DONE

Well, you win, keep using this site to post links to your videos and make money off doing that. They don't seem to care that you are cashing in, so why should I give a damn. You decided to bring MY DISABLED SON into this discussion which just shows what type of person you are. How DARE YOU. So sit there on your throne and do your thing. I have better things to occupy my time with. Go feel bad about that. EDITED For language. I was obviously mad for obvious reasons. Still done. Just not going to leave this post the way it was.

Need to know how to fully delete my account? All content, my repeaters, the whole thing?

WTF??? My sons confined to a wheelchair... you asshole, what kind of bullshit is that? You implying something here? Keep running your mouth about my kid. I knew you were a jackass, but now your bringing my son into this. Who the hell do you think you are?

OK, so yet another video about nothing,,, getting posted on here to get clicks and get you paid. Of course, content of the video. Especially one that is controversial, gets you more clicks and therefore more paid. Never mind that the regulations specify you can't use the channels. Rules are for bootlickers right? Nevermind that your efforts and video's were quite possibly a part of what got the FCC to do an about face on linking and shut all that down. So the rules only apply when they make YOU money. Maybe someone at the FCC needs to look into how you are cashing in on spreading misinformation. Maybe they will come down on you like they did the guy from Info Wars. Hard to tell. How's that AI chat bot working out for you?

(c) 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(c). The channel center frequencies are: 467.5500, 467.5750, 467.6000, 467.6250, 467.6500, 467.6750, 467.7000, and 467.7250 MHz. Meaning they are there, as part of the frequency allocation, but are NOT to be used for general simplex communications without communicating through a repeater. So they are extra channels how? Regulations say they can't be used for simplex operation, so they really aren't for general use.

Be aware that the 'coverage map' on the mygmrs.com web site is NOT a generated heat map like the one displayed above. It's a simple circle around the TX site that gives an average expected coverage based on path loss across flat ground. Meaning, if you look at the map for Johnstown675 on here, it ain't right, or even close, depending on the direction you are from the repeater. The map of my repeater (WRKC935 / Johnstown675) shows coverage in Pataskala, Newark, downtown Columbus, and several other area's that I have no coverage in. Those coverage holes are caused by the topography of the area. Case in point is the Granville ridge. I have good coverage on 161 / St Rt16 going east right up to the point you cross where Granville is and St Rt 16 comes in from Pataskala. After that the coverage stops for a time and then picks back up closer to Newark and continues out to St Rd 146 and further. Same thing happens going West, Works great until Little Turtle exit off 161. Then falls off getting on the 270 outer belt. But if you continue west on 161 it's good most of the way to St Rt 23 (High Street) in Worthington. Then it falls off until you get west of Columbus and then picks up until you are out to St Rt56 on I-70. I have talked from the Honda plant Northwest of Marysville, From Mechanicsburg, and from London (42 / I-70 ) from a portable. So my point is that you should NOT have an expectation that all area's in the green circle are going to work based on the mygmrs.com maps. And you are further limited due to using a handheld radio. The power is lower and the antenna's do not have the gain that a mobile or a base station would have. I say all this based on the programming that you have in your radio you posted the codeplug of. If you have the Pataskala repeater programmed, I know that machine has limited coverage in that area due to antenna height. If you are in the Pataskala area, and are having coverage issues getting into the Johnstown repeater, that's why you are having issues. I can't talk to it from Pataskala with a 50 watt mobile. The coverage just isn't there.

First thing is NOT giving them what they want, which is to be recognized and acknowledged for what they are doing. If at all possible, when the show up and there is a conversation going on, continue the conversation without commenting on the problem. Keep right on talking. If one of you gets covered up by the guy, DO NOT directly say that. Claim it's noise, or something else. If possible have a conversation going on a different channel so that it seems transparent. But DON'T say anything that gives them recognition. That is what they want. If you clear the frequency, again the person 'wins' by default. Don't let that happen. If needs be, get several other people into the conversation. Get a conference call going on telephones so everyone knows whats being said. And just keep talking like the person isn't even there. This will frustrate them the most. If they aren't having any effect, they will go find someone else to screw with. Make sure when they get on initially, ask them to REPEAT their call sign. Act like it's just another conversation. Act like they are having sign issues if you do this. Tell them they aren't making the repeater very well and advise them to try again when they get closer. Mention that they might want a better antenna. This is regardless of how good their signal is. Full quieting or not. THey are weak and barely making the repeater. But address them the same as you would anyone else that had a poor signal and them tell them to give you a call once they get closer. Throw your call and wait. That typically will confuse them and again cause them to be frustrated. I can't explain the mentality of folks that do this. And I use to do it all the time to certain individuals on CB because they had it coming. But to take time out of your day to just be an asshole. I don't follow that thought process, and I even identify as an offensive asshole, so I speak from some level of experience here. But DON'T give them ANY level of satisfaction if you can help it. If you aren't showing any level of frustration with them, they will be more frustrated than you are. They are looking for a captive audience. Don't be one.

