Why the Astro Saber is my choice for standard CAP radio

[Buzz]

Why the Astro Saber?

First, they are CHEAPER now than the EF Johnson radio.  Ebay prices are under $200 for Astro Sabers with P25 working, with charger, antenna and battery -- that's half the price of the EFJ, so for the same money you can have a spare.

Second, for CAP use you only need to have it programmed one time, so front-panel programming doesn't matter.  With 255 channels, one "codeplug" (the program in the radio's memory) will handle all of CAP needs nationwide, with plenty of room for other services, Ham, WX, etc.

Third, there is so much more available optional equipment.

Fourth, durability.  It's hard to hurt a Saber, much less kill one.


PURCHASING
Primary models of the Saber series are the I (basic), II (full-featured except no Touch-Tone keypad) and III (this is a II with the keypad for using autopatch systems).  There are additonal types such as the Saber, Systems Saber, and Astro Digital Saber.  When I talk about Sabers for CAP, I am ALWAYS talking about the Astro.  No other type is suitable.

The Astro Saber was made in several frequency ranges,  The one you are looking for will have a Model Number that starts with "H04J" or "H04K" -- this is the VHF unit that we use for CAP frequencies.  The "J" band (136 to 162MHz) is best for CAP, but the K band (146 to 178MHz) can be tuned to the CAP frequency set with no problems.

For CAP use, the Astro Saber II is sufficient.  This is an advantage, as the III is more desired by ham radio operators, leaving the II at a lower price range.

Not all Astro Sabers are set up for P25, so make sure before you bid or buy that the one you are looking at DOES have P25 working.

You also need an antenna and a battery.  All of the standard Sabers use the same batteries.  However Astro Sabers use a different type of antenna which is NOT interchangable with the earlier Sabers.  Astro Saber antennas have a connection that looks like an old TV "F" connector, with a small hole in the center and insulation between that and the threads.  You also MUST make sure that the Astro itself has the small center pin, which will be broken off if someone jams an earlier antenna onto the radio.

When the radio is powered on, the LCD display will say "Self Test" for a moment, then drop right into operating mode, unless there is no "codeplug" (a fancy word for "program") in memory.

Try to get the seller to program the radio for CAP use -- you will need to supply the frequencies and other settings -- and verify operation.  You may have to pay for programming.  Most Motorola authorized shops will have the software (which is different for each type of Motorola radio), and many hams who buy Astro Sabers will also have the RIB programmer and software.

The Astro Saber is an "obsolete" model, so they have come way down on price.  If you call around to Motorola shops, you may find a dealer who has some of them sitting in a box somewhere, and who would be willing to donate them to your squadron or even individual members, for the cost of programming or for the tax break.

Basic Checklist:
Astro Saber II or III (has display)
VHF (H04J or H04K)
P25
Codeplug programmed into radio
Antenna pin good
Antenna correct for Astro
Battery good
Charger


ACCESSORIES:
In addition to the Basic Checklist (which is the minimum that you will need), you may want to add accessories.

The Saber series was Motorola's premier portable for over a decade.  This means that there are numerous add-ons, both from Ma Batwings and from aftermarket sources.  Nearly everything that fits the standard Saber series will fit the Astro Saber (exceptions being anything which connects to the antenna mount).

The most important of these is BATTERIES.  They are still being made, and some vendors have updated technology, such as Lithium-Ion.

Next, you need a way to carry it.  This can be a belt clip (these are easily installed and removed) or pouch (available from various sources).

A speaker-microphone is a good thing to have for GT work.  You might also get a headset, "surveillance kit" or throat mic.  These may be partially supported by the antenna mount -- if so, they can be doctored by replacing the mounting screw or by simply eliminating the support.

If you will use this as your primary CAP radio, you might want an "Astro Vehicular Adapter," which is a unit that you mount in your car.  The Astro Saber drops into this and becomes a mobile rig, hooked up to a car-mounted antenna, speaker and hand mic.  The SVA -- a similar unit for the standard Saber -- WILL NOT WORK.

"Gang" drop-in chargers allow several batteries to be charged (or kept charged) at one time.  This could be useful to have at your ground-team base.


PROGRAMMING KIT:
The Astro Saber can be programmed with the RIB, which was Motorola's standard programming interface for decades.  These can be found in the aftermarket and on Ebay.  You will also need the Astro Saber / XT3000 software, for which the only legitimate source is Motorola (yes, they will sell you the software, but it's not cheap).  Sometimes this will show up on Ebay, or you may even find a complete package of radio, accessories and "everything you need to program it."  The software does all Astro Saber models, no matter which frequency range.

The ONLY two reasons that you would want this would be A), if you are a ham radio operator, with the need to add or delete frequencies, PL tones, etc, or B), if you are supporting multible Astro Sabers (for the squadron, group, etc) and need to be able program newly-bought radios when they show up.  If you don't fall into either of these categories, just have someone program your radio for you the one time and never worry about it again.


SUPPORT:
The Astro Saber is out of production, and Motorola has discontinued support.  However, having used Sabers and Astro Sabers for a couple of decades, I don't see this as a major consideration. 

On the off chance that you actually break one, parts are readily available on the used market, and the modular design makes it simple to swap out bad parts.  Or, for that matter, as the price continues to drop, it may become cheaper just to buy another radio and relegate the bad one to the parts locker.

There is also a strong user forum at Batwing Laboratories (www.batlabs.com), and almost anything you could ever wish to know, someone there can tell you.


