mbrun

Nearly anything you do to get the antenna higher in elevation is going to have a positive impact on your range. An HT hooked up to antenna at 20, 40, 60 feet and more is going to result in noticeable increase in range over an HT at 5 feet. Even in a mobile situation, putting an external antenna on the vehicle may add 4 feet of elevation increase. Here you win twice because the antenna is higher, plus the antenna is outside of the box that serves as a signal obstruction. Michael WRHS965 KE8PLM

Technically the average user would not know if you were using the repeater input frequencies in a simplex capacity. The issue with using the GMRS main 467.xxxxx frequencies for simplex is that use of them can render area repeaters ineffective or perhaps even useless if there were to be wide-spread traffic on them. What I mean by “illegally” is a follows from the FCC Part 95 rules: 95.1763 © 467 MHz main channels. Only mobile, hand-held portable, control and fixed stations may transmit on these 8 channels. Mobile, hand-held portable and control stations may transmit on these channels only when communicating through a repeater station or making brief test transmissions in accordance with § 95.319©. The channel center frequencies are: 467.5500, 467.5750, 467.6000, 467.6250, 467.6500, 467.6750, 467.7000, and 467.7250 MHz. By leaving these main frequencies solely for repeater input frequencies we preserve the usefulness of the service with repeaters. It has been reported on this forum and elsewhere that even the use of the 467 interstitials by FRS radios has been a become a serious problem for some repeaters. Hope that helps. Michael WRHS965 KE8PLM

I do not expect any performance impacts related to painting the cable. The RF signals travel on the inner surface of shield and outer surface of the center conductor. If by chance the paint had a metallic component, it would have a shielding effect and would be no different that running the coax in conduit, next to or within the metal channels of the vehicle. I can’t speak to the long-term adhesion though. Michael WRHS965 KE8PLM

The Red Cable should work just fine. The issue is with the software. Software needs to be run either in Admin’ or ‘Compatibility Mode’. There is a FAQ about it on the BTWR site. As I recall, you can right click on the desktop shortcut for the 905 software and choose compatibility mode setting from on one of the tabs accessible from there. Michael WRHS965 KE8PLM https://www.buytwowayradios.com/blog/2021/05/how-to-install-the-programming-cable-and-software-for-the-kg-905g.html

The operation performed by the Function Keys A, B and C on top of the radio are changed by altering the settings of Menu Function 48, 49, and 50. (Example: Press , then scroll to the setting you want to assign to the button, . Hope that helps. Michael WRHS965 KE8PLM

I believe you have encountered a common condition that exists with all BaoFeng and Midland repeater capable part 95 GMRS radios. The first 30 channels are either fixed Tx-Rx pairs, or otherwise the only ones you can transmit on. All the rest are Rx only. I don’t recall seeing any post that has indicated to the contrary. All four Wouxun GMRS models are capable of independent frequency and tone combinations in each of their 128-256-999 memories as do all the part 90 radios folks use. Michael WRHS965 KE8PLM

Sadly, yes you will need the RTS cable. Not sure exactly what they are doing and why though. Although I can use the Wouxun cable without issue with the factory software, that cable was not recognized by RTS software. There may be some trick to getting it work. I just did not feel like playing with it to figure it out. Michael WRHS965 KE8PLM

I use them merely to monitor two frequencies at once. Normally one side is set to my home simplex channel, the one intended for communication with the Ms when I am out walking and such, while the other is for the dominate repeater I use. Occasionally I use one receiver to scan all GMRS frequencies while staying tuned to another. Michael WRHS965 KE8PLM

Welcome to myGMRS. Michael WRHS965 KE8PLM

The higher up in frequency you go, the more line-of-site it becomes. This means that, in part, obstacles have an increasingly adverse affect on range. In GMRS, height is might. The fewer the obstacles between two antennas the greater the effective range of the signal travel. 50, 60, 70 miles on earth is truly possible, but these ranges are also truly exceptional, not the norm. When a city has a repeater that seems to work well and covers the whole city it is because the repeater antenna is usually way above average terrain and well above most buildings. If you could put an antenna up to that same degree at your home you too would experience that same wonderful coverage. Case in point. I can open a repeater 50 miles north of my home using just a 5w HT while standing outside. Why? Because the repeater antenna is 500’ or so higher than me. Now, if I hook up that same HT to my base antenna at 40’, 5 watts is more than enough to carry on a clear conversation through that repeater. However, the base antenna, again at 40’ feet, is still only sufficient for reliable simplex communications from my base to a 5 watt HT out to about 1.5-2 miles. My base antenna needs to be raised higher to get more base-to-HT range. When I do raise the antenna to 55’ or so and I gain an additional couple of miles. Raising the antenna nearly always decreases the number of obstacles that attenuate the signal, so that is why it is so important for good communications. Hope this helps some. Michael WRHS965 KE8PLM

