Raybestos

Thank You!

I have heard this is necessary. Ideally, the antenna would be designed, engineered, and made so this was not necessary. What materials are needed and what areas would need this treatment?

Thank You for reposting that, Steve! Yes, on my Android, where it went to yellow print on a white background, I could not read it.

That was interesting! Wish I could have read all of it. Unfortunately their webmaster didn't understand the importance of having a decent contrast between the background and the lettering on the latter portion. Hilarious that they blame OffRoaderX for their problems when he was just the messenger. I guess there really are people still who would "shoot the messenger".

"A GMRS user can expect a communications range of one to twenty-five miles depending on station class, terrain, and repeater use. GMRS stations cannot be interconnected with the public switched telephone network or any other network for the purpose of carrying GMRS communications, but these networks can be used for remote control of repeater stations. In other words, repeaters may not be linked via the internet—an example of an “other network” in the rules—to extend the range of the communications across a large geographic area. Linking multiple repeaters to enable a repeater outside the communications range of the handheld or mobile device to retransmit messages violates sections 95.1733(a)(8) and 95.1749 of the Commission’s rules, and potentially other rules in 47 C.F.R. Repeaters may be connected to the telephone network or other networks only for purposes of remote control of a GMRS station, not for carrying communication signals. In addition to violating Commission rules, linking repeaters is not in the public interest. Because GMRS spectrum is limited and used on a shared “commons” basis, the service only works well on a localized basis when users can hear each other and cooperate in the sharing of channels. Linking repeaters not only increases the potential for interference, but also uses up a limited spectrum resource over much larger areas than intended, limiting localized availability of the repeater channels." The above pretty much says it all. In particular, the part about: "In other words, repeaters may not be linked via the internet—an example of an “other network” in the rules—to extend the range of the communications across a large geographic area. Linking multiple repeaters to enable a repeater outside the communications range of the handheld or mobile device to retransmit messages violates sections 95.1733(a)(8) and 95.1749 of the Commission’s rules, and potentially other rules in 47 C.F.R. Repeaters may be connected to the telephone network or other networks only for purposes of remote control of a GMRS station, not for carrying communication signals." Any connection to another repeater constitutes one of the dictionary definitions of "a network". "From Vocabulary dot com: noun (broadcasting) a communication system consisting of a group of broadcasting stations that all transmit the same programs “the networks compete to broadcast important sports events” see more noun (electronics) a system of interconnected electronic components or circuits" FROM IONOS "Definition: Network A network is a group of two or more computers or other electronic devices that are interconnected for the purpose of exchanging data and sharing resources." Regardless of the method of linking used to attempt to circumvent FCC rules regarding GMRS linking, it is still an obnoxious practice that attempts to change the scope of GMRS from its intended purpose of personal communications into a hobby in and of itself, aka "ham radio lite".

True! The same as using a FRS/GMRS ht in the terrain I live in, as far distance goes. Please see my reply to dosw elsewhere regarding scanning/hailing on all five. Thank You for the reply!

Hi dosw! LOL@ "the baby monitor net" and "Mr Microphone simplex group". Seriously, I was just curious as to whether or not there really was such a net. At least the guy who started the GMRS/FRS Ch 19 thing put some thought into it and, in some areas at least, it has yielded results. While you "could" scan the five MURS channels and even call out on all five, that is unnecessarily cumbersome, even with only five channels. I am just double checking to try and find evidence, if any, that a MURS net with a suggested meeting channel exists. If not, I was going to suggest to the local area net that this entry be dropped from announcements as it serves no purpose. Thank You!

Hi! I have a question that I have been unable to find an answer for using traditional internet searches. An area GMRS net that I occasionally listen to lists other area and adjacent area nets. They occasionally mention a "Monday Night MURS Net At 9 PM". I presume this "net" (if it indeed exists) would be similar to the "GMRS/FRS Friday Night 9PM (local time) Net on FRS/GMRS Channel 19 Simplex". Unfortunately, unlike the FRS/GMRS Net, no channel number or frequency for such is ever provided, adding to the uselessness of this information. Does anyone know if there is such a Monday night MURS net and if so, on which channel it might occur on? Thank You!

