Leaderboard

I have been saying this for 2 years. Every day its worse and worse. GMRS had a purpose and folks want to change it. I dont see folks screaming to add repeaters and P25 to MURS. Get over it and use GMRS for what it is.

From my experience as a not-very-interested amateur radio license holder, I observed an interesting phenomenon occur on the local ham radio scene, as digital modes such as C4FM (Yaesu System Fusion) and DMR began to appear. It absolutely killed the local ham radio scene. People either embraced the technology, or hated it, and in that process, people got angry with those who disagreed with them (think modern day politics in America). As such, there is little-to-no amateur radio activity on repeaters anymore, and amateur radio as we knew it, has got both feet firmly in the grave…in this neck of the woods. Dozens of repeaters go unused. Those who embraced the digital voice modes (or “the dark side” as many called it), started out on talkgroups with fairly large gatherings of hams. Over time, they would get the azz of one another, and break off into other talkgroups of smaller, more intimate groups (another way of saying, only those who can tolerate each other), because they realized they could just keep creating new talkgroups. Now there are hundreds, if not thousands, of talkgroups, where two or three hams talk, where they used to talk to large groups on their local analog repeater. Excellent use of bandwidth. It is interesting to see the discussion of DMR, or perhaps some other form of modulation, on GMRS, with it’s limited bandwidth, and no requirement to understand anything at all about radios. When asked to share spectrum space with analog and digital users, I can only imagine what will happen. My worthless and unsolicited opinion is…if you want to play with a DMR radio, get yourself over to amateur radio. All sorts of people struggling there with code plugs, color codes, time slots, etc. And these are people who have “passed” a test to demonstrate proficiency in radio operation. I think there is too much effort being placed in trying to turn GMRS into amateur radio. People want internet linking, wide coverage repeaters, nets, vanity call signs, ARES/RACES affiliations, digital voice modes. It all exists over on ham radio.

I am not sure about everywhere in the US, but in VA and FL, SKYWARN is phone, internet (email/text) and Amateur Radio. ARES does integrate FRS/GMRS into its responses, but it's very limited and we don't train for it on the regular bases. It's use in training (where I am) is very rare because we usually put them in the hands of SAR/USAR staff, VIP and command staff, etc., during actual emergencies when Ham radio folks are short staffed and we need an unlicensed service for them to use, that keeps them in touch with Hams to move traffic to where it needs to go. Not to sound mean, but if you are too busy to study for the test, chances are you won't have time to drill/practice or actually help when/where needed. And that is okay, BTW. To give you some incentive, my wife got her license when she was 12... and had to learn/demonstrate Morse Code. The grandchild of a friend of mine got their license this year at just age 7. I was super intimidated by it, but just took the online practice exams until I passed with a 100%, and then went and took the actual test. It was a lot easier than I thought and had myself freaked out for nothing. I highly recommend spending a little bit of time on it and getting your Tech license. BTW, I recently bought a VHF/UHF handheld Ham radio (which is all you need to get started) for $35. It can be as cheap or expensive as you want it to be. That is really the intent of GMRS. The service restrictions don't really lend to doing much more. Repeaters greatly expand range, but they are few in some places and none in others, they are privately owned in most cases and have restrictions on power, modulation and information types that make it so its not practical for many cases. That said, I know there are whole communities that are prone to wild fires, earthquakes, etc., that implemented GMRS networks to help the whole community and to empower the community to help themselves. You can always reach out to your local volunteer groups and see if there is anything like that around you.

That makes more sense. ?

The continuous carrier bit is confusing. One could interpret that as 100 percent duty cycle or would that be CW type communications using Morse code? I'm guessing it's the 100 percent duty cycle one. The interference part seems to be ignored. I can't see how how a remote doorbell- pager will monitor for channel activity without the incorporation of a BCL, busy channel lockout, function. Same with telemetry systems etc. I think these applications just TX in the blind and screw any other traffic that happens to be there. Anyway MURS, Multi Use Radio Service, is the garbage band for stuff nobody wants elsewhere on VHF.

The only gotcha there would be the interference clause: DMR, NXDN, P25 also aren't authorized emission types, which we already knew, but it also mentions continuous carriers?: Can you get away with it? Probably, after all it's "just" MURS, as was already mentioned it's already a catch-all for all sorts of interference causing applications.

The FCC rules allows all matter of stuff that's prohibited on GMRS. I don't doubt that some areas may see little use, but that doesn't alter what is authorized. https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-47/chapter-I/subchapter-D/part-95/subpart-J/section-95.2731 What is notable is I don't see any limitation on the duration of those permitted uses. That would imply they can be used at high duty cycles.

