marcspaz

I work as a volunteer, specializing in emergency 2-way communications, with two county EOC's as well as for the federal government. The repeaters I have can perform VHF/VHF, UHF/UHF, or Crossland (VHF/UHF). They both are capable of analog and P.25 digital, as well as performing as relaying stations. Relaying is fun, stringing the two repeaters together via RF linking, to extend range as far as 2x to 4x the distance as a single repeater. Basically putting the repeaters on the edge of each other's coverage, using them like a huge wifi range extender. Heres a great example. Let's say I am in an area that I only get 4 or 5 miles of coverage mobile to mobile. In the same area I get 15-20 satute miles of coverage from my mobile to the first repeater. The two repeaters can talk to each other from 30-40 statute miles, and then a mobile on the other end can get 15-20 statute miles from the second repeater. I've now extended my mobile range 60 to 80 statute miles on the longest path.

@Radioguy7268 to restate the obvious, is a rule unenforced, really a rule at all?

It's like being at the zoo. Don't feed the monkeys. When you do, they tend to throw more poo at you.

The only language restrictions I am aware of were on Amateur radio, which were lifted 17 years ago (2006). Looking at the old GMRS rules and the LMRS rules, there have never been spoken language restrictions that I can find. There has been a long-standing expectation that GMRS and LMRS operators in the United States use clear and concise language to promote effective communication and prevent interference. In the past, this expectation has been interpreted by some as a requirement to use English, but I believe this was never an official rule or regulation. If anyone has a link to the government website with the previous rule stating English only, I am open to correction, if I am mistaken.

As others have mentioned, codes, hidden messages and transmitting a false or deceptive communication are all rule violations. I think 10-codes are allowed because they are so heavily used, documented and well known that it's not really considered code, but more like shorthand for voice.

@kidphc I went with the VHF high power because there are a few alligator 2m repeaters around me. I normally run a 50w radio and a 300w amp, but 90w-100w gets me into the repeaters that I can hear. The thing that made me switch is, during the summer, I remove the amp so it doesn't get stolen while the roof and doors are off. With the XTL5000, I can leave it installed and not worry about theft... and I'll still have enough power to reach the repeaters. Also, going to run dual heads. Two W7's.

Oh! If you want one antenna that does it all, get the Diamond NR7900a. It is high gain. VHF/UHF power rated 250w/300w respectively, and covers everything we need to do on amateur and GMRS. Probably the best mobile antenna I ever owned. https://www.diamondantenna.net/nr7900a.html

LOL... no doubt. Mostly with getting forgiveness from my wife. LOL

@kidphc, I have a Tram/Browning 1126-b 1/4 wave NMO antenna. It has great SWR for 70cm and GMRS. Rated from 410-490mhz. I just need to find a high-gain antenna that is good for 70cm. I have the MXTA26 which is awesome for GMRS and rated for 120w, but I don't think it's tuned for 70cm. I already have the radios, and next week I will be installing a UHF XTL5000 for GMRS and 70cm, and a VHF XTL5000 for 2m. They both make a measured 110w+. The VHF unit has a pre-amp, too.

@WQWX838, Sounds like a nice collection! Honestly, I have 3 repeaters (1 fixed and 2 portable). Not only are they closed systems, they are not even on all the time. Only when I plan to use them. The rest of the time, they are off. My fix repeater only covers about a 10 mile radius, anyway. So, I use a friends repeater that covers a 40 mile radius and really would only turn mine on if his was down.

I am confused here. Are you saying you need your own personal, portable repeater? Or are you saying you want to use someone else's repeater, along with simplex use?

I giggled at this one. Replace girlfriend with wife and this describes about 12 to 15 of my weekends every year. LOL

It looks like you are trying to use the Carlson Rule. Carson’s Rule is an estimation of the maximum bandwidth. The bandwidth will be proportionate with the audio signal amplitude, but with a maximum bandwidth estimated by Carson’s Rule, the bandwidth would be 2(5 kHz + 3 kHz) = 16KHz, not 15KHz. Unfortunately, on the VHF amateur bands, channel spacing is 15KHz across most of the country. This leads to a lot of bleed-over when there are conversations happening on adjacent channels. There are about 10 states that use 20KHz, which is better. UHF is 12.5KHz for NFM and 25KHz for FM on the amateur bands and GMRS, which is a bit more comfortable with regard to prevent/avoiding interference.

