Leaderboard

I've fat fingered entries when building a code plug for a radio. Later testing it and noticed it wasn't working. Reloading the code plug in the programming software that's when I spotted the mistake. Who knows who got hammered when I was testing the radio out transmitting on the wrong frequency. I understand the above and still screwed up because I didn't double and triple check the entries. This is why, at least for GMRS, the radio needs to be certified, fixed frequencies, because it's easy to mess up. The more programmable it is the more potential for mistakes. When programming Part 90 radios there is a LOT of room for mistakes, even by people who know what they are doing.

@pcradio I believe that a high quality part 90 radio can be used for GMRS without causing any problems as long as it’s by someone who knows and follows the regulations regarding power, bandwidth, frequencies, etc. I’ve heard of (but I don’t have a copy) a letter from the FCC stating something similar. Same for ham radio. A part 90 radio may be used. That’s truly acceptable. Many people operate with type 90 radios, tuned for both amateur and personal radio service frequencies. They do so mostly discreetly.

People started telling me about this a few months ago and I thought they were full of it, but I finally saw the listing on Amazon... My biggest issue I see is the confusion it will cause when telling "some people" that you're using a UV-5R on GMRS - "some people" wont know if they should report you to the FCC or not. Rumor has it that a very popular and beloved YouTuber will be making a video about this in the coming days.

Congratulations, proof that if you ask enough different sources you’ll find one that reinforces your belief.

More than 20 years ago, I got involved in an FCC Auction & made an honest effort to get some VHF channels in my economic area. The economic area I was interested in went for over $2.5 million for what amounted to about 8 possible channel pairs. Part 22 channels from back in the IMTS days were gold. Most of them around my area are being used for linked DMR wide area systems. There's even still some wide area Paging on the old VHF Part 22 channels. Not sure how much availability there would be if the FCC protected incumbent operations.

Welcome, and let the spending begin!

I remember hearing an old timer story about the one time they got fined from the FCC - because they had a Part 22 transmitter that was BELOW the wattage specified on the license. The FCC had warned them, and they didn't take it seriously because... well, nobody ever heard of a fine for being below your allowed power. That story came about because we were brainstorming around at a dinner meeting during the early days of narrowbanding and refarming, and some of us saw the same opportunity for more available talkpaths in Part 22 if you did some creative channel splitting and re-use of offset frequencies. The old timer warned us that in Part 22, things didn't need to make sense but you did need to follow the letter of the law. Again, that was 20+ years ago and a different era with the FCC and enforcement actions.

Lots of it going on. I have not identified that one rule...maybe I will dig around. The Commission routinely grants licensees requests to split the channel down the middle and licenses them to separate entities. Presumably they have waived that particular restriction. G

Yes, @marcspaz, speedy recovery and friendly nurses!!!

During that FCC Auction 20+ years ago, I attended an FCC Seminar down in DC & got to sit in with a bunch of people talking with FCC staff attorneys regarding the Auction process. One of the things we learned was that the FCC was only allowed to auction spectrum if there was more than one competing application for the allocation. That was the reason the attorneys always suggested that people checked the "all" button on their application, as they wanted to make sure that every market had a potential competing application. You did not need to bid on all the markets you expressed interest in, but without a competing application, the auction process could not legally proceed. Not sure if it still works that way, or if the FCC convinced the legislature to amend the auction rules. You would think that the concept should be to put the spectrum to use - rather than to just maximize Federal revenue. Google 1997 PCS auction defaults if you want to read up on some FCC comedy.

Bingo...

The Baofeng UV-5G appears to be certified. FCC ID: 2AN62-UV5G I have had several Baofeng UV-5T radios and they work fine on ham. The early ones had low modulation and issues with tones above a certain frequency.

Welcome aboard @gaberelli

Reading this thread reminds me of this Just substitute FCC for Phone Cops

I cannot disagree completely. In general, most all of the amateur systems sound on the edge of garbally, shrill, or muffled (Brandmeister) Our GMRS DMR repeater can also sound this way, but it depends on the transmitting user's radio quality. The utility DMR systems sound just fine and the vast majority of users like it - even the older employees. After working on many DMR systems, my confident conclusion is: - DMR audio can become quite good depending on the manufacturers microphone selection, audio processing on both TX and RX sides; and - Using the the same radio manufacturer throughout the network; and - The tonality of the speakers voice (some voices sound better on DMR than others; its also biased against females) - The RX speakers make no difference. The best I ever heard was when a $1500 David-Clarke headset was used with an XPR7550 portable radio. Equal or better than a strong wideband analog signal - and I am quite picky. This configuration met all the above conditions, however.

