FCC License Emission Designator (RTK Radios)

Shelby,
the highest emission designator on my license (for a Javad, AR-West, 35 watt modem) is 6K05G1D

Shawn Billings, post: 416574, member: 6521 wrote: Shelby,
the highest emission designator on my license (for a Javad, AR-West, 35 watt modem) is 6K05G1D

Thanks Shawn!

Looks like you are licensed for 6.25 khz bandwidth, the hardware is capable of 25/12.5/6.25 kHz, (of course 25kHz is no longer a legal option in the USA) so you must be operating at the narrowest bandwidth or at least that is what your license is for. Also interesting that Javad is using Phase Modulation (PM). Pacific Crest and Satel use Frequency Modulation (FM). While pretty similar methods, I would suspect that unlike Pacific Crest and Satel which can receive each other's broadcast that the Javad radio is only going to work with a Javad receiver or I suppose another brand with PM, don't know that for a fact, but seems logical.

SHG

I'm pretty sure our radios will do both Phase and Frequency modulations, although I also believe Phase is what we most commonly use (DBPSK). It's a little outside of my depth though.

Shelby, I looked ours up and we used 19K6F1D and we run between 461.025 and 434.50. We are running a Topcon branded radio but before we bought it I did a little research and its made by Satel.

Shawn Billings, post: 416583, member: 6521 wrote: I'm pretty sure our radios will do both Phase and Frequency modulations, although I also believe Phase is what we most commonly use (DBPSK). It's a little outside of my depth though.

Your FCC license is for phase ONLY, so if you can transmit FM (with the hardware) you would need a license mod to use it in FM mode.

I am adding SIX designators to my voice radios as the radios have all those listed (analog and digital voice). Will see if it flies at FCC, but I don't think there is a prohibition on multiple designators to allow multiple modes.

SHG

Shelby -

The standard designator used for the 12.5-kHz channel spacing was 11K2F1D a few years back when we were all modifying our licenses (one of mine is WPZP208 if you want to look at it on the FCC site - I still need to modify that one to remove the wide-band designators and the FCC sends a nag email every so often to remind me of that). Just a bit less than the 11K5F1D you say was rejected.

If you get definitive information that 11K2F1D is no longer allowed please let the rest of us know.

GB

Edit - Learned a bit more by searching 11K2F1D in the Google. Go to https://fccgrants.neocities.org/quick.htm and you can see a listing of recently issued/modified licenses. Pick a large state and search for that designator - it sure looks like 11K2F1D is still being allowed.

David Livingstone, post: 416585, member: 431 wrote: Shelby, I looked ours up and we used 19K6F1D and we run between 461.025 and 434.50. We are running a Topcon branded radio but before we bought it I did a little research and its made by Satel.

I am not certain that 19K6F1D is legal? That is the same as my current license AND I have had two licensing companies tell me I am not compliant and is part of what I am changing plus I am adding digital voice designators to my DMR mobile radios for voice communications.

I thought that 19K6F1D was legal if operating under what FCC termed 12.5 kHz equivalent efficiency and for data radios that would require employing data rates greater than 4.8 kbps per 6.25 kHz channel, such as 19.2 kbps per 25 kHz channel, meaning your over the air data rate would have to be 19,200 on an older 25 Khz radio. I don't know if that provision was taken away or not, BUT I assume maybe it has been removed since I am being told that is no longer a valid emission designator???

SHG

Glenn Borkenhagen, post: 416590, member: 961 wrote: Shelby -

The standard designator used for the 12.5-kHz channel spacing was 11K2F1D a few years back when we were all modifying our licenses (one of mine is WPZP208 if you want to look at it on the FCC site - I still need to modify that one to remove the wide-band designators and the FCC sends a nag email every so often to remind me of that). Just a bit less than the 11K5F1D you say was rejected.

If you get definitive information that 11K2F1D is no longer allowed please let the rest of us know.

GB

Glen, thanks for that, yeah I think I just screwed up with the 11.5 kHz and should of gone with 11.2 kHz, I was trying to leave some wiggle room for new RTK radios, BUT it actually looks like everything being marketed now is 8.6 kHz or less anyway, so maybe I will just not worry about that and go for it with 8.6 kHz. I actually DO NOT currently own a UHF RTK radio, was trying to add DMR digital to my voice radios and the RTK radio frequencies were flagged as non compliant on my FCC license, so I figured I would fix them and keep them in case I buy new RTK radios or rent gear for a project. The biggest cost is the DMR addition, that has to go through a frequency coordinator.