The antenna will be fine... fair price. I would buy an authentic MXT400 v2 (or newer) over the 115 because if you are going to be talking to repeaters, programming the repeater channels to operate wide band will ensure your audio levels are proper and there will be less noise in your signal. Wouxun KG905g would be my recommendation. The S88g is great, too, but after taxes and shipping it may be over $150.

Man, a 300 foot hill is pretty much going to be a no-go unless you put the repeater on the top of the hill. Here is a visual of what a 328' of blocking terrain looks like. I would not be very optimistic at this point.

Man, you have no idea who you're talking to. LOL. I'm independently wealthy. I have owned my own business for decades. I have a wife, kids, grand kids that I love and spend a bunch of time with. Along with a decades of studies in my field, I spent 7 years studying Constitutional Law and the founding and framing of the US. I have dabbled in politics, contributing to State level legislation. I have been an engineer since 1984 and have more licenses and certifications than I know what to do with, including two new certifications in the last 2 months. As an independent consultant, I have 13 years supporting the Department of Homeland Security; another 10 years supporting DoJ as well as DoD and I am currently an engineer working at the Pentagon. I love long-range shooting, have participated in professional level auto racing, 4-wheeling and I have been playing radio for 35 years, including being a licensed Amateur for 2 decades. Oh! I almost forgot, I started ground school recently and I am working on getting my private pilot license. I feel like my range of knowledge, understanding and experience are fairly vast. Though, I guess I can still do more (shrug). Just a quick reminder, you are the one who's very first post in this thread was bringing BS from "the other thread". I am just playing by your rules. See below... Yeah, about that... you're still very, very wrong about s-meter calibration and it's roots. SMDH. Saying the wrong thing over and over again doesn't make it right. I'm missing how it's dishonest to recognize the confusion of the original title (something you pointed out, I may add) correcting it and then literally making a note of what I corrected and why. I really do hope you are done posting in this thread, though. All you are doing is reaffirming your lack of knowledge and derailing a thread that was actually helpful. It's a train wreck now. With any luck, Rich will clean this thread up and lock it.

I changed the title because, as you pointed out, the title was a bit misleading. You made a valid point to which I conceded, yet you act like an ass. Stay in your lane son... the same guy who said "one s-unit is when human ear can tell the difference between levels of AM signal" has no business criticizing anyone else's understanding of technology. Updated Thread and Section titles for clarification for "Some People" to parse the information easier.

QFT! If I may add on to this (not directed to you), I am going to play both sides of this debate. The purpose of the Amateur Radio Service (also known as "ham" radio) in the United States is to provide a hobby and public service for individuals who are interested in radio communication and electronics experimentation. The purpose of GMRS is for short-distance two-way communications of licensees and their immediate family, for business or pleasure. Based on the definitions provided by the FCC, the idea that GMRS is exclusively utilitarian is not an accurate, in my opinion. There is overlap because of the interest in radio communications, even though GMRS is so much more restricted in use of hardware, power and range. I think OP is leaning more toward operating etiquette. I could be wrong. I like the idea of community members volunteering to make an orientation video and I like the idea of new people wanting to learn and having it as a resource. It just needs to focus on things specific to rules, technology and equipment to help people on getting started; not opinions about behavior, use, etc. While I occasionally violate this myself, I believe we should speak in plain English and if you are on a wide coverage area repeater, it's not a great idea to talk for hours. I recommend against tying up the repeater and radio waves for 2,000 sq miles or more for hours a day, several days a week, is kind of greedy. That said, it's up to the operator to decide what lingo, habits, and method they use on the service. As mentioned, the purpose of GMRS is for short-distance two-way communications to ease the activities of licensees and their immediate family. If that means rag-chewing, that is up to the operators involved. It's not really up to any one of us to tell anyone else how to use their radio/license. As far as repeaters go, the owner doesn't own the airwaves, but they own the hardware and can set the rules for sharing, if they want to share at all.

@WQWX838 I agree. I really think that it's in everyone's best interest to speak plainly. Unfortunately I hear a lot of lingo from Ham and firsr responders on the repeaters in the DC metro area. Many Hams use GMRS like its amateur radio, to the point where one of my friends revoked permission from a bunch of people on his repeater.

