WRKC935

While SOME might think that you need to bring your own group to the party so to speak, and chatting it up with other users isn't the thing to be doing, there are those of us that believe that's a lot of BS. While don't have near the number of repeaters that some do in Indiana or Illinois, I am growing the system in Ohio as I can. And our rules are pretty simple. Some ask that you gain permission for the use of their repeaters but grant to all comers, and then there are others like me that take the approach of it you have a license, by all means use it and I will speak to you if you are NOT using it correctly otherwise have at it and enjoy. Mind you that repeater system reaches across 4 states and covers most of Indiana, much of Illinois, and parts of Ohio. And we all work together to make sure it's available for all that are willing to use it and have a license to do so.

A lot of that is going to depend on the bonding more than the surge suppressor. As mentioned elsewhere, the BONDING is done for safety reasons and to keep all the equipment at the same voltage potential. So single point grounding of all equipment on the operator position is KEY in keeping the equipment running after a strike. If you have a strike hit any piece of the equipment , it should ALL jump to the same potential as the gear next to it. If that happens, you stand a better chance of it surviving. If one piece of gear jumps to 10KV and the rest stays at 0 volts, POOF. And you get a big fireworks show on your desk to boot. And one of the things that I had a hard time with when discussing grounding was how does a number 2 or number 6 wire really deal with a hit. It's tens of thousands of amps and millions of volts. But what was explained to me is there really is no way that you could pass that amount of current across a conductor that size for any length of time. But if the time was short enough, it would hold that sort of current. The other part was once you are in the structure, and the site has proper grounding, those smaller conductors are NOT exposed to those sorts of currents and voltages. If a single DC floating antenna takes a direct strike, the maximum voltage across the cable from center conductor to ground is the breakdown voltage of the cable. You can't put 100KV across two terminals that are 1 inch apart. The voltage will arc over and limit due to the arc, and that arc will short the rest of the voltage to ground. And that breakdown voltage is only present until the arc starts. Once an arc starts, it's no longer an open circuit. You have current flow and therefore a load against the potential. Welders will recognize this with simple stick welding. You have to fight to get the arc to establish. And a typical stick welder open circuit is about 60 to 80 volts. Once the arc is established, the welding voltage drops down to about 20 volts. And you can pull up several inches from the welded material and maintain the arc, still having a really low voltage present between the welding electrode and the material. Same thing with a coax cable on a tower that is hit. The center will arc over to the shield and the voltage gets limited between the shield and the center conductor. Of course the shield is grounded to the tower at the base of the antenna, where it transitions off the tower to the structure, at the entry point of the structure on the outside and then at the surge suppressor just inside the structure. At least that's the way it's done on commercial towers. In addition, it's grounded not less than every 100 feet coming down the tower. Back to the number 2 wire and the 100K amps and a gazillion volts. Lightning is swift. It's a LOT of power being dispersed very quickly. So the wire will heat up, but it's not an instantaneous thing. And since the duration of the voltage drop across the conductor (which is the actual voltage across the wire and NOT the total voltage present during the strike) is so quick, the relatively meager conductor size in actually ample to pass the voltage across it and into the ground. Now, something else that's NOT being considered. Since the cables are all grounded to the tower and everything else and all that is bonded together, the tower carry's a LOT of the power to ground via the metal structure and the metal in the concrete base of the tower. In other words, the single antenna cable of the antenna that gets hit, never really see's the entire blast of lightning, it's spread across a number of other conductors to ground.