SHG

Shelby -

I did some more looking and found FCC File No. 0007671184 which is a new-license RTK GPS application submitted in February 2017 by Atlas License Company. It requests 11K2F1D throughout, so I presume that is still a valid designator.

Good luck!

GB

Glenn Borkenhagen, post: 416595, member: 961 wrote: Shelby -

I did some more looking and found FCC File No. 0007671184 which is a new-license RTK GPS application submitted in February 2017 by Atlas License Company. It requests 11K2F1D throughout, so I presume that is still a valid designator.

Good luck!

GB

Glen, awesome, thank you! I will change to 11K2F1D then and resubmit!

SHG

Shelby, when I looked up our license, we had renewed it in 2012. I think this was right after we narrow banded?? I know I had a heck of a time coming up with the desginator and to be honest, I have no idea if its correct or not. I did some research on it at the time and finally found some info on line and thats why I used the one I did.

To be honest, I don't know anything about the emission designators. I used the ones that Javad provided to me. But inferring from Shelby's response above, I am guessing it's a code that incorporates the channel bandwidth and the modulation.

I'm also ignorant of the details, but for what it's worth, here's the scoop on my RTK radio license:

The first characters represent the bandwidth, so Jim's 1st one is 5.76 Khz, 2nd one is 6.08 Khz and so forth. NO narrowband compliant license can have a bandwidth higher than 11K2 or 11.2 Khz to meet the 01-01-13 12.5 Khz narrowbanding rule. This is the occupied width of the over the air transmissions, the narrower the bandwidth, the more uses can fit in any given slice of the finite radio spectrum. The most recent "old" rule was 25 Khz, now it is 12.5 Khz allowing twice as many users in the same 25 Khz piece of spectrum, eventually we will see 6.25 Khz allowing four times the users as 25 Khz. Prior to the old 25 Khz rule there was you got it a 50 Khz rule, BUT as time goes on the idea is to slice the spectrum thinner and thinner.

The last three characters are the emission type allowed:

Again looking at Jim's example, G = Phase modulation, 1 = A single channel containing quantized or digital information without the use of a modulating sub-carrier, excluding time-division multiplex, D = Data transmission, telemetry, telecommand.

The FCC has the secret decoder ring here.

What I was initially looking for is the maximum bandwidth portion of the designator since I am trying to modify my license to be legal IF I decide to get a new UHF radio (right now the 900 Mhz SS radio is working fine for my needs), I originally submitted 11K5 thinking that would be OK since it is less than 12.5 Khz, but turns out widest allowed is 11.2 Khz.

I could of gone less like in Jim's license, BUT as long as you DO NOT exceed your licensed bandwidth and remain of course in compliance with the narrowbanding rules, it seemed better to apply for the widest possible and still remain legal. Best I can tell is none of the common radios currently offered by any vendor is wider than 8.6 Khz and some are actually offering radios that meet the 6.25 Khz step which will be the next step at some point in the future (no time line by FCC currently).

I would encourage all radio users to check all your equipment and licenses to be sure you are compliant, while not likely (until another user complains), the FCC does investigate issues brought to their attention.

I knew that HAM license and theory would be useful for something and this is one of those times.

SHG

David Livingstone, post: 416688, member: 431 wrote: Shelby, when I looked up our license, we had renewed it in 2012. I think this was right after we narrow banded?? I know I had a heck of a time coming up with the designator and to be honest, I have no idea if its correct or not. I did some research on it at the time and finally found some info on line and that's why I used the one I did.

I paid good money to a Motorola dealer to have my license narrowbanded in 2012, I am now more educated and I think they missed the mark so I feel your pain. I think your license needs to be 11K2 (or less) instead of 19K6 to meet a narrowband licensing. That may be able to be ignored till you 10 year renewal BUT in any case you would have to be broadcasting with a 12.5Khz radio or operating with equivalent efficiency regardless of what your license currently has on it.

Mine came to light because I am adding digital voice (DMR) emission designators to my voice VHF radios, there can be NO modifications (even an address change) to a license without it all being compliant or at least that is my understanding. The fixing of the RTK bandwidth is the minor part of my process, getting the digital emissions on my voice radio actually needs to be approved by a frequency coordinator so more time and $$$, just changing to narrow bandwidth is pretty straightforward and I think a user could do that on their own with a little hair pulling at the FCC web site.

SHG

Shawn Billings, post: 416690, member: 6521 wrote: To be honest, I don't know anything about the emission designators. I used the ones that Javad provided to me. But inferring from Shelby's response above, I am guessing it's a code that incorporates the channel bandwidth and the modulation.

Shawn, I explain that a bit in post #15.

SHG

As I recall we renewed our license ourselves, or I should say our secretary did it and I helped her.