Jump to content

JLeikhim

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    161

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    10

 Content Type 

Posts posted by JLeikhim

  1. Midland MXT500

    in Equipment Reviews

    Posted

    Their website is kind of unhelpful. I've been eyeing some of their LMR gear, and in digging there's a lot of their LMR stuff that exists in their website still, with little to no leads as to whether it's current product or not. They do still appear to have some LMR product on the market, at least.
    They used to make some pretty good LMR gear. The early low band repeaters no so good.

    Sent from my SM-T350 using Tapatalk

  2. Midland MXT500

    in Equipment Reviews

    Posted



    Was at the Jeep Invasion show this weekend in TN and talked to the Midland Rep on site. they had the MTX575 on site. It is much bigger box than the 275. I would say its at least 3-4 times bigger. That's a disappointment. It does have a mini usb on the front next to the mic jack so it may have some programming flexibility but he didn't know. . The rep I talked to said late fall is target to sell them. Of course he knew nothing about W/N band. I tried to explain the repeater issue but he seemed to either not care or not understand.  YMMV


    Disappointing that the Midland Personal Radio rep can't talk intelligently about those subjects. I don't think Midland wants to see GMRS as anything more than a consumer toy. If customers were knowledgeable, they might buy radios with better specs and features. Funny that Midland does not make GMRS repeaters. The problem may be the corporate structure as they do have , (or once did) a land mobile radio division that once made some fair to midland (pun intended) mobile radios.

    Sent from my SM-T350 using Tapatalk

  3. A Post to GMRS Radio Manufacturers

    in Equipment Reviews

    Posted

    I think the lesson here is that if all you want is a cheap simplex radio to talk short distances in your group, then by all means buy a couple Midland radios. They will unfortunately be low performance narrow band radios by design.

    If you want to talk through repeaters and talk to other licensees, you need a commercial grade radio like many of the Kenwood radios. They are plentiful from used market at cheap price. They will have wide band capability, better receivers, multiple CTCSS ( PL ) / DCSS (DCS), split tone , repeater capability. Etc


    Sent from my SM-T350 using Tapatalk

  4. Sheriff on FRS?

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    I see they are on 155MHz.  It is unlikely they are on 155mHz since 155mHz is 0.155Hz.
    155.880MHz * 3 = 467.640MHz --> close enough to 467.6375MHz = FRS channel 11.
    Any chance the 155.880 transmitter site is VERY close to the OP's location?
     
    I think his dual band base antenna is presenting a ton of signal at 155.850 MHz and his Chinese receivers are overloading and creating third harmonic on or near 467.6375 MHz . A quick check would to put a UHF single band whip on the radio and see if the signal is radically reduced or goes away. It is too coincidental that the third harmonic falls right on channel.

    I would not rule out a spurious signal from the sheriff repeater, but we are talking about a $30K repeater and duplexer versus a $35 Chinese receiver. Any bets?

    Sent from my SM-T350 using Tapatalk


  6. Sheriff on FRS?

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    Update: I have sent a letter to the Sheriff's office. I have received no  reply. I have my D578 up and running as a base
    station. I am hearing the traffic certain times of the day of this radio? Still think it's a harmonic?
    Thanks
    WRCW870
    Yes, I think your receiver is likely the problem.

    Sent from my SM-T350 using Tapatalk

  8. Midland MXT500

    in Equipment Reviews

    Posted

    Any new news as to when we might see these?  I'm particularly interested in the 575.
     
    I am still waiting for the announcement. Maybe they are waiting for stock to be depleted on the older models?

    Sent from my SM-T350 using Tapatalk

  9. Communication with the ISS

    in Amateur Radio (Ham)

    Posted

    At a guess it was a result of their scheduling protocols. As I mentioned they have several hundred requests every year and have to make decisions far in advance.
    Did this science center already have a firm sked set up?
    I had no affiliation with ARISS and as far as I know ARISS does not control private contacts with the ISS. Nor does ARISS have any control of the airwaves.

    I was requested by local ham club to set up my station at a private event at a new museum. Instead of them politely inquiring what my involvement was I got bashed by so called "ARISS officials".

    I was just the guy who accepted when asked to volunteer my time and equipment.

    Very bad PR on their part. They could have been supportive if that is their charter, but instead chose to be asses.

    So no, no demo from me.

    This was a long while back, but left very bad taste for that org.

    Sent from my SM-T350 using Tapatalk

  10. Communication with the ISS

    in Amateur Radio (Ham)

    Posted

    Please note that school events are scheduled several years in advance.
    For more information on the ARISS* program, see: ARISS - Home
    * ARISS - Amateur Radio on the International Space Station
    Some years ago, a science center opened up near where I used to live. The local ham club asked me to move my satellite station there for an ISS contact. So naturally, I volunteered. Big mistake, next day, word got around to ARISS and I got all kinds of nasty messages from the ARISS folks saying I could not do that. Great way to treat volunteers.

