sale and/or trade. Is Icom coming out with a new rig I am not aware of?

  73 fer nw es gud DX,
QSL VIA: BUR, LotW, e-QSL
Bob AD5VJ
Old calls: WY5L/KH3-KE5CTY-N5IET
http://www.ad5vj.com/

Member: CTDXCC, NTCC, STXDXCC
FISTS: # 12637, SKCC# 2369
10X# 37210, FP#-1141
SMIRK#-5177, RARS #-149

Scanned for viruses by Blue Coat
http://www.WinProxy.com/
----
Your Moderator: Dick Flanagan K7VC, icom-owner at mailman.qth.net
Icom Users Net: Sundays, 1700Z, 14.316 MHz
Icom FAQ: http://www.qsl.net/icom/

----
Your Moderator: Dick Flanagan K7VC, icom-owner at mailman.qth.net
Icom Users Net: Sundays, 1700Z, 14.316 MHz
Icom FAQ: http://www.qsl.net/icom/

Scanned for viruses by Blue Coat
http://www.WinProxy.com/
----
Your Moderator: Dick Flanagan K7VC, icom-owner at mailman.qth.net
Icom Users Net: Sundays, 1700Z, 14.316 MHz
Icom FAQ: http://www.qsl.net/icom/