WRAF213

The rules are a bit hairy when differentiating fixed and base stations, but there are most certainly rules. Imagine you have a few friends or family members that live a few blocks down, and everyone has a base station type of installation. When communicating with only each other, the station class would be considered a fixed station, since all communicating stations are stationary and permanent. These fixed stations are limited to 15 watts, but can use the repeater input channels in simplex mode. If those stations participated in conversation with mobile and/or portable stations, they would be considered base stations and would be authorized 50 watts to make up for the lack of antenna gain or height typical of mobile and portable stations. Base stations, however, would not be authorized to use repeaters, while mobiles and portables are; base stations are expected to communicate on the repeater output (wide area repeaters aren't an expectation of GMRS, but rather repeaters that bring the effective range of portables and mobiles up to par with other base stations).

The only GMRS-exclusive channels left are the 467 MHz main channels (467.550, 467.575, etc), and those aren't easily accessible. FRS users almost certainly didn't notice the rule change regarding the 22-channel band plan, but most activity there is now legal.

Asking what's for dinner on a Part 90 system is fine if kept to a minimum; regulators almost certainly won't be pedantic about that. Creating a Part 90 system and inviting a closed group of friends to do casual conversation on it is not. Openly inviting people to join the system for casual conversation will get your license revoked. The FCC can do a station inspection if they suspect this, regardless of whether you're using encrpytion. Whether they end up doing so or not is irrelevant, that doesn't make it any more legal or responsible.

It'd be a base or mobile station, and thus authorized 50 watts. However, I don't believe simplex repeater operation is permitted under automatic control as the definition of a repeater station mentions a requirement for simultaneous retransmission, and only repeater stations are authorized for automatic control.

I didn't mention frequency coordinators; ultimately, it is the applicant that claims eligibility. But claiming eligibility through operations of a taxi business, when in reality there is no taxi business or the communications aren't for the purposes of operating a taxi business, would be lying about eligibility.

I used GMRS rather extensively during the Thomas Fire to provide evacuation information during the overnight power outage; and collect power, traffic, and fire status from residents and motorists. Cell service was unavailable that entire night, and with no power or cell phones, some residents dusted off their FRS radios and hopped on channel 1 looking for information. Directional antennas aided in determining rough locations of operators. Presently, I use GMRS to communicate with a small group of primarily FRS users and a local repeater. Few people monitor simplex channels, and those who do aren't GMRS licensees, so virtually all GMRS-to-GMRS operation is repeated.

There's quite a bit of non-compliant activity on Harvard (swearing, racism, sexism), "adult content", things kids shouldn't be hearing. The repeater is active during most of each afternoon, and is usually the only sustained FRS/GMRS activity in my area. Former FRS/GMRS combination radios have no problem pulling in the signal from Mt. Wilson over the entire Greater Los Angeles region.

No. Part 90 is not your party line. 90.403(a), (d), and (e) all limit your communications to only the permitted uses in 90.405, and ( will hold the licensee responsible for any violations, regardless of who is transmitting under the Part 90 license. 90.405(a)(2) limits your communications to transmissions directly related and necessary to your Part 90 eligibility. Unnecessary communications clog up the limited frequency pool for other eligible Part 90 licensees; they too are paying for a license, and interfering with their essential communications with your non-essential communications can warrant FCC investigation. 90.427(a) makes it extremely unwise to publish your operating frequency and access codes to the public, as you become responsible for a stranger's operation. 90.433© also makes you responsible for their radios, and 90.443( expects you to have some sort of Part 90 compliance information for each radio used, in addition to records of all maintenance. If you're not in direct control of the radios used on your license, station inspection (which you're making yourself an easy target for) will get messy. If you're claiming eligibility with some purpose you stretched the truth to make, most of your communications won't be necessary and incidental to the operations stated in your eligibility, violating 90.403. If you make up a purpose you have no intention of fulfilling, you're lying on an official form submitted to the federal government and committing a crime; furthermore, you will not be making essential communications as the eligibility does not exist and no essential communications can be made, further violating 90.403. If you're going to get a commercial license because you are performing commercial activities, go right ahead. That does not authorize you to use a Part 90 authorization to do your Part 95 activities. That is what Part 97 is for. I won't condone the recommendation of Part 90 when the stated purpose of operation is in conflict with the FCC rules and better fulfilled by other services.

