marcspaz

I thought it was one that's been neutered 🤔

A Fixed Station is one that's been repaired.
/s

Staffords is P25 Phase II. Its very simple to do what he did. Ton of videos and forum directions on how to do what he did and folks helped him. Just like here. 

This bubbled up on my local feed today.  I am not sure if this was an honest error or if this dude was legit trying to get into the law enforcement system, but the FCC only sent a no-no letter.  Part of me thinks that if it was an honest error and the person was just trying to repurpose the radio, that's fine... don't do it again.  Another part of me is thinking "he admitted to putting the radio on that frequency himself, which implies some nefarious behavior and he should get more than a warning."
 
Anyway, just a reminder to try not to cause interference when you are attempting to repurpose those older LMR Part 90 radios.
 
https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-410850A1.pdf
Snip of text...
 
 

Our 70cm antenna is at 900 feet and we get about a 35-40 mile radius of coverage. Our GMRS antenna is at 400 feet and we get 30-35 mile radio of coverage. And both bands have same dead spots depending on the terrain and trees.
Our 2m antenna is also at 900 feet and we get a 80-85 mile radius with it. I mention it to show the difference between VHF and UHF. The 2m and 70cm repeaters actually use the same set of antennas and go into a diplexer.

Anybody can come up with scenarios where any use could be helpful.  The issue is, is GMRS as specified in the regs, the right service for your usage scenario.  If not, and you want FCC to make a change, then propose that.  Just going rogue because it suits your purpose makes you a radio outlaw.
 
Part of the the issue is just the precise meaning of what "illegal" means in this context.  We should refer to violation rather than illegal since it is about regulations.  But I think it is generally understood that illegal in the radio context means violating FCC regs.
Linking over RF is not explicitly prohibited in the wording of the regs.  But it is at least discouraged in the rule clarification where it explains any linking is bad.  As far as I have ever heard or read, starting with ham, mixing radio services is prohibited by regulation.  There are no other frequencies that I know of that can legally (haha) carry GMRS conversations.  If you know of some, can you list the frequency and/or the service?
 
Sounds a lot like "our country, love it or leave it".  Leaving if you don't like how it is used would be fine IF EVERYONE WAS FOLLOWING THE RULES.  Leaving because some people want to break the rules is just running away rather than fighting.

The Calif High Desert offers a lot of locations with good elevation and wide open valleys.  One repeater here siting on a 4500 foot mountain top  (El Paso)  can talk Palmdale - Lone Pine about 160 miles (Repeater sitting about center point).   I've heard people talking on this repeater on HT's standing at Whitney Portals on the same path.   I think dry weather has a lot of benefit to talk distance as well.  

I'm sure you folks are getting great coverage where you are, but there are a lot a variables that make it so that works in those situations. It becomes problematic for a vast majority of the US.
On the ocean or in perfectly flat land areas, if you have an antenna that is on a 100' mast, you are only covering 14 mile radius.  Even if you bump to a 300' mast (which cost over $1m for a good commercial grade 300' tower) you are only looking at a radius of about 25 miles.  To cover 100 miles (200 total miles end to end) your antenna needs to be almost 1 mile above the average terrain.  That simply isn't possible in a vast majority of the US.  If you are able to put an antenna on a mountain that overlooks a valley, you are golden, though.
We have one of our antennas 1,000 feet above average terrain and we are barely pushing it a 45 miles, with dead spots inside that coverage area due to terrain.  That particular repeater is known throughout the mid-Atlantic for being one of the top 3 repeaters, even when we include amateur radio coverage, and the top coverage repeater for GMRS in the area.  Due to the terrain limits here, people/companies running farms need networked radios for reliable coverage and most of them are using commercial radio for it.

I don't like the idea of linking any repeaters for the sake of rag-chewing... but there is some practical applications that many seem to overlook.  Things like remote receivers for extended talk-in to a high power repeater than can't hear handheld and other low power radios.  Or, in an area that needs expanded coverage for emergency response (such as areas prone to flooding or severe snow causing issues) and any number of other situations.  Maybe you own a massive farm or ranch and one repeater just won't cover it.
 
Also, people keep saying linking repeaters is illegal and it is not.  It is 100% legal.  There is, however, a rule against using networks to link repeaters.  You can do RF linking over GMRS frequencies (which uses more bandwidth, not a very friendly idea) or you can link repeaters over another radio service that you are licensed for.
 
Also... just because you do or don't like something... that doesn't mean you're right.  We are not in a world, or at least we shouldn't be in a world, were the majority bans what they don't like and mandates what they do.  That is not freedom.  If you don't like how the radio service is used near you, then don't use it.

I'm sure you folks are getting great coverage where you are, but there are a lot a variables that make it so that works in those situations. It becomes problematic for a vast majority of the US.
On the ocean or in perfectly flat land areas, if you have an antenna that is on a 100' mast, you are only covering 14 mile radius.  Even if you bump to a 300' mast (which cost over $1m for a good commercial grade 300' tower) you are only looking at a radius of about 25 miles.  To cover 100 miles (200 total miles end to end) your antenna needs to be almost 1 mile above the average terrain.  That simply isn't possible in a vast majority of the US.  If you are able to put an antenna on a mountain that overlooks a valley, you are golden, though.
We have one of our antennas 1,000 feet above average terrain and we are barely pushing it a 45 miles, with dead spots inside that coverage area due to terrain.  That particular repeater is known throughout the mid-Atlantic for being one of the top 3 repeaters, even when we include amateur radio coverage, and the top coverage repeater for GMRS in the area.  Due to the terrain limits here, people/companies running farms need networked radios for reliable coverage and most of them are using commercial radio for it.

