rdunajewski

We now have four-letter words for people like that.

I just don't see the ban going on for much longer. I think we as a community need to step up and make a convincing case, on the record with the FCC. When they denied the requests to permit digital voice, they specifically mentioned that there was insufficient discussion about it in the record, and thus they could not make a ruling. Once a Petition for Rulemaking is filed with a very narrow set of requests (not the kitchen sink arguments that were flying around last time -- mostly due to so so many proposed changes by the FCC, we had to defend all of them), key GMRS groups and radio manufacturers will have a chance to discuss it officially on the record and the FCC can make the determination. Even still, the main issue I see with allowed digital voice is that no Part 95 equipment (to my knowledge) is even capable of being programmed to enable it. Maybe one or two models exist that carry dual Part 90 and 95 certification. Assuming the FCC even decided to lift the restriction on digital voice, one of three things will need to happen: The manufacturers will need to begin adding digital to their lineup of radios. This is not impossible, as some low-cost dPMR radios exist for Europe, but I don't see it as something they want to jump at right now. I think the tide will turn within the next 5-10 years, but that's quite far off. The FCC would need to permit GMRS licensees to use Part 90 equipment. We've been down this road before, and they pretty much completely shut down the argument. Their position seems to be that the manufacturers just need to submit their equipment for type certification and there would be no issue. The manufacturers will need to begin certifying their equipment for Part 95 as well. For whatever reason, the manufacturers seldom cross-certify for Part 95. We're only just now getting some of the Chinese radios to have Part 95 certification (much to the chagrin of some of us), but getting Motorola, Kenwood, Icom, etc to follow suit has not been going very well. GMRS and FRS were lumped together so GMRS radios ended up being seen as bubble pack radios to sell at Walmart, not for more robust communications. Hopefully now that the combo radios are no longer able to be marketed, that means GMRS will finally get some non-bubble pack love.Digital formats are finally working their way into cheaper radios (mostly DMR at this point), so hopefully the market for digital personal communications will continue to grow and the manufacturers will get serious about meeting the demand. I think this lack of motivation will be a driving factor in the FCC not permitting digital formats in the near future. I also think the bubble pack manufacturers will sit back and moan that digital doesn't do anything special and they don't want to hear complaints of interference. It will need to be a concerted effort to get this done, but I think the case can certainly be made. Everybody needs to be on the same page and the argument eventually has to be had on the record, not just online in forums.

I disagree, on FM this isn't an issue. If the 2 stations are far enough away that they do not interfere on analog, they would similarly not interfere on digital. It's only a problem when the two systems are close enough that analog interference would occur, then the digital signal would cause nearly identical interference. The problem is when a digital transmitter is transmitting all the time (like with trunking control channels), because the analog users would hear constant noise on the same channel (no matter how faint), rather than intermittent transmissions on a normal voice channel. Remember, a digital radio transmission is NOT a digital waveform, and therefore is no more harsh on FM than an analog transmission. The wave is still a sine wave, but the modulation being applied to it results in one of a few levels of frequency shift, since it's FM (commonly 4-level FSK is used). That means that the carrier (present whether on analog or digital) is going to shift either up one of 2 frequencies or down one of two frequencies to represent 2 bits of data (00, 01, 11, 10) rather than only one (0 or 1). What you're hearing on an analog receiver is actually the rhythmic fluctuations of the modulation, shifting up and down as the bits are transmitted. By contrast, analog is rather chaotically modulated by the actual audio being transmitted (a much messier wave, but conveniently one that you can understand as a sound wave/speech/tone/etc). At the end of the day, it doesn't matter what is modulating the carrier wave on FM. A digital signal doesn't actually go any further than an analog signal, it's just that a digital receiver can more easily distinguish, for example, one of 4 frequency shifts on a faint carrier than it could with 8 kHz of audio (including a CTCSS tone) to open up squelch. Hence, most digital radios have better sensitivity on digital (at the expense of a higher error rate in decoding the bits [known as BER - Bit Error Rate]).