Grounding bonding and the like are NOT to deal with a direct strike. The first and foremost reason to ground and bond is safety for the operator. And that is where the bonding part comes in. If you install a tower, toss a couple ground rods in the ground and connect them to the tower and do NOTHING else you create a bigger issue than if you just did nothing. And here's why. Your house, building or whatever has an electrical service connected to it. Part of the code for that service being connected is there is a safety ground. So that service has one or two ground rods connected to it (newer builds require 2 rods). You radios are plugged into that service and that ground. That ground is connected to the case of your radio and then the antenna is ALSO connected. That antenna is connected to the tower and the tower is grounded with a second set of ground rods. A ground strike that hits neither the tower or the electrical service will induce a pulse that will spread out across the ground as it disperses. Since the two different grounds are at different places, they are at different voltage potentials as the strike disperses in the ground. But you have connected them together with your radio being the fuse in the middle. So it goes poof. If the radio is NOT connected to the electrical ground, but is connected to the tower, but other equipment is sitting there on the desk that is connected to the electrical ground, then it will arc across from one device to the other, OR if the radio is connected to a computer or some other device that is on the electrical ground via data cables, then one device has a different voltage potential than the other across the data cable,,, again POOF. None of these are 'direct hits' They are all ground strikes that fry your gear due to lack of proper bonding between the different pieces of equipment connected to the different grounds. Specific to tower grounding. For a small tower for GMRS / HAM radio use, and NOT a big commercial tower, the reason for grounding the tower is NOT to deal with a direct hit, it's more to prevent the hit from coming at all. As we have all been told over and over. Lightning will take the path of least resistance. If you have an ungrounded tower, that tower can build a static charge on it with reference to ground. The tower is more conductive than the tree's around it, and it's now at a higher potential due to the static charge. That makes it the path of least resistance and therefore the most likely target for a strike. Anything connected to that tower is going to become part of the dispersion of that strike. So you ground it. Grounding the tower brings the entire tower back to the same voltage potential as the rest of the surrounding earth and therefor makes it no more of a target than anything else there because the grounding pulls the static charge off the tower, and in reality will not let it build up to begin with. Lightning suppressors. Lightning suppressors perform two different tasks when they are properly installed, and don't do anything if they are not installed correctly. They first and foremost need to be grounded. That ground needs to be right at the entry point where the cable enters the building. But the shield of the cable needs to be grounded on the outside of the building just before it enters the building as well. The surge suppression part of the device is to short down any voltage higher than the trigger voltage of the suppressor in use. This is typically about 100 volts. If any part of the tower is hit, every part of that tower and anything connected to it will have a voltage induced on it. That induced voltage will create a magnetic field (like a transformer) that will induce voltages on any other conductor near it including the center conductor of any coax on the tower. The suppression is to short that to the shield of the cable and then to the grounding system it's connected to. It's NOT to deal with a singular hit on a specific antenna on the tower. If that happens, the radio connected to that antenna will go POOF. BUT if the grounding is done correctly and the bonding is right, that will be the only radio damaged. If not, then the lightning will come down and tear up lots of stuff.

Try the Johnstown600 repeater if you have an elevated outdoor antenna. It's possible to make it but it's gonna be difficult.

I mention the rules thing for one reason only. If it's not brought to to the forefront in the initial discussion, then it will be discussed, debated, and pontificated by a number of folks that may or may NOT have a solid understanding of it and possibly convey partly or completely incorrect info that then needs corrected. This always seems to turn into a thing, threads get hijacked, dead horses beaten. It's just a thing that happens with online forums. Nothing new or exciting, just a continuance of the norm. Unless you are connecting your .5 watt radio to a 30dBi gain 20 foot dish and purposely creating interference for others I seriously doubt that the FCC is gonna come knocking. That being said. You mentioned both dBi and dBd gain numbers. Gonna give a quick explanation of each, because it's not common knowledge. dBi is gain over an isotropic radiator. This is the default 'paper' reference antenna that radiates RF in all directions at all angles equally. It's basically a free space radiator that has a sphere of RF eminating from it. I know that I used a lightbulb as an anology, and it's not quite correct since it can't radiate out the bottom of the lightbulb, but it's a good point of reference for most all other directions. dBd is gain over a dipole. Dipole is simple, and does exhibit gain over an Isotropic radiator since it's pattern doesn't include significant radiation off the ends of the antenna. That power has to go somewhere, so the increased radiation at certain angles give the antenna some amount of gain over the paper antenna in those directions. One of the other interesting things with antenna's an gain as opposed to amplifier gain which of course is an active component of the RF string is the amplifier is typically uni-directional with it's gain. Take a typical amplifier with a 10dB gain design. You put in 1 watt and 10 comes out. This will make you be heard farther than before. But it does nothing for your receive. Now, gain in an antenna doesn't so much 'boost' the receive signal. The signal is what ever it is at the antenna. Once again, we bring in the light source. The light isn't brighter for the directional antenna vs the onmi directional antenna. It's the same level. I am not going to bore you with math and what is referred to in the big antenna college text books as power density. I am gonna go back to the simple light source. So what a directional antenna does to increase your ability to 'hear' a signal is it darkens everything else out other than what it's pointed to. Take a flashlight outside at noon, you can see it at 100 yards. But you can't see a candle at the same distance. There is too much other light source (noise) to see the candle. But take the same candle out at midnight, and it can be clearly seen as a light source at the same distance. The directional antenna does this by ignoring the light (signal) from every other direction and only looking at the candle. A receive amplifier can't do that. It's going to amplify the signal some, but it's going to amplify all the other signals that we don't want as well.

