WRYC373

I do actually travel. Idaho isn't that far away and parts are above Line A. Also like I said I know people who this issue does affect who had questions about it. I investigated a little and saw the document @SteveShannon linked to which references the "above 25MHz treaty" which originally establishes the Radio Border lines. The 2 specific GMRS frequency pairs are kind of orphans created by 60 years of rule making by 2 countries somewhat independently. And while in effect the prohibition no longer serves the purpose it once did. There is verbiage in that treaty about shared services and it alludes to one party changed the use/restriction of frequencies the other may as well. So it's possible the FCC is internally looking at that specifically. But yes it is likely it will be years before we see any potential changes. It was kinda a cool look for me into how regulations change and develop. I deal with interpreting regulations for a living and I find it interesting to talk to different regulatory bodies on how they write and interpret regulations. And that can be especially difficult when the world changes faster than regulations can.

It came up during discussions of people I know who live above Line A who asked me and so I asked the FCC. I also was curious and I read through a couple of related treaties and regulations on the origin of those lines. Its relatively interesting. It got to the point where I was like I really want to see the code reference here. It had nothing to do with questioning the rule more to do with where does this rule still live.

Wrong quote

I sent an email recently asking for the basis of the line a restriction. Not due to my doubting of its validity but from curiosity due to Canada now using the frequencies listed as prohibited for their GMRS service and to see if the fcc had plans or if it was just a relic on the license. Dear FCC OMR, I am inquiring as to a discrepancy in the license provided for General Mobile Radio Service, Title 47 Part 95 Subpart E. Line A is mentioned on the license issued for GMRS prohibiting certain frequencies and I am curious as to the current code reference for that text as quoted: "Exception: Licensees who operate North of Line A and East of Line C may not operate on channels 462.650 MHZ, 467.650 MHZ, 462.700 MHZ and 467.700 MHZ unless your previous license authorized such operations." I was unable to find any code in the current eCFR Title 47 Part 95 that this exception refers to. Although I am aware of similar restrictions existing in Part 97 and Part 90 regarding other radio services but neither of those contain code that reflects a range that includes the frequencies referred to in the GMRS license restriction. Is there a current code reference that could be provided for that restriction? " I got a very nice email from the FCC in response. "Good Afternoon, This email is in response to your inquiry below. When you applied for your GMRS license in the Universal Licensing System (ULS), the application process required that you certify that you would not use the channels below when operating above Line A or East of Line C (see the snippet below from the reference copy of your application). This requirement was originally put in place due to incompatible uses in Canada. 95.309 provides that the operator of a personal radio service station may be subject to operating restrictions if the station is to be operated in certain locations described in the rules. We are evaluating if this restriction is still necessary based on Canada’s current usage of the channels. With that said, your license is currently conditioned to restrict use of these channels North of Line A and East of Line C so you may not operate on the channels in these areas as long as your license is conditioned with this restriction. I hope that this helpful Joshua Smith Assistant Division Chief Mobility Division Wireless Telecommunications Bureau " I think the important part here is that they are reviewing the current restrictions. Which gives me hope for a potential laxing of that rule. But for now Line A/C restrictions remain.

In response to this i think its fun to remember the history of our frequencies. GMRS came first as a solution for family sized businesses needing LMR like capabilities in the 60s allowing 2 pairs per license and it made sense to put it in the relatively unused at the time UHF portion of LMR/EMCOM. Then in the 70s power was increased to 50W and the pair rule abandoned and in the 80s business license issuing was suspended. Note many radios of this era were either just Part90 or dual Part90/95e. And almost no Part95e repeaters existed to my knowledge. Then FRS came around and thus was born a simple small easy to use solution for most American's radio needs supplanting finnicky CB HTs. Then hybrid FRS/GMRS radios came out from Motorola and other radio manufacturers and really made a mess of things until the 2017 ruling that opened the final can of worms. In short GMRS has always been in a weird spot.

@dosw I have actually hit that Ogden repeater during inversion from Utah County.

The best GMRS radio is the one that fits your needs. There are so many decent GMRS radios now. And so many companies are investing R&D into GMRS and Ham radios currently its great so look up specs and watch some reviews and then decide. Also remember if you can stand a little to a lot of nonsense used UHF Part 90 HTs are often an amazing value just ensure if you buy one it comes with a charger and battery and its software is available.

So basically from reading posts here and watching the interview again the individual from the FCC likely was not in a direct enforcement position. They then sent an email to their buddy warning him of enforcement action "soon to come" then asked for personal identifying information of users of a system without a court order or even likely approval from their boss/supervisor. This is usually called misfeasance or malfeasance depending on their job duties. This is not how enforcement officers/agents are trained to handle this type of situation at other agencies and likely violates internal policy for the FCC. So all in all great job everyone.

If anyone ever gives me GMRS QSO card I promise to hang it on the refrigerator.

