gortex2

Well Id start with the map on this website and see if any are listed. Next I'd listen to every pair via a HT or mobile. Next I'd listen to each pair at the location and antenna you want oput the repeater on. From there I'd pick a channel/.

If recorder has right and left inputs. Leave one side on mobile radio for rx then second to a SDR listening to your TX frequency.
 

You can't dop that. Your VXR is going to have a duplexer correct ? That is tuned for TX and RX channels. You can't flip them and use it the way you plan.

Well Id start with the map on this website and see if any are listed. Next I'd listen to every pair via a HT or mobile. Next I'd listen to each pair at the location and antenna you want oput the repeater on. From there I'd pick a channel/.

Well, You really need someone that is familiar with communications to work with you to figure all this out.
With GMRS, every member not related to another member needs to have a license.  So if a father son / sons are involved, they could all operate under one license.  But no one else can. 
With ham it's specific to the individual to have a license with the correct allocations for the frequencies in use.  This is typically not an issue any more.  But a Novice license holder would not be able to operate in the VHF / UHF spectrum until they upgraded to a technician license.
But your best bet is a statewide part 90 itinerant license with a repeater pair and a simplex frequency.  You would be using part 90 radios that could be used for ham OR GMRS with the correct programming. The other possibility is getting an MOU from the agencies you will be service and having their assigned frequencies for SAR deployments programmed into the radios so you would have direct communications with Incident Command.  Of course, you NEED to have an MOU, don't just start putting public safety frequencies in your radio thinking it will be ok. 
If your group is established and recognized by public safety agencies and you get calls from them requiring assistance on a search, then they may well want you to have their frequencies programmed so that they are getting real time information AND so when a search is called for weather, or the individual is located, they would want to pull everyone back in without needing to track a group leader down for each group to call back searchers.
SAR during an activation is considered first responders in many states.  For that length of time you are technically recognized as public safety.  That's what I would be looking for, not what cheap radio service can I throw together some radios and use cheaply as humanly possible. 
Look at it like this.
IF you are doing high angle (rope) rescue.  You can get proper harnesses and ropes that are specifically designed to be used in that capacity.  Or you can go to the hardware store and get whatever they have available that has a minimum break strength above what your heaviest guy is.  It will work after all right?
Same thing with radios.  You send people out into the wilderness to search for someone, that radio is their lifeline back to the world.  If they fall and get injured then that radio will bring them help.  What would you want to be out in the boonies with?  A good quality commercial radio, or a 15 dollar import that you bought because it was the cheapest thing you could find?
 
 

How do you know they aren't using FRS radios?

I have searched long and hard and have not found an answer to this question:
Probably more common than not, my radios have the ability to create Tx/Rx channels with any frequency that I choose. I created a "private" channel using the frequency 462.5375 MHz, which is just below the GMRS channel 1 (462.5625). Is this violating any FCC rules and / or potentially creating any problems? Yes, I do have an active GMRS license.
Thanks in advance for any feedback!
WSEI687 Dale

No clue how you think that's remotely possible. I have had all of the above repeaters apart on a bench and can say in 100% none use a mobile radio board in them. Even a quick look in a service manual you would see that. Feel free to research this and explain where these boards are incorporated in any of the repeaters I listed. I think the product engineers for those series would also be pretty confident with how they are built. 

Per the spec sheet that is the proper mic
https://www.motorolasolutions.com/content/dam/msi/docs/vertex-standard/legacy-products/VXR-7000_SpecSheet_0410_FINAL.pdf
 

It’s not a preference that every person who isn’t a relative be individually licensed; it’s a requirement. 

To your first 3 bullet points: ALL of that spectrum is already allocated to Part 90 (either as paging/radiotelephone or LMR) and will never be reallocated to a family service. Do a FCC ULS search for your proposed frequencies to see what I am talking about.
Requiring Narrowband would be theoretical if there was new spectrum available, but narrowbanding the existing frequencies will be utterly useless when there's already interstitial channels (FRS) between existing GMRS channels which would cause a lot of co-channel interference issues.
Digital Voice would not be within the rules either unless the point above with narrowbanding was able to be settled, and even then would only be one permitted modulation to prevent splintering of the service in a way that causes more issues than it solves. There's already super stringent regulation on data over the voice channels so I do not see a full digital modulation being easily accepted, never mind allowing multiple.
With all that said, there would not be any grandfathering allowed since these would be sweeping changes to the service that would mean that some of the currently grandfathered users would become unintentional interference to the other user base.
Moving the service definition will never happen either as all parts of 47 CFR have regulations which dictate frequencies and use cases for each service, none of which cross-over or are movable by current rule - FCC won't rewrite the book for GMRS especially with the current "attention" happening.
Part 90 equipment on Part 95 - that is actually doable and I was working on in 2017 and 2019 but would need to be a separate effort from everything else considering what I mentioned above about all the other pieces. Add type acceptance onto frequency/spectrum management for a service and this would stall before it got any traction.
 