Yeah, there have been 800Mhz radios that were produced with PL-259 connectors. Sure there is some loss. The N connector is a better option, but it's a situation where the performance difference isn't significant enough to matter in most real world situations. There are people that believe that little bit of loss is going to keep them from being able to communicate, or give them an edge on getting some rare DX contact in the case of the ham radio guys. But the truth is you would never notice. But I will say that installing PL259 connectors on RG-8 sized cables is a pain as opposed to an N connector. We use the Times Microwave LMR400 / LMR600 EZ connectors and that specific cable at work as a standard unless heliax is used, and the connectors go on quickly with the proper prep tool.

So there are some issues using a beam specifically with simplex operations. First issue is beamwidth of the antenna. Think of an onmi-diredctional antenna as a bare light bulb, the light comes out in all directions pretty much equally. Then we get into a short yagi of 3 or so elements. That's like having a flashlight. It's a directional beam of light that spreads out as the distance increases but is still very directional as compared to the bare light bulb. Now we get into the longer boom yagi's. And while 7 elements isn't really a big beam as opposed to some of the 30 element ones that ham's use for Satellite work, it's still significant forward gain. That's gonna be like a cheap red laser that up close is just a dot, but at a distance, the dot might be a foot or two across. You need to point that dot at the other person you are trying to communicate with and hold it on them throughout the communication as it progresses. And the more elements, the smaller that 'dot' is that you need to hold on the other party. Because once they are out of the dot, they are no longer able to communicate with you. Second issue is more of a regulation thing. While the repeater channels are NOT ERP regulated and any sort of antenna system can be employed for these simplex channels, some of the simplex channels are indeed ERP regulated and the ERP is a calculation of antenna gain and input power to the antenna. A 10 watt radio into a beam with 3dBi of gain is the same ERP as a 20 watt radio connected to an antenna with 0 dBi of gain (typically an omni-directional antenna). If you get into 6 or 9 dBi of gain, your .5 watt radio is no 2 watts, or 4 watts, when you are regulated to .5 watts of ERP and FRS is always regulated on ALL channels hence the reason an FRS radio has an antenna that can't be removed and connected to a different antenna.

BTW, I believe that the XTL and APX will address up to 4 heads. There is a way to set the head number on each head and they get daisy chained from head to head. The power would be a bigger issue at that point as I don't know I would want stand along power supplies running each head creating a ground loop on the data cable between the heads and the radio.

