marcspaz

I have to be honest... I own a repeater with no ID, but never had a site inspection. However, one of my friends has a repeater on every pair and none of them ID. He has had several inspections over the years at all of his locations and even without his systems ID'ing, his system were found compliant. One of the systems has been on the air for 17 years. It may be anecdotal, but I'm pretty sure under the private and share use clauses, they don't have to ID in those conditions. Again, just my opinion and sharing second hand info... but there it is. I actually really like this idea and generally agree... but my repeater system doesn't support automated ID, nor can one be added without some serious engineering on my part. This is pretty common for an inexpensive repeater.

I'm out with my wife and grand daughter right now... so I haven't read everything yet. I apologize if I'm missing something. I'll swing back and read the thread in detail when I'm home. I did glance through and I can tell you with 100% certainty that there is no chance for that antenna to work well were it is located. I have owned Jeeps most of my life. Every Wrangler I have owned since 2010, I have used a Diamond or Comet lip mount and it is always adjusted to its highest point and at least 7 to 8 inches away from the A Pillar. JL and JT vehicles have a plastic corner cap, so the mount should be a touch further forward than on the JK models. The one I have been using with great success for the past 4-5 years is the CP-5NMO from Comet. My previous Jeep...

Based on my understanding, I agree. The fact that the FCC never asks us what radio we are using nor what radios we own as it relates to qualifying for a license. Also, the fact that there is a provision for allowing station sharing, rather than a limitation on sharing, I have to suspect your statement is true. However, as I mentioned previously, we have to take the rules as a whole... so there are some requirements (limits) beyond simply ID'ing with your call sign that need to be met.

I would always support the idea of getting clarification on actions that are not clear and cause concern. Though, I would discuss stuff like this with a lawyer, not the FCC employees. Most FCC employees would do no better at interpreting the rules than any of us would.

I am not a lawyer and I am not offering anyone legal advice. I am simply sharing my opinion of my interpretation of the rules. This information is strictly 'use at your own risk'. Hey Steve... the disclaimer is not directed at you, but some knucklehead out there may make it necessary. T The situation in your example is a little different than what we are discussing, in that you are talking about borrowing and physically taking possession of a radio combined with sharing a station. That is a bit more complex, but the rules apply the same. FCC Rule §95.1705 (f) is titled "Cooperative use of GMRS stations." It says "GMRS licensees may share the use of their stations with other persons eligible in the GMRS, subject to the conditions and limitations in this paragraph." So, to start, this means we can share, but with limits. Sub-part (1) say "The GMRS station to be shared must be individually owned by the licensee, jointly owned by the participants and the licensee, leased individually by the licensee, or leased jointly by the participants and the licensee. " That tells us that only someone who actually owns the repeater can establish sharing. I am a sharing use of my friend's repeater hear in VA, but I have no ownership over it. So I can't establish a sharing agreement for someone else to share it, only my friend can. Sub-part (2) says that "The licensee must maintain access to and control over all stations authorized under its license. " Meaning my friend, the owner of the station/repeater must maintain control of the station. So, while I am using it, my friend still have enforcement capabilities as to who uses it and when. Sub-part (3) isn't relevant to the current discussion, but sub-part (4) states "All sharing arrangements must be conducted in accordance with a written agreement to be kept as part of the station records." Meaning, we can just have verbal agreement. If there is a site audit, we need documentation of whom is allowed to share the repeater. So, understanding those guidelines... lets look at your use case. Yes, based on my understanding of the aforementioned rules, that is correct. As I understand the rules, that is also correct. To my understanding, when we are chatting with each other, the repeater is considered properly identified when either of us ID. However, because we are both using other radios in the string, it still requires both of us to ID so we stay compliant with our local transmitters. Not just the repeater. If you use the repeater as an open repeater, it would have to transmit your ID every 15 minutes of use or at the end of a single or string of brief transmissions. You can automate it or if you are monitoring it do it manually by voice.

I'm glad you found someone to help get the radio installed! Sounds like you are having a great time and adding a mobile to the toolbox will just expand the fun. We have a good group around here (Northern VA). It's fun to get on the radio and chat with friends, coordinate get-togethers, and have someone to talk to when driving. You are creating the real-world use case for it by simply wanting to enjoy it. That's all that matter... so, enjoy!