Love it; so much so that I bought a license for multiple radio models I own. Editing, copy and pasting, importing and exporting are more intuitive and more to my liking. With license for multiple radios I can readily share channel settings between multiple radios. There are a few niceties that Chirp has that RTS does not have that I wish it did have (like hiding unused channels) but RTS is supported software. Michael WRHS965 KE8PLM

Good Day Almiz. You have clearly identified that you have a noise issue. Noise in a mobile setting is not uncommon, but the offending source can vary as there are loads of electronics in vehicles nowadays. The resolution can vary as well. It is going to take some experimentation on your part. Connect your radio directly to the directly to the battery instead if you are currently using a 12v accessory port to see if it makes a difference. For many it has. Try operating your radio using an external battery instead of the vehicle’s battery. Doing so can be an indication of whether the interference is coming in by way of your power cord or antenna. Try different locations for the antenna. Move the antenna further away from the engine and dash and move it toward the rear of the vehicle. Try a different routing of the antenna cable. Try coiling the extra coax into a 4-5” loop if there is extra present. Try the coil both near the radio and away from the radio. Try turning off various things in your vehicle, like bluetooth and wifi if it is so equipped. On another recent post on this forum, some reported they had a noise problem when using a very low-profile antenna. When they switched to a taller and higher gain antenna the offending noise went away, presumable a result of a change in pickup pattern. Try some of these things and report back. Regards Michael WRHS965 KE8PLM

Obstructions are your enemy. Obstructions are the earth, buildings, trees, etc. 20’ foot can be plenty high in many locations but is insufficient in many others. It also depends upon the elevation of the other radio’s antenna and the obstacles between them. Getting at least one antenna high relative to the obstacles is material to success. This is why the best working repeaters have antenna that are much higher than the average ground elevation and above other obstacles in the vicinity. Before I freak out about current performance, I would take an HT up the roof and try to communicate with another known working HT or mobile unit. The range you get doing this could be incredibly enlightening and that may help you with future decisions. Michael WRHS965 KE8PLM

I do not believe you should have had to do anything at all to communicate with an FRS radio. I believe the BTECH channel 17 was already factory configured to use the same frequency. Only change to that channel that may be necessary is enabling CTCSS or DCS if it was applicable. If I interpret correctly the various posts from other users on this forum I have read, you can program loads of your own channels for receive only on the BTECH, but you can only transmit on the ones that are factory programmed for you. A weakness of BTECH and Midland Radios. I will need to let owners of said radios comment further. Michael WRHS965 KE8PLM

I just educated myself a bit on UK and European CB. I learned that since the early 80’s legal CB in the UK has been FM. American AM & SSB and frequencies appear to have been illegal almost this whole time. Between 2013 and 2016 the UK adapted AM and SSB as modes as well as a coordinated set of EU frequencies that are compatible with the US, if I interpret the history correctly. So it seems the manufacturers gain by being able to make hardware that can be easily made legal on both sides of the pond, while operators on each side gain a new mode of operation within the 11m CB band. On another note, I dread the prospect of having to listen to the data bursts for the location and text messaging purposes. Anyone scanning with carrier squelch could have to contend with that. As long as the cost of radios with this location capability are priced at the high end of the spectrum I don’t imagine it will be an issue initially. However, as the sales go up and prices come down the neighborhood kids will soon have them. Perhaps this is the FCCs way of getting us used to data in the GMRS spectrum. Once the’re enough packets present we will all be more than willing to switch to all digital since it means we would not have to listen to them any more. One thing I interpret is that data packets can be sent automatically at the beginning of a transmission and at intervals not to exceed every 30 seconds. I also understand that a radio can be requested to send out its position based on the request from another radio. Presumably this will be more than just a broadcast request from one radio that causes 100 radios within ear-shot to report their location. Admittedly I have not played with any of the existing legal hardware that does this on FRS so I cannot speak to how objectionable this actually is. Perhaps if the data bursts are disguised through the use of a different modulation it could be tolerable. On the other hand this whole location feature could be a god-send to fox hunters. If you we could somehow get all those that like to create intentional interference to turn the feature on, the fox hunters could show up and net the fox more rapidly. [emoji23]. Mark my word, in your lifetime, there will be news story to this effect. Michael WRHS965 KE8PLM

