Lscott

I reference the attached file for cable losses. 1/2 inch LDF has almost half the loss of your typical LMR-400 cable. It will cost more but you get more signal to the antenna. One other point the losses also work on receive too. Lower loss cable you can work weaker stations.Coaxial Cable Attenuation Chart.pdf

I keep renewing my membership every year. The ARRL is the only lobbying group representing Ham Radio Operators. It does help when an ARRL rep wants to talk to the FCC, or a Congress critter, when they understand they influence a few hundred thousand voters. And the ARRL, I believe, has a seat at the WRC, World Radio Administrative Conferences, held every few years. One might argue about their effectiveness but one thing is for sure if you don't have a seat at the table nobody will hear or care about your view point.

Yup, I get the second point there. They can push off the support cost on to their dealer networks for the commercial stuff whereas a direct customer sale they are on the hook for support.

That's an interesting point. I have noticed that for a particular radio model the 400 to 470 band split will have the Part 90 certification only and the 450 to 470/490 will have both Part 90 and 95 certifications. Otherwise there is no difference between them.

The above is true. However they need to get the certification just once for a design. So long as they don't make any significant changes the certification applies to other models. I've seen that with some of the commercial Kenwood radios. The FCC ID for their P25 and NXDN radios, TK-5220/5320 and the NX-200/300 for example, are the same. https://comms.kenwood.com/common/pdf/download/TK-5220_5320_Specsheet.pdf https://comms.kenwood.com/common/pdf/download/02_NX-200G&300GBrochure.pdf I am going to guess the cost of the certification amortized over a large fleet is rather small. The testing done for Part 90 the results likely could be just dropped into the submission for Part 95 except where there are specific differences between the services. The additional tests, if any, I can't see being that huge of a burden. I suspect the real reason has to due with the rule changes in 2017/18 that disallowed businesses from applying for a GMRS license. With the rule changes the FCC effectively killed the business market for GMRS. In that case I can see why the main stream manufactures walked away. The paperwork and testing changes IMHO was a flimsy excuse.

IMHO I don't think they cornered the market as much as the main stream manufactures simply abandoned it. The main stream manufactures likely have higher profit margins on their commercial gear and don't want to get involved in the cut throat consumer market where the prices do nothing but drop. Government agencies and business have a lot more money to spend than the average Joe-six-pack. That's where they do the bulk of their business.

The attached file has more info on the proposed switch to digital on the marine band. It looks like they are leaning towards dPMR, and possibly NXDN. dPMR isn't really used in North America. However if the marine band does switch to dPMR it's very likely other services may start using it as well. If NXDN is modified to increase it's address range and can overcome the licensing questions it might be select as well. 1467189228_ImplementationofdigitalvoiceradiotelephonyintheVHFmaritimemobileband.pdf

I’ve been picking up some commercial Kenwood NXDN radios, several different models. They seem to be cheaper than the DMR ones. They are also far cheaper than any P25 radios I’ve seen. I have radios for D-Star, DMR, P25 and NXDN. Nothing yet for YSF. Around my area D-Star, DMR and YSF seem to be popular. There are a few P25 and one NXDN repeater near me. There is a fairly large NXDN linked system in west central Florida. I think there are a few other areas where NXDN is seeing some activity around the country. I heard there are some pockets of P25 use in California. For Ham radio I think DMR works better. I don’t think it’s a great fit when considered for other services. For example the ITU is looking at moving towards digital voice for VHF marine radio. The paper I read mentions DMR likely won’t work well. They seem to be leaning more towards FDMA modes like NXDN or dPMR. NXDN by the way is already used by the railroads in the US. https://cirm.org/documents/position-papers/CIRM Position Paper - Digital voice over VHF - November 2021.pdf You can search for who is licensed for which of the big three, DMR, P25 or NXDN at this site. https://digitalfrequencysearch.com/index.php

Most radios are like that. Nothing new.

I wonder if it has anything to do with the permissions when it installs? I have it loaded an an 8 core AMD Ryzen laptop running Windows 10 home edition just fine.

GMRS is aimed for the non technical user. The idea is to just pickup the radio, pick a channel and press the button to talk. That's why the limited selection of channels and limited features available verses Ham radio that uses a "band" where one selects a frequency to use, different operating modes etc. The GMRS service is structured to facilitate communications between family members and to conduct family business. The idea wasn't for making random contacts or experimenting with equipment, however some do this. Yes you'll find a significant number of Hams using GMRS too. Not necessarily a bad thing. One just has to keep in mind the differences between the services. What would be an acceptable topic on the Ham band maybe of little to no interest to a GMRS user.

Just wear your CERT, RACES and ARES hats. If that doesn't work tell the LEO you won't be making that annual donation to the policeman's association, yeah the one that calls you up several times a year on the phone.