I think you have a lot of spirit with this but sadly none of it is truly doable except the last part which should be tackled first to show that existing certified radios can be used in Part 95, which be default in 2024 opens up the "commonality of digital capable radios in a family service" and then work up from there. Sadly though there won't be any "free lunch" and GMRS will not see any change in frequency allocations unless something else is given up which this being my day job as well... I have yet to come to a workable conclusion that could be pitched to the FCC.

Greensboro 675 is active in the AM, Raliegh 675 Ive been told is good coverage but never heard a peep going thru the area. Thats about it until you get into Williamsburg. If you go 70 there is one I've heard but dont recall the frequency. Not alot over there I've heard. My route is normally off to 70 down to new bern then south for family. 

Greensboro 675 is active in the AM, Raliegh 675 Ive been told is good coverage but never heard a peep going thru the area. Thats about it until you get into Williamsburg. If you go 70 there is one I've heard but dont recall the frequency. Not alot over there I've heard. My route is normally off to 70 down to new bern then south for family. 

I sent an email recently asking for the basis of the line a restriction. Not due to my doubting of its validity but from curiosity due to Canada now using the frequencies listed as prohibited for their GMRS service and to see if the fcc had plans or if it was just a relic on the license.
 
Dear FCC OMR,
I am inquiring as to a discrepancy in the license provided for General Mobile Radio Service, Title 47 Part 95 Subpart E. Line A is mentioned on the license issued for GMRS prohibiting certain frequencies and I am curious as to the current code reference for that text as quoted:
"Exception: Licensees who operate North of Line A and East of Line C may not operate on channels 462.650 MHZ, 467.650 MHZ, 462.700 MHZ and 467.700 MHZ unless your previous license authorized such operations."                  
I was unable to find any code in the current eCFR Title 47 Part 95 that this exception refers to. Although I am aware of similar restrictions existing in Part 97 and Part 90 regarding other radio services but neither of those contain code that reflects a range that includes the frequencies referred to in the GMRS license restriction. 
Is there a current code reference that could be provided for that restriction? "
 
 
I got a very nice email from the FCC in response.
 
"Good Afternoon,
This email is in response to your inquiry below.  When you applied for your GMRS license in the Universal Licensing System (ULS), the application process required that you certify that you would not use the channels below when operating above Line A or East of Line C (see the snippet below from the reference copy of your application).  This requirement was originally put in place due to incompatible uses in Canada.  95.309 provides that the operator of a personal radio service station may be subject to operating restrictions if the station is to be operated in certain locations described in the rules.
We are evaluating if this restriction is still necessary based on Canada’s current usage of the channels.  With that said, your license is currently conditioned to restrict use of these channels North of Line A and East of Line C so you may not operate on the channels in these areas as long as your license is conditioned with this restriction.
I hope that this helpful
Joshua Smith
Assistant Division Chief
Mobility Division
Wireless Telecommunications Bureau
"
 
I think the important part here is that they are reviewing the current restrictions. Which gives me hope for a potential laxing of that rule. But for now Line A/C restrictions remain.

Did you sign in to the main site ? Its the same login but different location. The forum has nothing to do with the main site for login. 
 

Well, I got all my quarterly mobile and portable radio programming updates done so, my next project was to install the Antenna Specialist/Antenex/Laird/TE Connectivity Trunk Lip NMO Mount and C27 Base Load CB Antenna on my 23 Wrangler IZARUBICON 2 Dr. as recommended by a couple of forum members. The install went pretty easy and yes, I have chassis ground continuity at the mount and NMO connector. That was verified before I cut the cable to the desired length and installed the UHF (PL 259) Connector.

The mount and antenna was installed at the hood rear lip edge in front of the cowl on the passenger side as near to the outside as possible to not interfere with my Ditch Light.

Before I do any cutting of the antenna element, I better check the provided cutting chart and see what is recommended for the CB freqs and the chart indicated a cut at the 49" mark for 27 Megs. I measured the element and it was already 49". In checking the VSWR, right off the bat my Rig-Expert indicated an initial VSWR at just a tad less than 1.5:1 on Ch. 1 and a little less than 1.2:1 on Ch. 40. Since, I can't stretch the antenna element, I elected to raise the antenna element about a 1/4" in the antenna ferrel. That worked pretty good but, based on my readings, I elected to drop it a tad back down and I ended up with 1.05:1 across the board. I'll just have to live with that.

Next will be the comparison test and see what would be the difference in the Farz between the Firestik II and the C27 antennae. However, I have to wait until my friend gets back from Colorado next week so we can use the same Avalanche vehicle and I need to get another C27 antenna, so we are testing with a like antennae again.

Onto the next project.
Oh, by the way, please note, there is no shine/glare on my tires, and it is obvious that there is definitely no armorall on my Mickey Bajas.  It had to be the shine/glare from that well-polished Chrome Bumper.
 

