tweiss3
-
Posts
805 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
16
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Gallery
Classifieds
Posts posted by tweiss3
-
-
-
I rarely hear much when driving during the day. I do hear the brunswick and lakewood repeaters identify on schedule, but never heard another user.
My repeater is down due to a broken antenna, but never reaches that far either.
We really only use GMRS for family events and trips, being we can often be out of cell phone coverage, and its a ton easier to hit PTT and get their attention rather than pull the phone out and attempt a call.
I know some neighborhood groups use GMRS to keep track of each other, especially during long power outages.
-
I'm not sure about the MTS2000, but the other M stuff in 900 I've played with required hex edits to program in the 902 ham band, but did not use different software.
-
-
I wonder if he is hearing MDC1200 IDs, which aren't technically permitted over the repeaters, but are permitted on simplex.
-
This is typical Vertex Standard issue. There was a wideband revert package to roll the radio back. You then have to use older versions of the software to program in wideband.
-
1 hour ago, BoxCar said:
Moto and Kenwood I believe are made in Malasia.
It depends. "Federal" Kenwoods are built in Japan, the rest are currently made in Malaysia. I have a NX-5300-F6 sitting right here that is made in Japan, and the NX-5200-K3 says made in Malaysia. I believe something similar with Moto's APX series.
-
3 minutes ago, JamesBrox said:
I would. But from what I understand.....PL tones do nothing to what the radio hears. Thanks
You are rather misinformed. If you use a PL tone on receive, you are only going to hear transmissions that have the matching PL tone.
Also, keep in mind, FRS shares all channels with GMRS, so you may be hearing construction works goof around. There isn't anything in the world that will stop those transmissions.
-
-
5 minutes ago, marcspaz said:
Given that a significant amount of people on GMRS and in the form are also amateur radio operators and there is an amateur radio section of the form, I would say it's quite relevant. Steve's signature definitely brings more value than a single post you have made so far.
How about bringing some value to the conversation, instead of insults.
You mean one can be licensed in multiple categories by the FCC and carry multiple call signs? /scarcasm
- marcspaz and AdmiralCochrane
-
2
-
-
@kidphc Long term impressions? What about battery life? I've still got an eye on these.
-
-
16 hours ago, Sshannon said:
HF Stations are suggested to monitor 7.088 LSB. Your participation is crucial during this time. SEE 40meter.net Informal Nets held at 9am, Noon and 4pm.
I don't remember reading about this portion of the 40m band last time I went through Part 97. In relation to Voice & Image privileges for 7.075 thru 7.100, read 97.305(c) with footnote 97.307(f)(11), and then 97.301(e). Hawaii, and likely part of Alaska, technicians get 40 meter privileges within the CW portion of the band.
I likely glossed over this previously as it doesn't relate to me. I may still turn the radio on to see if I can hear them, though I would not be permitted to respond.
-
The real reason is an attempt to "stupid proof" the services. They want to force you to deliberately make an effort to transmit on the service you intend to use. If you had a mismash of frequencies from multiple service scanning at once, the chances of you responding to the wrong service with the wrong call sign is very high. If you have 2 different radios, you deliberately grab the GMRS microphone and transmit on the intended frequency. Now, it has happened to even the experienced operators, grabbing the wrong microphone and using the wrong call sign.
Are there good best management practices that can be used to minimize the cross use of services, and tossing out the incorrect call sign? Sure there are, but how many new licensees have enough trouble understanding how to program a single repeater, let alone run zones/scan lists/etc. Now toss in inexperience, and difficulty reading the rules directly from eCFR. It is much easier to say separate radio for each service than to try to write BMPs into the code as hard and fast regulations.
-
I'd call Rohn and talk to them about your specific site constraints. With all the rock, they might be able to help you with a matt foundation that would work for your loading scenario. It would still be reinforced, but would be wider than the standard foundation, and much shallower (maybe 2'), and could be placed directly on the bedrock, however deep that is (assuming its barely under the topsoil). I would buy a new base for imbedding in the concrete unless you want to use the bottom section as your base.
-
I have a feeling they are looking at the $1500 Garmin Tread with Group Ride and realize they aren't going to beat Garmin at their own game, but also realize they they currently have a market with deep pockets (jeep guys) that are likely to spend similar money if they get some published advantage over Garmin, even if it's actual implementation isn't seamless.
-
Just now, Sshannon said:
“Section 95.1767(a), to allow the devices sending digital data to operate at 50 watts instead of the current 5 watt limit.13 In its Waiver Amendment, Midland argues that operating at higher powers will better serve the safety needs of and real-life use by off-road users.14 Midland also states that GMRS device users will be better served by data transmissions, as opposed to voice messages, because data transmission are more reliable and more accurate.15 Further, it claims that allowing a 50 watt power limit would enable a data transmission range of roughly 5-6 miles, as opposed to .5-1 miles for 5 watts, which would better serve the needs of users.”
I find this section hilarious, because in this technical memo requesting the waiver, they acknowledge that range is an issue with HTs, however, they continue to advertise their FRS radios with range of "up to 20 miles" and their GMRS HTs with a range of "up to 36 miles".
-
-
-
I was made aware of this on another forum. https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-23-633A1.pdf
I know the "new channels" discussion got heated, this ought to get some discussion flowing. Lets hope this doesn't become an annoyance with pavement princesses texting and transmitting their location every 10 seconds.
-
10 hours ago, Lscott said:
Today Hams have gotten lazy by depending on the radio’s firmware to limit the digital PLL programming to keep within the band limits. Most Hams don’t realize they can’t operate too close to the band edges since the occupied signal bandwidth would extend past the edge even if the center frequency is within the band. When the FCC says you have to stay within the band limits that INCLUDES the signal’s occupied bandwidth too. Oops.
This is part of SSB operation 101.
-
Part 97 only requires testing from manufacturers to ensure they don't produce 20,000 units that are junk and spewing spurious emissions (though, it still happens). There is no testing requirements for an amateur licensee to get testing, however, part 97 is very clear on spurious emissions: § 97.307 Emission standards
-
7 minutes ago, WRXE944 said:
What were the beginning and end points of your trip? Which 6m radio did you use?
NE Ohio to SE Tennessee. I was using my 705 with my Little Tarheel II with the TuneMatic controller. I decided to keep it on 6m this trip for simplicity.
Toy to play with Harris XG-100P
in Amateur Radio (Ham)
Posted
So I found one that I was willing to part with my money for. This will be interesting.
What batteries are you guys using, OEM, aftermarket?