I don't think favoritism toward a particular standard would be in the best interest of the public, and likely wouldn't be specified by the FCC. What they are likely to do is specify a very limited set of emission designators which may or may not include the type of digital you're hoping to use (i.e. a TDMA format like DMR). So, if anyone has hopes of using DMR one day, they really need to make sure the FCC permits the associated emission type. For example, here are some common formats and their emission designators. The last 3 digits are significant as they designate the modulation and type: 2-slot DMR (MotoTRBO) voice 7K60FXE 2-slot DMR (MotoTRBO) data 7K60FXD P25 Phase I voice 8K10F1E P25 Phase I voice 8K10F1D P25 Phase II has several designators, of which 8K10F1W is one type NXDN 6.25kHz (IDAS/NEXEDGE) voice 4K00F1E NXDN 6.25kHz (IDAS/NEXEDGE) data 4K00F1D NXDN 6.25kHz (IDAS/NEXEDGE) voice+data 4K00F1W NXDN 12.5kHz (IDAS/NEXEDGE) voice 8K30F1E NXDN 12.5kHz (IDAS/NEXEDGE) voice 8K30F1D NXDN 12.5kHz (IDAS/NEXEDGE) voice+data 8K30F7W We are most likely to see the voice emissions allowed but not sure about the data or combined voice+data modes. Note that DMR is actually FXE and not F1E, which means an oversight (intentional or otherwise) by the FCC could exclude DMR simply my omitting its emission type. Now back to my opinion, I prefer DMR. Early on NXDN was a winner in my eyes, but once DMR became more openly supported and the Ham community embraced it, it has become the clear winner. Since we cannot benefit from 6.25 kHz channels on GMRS anytime soon, narrowband NXDN doesn't do anything for us except minimize adjacent channel interference, which typically isn't a big problem on GMRS to begin with. We just don't want to be locked into a particular standard and then when something new and improved comes out, we're locked in by the Part 95 rules. If it meets the emission designators, it would be open to use. TDMA systems like DMR, however, allow us to use a 12.5 kHz channel (really a 25 kHz channel, but we're occupying 12.5 kHz in this case) with 2 time slots, or virtual channels. This doubles our efficiency on a given channel, even if GMRS isn't so busy to really need it right now. It would be good for putting up one repeater and having 2 distinct usages like a private slot for the individual/family putting up the system, and a slot open for the public to use. The two groups can coexist and transmit simultaneously without affecting each other.

Happy Thanksgiving! Hopefully everyone's bellies are full and you're spending time with your friends and family. Now that we're heading straight into the holiday season, I wanted to mention that we have launched a new store. Previously we had a Spreadshirt shop which only sold t-shirts and similar apparel. Now, we're expanding into other categories such as radios and radio accessories. Many of our Spreadshirt items are available on this new Shopify store. We're still working on dealer arrangements with some GMRS radio manufacturers, but in the meantime we have a great Black Friday/Cyber Monday deal: 20% Off your order of $50 or more! Just use the discount code BLACKFRIDAY19 at checkout. If you have ideas for products or designs we should carry, please let me know! https://shop.mygmrs.com/

Sounds like you're looking for a voting system where the yellow circles are satellite receivers, and the audio gets back to the transmitter site (which can and should also have its own receiver, like a normal repeater). Then you need something to evaluate the signals coming in from the array receivers and select which one to use as the transmitter's source of audio to repeat. The voter can switch fairly seamlessly between receiver sites as the signal varies during a transmission. Rather than cutting out when the signal changes, ideally a second receiver will pick up the user and the repeater will grab that other receiver's audio. Traditionally this is done with leased phone lines or microwave links which are very expensive. However, this can also be done over the Internet with one major caveat: timing. When your voter is comparing the signal quality of each receiver, the audio waves need to be in-phase (synchronized) for the comparison to work. For RF or copper links, this is pretty simple to do as everything comes in (roughly) at the speed of light. Over the Internet, however, the packets containing the audio can and will be delayed by variable amounts of time. The only way to line up the audio across various receiver sources is to use an accurate timing system like GPS to "timestamp" each packet and assemble them on the other end. There's a device called an RTCM for Allstar which does this. They're not super cheap but nowhere near the expensive professional grade stuff. You'd need one at the repeater location and one for each additional receiver, plus a GPS for each site. I've done some experimenting with these. You can even achieve simulcast where you have multiple transmitters at the same time, but the RF needs to be in-phase as well or the transmitters will interfere with each other instead of "amplifying" their collective signals. You'd need transmitters which have an external 10 MHz reference signal and a timing source based off GPS ($$) to provide a synchronized 10 MHz clock input. I haven't gone this far, and I think this is probably overkill for GMRS.