While I disagree with it needing to be done by 'someone with proper knowledge and equipment' the nano VNA is fine for a NOTCH duplexer, in my opinion, that's the opinion of a guy that's been donig this for 15 years professionally and over 20 years in general. The little flatpack notch setups aren't going to be tight enough that if they are only close they will not be close enough. And there are tests that can be done to ensure they are at least that close. I have tuned them with nothing more than a radio, attenuator, RF signal meter and a bit of know how. And when I put them on a regular VNA they were dead on. Biggest concern is does the VNA output the frequency it says on the display. Easy test is put a frequency in it that you have a receiver for and verify it can be heard in the receiver. If you can hear it as a carrier, then it's on frequency enough to tune a flatpack. If you decide to take it on yourself, you need to know a few things. First is the open port on the fatpack needs to be connected to a dummy load. If it's not terminated, ti's not going to tune up right. Second is how you actually move the notch. Guys without any experience will just start cranking on whatever cavity they feel the need to and NOT move a little at a time. Once you move one cavity off far enough the notch in that cavity will disappear. Once that happens, it's a PITA to figure out. So make your changes up or down about a half turn at a time and do ALL three cavities with each step move. You will want to set your VNA with a wide frequency range to start. Once you are close, then you drop the bandwidth down to 1 Mhz and finally 500Khz to walk it in all the way. Remember that you are notching the TX out of the high side (receive side) and the RX out of the low side (transmit side). They should be marked high and low. So follow that and you will be fine. DO NOT however attempt to tune one the way I talked about before with just using a radio, attenuator and RF meter. I have tuned hurdreds of duplexers, built up combiner networks from parts, learned all the math and crap that goes with doing that. It's not stuff for a beginner to attempt.

So are they using an MDC control list, or a RAC (repeater access code) to open the repeater? Moto did support those on some of their repeaters. I am not so much interested in locking people out of my repeater at present, but If I could figure out an MDC switch that would turn on such a filter switching the repeater to 'private use' when needed that might be something.

No idea, But figuring that you are reading the labels of the crap you have in your medicine cabinet for daily consumption, you would be far better equip and experienced to answer those questions. But from Googling the names of the medications, and the fact you brought them up. Well it does explain a few things. Guess you subscribe to a statement a friend once made to me. Better living tomorrow through the pharmacological discoveries of today. So just remember to stay on your meds and we will all be just fine.

Hit a repeater at 25 miles with .1 watt? Yeah, it's not hard. Several ways to do it. First is vertical height, if you get the radio in the air far enough it's not hard. Aircraft will do it in any situation. Beyond that, two tall hills over a valley would work as well. Issue is to have unobstructed line of site. Second is antenna gain. Lots of it. Toss up a 12 foot dish that you can pull close to 30dB of forward gain. Same way I do it with 23dBm (200 milliwatts) for 23 miles at 4.9Ghz. Of course path loss at 4.9 is WAY higher at that distance than 460 Mhz. At 460 the path loss is 117dB. At 4.9Ghz it's 137dB. SO 20 dB more. You have to remember that a repeater, or at least one with reasonable coverage is going to have vertical height already. Repeaters with antenna's at 50 or 100 feet don't talk 25 miles period. The curvature of the earth makes the line of site horizon 14 miles for a 100 foot high antenna. Beyond that you need to increase height to maintain LOS.

Count for what?

Set your Repeater tuning steps to 25 as well.

GRID DOWN!!!!!! GRID DOWN!!!!!

How about I prove you RIGHT. The FCC has clearly said several places in CFR 47 that you can NOT operate a radio on multiple services. So no radio an legally operate on GMRS and HAM, MURS and HAM, GMRS and MURS or part 90 and any other service. So yeah, they don't exist. BUT, both MURS and GMRS are cut out of the part 90 frequency allocation. So an antenna like this can and does exist for dual band commercial radios like those offered by Motorola, Harris and Kenwood. But, and I have said this here before, those manufactures spend a good deal of money designing their radios and accessories, including the antenna's to have the greatest performance possible. Taking the factory antenna off a 10 thousand dollar radio, and replacing it with one of these may or may NOT give you a performance increase.

