DaveInDenver
Middle Income Semi-Redneck
There is no type acceptance for Part 97. There is a spectral purity clause for external amps, but compliance to it doesn't matter if the device is homebrew or manufactured. Commercial manufacturers have to test their radios for certification within Part 15 limitations, which amateurs who build their own don't have to do. That makes hams somewhat unique, in that your license grants you some privileges w.r.t. FCC certification of your own gear.
I don't think anyone suggests it's illegal or even flat-out a mistake to modify your radios for what-if scenarios. It's not illegal to have a radio capable of transmitting out of the ham bands in your possession. A lot of ham gear is re-purposed from commercial and public service or CBs that could still be used in their original service technically. It's just that once you use it for ham you break any previous type acceptance for Part 90 or 95. Then you violate the rules when you actually key up out of band you are licensed to use.
The problem as I see it is citing one extremely detailed account where failures or mistakes demonstrate the usefulness does not mean it's generally going to be so. Unless you break the rules to test out your mods you can't know interoperability works or not until you try and obviously the ham who set up the hasty repeater did what was necessary. Doesn't change that I think from a SAR perspective it's better to control what you can, train with legal transmitters, have cross-system net controllers and replace faulty components when you find them. Will you maybe one day look like a hero for having freebanded radios when 4 layers of other stuff break down? Sure, maybe.
The key sentence in the life or limb clause is that there must not be any normal means of communications available in a life or property threatening situation. If a ham wants to modify their radio, I don't belie their intentions just for a scenario like you describe. But I see a whole lot of people wanting to mod their radios to converge SAR, FRS or CB out of convenience and that is against the rules, like it or not. I don't want to lose the amateur privileges because of people using Part 97.403 as justification for non-emergency uses.
I don't think anyone suggests it's illegal or even flat-out a mistake to modify your radios for what-if scenarios. It's not illegal to have a radio capable of transmitting out of the ham bands in your possession. A lot of ham gear is re-purposed from commercial and public service or CBs that could still be used in their original service technically. It's just that once you use it for ham you break any previous type acceptance for Part 90 or 95. Then you violate the rules when you actually key up out of band you are licensed to use.
The problem as I see it is citing one extremely detailed account where failures or mistakes demonstrate the usefulness does not mean it's generally going to be so. Unless you break the rules to test out your mods you can't know interoperability works or not until you try and obviously the ham who set up the hasty repeater did what was necessary. Doesn't change that I think from a SAR perspective it's better to control what you can, train with legal transmitters, have cross-system net controllers and replace faulty components when you find them. Will you maybe one day look like a hero for having freebanded radios when 4 layers of other stuff break down? Sure, maybe.
The key sentence in the life or limb clause is that there must not be any normal means of communications available in a life or property threatening situation. If a ham wants to modify their radio, I don't belie their intentions just for a scenario like you describe. But I see a whole lot of people wanting to mod their radios to converge SAR, FRS or CB out of convenience and that is against the rules, like it or not. I don't want to lose the amateur privileges because of people using Part 97.403 as justification for non-emergency uses.
