Leaderboard

I am just learning that the FCC has given serious consideration to allowing location positioning information to be included in GMRS communications on all channels, and allowing FM modulation on existing CB channels. Here is a fresh-off-the-press YouTube video that provides an overview: 741 Channel - And here is the FCC rules amendment that that covers the proposed changes: https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-374114A1.pdf?fbclid=IwAR3GQrL1LL_zjxMRzjiNi4Kxf8VqgojRP4bKAKCsrOxSskyFMxfceV-umjE Looks like Motorola is is behind the petition for location positioning capability and Cobra is behind the petition for FM on CB frequencies. The FCC document should be a good read. I have not read the whole thing yet. I hope to find something in there too that officially legalizes part 90 radios for GMRS. Michael WRHS965 KE8PLM

Depending on the area you may never hear back from them. It appears folks think its cool to have repeaters and put them in the database and never seem to really have a reliable repeater and loose interest because of it. Your best bet is to listen and see if its really online. If it is then try above and see if you can get them.

Greetings!!! Anyone make their own antennas for the field or for home? I cut an old homemade dipole down to 470mhz and am using it as a scanner/gmrs antenna in my shop (stapled to the outside of my shop) right now but am gathering materials to make a copper pipe/pvc vertical dipole that I can raise over my roof. WRMQ982

I do not believe you should have had to do anything at all to communicate with an FRS radio. I believe the BTECH channel 17 was already factory configured to use the same frequency. Only change to that channel that may be necessary is enabling CTCSS or DCS if it was applicable. If I interpret correctly the various posts from other users on this forum I have read, you can program loads of your own channels for receive only on the BTECH, but you can only transmit on the ones that are factory programmed for you. A weakness of BTECH and Midland Radios. I will need to let owners of said radios comment further. Michael WRHS965 KE8PLM

I just educated myself a bit on UK and European CB. I learned that since the early 80’s legal CB in the UK has been FM. American AM & SSB and frequencies appear to have been illegal almost this whole time. Between 2013 and 2016 the UK adapted AM and SSB as modes as well as a coordinated set of EU frequencies that are compatible with the US, if I interpret the history correctly. So it seems the manufacturers gain by being able to make hardware that can be easily made legal on both sides of the pond, while operators on each side gain a new mode of operation within the 11m CB band. On another note, I dread the prospect of having to listen to the data bursts for the location and text messaging purposes. Anyone scanning with carrier squelch could have to contend with that. As long as the cost of radios with this location capability are priced at the high end of the spectrum I don’t imagine it will be an issue initially. However, as the sales go up and prices come down the neighborhood kids will soon have them. Perhaps this is the FCCs way of getting us used to data in the GMRS spectrum. Once the’re enough packets present we will all be more than willing to switch to all digital since it means we would not have to listen to them any more. One thing I interpret is that data packets can be sent automatically at the beginning of a transmission and at intervals not to exceed every 30 seconds. I also understand that a radio can be requested to send out its position based on the request from another radio. Presumably this will be more than just a broadcast request from one radio that causes 100 radios within ear-shot to report their location. Admittedly I have not played with any of the existing legal hardware that does this on FRS so I cannot speak to how objectionable this actually is. Perhaps if the data bursts are disguised through the use of a different modulation it could be tolerable. On the other hand this whole location feature could be a god-send to fox hunters. If you we could somehow get all those that like to create intentional interference to turn the feature on, the fox hunters could show up and net the fox more rapidly. [emoji23]. Mark my word, in your lifetime, there will be news story to this effect. Michael WRHS965 KE8PLM

I think a good part of the issue, at least for me, is that there are no APRS facilities near me. As such, I can only see if I got it working when I go on a long drive.

There is very little to stop the change from being published. The rule change has to be vetted by administrative agencies for finance and paperwork impacts and then scheduled for pub by the Government Printing Office on an almost space-available basis. Routine red-tape delays.

The changes have to be published in the Federal Register first. They will then be effective 30 calendar days later. It can take more than 2 months for the publishing.

The only issue I had with this is that they declined to enforce a Busy Channel Lockout for automatic data/location bursts. You could set up your radio to transmit every 30 seconds, for example, and it'll beacon regardless of whether the channel is busy with voice traffic. Add in multiple radios in the same range, and I fear the GMRS channels will start to sound like APRS with data bursts all over the place. I had proposed the busy channel lockout feature but they specifically rejected it, claiming it was up to the licensee to ensure their radio is not causing interference. But once you enable an automatic location report, the licensee is relinquishing control to the radio for some period of time. It only seems like common sense for the radio to hold off the transmission until the channel is clear again. I'd also think the manufacturers would voluntarily add this feature as it would increase the reliability of their messages in the presence of co-channel interference. As far as FM on CB, I think it's great. It throws a lifeline to the CB radio manufacturers who can now introduce new FM-capable radios and revitalize the service a little bit. Seems GMRS has been taking over for quite a while, which is why some companies like Midland have all but given up on CB and moved onto making mobile GMRS products. For me, the interesting thing is that the reasons the FCC rejected digital voice on GMRS are the same reasons they initially denied Cobra's request to allow FM on CB. It fundamentally changes the nature of the service, it creates a compatibility issue between existing users and FM users, etc. They chose to mandate that AM is required on any FM-capable radios to ensure backwards compatibility. Using the same workaround, we could petition for digital voice on GMRS as long as digital radios are backwards compatible with analog on these channels so you can always talk to the analog people and hear the traffic on the channel. So for that, I'm very excited for the next round of interest in digital voice on GMRS. Seems a no-brainer now, we just need to file a well-organized petition for it with support from users and manufacturers.

The RG-8X cable cuts the power being fed to your antenna by half for the 50-foot length in use. The gain of the antenna makes up for the losses in the cable so the result is you are even power wise. From the info you have provided though, it appears you don't have any test equipment. The best place to start will be with a SWR/Power meter for UHF measurements. I would add to that a dummy load handling 50W at a minimum. The dummy load will provide a known value so you can see how well the SWR/Power meter is calibrated. Both items are available from radio shops selling radios and Amazon. While not a recommendation, many people use UHF meters from Surecom that provide the transmit frequency, power being sent, the amount of power reflected back because of impedance mismatch and the percent of power being fed to the antenna. These will tell you how well your antenna and/or radio is performing.

That sounds like an Ed Fong antenna. Quality product, just make sure to follow his instructions (including using the correct type of PVC, and not messing with the wound coil). My first thought is the cable. 50' of RG8X might have a fair bit of loss. For long runs, LMR-400 is a much better choice. To test, bring the antenna close to the radio, use a short cord (less than 6 feet), and see what the range is like. If you get equal (or better) range with the short cable, then the problem is either the cable, or interference along the cable's route.

A few things may be going on... Mostly I found I had to email them directly by tracking them down... The make a request is weak and they do not respond. Another issue is the are no longer active and you need to see if you hear traffic without the PL codes. And lastly they may have offered their repeater to other "in the beginning" and now only keep it for their family and friends and did not remove it for the list of repeaters. So let us know what you find out... I personally put my own repeater up as a private/family and few friends in neighborhood and did not list it... MacJack

Something like this @WyoJoe GMRS Road Ch. 20.mp4