Logan5

Yeah, that freedom to customize is a huge plus; the actual doing, not so much. I'll take the extra work over locked down radios anytime. I've always been a big commercial Motorola fan but their programming hoops, etc always drive me away. I end up going non-/\/\ for less hassle and more air time.

Bad link.

"On March 14, 2013, the Enforcement Bureau’s Spectrum Enforcement Division (SED)received a complaint alleging that Baofeng radio model UV-5R was capable of (1) transmitting on landmobile frequencies using the equipment’s external controls and (2) operating at power levels above thosespecified in its Equipment Authorization. On October 30, 2017, SED issued a Letter of Inquiry (LOI) toAmcrest, an authorized distributor of Baofeng radios, directing it to submit a sworn written response to aseries of questions relating to these allegations..." While Boafeng has some issues, it took the FCC over four years to respond to the initial complaint.   WOW....obviously not a priority.  https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-18-801A1.docx

Today the Northern California GMRS Users Group (NCGUG) reached a two-year milestone.  Since July 2016, we have filed 84 specific complaints of ongoing and repeated interference  related to unlicensed maritime traffic on our repeater uplink channel (affecting two repeaters).  We have yet to receive anything significant from Commission other than their canned response, but we did receive some meaningful help from the local enforcement office.  As a result, we were able to ID one of the shipping companies involved and reach out to them.  Of course, this is truly a whack-a-mole situation as it is an international shipping problem.     
 
However, we noted that the local enforcement office is not tied into this system at all and were unaware of any complaints.  We had to notify them directly.  Obviously some improvements are needed here....but this allows DC to filter this stuff for them. 
 
But this information may be critical someday in defending the GMRS and our interests.  I particularly encourage repeater owners to monitor their input frequencies for problems when possible as these are the most critical asset of a GMRS repeater system. 

Thank you so much for sharing this information, Greg. 
 
Mod, is this thread worthy enough to be pinned?

I came across the North Shore Emergency Association's website recently and found their club history page interesting:
 
nsea.com/nseainfo.htm
 
This link briefly discusses how the "travel tone" of 141.3 Hz and the national calling/emergency frequency of 462.675 MHz came to be. NSEA was one of the very first adopters of GMRS in the early 1970s, then the Class "A" Citizens Band. Here's a quick snippet from the link:
 
NSEA members were instrumental in bringing UHF technology to other public service groups in CB, especially R.E.A.C.T. (Radio Emergency Associated Citizens Teams). Beginning in 1976 key NSEA members spent extensive time meeting with REACT teams in more than a dozen-and-a-half different states, bringing a portable repeater, together with a number of mobile and portable units for field demonstrations...As a result, over 200 personal use repeater systems (all on the same frequency [462.675 MHz]) were set up throughout the United States. In recognition of this trend of explosive growth the Federal Communications Commission formally recognized our frequency [462.675 MHz] as the national emergency and traveler's assistance channel in the Part 95A Rules and Regulations.
 
Pretty cool slice of radio history!

You can use a dual band antenna if your running a base station, but if you run a repeater, you should consider separate antennas, as you would have to be very careful. I don't do much VHF, but I do have a workman UV200 in storage. for the repeater we have also run the Comet 712. These fiber glass antennas flex a lot in gale force winds, need additional sealant or heat shrink around middle. If you are single story, get yourself a 20' section of  pole 2" pole and a house bracket, some even have the ability to tilt out for service. you can mount another 10' to that for about 30' without spending too much.

Roof vs headache rack will make a difference.  For a 1/4 wave antenna to work properly, you need sufficient ground plane; the center of the roof is where you would want to mount this antenna.  If you prefer to mount an antenna on the headache rack, use a 1/2 wave antenna which does not require a ground plane.

Yes many repeaters have a hang time. a period of a second or two that the carrier is still open after you activate the repeater. There are other ways as well, if you use a scanner or another radio, make sure that the TX and the RX/scanner radio are far enough away to prevent co channel interference. good luck

If I understand correctly, a duplexer is not necessary with two antennas. This trailer is 16 ft in length. Aantennas would bebon 20 ft masts (from ground).

Have you ever opened up your BCR-40U? It is in fact nothing more nor less than "two mobiles in a box". There is of course a custom controller, front panel controls, display, and a 30 amp power supply.

I have a Bridgecom BCR-40U with duplexer tuned to 462.675 CTCSS 123.0 for which I'm asking $1000 + shipping. It includes the programming software and programming cable.