A friend of mine put my (not counterfeit) NA-771 on a VNA, resonances were at 151 MHz and 445 MHz. I don't remember the 2:1 VSWR range on VHF, but on 440 it came out to about 431 to 462.9 MHz. The antennas are fairly broadband, but with resonance actually rather close to where they state it is, the NA-701C would work more efficiently when transmitting at 467 MHz. I can't speak for the bandwidth of the NA-701 as I don't own one, but I'd expect it to be a bit wider than the NA-771's. I assume the GMRS-V1 ships with the same antenna as the UV-82. Mine came out resonant somewhere around 505 MHz. It's under 5:1 (maybe even less, I can't remember) at 467 MHz, though. Next time I've got access to the VNA I should do a writeup.

Well, here's my interpretation: One goal of GMRS regulation is to ensure reliable communications between two parties, who are likely fairly close to each other. Mobiles and portables experience highly variable propagation, so adding a repeater effectively gives one side of the conversation coming from a transmitter similar to a fixed station. Fixed stations aren't subject to this propagation problem, so in this original use case for GMRS, a repeater shouldn't be necessary; it would only congest the GMRS channels further. Handhelds and mobiles, being close to the ground, should have shorter range than a fixed station, and a repeater should have longer range than a fixed station (to account for the variability of the portable/mobile stations). Since both fixed and repeater stations should have a long range, two channels would be in use over a fairly wide area. Therefore, it would be in the FCC's best interest to limit the number of channels being used by a single conversation with long range transmitters. While the rules may be confusing, or just outright weird or unfair, there's a logical explanation, and that's to maximize channel reuse (in theory).

And don't be afraid to ask! There may be some bitter people out there, but there are at least as many people out there that want to help new licensees get on the air with good operating practice and knowledge. I find it helps to listen a lot, like when you aren't able (or willing) to talk but can have a receiver on. You'll catch on to patterns in their behavior, and active attempts at mimicking that will feel natural before you know it. A pretty common thing that licensed folk do is use the NATO phonetic alphabet for identification etc., it's something good and easy to learn (start with your own callsign), and can be useful outside of radio too.

Since I'm not in your specific area, I can't provide specific advice. However, my suggestion is to scan around the output frequencies and see if you can hear any repeaters. I have an RTL-SDR that's just about dedicated to that purpose, and it'll even indicate output tones / codes. It can take some time to find a repeater that way, but it's a reliable method if there's no repeaters listed in your area.

I'd assume it works about as well as a Nagoya NA-701 does on 440, which is pretty great. I still prefer dipoles

This year, quite a few new FRS operators got on the air; AFAICT only one group is left, some children using FRS 2 around their own backyard. I responded to everyone that asked if they could be heard, and almost all of them said they didn't know walkie talkies could talk to 'other people'. Range to my GMRS handheld was typically about 4 miles. At its peak, I could hear 3 or 4 separate conversations on FRS 1 at any given time. The band was pretty busy. Activity dropped to about normal after two days. I believe rechargeable batteries becoming readily available in blister-pack FRS radios is helping with their perceived usefulness, but kids lose interest and parents around here hear what is going on at the Harvard repeater. Fortunately, there wasn't any increase in activity on 462.125 MHz PL69.3, channel 1 on an unprogrammed BF-888S.

The FCC's concern with digital modes on GMRS is the loss of interoperability with existing GMRS and FRS radios. Users operating analog will receive interference from digital users and will be unable to contact the digital users; this is why the FCC limits how frequently data transmissions can be sent, anything that isn't analog voice is interference to analog voice users. The problem gets worse with multiple incompatible digital modes on the same channel. Unlike Part 90 and 97 operation, FRS/GMRS technical standards effectively dictate that all certified units must be able to interoperate because there is a limited set of channels that are shared by a large number of users. In the Part 90 reform fact sheet, the FCC states "We also note that seven parties filed petitions for rulemaking requesting that we allow a time division multiple access (TDMA) modulation technique (i.e., 7K60FXE 2‐slot DMR TDMA) on GMRS frequencies to facilitate digital emissions and narrowbanding to increase capacity on GMRS channels. We deny these petitions. As explained above, the ability of GMRS licensees to communicate with each other is essential for the “listen before talk” etiquette, self-policing, and emergency calls that occur on these shared channels, and introducing a new modulation technique that is inconsistent with existing equipment would complicate the shared environment of GMRS channels. Further, with the use of the interstitial channels by GMRS and FRS units, we do not feel that the gains achieved by implementing narrowband digital techniques outweigh the losses in equipment investments and complications of introducing a new modulation scheme for GMRS radios."