I'll be completely honest, I didn't read all of the posts above... But I recommend you make a connector that plugs into the accessory connector which jumpers 12V to Pin 3 so it will work. You might have to hunt around to find the exact part you need, but you should be able to get it from an electronics supplier online like Mouser or Digi-Key. Then you don't have a paper clip shoved in there which could pop out or worse, jumper the wrong pins and cause a short.

I wanted to point our our Community Guidelines for these forums. It's available in the footer of every page next to the Privacy Policy. Please read and understand these rules. They may change periodically if there is a need to curtail any poor behavior, but I expect the basics are good enough. The intent is to keep this a family-friendly place free of drama and argument and adult content. https://forums.mygmrs.com/index.php?app=forums&module=extras&section=boardrules Thank you.

Hi Everyone, Unfortunately, our moderators Gary (PastorGary) and William (spd641) will no longer be volunteering for us. I have reluctantly made the decision to remove their moderator status after some disagreements about how to run the forums resulting in William asking to have his account deleted from myGMRS completely. I appreciate the help they have given over the past few years and I know many of you feel the same as they have become staples of the community. For the time being, all management of the forums will be my responsibility and you're welcome to contact me with any concerns you may have. Thank you for your understanding and I would appreciate everyone's help in ensuring a smooth transition.

I made this new map live. Still a couple minor things to fix, but I think the ability to filter out the stale stuff is more important.

Done!

@berkinet wins the prize for being the first to notice.

Only a bit late... But I fixed these dead links.

I've been working on a new map replacement which will hide old and offline repeaters by default, but still gives you the option of showing them all. https://mygmrs.com/map-new/ I still have a lot of things to add to make it ready to replace the current map, but I wanted to share the progress now and get feedback from the community here. Some outstanding issues are: The label below each icon needs to be styled, so it stands out against a dark background. I'm having trouble getting this to work with the library I've chosen to use on this version of the map, but I'm sure I'll be able to find a way without scrapping anything. Clicking on the repeater icon should modify the URL to point to the repeater ID that is selected. Repeater details (the description field) aren't visible yet. Several repeaters do not have GPS coordinates and show up at 0, 0 which is off the coast of Africa. This is mainly a problem with the database that needs to be fixed, but the map should hide them since it's obviously wrong.At least the performance of loading that many repeaters and toggling the switches on and off seems to be quite good. Let me know if it's slower for you than the current map. I have big plans for a complete site redesign to make it more modern. I've headed down this path several times but got bogged down between work and my personal life, so I never got a complete redesign done. I've been making small changes here and there to support this big effort, so I'm hoping we can get a better site off the ground which will solve some of the pain points like the stale repeaters.

Not true, GMRS can be used for business purposes as long as each individual person is licensed. No licenses will be issued to a business entity, only individuals. So if you have 5 people that need to communicate for the business, you better have 5 licenses (assuming none of them are related, otherwise the relatives can share the one license).

Try clicking My Media in the post editor. That should let you select an image or upload a new attachment.

Also, are you comparing the repeater range by activating the repeater or are you directly keying up the repeater's transmitter to do the test? If you're having any kind of receiver issue or desense issue then you're going to see that as either poor range or a fast keyup and an immediate drop of the input. Best way to make sure the TX side is good is to have someone physically key up the transmitter and verify its range independent of the repeat functionality. If that's good, start looking at the RX side for issues. If not, maybe you're slightly off-frequency and once you go out of the 500 yard range you're no longer picking up the transmitter anymore bleeding over onto the right frequency.

Here is our reply in the Docket, posted today: https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/1061939433150/FCC%20Comment-MSI.pdf

Here's my letter acknowledging the meeting with the FCC, per their request, to keep a record of the communication: https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/1060628686973/FCC-Letter-2018-06-06.pdf We'll be drafting a reply to the petition shortly.