CONCLUSION:
I am a firm believer in standardization of equipment.  I feel that CAP members who buy their own radios should standardize on the Astro Saber.  There is no better choice from any standpoint OTHER THAN manufacturer support (EFJ has it, Ma Batwings doesn't).

[HGjunkie]

I was looking at one of those fancy Throat Mics for my MT2000, but figured it would make me look like a tool so I just went for the regular speaker mic add-on.

[wuzafuzz]

I like the Astro Saber but I disagree CAP member owned radios should standardize on the Saber.  In fact I'm pretty fond of my XTS5000.  I know a variety of folks with other compliant radios, Motorola's, Icoms, Kenweeds, etc.  Let folks use what works for them.

Now I do think it would be great if a given wing invested in equipment to support one type of member owned radio.  Find a reasonably priced radio and offer free programming to members.  That would be a service!  If people stray from that path they are own their own but I'd wager those are the radio savvy people who would be OK with that.

The biggest potential issue, to me, is that we likely won't have infrastructure to support member owned radios when encryption arrives on scene.  When we'll REALLY see encryption is the zillion dollar question.  If we limit encryption to missions absolutely requiring its use we won't exclude too many radios.  But that's another topic entirely.

[Eclipse]

Why the Astro Saber?  First, they are CHEAPER now than the EF Johnson radio. 

Saying anything is cheaper then the EFJ's isn't exactly a stretch.  My wing is swimming in 16-channel HT1000's, and they can be picked up fairly easily under $200.  If anything those should be the workhorses of CAP as they are compliant, and popping up all over the place as the Guard and other agencies cycle them out of their use.

We recently received an offer donation of 150 (yes 150) HT1K's from the local Guard.  The biggest challenge was what the heck to do with that many radios.

If you will use this as your primary CAP radio, you might want an "Astro Vehicular Adapter," which is a unit that you mount in your car.  The Astro Saber drops into this and becomes a mobile rig, hooked up to a car-mounted antenna, speaker and hand mic.  The SVA -- a similar unit for the standard Saber -- WILL NOT WORK.

I thought it was against CAP regs to use an HT connected to a mobile antenna, or is that just specific to certain radios?

I was looking at one of those fancy Throat Mics for my MT2000, but figured it would make me look like a tool so I just went for the regular speaker mic add-on.

Most of the people up my way use surveillance mics, or at least the earpieces on the speaker mics - makes for a much more pleasant environment without all the background noise.

Now I do think it would be great if a given wing invested in equipment to support one type of member owned radio.  Find a reasonably priced radio and offer free programming to members.  That would be a service!  If people stray from that path they are own their own but I'd wager those are the radio savvy people who would be OK with that.

No matter what they chose, there would always be someone whining it didn't cover their, and with the good people of Kowl-Loon making stuff close to "free", if you're able to afford a radio, you can afford the accessories.

Besides, the wing's job is to encourage the use of corporate assets, not necessarily member-owned, especially if it costs the wing money.  I would say, however, that most wing DC's should at least have the ability to program whatever is handed to them.

[wuzafuzz]

Now I do think it would be great if a given wing invested in equipment to support one type of member owned radio.  Find a reasonably priced radio and offer free programming to members.  That would be a service!  If people stray from that path they are own their own but I'd wager those are the radio savvy people who would be OK with that.

No matter what they chose, there would always be someone whining it didn't cover their, and with the good people of Kowl-Loon making stuff close to "free", if you're able to afford a radio, you can afford the accessories.

Besides, the wing's job is to encourage the use of corporate assets, not necessarily member-owned, especially if it costs the wing money.  I would say, however, that most wing DC's should at least have the ability to program whatever is handed to them.

Whiners will always exist but needn't affect such a program.  "If you have 'this,' we can do 'this" for you."

There is no reason a wing or squadron can't provide such a service if funds are available.  Local decision on the use of money.  Doing so would not be inconsistent with encouraging best use of corporate assets.  Member owned radios are a beneficial supplement to our corporate assets; if we can make that a little easier for members it's not a bad thing.

[Slim]

We recently received an offer donation of 150 (yes 150) HT1K's from the local Guard.  The biggest challenge was what the heck to do with that many radios.

Don't suppose you guys would be willing to transfer a dozen to MIWG, would you?  Would sure be nice to have enough to support an encampment without having to beg for assets from our go kits, and eventually have to borrow some from our support base, just to have enough.

There's nothing wrong with the Astro Saber; for the right price, I'd pick one up.  The only real downside to the Astro Saber is the size of it.  With the ultra-high capacity battery, that guy's twice the size of an EFJ 5100.  But, you can't kill 'em for nothing, and they'll just keep going.

Using the radio through a convertacom, or AVA, is an issue.  Just because a radio is compliant as a handheld doesn't necessarily mean it'll still be compliant with an external power source and antenna.  There are different compliance requirements for portables and mobiles.

I've got my sights set on an XTS-3000, if i can find the right model, with the right flash, for the right price (and have the disposable income).  Downside is that it's also out of support with big M, upside is that it uses the same accessories as my MT-2000, with the exception of batteries and programming software.

The XTS-5000 is a great radio, and also has commonality in accessories to the HT/MT series, and the XTS-3000.  The downside is that the 5000 is still a current version, and the right radio, with the proper flash for P-25 is still pretty steep.  I haven't seen one go for less than a grand.

