marcspaz

I'm not disagreeing with you there. That seems to be normal behavior in the real world. There are dozens of repeaters near me that are open for public use and only 2 of them self-ID (both in 20wpm CW). The issue is, legally, the statute regulation is very plain language. If its my repeater, me and my immediate family use the repeater... no need for the repeater to ID. If another licensee uses my repeater, than the repeater must ID with my station identification. The only legal exception I can think of would be a grandfathered GMRS station license. If a Trust holds a license and the Trust bi-laws states that anyone who uses the repeater is formally a beneficiary of the trust while using the repeater, than there would be no ID requirement. (All purely hypothetical, BTW... just thinking about a legal exemption.) Just a little understanding of why I am saying what I am saying. I studied Constitutional Law for 7 year (2 in college and 5 years of independent study) and I have spent years helping both write pro-2a Bills and fight anti-2a legislation. I am looking at it purely from a statutory prospective based on my training and experience. That said, the FCC has the discretion to prosecute or not. If laws are widely broken or those infractions are largely ignored by law enforcement, that doesn't make it legal, from a statutory standpoint. A great example would be CB radio. Maximum legal power on AM is the mean carrier power must not exceed 4 watts and its strictly prohibited to use any external amplifier of any kind. That is the statute. In reality, I don't know a single person who owns a CB that is running less than 30 watts without an amp and less than 200 watts with an amp. Most CB operators I know have amps that are well over 2,000 watts. Thousands of people are talking DX for 1,500 - 2,500 miles, every single day on CB. Yet there is no known FCC enforcement that I am aware of, on any of these people who violate the law, and its all the same people for decades. That doesn't mean its legal. It just means the FCC is ignoring it, for the most part.

The way the law is written, if the owner of the repeater and family members covered under the license are using the repeater to talk to each other, then there is no need to have the repeater transmit a station ID. Of course that assumes everyone using the repeater is ID'ing correctly. When the repeater is used to retransmit comms from other operators (not the owner), then the repeater needs to self ID with the owner's station identification using voice or CW.

I laughed pretty hard when I read this line. Mostly because the same guys I heard say that, are sitting on one HF frequency, talking to the same 3 guys all day, for 20 years. AND, they only ID maybe once every 2 hours and God forbid someone is on the air, tying up "their frequency" when they what to get online and BS for 5 hours.

The radio was only a few days old when it broke. The Ham Radio Outlet gave me a brand new radio and sent the damaged one back for analysis. It may be a month or so before we hear back. They may never tell me what the result is... but at least the HRO took good care of me.

Looks like the TM-8402A might do the trick, and cover Ham UHF, too... but the price is high on some of these.

That's my recollection in the Ham world too. If you didn't have a Yaesu, you made a mistake. That was 18-20 years ago. You can't imagine how disappoints I was when both of my FT-8900's broke and the fact that I am on my second FT-857D because the first one had the PA's catch on fire. I still have massive RFI on the FT-857D that is installed in the truck. I can't use 60m or 10m because of it. I bench tested the radio with a dummy load and everything was fine, so its RFI due to radiation exposure from the whip. It's driving me nuts... I can't fix it and Yaesu is stumped, too.

Wow... refurbished might be a way to go. I just don't want something DOA and be out of luck. As long as its clean and I have some recourse if there is an issue, that would be good. You are correct to a degree. While Motorola never owned Yaesu directly, when they acquired majority shares in the Vertex Standard label, they didn't take sole ownership. They continued to work with Yaesu to develop and sell products. While Vertex Standard was defunct in 2011(2012?), Motorola is currently actively selling new parts and products with the V/S Vertex Standard label, specifically and exclusively to be operated with Yaesu amateur radios. A good example is the Yaesu FT857D and the Yaesu FC-40 Antenna tuner. Brand new FC-40's are being manufactured today, exclusively by Motorola, shipped to customer in a Yaesu labeled box/packaging, but the device itself has exclusively Vertex Standard labels on the product. The tuner ONLY works with some Yaesu amateur radios. There is definitely an active and ongoing relationship between Motorola and Yaesu, via the Vertex Standard label.

