35MHz legal UK channels

[Allan Bennett]

Yesterday a new member came to our club field with his esky heli. While we were running through the procedures with him, including the need for his personal frequency peg for our peg board, we saw that his radio crystal was 35.87MHz (channel 187) which is a European channel, I believe.

 

Several years ago I discovered that my Twister Bell 47, purchased from a local store, was also on a European channel; and I few months ago I was in a discussion on another forum with another UK esky owner who had a channel 187 crystal.

 

Have the rules changed about what channels are legal in the UK, are official importers just ignoring them, or are these examples (including mine, bought from a "reputable" local store) "grey" imports from European dealers/distributors?

Edited By Allan Bennett on 01/08/2011 11:58:31

[Peter Beeney]

Allan,

I don’t think the rules have changed at all, but I think these ‘different’ frequency items have been around for a long time. Quite a few years back, when the small, very cheap plastic powered gliders first appeared on the scene a friend was given one as a free gift with some expensive computer software that he’d purchased. It just said that it was was on 35 MHz, no channel number. I have a scanner so we soon found it was way out of the legal channels, like yours, in the area above, I can’t remember which one.

Also I remember walking round a street market at Christmas time way back and there was a stall with a great stack of r/c cars, boats and planes. Very cheap, many around £30, but they looked to be fair quality so perhaps value for money. I particularly tried to check out the frequencies, not much info on the boxes but I saw a lot of 27, some 35, plus 38 and 40. But as to whether any of it was legal was anybodies guess!

Provided all these are out of the legal bandwidth it probably doesn’t matter very much. They won’t interfere with the legitimate uses, and I don’t think anyone outside aeromodelling would ever notice because I’m sure there are very few users. 35 MHz is only just in the VHF bracket, that runs from 30 to 300 MHz, and it’s possible it’s a too low frequency to be any general use. I’ve always understood it to be a block of frequencies used by the military, long abandoned. In fact it would not surprise me if they haven’t still got some sort off handle on them, just in case they wanted them back for some reason!
So, if you do have one of these around, you just need to know that it’s not in the channel 55 to 90 groove.
If you consider all the other aspects of modern day aeromodelling then this is about par, I reckon. If fact, perhaps the kick from it is now found by how successful you are in overcoming all the pitfalls, traps and general handicaps set by the importers and suppliers. I don’t think anyone considers the frequency conundrum in the slightest! That’s just my old cynical hat again, take no notice….

I suspect that with the ease and cheapness that 2.4 can now be provided it will not be long before it all goes down this route. If it already isn’t doing so.

Incidentally, is 35. 870 MHz channel 187? I have a feeling it should be channel 147, but I might be wrong; and not that it makes a gnat’s whisker of difference anyway! You would be really unlucky if someone came along on the same frequency. But, stranger things have happened, back in the days of 27 megs one day two people shot each other down when they were both clandestinely using 72 megs; and both on the same frequency! But, of course, nether knew of the other. They really had to laugh about that one!

PB

[PatMc]

Allan, here are the legal UK frequencies but others are allowed at very low RF outputs for use with "toys".

It's not illegal for traders to sell other Txs on other European frequency bands so long as they are CE marked but it is illegal to operate them on those frequencies in the UK.

The 35MHz version of MPX Cockpit SX (& probably other MPX Txs) as sold here is capable of being programmed to all of the German & UK frequency bands.

[kc]

Surely your club cannot allow anyone to fly with anything but a legal frequency. The model might get shot down by a proper user of the frequency. If there were an accident it's likely the insurance company would try to not pay out.

The committee members might be liable.if they condone some illegal use too.

 

Aeromodellers have too much to lose to allow use of illegal frequencies ourselves.

The proper course is to take the equipment back to the vendor and claim its not fit for the purpose its sold for and demand legal crystals or a refund.

 

 

[PatMc]

KC, depending on the rf output it might not be illegal. Even if it is normal rf output (100mW ?) it won't have been illegal for the vendor to sell it so long as it has a genuine CE sticker.

[Allan Bennett]

So, the consensus is that vendors are legally permitted to sell the stuff, presumably because the buyer might want to fly it in another country where it's a recognised frequency; but the buyer is not permitted to fly it in the UK.

 

Why do our legislators go to the bother of making laws that they're unable or unwilling to enforce? I hate red tape, but requiring someone who buys a "foreign" radio set to sign a disclaimer that he's not going to fly it in the UK might deter some of the unscrupulous dealers who sell these things.

 

kc, I put channel 82 crystals in my Twister Bell as soon as I got it, and had no problems because I fly it only within my garage. But I wonder how much the range is adversely affected because, even though they're both in the 35MHz band, the radios may be optimised for whichever part of the band they're destined to be operated in.

[kc]

If the equipment is very low output it is probably even more dangerous ( for planes ) because it may easily go out of range and cause damage. The BMFA handbook lists the frequencies we can use and 147 etc is not one of them!