I always love hearing/reading opinions of others.  Especially if they are different than mine, because I may learn something new that could lead to a position change.  Friendly chat is always welcome.  You have some very good and very valid points.  I don't see anything I disagree with.  Good analysis, for sure.

I always love hearing/reading opinions of others.  Especially if they are different than mine, because I may learn something new that could lead to a position change.  Friendly chat is always welcome.  You have some very good and very valid points.  I don't see anything I disagree with.  Good analysis, for sure.

Likewise Mark..   I appreciate your opinions as well.   And i admit, i have learned a lot from your post.  

I always love hearing/reading opinions of others.  Especially if they are different than mine, because I may learn something new that could lead to a position change.  Friendly chat is always welcome.  You have some very good and very valid points.  I don't see anything I disagree with.  Good analysis, for sure.

I don't like the idea of linking any repeaters for the sake of rag-chewing... but there is some practical applications that many seem to overlook.  Things like remote receivers for extended talk-in to a high power repeater than can't hear handheld and other low power radios.  Or, in an area that needs expanded coverage for emergency response (such as areas prone to flooding or severe snow causing issues) and any number of other situations.  Maybe you own a massive farm or ranch and one repeater just won't cover it.
 
Also, people keep saying linking repeaters is illegal and it is not.  It is 100% legal.  There is, however, a rule against using networks to link repeaters.  You can do RF linking over GMRS frequencies (which uses more bandwidth, not a very friendly idea) or you can link repeaters over another radio service that you are licensed for.
 
Also... just because you do or don't like something... that doesn't mean you're right.  We are not in a world, or at least we shouldn't be in a world, were the majority bans what they don't like and mandates what they do.  That is not freedom.  If you don't like how the radio service is used near you, then don't use it.

I don't like the idea of linking any repeaters for the sake of rag-chewing... but there is some practical applications that many seem to overlook.  Things like remote receivers for extended talk-in to a high power repeater than can't hear handheld and other low power radios.  Or, in an area that needs expanded coverage for emergency response (such as areas prone to flooding or severe snow causing issues) and any number of other situations.  Maybe you own a massive farm or ranch and one repeater just won't cover it.
 
Also, people keep saying linking repeaters is illegal and it is not.  It is 100% legal.  There is, however, a rule against using networks to link repeaters.  You can do RF linking over GMRS frequencies (which uses more bandwidth, not a very friendly idea) or you can link repeaters over another radio service that you are licensed for.
 
Also... just because you do or don't like something... that doesn't mean you're right.  We are not in a world, or at least we shouldn't be in a world, were the majority bans what they don't like and mandates what they do.  That is not freedom.  If you don't like how the radio service is used near you, then don't use it.

I don't like the idea of linking any repeaters for the sake of rag-chewing... but there is some practical applications that many seem to overlook.  Things like remote receivers for extended talk-in to a high power repeater than can't hear handheld and other low power radios.  Or, in an area that needs expanded coverage for emergency response (such as areas prone to flooding or severe snow causing issues) and any number of other situations.  Maybe you own a massive farm or ranch and one repeater just won't cover it.
 
Also, people keep saying linking repeaters is illegal and it is not.  It is 100% legal.  There is, however, a rule against using networks to link repeaters.  You can do RF linking over GMRS frequencies (which uses more bandwidth, not a very friendly idea) or you can link repeaters over another radio service that you are licensed for.
 
Also... just because you do or don't like something... that doesn't mean you're right.  We are not in a world, or at least we shouldn't be in a world, were the majority bans what they don't like and mandates what they do.  That is not freedom.  If you don't like how the radio service is used near you, then don't use it.

There is also an old saying about government over-reach being out of control, and free men dont ask for permission, especially when doing nothing wrong.

Everyone has realized out that the FCC STILL does not care.

This bubbled up on my local feed today.  I am not sure if this was an honest error or if this dude was legit trying to get into the law enforcement system, but the FCC only sent a no-no letter.  Part of me thinks that if it was an honest error and the person was just trying to repurpose the radio, that's fine... don't do it again.  Another part of me is thinking "he admitted to putting the radio on that frequency himself, which implies some nefarious behavior and he should get more than a warning."
 
Anyway, just a reminder to try not to cause interference when you are attempting to repurpose those older LMR Part 90 radios.
 
https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-410850A1.pdf
Snip of text...
 
 

Sounds like the violator had better be VERY careful in his response letter to the FCC. Should probably send them a pic of the radio with a bullet hole through it, LOL.

"illegally programmed" is...certainly a hell of a phrase to use.

I say an intentional act.   Cities Counties, etc selling off old radios decommision them and clean of all programing. The guy admitted to tuning into a police frequency and also menat he had to tune in the correct PL tones.  A few years ago the same thing happened in our community. After about two days a squad of Hams assisting the cops were able to zero in on the offender.  The FCC in this case was notified after they nailed the guy and according to the news accounts, the FCC handled the problem..  Now days with Public Safety going all digital its almost impossible to breach their systems.  

He probably had no clue it would transmit an authentication code and he was trying to use it as a scanner.  or not?   
 

Or... you could have just replied 'no'.