Lscott

It's also commonly called a "Parrot" repeater. The way they function is the repeater will record, some seconds to a minute or so, of the input audio stream. Then on termination of the reception it will re-transmit the audio just recorded usually on the same frequency. These repeaters are less expensive due to the fact they don't need bulky and costly cavity filters, used to isolate the receiver from the transmitter, for true simultaneous reception and transmission of the audio stream. Some have built one for remote emergency communications. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o05ILiIg5o4 https://www.argentdata.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=98 The negative aspect is the delay due to the necessity of recording the input audio stream and then the re-transmission. Many people find using a Parrot repeater rather irritating due to the delay.

Is there any growing consensus, like with SSB, what channels to use for FM?

Has anyone used the new CB 11m radios on FM? Opinions?

Make sure the voice announcements are set for Chinese.

What, and contribute to more band crowding that others have been complaining about lately?!

I wouldn't equate the two. I do want to point out the somewhat frequent post where a new GMRS user wants to setup a repeater. Most have no idea what they are getting into and what the various pit falls might be. The real important question is how many of those who want a repeater REALLY need one of their own? With just 8 frequency pairs it won't take that many before interference between them becomes a problem. Perhaps the FCC could require some kind of coordination, either officially, or through a local group of repeater owners. The Ham community had a coordination group. It might even be a better idea to pool the resources from several potential repeater owners. The pooled resources are used to Install a repeater at a location with a wide area coverage and open access to reduce the need for a bunch of smaller coverage zone repeaters scattered all over a given area at random. When one looks at the cost and work required to roll your own and the small coverage zone you get with a site with poor antenna elevation the above suggestion looks better. This was done with a couple of repeaters in the Detroit area in the past several months. The additional benefit are the repeaters are link so even more of the area is covered. My understanding is another one will likely get install farther up north of the area, likely also linked too.

How about looking at this option?

The attached files are also useful. Common Emmision Mode Designators.pdf FCC Service and Station Codes.pdf

Given how small the screens are you almost have to hold it up close to see anything. The one thing all these laws show are the people who write them have little to no technical or operational knowledge of radio usage. Further what studies do they even consult, if any, to justify some of the stupid provisions in them. I just have to laugh when watching YouTube videos of cops in a high speed chase doing 90+ MPH driving ONE HANDED while calling out direction and road intersections on the radio. You can clearly see it in the body cam footage. I sure would like to know what course they took to learn how to "safely" drive like that, one handed using a radio, while the rest of us are considered a road hazard.

This also explains why manufacturers went to digital for the very narrow band channel setting, 6.25KHz, which at some point the FCC might mandate. The manufacturers claim FM using anything less than the current 12.5KHz channel spacing isn’t practical and the only way to achieve it is through digital voice technologies.

It’s a bit more complex than the above. Narrowband vs Wideband.pdf

This is exactly why the law is very poorly written. Leaving it up to the cop or judge to make a technical determination is not how the law should have been crafted. There is no “objective” standard and leaves it to the personal option of the officer or judge. That’s how laws get invalidated. Just to make it clear the law as written ONLY mentions some part of the upper body holding or supporting the offending device, nothing about the legs. I mention this because on more than one occasion I’ve had Hams tell me they send CW while driving with a Morse key strapped to their thigh. Dah?! That’s OK while a wireless BT speaker mic isn’t?

Stalin’s head of the KGB once said “show me the man and I’ll show you the crime.”

I’m guessing it’s a homemade repeater that went on the fritz. That’s why there should be a TOT, time out timer, on the transmitter. Also there should be a repeater control operator monitoring it too. The later should have the ability to remotely gain control of the repeater and disable it. I’m reminded of another story on the Ham band. There was a similar case with a continuous unmodulated signal. That case was tracked down by some Hams using DF techniques. The cause was the mobile radio’s mic got stuck in the seat back somehow where the PTT was pressed in. The owner never noticed.

No doubt about that point.

If the law is written in such a matter where it’s vague and subjective interpretation that varies from officer to the next courts have found these laws invalid and or unconstitutional. It seems to me the law is arbitrary without logical reason for the distinction.

I’ve had good luck with Kenwood radios. Most allow programming for wide or narrow band FM. My typical GMRS carry radio is the TK-3170. https://pdfs.kenwoodproducts.com/9/TK-2170&3170Brochure.pdf

So how does my remote control Bluetooth speaker mic fit into the picture? It seems technology is a step or two ahead of the law and it hasn’t even gone into effect yet!

If anyone is interested the attached brochure has the various models shown. Otto Professional Surveillance Kit.pdf

I don't care much for anything that sticks in my ear either. Mine are rather sensitive. After a few hours the ear starts to hurt a lot where the insert is located. The "D-Ring" is comfortable to wear for long periods. I don't much care for the lapel mike location. I have another ear headset that is a multi wire design. There is a long wire you run down your sleeve. The mike and PTT are on that.

That fits several model Kenwood radios I have. Those use the universal connector side port. The rest of them use the typical "K" type connector you see on the cheap Chinese radios. The universal connector is billed as being pretty much water proof compared to the "K" style. The negative with the universal connector is one of the pins can be energized with 5VDC which is used for some of the GPS and noise canceling enabled microphones. If you're not using an external speaker mike you need to have the side cover installed or you could short out the pins and wreck the radio.

All kidding aside I like the “D-Ring” ear hanger type better. Nothing to stick in your ear and my experience the sound quality is much better.

Need a Tee-Shirt with FBI stenciled on it too to enhance the effectiveness.

Yes, it is a lot to digest. The first chapter is likely all most people need to read. The bottom line is worrying about the different between an SWR of 1:1 verses 1.5:1 isn't worth the trouble.

From the looks of things I would say they are serious. However I'm shocked these people will bet their life on a cheap $25 Chinese radio. It's not like they went around begging for free radio handouts. From the money they spent on the weapons etc. they certainly can afford better quality radio gear. At least get something with good encryption, like AES256, if they're worried about the government spying on them. A cheap UV-5R isn't it.