Even a tiny helicopter could cause terrible injuries if it caught someone in the face, so the potential for a large claim still exists. Just what the ''ambulance chasing' lawyers would relish!

 

Why is anbody even considering flying with illegal frequencies? We have cheap but reliable gear available so there is no excuse.

 

If the retailer quibbles about a refund I reckon Trading Standards would help, and they might prevent further sales to unsuspecting customers too. Helping stamp out dodgy retailers will help decent model shops.

[FlyinBrian]

Posted by kc on 02/08/2011 10:45:51:

 

Why is anbody even considering flying with illegal frequencies? We have cheap but reliable gear available so there is no excuse.

 

 

I think its called ignorance

[PatMc]

KC,

I think it's already been established in this thread that it's illegal to operate 35.87MHz in the UK but not to sell equipment on that frequency.However it could have been bought via the internet from outside the UK.

Here's the OFCOM explanation of the regulations as they apply to radio controlled models.

There are conditions to be met for retailers selling European but not UK legal equipment, section 7 of the link details these.

IMO you're overstating the dangers of models controlled by low output rf. Most free flight power models would be more hazardous than any of the toys sold using short range equipment that's allowed under the regulations but there's no history of serious injuries caused by these or claims for personal damages being pursued.

 

 

[Allan Bennett]

Posted by PatMc on 02/08/2011 22:32:01:

KC,

I think it's already been established in this thread that it's illegal to operate 35.87MHz in the UK but not to sell equipment on that frequency.However it could have been bought via the internet from outside the UK.

Here's the OFCOM explanation of the regulations as they apply to radio controlled models.

There are conditions to be met for retailers selling European but not UK legal equipment, section 7 of the link details these. ...

 

 

Part of Section 7 says, "To prevent the possibility of radio equipment causing interference the R&TTE Directive requires the manufacturer or the person responsible for placing the radio equipment on the market to inform the user by information on the packaging and in the instructions for use in which countries the equipment can legally be used and what, if any authorisations are required. Also, where restrictions exist, the alert symbol (an exclamation mark in a circle) should be placed next to the CE mark. ... Ofcom will take enforcement action where non compliance becomes apparent."

 

The person responsible for placing the radio equipment on the market must be the vendor. So, how many of us have ever seen the alert symbol on an RTF model?

[PatMc]

 

Part of Section 7 says, "To prevent the possibility of radio equipment causing interference the R&TTE Directive requires the manufacturer or the person responsible for placing the radio equipment on the market to inform the user by information on the packaging and in the instructions for use in which countries the equipment can legally be used and what, if any authorisations are required. Also, where restrictions exist, the alert symbol (an exclamation mark in a circle) should be placed next to the CE mark. ... Ofcom will take enforcement action where non compliance becomes apparent."

 

The person responsible for placing the radio equipment on the market must be the vendor. So, how many of us have ever seen the alert symbol on an RTF model?

How many of us have seen a retailer offering for sale a RTF model which falls into the category requiring the alert symbol ?

 

The 35 MHz MPX Cockpit SX has a warning in the instructions that the frequency must be set to one which is approved for use in the location it's operated in. It refers to included documentation detailing the approved frequencies in various European countries.

A version of the Spektrum DX6 carrying the alert symbol with list of countries where it could be used was sold in the UK by at least one leading model retailer.

[Allan Bennett]

Come to think of it, surely the wording of Section 7 means that all RC equipment sold in UK must carry the "alert symbol" because some other EU countries have various restrictions on power output, and different frequency ranges, compared with what's permitted in UK -- even for the 2.4GHz sets.

 

What a burocratic nightmare!!

[flytilbroke]

The BRITISH radio regulations are applicable in BRITAIN. It is the responsibility of the proposed user to ensure that they abide by UK law. Simple. The law in each EC country is different from the others.

[Allan Bennett]

The problem is we're being sucked into the United States of Europe, and the regulation that's been quoted seems to refer to everything sold in Europe that might be subject to different regulations in different parts of Europe.

[PatMc]

Posted by Allan Bennett on 04/08/2011 08:03:49:
The problem is we're being sucked into the United States of Europe, and the regulation that's been quoted seems to refer to everything sold in Europe that might be subject to different regulations in different parts of Europe.

On the contrary, the method of applying the CE standard with the alert symbol means that agreed common criteria can apply allowing for national regulations within individual countries. This means that there is the minimum bureaucracy without hindering free trade between EEC members.

 

OTOH "requiring someone who buys a "foreign" radio set to sign a disclaimer that he's not going to fly it in the UK might deter some of the unscrupulous dealers who sell these things." as you suggested previously would increase bureaucracy & impose an unwanted burden on retailers. Nut & sledgehammer spring to mind.

[kc]

Yes it would increase the bureaucracy but only on the unscrupulous retailers!