[arajca]

Another plus to the XTS3000/5000 is they use the smae batteries, chargers, and speaker mikes as the EF Johnsons.

[Buzz]

There's nothing wrong with the Astro Saber; for the right price, I'd pick one up.  The only real downside to the Astro Saber is the size of it.  With the ultra-high capacity battery, that guy's twice the size of an EFJ 5100.  But, you can't kill 'em for nothing, and they'll just keep going.

Which is the whole point.

BTW, my first CAP VHF portable radio was a Regency mobile with a battery pack and a 19" whip antenna.  I've been carrying Saber and Astro Saber radios for 20 years, and have never considered size an issue.  I have never had one of them fail, which is a lot more than I can say about pretty much every other radio I've seen folks using, including the EFJ.

Using the radio through a convertacom, or AVA, is an issue.  Just because a radio is compliant as a handheld doesn't necessarily mean it'll still be compliant with an external power source and antenna.  There are different compliance requirements for portables and mobiles.

All the AVA does is provide power, an audio amplifier, and connections for external mic, speaker and antenna.  None of these in any way affects bandwidth or frequency stability.

[Buzz]

We recently received an offer donation of 150 (yes 150) HT1K's from the local Guard.  The biggest challenge was what the heck to do with that many radios.

I can't think of any reason not to accept.  So many possibilities will open that you will wish it had been more of them.

[Eclipse]

It wasn't my offer to refuse, but I know there were some questions about who would get them and where they would go.
I don't know the full details - it was ICENINE's AOR and it was only mentioned in passing to me.

Like many wings we are swimming in equipment we can't issue, and the stuff out there already is not utilized to its fullest.

We've already go-packs for encampments and air shows, and don't really need them for most missions.  There are GTL sets all over the wing
under the TOA, and most of those members have their own radios and prefer them, so...

[Buzz]

I think that you guys are missing my big point on standardization.

A standard doesn't mean that something is the only choice, it just means that it is a better choice for a wider range of uses and users.  The Gonset and Regency radios from my cadet days are now museum pieces, but in their day, they were the standards -- but nobody would ever claim that they were the best radios which could be used.  There were Regency rigs in use until the VHF blackout date, because they did the job and were cost-effective.  Likewise ham radios with the CAP/MARS mod.

Many of the people who were using those radios are still trying to decide what they'll buy as replacements.

The Astro Saber wins hands-down for cost effectiveness, unless you can show me another P25 platform (on the approved list) in the sub-$150 price range.

There are a lot of them out there, more than enough for our needs, and the pool of available spare parts, accessories, etc will be there for years to come.

If someone GIVES you a radio, that's a different story, but if you have to BUY your equipment, why spend more than you have to? 

[Buzz]

It wasn't my offer to refuse, but I know there were some questions about who would get them and where they would go.

Unless these were only on permanent loan and not permitted to be shared throughout CAP, places wouldn't be hard to find.

I learned a long time ago never to refuse equipment which will be useful (as in compliant) a year later, if you can find a place to store it.  Needs can change on a moment's notice -- a lesson which was reinforced 10 years ago.

[Eclipse]

^ That same attitude is why we have garages full of unusable equipment we can't easily get rid of because of DRMO rules.
Not saying that this is the case, here, but we've got a lot of "you never know" junk floating around.

[Buzz]

Note that I specified that it be something which can be shared, for that very reason.

[Slim]

There's nothing wrong with the Astro Saber; for the right price, I'd pick one up.  The only real downside to the Astro Saber is the size of it.  With the ultra-high capacity battery, that guy's twice the size of an EFJ 5100.  But, you can't kill 'em for nothing, and they'll just keep going.

Which is the whole point.

BTW, my first CAP VHF portable radio was a Regency mobile with a battery pack and a 19" whip antenna.  I've been carrying Saber and Astro Saber radios for 20 years, and have never considered size an issue.  I have never had one of them fail, which is a lot more than I can say about pretty much every other radio I've seen folks using, including the EFJ.

Don't get me wrong, I carried a Saber for years at work, and still own one.  They're great radios, and they just don't break.  I also own an MT-2000, several HT-1000s, and a few of the old Genesis series radios.  I don't necessarily mind a big radio, but why carry a big one if you can get one a little more reasonably sized?

Using the radio through a convertacom, or AVA, is an issue.  Just because a radio is compliant as a handheld doesn't necessarily mean it'll still be compliant with an external power source and antenna.  There are different compliance requirements for portables and mobiles.

All the AVA does is provide power, an audio amplifier, and connections for external mic, speaker and antenna.  None of these in any way affects bandwidth or frequency stability.

Which essentially makes it a mobile radio by adding that external power source and antenna.  Sure, you could probably do it anyway, and nobody would notice it, but that still doesn't make it right (I think I've heard the word "Integrity" thrown around someplace).  The Astro Saber (or any other portable radio) hasn't been tested by the NTC as compliant as anything but a portable radio.  And the standards are different between the two.  It's not like the days of olde in CAP communications when I could take my Kenwood TH-215A, put an external antenna and an amplifier on it, and be good to go as a mobile radio.

[Buzz]

why carry a big one if you can get one a little more reasonably sized?

You mean, why carry a $150 big one that is hard to kill, with readily -available big batteries for $50 and any accessory that you can use, instead of a $450 smaller one which isn't quite so tough and which needs $90 batteries and has a limited range of accessories?

Which essentially makes it a mobile radio by adding that external power source and antenna.