But Class A of the Citizens Radio Service did... GMRS is essentially a renaming of that "Class" system. The renaming took place in 1987... FRS is a mishmash promulgated by RatShack in 1994, originally using only the interstitial channels (and creating 467 interstitials). I no longer have the paper, but my original GMRS license (not labeled Class A) had the two frequency authorization. I'd have to dig up the Maxon radio to find which two...

Yes, DMR might make sense for MURS. It's already sort of a catch-all garbage service as it is with people using remote doorbells, wireless data logging devices etc. I doubt DMR would do much more to mess it up than all the other crap that's there now.

You have some valid points. I think the issue with going digital has more to do with improved voice quality than anything else. There is some possible range improvements, likely due to digital voice modes to maintain clear communications until you reach the range limit. As you pointed out the signals propagate the same regardless of mode. I suspect the attraction of digital voice for the average non-technical GMRS user is clarity of the audio signal under conditions where analog FM will sound like crap. It's a better user experience. The issue with how to configure the radio for digital mode(s) can be addressed by restricting the options. For example all compatible radios must use the same time slot, or likely both, the group ID can be fixed (All Call), leaving leaving just the color code as an option. Remember the EU has the dPMR446 license free service. The use of DMR isn't really the only choice. I wish people would get that out of their head and consider the other modes that might be much better, simpler, from a user's view point. There are other digital voice modes requiring less setup, such as the one I just mentioned. I have the programming software for the Kenwood TK-3701D, which is an EU license free analog/PMR446 radio, just to see what it looks like. See attached file for an example of the digital half of the radio memory setup. It's really not that complex, on a par with analog FM. Part of the issue with getting the FCC to consider digital voice mode(s) will be how to fit it into the existing GMRS service given it's current limitations. DMR might not be the best idea regardless of how "popular" it is. People are using it simply because it's readily available with somewhat affordable radios. As some others have pointed out it's already causing problems. Using a different digital voice mode with some sane rule changes that can be fixed IMHO.

DMR is, at the fundamental level, still FM radio. Yes, the way the signal degrades with range is better than analog FM, but the overall range is about the same. It is simply that the digital tends to maintain voice quality better than analog until the dropout point whereas analog quality degrades semi-linearly as the distance increases. The perception of range, all things being equal, appears better with digital. If there is any real valid reason to allow digital, in the case of DMR for example, it is the ability for a repeater to provide 2 radio channels (using two time slots) on a single frequency, of which two simultaneous, separate, conversations can take place at the same time. Basically doubling the available 'channels' This is true for subscriber units as well. All that said, it is unlikely the FCC will consider digital for GMRS anytime soon. One would think if that were the case, they would have done it with the last major revamp a couple of years back. Will/Could it happen, sure. But I wouldn't hold my breath. Even if the FCC were to do it, it brings up another, perhaps bigger issue that other posters have pointed out. There are many GMRS users now who struggle just to program their existing analog FM radios, others still who don't completely grasp the concept of basic repeater operation and things like CTCSS or DCS. I can say with a bit of authority that programming a DMR radio isn't something the average GMRS user is capable of doing, at least not without assistance, as it is many times more complicated than configuring analog FM radios. Compound that with proper usage of DMR. Also, things like who ensures that digital IDs are not duplicated? IMHO, adding digital to GMRS has many potential pitfalls, the least of which is the FCC granting permission to do it.

Certainly. He is just mentioning that many people want to make GMRS another version of HAM, part of that being the move towards DMR. And yes, it is true. Many view GMRS as the easier and study-free way to use radio, but HAM was created for the sole purpose of radio enthusiasm and interest.

Hypothetically if one didn’t use the amplifier there wouldn’t be the necessity of asking the question.

This got me curious. Some forward thinking ARES groups do include GMRS in their plans. It would be silly not to. If the goal is to communicate as widely as possible to those people who are affected by an emergency or those people who can help during an emergency you don’t turn up your nose because it’s not amateur radio. You use every means possible and you plan to succeed. https://www.aresd1.com/post/ares-district-1-deploys-to-hobart-for-simulated-emergency-test

No you cannot get a vanity callsign on GMRS. What you want is an amateur radio license. You can get a vanity callsign, you can meet new and interesting people on repeaters and talk about all sorts of interesting topics, as well as use many other bands and forms of modulation…SSB, digital, internet linking, etc. Get an amateur radio license. It costs the same as a GMRS license, and you can easily memorize the questions to the test, as tens of thousands have done so. Very easy.