This is true. Dual head was available on the Spectra, AstroSpectra, XTL and APX lines of radios. Now a dual head setup for an APX is going to be in the thousands of dollars, so I don't know what your budget is, but it's certainly out of mine. Another option couple of options. First is a tone remote setup where there are remotes that look like a desk phone sitting in different places throughout the house, and areall wired back to a tone remote panel that is connected to your radio. The audio is routed to all the desk sets and you simply lift the receiver and hit the PTT to talk. This stuff is around on ebay and could be used. This is going to be easiest if you use a commercial radio for the interface, they are designed for it. A Motorola CDM is a really good choice here. And if you find the right stuff you can change channels from the remotes. Second option is a Zello / RoIP setup where you connect an interface to your radio and then your phone connects to the interface that is available via WiFi or Internet to the radio gateway. This gives you access most anywhere your phone can connect to the Internet. Another option that is going to be a bit more costly, but has a LOT of additional abilities is CTI Products Radio Pro. This is going to require a Motorola XPR radio and a Radio Pro Gateway to function but you have full control of the radio via either a computer running the 'Dispatch' Software or a smart phone running the app. With this setup you can use the Phone for mobile comms and if traveling, you can load the client on your laptop and have full control for radio use while abroad as long as you have a WiFi connection.

Get over yourself dude. Never said I blocked you specifically. Hell I'm Batman and your the Joker. We need each other. It's a love hate relationship. Where on a rare occasion when the stars align, we might actually agree on something. But we do have a symbiotic relationship where one of us is the host and the other is the parasite. We just can't agree on who is who. But that's all right. You'll keep making my butt itch and I will keep giving you headaches. It's all good.

Well, news flash, YOU have been lied to. There are indeed dumbass ham operators that believe this crap and a number of GMRS guys that fall into this as well. The biggest believer in this BS about SWR by far is CB operators. I have also come across the ones that think that any amount of cable loss that's not an absolute necessity is sinking an installation and the radio system will never talk without more than X dB of cable loss. And these moron's will die on that hill as well with their beliefs. There was a time that being a ham operator actually meant that you had some level of technical ability and knowledge. In fact it was a requirement to prove that knowledge during testing for a ham license. That's not been the case in years. Once the FOIA became a thing and the question pool for the tests were made into study guides for passing the test, there was no longer a need to have specific knowledge of radio, you just had to be able to memorize enough of the questions and answers to pass the test. And these folks that get licensed now did just that and then through a total lack of any real knowledge, listen to wives tails of Whoa when it comes to cable loss and SWR and treat those lies as gospel and preach them to all that will listen. And the reason they believe? Because the dolt that is preaching the good word of SWR has been licensed for 6 weeks longer than they have. I don't understand the 'importance' of the length of time that someone has walked around with a ham license in their pocket. Old people have had drivers licenses for far longer in some instances, it doesn't mean that grandma should still be driving when she has run over 12 curbs, 4 dogs and a shrub or two in the front yard. Does it mean that you are some how a master of bating when you have been playing with yourself for 30 years? No, it just means your old and lonely. And not much different mentally than most teenage boys. Other than they might get some at some point down the road. The guys that had to actually construct a radio at the testing office to get their ham license (yes it was a thing once) are about 3 days older than the dirt that they will be buried in any day now, if they haven't been already. I will have been a ham operator for 30 years in April or 24. And that don't mean crap. Other than I got a ham license long ago. It doesn't prove anything past my ability to fill out a forum every 10 years and send some money to the FCC with that forum and renew my license. It's the same method used to renew a GMRS license, a commercial radio license or many other certificates that someone might have. What does prove out that I know something about radio and electronics? Two years of electronics in high school with a state certificate of completion. Three years of college with a degree in electronic repair and a degree in industrial electronics. Fourteen years as a communications field technician designing, installing and repairing public safety communications system and 911 phone systems. That would be a good starting point. But, any skill that you are being paid to use, and have been paid to use for more than 2 years typically means you must know something about it, because most employers would have fired you in that time frame if you weren't any good at what you are being paid to do. Again, just my personal opinion.