FCC doesn't consider AS-in-AVA as a separate radio type, and I know from personal experience that there have been plenty of AVAs used by various NTIA-controlled Federal agencies AND THE AIR FORCE.  Some are still in service here and there.  Until I see something to indicate otherwise, I'm going to assume that the Feds have accepted the AS-AVA combination as being an AS and leave it at that.

As the EFJ is designed to operate while the battery is being charged, but is not given a separate approval by NTC for this "configuration," it's plain to see that NTC doesn't consider battery chargers to be an issue.  I also see nothing to indicate a separate approval or disapproval for external microphone, speaker or antenna on the EFJ -- is there a specific restriction or prohibition in the manual for connecting these things?  If not, again we have to assume that NTC doesn't consider use of these to make the portable into a mobile or base station.

The question is how tightly you believe the NTC approval to be issued.  Is a radio on the list only approved with the original factory-supplied battery?  Can you use a Sony headset instead of a factory-issue earplug?  If the concern is strictly about emission standards -- which is my understanding, not only from reading the info but also from discussions with NTC a few years ago regarding keeping the non-Astro radios in service -- then so long as you don't go outside the standards, you're good to go.

[Eclipse]

Assume whatever you like, as you know, the FCC does not control our radios, NTIA does, and just because you've seen someone violating the rules (because it was convenient and they didn't ask), doesn't change the rules.

Does the NTIA consider the mobile configuration verboten?

[RADIOMAN015]

Assume whatever you like, as you know, the FCC does not control our radios, NTIA does, and just because you've seen someone violating the rules (because it was convenient and they didn't ask), doesn't change the rules.

Does the NTIA consider the mobile configuration verboten?

CAP utilizes DOD/AF frequencies and therefore should be asking the appropriate land mobile radio chiefs at via the chain of command e.g.  AU, AETC, HQ USAF.   Adding microphones, speakers, or a different power source does not affect power output or transmitter frequency stability.   Certain external antennas with high gains might be an issue.  I don't see any issue with a small magnetic mount antenna on the roof of a vehicle attached to a portable inside the vehicle.  It will ensure that adequate comms can be maintained while the vehicle is in motion versus having to stop the vehicle and exit away from the vehicle in order to obtain adequate comms.  One does have to look at operational efficiency when only portables are available.   I heard rumors that those with 5 watt portables (with magnetic mount antennas on the vehicle roof) have seen very good improvement in accessing repeaters while mobile, where before no access or choppy access occurred. 

RM         

[wuzafuzz]

Can anyone cite an NTIA rule or CAP directive that prohibits external antennas on portable radios?  Can anyone provide documentary proof that spectral efficiency is hampered with an external antenna?

Note I am only asking about external antennas.  The instant any portable solution includes a power amplifier, all bets are off.

[Buzz]

Assume whatever you like, as you know, the FCC does not control our radios, NTIA does 

Not true.  The FCC is the certifying agency for our radios.  NTIA and NTC approve or disapprove radios based on the FCC certification data.

and just because you've seen someone violating the rules (because it was convenient and they didn't ask), doesn't change the rules.

Which rule prohibits operating a portable radio while it is connected to an external power supply?  Be specific.

Which rule prohibits operating a portable radio while it is connected to an external antenna?  Be specific.

AVAs don't just grow, they have to be purchased.  I would love to hear how the many-many AVAs that I've seen in Federal vehicles (including AF vehicles) got through the purchase process if they were a violation of the rules.

You and Slim are operating on the belief that connecting external power, microphone, speaker and antenna changes a portable radio into a mobile (or base) radio.  Unless you can find A). a rule which agrees, and B), A PROHIBITION against doing so, there is really no point to the argument. 

Work the numbers:
1)  In CAP decision-making, where there is no prohibition or direction, you are expected to use common sense and judgment.
2)  NTIA and NTC compliance are SOLELY based on emission standards.
3)  Emission standards are not affected by power supply, microphone, speaker, antenna or mounting / carrying method.
4)  The AVA only provides a convenient method of connecting those to the Astro Saber.
5)  The Astro Saber is listed as being NTIA and NTC compliant.

Where in there do you find room for concern, much less reason?

[SarDragon]

I recall reading somewhere that attaching an external antenna to a portable radio effectively changed it to a mobile radio. I do not recall the source of that info.

That said, I just finished a search of the NTIA Red Book, using "external", "external antenna", and "antenna" as search terms, and found nothing remotely resembling the idea in the first paragraph. I'll leave it for someone else to do a similar search in the FCC rules.

[Eclipse]

I recall reading somewhere that attaching an external antenna to a portable radio effectively changed it to a mobile radio. I do not recall the source of that info.

That said, I just finished a search of the NTIA Red Book, using "external", "external antenna", and "antenna" as search terms, and found nothing remotely resembling the idea in the first paragraph. I'll leave it for someone else to do a similar search in the FCC rules.

3)  Emission standards are not affected by power supply, microphone, speaker, antenna or mounting / carrying method.

Emission standards aren't affected, since those are typed in a document, but emissions are, which is what we are discussing here.

To SARDRAGON's response, the opinion of my wing's DC on this is that, at a minimum, a handheld radio, used as a mobile in a vehicle, would then have to meet the mobile standards, and an antenna with gain could well cause the radio to violate those standards.  Since there's no specific standard, he says the simplified" standards available via the compliance list web page could be used as an arguing point, but would not necessarily be accepted by a given wing.

