So laws are to be obeyed only if one doesn't get caught? Sorry, that's not how I operate.

It may not be worth them checking every single field all day, but what does one say should an FCC employee show up at the field one day? What was somebody referring to Hobby Lobby for?

You're nice and safe saying all this from Germany. Suppose you bring a model to fly at our field in Muncie. Should you be allowed to use your non-FCC approved equipment on our soil? When the Horizon guys when to the Horizon Air Meet in Donauworth, I personally set DX8's to EU mode.

Andy

Should you be allowed to use your non-FCC approved equipment on our soil?

Of course. As I assembled my system myself, it falls unter Part 15 of the FCC regulations, thus requiring no certification.
Apart from that, my equipment has FCC certification:
http://www.meshnetics.com/zigbee-modules/amp/

The FCC's definition of "assembled yourself" and "hobbyist" is different than the one you have advocated on this thread and numerous others. While their definition may not appear in an online copy of Part 15, you would do well to study case history of Part 15 violations. It has been defined case-by-case (and quite consistently in the FCC's favor) for quite a while. If you'd really like a good understanding of Part 15, try www.arrl.org - while they are not the FCC, they sure understand it well!

Does Jeti use the same Meshnetics board unmodified? This is what we are discussing, not what you are personally using. Now, if you're trying to avoid the question, I can understand your behavior of redirection.

As a hint, the "hobbyist" and "self-assembled" definitions would be very much in line with what Mr. Dunk is doing on the DIY Electronics forum. He is working with bare chips (not modules) on his own PCBs.

Andy

Well, you seem to fear competition greatly, judging from how determined you try to scare people away.
Shouldn't you job rather be to help these people?

According to my understanding, if the part of the system that actually takes care of creating the RF power utilized in the transmission of data has a FCC certification (in this case the Meshnetics ZigBee module), there is no need for the entire system to have another FCC certification. However, the whole system as such should still be operated under Part 15 rules which basically means it must not cause harmful interference to others.

The ARRL web site case studies seem to deal with Part 15 devices that were operated in such a way that they were causing harmful interference. The devices were generally not illegal nor broken but their use situation was what made them illegal in that particular spot. I did not find anything there that would actually apply to 2.4GHz band RC transmitters, the cases were mostly about electrical fences and power line transmitters etc.

But most of all this seems to be a question of interpretation. I'm sure anybody involved can interpret the situation to their own favor as the Part 15 rules are very complex and not that clear at all. Having lived in the USA for three years (and I liked it very much I must say) I have also noticed that all the regulations or rules there do not seem to follow the same logic as we Europeans are used to.

I don't know what happened with Hobby Lobby and Jeti but sounds like it was s similar case in terms of technology involved.

Originally Posted by village_idiot

The MC32 looks kind of nice, does anyone know if the gimbals can be rotated so that they work over a different set of angles? A lot of the single stick and some of the tray radios allowed this but I can't tell if that new radio allows the entire gimbal assembly to rotate.

The unit that I saw in Germany did not have the ability to rotate the gimbals. I will ask about this.

Originally Posted by Finnspeed

According to my understanding, if the part of the system that actually takes care of creating the RF power utilized in the transmission of data has a FCC certification (in this case the Meshnetics ZigBee module), there is no need for the entire system to have another FCC certification.

That would be correct IF the Meshnetics module was an FCC certified device, which as of this afternoon, is not the case. Furthermore, the JETI receivers use discrete circuitry (not modules), none of which will pass either the restricted lower or upper band edge testing.

We just finished our own 2.4GHz and 900MHz modules, so I am quite familiar with everything you must do in order to comply wth the current Part 15 rules. "Modular" testing requires much more strict rules for compliancy because they can be placed into other products.

Andy is right, Julez. "Assemble yourself" refers to using discrete components to form something that is functional, in this case a transmitter. It does not include taking something that is already functional and making it even more functional. In order to do that, you must have what is called "modular" approval. There are two types of modular approval, full and limited. Full lets you sell your product for use in another product without any restrictions other than the end product should be tested to make sure it still complies with Part 15 rules, including SAR testing. Limited modular approval is for companies that want to make a module for their own use, where it will be installed in products produced only by them, and guarantee the module and end product remains compliant. This is often done when a device needs to have some of the strict full modular compliancy requirements dropped. For example, you might want to remove the required voltage regulation if your end product already has it. You could also remove the required metal shielding if the device will pass without it.

I am impressed.
For a change, Graupner seems to have really put some thought into this system.
The modules feature:
- A jack for the SmartBox
- A slot for a Micro SD-Card to record the telemetry data
- An earphone jack

For a change, Graupner seems to have really put some thought into this system.

This is wrong again! As Gaupner's CEO Stefan Graupner stated in his press conference at the fair in Friedrichshafen :

" We have specified the system."

This means :

- Graupner did the specification
- the system was then engineered and developed by their Korean partner
- so as a conclusion : This is Korean technology not German technology

Juergen

And Hitec what is ?

Whoever did the work, having the smart box connector and an earphone jack for alarms is useful, as well as recording the telemetry data to an SD card. Would have been nice to get a full size SDHC card slot, but the micro slot is better than nothing.

Everything can be updated via USB.

The HoTT system is so smart that in case of an update it looses all the progamming a user has done before. After every update a complete reset of the system has to be done ! It is then in an initale state like you received it from Graupner.

This is different with my Aurora 9 ! When we do an udate with ths TX via the internet we don't loose anything.

So the update mode of the brand new HoTT system seems to be a "little old fashioned".

Juergen

Hitec conveniently avoids this problem, as their modules and recievers are not programmable at all.
Glass house, anyone?

Another Feature: For the bigger tray style transmitters with built-in modules, Graupner designed the HOTT modules in a way that they can be easily mounted "over" the MHZ Modules, thus allowing convenient upgrades without losing MHz.

Hitec conveniently avoids this problem, as their modules and recievers are not programmable at all.
Glass house, anyone?

This is of course not true!

- one can upgrade and program the TX
- one can upgrade and progam (failsafe) the RX's
- one can upgade the module

This guy only tells BS!

Juergen