marcspaz

The gen one MXT400 stinks. The gen two works fine...but no split tons support. Most repeaters have a tail...yes.

I know I personally made a comment about sharing channels with kids... but the was me just being a smart aleck. I actually think it would be a great idea. I'm a dad and a grandfather, so i understand wanting to keep the kids engaged and having fun. It's a family friendly radio service by design. That said... with young people being among our most vulnerable, i would keep an ear open. My amateur radio club did something similar, hosting a Kids Night net every week, on Saturday. We have our kids and grandchildren get on the radio and talk to each other. They have a great time. Some of them like it so much that they are studying to get their license.

Wow... this is perfect! I couldn't agree more, with all of this. I can't understand for the life of me, why the FCC would have two distinctively different services, sharing frequencies. They didn't even bother setting a primary and secondary service.

An "I think", I don't know that this would be easy to confirm. We could probably get sales data from manufacturers for 2 or 3 decades of sales, assume x% are no longer working and x% exported. It would still be a guess, but may be close. This brings three questions to mind for me. Who will do the leg-work? Will the manufacturers be willing to play ball? Would polling the user community have any value? I think the same as above. We would have to poll manufacturing data... though that should be a bit easier since the performance data is public information. Anecdotally, no Midland radios I have owned have WB. All of my BTechs did both. I believe this is a commercially driven, supply side debate, more of a 'what if'. If the demand is there and manufactures are willing to invest in the market, then that would swing policy more so than the individual users, such as family units. That said, obviously, you can't completely rule out the Legislature and/or the FCC following the natural flow in a direction of all NB. Agreed. They also did it with Citizens Band, deregulating that (for the most part) and getting rid of license requirements.

He is not saying the repeater output frequencies... He is saying repeater output.

Now I know you are a troll. I'm done.

Nope.... Dude... words have meaning. You can't transmit on a repeater output unless you're on the input. You even highlighted it above. You doubling down on the wrong thing doesn't make you correct.

Russ... this is 100% factually incorrect. Based on Code of Federal Regulations, FRS radios are not permitted to transmit on the repeater input frequencies, therefore will never be heard on a repeat output. They are explicitly only allowed to transmit on the allocated simplex frequencies. In fact, the ability to transmit on any frequency beyond the 22 simplex frequencies assigned to the FRS would automatically disqualify any transceiver from getting its part 95 FRS certification. Only part 95 certified GMRS radios are permitted to transmit on the repeater input frequencies, and that requires a GMRS operator's license. Considering I have spent the last 22 years as independent consultant for the US federal government (17+ for local government), specializing in providing emergency communications sustainment and restoration support to critical communications infrastructure, I am pretty sure I am a bit more in tune with what is happening in the industry, than what you are giving me credit for.

I wouldn't rule it out as a possibility, for sure.

So we went from childish to vague ominous threats that are as empty as space, as if you have some kind of control or insight as to what the future holds for the spectrum and its users. Nice! So, here's a little secret about how many of our laws are made and regulatory agencies plan. Big business polls the people to find the largest marketable demographic that is likely to buy something. Then they look at likelihood and expense to deliver in a specific timeframe, estimate time to profitability and anticipated duration of product or service lifetime. If they think the can make a lot of money soon, the companies bribe/lobby/make campaign contributions to whomever they need to (in the order of hundreds of millions) until they get their way. You aren't going to change anything. You don't have any insight or insider knowledge. You're talking out your butt.. and if anything does change (I'm sure one day it will) regardless of how much you will claim it was you, you would have had nothing to do with it.

That was painful. I saw his posts on QRZ... but I haven't seen this one.

Being as sincere as I can be, this is a discussion forum and we like to talk about this stuff. Just because a bunch of people disagree with your opinion, that doesn't mean the conversation doesn't have value. You have to understand, though. It's not a question of facing change, but rather the change you suggest is not an improvement. It was the technical equivalent of telling people that cars pollute too much, so your solution is to got back to horse drawn carts. You have to expect a nation full of personal automobile owners would think its a terrible idea, regardless of any potential perceived benefits. The more narrow the signal, the less data you can move. In the voice service, that translates to loss of signal and voice fidelity. That translates to less range and a voice service that has less potential, not more. So, in the same way I made a valid technical point of fact to support my opinion, I would recommend you continuing the conversation in the same way. Having the adult equivalent response of, taking your ball and going home, isn't going to win people over.