@KAF6045, you must take all of the rules collectively into consideration. Not just one half of one qualifier in one sub-part of a sub-section. For example, § 95.1705 (f) allows for legal station sharing. That is why owners setup clubs and/or have you request sharing access of the repeater in writing (via email or the web app here on MyGMRS.com, for example). The request and approval become part of the station record. The licensees who are sharing the repeater operate under their own license... therefore, no special ID system is required. The only time a repeater requires an ID is if it is an open repeater... meaning it's not private or shared, but rather open to the public for any licensed operator, without written agreement or record. If @tdukes plans on sharing, he's fine with no ID. If he plans on providing an "open system", then it will need an ID.

So, two things come to mind. One is, your repeater doesn't have to ID itself as long as the users are ID'ing. If someone doesn't ID... tell them they are not allowed to use the machine. The other being there are no part 95 certified amplifiers. Repeater owners do occasionally get site visits from the FCC for inspection. I doubt you would get more than a verbal to stop using it (if anyone actually came by), but in my opinion, the risk isn't worth the benefit. Especially because there is almost no practical difference in rang or quality of communications between 15-20 watts and 50 watts. Your money is much more well spent in buying a great antenna system and doing what it takes to reduce losses on the transmission line. With that said, you can buy a proper/real type approved or grandfathered type 90 repeater for a touch more money than you are already planning on, but it will have the tech to support heavy use if needed. Some are as cheap as $400... a great commercial grade might be around $1,500. I would recommend searching the forum and talking to some of the active repeater owners on the site to get a better idea of what to expect. I have a 25w continuous duty repeater that was built from two transceivers. It cost me about $1,000 for everything.

I'm just going to adjust against my known good commercially calibrated equipment. Honestly, it's not even important for this stuff to be precise. I just need it close enough to know if stuff is working or not. If it's close enough, I'm not going to mess with them. The frequency counter, for instance, is only going to be used to pull/confirm tones. The Tiny SA is going to be used to see if any harmonics are being transmitted from a device at a significant level or is a neighboring device is causing RFI, etc. Like I mentioned, cheap gear for GMRS radio installs.

Well, I bit the bullet and bought some cheap portable tools. I have a Tektronex SA, a Bird power/SWR meter, and MFJ antenna system analyzer. They all work great, but I'm not thrilled about transporting a bunch of insanely expensive gear when I go help a new GMRS operator with the mobile or base station. Or friend Randy put together a nice video about tools a GMRS user should have and what would be nice to have if you're a geek. LoL anyway, I ordered a Nano VNA, Tiny SA, and a Surecom SF401 Plus frequency counter. Any information, warnings, tips, tricks those of you who have them can share? I know the Nano VNA is a rock star based on all the folks that have been using them for a few years. I can't wait to see how accurate the other items are compared to the higher priced equipment. I'm sure there will be some small variations, but I'm not expecting anything dramatic. Two arrived today. The frequency counter should be here tomorrow.

@OffRoaderX, I think TNRonin needs a link in order to fully understand... LOL

Man... that drives me nuts. Mandate what they like and ban what they don't. People need to learn that diversity of thought is critical and their opinions really don't matter. That why I say down with DMR. Long live P25!

Me personally, I won't publicly condone rule violations. That's just stupid, for an unfathomable amount of reasons. Also, if someone asks about the rules, I'll genuinely try to provide a good/correct answer. Beyond that... I really don't care who does what. I just like to argue on the interwebz when I'm bored.

Yes. Correct. If Tone is selected, it will automatically select the correct column and put a value in it. Simply change it to the correct tone for the repeater you wish to access.

From top to bottom... - Open the repeater, but hear everyone. Doesn't matter if the repeater is running splits/etc., you will still hear it and everyone else. - To open the repeater and only hear the repeater or simplex stations with the transmit tone set. - Running "Splits" to open the repeater with one tone and only hear the repeater output or simplex stations running a different tone than the input tone. (*not all radio models and firmware versions support this mode.)

