gortex2

If you really needed the RT97 to ID you can get the RT97S which can be connected to a Raspberry Pi and the ID can be done through that.
 
If you don't want to do that or can't do that at the repeater location just use another radio to send the ID over the input frequency from a remote location. Done.
 
But in all honesty the GMRS repeaters I have run across don't ID...as do the cast majority of simplex GMRS users (Bubble Pack Users)
 
 

The Midland 275 is about as close to a ‘plug-n-play’ mobile GMRS as there is.

In the old days, .675 was an FCC designated emergency channel usable by any licensee for /emergencies/ (this is back when one applied for TWO of the main frequency pairs, and they were listed on one's license -- you could NOT use any other main frequency; if your radio was, as many business radios of the era, only a two-channel radio [A/B toggle switch], and your license did not include .675, you had no access to the emergency frequency. If you specified .675 as one of your two frequencies, then it was available for general use. When I got licensed, the Maxon GMRS 210+3 was a desirable radio: it had the 462MHz interstitials (in 1-7), .675 (as channel 8), and channels 9&10 were "shop" programmable for the two frequencies on one's license. [While FCC regulations specified a radio shop must do the programming, they included the programming manual -- take the back off, press some button to enter #9 mode, rotate dial to select frequency, press button to enter #10 mode, turn dial to select frequency] Repeater vs Simplex was handled by a front-panel button which would toggle the current channel's state.
Note the age of my call-sign -- a 3x4 vs the current crop of 4x3.

My first GMRS radio ever was a beat up, used Kenwood NX300 K4 (400 - 470MHz).  I still have it and it works fine.  My current EDC radio is a new (not new now lol) Kenwood NX300 K4.  I've tried LOTS of radios (Including Motorola commercials) and I keep going back to my trusty NX300 because it's an absolute unit and is insane reliable.  The only upgrades I've done to it are the larger 4500mah pouch cell battery (Fatter) and upgraded to a Panorama 450 - 470MHz antenna!

You've got to be kidding me.  IF the USER speaks their Call Sign, then that is what's transmitted over the air.  In GMRS, there is NO Call Sign assigned by the FCC to a Repeater. There is no Coordination with GMRS, and there's absolutely no correlation between the physical location of a repeater and the mailing address of the Licensed user.
You are making up rules & then trying to find places to apply them. Stop.

That's a warped interpretation IMHO.
A repeater that does not have CWID can just have the individual users stating their own Call Signs in plain English at the required intervals, and no laws have been broken.
 
 

Exactly. This can be caused (I know you already know, Marc) by too sharp of a bend in the coax or too tight of a cable tie which squeezes the coax too tight, causing the inner conductor to migrate through the insulation (especially foam core) and contact the shield. 
This is the kind of issue I thought he could self diagnose when I suggested changing out every element one at a time to logically troubleshoot the issue: radio, coax, antenna.  Of course it’s possible that a person replaces the coax and makes the same installation mistakes as before, causing the same problem. It’s also possible to take a piece of coax and move it somewhere else and have the condition reverse itself, resulting in the inner conductor no longer touching the shield, at least temporarily, but personally I would discard or at least cut out the bad spot and repurpose a failed coax cable.

Based on what you said on Sunday at 08:42 PM, about the receiver being excellent when the centered of the coax is hooked but, but get bad when you screw the ground collar on, I'm thinking you have a bad coax or bad mount, regardless of how good your SWR is. It indicates a possible partial short.

That’s what a net is until it’s needed.  Depending on the net controller it might have a little more personality, but it’s really just an exercise of the systems.

I was in Las Vegas a few weeks ago and listened in to a GMRS net for a bit, and it was the most boring thing ever.  First, there was 15 minutes of "check ins" followed by a few more minutes of "did I miss anybody?"  Never again lol

I have no idea why you felt the need to involve me in this discussion, but since you did, here I am.
You are slightly misrepresenting the exchange from the other thread, however.  The discussion there was about "re-locking" a radio, not just about programming GMRS frequencies.  Honestly I don't even know if that's a thing ... there are lots of magic key sequencies to unlock various radios available on the Internet, but I haven't run across any that will re-lock one so that it is type-accepted again.  If a such a sequence (or flag in CPS, etc.) DID exist, then I would argue that it would make the radio type-accepted again.
If one unlocks a GMRS radio, then it is no longer type accepted, since 95.1761(c) disallows certification of a radio for GMRS if it has the CAPABILITY (emphasis mine) of transmitting on a non-GMRS frequency.  The only exception would be a Part 90 radio that also has Part 95 certification.  So the instant a GMRS radio is "unlocked" it is no longer type accepted.  Whether or not one actually has MURS (or any other) frequencies programmed in the radio is irrelevant.
And BTW ... the whole "in an emergency you can transmit on any frequency" thing is a myth.  Nowhere in FCC Part 95, 97 or even 90 will you find that.

