[Milsurplus] Aircraft comm/nav specs

[Rod Hogg]

Aircraft Radio Specs,

I don't see any difference in the channel spacing requirement on aircraft
than that of Land Mobile, which is undergoing it's second "narrow banding".
Effect 01-01-2013, all (almost all) Part 90 equipment in the 150-174Mhz and
the 421-512 Mhz bands must be 12.5Khz or narrower channel, vs current 25Khz
most use now. +/- 2.5Hz Dev for FM.  Gotta get more channels I guess.

Key word is PART 90, ham bands NOT included (part 97) and certain paging
frequencies in part 90 exempt for now.

Also the low bands below 150Mhz are NOT included.

We went through this in the 50-60's, went from +/- 25Khz Deviation (or what
ever you could yell it up to) to +/- 5Khz.  Oh the hours spent converting
radio sets!

Rod
KØEQH
 

-----Original Message-----
From: milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net
[mailto:milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Ken Kinderman
Sent: Wednesday, August 25, 2010 10:46 AM
To: Jim Haynes
Cc: milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] Aircraft comm/nav specs

Jim and others,

Thanks for the info. So, as I read it, it has nothing to do with emission
purity or stability (although there must be some stability and accuracy
requirement somewhere in the regs)... more to do with channel capacity and
spacing, and the requirement to be able to access more discrete channels
than ever before.

The reason I ask is that I am working with some vintage aircraft
restorations that include ARC-3 and SCR-522. Naturally, these aircraft have
up-to-date avionics on the cockpit panel. But from the comments, there would
seems to be nothing to preclude operating these older sets on a channel or
two. The better course of action would be to crystal them for the ham bands
and have some aeronautical mobile fun when aloft.

By the way, was up at Oshkosh a few weeks ago... the most visible vendor,
with multiple tents, booths and dealers was Garmin.

73,

Ken
W2EWL

On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 3:52 PM, Jim Haynes <jhhaynes at earthlink.net> wrote:

>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> >From: Ken Kinderman <scr274 at gmail.com>
> >Sent: Aug 24, 2010 2:14 PM
> >To: milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
> >Subject: [Milsurplus] Aircraft comm/nav specs
> >
> >What happened on Jan 1, 1997 to affect aircraft comm specs? Anything to
do
> >with acceptability of plain old AM as in ARC-3, ARC-1 operation?
Something
> >tells me it was related to minimum channel capacity?
> >
> Probably that's when the channel spacing was shifted to 0.25 KHz from 0.50
> KHz
>
>
______________________________________________________________
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

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html