Leaderboard

If there was a suggested or official GMRS travel channel, I would use it. I've also considered getting my own window decals that essentially say something like "GMRS - CH20" to let other's know what channel I'm monitoring, call sign optional. I just recently made a two day turnaround, 350 miles each way, and had the radio on scan. I picked up some repeater chatter, a little car to car chatter, and in one city there was a road crew using a channel (I'm assuming on FRS) to direct traffic flow. Not one person chimed in and said "Break for that good looking guy in the pickup truck", so I was a bit disappointed in that respect. Perhaps if I had those decals the results would be different. ? Jokes aside, I know that many aren't too keen on seeing GMRS go to the wild side like CB did back in the 70's. I wouldn't want that either but it would be nice to be able to reach out to get a traffic report or local information during the trip and hey, if you were really bored then just have a friendly chat on a side channel. Actually I don't believe two way radio will hit the frenzy like CB did years ago mainly because of mobile phones. Most folks are self absorbed with their phone and that's as far as they want to take it. So if the GMRS community ever gets organized enough to have an official travel channel then I'll roll with it and if MyGMRS wants to crank out some decals then I'd be glad to pitch in on that too. My 2¢

Again, your opinion, but that was the focus of my original question to @BoxCarsince he was so forceful in his comment, twice: is there a rule out there that tells us which way to go? Oh, please educate us as to what is "true GMRS chat" so that we can be a member of your "club!" Tell us how you really feel! ? But not off topic enough to keep you from posting your thoughts... twice! But, "off topic" REALLY?!? I have reviewed this thread twice now. It went on and on about a relatively simple issue: whether or not a GMRS repeater owner has the right to require users to have the owner's permission. After it beat that issue to death; about 14 months later, a fresh group of members beat it to death, again! Yet in all those 4 and 1/2 pages of posts, no one even suggested a solution to the problem!?! It seems to me you can't have it both ways: if you have the right to give permission to those who use your repeater, you can't disclaim liability for how they use it! But that is just my opinion. Then Dan posited: To which @BoxCarreplied: @DDinMCMI, Dan, came back with some FCC Part 95 quotes to which @BoxCarrepeated his position again: And then Dan capitulated, apparently because @BoxCarsaid it twice: But saying it twice, with verve even, did not satisfy my curiosity, so I asked @BoxCarto cite the basis of his statements, which he is apparently unable or unwilling to do. Now just because something is rare does not mean we should not plan for it. For example I have been purchasing earthquake insurance which some people would say is a waste of money since 1995. I will bet dollars to donuts that @OffRoaderX, being the prudent businessman that he is, checked with his insurance agent and made sure that his homeowners liability policy covers the repeater that he installed at his home. Your mileage, as a repeater owner, may differ! OK: I hope you feel better now! ?

If it comes up often then it sure sounds like there might be a need for one. DownEastNC sits back and waits on lecture about how GMRS is supposed to be for personal communications

I have what may be a similar issue, but I have intermittent drop outs of audio and RF output. I have tried wiggling the mic plug in the jack, and then I wedged it into place, and that may help...it is had to tell since the problem is intermittent, BTWR said they were sending a replacement mic incase a loose wire/contact is causing the problem. That was about one month ago, and I am still waiting for the mic. I really like the radio otherwise.

WoW: what an insult that is to @kb2ztxand a self-referencing statement, too! ?

I miss the good knowledgeable people from the past too. Too bad they do not visit anymore.

Hello! Thank you to everyone for there input! I have the flashcode here 104270-001000-1 and it's a model 1.5. If I'm not mistaken, it's a UHF/VHF unit so it should be able to work right? Plus I can have some frequencies for scanning like weather and railroad. I only have intentions and desires for analog at the moment until I can work my way up to an Amateur Radio license.

So we are focusing on something that rarely happens and there is no real rule out there to tell us which way to go. Sadly we spend more time talking about non compliant CCR radios and every other topic on this forum than true GMRS chat. There used to be a few good guys on here that were not only knowledgeable but involved heavily in GMRS as well as other services. On a similar topic our threads appear to drift off topic alot.... Done ranting. I'll go play on P25 LMR now...

Another opinion of what you think the law should be, which, of course, you are entitled to have. I am only aware of two areas of broad immunity in the laws of the United States: 1) Section 230 of the Communications and Decency Act that basically gives Internet providers immunity from the content posted by others on Internet websites hosted by those providers; and 2) The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act which shields gun manufacturers and dealers from most civil litigation. But @Boxcar made the broad assertion that: And I would like to see exactly where @BoxCar gets his information to base his statement or perhaps an admission on his part that, like @kirk5056 and @kb2ztx, it is only his opinion or hope of what the law should be. This website has a high regard by its readers of posting information that is factually correct or of a poster's opinion, and we should continue to stand behind that reputation. A simple request on my part.

I'll jump on this topic against better judgement. If someone gets on my repeater without permission and is stupid its on them. If i gave them permission i take responsibility. There is no keeping idiots off a repeater if they want to no matter what we do. Just take it with a grain of salt. Back to reqular programming.

No wideband key needed for APX line.

Nope, Frank himself! Sent from my SM-T350 using Tapatalk

This will be for an EXV-534. I had an eBay seller drop me an offer at $40 so I figured that is a good price...snagged it up. I will try to use my USB cable that has worked for my VX231 and VX261s...if that doesn't work I guess I will be looking into a FIF

Yes - The XS20G is an SOC (not SuperHet) - Source: The owner of the only XS20G authorized dealership in the United States - he also designed/spec'd the radio for manufacturing. I too have a KG905G (a few), KG-935G (several), KG-805G (a couple), multiple KG-1000Gs, and some KG-UV9s... and I can tell NO difference between the XS20G or 935G (both SOC) and all the other Superhet radios - they all receive the same, from everything I can see/hear and from reports from human ears, they transmit the same - the signal sensitivity , although maybe different on a scope - i am not able to perceive any difference.. and the squelch,as best as I can tell, are the same.. ...However... i CAN tell a (HUGE) difference in the $30-$50 SOC radios (Retevis, BoofWang, etc) and any of the Wouxun SOC or SuperHet radios - even the BTech 50X1 - huge difference in receive sensitivity and even bigger difference in squelch operation.

I don’t know if I would worry about the radio outputting more that 2 watts. Given the gain figure I’ve read about for the typical VHF rubber duck antenna of negative 5db, a factor of 0.32, a 5 watt radio would only be radiating about 1.6 watts anyway. And, of course, using an external high gain VHF vertical the ERP could be even higher.

Press and hold the ‘Exit’ key until the lock icon appears. Press and hold again until the lock icon disappears. Michael WRHS965 KE8PLM

In my continued understanding of the rules, Yes. If a repeater is used solely for communication by the owner and others covered by the owner’s license, my understanding continues to be that it does not need to ID. At the moment it switches from owner’s family communications to use by members of the public/different license then it is suppose to ID. Michael WRHS965 KE8PLM

If a tree falls in the woods, does it make a sound? If the FCC writes a regulation that it never enforces, does it even matter? If someone wins an argument on the internet, does anyone care?

Yes Dan, that's exactly what I'm saying. A repeater owner has no responsibility for traffic across the repeater unless they specifically generate the input traffic. Access codes do not imply control as there is no operator at the station's controls. If repeater owners were held liable for illegal or improper traffic there wouldn't be any repeaters because of liability issues.

One of my high school shop instructors always had a come back when we tried to push things. He would say "Just because your speedometer says 100 mph doesn't mean you can go that fast"