Lscott
-
Posts
2918 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
99
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Gallery
Classifieds
Posts posted by Lscott
-
-
-
The warning message you are seeing basically means you have selected some features in the programming software that work ONLY with the version 2 radio. Most likely you'll need to go through all the options in the programming software and look at the help file entry for it. In my experience there might be a note warning the feature isn't support in the earlier hardware version so you'll have to deselect it.
-
40 minutes ago, WRTJ269 said:
Im programming it the same as my other radios, just making sure this Kenwood is programming right. all frequencies and encode and decode are correct. I do get an error for "Stun Status Validation" and Firmware doesn't support, but it does take my codeplug. So just wanted to see if there is a setting in the KPG-49D that I might be overlooking.
Sounds like your firmware is really old. I've attached the latest firmware I have archived for a version 1 radio only. You can try updating your radio with the firmware if you have a version 1 radio. DO NOT try using it if it's not a version 1.
If you do then you need to run the "Fpro,exe" utility in the folder where you installed the radio programming software.
-
5 minutes ago, WRXB215 said:
Not really on a linked system using separate repeater frequency pairs. Since several repeaters are "linked" when a station accesses one you hear the audio broadcast on the other linked repeaters. So instead of hearing the audio on the output of the one repeater its now on the output frequency side of the repeater pair frequency of the linked repeaters, effectively using those channels, even though the station is not directly accessing them.
Remember the linked repeaters will ALL be transmitting at the same time the exact same audio stream. If they were all on the same repeater pair frequency the linked repeaters would be transmitting at the same time on the same frequency effectively jamming each other if they were too close to the receiving station. Using a separate PL tone on the output for each repeater would be useless.
-
10 hours ago, WSAK691 said:
It's getting a bit tired when I tune into 3 different repeater frequencies and am hearing the same conversation being had by a handful of guys in metro Indy.
I think you articulated the problem.
By having several repeaters in an area linked each one requires it's own pair of frequencies. Sticking to the usual standard of a 5MHz offset that leaves just 8 pairs. So, by linking several repeaters together when any one of them goes active all are now on the air. This effectively ties up several valuable repeater pair frequencies whereas one might have been sufficient.
The argument for this practice is now a much wider area is covered. However one forgets that another user may wish to setup their own repeater, and has NO desire to share it with anyone outside their family or group. The multiple linked repeaters now consumes the limited repeater frequency pairs, and possibility leaving none available for somebody to use on a limited basis.
For example here in the metro Detroit area we have, I think, three linked repeaters, and one wide area standalone repeater. Since we are past the FCC's "Line A" two of the official repeater frequency pairs are not available. With four of the remaining pairs consumed by the linked system that leaves just 2 frequency pairs open for somebody else to use.
-
1 hour ago, WRYZ926 said:
and they say made in China on them.
Many years ago people laughed when the Japanese were getting into the US auto market and GM had about 50 percent of the US market share. Now you see Asian auto's everywhere and GM's market share is down around 25 percent or so. I wouldn't laugh about the Chinese radios.
-
1 hour ago, WRTZ750 said:
I realize this is a crystal ball question but, how likely would digital voice transmissions be in the future for GMRS? Thoughts?
All depends on how it's done and presented to the FCC. For years they said no to FM on 11M CB. Then one day, POOF, they said OK.
While there is a crowd who don't like the idea that may become moot. In some areas digital voice modes are already in use, very much in violation of FCC regulations. If it becomes further widely practiced, like the mess with combo FRS/GMRS radios and people ignoring the license requirements, they will just throw in the towel, again, and make it legal. Saves them time, man power and money so they don't have to deal with the enforcement issues. That's basically what they did with the FRS/GMRS rule revisions in 2017. Just made what people were doing legal, then ignored the service.
-
52 minutes ago, WSAA635 said:
The FCC has to post infractions that were enforced on their web site. Just look up how many people have been busted for transmitting with out of band radios. I'd be willing to bet it's ZERO.
