BoxCar

I use a "Deans" T-connector. They are available at any hobby store selling radio control cars, boats and planes. The connectors will handle a 30 amp load with no problems.

I purchased Mr. Marten's GMRS J-Pole and it's working great.

I like the new look.

The key points in the letter were the use of the GMRS frequencies and uncertified units. They are using the GMRS capable equipment for its higher power so they can cover longer distances between flagging points. The uncertified equipment would be amatuer gear repurposed for GMRS/Part 90 frequencies.

I just bought a J Pole. Description Unit price Qty Amount 462 MHz Land Mobile (GMRS) J-Pole Antenna - SO-239 $25.00 USD 1 $25.00 USD Subtotal $25.00 USD Shipping and handling $7.95 USD Total $32.95 USD Payment $32.95 USD

The FCC just issued a notice of violation to Traffic Control Services for unlicensed operation on LMR and GMRS frequencies in 4 mid-Atlantic sates. https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-357545A1.pdf

You may also want to consider a solar charger for use as an alternative power source.

I have followed this thread since it began and would like to state my take on the issues brought forward. First of all, I am saddened by the losses the wildfires brought to this section of Northern California. We have some very near and dear friends that lost everything in Paradise so the news of this particular fire and its aftermath struck a very deep and meaningful chord with my wife and me. Our friends have moved on, they decided they didn't want to rebuild and, with California property tax laws the way they are probably couldn't afford to and remain. While the idea is sound, the primary issues already brought forward still remain. Like Part 97, Part 95 is a licensed service and that in itself is the biggest barrier. Just as the amateurs wouldn't appreciate flocks of casual users flooding their 2 meter spectrum with both licensed and unlicensed users keying up on almost any available channel and causing problems, the issue of attempting to integrate the FRS users with GMRS repeaters has just as much potential for problems as opening Part 97 airwaves. FRS radios have some very tight restrictions regarding their equipment and channel usage. Their radios are non-programmable so they could not use a repeater with its offsets. Their equipment physically cannot be modified as antennas must be permanently attached and are quite poor in their operation limiting distance to around a kilometer under most conditions. Yes, GMRS capable radios are easy to procure and are very inexpensive at the lower tiers. But often, these same low-cost radios are also enabled to operate in the 2 meter spectrum which is the other half of the Part 95/97 conundrum. There is nothing stopping a person from pushing enough buttons, or doing a little Internet research, to find out how to enable Part 90 or 97 frequencies. This has the potential to recreate the CB problems of the 1970's where you could pick up a 10 meter CB, tweek a couple coils and suddenly increase the transmit power between 3 and 6 dB. It wasn't long after that crystal boxes became available and phase-locked loops were reprogrammed to add extra channels along with linear amplifiers boosting output power from less than the typical 4 watts to more than 1000. The most basic assumption which was made in this proposal was that people would play by the rules, but we saw how well that worked with CB. It doesn't. Why would I spend the licensing fee when my next door neighbor just bought a radio and fired it up without bothering to fill out a form and send in an "unnecessary" payment just to talk to my friends and the police didn't come to his door. Amateurs have been spared a lot of the issues surrounding readily available inexpensive equipment for many years. Now, some of the mystique surrounding ham radio is peeling away with the readily obtainable Technician license and low cost equipment. My feeling is the only thing stopping, no slowing down the repeat of the CB craze is the relative obscurity of the service and advertising the service with its potential benefit in an emergency or disaster situation will only fuel the craze from "to be prepared" to isn't this great fun and so easy to get into. One needs to remember, it wasn't the hand-held walkie-talkie that drove the CB fiasco, it was the mobile easily installed into your vehicle giving you the greater range and mobility.

About the only people in California on VHF-L these days under 90.20 are the CHP.

Simply put, gain is gain. Gain is measured as an increase over an isotropic dipole of the RF field strength. From my understanding the difference between the two, a mobile and base antenna has to do with the height of the two antennas and the amount of radiating surface of each. You really can't compare one of these against the other but you could compare the mobile to another or a base against another base antenna.

FirstNet or FedNet as it should truly be called is another cellular telephone system with its emphasis on data rather than voice. What ATT rightly understood about the win to build the network is it will/has turned into a money sink for the users. Even with the ability to ruthlessly preempt other Band 14 users and access to ATT's other bands the envisioned bandwidth will not be available at the scene of a major incident. There are a little over 12 million "first responders" and another 18 million other emergency responders as defined by the Homeland Security Act of 2001. The present governance is almost entirely in the hands of law enforcement who don't always play nicely in the sandbox with fire and EMS. Don't even ask them if the utility companies deserve to be included, they are very much opposed. In a disaster situation the two things most needed are water and electricity and you can't get that from law enforcement, fire or EMS. If I sound a little bitter about it, it's because I spent a good many years arguing that no responder or class of responder does their job alone but was not truly heard by the first responders or the Commission. What the system lacks, and has been pointed out, is mission-critical voice communications. The cellular devices in use are a peer-to-peer connection while LMR or radio is a one-to-many. Say something on a channel and everyone on that channel in range hears that same message. That doesn't happen with cellular and, if and when it does come about it will be at the cost of the bandwidth needed for data.

MotoTRBO is akin to an angry buzzsaw

My take on the section is a receiver for either service may not be connected to a transmitter of the other service. In other words, a cross-service repeater. Put a human operator in the middle and the sceario changes as there is no direct interconnection.

I played primarily in 90.20 and 90.35

I talked to Tracy Simmons at the FCC Gettysburg and he stated there is nothing in the rules about commercial users on FRS while using them for flagging operations. As far as getting a 90.35 license for flagging operations the BILT coordinators are very loathe about doling out nationwide licenses. Why nationwide? Your choices are either a fixed radius site-based, county wide, state wide or national. As flagging operations most often fall into the temporary category of being at a location less than a year they also run into the issue of other users on the same channel with higher powered mobiles or base stations. Low-power FRS just fills the bill for what they are doing.

You are definitely out of date regarding the penalties that the FCC can assess. It is up to $16,000 per day per violation with a cap over 100K. I suggest you get a more current copy of the regs as your 2010 edition has been changed many times. As a book, it's published every 2 years so that would make yours at least 4 versions behind.

From my work in Part 90 a NB radio is down 3dB from a WB in both range and S/N. This was a common complaint during the Narrow Banding that slice of spectrum had to go through. Don't get me started on the mess MotoTRBO brought to the scene.

The FCC has actually weighed in on the subject of rebroadcasting NOAA weather in dealing with the Traveler Information Station proceedings. Several owners of TIS or Highway Advisory Radio stations. The Enforcement Division cited these station operators for transmitting information (routine weather) that was not within the allowed information classes. Routine weather does not fall within the boundary of information related to the protection of life or property. They did not state if alerts which were broadcast with the SAME tones were permissible. One has to remember that weather warnings expire 4 hours after being issued or cancelled with another SAME burst.

Up until recently the primary advantage of POTS was being on a copper wire. Battery was supplied by the telco's switching office but that's going away with the replacement of copper with fiber.

Finally got this resolved. It took a later version of BF-480 than the one I was using.

Double checked the programming in Chirp and Scan was checked. Still no joy with scanning.

The UV-50X3 has a separate receiver and is designed to function as a crossband repeater

How about the 50W duplexer built i

Miklor also reports the radio is Part 90 approved. http://www.miklor.com/COM/Review_50X3.php

I thank you for the education regarding the interplay between parts 95 and 97. I did note one thing in the ARRL link you sent that could have been a deciding factor in denying the petition. That point was brought out in the closing paragraph regarding the use of home brew equipment.