<html><head></head><body><div class="yahoo-style-wrap" style="font-family:courier new, courier, monaco, monospace, sans-serif;font-size:16px;"><div id="ydp6d548bfeyahoo_quoted_1795371479" class="ydp6d548bfeyahoo_quoted">
<div style="font-family:'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif;font-size:13px;color:#26282a;">
<div>
On Wednesday, February 27, 2019, 8:54:51 PM EST, Nick VA3NNW <tapr@noseynick.com> wrote:
</div><br clear="none"><div><div dir="ltr">Pat, the owner, doesn't operate HF mobile, but we might try some <br clear="none">experiments if we can borrow an HF whip from another club member <br clear="none"><div>sometime. Probably not in the next few weeks due to other priorities.</div><div><br></div><div><b>*** If Pat doesn't operate HF, then using his experience doesn't apply to this discussion. VHF operation and operation from rigs that are located outside of the vehicle and relying on it only for power has never been reported as a problem.</b></div><div><b><br></b></div><div><b> The primary issue to amateur and first responders: QRM to HF operations while in motion is degraded to the point of being fully impossible, negating access to an incredible power plant for those that rely on HF to perform their tasks.</b><br></div><br clear="none"><div>Part 15 exemptions: What's part 15?....</div><div><br></div><div><b>*** FCC Part 15 rules apply to devices whose purpose is something other than radiating RF, however do so as a consequence of their normal operation. It is intended to protect licensed RF users from interference. The link that I shared earlier shows an exemption offered to EV manufacturers (presumably to jump start development). It is time to revisit that exemption (or...require manufacturers to offer a "low RF emissions" mod...if even for an additional cost).<br></b></div><div><br></div><div><br></div></div></div>
</div>
</div></div></body></html>