Whether you are looking for a new Part 90 radio or want to "upgrade" to a superhet radio may I introduce the Vertex (Yaesu) VX-231. It comes in 3 freq ranges so ensure you get the one that covers GMRS. And its like 40$ on ebay used. The good It has amazing sound properties for a 40$ ebay radio. Quality Yaesu earpieces are easy to find but pricier than K-type connectors. Very easy to use with 2 programmable buttons and 1 dial for channels. Programming cable is cheap and the program can be easily found CE99 is what you want. Can be narrowband or wideband (change system clock to 2010 to prevent issues). Programming software works on modern Windows systems. Comes with a good antenna and the radio is rated for 5W. Repeater capable and supports CTCSS and DCS tones. The bad Batteries are harder to find and the chargers can be annoying to match. Uses Standard SMA-F antenna connectors not SMA-M so your GMRS antennas likely wont fit. The ugly No on screen display so you gotta memorize each channel. No on the go programming but this is normal for a Part 90 radio. These are very simple to use radios and Ive used them kayaking before without issues and have a 2M ham band one that has been through the ringer and still works well.

I think digital is coming I know midland has been bothering the FCC for it for a good amount of time. It is just whether they budge. Midland wants to do some sort of DMR like system for their radios ive seen the filings a few times but I cant remember if the FCC approved any I will have to go dig again.

If repeater access is a big issue for you then I would put up my own, or if cost prohibitive I would at least setup a high antenna and base station.

He looked like he was staring straight into my soul.

On a technical level data can be sent through any GMRS radio provided you own a smart phone or a computer For example APRSDROID (which is free if you download it from their website and build it vs paying the appstore version) will work if you're in simplex receiving range and you can decode it with any other radio and phone. It obviously wont work like ham APRS. I am not saying its allowed by the FCC but I can assure you it would work as 2 phones set up to act as APRS clients in hearing range of each other will encode and decode the data. The cable that allows you to turn any android phone into a digital encoder and to do this with any K-type radio is 2$ on Aliexpress. I use mine in my car for road trips so people can track me on aprs.fi and it works very well with my cheap motorola phone and a baofeng connected to my car antenna.

RT95 is also a Part97 it was sold as a GMRS radio along with the similar AT-778UV but neither were actually part 95 certified. The AT-779UV is the same as the DB20G but with a part97 cert instead of the Part 95.

Like i said my ideas were not going to happen for a variety of reasons. The situation will not change until the FCC changes the rules.

You may petition the FCC and I support your Civic powers to do so. The issue is where would the FCC pull frequencies from. GMRS is smack dab in the middle of the LMR(PART 90) allocations. 35$ users are not going to convince the FCC to move paid LMR Freqs from businesses to GMRS. GMRS is also not narrowbanded like UHF LMR. Meaning one repeater pair is potentially taking a lot of frequencies away from LMR. LMR is also regionally coordinated as ham radio is meaning there is a band coordinator per region that would need to be involved.

Repeater linking is such a big topic because of the limited channels and lack of FCC guidance. There needs to be a compromise between repeater linkages and the need for local comms. I have some ideas to prevent stepping on each other but all of them would need buy in from repeater owners both of the linked and unlinked varieties. Anything I say below is my personal dumb opinion and should be regarded as such. Restricting a single repeater pair for linkage. Example: the pair 462.675 / 467.675 could be the only pair allowed to be on a linked system. All other pairs should be kept free of linked repeater systems. This would mean that no other repeater pair should be used for linking and would lessen the issue where every repeater pair in a geographic area is now "hogged" by one linked system. And if you tuned to this repeater pair you could assume/hope that its the link system you are reaching. But would require special planning in where to place linked repeaters. 2 All linked repeater systems ID with the name of the repeater linkage system in addition to the call sign. Example: "*Repeater Call sign* LINK SYSTEM CENTRAL VA". This would allow someone to know that there is a linked repeater on that frequency and it is at least in receiving range. Use the same set of privacy tones for linked systems obviously this doesn't actually solve a lot of the issue but may mitigate it somewhat. I know none of this will happen but even one of these being implemented in my opinion would relieve at least some of the issues repeater linkages cause currently.

@WSAH786 I know you said you didn't want ham license but if you miss the conversations from days of CB I am going to recommend it. I am not going to say "The test is easy or whatever" but i think you may enjoy the end result of a General Ham License more than you are currently getting out of GMRS and there is no longer a morse code requirement for the ham test. You can use ham radio however you want within the law and a lot of people have little impromptu group chats like you are describing. I say all of this as someone who uses GMRS much more than my Ham license mainly due to my family being covered under my GMRS license.

If you have line of sight to the repeater then you should be good. If you don't and when you moved down the road you do then that explains it. Look on google earth if you know where the repeater is and see if theres any industrial stuff between you and it. My guess now that you say moving away fixed it. Is that something is generating interference between you and the repeater. So id draw a line between you and the repeater and see what's there.

Blessed may he be who gave the FCC another 35$ to be told "no thou shalt not!".

Some theories some may be wrong: Street lamps/house lamps causing interference Tropospheric Ducting or Radiating Inversion causing far away signals to interfere Heavy night fogs. The repeater is solar powered only and the battery is on it's last legs. (If no one can talk to each other at night and it's not just you).

Sorry my first reply was more negative than I meant it to be. As @WRXP381 pointed out there may be repeaters near you a quick glance seems that there are many in your area. https://mygmrs.com/repeaters

Do you know other people with GMRS licenses or even FRS radios? GMRS is like a Tequila Mixer its bring your own fun. If you bought a GMRS HT hoping to make contacts or join a club/ learn the depths of radio you may be a little disappointed. I'm not going to discourage you because lots of people do use it that way and if that works for them then more the merrier.

Try searching your Callsign on mygmrs.com not the forum does it popup? If not wait for it to. If it does then try to resign up?