Not if it is capable of operation outside its certification. Monitoring MURS is not a violation but enabling transmission is outside the certification for the radio. You have modified the radio so it is no longer compliant with its certified use. You are operating under Part 15 rules using a modified Part 95 radio.

Adding MURS frequencies moved your radio from being a GMRS unit to an uncertified intentional radiator operating outside its designated purpose. You can't have your Part 95(e) and eat it too!

1) You cannot manually program a GMRS radio from the front panel.
At most, you can change certain settings like transmit and receive PL tones, but frequency programming from the front panel by end users is prohibited by the FCC regulations.
 
2) You cannot legally program a GMRS radio to operate on park service or other public safety frequencies to contact such agencies whether in an emergency or not.
To begin with you’re limited by you license to using the GMRS UHF frequencies which such agencies are not licensed (or equipped) to use.
Most of those agencies operate on very different bands frequency ranges outside of and incompatible with UHF, usually digital trunked 700/800 MHz systems in this modern era though many may still be using legacy VHF (150 MHz) systems.
State and local agencies are licensed by the FCC under a specific set of regulations which prohibit unlicensed and unauthorized users under all circumstances. The federal agencies are authorized by the NTIA (a separate federal agency outside of the FCC responsible for all federal government radio regulations).
Persons caught operating on these frequencies without authorization are usually arrested by the agency involved and can be prosecuted under various laws beyond the FCC regulations.

The confusion arises from the difference in terminology and the use of different examples between these two different threads.
The important consideration is that once a Part 95(e) GMRS radio has been "unlocked" and then "relocked" back to just GMRS, there is just no practical way to discern that this radio is any different than it was when granted certification.  
Those that agree this is "a thing" can sleep at night even after using their "re-locked" GMRS radios and the remainder of the GMRS population will just ignore or not even be aware that their radio may possibly be "unlocked" and sleep well at night as well.
This guy, below, believes, as expressed in his video, to the contrary about use of radios during emergencies.  While he cautions that he is not an attorney, his common-sense approach to the issue, would seem to protect one's use of their radio during an emergency (that of course does not interfere with other necessary emergency communications):
As to emergency communications, some people believe to the contrary:
 

Getting permission is a matter of contacting whoever watches over that land.
 
I use the Retevis RT97 for this purpose. It and a solar controller are strapped to the back of a solar panel. I have a small amount of coax going from the RT97 to the Antenna which is mounted just above it. The battery is a sealed lead acid battery that is at the base of the tree everything is mounted on.  I get 25-30 miles of range on this set-up...but it is definitely not a commercial grade set-up. Given the same location if it was viable to put a "real" repeater up there it would blow the doors off the RT97. It has taken me about 2 years of trial and error to get this setup to work...winter is my worst problem (Alaska).

As said depends on use. I run a 1/4 wave on the JK on the front fender. Was at JJUSA this weekend. Both days everyone on my trip that had a mobile had the Phantom antenna. We had no issues on our trails. Half the group had handhelds and I could here everyone on my trail with no issues.   

Ahhh, he just don't like me much.  So he gets in his digs anywhere he can.  I pretty much ignore his shenanigans at this point, as they really don't effect me and if it gives him pleasure to badger me, at least he's not doing it to someone else that might take it to heart. 
 