I would agree that a lot of people feel that way. However, there is a tremendous amount of tech and protocols to discover with a Tech license, too. If you spend a lot of time in the upper end of VHF and UHF, you are dealing with line of sight services. Moving voice and data via RF linked networks and being a part of that systems can be a great time. Designing mesh networks and flowing email and other data is fun too. On the high side of HF (10m) and the low side of VHF (6m) you can still talk all around the country as well as making some international contacts using simplex comms. I think many Hams will say that the "hobby starts" with the general and advanced licenses because they never really had an interest in pursuing the great opportunities that entry level licenses provide, either because they don't know those options are there or they didn't see the potential. However, once you have easy success with the low side of HF (80m and 40m) and the high side of MF (160m), it encourages people into getting into other protocols and activities that also exist in the Tech class privileges. I have to admit, the main reason I wanted to upgrade my license was so I could talk simplex to my friends in South Carolina, Florida, Texas, Arizona and Rhode Island. However, being able to talk to people in New Zealand, Italy, Japan, Spain, Central and South America as well as all over Europe, direct, and with just 100 watts and an omnidirectional antenna is a nice plus! The HF equipment is a lot more fun to use too.

Okay.. cool. I'll consider a referb if the price is right.

That's great! I heard a couple of QSO's on a linked net. It's awesome seeing and hearing the kids talk to Santa. Good luck on upgrading to General. I did it a few months ago. Well worth the effort. I love talking on the lower HF and upper MF frequencies. You will really enjoy it.

I have looked at the Alinco and AnyTone radios. Their prices are okay, but I am trying to stay away from Chinese radios. I am not 100% ruling them out. Thank you! I hope you had a Merry Christmas! Vertex Standard, Motorola and Yaesu are all the same company. I have 4 Yaesu radios and every one of them has broken on me in the past 4 months... the vendors refuse to exchange them and I had to send them all back to Yaesu for repair. Every one of them had a receive filter failure. One of them is still broken and VS doesn't know what to do to fix it. The one before this one caught on fire while I was using it. I'm not too sure I want to go that route again. I haven't ruled it out... but consideration is very weak right now. The Kenwood looks pretty nice. I did a quick search and all I am finding is used and refurbished. I'll reach out to a local authorized vendor next week and see if I can get some pricing.

I am starting to do some research for a new radio. I am tempted to use my MARS/CAP hardware. However, I would rather have a Part 90 radio, since they seem to be widely accepted (at least anecdotally) by the FCC for use in GMRS, and MARS/CAP gear is not Part 90 or 95 approved. Does anyone have a lead on new Part 90 mobile radio's I can use for GMRS... like, current production line from a manufacturer? I am trying to stay away from legacy models and used radios. I definitely don't want a CCR. As it stands right now, the Icom F6021 looks like a nice option. I found a few older posts about them. Does anyone have any recent experience with that model? Are programing cables and software easy to find? Some of the sites I have looked at seem to be showing a USB to RJ45, but Icom shows a serial bus connector (like DB9) on the radio. Any other current production radio recommendations? I have just about had it with my Midland MXT400's. I sold 2 and have one left... I'm going to dump that one soon, too. My one and only problem is, I hate having to constantly manually change my tone configuration as I drive around. I have 3 major coverage repeaters near me that work amazing. I can't add any saved channels, there are no programming or expansion options and I can't stand having to set the tone on the radio several times a day as I drive around. If it wasn't for that, I would be happy. So, a multi-channel programmable radio is a must.

As RCM mentions... just set the proper offset and tone and you should be good to go. I would recommend checking the SWR. Many dual-band antennas do not go all the way to 470 MHz, but rather, are not rated above 450 MHz. BTW... I looked up the mini 8900 because I haven't heard of it before. Wow, that thing is tiny! LOL I hope you have good luck with it.

You have to select a channel and then manually engage the code/tone scanning feature.

I can do it after New Year's day. But my equipment is very old and doesn't have any computer interfaces... so I can only provide data... no images like what Corey gave us in the past.

HAHA... got to love the nickel tour.

I understood the question just fine, and answered it. So did others. If you read my responses, you will see that I used polite language to express that fact that the tech is extremely useful (and why) and he (everyone) should spend 3 minutes reading the owners manual to learn how to use the new radio they just bought instead of complaining about it here. Of course, I just gave you the less polite, 5 cent version... but question answered none the less.

Thank you for the kudos... much appreciated, my friend.

While I agree with you... my comments are generalized. People with HT's and mobile radios aren't going to walk/drive around with massive tuning cans and massive narrow resonance antennas for improved noise filtering. Also... a hug majority of complaining and questions I see/hear is "I can't reach a repeater" and "how do I get more range out of my radio?" Most people building repeaters are likely educated and experienced enough that the don't need my advice.

It was sent to Yaesu for review. My initial thought is the controller failed. Just moments before, the transceiver would keep sending an FM carrier after I let the PTT go. I had to disconnect the power to shut it off. It seemed okay for about 5 minutes after the reboot,before the fire. Another reason I think it was the controller IC failure is because a huge voltage spike from the IF circuit nuked both antennas and feed lines on the VHF/UHF side and the HF side.