This. GMRS is an analog service, with all legal hardware on the band putting out 12.5khz or 25khz FM modulation (technically SSB and AM would be allowed too, but nobody makes this). The problem with DMR is that it's disruptive to these kinds of radios - traditional analog PL's will often leak DMR through as they're triggered by the signal, and currently most DMR's radio transmit inhibit functions are set to listen to the presence of other digital signals only, in short even with the equivalent "BCL" enabled they'd walk all over analog traffic. DMR users have no way of knowing what non-DMR signals exist on frequency (not saying it's impossible to implement, it just doesn't exist). Using DMR on the interstitial channels might be a workable solution, maybe even at full power, as they're 12.5khz wide and would fit reasonably well between the main GMRS channels when considering true signal bandwith, but asking it to co-exist with analog repeater systems on the same channels is trouble. That's not to say that DMR is not more spectrum efficient, you have half the band width, and twice the time slots (which can also allow for single frequency full duplex repeaters), so it could effectively handle 4 times the traffic as a whole had it been what GMRS was based on, but that's not the case currently. The other stumbling block would be programming - lots of folks have trouble with understanding repeater PL's, let alone talk groups, time slots, DMR id's, color codes, transmit inhibits, roaming settings, and what not - this would need to be made more intuitive to users first, perhaps even standardized by industry, as getting it wrong can seriously mess up the usability of a repeater.

In the old days, a GMRS license only authorized two frequencies, and most radios only had a "A"/"B" toggle to select the channel. The channels had to be programmed by a shop in accordance with the license. Referring to the frequency (or, at least, the kHz section) would have been common practice as what one had in "A" might have been programmed as "B" on the other radio. And note how many repeaters name themselves with the kHz section... (I just looked at the repeater list, with no search criteria, and six of the first ten are named AAA 999 where the 999 is the kHz part of the frequency). (When the interstitials were introduced, some radios expanded the number of channels to include those -- the Maxon GMRS 210+3 used channels 1-7 for interstitials, channel 8 for the FCC defined emergency frequency ".675" [usable by any license for emergencies, general use only if it was one of the two authorized frequencies], and channel 9&10 were the programmable slot for license frequencies; 675 is the 6th of the 8 primary frequencies). Many modern radios allow one to NAME the channel slots. Using names makes the absolute numbering of the 2017 reorganization unnecessary. Especially if one has reason to use CTCSS codes as one could enter the same frequency in different slots each having their own specific tone configuration. The OP's imported list shows that -- having /named/ the first 22 slots as "FRS xx", and then using "GMRS xx" for the same frequencies in (W)FM (And using frequency in naming the default repeater slots). AS FOR THE OP: from the excerpt image, it appears that it loaded pure FRS -- NFM -- definitions first, then started with the GMRS (W)FM definitions. Unless one really needs the NFM mode, I'd just delete the FRS specific entries and move the others up to fill the space. The "preprogrammed" radios don't have the FRS/GMRS duplication, they are either FRS-only or GMRS-only.

Couldn't you just leave the CW ID blank when configuring the controller?

The chances of getting the FCC to grant more exclusive frequencies for GMRS are next to zero. We’re lucky they don’t take some away to use for Part 90 users. We’re far better off petitioning the FCC to allow digital voice modes on GMRS. The cheap FRS radios would stay the same, limited power, no repeater access and narrow band FM only. There is a thread I started on the topic 1 or 2 months back. In one of my posts there is an attached file outlining the idea.

Mine came with the tip already extended. Contact Smiley via email or phone, they were very helpful when I called. 5/8 wave at 465 is 1.26 feet. That is 15.12 inches. Your collapsed length appears correct. qsl.net has a calculator for 5/8th wave antennas.

The answer to your question is "NO" .. Weird that after so many words, the question still had not been answered.

Yes, I know 2 people that got 'bad' DB25G radios. IIRC they could not program them correctly but I dont remember exactly so I txt'd one of them to confirm. In both cases they sent them back and had them replaced with ones that actually work. This was a few months ago so I would hope/guess that they are no longer shipping bad units. Edit/Update: Turns out it was 3 people that got bad units, and the issue was as you described, not being able to additional repeater channels and also not being able to do a factory reset. All got replacement units that worked, but it was a PITA. Have not been able to confirm if bad units are still being shipped.