Would that also include a friendly door knock, unofficially, by an FCC field engineer letting you know they noticed what you're doing and giving you the opportunity to quit?
-
28 minutes ago, WRYZ926 said:
I have modified a couple of my VHF/UHF radios myself. It allow me to run fewer radios at one time.
We discourage doing something like this in a public forum and using them out of band. It just confuses new comers giving them advise that might get them into trouble. What people do privately is their business, I'm not a radio cop. If somebody wants information along these lines the best advise is to go with a private message to the other party.
-
1 minute ago, GreggInFL said:
With all the water in Florida I guarantee you can find GMRS users who have added Marine VHF to their radios.
Really?
-
58 minutes ago, WSAA635 said:
Also, they're not Laws, they're Rules and Regulations.
If you want to dispute an FCC fine you have to go before an "Administrative Law Judge". Lots of the bureaucratic government agencies have these.
-
37 minutes ago, GreggInFL said:
I assume you are referring to offering products for sale. How about internal business operations; e.g. Walmart running its stores with GMRS (assuming the company would want to)?
There is nothing stopping, for example Walmart, from using GMRS EXCEPT users must each have their own license. The FCC will not issue GMRS licenses to business, only individual users. If a business was licensed before the rule changes in 2017, and maintained it active, they are grandfathered in and can continue to use GMRS for business operations. If they let it expire they're screwed. The FCC will NOT issue a GMRS license in the name of the business in that case.
As an example the local mall by me was licensed to use GMRS for their house keeping staff. However they let the license expire, A LONG TIME AGO. They never renewed it. They continue to use their radios and the limited range repeater. So far it seems the FCC isn't interested in taking any action.
I'm absolutely sure what is going on since I've been to the mall many times with my HT to walk around for exorcise. They are using channel 16. They are setup for a repeater because I have my radio programed that way, which means they must be operating under GMRS rules to access the repeater input frequencies. If people choose to hijack the repeater they have realistically no choice except to ignore it rather than complain, otherwise the FCC might be way more interested in their long unlicensed operation history.
ULS_License_-_General_Mobile_Radio__GMRS__License_-_KAB1523_-_LA-job_178.pdf
-
7 minutes ago, WRXB215 said:
I agree with you especially in light of the "life or property" clause. I would hate to be on a GMRS radio, bleeding out, can hear hams talking, but not be able to ask them for help.
Most of my Ham radios have the "MARS/CAP" mod done for out of band operation. Is it legal to operate like that, no, but as you said when it's your life, or somebody else, who cares about a FCC fine. I would rather have it and not need it than need it and not have it.
Some Hams have a major problem with people modifying their radios for out of band operation, and will refuse to use one. They forget you don't have to use it out of band. In fact not too long ago most radios had analog VFO's and could very easily go out of band. It 's the operator's responsibility to know the band limits and stay within them. Hams have gotten lazy and depend on the radio's firmware to keep operations within the band limits now days.
Now on the practical side of using modified Ham gear out of band. The radios will very likely have filters on the output designed for the "official" frequency range for Ham. That's to comply with the FCC's emission requirements. Once you try running outside of the filter range the power can drop off very rapidly. It all depends on how tight the filters are. In some cases it just isn't really worth it. For example the Icom IC706MKIIG the power output at 462MHz is already low. When you get to 467MHz it's basically useless, you get as much from an HT or more. Other radios models when modified might do better.
-
I remember the old TV's with the "instant on" feature. The tube filaments were powered at reduced voltage when the TV was "OFF" then the full filament voltage was applied when it was turned on. Since the filaments were already near operating temperature it didn't take long for the TV to be ready. This also increased tube life due to the reduced thermal and mechanical shock between cold and hot filaments.
-
-
21 minutes ago, Sshannon said:
There is one radio service that encrypts conversations, doesn’t require users to ID, and doesn’t require users to own a license.