No, not a done deal. It is written for the next stage in the process. Michael WRHS965 KE8PLM

I am just learning that the FCC has given serious consideration to allowing location positioning information to be included in GMRS communications on all channels, and allowing FM modulation on existing CB channels. Here is a fresh-off-the-press YouTube video that provides an overview: 741 Channel - And here is the FCC rules amendment that that covers the proposed changes: https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-374114A1.pdf?fbclid=IwAR3GQrL1LL_zjxMRzjiNi4Kxf8VqgojRP4bKAKCsrOxSskyFMxfceV-umjE Looks like Motorola is is behind the petition for location positioning capability and Cobra is behind the petition for FM on CB frequencies. The FCC document should be a good read. I have not read the whole thing yet. I hope to find something in there too that officially legalizes part 90 radios for GMRS. Michael WRHS965 KE8PLM

Yes, for the education and fun of it. I have made a few different 1/4 wave ground planes that I can use in a pinch on different services. But I am using commercially made antennas on the home and vehicle. Michael WRHS965 KE8PLM

I had my radio on for trip to and from SC memorial day weekend. I heard bubble pack radios off and on on the way down, but nothing on the way back, nothing repeater related. I also recently spent 24 hours in car two and from MN. The main traffic heard was between family in the caravan, plus third-party bubble-pack traffic. Again, nothing repeater related. Good traffic on the air around home in Cincinnati. Michael WRHS965 KE8PLM

You are absolutely correct. A technique that I and others have used is to leave the factory programming intact, including the factory repeater channel combinations. Then add a range of pre-configured repeater pairs or your own for all standard repeater pairs. (For example, my radios have the standard 30 channels assignments from the factory, plus 8 channels preconfigured for each of the 8 possible repeater pairs. They are labelled 550A through 550H all the way up to 725A through 725H). Using this pattern I can, on the fly, dedicate any of those preconfigured pairs to a valid repeater by assigning the tones and naming the channel in the field. So far that has worked very well for me. Michael WRHS965 KE8PLM

The factory most likely tests their antennas with a laboratory grade VNA. Here is a photo I just took using a calibrated NanoVNA to check one of my 144-520MHz HT antennas. Not bad at all. I can tell you that the results changed, but insignificantly, between holding the VNA vertical, horizontal, standing it on a table, laying it flat on a wooden table, laying it flat on wooden table with the antenna overhanging the edge of the table, and when touching and not touching the chassis ground of the VNA. When comparing HT antenna performance, the best comparison of antennas is not going to be it’s SWR, but relative difference in signal strength at some given far field distance using some given amount of input power. Michael WRHS965 KE8PLM

Keep it simple so you have a good initial experience. I use the Midland MXTA26 with Midland’s NMO mag mount base. It is factory tuned and was verified to be factory tuned very well. Thoroughly pleased with its performance over the last year. Michael WRHS965 KE8PLM

I theorize a similar same effect as reflector or director in a yagi with the diameter of the shield playing role. Michael WRHS965 KE8PLM

I largely agree with noise in the vehicle being a factor. My cheap GXT1000s cannot be used to scan in the vehicle while running. The KG-805 will act up to much lesser degree while using a rubber duck inside the vehicle, but when using the external mag mount antenna it is not an issue. Michael WRHS965 KE8PLM

One of the things I had experimented with too was proximity of the amateur antenna to the feed-line that goes higher up the mast to the GMRS antenna. There was a definite shift in SWR as the distance varied but in the end the shift was not enough to be of concern, merely recognition that it is playing a factor. Michael WRHS965 KE8PLM