We also have some idle ones in our area I contacted the FCC a month ago to see how one might licenses them. An attorney confirmed that an auction is required. And none are currently planned.

Totally agree. These remain like gold, but we have been using them for trunked control channels, and then combine them with Part 90 channels, where we cannot attain FB8 status. The Part 22 channels are wideband (like GMRS) and can support two DMR channels like I proposed on the original post. I am also experimenting with placing three DMR channels in one Part 22 (-6.25 kHz, Center, + 6.25 kHz), with geographic separation between any 6.25 kHz adjacent channels.

They're just option shopping. Looking for someone to validate what they know is wrong so they don't feel so guilty. Same thing when your kids say everyone else is doing it, until you remind them strongly they're not or else.

To me the digital speech modes sound like the speaker has a drunken slurred voice. Better processing might help some, but higher fidelity requires greater bandwidth.

Save your money and buy a quality radio.

Total GMRS noob here. Looking forward to learning from y'all.

While I don't have Win11, and don't have a justification at the moment to try connecting my unit (I suspect the cable alone won't trigger COM port) what I recall is that: 1) IF you've allowed Windows to install a Prolific driver for the cable, you'll likely have manually remove the driver and COM port from the device manager. 2) disconnect the cable 3) download an older Prolific driver and manually install it before connecting the cable. My understanding is that these cables do NOT use a Prolific chip -- they use a cheap knock-off that masquerades as a Prolific chip. Problem is that Prolific's modern drivers have code to detect the knock-off chips and won't run with them.

Welcome @WRXX896 to Mygmrs. 73’s

Or, spend $800 to $1000 and get a purpose built repeater with a decent receiver front end that won't desense, and cooling fans to boot. Public Service announcement: your "50 watts" won't perform any better than a properly configured 10 watt repeater when you are talking back in with 5 watt portables. Especially if you're talking through a cheap compact duplexer that's probably rated at 65 or 70 dB isolation (and that's when it's properly tuned).

Program your channel to transmit on 467.725 and receive on 462.725.

462 is always the output (your RX) and 467 is always the input (your TX). If you have a 'real' GMRS radio you dont need to worry about that, you just pick the correct repeater 'channel', which will already have the tx and rx setup.

QFT! Talk with a frequency Coordinator, tell them that you want to put up your own Private Carrier system for "Part 90 eligibles" and license your DMR system as FB6 repeaters. Yes, it will cost you more than $35 up front, but now you have the keys to your DMR kingdom, and you can DMR to your heart's content, because every user on your FB6/M06 system now runs under your fancy Private Carrier license. You can (but don't have to) even collect user fees for the use of your system.

Yet I never said I could squeeze in four . Strangely, I think we are in agreement here, however. Just one example. There channels in the VHF and UHF commercial bands remain 25 kHz wide like GMRS (see 152.72 MHz, 454.350 MHz, etc.). These are under FCC Part 22, not Part 90. Within the 454.350 channel we placed one DMR signal 6.25 kHz below and one 6.25 kHz above the center at 454.350. So that provides for four simultaneous conversation paths (four slots). I am currently experimenting with placing a third DMR signal centered on 454.350 MHz, but geographically separated from the other two to limit adjacent channel interference. So far this is working great as long as the separation is adequate.

Hello Rich, I never knew this is a one person operation. Now that I know that I am glad I am a supporting member as I can't imagine how hard it is to keep up with all the questions, updates, upgrades and just keeping things running. I am thankful for the work you have been doing. I too would volunteer to help when I can, if I can. I guess I would need to know what you need help with. It would have to be things that do not require a work like schedule. But I could figure out days or times I could work on stuff. Again thank you, Royce

Let me say thank you for all you do. I became a premium member shortly after joining because personally I felt like I was stealing from you guys with as much resources you have on here. All the help and info I have received on this site and then even being able to start a page for my state has been great. We have some really good guys up here in Alaska and they are really getting us caught up with the rest of the states which I am so grateful for. I don't mind volunteering and helping you with whatever you need, but I don't know how much help I can be still being so new to radios, but I'm always willing to help others if I can. Thank you again sir!