The way to do this right is two radios. One radio that was a 1 to 25 watt radio set at the lowest possible power in each position for inner vehicle communications. These would only be for the operators of the 'train'. A second radio on a different channel for escort and spotter operations. These could be 1 to 25 watt versions as well but turned up to 10 or so watts to communicate with the escort vehicles and the train vehicles. There are two equally important sources of radio traffic when running a setup like this. First of course is from the other operators on the connected vehicle. The second being from spotter / escort ops that are running all around the vehicle. And a front lead vehicle may be a 1/2 mile or more in front of the load vehicle to spot traffic, road conditions or other issues that will effect the navigation of the load vehicle. Being able to hear BOTH is important, to the point two radios are all but a requirement. Licenses can be simple itinerant nationwide frequencies but multiple channels are also a must if you would happen to run into another license holder that would cause interference. If that happens everyone switches to a different channel and the issue is averted. And escort / spotters are NOT on the same channel as the vehicle operations for the same reason. Something as simple as changing speed is a group effort here. All power units have to be doing the same thing at the same time. And that 'team effort' for lack of a better description is why NO ONE else is on their channel. CB radios and other 'distractions' shouldn't be present in the load vehicles either. If CB or other radio monitoring is needed, that needs to be a function of the escort / spotter team. They can then relay important information to the load vehicles across the spotter radios. At least that's the proper way to do it in my mind.

So the first issue that they may be having is the fact the radios they have are in the Part 90 allocation. And do you know what frequency they are on? Could be VHF. could be UHF. Hard to say. All this has to do with the noise floor of the area around the facility. Rural area noise floors are typically going to be lower than urban areas. The type of license they have is also a consideration. If they are saddled with an itinerant license, their neighbors across the street may have the same frequencies as they do further limiting their ability to talk. Lastly, the squelch level of the radios they have, which is programmable only and not user adjustable may have a hand in the lack luster coverage they are experiencing. GMRS and HAM UHF frequencies are typically fairly quiet and the noise floor there is very low typically. Much lower than the noise floor in the part 90 allocated frequencies. But what I can tell you is this. There are a number of different radio services out there that are for different applications and users. FRS radios that are sold in a big box store in bubble packs are meant by the service they are attached to to NOT be used for commercial / government entity applications. Just because you can buy them across the counter doesn't mean they are for every application you can imagine. FRS specifically stands for FAMILY radio service. Meaning they are for family use in a similar way that a child's walkie-talkie is meant for that application and NOT as a radio system for public safety. Could you use kids walkie-talkies in a public safety situation? Sure, if the range was limited, and the interference was minimal, police could use them to communicate. But that's not what they are for, and if a police department was to use them for law enforcement activities and the FCC caught wind of it there would be some fall out over it. Same goes for FRS radios being used for school communications. It's not what that service was intended for. And improper use of a radio service is technically against the regulations. Now, mind you seeing any sort of enforcement with this is pretty far fetched, BUT if the FCC were to get wind of it and decide to levy fines to the schools for using the FRS service as their communications system, those fines could reach over 10K in short order. So messing about with things of this nature, not being aware of the regulations could get them in hot water. And while the FCC can't really come for you for violations, the school could seek to create a civil case against you for sending them that direction.

Correct, the payload is the only ting typically encrypted, but the 'repeaters' in a conventional system are also transparent to the data stream. They look at the signal to see that it's P25 and nothing else. If it's a 'system' then the data stream is further processed to see that the talkgroup ID and radio ID are encrypted before allowing the traffic to pass. But if you stand up a stand alone Quantar repeater in P25, and run encryption on the subscribers, the repeater doesn't care or even have the ability to look at the data stream. Now the headers which carry the ID are NOT encrypted typically. This becomes apparent when you have a radio that isn't encrypted listening to the secure traffic. The transmitting radio ID will be displayed, but the audio is muted since there is no way for the receiving radio that's not encrypted or doesn't have the proper key in it to decrypt the radio traffic. As mentioned, to have 'wireline' control of the repeater, it requires a DIU with encryption in the DIU to communicate via wireline encrypted. The repeater isn't encrypting the traffic, that is done by the DIU and the encrypted data stream is fed directly to the repeater and it puts that stream on the air.