Further, a wing would be well within its rights as a license authority to require a radio used in that mode be tested for compliance on whatever schedule they see fit.  Which doesn't mean you "can't", but sure sounds like a PITA just to prove the point you "can".

The prohibition regarding this configuration apparently existed in a previous version of 100-1 and was aimed squarely at personal radios.

[lordmonar]

Unless you are putting in a post amp......you are not going to be able to put an antenna on a had held that will make it exceed the PEP for the FREQEUNCY standard.

A radio is a a radio is a radio.

The standards are set up for the frequency band....not necessarily for the radio.

The complaint list breaking down the radios into types (portable, mobile, fixed) is simply a way to seperate the actual radios so you find them easy.   Setting up your hand held in your comm room with an external antenna is not goint to make it non-compliant.

[wuzafuzz]

Emission standards aren't affected, since those are typed in a document, but emissions are, which is what we are discussing here.

To SARDRAGON's response, the opinion of my wing's DC on this is that, at a minimum, a handheld radio, used as a mobile in a vehicle, would then have to meet the mobile standards, and an antenna with gain could well cause the radio to violate those standards.  Since there's no specific standard, he says the simplified" standards available via the compliance list web page could be used as an arguing point, but would not necessarily be accepted by a given wing.

Further, a wing would be well within its rights as a license authority to require a radio used in that mode be tested for compliance on whatever schedule they see fit.  Which doesn't mean you "can't", but sure sounds like a PITA just to prove the point you "can".

The prohibition regarding this configuration apparently existed in a previous version of 100-1 and was aimed squarely at personal radios.

Is this "law," or is this "folk law?" 

My understanding of typical mobile gain antennas is they primarily focus the radiated energy into a pattern, typically along the horizon where most of the people you want to talk to are.  Think of taking a sphere and squishing it down into a doughnut, the edges reach a little farther on the horizontal plane.  (There are other directional antennas with different patterns but that's outside the scope of this discussion.) 

I don't believe focusing the energy in a given direction will change the bandwidth of the signal from the transmitter.  Emitted bandwidth is what we are worried about here, not radiation pattern.  If the transmitter sends a narrow band 5 watt signal on 155.160 MHz through the coax and to the antenna, the antenna will radiate no more than 5 watts (less thanks to any loss in the antenna system) narrow band on 155.160 MHz.  The gain merely means that most of that energy goes out on the horizon, with very little going straight up (or down). 

We don't concern ourselves with mobile radios changing compliance if we swap between unity gain or gain antennas.  Adding a more efficient antenna to a portable should be handled the same.  Portables transmit so little power they need all the help they can get.

As for a prohibition in a previous version of 100-1, I'll wager it was removed for a reason.  In any case a former rule is no longer a factor.

[Buzz]

3)  Emission standards are not affected by power supply, microphone, speaker, antenna or mounting / carrying method.

Emission standards aren't affected, since those are typed in a document, but emissions are, which is what we are discussing here.

No, they are not.  Emissions are determined by the internal radio circuitry.  I think you're thinking of radiation, which IS affected by antenna.  Nothing in the standard talks about radiation.

Further, a wing would be well within its rights as a license authority to require a radio used in that mode be tested for compliance on whatever schedule they see fit.

Nope.  Wings are not authorized to set communications equipment standards, no matter how strong the opinion of the Wing staff.  Any radio on the NTIA or NTC approved list is APPROVED.  Unless he can find a prohibition IN WRITING against external power supplies or antennas, it's out of his hands.

The prohibition regarding this configuration apparently existed in a previous version of 100-1 and was aimed squarely at personal radios.

My first ROP card was issued in 1972.  I have never seen any such prohibition in any 100-1.  In fact, until the handoff to NTIA, there was no equipment standard -- if it would operate on CAP frequencies, it could be used, and most of us either used ham gear or recycled public safety radios.

[Eclipse]

Nope.  Wings are not authorized to set communications equipment standards, no matter how strong the opinion of the Wing staff.  Any radio on the NTIA or NTC approved list is APPROVED.  Unless he can find a prohibition IN WRITING against external power supplies or antennas, it's out of his hands.

You're confusing the list of approved equipment with the hands-on testing of a specific radio for compliance.
It's not only within the scope of authority for a Wing's Licensing Officer to do that, it is one of their responsibilities.  Most, if not all, wings test equipment
for actual compliance before licensing it, with those who are allowed to test radios within a specific band of skills and certifications.

Just because the model number is on the compliant list doesn't mean that a non-standard installation will pass the testing.

[arajca]

Nope.  Wings are not authorized to set communications equipment standards, no matter how strong the opinion of the Wing staff.  Any radio on the NTIA or NTC approved list is APPROVED.  Unless he can find a prohibition IN WRITING against external power supplies or antennas, it's out of his hands.

You're confusing the list of approved equipment with the hands-on testing of a specific radio for compliance.
It's not only within the scope of authority for a Wing's Licensing Officer to do that, it is one of their responsibilities.  Most, if not all, wings test equipment
for actual compliance before licensing it, with those who are allowed to test radios within a specific band of skills and certifications.

Just because the model number is on the compliant list doesn't mean that a non-standard installation will pass the testing.

