Leaderboard

If it was a cable problem, I'd expect problems in both directions. Same for an antenna problem. However, a problem at the cable/antenna connection could result in a dead antenna, and high SWR putting a radiating signal on the OUTSIDE of the coax. (I managed to open squelch on a D-Star repeater located a few miles south of me using an Icom ID52 -- that was still set for SLO [100mW -- less than the GMRS/FRS 500mW channels]. So if you had a radiating coax it may still have put out enough signal to be heard, but not receive.) My first approach -- start with an antenna analyzer that covers UHF range. And you probably won't like this -- start at the antenna itself, using something like a 1-3 foot coax from analyzer to antenna. Verify antenna SWR/resonance in the 462Mhz end (preferably your actual repeater output frequency; you aren't going to get both 462 and 467MHz to be resonant, and somewhat high SWR on the 467 receive shouldn't be deadly unless by some chance it is really obscene [historical meaning: out of sight ? ]). If the antenna checks out, and with coax disconnected at both ends [disconnect ground end before you climb the tower, so you can do this while on the tower and have that end disconnected for the antenna test -- use the analyzer to determine open-ended cable length ("distance to fault" or similar check; you will need to know the cable velocity factor to compute electrical length vs physical length). If cable (fault) length is appropriate for the real cable -- no open or shorted fault in the middle -- reconnect cable to antenna and go back to ground level. Recheck SWR/resonance of the cable&antenna link. You might want to compute how many wavelengths of your target frequency fit the (electrical) length of the coax -- there can be "weird" behavior at certain multiples of quarter or half wave where SWR looks great (or terrible) because of interaction of reflected wave with forward wave. I'd have to dig up my ARRL handbooks to find the exact relationship. Note: while I refer to SWR, actual Forward and Reflected power levels may be more indicative along with the ratio.

I mostly hear net check-ins Sunday afternoons and evenings. That is a lower-traffic time, anyway, I think. If they're going to do their check-ins and verify their equipment and skills are up to date, I see no reason to discourage that use. It is neither an improper use, nor something I have any reason to be annoyed about. Net check-ins are certainly less annoying than the after-school blister-pack kiddies filling up a channel with screeches, feedback, and relentless roger beeps. Can't do anything about them either, and again, it's not my place to issue edicts from atop my high horse. It would be great if the blister-pack kiddies could stick to 500mw channels, but there's no restriction or governing authority guidance that says they must do so. The nets are a welcome bit of sanity. I don't mind listening in and trying to figure out where they're transmitting from.

How did the other user have their radio set up to respond to you? Normal function on a repeater channel is that the portable would listen on 462.xxx, but transmit on 467.xxx If you go to Simplex, your portable is now transmitting and receiving on 462.xxx Unless the other user switched their radio to simplex also - they would still be transmitting on 467.xxx and of course your portable that's listening on 462.xxx would not hear them. As Sshannon mentioned above - there aren't many scenarios where an antenna line would be passing transmit, but blocking receive. I'd put money on the distant user still transmitting on the high side of the split at 467.xxx

Nets are good for checking your radios, that's about it. I like to use them to check my equipment from time to time when it comes to operating through a repeater to make sure its still working seeing as how I talk very little on radio these days. I like to keep things in check just to make sure its still working should I need it in an emergency.

@MichaelLAX @WRPS580 First, @MichaelLAX, reviewers typically didn't provide details whether their radio and the target radio were both set to wide band. However, @WRPS580 did mention of the two GM-30 radios he has, both were the same firmware version, same programming, and same bandwidth (wide/narrow). So without knowing if he was using his two radios for a transmission test to each other or if he used his radios separately to talk to a different radio, at least the parameters of his two radios were the same. To be fair to Radioddity, reports of low audio are inconclusive. Maybe the majority occurred if a GM-30 that was in narrowband tried talking to another GMRS radio that was set to wideband. Or if there was a problem early in the GM-30's release, perhaps Radioddity fixed it, possibly quietly. There have been quite a few positive reviews of this radio stating there was no low audio issue. Therefore, the first response by @MichaelLAX to this post offers good advice. If purchasing a GM-30, when asking for radio checks, explicitly ask how the tx audio sounds. This is actually a good thing to ask when getting early radio checks for any radio purchase you make. And as Michael stated, if the GM-30 (or any newly purchased radio) exhibits low tx audio, be prepared to return it within the exchange/warranty interval. Thanks again for everyone's comments. In Summary 1. Plenty of people say this radio is good and does not have low tx audio. 2. As with any new radio, ask for radio checks and explicitly ask how the tx audio is. 3. If there is a low tx or other issue, exchange the radio within the exchange/warranty window.

Yes

That's really sad. Sounds like a great group of guys. If someone had the funds and skill to set up a repeater there really isn't much they could do to stop you.

Hey there everyone, just wanted to stop in and say hey. Like the Title says I'm new to GMRS. Just got my license and a handheld and live near the linglestown (351) repeater. My call sign is WRTJ860 if any in the area wants to chat, my radio is usually on I'm still trying to figure this all out, especially reprograming of the radio to my liking which is an older Baofeng 82HP to learn on. i will take any and all advice and look forward to meeting and talking to whomever i meet, Ron

Make sense. I am moving the other way away from the MXTs for radios that allow more. Altho the wife's TJ still running the MXT115 Re-did the wife's TJ mount. Found a LED third brake light for the TJ at the swapmeet today. Got home installed and the ball started rolling on a new mount, inspired from an earlier post.

I think you made a pretty good choice.

Not only that but instead of "stale" repeaters they can be community confirmed to be working which might filter out some of the repeaters that are listed but do not exist.

Just remember, that as predicted in the proclamation video, "some people" will always and forever spew reasons why Ch19 (any channel, actually) is not "the right choice", and will argue about it as they have for years, accomplishing nothing.. Those people are not invited to join with the rest of us normal people on Ch19.. They can go talk to themselves on some other channel.. My name is Queen Randy and I approve this message.