So, the Rugged mount is trash. It mounts the antenna in a bad spot. I highly recommend this mount... https://www.hamradio.com/detail.cfm?pid=H0-006551 Put the mount on the lip of the hood, at least 8 inches forward of the windshield / A-pillar. The MXTA26 is a excellent antenna. However, terrain and RFI is going to dictate your range. From a mountain top to a valley, you may get well over 100 miles, but in an area where there are hills between you and the other station, you may not get a mile. An example is, I live in a natural depression and between the terrain and the noise from all the other homes and I can't talk 2,300 feet. If I leave my neighborhood, I can get 5 to 8 miles. Up in the mountains, at about 4,400 feet, I can easily talk 160 miles to a station on another mountain top. Install example from my 2016 JK. I have the same setup on my 20 JL, too.

That looks like a slick little radio. Hope the project works out. Looking forward to hearing about how it goes.

There are a few repeaters in Broward... but they all have very limited range. 4 or 5 miles... tops. I can reach just as far mobile-to-mobile. Unless you happen to be on a handheld radio within 2.5-3 miles of the repeater and wanting to talk to someone that close to the repeater, it's not even worth trying. If I retire down there, I will put up a wide coverage area repeater (30+ miles), but for now I don't spend enough time there to justify it.

The only way to know for sure is if there is a transmit tail after they stop talking. Not all repeaters have a tail and some repeaters are designed to disable the tail if the radio it is repeating for issues a command to not transmit the tail after its transmission. So, it gets kind of tough. If you have a radio that allows you to listen to the repeater input (instead of the repeater output as normal) and if you are close enough to any of the other people, you may hear them transmitting on the repeater input frequency, if they are using the repeater. Also, some people talk simplex with CTCSS or DCS tones and may not hear you anyway... which makes it even tougher to tell. Honestly, there is a near 100% certainty that if you hear them on simplex and you can also work the repeater, they are close enough to hear the repeater, too. So, I usually start my replies on the repeater frequency and ask them if they are on the repeater. If they aren't and I am hearing them direct, then I move to simplex, accordingly.

I think there may be some misconceptions about UHF connectors (and M-type) vs N-type connectors when it comes to the bottom end of UHF. You can buy garbage UHF connectors that won't work well, 100%, but that holds true for N-type, too. N-type connectors were created in the 40's, when there were no real standards for UHF connectors, not that there is much of a standard now. The DOD needed consistent performance, so Bell Labs created a standard to be met and created N-type connectors. If you buy a quality silver/teflon UHF connector manufactured by a company like Lands Precision or Larsen (about $8 per connector, $16 per set to make a cable) you will not see any difference in insertion loss or any performance degradation when compared to a comparable price and quality N-type connector in GMRS systems. I personally have done tests using LMR400. I made 2 patch cables that had UHF connectors and 2 patch cables that had N connectors. I tested them with my analyzer between 440 MHz and 500 MHz and there was exactly zero difference between 3 of the 4 cables. One of the cables with UHF connectors had an increase in insertion loss 0.01 dB... which I am assuming had something to do with me and the way I made the patch cable or possibly the section of cable itself introduced the difference and it had nothing to do with the connectors. Bottom line, we are not running enough power, moving enough data, or have high enough duty cycle that would require an N-type connector. Our only real benefit would be for outdoor connections and utilizing the native weatherproofing instead of having to add additional weatherproofing to a UHF connection.

https://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/UlsSearch/searchAdvanced.jsp

I am missing something. If you want to talk direct simplex, the channel would be setup like this for both radios.... On the repeater, both would be configured like this.... And if you want to user the repeater and only hear the repeater output when someone is talking, both would be configured like this.... Of course, adjust your channel names and power levels as desired.

@axorlov. That link makes me want to toss my SRH77CA in the trash. I am going to try to replicate that test with an FT-65 and an FT3DR to see what my results are like. I'll start another thread after it's done. I need a few days. Great link. Thanks for sharing.

No doubt, but there is an awful lot of discussion on the subject and it gets old having users tell engineers how wrong they are.

I can't believe we're talking about testing HT antenna SWR again. SMH