1. Wing Licensing Officers are NOT responsible for testing comm equipment, CAP-owned or otherwise. The typical DCL issues call signs and station licenses, and may be the approver for B-CUT and A-CUT in Eservices.
2. Most wings DO NOT test equipment themselves. To properly test it takes specialized equipment and training that very few CAP members have. The NTC may have the equipment, but I do not know of any wings that have it. Your typical SWR meter is not used for this testing.
3. Manufacturers test the equipment, or have third party testing organizations do it. CAP relies on this testing to specific standards using specific test protocols. CAP does not do type accepting. I think the only testing like this the NTC does is when a radio comes in with an out-of-specs issue.
4. Wings rely on the approved list put out by the NTC. We do not have the time or the money to test every radio that the wing has. My wing has over 350 vhf radios.
5. As for non-standard installations, using a Convert-A-Com or similar device - without a power amplifier - is a standard installation, just not common in CAP, due in part ot the expense. Adding a power amplifer changes the radio classification from portable to mobile and the radio needs to meet the mobile standards when used with the power amplifer.

[Eclipse]

4. Wings rely on the approved list put out by the NTC. We do not have the time or the money to test every radio that the wing has. My wing has over 350 vhf radios.

My wing has at least 5 members that I know personally, and a fair number more than that, qualified to test and certify equipment and requires all equipment be tested and certified before it can be put into service and licensed.

Honestly, I don't know how we ever get anything done with a program that is so inconsistently managed and executed.  The range of "different" we see on these boards in both interpretation and execution borders on the ridiculous.

Some wings are swimming in radios, others can't get what they need.  Some expire B-Cuts, others don't.  Some issue callsigns to people, some to stations.

Etc., etc.

Seriously.

[Slim]

Forget it, guys.  We're having an argument with an anonymous "expert" on the internet.

The Astro Saber works for you.  You have one, and you like it.  Great!  But that doesn't mean that there are other, better radios out there (*gasp*) that work just as well if not better.  I own Jedi and Waris series radios; I use them for CAP, and I trust them with my life at work.  I won't disparage you for carrying around a one pound brick with and antenna, as long as you don't fault me for carrying a radio that is half the size and weight of yours, works as well or better than yours, that I already own (and more importantly, own all of the accessories for--including the hard to come by legally programming software).  Mmmkay?

Definitely not worth any more of my time.

Ohbytheway....when I attempted to place my MT-2000 convertacom into service, my wing rejected the license application for it.  Why, because adding external power and antenna to it wasn't compliant.  As pointed out to me, if that combination was approved for use, it would have been noted on the mobile or fixed station compliance lists.  Kinda like the old argument that you can wear a pink tutu with your service dress, because the 39-1 doesn't say you can't.

[Buzz]

Forget it, guys.  We're having an argument with an anonymous "expert" on the internet.

Yes, I am.  Two of you, actually.

According to NTC:

"Please Note: The equipment in these lists have been evaluated by comparing the manufacturer's published specifications with the published requirements of the NTIA in Chapter 5 of the "Manual of Regulations and Procedures for Federal Radio Frequeny Management" (Redbook). While these determinations are considered authoritative for the Civil Air Patrol Communications program, they may or may not meet the requirements of any other Federal Communications program. Users in other programs should consult with their program management before using these lists."

See that word, "authoritative" . . ?  Unless you can show a rule or reg which disagrees, then you really don't have a leg to stand on -- and if there were such a reg, you would have quoted it by now to prove your beliefs.

BTW, the testing requirements (TIA / EIA 603-B & TSB 102.CAAA-A) MANDATE the use of a STABLE POWER SUPPLY (a battery is not rated as a stable supply) and NO ANTENNA WHATSOEVER (the output goes into a dummy load).  That's about as non-standard an installation as you can come up with.

You might also notice that the transmit standards published on the NTC compliance page are THE SAME for mobile or portable.

However, as this appears to be a religious issue with you and Eclipse, I will let you believe whatever you like.  For myself, I will stick with the NTIA and NTC standards.

And please stop trying to put words in my mouth, Slim.  I have never once said that there were not better radios out there, but pointed out that a CAP-ready Astro Saber is half the price of the next-best, while being significantly more durable -- and you completely dodged the issue of cost effectiveness. 

As far as the programming software being "hard to come by legally," that pegs the BS-O-Meter.   Ma Batwings is happy to sell ANYONE any available version of the software, and I don't know of a Motorola authorized shop which doesn't have a copy of everything since the EEPROM days.  I myself have a (legal) copy of the RSS or CPS for every applicable Motorola platform I've ever used, and I'm not a Motorola authorized shop.  If someone told you that it's any more difficult than signing the user agreement and sending it in with your check, they were pulling your leg.

[DakRadz]

Entirely out of my lane, however....

It's nice to see a new topic for flaming. I knew you communication types had it in you.

But how many of you are authorized to wear the communication patch on your BDUs?

[SarDragon]

Entirely out of my lane, however....

It's nice to see a new topic for flaming. I knew you communication types had it in you.

But how many of you are authorized to wear the communication patch on your BDUs?

And how does that really matter in the grand scheme of things, particularly on this thread?

[wuzafuzz]

As far as the programming software being "hard to come by legally," that pegs the BS-O-Meter.   Ma Batwings is happy to sell ANYONE any available version of the software, and I don't know of a Motorola authorized shop which doesn't have a copy of everything since the EEPROM days.  I myself have a (legal) copy of the RSS or CPS for every applicable Motorola platform I've ever used, and I'm not a Motorola authorized shop.  If someone told you that it's any more difficult than signing the user agreement and sending it in with your check, they were pulling your leg.