They take your radio. Problem solved.

Oops, didn't proof read before hitting the send key.

That I can believe could be a charge. It's not an area FCC had jurisdiction over, since their area is spectrum management and licensing.

Best advise I've heard is ensure the radio(s) are turned OFF when you're stopped. Some Hams have had their legitimate radios confiscated by stupid LEO's that don't know the law, particularly about exemptions for Ham radio license holders. If they can hear public safety traffic audio they could convince a judge they had "reasonable suspicion" a crime was afoot etc. Other than providing the required documents specified by the state's MVD you don't have to answer any of the LEO's questions. They are not trained communication professionals. While they still may take the radio(s) at least in court you can make the claim they had no expertise to make any determination as to the nature of the "device" they saw. Might even have recourse to recover damages.

Yeah, its right up there with the age old WTFM.

Having a license one should have a basic understanding of the rules. Where some ambiguous areas are found these forums are a resource to use to get some clarification. What is a bit distressing is when people ask questions before actually reading the rules FIRST. That would eliminate a lot of the more obvious questions.

I wonder if that law has been challenged in court? As I mentioned before you can program a radio for frequencies you're not authorized so long as you don't transmit on them. Back when over the air pay TV was the "thing" a lot of people built decoders to interface to their TV's in my area. I had one, built on a solder less breadboard. One of the services simply transmitted their signal on a microwave band and used a down converter connected to the TV, no scrambling or encryption. People were building simple two transistor converters in coffee cans or put up a simple BBQ grill type antenna on the roof with the simple down converter on the back. Radio Shack was selling the strip-line transistors. You could get the PCB layout and circuit off the fairly new Internet at the time. The company had teams driving around looking for those antennas and taking people to court. I don't believe they were very successful claiming theft of service since they did nothing to protect the signal from interception and use. I think the major legal option was if it's transmitted over the air there is NO expectation of privacy. The two companies using different methods soon went out of business. It was way to easy to get the programming for free.

The key point was “transmit”. You can have a radio programmed for other services which it’s not certified for by the FCC. Just as long as you don’t use the PTT button you should be fine. I believe some countries just having the wrong frequencies programmed in your not licensed to use, just RX only, is a violation of their radio regulations. Some foreign Hams visiting are shocked to discover here in the US it isn’t against the law. I think we’re lucky here, it could be changed by Congress at anytime. ? Ham radios are only certified for Part 15. The FCC’s concern is the ability to intercept cell phone transmissions. They also check for transmitter spurious emissions. There are limits the radios can’t exceed. That’s one of the major complaints about the low end CCR, cheap Chinese radios, like the much hyped UV-5R. The attached file shows a test somebody did on a sample. Also the schematic, source claims it for the above radio but I can’t confirm it, shows just some basic filtering on both the RX and TX paths. Both files are what I have in my technical library folder for this radio. I haven’t taken the time to see if there is anything more recent available. UV-5R VHF Harmonics Test.pdf SCHEMATIC Baofeng UV-5R.pdf

You need to reread the section of my post mentioning radio modification. I don’t recall saying anything about transmitting out of band much less what specific service. Personally I have a fleet of radios FCC certified for Parts 90, and 95. They are also legal to use under Part 97. As long as I hold a valid license for the particular service I don’t have a reason to worry about the FCC. I keep electronic files for every radio I own. That includes manufacturers brochures, operating manuals, service manuals, FCC certification grants etc. that I can locate. I know what I can and can’t do with a radio. You would be surprised by what shows up. Some of my commercial analog/digital radios have Part 95 certification. Until the FCC authorizes digital voice modes I just can’t use that feature. The radio is still legal to use on FM.

Check this link. Of course no guarantees the info is still correct but at least it a starting point. https://www.qsl.net/wd9ewk/xe-frs.html

It would be more professional if you simply stated Part 97. Then at least people have an idea where to go and look for the specifics. When I read comments like the above I have to question the posters agenda. I usually encounter this from people who have a dislike for Hams. There is nothing illegal about using radios that have their TX and Rx ranges opened up so long as the operator stays within the limits of their FFC license. Hams have gotten spoiled by modern radios with synthesized frequency generation and depend on the radios firmware to stay within the band limits. For decades that was never the case. Hams aways are required to know the band limits regardless of what technology is used. For example running 5KHz deviation, 25KHz bandwidth, FM on 449.995MHz results in part of the signal falling outside of the Ham 70cm band even if the unmodulated carrier doesn’t.

Nothing wrong with honest debate. ?

You have a point. Besides the strictly FCC violations I can see where possibly some local laws could apply. In the end it likely will be case specific so I wouldn’t go so far as making generalizations.