Leaderboard

3 pages of arguing over a control station, fixed station....yet we help guys use non certified radios for use......im baffled...

This reminded me one of my own Garmin Rino units, and the field repairs many of us did when the antennas did come off in the field (using them in Afghanistan to keep track of team members, with the caveat that location polling was turned off/radio was turned off when we did not want to be sending data). this was a check and balance to the AN/PSM-11 GPS before the newer DAGR series came out. Many Garmin Rino's that had broken antennas, 120 and 530 models, often ended up with a retrofitted longer antenna. In my case, I just jammed the rubber cover with black Permatex and sealed it back up. Then when the rubber itself broke, it got the heat shrink with polyolefin sealant fix. Part of the failure on these is that many of us pulled the radios out of a molle case by its radio antenna, so the cover would pull off eventually. Do not pull radios out of pouches by the antenna. Somewhere online someone may have posted a Garmin Rino with a longer antenna fitted, but I could not find one myself. Better than throwing the unit away and new models come so fast support from Garmin often ends after 2-3 years.

Please disregard. Found it on the seller's website.

I read something about cheap knockoffs before buying. I didn't want to order from China but from a reputable dealer. So I ordered mine (NanoVNA-H4) for around $100 shipped from R&L Electronics and it came in 3 days. Fair price from a highly rated dealer. I did attempt to pull a SWR sweep on a Nagoya NA-771G HT antenna but trying to test a HT antenna on a NanoVNA is close to impossible from what I've gathered on internet. It's hard to compensate for the ground plane of the radio itself since its not attached to the radio. I did a SWR sweep with a 6 inch jumper and holding the antenna at the connector in my hand and pulled a SWR of around 3.0 across the band. If I just let it dangle from the jumper it was 6.0 to 8.0! For the price, its a neat tool to play with for external antennas, but for HT antennas it's kinda useless. But then again, I've only had it for a day.

I see I got some of that wrong, not enough coffee this morning. I was trying to sort it out before asking if I got it right so not to waste anyones time. No apologies nessasary. I thank you for taking the time and effort to set me straight. I don't think you made this more complex than it needs to be, we can give that credit to the FCC.

What crap. First there was a design in the USA that was open source. The some other people in the USA improved that design. Then a guy in Japan improved that design. Then a guy in China took that design and created a commercial product but he also made the software and hardware open source. However they tried to claim both proprietary design while taking advantage of improvements made by users. Other companies have taken that design and modified it, sometimes for the better and sometimes not, but to claim that everyone else is somehow violating their original design is an exaggeration. Casting aspersions by speculating that the “clones” could be constructed of lower quality components is simply innuendo.

Correct Well, FCC doesn't number GMRS channels, but they do number FRS channels (Subpart B - FRS - paragraph 95.563). Obviously manufacturers have chosen numbers for the GMRS channels. Wikipedia identifies them as well, but nothing I have found in FCC regs identify GMRS channels by any numbers other than those used for FRS. FRS Channels 1-7 are the 462 MHz GMRS Interstitial channels. Of GMRS stations, only mobile, hand-held portable, and base stations may transmit on these channels and only at 5 watts or less ERP. FRS channels 8-14 are the 467 MHz GMRS Interstitial channels. Only hand-held portable GMRS stations may transmit on these seven channels and at no more than 0.5 watts ERP. FRS channels 15-22 are the 462 MHz GMRS main channels. Of GMRS stations, only mobile, hand-held portable, repeater, base and fixed stations may transmit on these channels. Fixed stations must not exceed 15 watts on any channels where they are allowed to transmit. Mobile, repeater, and base stations are allowed up to 50 watts. The only numbers that are left are 23-30, so those might be the right numbers to use for the 467 MHz main channels, but I don't want to assume. Only mobile, hand-held portable, control, and fixed stations may transmit on these eight channels, but for different purposes: Mobile, hand-held portable, and control stations may use these channels to communicate through a repeater or for brief test transmissions. Fixed stations may only use these channels to directly transmit to other fixed stations. I confess this fascinates me because it certainly makes it technically feasible to construct a full duplex communications network with one fixed station transmitting on a 462 main channel and the other transmitting on a 467 main channel. I apologize if I am making this more complex than it should be. I have no idea why FCC has defined these different types of stations.