You might have heard that someone had to 'buy back' an entire system over the issues with the interference that it was causing and getting from surrounding agencies. I have first hand knowledge of that system. Those issues were also why the APX line of radios never received the ability to do DMR. That family of radios were built for public safety in mind of course. And Motorola didn't want to even go down that road for interoperability. I know of a Motorola shop owner that did setup a TRBO system after all the mess happened. He told me that M said if it didn't work, they would pull his dealership from him. He was a very accomplished RF engineer, and his system did work without issue. But it was not a case of just taking out the analog repeaters and dropping in DMR on the same frequencies and power levels. Some of the original frequencies were reused, but some couldn't be. And the whole thing was re-engineered. Different antenna's at different heights, and power levels were all significantly reduced. But DMR requires a different mentality and effort than old school analog radio where you run as much power as allowed as high on the tower as you can. This is another concern that I, to this point, have been reluctant to bring up with DMR on GMRS. GMRS users typically do subscribe to the 'height is might' mentality with strong reliance on power. We hear guys complaining that there 50 watt radio only does 48 watts on their meter (coax loss in the test jumper is the typical cause) and wanting those extra 2 watts. With that line of thinking, dumping DMR into GMRS in a suburban or urban environment WILL cause interference problems of course. And getting the max power thought process out of peoples heads isn't going to be possible. So there is yet another reason to steer clear of the whole idea of DMR on GMRS.

yeah, i made a list finally

A sort of limited explanation of ERP vs power. Where the power or watts measured from a power meter, which is where the 50 watts thing comes in. There is something called ERP or effective radiated power. This has to do with antenna gain. Gain is typically figured off of an Isotropic radiator, which is really a theoretical antenna that radiates power in all directions evenly. All directions meaning up, down and every degree of a circle around the radiator at all angles evenly. It's not an antenna that really exists except on paper as a reference. To achieve gain in an antenna, the elements are configured in such a way that the power that is radiated up and down is redirected more toward a flat plane horizontal to the center of the vertical radiator (vertical antenna). Since even basic quarter wave antenna's have some amount of gain over the reference, it's better to consider those as a reference point when trying to figure out performance gain. But it works like this. 3dB of gain, either from some type of amplifier or an antenna is going to effectively be a doubling of power. If you consider the 3 dB of gain against the reference antenna, the antenna in question will perform at a level as if the reference antenna had double the power feeding it. So an antenna with 0dB of gain will talk as far with 100 watts as an antenna with 3dB of gain will talk with 50 watts, as long as you are considering the antenna radiation pattern. Meaning since the antenna is taking radiation away from the higher and lower angles off the horizontal plane across the center of the antenna, it will talk farther across that plane, but you LOOSE coverage in the higher and lower angles of radiation. Yes, this is a difficult topic to really understand. And not having radiation pattern diagrams posted here make sit harder to see. All that being said. There is no 'limit' to antenna gain in GMRS. Part 90 licenses do have a maximum TX power and a maximum ERP. We luckily are not saddled with a max ERP. So we can run right up to the 50 watts of maximum power, and if we so desire to get totally crazy, we can legally put up a 20 foot dish and feed that dish with 30 dB of gain with our 50 watts of limited power and have 5000 watts of ERP. Now there are some safety issues that need addressed with that sort of ERP, and of course, a dish is gonna be pretty tight with the radiation pattern, but it's still technically legal to do it. As a side note to that. We are NOT allowed to operate with those antenna gain levels on the 467 interstitial frequencies and I don't believe we can do it on the 462 ones either. So bear that in mind when getting crazy with an antenna system.