No, and there is a reason for that. The GMRS service is not meant to be used for that type of business communications. If you are a 501c then you are a business. A non-profit, but a business anyway. And while it gets used all the time, FRS is the same way. Not for business use. It's right there in the name FAMILY radio service. Not crane operator plumber electrician and church radio service. No one seems to pay attention to that, they just go buy some WalMart radios and use it for whatever they want. I would venture to say that there are more illegal FRS radio operations out there than guys with CB amps, even in the hey day of CB. MURS is what was created for business use with a cheap license. Of course, no one bothers with that either. But those radios cost more so they just keep buying FRS radios and using them. If you are a business, you need a business radio license and the proper equipment for that license. Not trying to misuse another radio service that is clearly NOT for non-family businesses. IF you were all family, and have a business, then it's legal, as long as only family members are on the radio. Outside of that, you need a part 90 license and part 90 radios.

Well, the first two apply to GMRS. THe third one is for HF (2 to 30 Mhz) operations and not suitable for GMRS work. So we will start with the 'roll up antenna kit' This is the same design as the Ed Fong, and other similar antenna's. If you search around on Google, looking for 'twinlead J-pole antenna' they will pop up all over the place. There is nothing special about them really. And they are a KIT. Meaning that you get to solder them together. If you are comfortable with that, they are a usable antenna and will work well in the right conditions. THe one from DX Engineering. They tend to never sell junk. If they carry it, it's usable. No idea on actual performance, but certainly better than the stock antenna's that came with your radio if it's a cheap import. If you are running around with a Motorola radio, I don't know what you might gain. Mot puts a lot of effort in to their stuff, and so do the other 'big name' commercial radio companies. And in truth, if there was something better for their radios, they would be selling them too.

OK, been meaning to explain this and this is a good time. The commercial guys here will all tell you there are three tests that we perform when installing a new repeater system out in the field. First test is 12dB sinad with the service monitor connected to the duplexer wit no antenna. Second test is for something called isolation. We drop the input signal down to where the repeater squelches, or stops transmitting and then increase the signal slowly until the receiver just opens back up. What we then look for is the repeater to drop again when the transmitter comes up and then drop back out. If the duplexer isn't tuned correctly, the repeater will 'ping pong' up and down because the TX frequency is getting into the receiver and deafening it to some degree. If it does start to ping pong, we increase the signal level in in TENTH's of a dBm until it stops. At that point, we usually stop the testing, touch up the duplexer tuning and run through all the tests again. The last test is antenna desense. An isolation Tee is connected to the duplexer antenna port and a dummy load is then connected to the output. The tap port has signal injected on it to the point the receiver opens and the signal level is noted. Then the signal is removed, and the dummy load is unhooked and the antenna is connected. The signal is injected again on the tap and increased to the point that the receiver opens again. The difference in the required signal level is the antenna desense for that antenna and repeater system at that site. Now, here's how that applies to what YOU are seeing. With the 12dB Sinad test, you need to understand what that measurement is. That being a ratio of signal to noise in the receiver. Here's a good explanation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SINAD But it's NOT the minimum signal level that the repeater can hear and open up. That is actually the LAST test (antenna desense) where the signal level is just above the noise floor enough for the receiver to recognize it and hear the PL /DPL. On a repeater running CSQ, the level is going to be lower, because it doesn't need to hear the tone above the noise, just the RF. These readings are gonna be 6 to 12 dB different in their levels. And the basis of where I make the statements about needing to be able to increase signal level a BUNCH to get a noisy signal to be full quieting. It's not a watt or two, unless you are only running 1 watt or less to begin with. That's based on using dB and specifically dBm numbers for power output in place of watts. An example is 30dBm is 1 watt, 33 dBm is 2 watts, 36dBm is 4 watts. on the upper end, 50dbm is 100 watts and 53dBm is 200 watts. So when you look at it that way, and start realizing that to go from just opening a repeater receiver at -119dBm to 12 dB SINAD at -110dBm or so, that 9dB signal level change is HUGE in the percentage of power change when you convert it back to watts. And the best part is you can calculate all this if you have the information about the equipment in play. You need the antenna model (so you know the gain) the coax type and length (to calculate the cable loss) the number and type of jumpers (again cable loss) the duplexer model (insertion loss). Then you need YOUR power level in watts (converted to dBm) and your antenna system numbers as well. The last part is the distance between the antenna's to calculate something called PATH LOSS. With all that you can calculate what the actual signal is at the repeater input from your radio transmitter from miles away. And yes, I have tested this and found that it's accurate within a dB or two. The difference is from signals that bounce off other things and arrive out of phase to the antenna and cancel put part of the signal. This is called Rayleigh effect. (Again, go look it up, NOT typing it all out) but that also explains sitting in traffic and the repeater fading out. Moving 2 feet and the repeater signal coming back.