I love the way Yaesu radios look and feel. They have great features and are very intuitive to use. BUT... my FT-8900 had blown receive filters, brand new out of the box. And today, my 5 day old $800 Yaesu FT-857D caught on fire while I was in the middle of a QSO. With all of the terrible stuff that I experienced with BTech/BaoFeng ham radios, none of them caught on fire and nearly burn my Jeep down with me in it. I think I am going to switch to Kenwood. LOL

Yep. Page 26 of the manual.

I can't really speak to the Midland being a rebadged brand. I have heard some mention it, but I haven't really seen anything that supports it. I think it's like TV tech about 20 years ago. Mitsubishi was making IC's that were used in almost every TV built, so rumor spread that all TV's were just rebranded Mitsubishi TV's.... which was not true. I have several MXT400's. If you want new, no nonsense, out of the box with a warranty, they are great. But like anything else entry level, there are some drawbacks. No split tone and lack of wide-band are the 2 most notable. I have a few Baofeng ham radios. They are okay, but I wouldn't rely on them in a Dark Sky event. I use iCom and Yaesu for "when it counts". I've mentioned this before... GMRS is not a proper solution for COOP/DR ops, even if it's for your family. You really should get ham licenses and use HF. I can talk simplex wide-band FM, reliably, for several hundred miles, and around the globe on SSB. I really love GMRS and it's the platform I use the most... but it's a line of sight service/technology.

It's funny... I do exactly what you are talking about with everyone except for when I talk to my son, regardless of the band. LOL Him and I usually plan to talk on a specific frequency at a particular... so unless the frequency is in use at that time, I'll just get on the radio and say "hey buddy, you there?" or, "Hey Nick, you on the air?" I am not sure why... he is the only person I do that with on both GMRS, 2m, 70cm.

I have seen a few posts talking about getting more distance out of UHF gear, such as the GMRS equipment we use. It looks like the common theme is, many immediately want to go for more power, assuming they can brute-force their way through issues. I am hoping myself and some of the other people who have some training and practical experience can use this thread to help new users understand how to make life better without more power. I want to start with handheld transceivers. HT antennas use your body as a counterpoise. Depending on how you are dressed, how tall you are, how you are holding the radio, the radio position, the distance of the radio from your body, what direction you are facing, all impact performance. Even how much fat, salt and water your body is retaining at the moment impacts how an HT antenna works, because those things vary the conductivity of the human body. In all seriousness, forget about more power... or even more range from a typical HT. If you want more range out of your HT, your best bet is to find higher ground, figure out where the best place to stand is, and what general direction to be facing when compared to the receiving station provides the best communications path. Mobile antennas are often several wavelengths+ in overall height and the body of the vehicle is typically a much better reflective counterpoise. There is a lot that can be done in the mobile and base antenna world that can help, but for now, lets continue to focus on why 'more power' likely isn't the right answer. There is a standard in radio communications about intelligibility of radio communications. It is called the 5/9 scale. 0 to 5 for voice clarity and 0 to 9+ for signal strength in s-units. It is said that while a 2/1 signal provides partially usable comms, the lowest "reliable" communications happens at a 3/2 (or 32) and the best is a 5/9+ (often called 599, 59+20, 59+40). With that in mind, you have to quadruple your power to impact a receiver 1 s-unit. So, if the other party is receiving a signal at 1/2 s-unit while you are using 4 watts, you need 16 watts to go to 1 s-unit. You then need to jump to 64 watts for 2 s-units. Finally a third jump in power of 256 watts to get to 3 s-units and possibly getting a reliable communications signal (a 2/3 or 3/3). Depending on the modulation of the carrier signal and bandwidth, you may need to jump to 4 s-units, requiring well over 1,000 watts. Now, lets say the same receive condition exists, but now you are already using 20 watts for that 1/2 s-unit. Now your power jumps are 80 watts, 320 watts, 1,280 watts for 3 s-units and possibly needing 5,120 watts for 4 s-units. Well, the first bump you made already seriously violates power restrictions in GMRS. AND, this is under hypothetical perfect conditions, assuming nothing else changed in the environment. Which almost never exists. Chasing better performance by boosting power typically doesn't give you any truly desirable results. The top 3 items that will help improve comms in almost every band is elevation, elevation, and elevation. From there its antenna tuning (and beams) filters to reduce interference and lowering the noise floor, as some examples. So, for our technically skill folks... Would anyone like to contribute some general advice for new users to benefit from? General advice on what to do or not to do?