I can hit 4 repeaters (HAM) from my house. I scan all of them. I rarely hear anything on them. One of them has some net one night. The one in my county never has anyone on it. Its litterly dead. 

What is the regular procedure when there is an established repeater in an area and someone else comes in and installs a new repeater on the exact same frequency? Like within a couple of miles of each other.
I left them a comment on their repeater, which they have offered for public use, stating there was already a repeater just a few miles away on that same frequency. They deleted my comment.
To me it is just ignorant to put up another repeater, in the exact same area, on the exact same frequency, as another repeater that has already been established in the area, that is at a higher elevation, covers all of the same area and more.

AS said every SAR member would need their license. Most will not want to pay that. Your best bet is a public safety frequency. Our SAR team has multiplei n VHF and UHF as well as interop stuff. To do SAR correct you need to do it right. Other than training I would not run an operation on GMRS or ham. 

Actually I have, multiple times.  It's just htat no one actually listens to what anyone is saying on this topic because they have some preconceived notion that it's just more of the same.  And in truth, much of it is. 
Go back and look at my posts about NOT having more than one repeater that's linked to a system in any given operating area.  Read the part about a requirement that ANY linked repeater owner MUST insure that a non-linked repeater with similar coverage footprint must exist where they have a linked repeater. While that is a certainty that 2 pairs will be consumed, it also ensures that a local repeater will exist for the locals to use that's not just some garage repeater with a 40 foot high antenna while the linked repeater covers 4 counties.  And part of that requirement is the local repeater should have similar or greater public access. 
The interference thing is simple enough to deal with.  Receivers at the transmit sites of the linked repeaters keeping them from transmitting if the frequency is in use locally.  Simple enough to do.
 
My take is to build it better, not just toss something on the air and hide behind the 'equal use' regulations about repeater frequencies. 
But I agree, it can't be 3 or 4 repeaters in a single area on different frequencies all linked together.
Hell I even put in that the only way to do infill for coverage is true simulcast transmit on a single frequency, or don't do it at all.  But, that's not gonna happen either.  None of the linking will come back.... you have a better chance of winning the lottery than seeing the FCC change it's tune on this.
 
And for the record.  I never ask for a DIME to access any of my repeaters, linked or otherwise.  And argued the point with others about charging.  SO that don't fly with me either.
 
 

Spent most of yesterday cleaning up and fixing more of the JK from our last JJ Uhwarie trip. Wife got to apply her "band aids" to the damaged metal. I got to replace the driver steel brake line from the ABS unit to the rear of the jeep. Ya me. Even prebent stuff is a PITA to install. Also did the 3rd pressure wash to get mud out and off it and replaced a ton of the plastic clips on the front fenders. Laslty installed a new amazon ccr AM/FM/BT/Car play radio. We mainly wanted to be able to stream from our phones and old radio only supported the aux port (no usb) and the AMFM was broken. Today need to get it loaded back up and take it for a spin. Cumberlands in a couple weeks. 

Spent most of yesterday cleaning up and fixing more of the JK from our last JJ Uhwarie trip. Wife got to apply her "band aids" to the damaged metal. I got to replace the driver steel brake line from the ABS unit to the rear of the jeep. Ya me. Even prebent stuff is a PITA to install. Also did the 3rd pressure wash to get mud out and off it and replaced a ton of the plastic clips on the front fenders. Laslty installed a new amazon ccr AM/FM/BT/Car play radio. We mainly wanted to be able to stream from our phones and old radio only supported the aux port (no usb) and the AMFM was broken. Today need to get it loaded back up and take it for a spin. Cumberlands in a couple weeks. 

Spent most of yesterday cleaning up and fixing more of the JK from our last JJ Uhwarie trip. Wife got to apply her "band aids" to the damaged metal. I got to replace the driver steel brake line from the ABS unit to the rear of the jeep. Ya me. Even prebent stuff is a PITA to install. Also did the 3rd pressure wash to get mud out and off it and replaced a ton of the plastic clips on the front fenders. Laslty installed a new amazon ccr AM/FM/BT/Car play radio. We mainly wanted to be able to stream from our phones and old radio only supported the aux port (no usb) and the AMFM was broken. Today need to get it loaded back up and take it for a spin. Cumberlands in a couple weeks. 

No thank you !  Ham radio has everything you are looking for. No need to change the intended use of GMRS.
The ham test for tech is very easy.
WRKL858/KK4THK

PASS - Best Thing That Ever Recently Happened, Is That The FCC Mobility Division Clarified A Long Over Due Ruling On The Linking Of GMRS Repeater Stations......
Like It Or Not - GMRS Repeater Linking Is Only & Mostly Supported By Those With Small Roof Top Repeaters Wanting To Talk Distances, Those That Are Unable To Take Or Pass A Ham License Test, Or Repeater Owners Wanting To Engage In A "For Profit" GMRS Operation.
Time For All To Get Over This.......