What purpose does the extended tx serve

[VK4WDM]

Not one person here has ever produced an instance where enforcement action has come about due to radios being possessed that have factory standard, overseas amateur band allocations. The issue has always been to do with CB and other bands (on HF radios) and commercial/emergency service frequencies (primarily in UHF radios).

Guys,

I have personally talked directly to a senior official in the ACMA who confirmed the correctness of what Richard is saying.

The subject has been fried to death on at least four other threads. There is absolutely no point in debating it again, and again and again.

73

Wayne VK4WDM

[VK3ALB]

So does that mean my 600w PA for 2m is going to put me in jail even though I'll only ever run it at 400w ??

No.

[VK4TI]

Not one person here has ever produced an instance where enforcement action has come about due to radios being possessed that have factory standard, overseas amateur band allocations. The issue has always been to do with CB and other bands (on HF radios) and commercial/emergency service frequencies (primarily in UHF radios).

Guys,

I have personally talked directly to a senior official in the ACMA who confirmed the correctness of what Richard is saying.

The subject has been fried to death on at least four other threads. There is absolutely no point in debating it again, and again and again.

73

Wayne VK4WDM

There is if no proof on a letterhead or other verifiable manner appears , I stand by my earlier post until proof surfaces rather than opinions unverified as acceptance of miss-informational claims is just to easy .
Barry
VK4TI

[VK2GOM]

I would like some clarification how the capability to transmit out of band is a contravention of the license and the telecommunications act, but a 2m linear capable of operating at excess power in contravention of the license and the telecommunications act is not illegal.

Do contraventions thus apply to frequency only, not power? (of course they don't, but this is how it looks).

Merry Christmas / Merry ChristFSMas / Nadolig Llawen to all

73 - Rob VK2GOM / GW0MOH

[VK1VMA]

Not only that, but the ability to transmit out of band is allowable in some cases but not others, and further enquiries have revealed that those cases vary from one individual RI to the next.

The specifics aren't spelled out anywhere in writing, and at this stage I've developed the view that there isn't much in the way of internal ACMA policy regarding what they consider allowable and what they don't.

[VK3ALB]

I would like some clarification how the capability to transmit out of band is a contravention of the license and the telecommunications act, but a 2m linear capable of operating at excess power in contravention of the license and the telecommunications act is not illegal.

Do contraventions thus apply to frequency only, not power? (of course they don't, but this is how it looks).

Merry Christmas / Merry ChristFSMas / Nadolig Llawen to all

73 - Rob VK2GOM / GW0MOH

I think for the very same reason that an IC7000 capable of transmitting on 3850 is not illegal. The amplifier is a 2m amplifier that can be run at 400W PEP by a qualified AR operator like VK3BA - no issue.

Didn't you tell us that you received a call from the ACMA explaining that ham radios that can transmit outside of the Australian AR band plan but align with international band plans were ok?

[VK2AAH]

Hi Rob,

If a radio has been modified to operate "out of band" isn't it reasonable for an RI to assume that it was modified for a reason? To use it. And isn't the ACMA's primary role to manage spectrum, and to ensure licensees can use their spectrum without interference from unlicenced users?

That to me is the gist of the argument.

If the radio can operate out of band by design and was manufactured that way for a global market (or home brew) no intent to misuse it is demonstrated- therefore there isn't a problem. The same goes with an amplifier, within reason. I have a 600W amp too- it was made that way & it is good practice (in my view) to operate the device within its specs so again there is no demonstrated intent to exceed my legal power. I know I feel comfortable justifying myself to an RI or a court if it came to that...

Cheers

Richard
VK2AAH

[VK2GOM]

Out of interest I have just checked my Australian sourced Icom 7600, and it will transmit (tested into a dummy load) in the 80m 'gap' in the VK bandplan. It came out of the factory this way, and was bought in Australia. It will also transmit beyond 50.3MHz too, as you would expect.