Radioguy7268,
 
I'm in Brooklyn very south and east, no buildings just houses, by the water... Very little rf interference. The only uhf rf 70cm is the nypd / fire / ems repeaters on a couple of telephone poles and vhf from Airplanes, Kennedy Airport and marine channels.  People don't even have driveway door remotes.... Nearest cell tower is 1 mile. But lots of above the ground electrical wire on telephone poles.... We have about 3 gmrs repeaters and 5 ham 70cm repeaters. But Brooklyn is huge... We can fit 2 1/2 London's or Berlin and France together inside Brooklyn..The repeaters are all spaced far apart. It's not like Manhattan at all. We have a saying in Brooklyn - Keep Brooklyn low and local.... No tall buildings and no Wal-Mart.
My antenna is 45ft high. which is 20 ft over my house. Only a couple of drive thru about 3 miles away that broadcast on .5 watts murs. Just mom and pop stores that most don't even take debit card..... I'm in the sticks of Jamaica Bay...I'm by a 25 square mile national park made up of wetlands sparse trees.
I work in Manhattan and can hit my repeater 20 air miles from the 28 floor roof deck my friend is the super of...5 watt hand held. 

The repeater antenna I recommended, the DB404-B has a gain of 5.9dBi, with no beam tilt.  That is a great antenna to use if you have it high in the air, and height always out-performs antenna gain.
 
A 10dBi gain antenna at 30 feet will do well in a situation like this, but won't have the range of a 5dBi antenna at twice the height.
 
One must also keep in mind that antenna gain comes as a compromise.  To make gain, the antenna must have a narrow beam-width... as in the antenna system is designed to pull the energy up off the ground, and down out of the sky, focusing it into the horizon.  If you have a high-gain antenna on a tall tower, it will have great distance range, but will also provide very poor results up close to the tower site.  The signal will simply over-shoot the target radio.
 
Real world case:  I take care of a UHF Ham repeater in Campbell Nebraska on 444.475/449.475.  It is using a DB420, which has 11.3dBi gain, and it is mounted at about 290 feet on a commercial tower.  Other repeaters link into this site from well over 40 miles away.  I live 7 miles away from this site, and can use a 2-Watt handheld from my back yard just fine.  If I travel closer to the machine, I drop in and out, and can no longer hold the machine when I'm 1-3 miles away, due to no ground coverage, and signal overshoot.  I'm inside the shadow ring of the antenna system.
 
Summary: Use a higher elevation, and a not-quite-so-high gain antenna for a project like this ranch.  The lower gain antenna will have much better ground coverage near the tower site, without shadow rings around the site, and the height will make up the distance covered.

199.9  feet unless you are within an FAA flight pattern for a local airport. See 47 CFR 95.317 for details and current restrictions.

https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=72b61b708f0ce25ea78b21b0aed4e95b&node=47:5.0.1.1.5&rgn=div5

 

I've been trying to decide about GMRS for about a year now. I have two ranches in West Texas that are about 6 1/2 miles apart and in many areas cell phone is not reliable. I've had my ham license, but I can't legally use ham to conduct our family ranch activities.
 
I would also like to be able to communicate with my home in town which is about 9.5 miles.  I'm pretty sure I can't do this with just handhelds, but I plan to use the Midland MXT400 in by truck and set up a base at my home in town with another MXT400.  With my house being at least 20 ft high, I should be able to get an antennae around 40 ft. 
 
I've checked elevation on google earth, and my ranch has an elevation of approximately 80 ft higher than town (only 40 ft if the antenna is 40 ft), but there is a rise/hill about 10 feet higher that is about 1.5 miles from the ranch. Since I don't really have a lot of experience with UHF, I was wondering if it was likely that reliable communication would be possible between the mobile and base, with the base having a 40 ft antenna.
 
Ultimately, I'm thinking about putting a repeater at the ranch, which would allow a 40 ft antennae (20 ft. over existing structure) at that location. 
 
Any comments would be welcome.
 
Thanks - Karl

I read the part about the spectrum analyzer picture and he did not think the TX was at all foul? did not even mention the side peak. I should also mention mine is an all together different radio.

This is the best picture I cold take of the output

Thanks Berkinet, This analyzer output looks similar, only the second peak is about 1/2 to 2/3rds the height of the main peak under my test. Also I noticed more low power scatter. I imagine it is different from radio to radio of the same model. lack or absence of quality control is likely to blame.

Found this... http://www.opg.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/IMG_20160826_115553.jpg
 
on this site... http://www.opg.org/2016/08/26/wln-kd-c1-the-programmable-toy-radio/

I would say highly likely. so I plan to try to replicate the results.  should I have an exact measure from antenna to antenna? How can I prove it's not user error? I only have one spectrum analyzer. used same RX antenna on the analyzer. I will try again.

I should also mention, I am not well versed on the analyzer I am using. I am still learning to use it.

Ok this time I used my spectrum analyzer for a quick test, and know why the mini walkie shows such high power. unlike all other radios in my quick check, the mini walkie has two peaks and additional low power splatter. Since this test was quick, I did not measure the frequency for the peaks or low power splatter, but it looks to be centered within 3 wide band channels. I have not repeated this test so these are first readings. but looks very messy so far. Even the BF-T1 had a clean single peak. Will update when I run more test.

How can you just leave us all hanging, what was the outcome?

I bought a pair of the TR-505s to give to my (grown up) children. I put in the 'mid power' GMRS channels, and our local NOAA weather channels. If you tab into the TX frequency column and hit the delete key to erase the numbers, transmit is disabled.