 

 

The BMFA handbook page 78 says ( referring to illegal use of 72 Mhz ) " may face a fine and confiscation of the equipment " Presumably that would be the same for other illegal frequencies.

We have no way of knowing if toys had caused any serious injury claims. In any case free flight models flown by ' experts' seem dangerous enough to me! I was at Old Warden last month and beat a hasty retreat from the freeflight field when a diesel model crashed 8 feet away from my wife!

 

[PatMc]

Posted by kc on 04/08/2011 11:09:47:

Yes it would increase the bureaucracy but only on the unscrupulous retailers!

 

 

It would affect all retailers whether legally selling these Txs or not. Try running the idea past your LMS proprietor see what his reaction is.

 

Posted by kc on 04/08/2011 11:09:47:

The BMFA handbook page 78 says ( referring to illegal use of 72 Mhz ) " may face a fine and confiscation of the equipment " Presumably that would be the same for other illegal frequencies.

See section 5 of the OFCOM link I provided previously.

 

Posted by kc on 04/08/2011 11:09:47:

We have no way of knowing if toys had caused any serious injury claims. In any case free flight models flown by ' experts' seem dangerous enough to me! I was at Old Warden last month and beat a hasty retreat from the freeflight field when a diesel model crashed 8 feet away from my wife!

 

If a toy plane caused serious injury it would be splashed all over the newspapers.

Re free flight models - the fact is that people have been actively flying them for over 100 years & certainly as long as the BMFA/SMAE has provided insurance facilities for members but we are acknowledged as low risk by the insurers when compared with other sports/hobbies.

[kc]

I am saying retailers who sell illegal frequency stuff in this country should have to do the paperwork not legal frequency vendors.

 

Yes we are relatively low risk because we do things correctly. We cannot tolerate people who deliberatly fly illegal frequencies.

 

We may well ask why these frequencies are not legal here but OK in other EC countries. We seem to have all the problems belonging to the EC but not all the benefits such as these extra frequencies! But maybe these extra frequencies are used for other purposes here such as tower cranes, robots for bomb disposal, military or railway communications or who knows what. But illegal is illegal whether we like it or not.

[PatMc]

Posted by kc on 05/08/2011 12:19:48:

I am saying retailers who sell illegal frequency stuff in this country should have to do the paperwork not legal frequency vendors.

I take it you mean legal in EEC but not useable within UK ?

Where's there any evidence of these vendors - apart from any shop that sells MPX ? The OP doesn't say where the helicopter was purchased, it could have been a personal import.

Why should any retailer wish to sell illegal radio equipment when it would be the same price, profit margin etc as perfectly legal stuff ?

IMO the system that's in place is working & doesn't need changing. In any case it's referring to a shrinking part of the market since 2.4GHz is becoming more universally accepted with similar national regulations.

 

Posted by kc on 05/08/2011 12:19:48:

Yes we are relatively low risk because we do things correctly. We cannot tolerate people who deliberatly fly illegal frequencies.

The point about model flying being low risk arose from your concern about low rf power/range toys & my comparing them with free flight models. It has nothing to do with illegal frequencies.

Posted by kc on 05/08/2011 12:19:48:

We may well ask why these frequencies are not legal here but OK in other EC countries. We seem to have all the problems belonging to the EC but not all the benefits such as these extra frequencies! But maybe these extra frequencies are used for other purposes here such as tower cranes, robots for bomb disposal, military or railway communications or who knows what. But illegal is illegal whether we like it or not.

I think you'll find that in Europe (both EEC & non EEC) we have the highest number of legal channels for model aircraft & also the highest number when combined with surface models.

 

[Allan Bennett]

Posted by PatMc on 05/08/2011 21:05:29:

Posted by kc on 05/08/2011 12:19:48:

I am saying retailers who sell illegal frequency stuff in this country should have to do the paperwork not legal frequency vendors.

I take it you mean legal in EEC but not useable within UK ?

Where's there any evidence of these vendors - apart from any shop that sells MPX ? The OP doesn't say where the helicopter was purchased, it could have been a personal import.

Why should any retailer wish to sell illegal radio equipment when it would be the same price, profit margin etc as perfectly legal stuff ? ...

 

Our new member had purchased his esky on eBay, so no knowing where it really came from. My own Twister Bell 47 was purchased from my local model shop (no longer trading) and, at the time, he had several for sale, and was able to get spares, so I assumed they were official Perkins stock. I've discussed this issue with the owner of my current local model shop, and he tells me he recently saw a stand next to his at a big show where models were being sold on non-UK frequencies. He spoke to the owner about it, but the owner didn't know or didn't care, or both.

 

As to why anyone should do it -- presumably there are some European wholesalers who are able to undercut the official UK importers, so retailers can make bigger profits if they charge the UK rrp.

 

I agree, there is a system in place but, like with so many other of our laws, nobody seems to be enforcing it