Actually, one book, or set of books, that I would possibly recommend is the ARRL Handbook. Yes, there is FAR more information in that book than needed for a primer, but if someone with previous experience was to read through, all of the major parts of 'radio' would be there and you could figure out a list of chapters and pages to suggest to a new license holder to get them up and going. I would put the following chapters as must reads, in no specific order. SAFETY VHF/UHF antennas COAX Signal propagation in UHF FM radio 'technology' VHF/UHF equipment There is a LOT in the ARRL handbook. In fact, there is enough in the Handbook that my college electronics instructor used the ARRL Handbook as the textbook for the class. For those that aren't familiar, the book is probably the best compilation of electronics technology, communications theory and RF methodology in existence. It covers everything from the most basic explanation of AC and DC circuits, Ohms Law all the way to digital microprocessors. It covers RF techniques from 'DC to Daylight' starting with VLF at 136Khz clear through to Microwave technologies and wave guide design for 40Ghz. There is information on any and every sort of digital modulation method and of course AM/FM/SSB is covered in depth. Sure, it's WAY more than an entry level person would want to try to absorb all at once, but again, if someone were to put together a list of the specific materials to read, it then becomes a reference for furthering the persons knowledge going forward. This set of books and the ARRL Antenna Book are my goto reference for all things radio.

Gee, couldn't get anywhere finding someone dumb enough to petition the FCC for DMR or some other digital modulation format on GMRS , so you decide to bring up the question of the actual existence of the FCC. DO you actually work for a living or are you stuck in your house, just sitting there figuring out new ways to post stuff on the web to wind up the masses and cause trouble? I said this before, if YOU don't like the service, find a different one. Or go entertain yourself with freeband, pirating on commercial frequencies, or just put Zello on your cell phone and use that. It's become clear that you are not here to have a reasonable conversation about any topic that resembles reality and instead just post things that will stir up the best result. Welcome to the ignore list. You have joined a rare bunch that up to now only included OffroaderX. May the two of you find happiness in limbo.

Still didn't answer the question about why YOU don't bother to go petition the FCC about making a rule change allowing DMR on GMRS. And again, as myself and others have said in this thread. This is a dead horse being beaten again. This has been rehashed over and over again. No one is going to petition the FCC for the rule change, including members here who have actually successfully petitioned the FCC for rule changes. And the reason is simple. DMR on GMRS will cause nothing but problems for the current users. It's about as dumb as when the FCC decided to change CB radio from 23 channels to 40 channels making everyone's equipment obsolete when the change took effect. The actual part 95 radios that are in service will be unable to operate with DMR. Same issue exists for adding channels to GMRS or making GMRS narrow band. If you want to petition the FCC for a rule change, and get it to the point that it's open for public comment, we will certainly comment on the change. Until then, be happy with what you have, and if it doesn't suit your purposes use a different service. Because while your numbers are correct, they apply to DMR being effected by Analog signals. Not the effects of DMR on the ANALOG signals of the multitude of users out there currently using the service within the rules as they are now.

There is an 8 page discussion on this topic elsewhere on the board. It's the same dead horse with a different bridal. Here's a thought. Why don't YOU petition the FCC for a rule change allowing digital modulation on GMRS? And I have NO idea where you got the idea that DMR is somehow better suited to deal with analog signals than other analog signals. Any type of signal getting into a DMR receiver will raise the BER and cause artifacting and digitization of the audio. That's if it comes through at all. Public Safety is discouraged by the FCC from using any sort of DMR because of the issues with it not playing well with analog signals and the fact that the public safety frequencies were issued multiple times in an area, sometimes within the same county and the end users would just run different PL's to filter out the other users traffic. There is a requirement under part 90 that a user much first monitor the frequency in use to be sure that there isn't another user on it. That is what the MONITOR button is for, and why there is a 'Hub defeat's PL' that turns off the PL requirement on a mobile radio when you take the mike from the hanger. Now I don't believe that GMRS has such a requirement. It's also why there is a channel free and color code free setting in DMR radios. When using a DMR programmed channel it's suppose to be set for channel free if there is another user close enough that their licensed coverage area overlaps your coverage area. GMRS doesn't have 'licensed coverage area's. We are power limited but that's it, as long as your transmitter is 50 watt's or less, the sky's the limit on antenna height and antenna gain. Yes, if your tower is over 200 feet you have to have it registered and have obstruction lighting, but that's not a height limit, it's an additional requirement by the FAA not the FCC for towers exceeding a certain height. You ant DMR, go get a part 90 license, go get a ham license. DMR is prevalent in both of those services. It's not allowed on GMRS currently and I really don't see that ever changing.