LOL... love it. GMRS Callsign:WRCW554 Ham Callsign:KN6SD

I can't help you very much on your specific case, but I would like to provide a little feedback on radios and duty cycle. There is a common misconception that you can take a transmitter and run it at a fraction of its rated output power and get a higher or 100% duty cycle. This is false and you may break your radio. It is true that you will be able to get a higher duty cycle out of the PA(s), but if the entire radio isn't designed for repeater use and 100% duty cycle at some power level, it's going to be a bad choice. Whatever you end up doing, verify the duty cycle with the manufacturer.

Good deal... it's a heck of a performer. You're going to like the coverage you get out of it.

I don't have any specific recommendations. I don't operate QRP, though some of my friends and fellow club members do. I have been out in the mountains with them while operating and it it amazing to see how well they get their stuff to work. I would recommend finding a group or forum the specializes in QRP. That would be a much better resource of information. I suggested 40 meter because most people can/will only have one device. 40 meter is global comms day or night, while compared to other bands, such as 20 that works best during the day and possibly not at all at night... or 80m which works the best at night, but possibly not at all during the day. You can get much better efficiency and a smaller antenna with 20m, but you risk not having night time comms.

Great points! I forgot to mention that most of my VHF DX stuff is upper side band. Its a great mode. The transceivers don't run as hot, have a higher duty cycle and are much more efficient than FM or AM.

Hmm. That's less than ideal, isn't it.

There is a tremendous amount of benefits with Amateur Radio vs. GMRS. First, lets just talk about voice. On GMRS simplex, the absolute very best you can expect from a perfect setup, is going to be about 70 miles. Likely less. That would be mobile or base. With Amateur Radio VHF and UHF, the power limits are 1500 watts with no radiated power restrictions. That means with a little elevation, you are talking coast to coast on the higher portions of VHF and the lower portions of UHF. On the lower portions of VHF, you can talk to Europe, Mediterranean, Northern Africa, etc. Even in my mobile, I can talk to NY from Virginia on VHF simplex. With things other than voice... there is no limit to what you can do beyond no encryption. If you can dream it, you can do it on amateur radio. There is APRS, which provides transceiver location services. There FLDigi which is used for texting and simple messaging. There is WinLink which is a 100% radio-based email service that allows you to email other operators as well as people on the public internet. And much, much more. The benefit of HF and MF is, the ease of global comms as you drop in frequency. I was driving around in my Jeep today on an HF frequency that Tech license holders have access to. I talked to people in 3 different countries on 2 different continents with a simple 100 watt mobile radio and a whip antenna. It's really a lot of fun. As far as a base station goes, I don't use mobile radios for base a station. I have base station radios that I use for VHF, and a VHF/UHF repeater. I talk on VHF on the base for several hours a week, sitting in my executive desk chair. As far as the quality of conversation... I can't really say much about that. I would assume there are plenty of people to talk to without getting into religion, politics, etc. I avoid them like the plague. With regard to if it's worth it... that is a personal choice that each person needs to decide for themselves. I think it is. I held my Tech license for 17+ years before I got my General and had a great time. I also think the GMRS and FRS are great radio service and fill a nice niche.

Good point... LoL

Its unlikely flashing existing hardware will be an option. The electronic components used to make filters are designed for narrow use and may not be tuned properly for just a reflash. Think of it like a car on the highway. If you have a car that can travel at 200mph and the speed limit is raised to 200mph, you're good to go. However, if your car has a top speed of 80... it doesn't matter how high the speed limit is. You would have to re-engineer the car to go faster.

There is something called the Open Repeater Initiative or OPI. It uses 462.675 with a CTCSS Tone of 141.3Hz. The frequency was selected by a group of Repeater owners who wanted to create a standard for travelers to be able to have easy access to repeater while on the road, without having to search for a repeater or ask for permission to use it. The 141.3 tone was also selected as the "travel tone" standard. Scanning the frequencies is okay, but you may only talk for a couple of miles. Using open repeaters with "traveler" settings gives you a chance to reach the greatest number of operators for more distance and time.

That is a huge step in the wrong direction, IMHO. We need FRS & GMRS to stop sharing frequencies. Let FRS be low power narrow band and give GMRS operators more wideband frequencies. I'm tired of sharing the channels with 4 and 5 year old kids screaming at their cousin who is only 30 feet away, about how much they love play dough.

LoL yea, looks that way. With what I do for a living, I actually type truncated a lot (talking about log files, databases, etc.). My phone constantly changes correctly spelled words to other words it thinks I mean. I dont proofread enough and I keep sending messages I don't mean. An example.. a friend asked me if I wanted to buy a bicycle he was selling. I replied that I was to fat to ride a bike, but my phone changed it to I was to gay to ride a bike. Needless to say, my friend was very confused.

Many fire and police in the US are on trunked digital systems that are encrypted. There are very few that are using analog radios and that traffic is usually chatter. Nothing worth listening to.