In that map, the two radios would need to be inside both respective circles. If you are going to have either a permanent base station or a portable/temporary base station at a camp, you would be much better served with a 5w-10w mobile used as a base station, and a portable mast with a high-gain antenna on it. This will increase your range due to the base antenna being higher and the gain from the antenna helps with transmit power and receive sensitivity. Below are a couple of my portable antenna's for example.

Alex... Man, I am trying so hard to be nice/respectful, but I am totally bewildered by every response from you and I am starting to get a little upset. Like, it's giving me a headache. I will do what I can to make this as clear as possible. Read the next two sentences very carefully, and then read it again. I am NOT discussing RST reports for CW. I am talking about a modern Signal Report for analog voice, with origins rooted in RST. This is going to be my last reply to you on this... the only two reasons I am replying at all is because I am hoping what I'm writing will finally make sense to you, and to explain to new operators and non-hams who may hear this lingo, what it is that Hams are saying to them. One more breakdown... please read carefully. The radio's s-meter is literally, exclusively reflecting the signal strength and in the current/modern Signal Report, the S represents signal strength. You get the signal strength from the s-meter. Period. End of discussion. We are not using RST for voice. The Readability (intelligibility) of the words being spoken describes how well the listener understand what you are saying. That's it. Nothing else. I am talking about modern signal reports. There is no mutually exclusivity. The s-meter literally provides you with a measured value (if the meter is properly calibrated) for 50% of the report you are delivering. Unless you are not using a modern analog voice signal report scheme, you can't provide an accurate signal report without a calibrated s-meter. The requirement for a calibrated meter is why I said it could be scientific or subjective, depending on your radio meter type and if the meter is calibrated. I don't participate in CW exchanges, so I can't speak to how the RST reports are being used today. However, I can say (agreeing with you) the original RST reporting system was created to be used with Morse Code. However, I am NOT explaining the original RST reporting system. I am explaining the current signal reporting system, that has been adopted from the original RST system, for the purpose reporting voice quality and signal strength for all analog voice communications that amateur radio operators use and that GMRS operators may be exposed to. CW RST reports have nothing to do with this, beyond the origin story.

@axorlov, I'm not sure why you keep coming back to this. Nothing you have shared is relevant to how things are done for voice, today. Outside of a history lesson (which is actually really entertaining to read and learn about), what was created for CW 90 years ago has nothing to do with what is used for voice today. And aural has nothing to do with the signal strength in today's method. You can either choose to use the current globally accepted method used for voice or not. That doesn't change how and when it's used today.

Honestly... that is very normal. Radio manufactures advertise "up to" a specific wattage. They don't guaranty a certain wattage. They radio may make 45w to 48w under specific conditions on a specific frequency, which may not be easily reproduced. The manufactures have to keep the power low enough below the 50w legal limit, because is a random radio gets tested and FCC finds that it exceeds the limit, the company can have the certification pulled. Also, a good portion of 50w radios I test, typically have a max power of 34w-38w... depending on the frequency used compared to the frequency tested by the manufacturer. That is just the way it is most of the time. Worth mentioning, there is a reason why other radios cost twice as much, if not more. Sometimes that few extra watts is part of it.

If there was zero other terrain? That would be correct. This is exactly why RF LOS terminates about 15% further than visual line of sight. RF is both scattered and partially refracted over the horizon. The closer to the horizon line, the more dense the scatter is. It's really hard to answer that question. For example, are we talking about a building? A small hill? or a 5,000'+ mountain? My house is in a recess in the ground by about 100 feet, with the ridge line about 150 yards away. I can stand in my driveway with a handheld radio and still reach another handheld about a mile away before the shadowing become to great. There is a way, but it is way beyond my skill set and understanding. The level of effort and all contributing factors vary too rapidly and greatly to attempt to try to calculate it in some practical time-frame, as well. To make things worse, the results would only be valid for the exact forecasted locations of the two radios. If you move either radio even an inch in any direction, the values are no loner valid. Items in the sky like rain and fog will attenuate the signal more. While diffraction, reflection and scattering of radio waves is the principle behind extending LOS, as those conditions increase, the amount of dilution increases, leading to more attenuation, not more extended range. The PPM of the photons simply drops too low to receive.

Those are pretty slick!