So I presume this is still perfectly legal? (phew - that's good to hear). Although the regs could still be interpreted either way, and some RI's (from what I have read here) would consider it illegal. Thoughts of a previous poster's RI visit and blasting a large HSS drill bit through the radio to satisfy them makes me shudder at the very though of it

But of course I am not going to operate it in the 'gap' as there is nobody to talk to. Well... there is actually - the rest of the world who have the full 80m allocation, so perhaps that's a bad example, but blatant 'freebanding' doesn't make sense in my eyes, where there is most definitely nobody to talk to.

And 10m linears that could easily be used to develop big power on 27MHz CB... another case of capability vs intent.

73 - Rob VK2GOM / GW0MOH

[VK1VMA]

Hi Rob,

If a radio has been modified to operate "out of band" isn't it reasonable for an RI to assume that it was modified for a reason? To use it. And isn't the ACMA's primary role to manage spectrum, and to ensure licensees can use their spectrum without interference from unlicenced users?

That to me is the gist of the argument.

If the radio can operate out of band by design and was manufactured that way for a global market (or home brew) no intent to misuse it is demonstrated- therefore there isn't a problem.

Even that is inconsistently interpreted by ACMA.

A radio that can do the top end of 80m is OK, yet an FT101E that left the factory with 11m, and that even has 11m marked on the front panel by the factory, is not legal despite the fact this was an amateur band back when it was sold.

I'm wondering then what will happen when 420-430MHz is removed from amateur use completely -- surely all our existing 70cm kit, which will now be capable of transmitting on emergency services LMR band will now become illegal if ACMA's interpretation is to be applied consistently?

[VK3ALB]

A radio that can do the top end of 80m is OK, yet an FT101E that left the factory with 11m, and that even has 11m marked on the front panel by the factory, is not legal despite the fact this was an amateur band back when it was sold.

The issue is that 27MHz is now covered by a class license which specifies channelized operation and limited power - neither of which is possible with the FT101E. However it's not too hard to pull a crystal to make things right.

[VK2AAH]

It all comes down to intent. If the radio is an antique that came with 11m as standard then there could be an argument that no intent is demonstrated- but then an argument could be made that simply removing the rock can fix that... and as an amateur why wouldn't you do that? It is not a mod that compromises the historic integrity of the radio.

420-430MHz is one that will take time to settle for sure. It comes standard in radios (currently) so again no intent to use it can be demonstrated. But my guess would be that the first time an out of band amateur interferes with a government harmonised spectrum network in that band- then you may see a less forgiving attitude from the ACMA.

Cheers,

Richard
VK2AAH

[VK3AUU]

Radiocommunications Act 1992
Act No. 174 of 1992 as amended

Part 3.1—Unlicensed radiocommunications
Division 1—Offences
46 Unlicensed operation of radiocommunications devices
(1) Subject to section 49, a person must not operate a
radiocommunications device otherwise than as authorised by:
(a) a spectrum licence; or
(b) an apparatus licence; or
(c) a class licence.

(2) Subsection (1) does not apply if the person has a reasonable
excuse.
Note: A defendant bears an evidential burden in relation to the matter in
subsection (2) (see subsection 13.3(3) of the Criminal Code).


47 Unlawful possession of radiocommunications devices
(1) Subject to section 49, a person must not have a
radiocommunications device in his or her possession for the
purpose of operating the device otherwise than as authorised by:
(a) a spectrum licence; or
(b) an apparatus licence; or
(c) a class licence.

(2) Subsection (1) does not apply if the person has a reasonable
excuse.
Note: A defendant bears an evidential burden in relation to the matter in
subsection (2) (see subsection 13.3(3) of the Criminal Code).