The FCC made it clear that they wanted quality comments, not a large quantity. So I don't necessarily want to flood them with comments. I think it would be a good idea for people to only submit a filing to the FCC if they strongly disagree with the position I put forward. No need for everyone to file just to say the same things or to go off the reservation with other issues. Regarding the duration of the data burst -- it really depends what modulation and baudrate they want to go with. If it's low speed, 5 seconds might be reasonable. If it's high speed, 5 seconds may be completely unnecessary. But I also don't want to sit here and argue over numbers. As long as there's some sane limit to the number of these bursts, and most importantly, busy channel lockout, I'm fairly happy. If you do want to file now, the docket is here. Click "+ New Filing" or "+ Express" to get started: https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/search/filings?sort=date_disseminated,DESC&proceedings_name=10-119 Topics the FCC wanted feedback on specifically: Would automatic data transmissions cause interference with other GMRS operators? How so? (Strong arguments needed) Should these be restricted to certain channels? Why? Motorola seemed okay with avoiding repeater inputs for now, to avoid interference. What should the duty cycle limits be? Proposal so far was no more than every 2 minutes with less than a 5 second burst. What other restrictions might be needed to avoid disruption of other GMRS operators?

To all GMRS licensees: I have just spoken with the FCC regarding a Petition for Reconsideration filed by Motorola regarding automatic GPS and data transmissions on the GMRS band. Motorola would like to allow automatic transmissions on the 462 MHz frequencies which includes repeater outputs (Channel 15-22) and the interstitial 462 MHz channels (Channels 1-7). The repeater inputs are not presently mentioned, however we will articulate our position to the Commission that these input frequencies should be prohibited due to the potential of interference to repeaters. myGMRS.com (and it's parent company RepeaterFinder, LLC) will be filing an ex parte response in the docket with the following requests: A Busy Channel Lockout (BCL) feature be mandated for any radios which are to operate in an automatic fashion. The devices must inhibit transmission if there is co-channel activity to prevent interference to other users of the shared frequencies. Blind periodic transmissions are going to be very problematic and will almost certainly cause interference. Limit automatic transmission to the 462 MHz GMRS channels only. Repeater inputs must be excluded to mitigate potential interference. Duty cycle limits of the bursts must be set by the FCC. I believe Uniden America proposed no more than once every 2 minutes and no more than 5 seconds per transmission. This sounds reasonable to cover longer text messages and location updates without constantly trashing the band. The FCC plans to respond to Motorola and issue a decision in the next couple of weeks, so anyone who would like to submit comments to the record is encouraged to do so as soon as possible. No exact deadline was given, but they expressed a desire to have this hammered out within the next week or two. I will provide further details later today. Original Petition for Reconsideration from September 2017: https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/10928247080350/Ready%20For%20Filing_Motorola%20Part%2095%20Petition%20for%20Recon.pdf Further Comments from Motorola from January 2018: https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/101081822912433/Motorola_Part%2095%20Recon_Further%20Comments.pdf Letter from Motorola Detailing their Discussion with Members of the FCC from April 2018: https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/10420845023222/April%202018_GMRS_FRS_ex%20parte%20notification.docx

What kind of IG system? Itinerant or a repeater/base system? I hear the itinerant is relatively easy to get but the latter is the pain in the butt.

Done!

David, The seller is asking about the subaudible tones that are used to unsquelch the speaker of the radio. If you've used an FRS/GMRS radio these are the privacy codes. Motorola uses PL for "Private Line" and DPL for "Digital Private Line". If you're having this programmed for repeaters, you'll need to provide the receive and transmit frequencies of each repeater, plus the tone information the repeater requires. If you're a member of this site, you can look up the repeater information once you're logged in. Provide this information to the seller and they will program the channels for you. Remember that the radio will need to transmit on 467.xxx MHz and receive on 462.xxx MHz for repeater operation. If you want to create simplex (non-repeater) channels in the radio (always a good idea in case no repeater is around), TX and RX will be on 462.xxx MHz.

According to the manual, you need to hit the Menu button until you get "rP" on the screen, then select "On" to enable duplex mode. Sounds like they (thankfully) turned this off by default. https://midlandusa.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/MXT115-Owners-manual-Final-24Oct16.pdf