Leaderboard

GMRS requires a user license, FRS does not. FRS "Rules" are generally non enforceable. 'FRS is licensed by rule. This means an individual license is not required to operate an FRS radio provide you comply with the rules. You may operate an FRS radio regardless of your age, and for personal or for business use if you are not a representative of a foreign government.' And you are right...businesses need to be on MURS if they want cheap comms. Maybe the good thing is that most of the cheap radios that people buy from a "store" are good for 2 watts at best. Really what was done with the rules was to make what people were (uneducated about radio) doing illegally with store bought radios that did GMRS and FRS in being legal. The fcc should have never allowed combo radios to begin with.

Something to bookmark on your browser. The Enforcement Bureau has opened a new portal to report interference and complaints for Public Safety, Business users and consumers. GMRS/FRS users can report problems using the Consumer tab at https://fccprod.service-now.com/psix-esix/

I was fixing to say he was actually hearing "intermod." Even some of my professional radios suffer from intermod while near downtown Chicago.

Possibly you are hearing the Grundy 700 repeater as it has approximately 80 mile radius: https://mygmrs.com/view?id=529 It is located at 500' on the WBEZ tower using a 16-bay folded dipole (Andrew DB420), Hardline 1-5/8 (Andrew) and a Motorola Quantar HighPower, 50w out the 6-Cavity (RFS CP450-422).

That FCC publication strongly implies that part 90 radios may be used on part 95 without specific certification; it also implies that 90/95 dual service certification will continue to be available. The way I see it, the golden radio is something like the GD-77s -- part 90 certified ham radios. They'll tune the whole 70cm band, and the 90 cert implies it may be used on GMRS, per that publication.

FirstNet or FedNet as it should truly be called is another cellular telephone system with its emphasis on data rather than voice. What ATT rightly understood about the win to build the network is it will/has turned into a money sink for the users. Even with the ability to ruthlessly preempt other Band 14 users and access to ATT's other bands the envisioned bandwidth will not be available at the scene of a major incident. There are a little over 12 million "first responders" and another 18 million other emergency responders as defined by the Homeland Security Act of 2001. The present governance is almost entirely in the hands of law enforcement who don't always play nicely in the sandbox with fire and EMS. Don't even ask them if the utility companies deserve to be included, they are very much opposed. In a disaster situation the two things most needed are water and electricity and you can't get that from law enforcement, fire or EMS. If I sound a little bitter about it, it's because I spent a good many years arguing that no responder or class of responder does their job alone but was not truly heard by the first responders or the Commission. What the system lacks, and has been pointed out, is mission-critical voice communications. The cellular devices in use are a peer-to-peer connection while LMR or radio is a one-to-many. Say something on a channel and everyone on that channel in range hears that same message. That doesn't happen with cellular and, if and when it does come about it will be at the cost of the bandwidth needed for data.

I had assumed the first couple of responses had adequately addressed the original post. But, that seems to not be the case. So, I will give it a try... #1) GMRS and Amateur radio are two completely separate services with different applications, users and purposes. In particular, the US Amateur Radio service is based on International agreements: #2) As the FCC made clear in its response to the 2014 petition, allowing non-certified radios to be used in the GMRS "would allow for the proliferation of home-built, non-standardized transmitters in the GMRS, with no practicable way for the Commission to monitor and enforce regulatory compliance for these devices." Further, allowing licensed amateurs to operate non-certified equipment in the GMRS would provide special privileges for users of one service operating in another, completely unrelated, service. This would be an extremely slippery slope, one any regulatory agency would want to avoid. #3) Amateur Radio and GMRS each have their place in the world. I believe the FCC made the right decision. Blurring the boundary between the two would not result in any real benefit for anyone and might cause a lot of problems for both services. #4) If you really want/must use ham gear on GMRS, go ahead, nobody is really going to stop you. Take responsibility for your action and operate accordingly. Just do not expect the FCC to officially condone your actions.

You do realize that you are expecting logic from an agency of the federal government.