[Milsurplus] Mil HF rigs not NTIA compliant

[Dick]

Pete, your state director's stodginess and rigidity will probably loosen up
in direct proportion to the magnitude of the disaster that strikes the
state.  Until then, like most state directors of nearly anything, his main
job is to justify his existence.  It's interesting how quickly they get a
lot more flexible and practical when natural or man-made disasters start
destroying their beloved hi-tech gadgetry and the hams with our seemingly
"primitive" gear are the only ones who can communicate reliably.

73,

Dick W1NMZ
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Peter Gottlieb" <nerd at verizon.net>
To: <Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: 13 September, 2004 16:57
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] Mil HF rigs not NTIA compliant


> I know.  I even got a letter stating such from the NTC and that it would
be
> fine to use it under 20 MHz (we NEVER use any freqs over 20 MHz anyway).
> But the state director of communications is rather narrow in his
> interpretation and will not budge.  I have a PRC-104 which is spec'd at 1
> PPM over -46 to +71C and his opinion is that it cannot be used, period.
> Heck, *I* don't even work over that temperature range!
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Bob Camp" <ham at cq.nu>
> To: "Peter Gottlieb" <nerd at verizon.net>; "Milsurplus"
> <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
> Sent: Monday, September 13, 2004 7:34 PM
> Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] Mil HF rigs not NTIA compliant
>
>
> > Hi
> >
> > At least as I read the NTIA standards the issue of stability only comes
in
> > above 20 MHz. Below that a 1 ppm radio is perfectly acceptable since it
> > will be inside the +/- 20 Hz specification.
> >
> > A lot of the military portable gear is TCXO based. Over a reasonable
> > military temperature range 1 ppm was a rational stability specification.
> > The  mobile and base gear usually was specified at something better than
> > 0.1 ppm.
> >
> > Does the good old NTIA specify a temperature range? If they do I missed
it
> > on their site ...
> >
> > Enjoy!
> >
> > Bob Camp
> > KB8TQ
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sep 13, 2004, at 5:16 PM, Peter Gottlieb wrote:
> >
> >> Does anybody know why most military rigs are spec'd at 1 PPM frequency
> >> accuracy while NTIA compliance requires 0.66 PPM ?
> >>
> >> I would like to use mil surplus (and very rugged and reliable)
equipment
> >> for CAP etc. but am prohibited due to this non-compliance.
> >>
> >> Side note:  I have yet to find a rig that wasn't significantly better
> >> than that 1 PPM spec, but nevertheless, NTIA compliance is based on
radio
> >> specs, not performance.
> >>
> >> Peter
> >>
> >>
> >> ______________________________________________________________
> >> Milsurplus mailing list
> >> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> >> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> >> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
> >>
> >
> >
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net