It's not difficult, I've done it, but spending $300 for software to program a $200 used radio can be tough to swallow.  Not to mention renewing said subscription if necessary to get newer software.  Granted, older radios might not have newer software coming out all the time but it is an issue for newer radios.

As was mentioned in earlier posts, that software cost isn't such an ordeal if resources are pooled.  But for an individual, it's a PITA unless they are a devoted radio geek.  Using an outside radio shiop is also prohibitively expensive unless they have a ready built codeplug.  Plus they have to be approved by National & CAP-USAF CAPR 100-1 12-10 e.

[Buzz]

The point is that the software isn't hard to get at all, and there is no prohibition in the terms of use agreement against programming as many radios as you like, so if anyone has the software they can do the job.  I've done it for a number of people with their own Motorola radios over the years.

[myBatteryman]

Hello All,

Just an old man sticking in his 2 cents worth.

This thread on CAP radios is very interesting, and lots has changed in CAP in the 30 years since I was active. But I have spent those 3o years in radio, preceded by the CAP Master Communicator level and turned that into a long career.


So, I think I can say, with some authority, the argument about external antennas and accessories is confused.

First, there is no regulation of accessoeies or their use as long as they are passive component.s

So amplifiers are regulated since they are active. 

Antennas are not regulated in a mobile configuration. Base antennas are rehulated but only as to height above structures, FAA regs, and local zoning.

Most mobile antennas are unity gain or 3 dB gain. There is no regulation on these mobile antennas since they wil never exceed a maximum Effective radiated power limit with gain that is barely better than the insertion loss of the cable and fittings.

Long ago when I sat for my Commercial FCC ticket there was a question that asked On a 3 dB antenna, how many wavelengths long is the feedline?  The answer is, of course, long enough to reach.

It is easy to take one idea and extend it inccorectly. 

As for the regulatory risk of breaking some rule of the Air Force, the NTIA, or FCC, I would side with it being infiniely more likely to self regulate you rseleves incorrectly than break any real taboos.

Mictophones, earphones, headsets are all passive devices and not reulated.

DC Power suplies, batteries, battery eliminators, solar chargers, windmills, and water wheels are likewise not regulated since they do not change the emiisions as was stated in the thread so well.

Assuming your radio is type accepted by the FCC and you have not modified it, you meet all legal requirement.s You are not stretching any ethical boundaries.

Mr Buzz, please email me. I want to send you a Surveillance Mic for your radio, and I assure you that it does not change your portable into a mobile.

Jim Bennett
http://mybatteryman.com
317-222-1329

[SarDragon]

Ok, help me out here with some definitions and situations, based on the idea that there are different NTIA spec for mobile and portable radios.

First Q - what is the difference between a mobile and a portable?

I'm guessing that it has to do with (semi)permanent installation in a vehicle - vehicle power and an external antenna.

Second Q - does the use of a portable in a vehicle, hooked up to vehicle power and an external antenna, now change its classification to mobile?

That's the basis for much of the discussion above. Other external bits and pieces (mics, headphones, speakers, etc) do not enter into the scenario.

[Edit]

I just compared the specs from the compliancy list, and the differences are only in the receiver section. Receiver non-compliance, however, has supposedly caused otherwise usable radios to be removed from service.

[myBatteryman]

I have to admit, I am only supposing here... but this is what is likely as to the differences in specs between Portable and Mobile radio

1. Transmitters - Portables limited output power by limitations of battery capacity. Mobile radios have significantly higher output power so their emissions can be more harmful.

2. Receivers - A likely reason for the difference in specifications is to be sure the radios chosen have better intermod specifications. Anyone who ever used a Regency radio in a metropolitan area can recognize that the receiver front end filtering is very problematic.

Those are technical reasons I can think of, perhaps you can direct the question to the team at your National Headquarters who established the NTIA compliant list.

Jim Bennett
http://mybatteryman.com

[RRLE]

First Q - what is the difference between a mobile and a portable?

I searched the FCC web site for "portable radio" (with the quotes). The term is almost always associated with handheld radio. A Fire Service presentation also equates portable and handheld.

The term "mobile radio" is a bit more problematic. It appears that all portable radios are also mobile radios but not all mobile radios are portable.

[sardak]

I'd go with this definition, from Code of Federal Regulations Part 47, Telecommunications

§ 2.1093 Radiofrequency radiation exposure evaluation: portable devices.

For purposes of this section, a portable device is defined as a transmitting device designed to be used so that the radiating structure(s) of the device is/are within 20 centimeters (8 inches) of the body of the user.

A more thorough search of Part 47 would probably help define mobile, also. Both FCC and NTIA rules and regs fall under 47CFR.

Mike

[SarDragon]

OK, so it appears to me that attaching an external antenna to a portable device makes it a mobile device, subject to the rules pertaining thereto.

Discuss.

[sardak]

A more thorough search of Part 47 would probably help define mobile, also. Both FCC and NTIA rules and regs fall under 47CFR (not quite - the FCC regs refer to an NTIA website).

OK, so it appears to me that attaching an external antenna to a portable device makes it a mobile device, subject to the rules pertaining thereto. Discuss.

Caveat for discussion - this information pertains to FCC Part 90, Private Land Mobile Service, which includes Public Safety licensees. The EFJ 5100 series radios are authorized under Part 90 for non-federal agency users. CAP is a federal agency and falls under NTIA, not FCC. However, if CAP was a non-federal user, our uses for radios would fall under Part 90 (and some wings have or had licenses under Part 90).