Welcome to the confusing task of programming Motorola Radios

I have used other 'stubby' antenna's. Mostly for Motorola radios, but the antenna really don't care what radio it's attached to. Stubby's are fine if they will put out enough signal and receive enough signal to function in the application you are trying to use them for. If you are using a repeater that you are already noisy into with a standard antenna, you aren't gonna have much luck with a stubby. If you have a good signal, the repeater is close, or the other radio you are talking to simplex is close, then again, not an issue. You're not going to bounce signals off the moon with a stubby antenna. But you aren't gonna carry around a 20 foot dish to talk simplex with that would bounce signals off the moon when powered with an HT either.

On the opposite end of this spectrum. I run 6 repeaters off of 24 volt power. The battery plant (commercial term for battery strings and a charger) is 5 strings of 105 AH 12 volt AGM batteries and a modular rectifier (charger / power supply) that is 180 amp out at 48 volt full load. The supply is grid powered right now, but none of the radios connected to it even notice when the AC power fails. At my current load the batteries would carry that equipment for at least 2 days. The 24 volt power is derived from 48 to 24 volt inverters that are 40 amp each. There are 5 units that are setup in parallel for a total output of 200 amp at full load. I am no where near that and have run the repeaters on 2 of these units with my current load. Future plans I am going to install a 100 amp 48 to 12 volt buck converter for 12 volt items and additional DC distribution setup for 12 volts. I also am going to be installing a 48 to 120 volt AC inverter for the few devices that can't be run on DC power. Some networking equipment just doesn't support DC power or the power supplies to run off DC are silly expensive. Obviously solar and wind are things I am going to be looking at in the future as well for charging and carrying the site load. The problem is as the static load increases, the amount of solar needed increases as well. Meaning if I have 20 amps of static load (load without radios transmitting) I need at least 30 to 40 amps of charge current from the solar / wind system to maintain the charge in the battery plant and carry the static load. So it's not as simple as getting some 12 volt panels and connecting them to one or two batteries through a small charge controller. Systems like that are GREAT for home installs that are for running radios and some LED lighting. And that lighting is of course available from RV stores. But it's not enough to run bigger loads. Currently the stuff I have on the plant: two GMRS repeaters Two ham repeaters two high power base radios (repeaters configured as base stations for simplex operation) Two 800 repeaters for a public safety backup system for the county ADREN MESH system (ham WiFi) multiple microwave links for the site and public safety IP console system connecting a number of base radios The base radios (rack mounted mobiles) are on a second battery plant that is 12 volt. It consists of a 75 amp charger / supply and 6 12 volt 75 AH batteries. That 12 volt system also runs my 2 HF radios.

This is very true. Using the term 'illegal' isn't correct. And Randy's right, the FCC regulations are not laws. They are codified regulations governing the different radio services. Further, they are only enforceable by the that agency. Which is why they show up for inspections and issue "Notices of Liability" not citations and Law Enforcement is only involved to enforce their ability to inspect / seize equipment if it comes to that. I believe that the citations/ fines issued are civil forfeiture as well. But I don't know that for certain.

First thing to understand is what is fair to good signal level in the radio. -95 dBm is whats required for an ERRS for in building public safety coverage. That's a noise free solid signal. -105 is the very beginning of noise in the receiver on a WIDE BAND FM signal a typical radio will hit 12dB Sinad at somewhere around -112 to -115 dBm that should be a full copy signal with noticeable static in the background. So now we get to structure attenuation. And that's going to depend on the structure, and the materials used. Assuming here that you have a standard stick build (wood 2X4) framing. Drywall interior finish and vinyl or wood siding exterior. The reason I know it's not stucco is that is applied to chicken wire which has MORE attenuation than the vinyl siding. Metal siding is higher yet. And the house is a bit older as the windows are probably not E-glass which has a very high attenuation level, comparable to sheet metal. Stick build vinyl is going to have somewhere around 10dB of attenuation, stucco is around 20dB and metal is going to be 30dB plus. I have walked building that were sheet metal exterior next to a transmit site (less than a mile) and had no usable (less than -105dBm signal level inside the building) with a -50dBm signal outside. And hearing the repeater isn't what really tells me the attenuation level. It's the fact you can talk to the repeater. The portable output signal is down at LEAST 12 dB from the repeater, assuming that you are running at 50 watts out, losses getting that down 4 to 6 dB in the cable and duplexer, and a modest gain antenna. The portable has 4 watts, and no real gain from the antenna. It's all numbers. power out - duplexer loss - cable loss + antenna gain = ERP ERP - path loss - building attenuation +/- antenna gain = signal in the radio All that should be calculated in dB. Convert the power output from watt's to dBm and then run the numbers. They will be right as long as the information is correct and will never lie.