Well, you need to explain 'other networks' Are you talking about networks other than the one associated with this site or are you referring to regional groups within this site / system? With the configuration of the software for connectivity to a specific system, only that system can be accessed with a specific configuration. The system (AllStarLink) that is used for linking requires the configuration to point to a specific set of servers that are for the system. User names, passwords, node numbers and other related stuff only has one entry. So connecting to 'multiple systems' while it MAY be possible, is not a supported configuration with this system that I am aware of. Explain what you are wanting to do, what specific issue you are having and you will be assisted if it's for THIS system. For configuration information to other systems, and you need to define 'systems'. We define systems as a group of NODES (individual repeaters) that are connected together either directly or via a State level HUB or possibly to one of the regional HUBS that are part of the overall system. Are you defining a system as a single or possibly a single group of repeaters, such as the MidWest group, or are you referring to a system level difference such as MYGMRS.com or USGMRS which is a different SYSTEM?

Yeah, If you take your mouse and hover over his name a box will pop up. Bottom right is a button 'ignore'. Just click that as many others have. It's a pretty common practice. He seems to be the self appointed court jester or something. It seems he likes to keep his post count higher than anyone else around here by nitpicking every little thing he can find. Other than that, he's a legend in his own mind with all things GMRS and even has a YouTube Channel to pass on his wicked smartness about hobby radio. Oh, and for some reason no one understands, and by his own admission, he is NOT a river in Italy that Romans can freely cross. Never really understood that one. But he openly states that in his YouTube persona. Welcome to the board.

Is there something else going on here?? Read the copied part of the post again. G R M S ???? really thought it was GMRS but the copied stuff keeps referring to it as GRMS. Not that you can link a part 90 freq to part 97 or any other service, but it just strikes me as odd that the incorrect(?) GRMS moniker shows up multiple times. As if the guy is trying to setup his own radio service.

That is a HUGE decision if you are going to any significant height. And the biggest issue is cost. Putting up a tower over 100 feet can easily exceed $50K in cost. And that could double depending on property value. Any sort of 'group effort' tower should be placed on a neutral site, and not at any one members location. Reason for this is simple. Legally it's THEIR tower. No matter how hard you lawyer that effort, it's on their property and locks it into them. And there is the need to figure out income if a tower of any significance is erected and a prospective tenant approaches the group / land owner for access. The land owner WILL want in on the income stream if a tower on his land is all of a sudden making 2 grand or more a month. And yes, depending on location and other factors is a reasonable number. BUT, do not expect a tenant on your tower as a method to pay for it. Another requirement is cost going forward. Tower sites have maintenance costs, taxes, utility costs and anything else a piece of real estate would have. And additional costs like obstruction lighting maintenance and registration that no other piece of real estate has. But, renting space from one of the large vertical real estate companies has it's own set of issues. Mainly that you would be hard pressed to get into an agreement of less than 5 years with them. And their contracts are iron clad. If you enter a contract with them, it doesn't matter if you are there 5 months, or 5 years. You are going to be on the hook for the 5 year term of the contract. The only plus to renting is you do have some way out at the point of the term of the contract ending. Keep in mind that this is hobby radio. Folks loose interest and ultimately there may come a time that no one is interested any more. With a rented space, you can hire a tower climber to remove your antenna's and such from a rented site and not extend the lease for another term. With an owned site, it is real property and would need to be transferred to another or razed (tower and building torn down) and the property sold. Which again, creates issues with the original group that funded the build. The way that the ownership was worked out will have repercussions on how the money from the sale of the real estate gets distributed. And those things need to be worked out prior to building a tower site that will be for a group. I understand this rat hole pretty well and can give you information on what needs to be done and how to do it, within reason.