48 Additional provisions about possession of radiocommunications
devices
(1) Without limiting section 47, a person is taken, for the purposes of
that section, to have a radiocommunications device in his or her
possession for the purpose of operation if it is in his or her
possession, otherwise than for the purpose of supply to another
person, and can be operated merely by doing one or more of the
following:
(a) connecting the device to an electric power supply by means
of an electric plug or other electrical connection;
(b) connecting a microphone to the device by inserting a
microphone plug into the device;
(c) switching on the device;
(d) switching on any other equipment relevant to the device’s
operation;
(e) adjusting settings by manipulating the device’s external
switches, dials or other controls;
(f) connecting the device to an antenna.

(2) Subsection (1) only applies in the absence of any evidence to the
contrary.

(3) A reference in this Division to a person having a
radiocommunications device in his or her possession includes a
reference to the person having it under control in any place
whatever, whether for the use or benefit of that person or another
person, and although another person has the actual possession or
custody of it.


Chapter 3 Licensing of radiocommunications
Part 3.1 Unlicensed radiocommunications
Division 1 Offences
Section 49
56 Radiocommunications Act 1992
49 Emergency operation etc. of radiocommunications devices
(1) A person does not contravene section 46 or 47 by operating a
radiocommunications device, or having a radiocommunications
device in his or her possession, in the reasonable belief that the
operation or possession was necessary for the purpose of:
(a) securing the safety of a vessel, aircraft or space object that
was in danger; or
(b) dealing with an emergency involving a serious threat to the
environment; or
(c) dealing with an emergency involving risk of death of, or
injury to, persons; or
(d) dealing with an emergency involving risk of substantial loss
of, or substantial damage to, property.

(2) In proceedings for an offence against section 46 or 47, the burden
of proving any of the matters referred to in subsection (1) lies on
the defendant.

(3) Nothing in this section limits the scope of the expression
“reasonable excuse” in section 46 or 47.

[VK6OX]

This thread suffers from thermal runaway!!

[VK4WDM]

"amateur band back when it was sold"

Not really. 11m was never officially designated as an ham band by the ITU. The FT101E was sold in a few countries as an experiment (I guess it was to see if a hybrid ham/cb rig had a future). Australian hams were allowed to use 11m for about a year. It was withdrawn because a lot of these FT101E were being used illegally by CBer's - and that is still the worry with them now if they move from ham to CBer. Not really a major problem is it - just take the 11m crystal out!

There is also a worry about "demanding something in written form." Be careful what you ask for. ATM the RI's (some of them are also hams) exercise a lot of descretion and common sense, and are open to a reasonable argument about why a ham has a piece of equipment that is not legal if the "letter of the regs" rather than the "spirit of the regs" is applied (there is reasonable excuse clause in the regs as David VK3AUU pointed out).

Having everything spelt out in "black and white" removes that descretion and will do more harm than good.

And to repeat this again: the vast majority of ham equipment and ham activities are not a worry to the ACMA. Their major concern is eliminating risks to public safety and threats of interference to essential services.

73

Wayne VK4WDM

[VK1VMA]

Not really. 11m was never officially designated as an ham band by the ITU. The FT101E was sold in a few countries as an experiment (I guess it was to see if a hybrid ham/cb rig had a future). Australian hams were allowed to use 11m for about a year. It was withdrawn because a lot of these FT101E were being used illegally by CBer's - and that is still the worry with them now if they move from ham to CBer. Not really a major problem is it - just take the 11m crystal out!

While countries such as Australia had the 11m band very briefly and it was never an ITU amateur band, 11m was first allocated to the amateur service on a secondary basis in the USA in 1947, well before the 23 channel CB service came into being in 1958, and certainly long before the 40 channel plan we know now was introduced over there in 1977, at which point the USA amateur allocation was removed and amateur equipment generally ceased to be shipped with 11m capability. Given that at the time the USA was (and still is) the largest amateur market in the world after Japan, it makes commercial sense for radios to be produced according to USA band allocations.