    Sent from my SM-T350 using Tapatalk

  13. 230 mile contact

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    That is very cool indeed!

    My best was some 2M SSB from Tallahassee FL to Texas and once to Clingmans Dome in Blue Ridge Mountains . But both times I had over 100 watts at 90 feet AGL and a RX masthead preamp.

    So your walkie at ground level GMRS is damn impressive.

    Sent from my SM-T350 using Tapatalk



  14. University using GMRS without license...

    in FCC Rules Discussion

    Posted

    Yeah, a mall by me has a GMRS repeater setup on RPT16, the same channel the local repeater, fortunately using a different tone, I use is on only 6 to 7 miles away with around 80 registered users. Their license expired in 10/2015! They still use it.
    They way I look at it their choices are as follows.
    1. Keep using it. Ignorance is bliss.
    2. If the repeater gets "hijacked" by licensed GMRS users, ignore them. (see option 6 why this might be the better choice for the moment)
    3. Get a legit business only licensed frequency. Then have their radios reprogrammed, repeater reprogrammed and the duplexer re-tuned to use it.
    4. Shut it all down and go away.
    5. Switch to using FRS radios instead giving up the repeater.
    6. Complain to the FCC about their repeater getting "hijacked" by licensed GMRS users, get shut down by the FCC and pay $10k's in fines for operating illegally without a license for almost 7 years. Then go to option 3, 4 or 5 anyway.
    I like option 2. Perhaps social media can encourage local participation during the holidays.

    Sent from my SM-T350 using Tapatalk

  20. The never-ending Part 90/95 debate, and my discussion with the FCC

    in FCC Rules Discussion

    Posted

    It would be a pretty indefensible position for the FCC if challenged to prove a licensee's use of a part 90 radio in a non-interfering manner was causing harm.

    The FCC would have to prove excessive power or interference directly related to the part 90 usage.

    The numbers of FCC NALs issued for GMRS operations is nearly zero. The few exceptions are flagrant business use of the repeater pairs.

    The biggest risk on the reputation of the service are the knuckleheads that operate without a license because "they are special".


    Sent from my SM-T350 using Tapatalk



  21. Midland MXT500

    in Equipment Reviews

    Posted

    Found some photos looks like a mish-mash of the 400.
    Is it me or does the body of the radio look like the body of a Yaesu FTM400?
    Looks like it is going to be a great radio. Available 25khx spacing. Testing showing 49.x Watts (manufacturer cushion to allow for tolerance variations). Looks very spectral clean with almost no spurious emissions.
    My only gripe "hi and lo" power settings from what I can see in the manual. So you get 5w or 50w, wouldn't a medium of 15-20w power setting been nice? don't like running radios at full power unless I need to.
    https://fccid.io/MMAXT575/External-Photos/Ext-Photos-5212922
    https://fccid.io/MMAMXT575
    According to the link, the FCC grant is for wideband 16K0F3E. Kudos to Midland if they finally took heed that GMRS is a wideband service. I might buy one of these for the wife's vehicle.

    Sent from my SM-T350 using Tapatalk

  22. FCC (or Motorola...): Hytera is a National Security Threat?

    in General Discussion

    Posted



    Well, in this case you are.  I WORK for the company that put in the last of the public safety DMR systems in Ohio.  And then bought it back.  And oddly enough, we installed the system that was 3 counties away, that was interfering with at least one of the channels and had that customer complaining that they were hearing the DMR noise from a repeater that was 3 counties away.  Installed on a 4 story building, running a 40 watt XPR8300 repeater on VHF.  The Frequency in question was 155.415.  Motorola was NOT pleased at all about any of it.  They had never interferred with each other when they were bout analog.  Never even heard each other.  But the DMR being heard by teh analog was an issue, and the bigger issue was the DMR subscribers were hearing the analog signal strongly enough (was a 5 site simulcast system) that they were not fully capturing the DMR signal and the BER was climbing to the point they were unable to decode the signal.  It happened on 3 of the 4 public safety VHF frequencies.  If it were UHF, it would most likely been different.  We did some testing to see if it could be fixed.  Tried setting the radios to color code free instead of channel free.  No dice.  We also tried to see how well DMR would talk out.  Took a subscriber out to a distance that it was hearing mostly noise on NB FM.  Switched it to DMR and had a BER that floated between 2 and 3%. 
     
     


    Had you installed a P25 system on that frequency and site, the complaints would have been exactly the same.

    Sent from my SM-T350 using Tapatalk

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Guidelines.

  I accept