It even has a worldwide network of repeaters.
What’s more, it fits in a person’s pocket. In fact most adults and a lot of kids already have these wondrous radios.
Also comes with a monthly bill.
-
2 hours ago, WSAG543 said:
I also don't understand the need/requirement to use callsigns for private conversations
Simple. GMRS was not intended to be private. You need to use a call sign basically the same logic why you’re required to have a license plate on your car, registration number on boats, airplanes etc. Don’t want to use call signs there is always FRS.
-
1 hour ago, tweiss3 said:
Funny, I went skiing Saturday, and the lift operators have brand new NX-1200/1300 radios. I was surprised how small they were.
Kenwood did a really good job keeping the size down. They aren't that heavy either. The prices are reasonable depending on where you look. Most of the NX1200/1300's are the cheaper non-display type. OK for business use where one tends to stay on one to a few channels. More than that you really need the display versions. Trying to remember a couple of hundred channels is rather tough to do otherwise.
https://forums.mygmrs.com/gallery/image/290-nx-1300duk5/?context=new
https://forums.mygmrs.com/gallery/image/302-nx-1300duk5-rssi-display/
Apparently they do front panel programming. It has to be the display model with at least the limited keypad. See attached file.
There is no additional entitlement license to get this feature from what I can see in the available options. For Ham use this is a perk.
-
1 hour ago, Sshannon said:
But there’s still a lot of really good Japanese made rigs out there and not all hams are cheap.
Somebody is buying those Ham only Icom and Yeasu $10K plus HF rigs just for contesting.
-
1 hour ago, tweiss3 said:
if you want DMR, the price point on the NX1200/1300 is better than the D75.
That's why I have three of them, NX-1300DUK5's effectively. Just for completeness I wouldn't mind picking up a NX-1200 for VHF DMR. Although there isn't much VHF DMR activity by me.
I have my eye on an auction for a TK-D200GE radio out of the UK. If the bids don't get to crazy I'll throw in a bid on it. That would give me two, I have one now, to go along with the two UHF model TK-D300E's I have
However the D74A and D75A will do digital on 1.25M. The only other radio I have that will do digital on that band it is the D578. The D578 does DMR at least, not D-Star.
-
I'm not shelling out the price I see being quoted of $750 to $770 each. The D75A is a nice radio but it doesn't seem to offer enough in major functionality to justify spending the money. If nothing else I wanted to see AT LEAST split band programming. Also a DMR version would have been the deal maker. At best it's just a slight update/refresh of the D74A. Oh, the battery life on the D74 sucks.
-
40 minutes ago, fremont said:
Purely anecdotal, but I and a friend have tried MURS vs GMRS in high desert country (no buildings or big mountains, etc), and MURS wins at 2w vs GMRS at 5w. He lives there year-around and had no idea what MURS was until I loaned him my Wouxun KG-805M (and a Smiley OEM antenna). He said "Thanks, I'm buying two of them."
You buy what works for you. GMRS isn't the solution in all cases.
-
11 minutes ago, WRYS709 said:
Nice to see that Kenwood TH-79A there, too!
I have a box full of 2 TH-22s, a 79a that works and one that doesn't, the base charger, a collection of rechargeable battery packs of various sizes, voltages and amps, and the original headset with VOX
Brings back memories of the 90s!
I got a super good deal on the TH-79A at a swap. Couldn't pass it up.
https://forums.mygmrs.com/gallery/image/253-th-79ajpg/?context=new
-
34 minutes ago, PACNWComms said:
Bought an old Hallicrafters SX-24 with matching speaker. Doesn't look like much but still works
Yeah, now you have to look for some NOS, new old stock, tubes to keep it going. Likely cost you more for those than what you paid for the radio.
- AdmiralCochrane and WRXB215
-
2
GMRS texting
in General Discussion
Posted
Until you have a dozen or so stations doing it on your channel. Then even a short data burst at frequent intervals is going to be irritating.