Wait, what AI engine created that post? Or where did it get copied and pasted from? Training ground for engineers, and emergency responders? The engineers thing is laughable at best, and I have NEVER even heard of ham radio being a contributing factor in someone becoming a cop or fire fighter. Now I have seen MANY a wacker that couldn't get into public safety for various reasons end up with a ham license. Never the other way around. Others are welcome to comment here, if they have ever heard such a thing, but I'm not gonna hold out much hope. The engineer's thing. Most new hams are not even good appliance operators. They care little about the quality of their equipment (Baofengs) and for a long time they were getting their license for other reasons like joining a SAR / CERT group and it was sort of a requirement for those groups. The continued push that ham radio is for emergency communications promises the ARRL a new batch of members / license holders every time there is some significant incident that other types of communications fail and the otherwise uninformed general public see the statement that "Ham Radio Saves Lives" and go see about getting licensed. Some get as far as finding out about the tests and that sends them to GMRS or drives them off all together. A few go the full route and get licensed, buy a radio and listen to it for a month or so and put it in a closet. VERY few become anything resembling active in the hobby. Fostering innovation? Gonna ask, what innovative thing that had made a significant contribution to radio communications has come out of ham radio in the last 50 years? I just had this 'argument' with a bunch of backwards thinking hams that were certain that StarLink was going to be the end of EMCOMM (emergency communications) with regards to ham radio. And if they don't figure out how to adopt it and other newer technologies, then yes, it might do just that. The whole ad-hoc, no infrastructure, radio to radio communications thing is great if two things are present. First is the distances are short. No one is going to be of any assistance with a flood or tornado if they are on the other side of the country. Those sorts of things are localized. The communications need to be localized as well. FEMA and other state EMA agencies have all but completely gotten away form HF as a resource, because it's of limited use. They bring in trailer mounted towers and VHF/UHF/800 equipment to restore communications for public safety. So if you have no infrastructure, the other thing you need is enough people to bridge the gap in coverage between where you are and where the people are you need to communicate with. That requires operators in specific places to relay traffic from you to the other party. Ham radio was in the past fairly active most places. Now that activity is significantly lower. And even if those people are in the right locations, are they going to be willing to participate and pass traffic.

Well, it's provoked. Just maybe not here. If you happen to log into eham and look in the EMCOMM section, you can see a multipage show about how StarLink is now going to replace ARES and hammie EMCOMM. And me trying my level best to explain that the ONLY thing that will bring about the end of EMCOMM in ham radio is the narrow minded ham operators that feel that EMCOMM can ONLY take place on the ham bands, with some sort of voice communications. If a microphone isn't involved, and it's not in the assigned frequency spectrum of the ham radio allocation then it's 'not real EMCOMM'. And they just keep coming out of the woodwork furthering the narrow minded thought processes. But they refuse to see StarLink as a possible tool in their EMCOMM toolbox for data transfer and instead poo poo on the idea of it completely. Bringing up that ham radio is ad-hoc and redundant and in their minds will still save the world from the evil Motorola radio systems. Mind you.... and I can't believe I am saying this. I agree with Randy on a good bit of his view on ham radio and the SAD HAMS thing. Keep in mind that on November 6th, I renewed my license for the 3rd time.. I have been licensed since 94, making it over 30 years a ham. But I keep getting reminded. Just the other day, I actually heard a couple guys using the repeater. So I piped up and attempted to join in. I finally got recognized, and even after being recognized and spoken to, the two original members of the conversation would continually short key. When I said something about it, the guys reaction was, "yeah, I tend to do that most of the time". fully admitting that he steps on everyone else and just doesn't care. I took the high road and left the 100 watt radio in low power and tried to maintain a turn, but they just weren't having that. I choose to take the high road and maintain two ham repeaters. Keep tossing my call out on the local repeaters to see if there is anyone to talk to. And maintain a presence. Which is more than most it seems.