§ 90.7   Definitions.

-- Mobile service. A service of radiocommunication between mobile and base stations, or between mobile stations.
-- Mobile station. A station in the mobile service intended to be used while in motion or during halts at unspecified points. This includes hand carried transmitters.
***********
http://apps.fcc.gov/oetcf/kdb/forms/FTSSearchResultPage.cfm?id=20454&switch=P

Publication Number: 951136    Rule Parts: 90    Publication Date: 03/23/2007
Keyword: Alternative antenna requirements for Part 90 devices
First Category:    Radio Service Rules
Second Category:    Portable - Part 2.1093
   
Question: Does changing the antenna for a device authorized under part 90 of the rules require a new application?

Answer: The rules governing permissive changes to equipment subject to Certification are contained in Section 2.1043.  A new application for Certification does not need to be filed when changing the antenna on a Part 90 device.  Please note the need for RF exposure analysis with a new/different antenna.  See Section 2.1091 (mobile), 2.1093 (portable).

***************
As for amplifiers
From the FCC "AMPLIFIER, BOOSTER, AND REPEATER - BASIC ITEMS" reminder sheet:  http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/kdb/GetAttachment.html?id=20762

90.219 – "Licensees authorized to operate radio systems in the frequency bands above 150 MHz may employ signal boosters at fixed locations ..."

90.7 "Mobile repeater station. A mobile station authorized to retransmit automatically on a mobile service frequency, communications to or from hand-carried transmitters."

90.7 "Signal booster. A device at a fixed location which automatically receives, amplifies, and retransmits on a one-way or two-way basis, the signals received from base, fixed, mobile, and portable stations, with no change in frequency or authorized bandwidth.

The FCC Permissive Changes publication (which addresses antennas and amplifiers)  http://apps.fcc.gov/kdb/GetAttachment.html?id=36662

-- Antenna changes may be made without an authorization request, if adherence to the grant conditions for RFx compliance and applicable maximum ERP/EIRP rules is observed.

-- A transmitter with and without an external amplifier may be authorized under one FCC ID, if approved in the original authorization. Adding an external amplifier is not allowed with a permissive change. A new equipment authorization application with a new FCC ID is required to add an external amplifier.

Mike

[Buzz]

OK, so it appears to me that attaching an external antenna to a portable device makes it a mobile device, subject to the rules pertaining thereto.

Discuss.

Wow, gone for a while, come back and this is still running!

To answer the apparent question, NO, a portable radio hooked up to a fixed antenna is still a portable radio.  A portable radio hooked up to an external device of any kind is still a portable radio.

This gets a little gray when you use an external output power amplifier -- technically, the portable becomes the exciter for the PA -- but any PA approved for a particular portable (for instance, if you have the Motorola PA that's designed to work with the Astro Vehicular Adapter), the Feds (including NTIA) consider it to still be a portable radio. 

[Buzz]

Sardak:

A couple of points.  First, these rules are not all-inclusive.  For instance, the California Highway Patrol uses repeaters extensively, and they operate in the low VHF band, though the rule you cited only covers VHF high and up. 

Second, the rule considers a portable radio to be a mobile radio, while the other rule you cited gives a specific definition for a portable radio.

This is the problem with regulations (Federal regs especially) -- over decades, they get refined, re-interpreted and just plain mixed up.  Every administration seems to feel the need to fingerprint everything, and they don't care what a mess they are making, because that just gives the next administration something that THEY can fingerprint, as they try to re-adjust the re-adjustment.

There are always two kinds of person reading regulations.  One type is looking for guidance on how to do things, and the other is looking for reasons that things can't be done. 

[LIGCommsOfficer]

Does anyone know where I can find a weatherproof, rugged carrying case for the Astro Saber III? Members of my Group and I have purchased six of these for CAP use. The only carrying cases I see on the market - either from Motorola or third party companys is the leather holster - which leaves the top half of the radio exposed to damage in bad weather, or when working on a ground team in rough terrain. I'd like something with a protective flap that opens to enable access to the top controls and keypad.

[stillamarine]

Are they not weather proof? I can't count how many times I've been in the rain working a wreck or something and have never had a problem out of my Motorola 5000. But of course its newer.

[Cowthief]

Hello.

I have carefully read all of the FCC and NTIA rules.
First off, CAP operates under 150 MHz, so the FCC rules do not apply.
Second, an amplifier must be certified under part 90 to meet part 90 requirements.
Motorola has certified the Sabre and Astro Sabre as meeting the FCC and NTIA requirements with or without a Convertacom, the drop-in charger and external antenna/speaker/mic adapter.
There is NO issue on the use of an external antenna.
There is NO such thing as an approved antenna, mobile or portable.
Even the FAA is not that picky for general aviation.
To answer this is real easy, ask what is the approved antenna for an xxxx radio? no such rule.
As far as amplifiers go, the Astro Sabre can do digital and with some firmware update P-25.
Very few amplifiers can deal with a digital signal that were not produced to deal with a digital signal.
To do otherwise may produce all sorts of RF noise.
But, a convertacom with an amplifier that is approved for digital can be used on CAP frequencies.
What you need to do is contact Motorola government products group and have them provide you with the correct documents and decals.
This is a free service that Motorola provides.
They do this to hopefully sell more radios.