So. If I understand this all correctly you have two repeaters. One is made up two KG1000s and the other is an RT97. The KG repeater is not receiving the same signals that the RT97 can receive. If the antenna and feedline are the same between the two, and in the same location, than that indicates there is a problem with either the duplexer or the receiver of your KG repeater. We can start with simple problems starting with the squelch levels of the receiver making sure they aren't set too high. Try swapping the KG's around to see if one works better than the other at receiving. If that makes no change take a look at the duplexer or take it somewhere to have it looked at to ensure it is tuned correctly.

In the case of my OCFD, it was pretty much required. On 20m the uncontrolled compliance distance is 7.5 feet. That's almost the distance between my house and neighbor's -- and they have a two story which puts the upstairs bed-rooms right at the height of my antenna. Granted, there is another 4-5 feet of paracord from mast to end of antenna. On 10m the distance is 17 feet (FM); on 6m the compliance distance is a whopping 25 feet! (Hmm, I may need to update my evaluation report -- my summary lists 6m compliance at 16.5 feet).

Radioddity CPS software only works in Windows and not on a Mac unless you are using Windows in emulation on that Mac.

Mostly that’s a convenient way to view it, but there are some fine details that differ. Base stations may communicate with both base stations or mobile stations. Base stations may not communicate on the any of the 467 frequencies, whereas fixed stations may communicate with each other on the 467 main channels.

No reason to apologize. These regulations could have been written more clearly. That’s the reason I put the definition and all of the regulations in Part 95 that mention Fixed Stations into a single document. I’ve considered making a matrix but I could get messy.

Technically you can, but the definition limits it only to communicating with other fixed stations.

That is a confusing statement. Why couldn't you talk with a portable station from a fixed stations?

The Garmins are definitely GMRS, putting out five watts. For GMRS, paragraph 95.1787(a)(4) says that GMRS hand-held portables capable of sending digital data must have non-removable antennas.

The SPECIFIC equipment that you need to check a duplexer is a tracking generator and spectrum analyzer. And the knowledge on how to run it. You can also use a VNA including those cheap little ones but they are not going to be as accurate as a better quality piece of equipment. Now there are other ways of doing it that don't involve as much expensive gear. A GOOD watt meter can get you close on the pass. You would place the watt meter in the line BEFORE the duplexer and then connect a dummy load (not an antenna) to the antenna port on the duplexer. Transmit and check your forward and reflected power. If you have more than 1 or 2 watts of reflect, the duplexer is probably not working or tuned right. Then place the watt meter between the duplexer and dummy load. You are looking for LESS than 2 dB of loss. So if the radio is doing 10 watts, expect 7 to 8 watts out. If you are getting 6 or less, then again there is an issue. Now for the RECEIVE side. Program the radio to transmit on the INPUT frequency of the repeater. Connect it to the HIGH side of the duplexer and do the same test. Again you are looking for 2dB or less of loss. At NO POINT should you try transmitting the wrong frequency through the duplexer. The reflect from doing so is higher than having an open coax and WILL blow the finals in the radio you are using to test. And you are also advised to turn the power down on the radio to 10 watts if your watt meter has a setting that it's close to full deflection at that power level. But the lowest setting creating the greatest deflection on the meter is the way to go with this. DON'T try tuning the duplexer with this test method. Doing it wrong will tune the notch across the transmit frequency and again, blow the radio.

Got the RT97s linked with the correct audio settings with the RIM-Lite in simpleusb.conf carrierfrom = usbinvert ctcssfrom = no I had them both usbinvert, this was incorrect I also turned off a couple of courtesy tones within rpt.conf unlinkedct linkunkeyct Here are a few configs and commands I use often, I had bookmarks to multiple posts from here and this should cover most of your basic needs. sudo nano /etc/asterisk/simpleusb.conf sudo simpleusb-tune-menu sudo nano /etc/asterisk/rpt.conf sudo shutdown -r now sudo service asterisk restart sudo nano /etc/asterisk/usbradio.conf Helpful resources I bookmarked (with some being redundant) when I was researching; perhaps it will help someone save time. https://onnocenter.or.id/wiki/index.php/Asterisk_RoIP:_usbradio.conf https://www.parkerradio.org/community/projects/allstar-node-from-motorola-cdm-1250-radio/ https://wiki.allstarlink.org/wiki/Beginners_Guide https://wiki.allstarlink.org/wiki/Rpt.conf https://forums.mygmrs.com/topic/3739-noob-cheat-sheet-for-node-programing/#comment-37327 https://forums.mygmrs.com/topic/3793-new-node-set-up/ https://youtu.be/1Um4kb_swDo

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.