My concern with the 11m issue is not so much the requirement to pull the crystal (who cares about CB? ), but how this interpretation will apply to other bands removed from the amateur service. How will this interpretation apply to, say, 420-430MHz, which is already being used for emergency service LMR network in NSW and probably elsewhere, and will very soon cease to be an amateur allocation, especially in light of the great concern that ACMA (quite rightfully) has regarding interference to emergency services? I can mask out the bottom 10MHz of 70cm and make it inaccessible on my equipment, which is all reasonably modern so for me personally I wouldn't have a problem in complying, but there's a lot of gear out there on which this would be impossible.

While some individual RIs, such as the one who contacted me re this thread a while ago work very hard to try and educate and inform the community individually and should be commended for their efforts, ACMA as an organisation has done a pretty hopeless job of trying to inform the amateur community at large of its view.

[VK4TIM]

There are some cases where microwave transverters have been used with an IF that may fall slightly outside the designated Amateur band, and sometimes this might be done to make the MHz digit line up with the microwave band MHz digit, for example 5760 MHz might come out at 140MHz, or 10368 MHz might come out at 148 MHz, in the case of a 2m IF.
That is the only reason that I would use a TX that could operate outside the Amateur band, and at very low power, say 5-10 mW and no more. From an interference perspective, as long as the transverter is well screened and constructed, radiation at IF will not be a problem as long as the exciter power is kept that low.

I had a visit by one of the Brisbane RIs earlier on this year regarding a local interference complaint (garage door opener), he had a look at all my equipment, and was happy with everything, including my work commercial portable that had a couple of Amateur frequencies programmed.
I had a valid reason to be in posession of that radio, which is not user programmable from the front of the radio.

The biggest problem is the cheap chinese handhelds that are sold for low prices and do transmit everywhere.

I have never operated on the 11m band, and this includes using type approved equipment. I have no real desire to. There's more fun to be had on 10m!
Interesting to note that ZLs have Amateur access to a band around the bottom end of 27 MHz, but I think it's digital transmissions only and limited to 5W.

[VK4WDM]

How will this interpretation apply to, say, 420-430MHz,

Yes, I agree that this is of real concern. My 70cm rig is of the older type and would be impossible to re-program it to restrict it to the new allocation. One would assume that the WIA and the ACMA would involved in sorting this situation out before any major changes are made. In my view 70m should be treated exactly the same as other bands like 80m where there is no retrictions on owning a transmitter capable of transmitting outside the VK bands, but the onus is on the ham not to do so.

73

Wayne VK4WDM

[VK1VMA]

The view of the ACMA is very precisely spelled out in the regulations I just posted. Can't you people out there understand plain English.

You'd think so, but it's not.

It's up to the courts to decide what constitutes a "reasonable excuse", and as the agency responsible for enforcing this particular legislation ACMA has its own views of what it thinks will and won't past muster at court. Those views have not necessarily turned out to be the same as the views formed by the WIA, or by other amateurs.

In fact, some of those views appear at face value to be rather counterintuitive and contrary to what was generally assumed to be a "reasonable excuse", hence why this is such a hot topic of discussion.

[VK2AAH]

Well yes & no...

"Reasonable excuse" gives the RI the first chance to exercise discretion. If he/she doesn't issue the bluey then it never gets to the court. But as you point out if they do proceed to enforcement (and when did that last occur for a non-interference related breach???) then the court can choose to do so.

Cheers


Richard
VK2AAH

[VK4TI]

Well yes & no...

"Reasonable excuse" gives the RI the first chance to exercise discretion. If he/she doesn't issue the bluey then it never gets to the court. But as you point out if they do proceed to enforcement (and when did that last occur for a non-interference related breach???) then the court can choose to do so.

Cheers


Richard
VK2AAH

Have a good read , supports your view imho

http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Series/F2005B01164

http://www.acma.gov.au/WEB/STANDARD/pc=PC_1301

http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/C2012C00818

Within the Radiocommunications Act Part 3.1 is of interest - That being the list of offences -

You will note that under each of them, a reasonable cuase can be applied -