A lot of it was changes in the routing of grounding.  They added / changed the routing of grounding to the floor in new builds from it going up.  The other thing that was added was site safety and air born concerns with working in a tower site,  mostly bird dropping concerns.  They went woke and renamed the Master Ground bar to some other WOKE thing that doesn't include the name MASTER.  Not that the subordinate bars were called SLAVE but whatever. 
I actually commented in training that the next change would be the removal of male and female designations for RF connectors.  And that we would quite possibly all be switching to the HP hermaphrodite connectors for all cabling and connections.  Yes, that's really a thing, at about 200 bucks a piece. I believe they were the APC-7 connector.  But they were truly sexless and would attach to each other without a male and female specific connector.  Turned out the trainer was on the R-56 steering committee and wasn't real impressed with my comments about it being the R-56 WOKE revision.  I believe he was somehow offended, and made comment about folks and their right to identify any way they want to.  I replied by agreeing 100% and informed him that I identify as an offensive asshole, so I was 100% covered if he was offended.  Which is my normal reply to all discussions of that topic. 
Outside the WOKE additions and changes in definitions, there were some additional situations with grounding antenna's on building roofs that were covered.  And the other thing I remember was cable management with CAT-5/6 cabling now that Gigabit Ethernet was a thing.  The old standard was written prior to much of that.
I believe they added the bonding for armored Ethernet and Fiber cables as well.  Again stuff we didn't have when the last standard was created. 
But I will say the bonding and grounding section is worth reading.  And will at least sort of hold your interest.  As far as the rest of it, if you are having issues getting to sleep the standards for the height of lighting above the cable tray, and the height above the racks for cable tray.  The requirements for fire suppression equipment and it's locations and other really boring stuff, reading that will put you right to sleep. 
Conducting an audit of a site at this point is very difficult.  You almost need to make a detailed video of all aspects of the site and then review it with the standard open and compare what you are seeing wit what the standard says.  There is A LOT to know and you can easily miss things with only one pass through a site. 
Like any other code, the purpose of it is personal safety first and foremost.  Followed by the reliability of the equipment in the site and the system as a whole.  And while some of it applies to the average guy's install in his basement, a BUNCH of it either doesn't apply, or would be too costly to the average radio operator to implement. 
But, here's the thing with this standard.  And why it's important.  In a dispatch site with a co-located RF site, meaning a site with dispatchers and a tower.  There is an electrical path that exists from the top of the tower to the dispatchers headset if they are using a wired headset and at minimum the path exists to the computers and radios in the room where the dispatchers are.  They can't STOP doing their job when a lightning storm rolls past.  So their protection is of the utmost importance.  And when a government entity want's to save on the grounding and bonding work needed for a site like this, making that statement typically shuts the discussion of cutting corners down about the labor and material cost for it.
 

2017 manual.
That's the current standard and the one I just certified on last year.
Scanning it??? It's 736 pages.... NO I ain't gonna scan it.
68P81089E50-C_Standards_and_Guidelines_for_Communication_Sites_R56.pdf

I want to thank everyone for the help, i found an i20r with the help of  WRDU953 who came to my rescue with one, i can now start to get running again, thank you all for the info.

I am not aware of any disruptions severe enough to prevent GPS usage in the U.S. As for communications, Garmin has not posted any outages affecting their world-wide inReach Satellite SOS capability for at least the last year.
Going back to the start of this thread, we are talking about snowmobilers and hikers in Wyoming trying to use their extremely short range and license-free FRS radios in that state’s “Be 307 Aware” emergency communications scheme. To summon emergency help when outdoors and out of cellphone range, a satellite communicator or Personal Locator Beacon (PLB) would be my recommendation for most people.

I would imagine something of pretty big nature would have to occur for SAR Sat to not get an activation. Garmin has its own dispatch center that will reply to any SOS from an InReach. Additionally many of us have multiple contacts setup for a trigger to an SOS (SAR Chiefs and Officers, Spouse, other important folks) that is in addition to Garmin/SAR Sat folks handling the emergency.  The actual devise communicates directly to the satellites in range. The Mission Control centers are in 6 different locations around the world. 
For actual use I can say in a normal incident area (hurricane response) I have sent a message via my InReach and the other party got that message within 5 minutes. This was a message only and not an actual SOS Emergency trigger. In everyday use I have seen messages populate on my cell (text and email) within 5 minutes in testing and training missions. For those that are in the rough country and routinely don't have cell signal the units are very reasonable for safety plans. I have one in each vehicle all the time now. Lots of the US that has little to no cell still. 
Garmin has a video on this that we show to new users - 
 
 

This may have been covered already (I am ‘late to the party’) but, if the signal from your HT cannot reach your home when you are standing outside your car, then a car mounted antenna may or may not make the distance you require.

Marcspaz wrote: “I would recommend portable HF radios first, and satellite communications second.”
I would reverse the order on that: For emergency use, a Satellite Communicator (or PLB) s more reliable (also easier to operate and smaller to carry) than an HF radio+antenna.

The problem is, tone 11 isn't the same on every FRS/GMRS radio.