I don't understand the people trying to come up with some loophole for this. A linked GMRS system in range of me has finally done the right thing and de-linked their repeaters. The other night, I heard about four to six guys having a pity party on the repeater closest to me about "how wrong it is" that the FCC has taken away their linking. One or two trotted out the false notion that RF linking will be legal once they figure out how to do that. What was missed by all of them was that they were all on one repeater, having a nice, friendly, conversation, and it was working just fine despite the absence of linking. Also unnoticed by them I feel sure, is that three or four other repeaters were open and available to others in the respective local areas of each repeater, for similar conversations, contact with family or friends on the road, or other originally intended uses of GMRS. I have yet to hear a GMRS conversation taking place on one repeater, that the world would suffer if it were not simultaneously broadcast over multiple other repeaters. I spoke with an old regular contact and over-the-air friend last night who lamented the loss of linking on that system. I mentioned the advantage in that now, each repeater can carry its own, local area, conversations without disrupting that ability over a 100 mile long path for others. As he thought about it, he agreed with me. He did wish for the ability to at least link as needed, but I think he will adjust well to the change, with time.

Interesting point, Mark! Another possibility I had not considered!

I confess to pondering weird stuff, probably quite a bit. I used to think about how cheap (Red) Chinese radios have all but replaced higher-end, traditionally Japanese, radios like Kenwood, Icom, and Yeasu, in the ham and other markets. I used to wonder if the Chinese may have produced, or at least pondered such, radios with a "kill switch" code which could disable hundreds of thousands of these devices if our country were to be at war with them. I pondered the likelihood of carcinogenic chemicals in the radios. I never pondered what the Israelis are said to have done, adding explosive charges to the radios. Now that cat is out of the bag, it is a viable concern to ponder, especially when receiving radios from a known adversary. With ham or GMRS, not on a known network, delivery of a signal to start harmful processes might be difficult, but "where there's a will...". Oh, and think about where all of our I-Phones and many Androids come from. With a huge connected network, delivery of harmful processes might not be so difficult.

A man worked in a factory and augmented his meager income by playing guitar at bars and special events on weekends. He was in a terrible industrial accident that claimed one of his arms. The factory fired him, saying they had no work for a one-armed man. Of course he could no longer play guitar, something he enjoyed doing, with one arm. The poor man decided to end it all and was standing in a chair, rigging a noose on the ceiling of his third floor apartment. Just as he was about to put the noose around his own neck, the man, facing the window on the front of his building, sees a man with no arms, walking down the sidewalk, whistling, and occasionally jumping in the air and clicking his heels. The man felt bad. Here he was, about to end it all and yet here goes a man with no arms, walking down the street, happy, and apparently content with the world. The man threw the noose to the side, jumped off of the chair he was standing on, and ran downstairs to try and catch up to the happy man with no arms. It took the man about a block to catch up to the man with no arms, who was still jumping in the air and clicking his heels at regular intervals. He asked the man with no arms to stop and he did, growling "What do you want?" "Sir, I was about to end it all a minute ago. Then I saw you walking down the street, apparently very happy, whistling and clicking your heels every few steps. How do you do it? I must know", said the one armed man. "How do I do what?", snapped the guy with no arms. "How do you remain happy with your disability, which is worse than my own?" "I'm not happy", snapped the man with no arms. "Then why are you jumping in the air and clicking your heels every few steps?, asked the one armed man. "My butt itches."

I recall when I first got into CB (Class D) in 1970, there were a few, actually a VERY few, guys with an echo feature on their radios. All of them were running some type of homebrew echo device and all of them sounded very cool. It was (at least, to me) a rare auditory treat when one of them activated their echo device. Those echo boxes were very clear and had a resonance and quality to the sound that the store-bought ones never had or never will have. One guy told me that his was built using the reverb from an old electronic organ. It was one of the best of all. Around the late 1970's or early 80's, store-bought echo boxes began to appear. Every truck driver, for whatever reason, had one. They didn't just run them on "special occasions", but on every single transmission. They sounded like absolute $#!^ on the radio. They made the voice of the user distorted. With wind and road noise feeding into them, they made hearing what the driver was saying, a real chore. They were incredibly obnoxious. I hope they NEVER catch on, on GMRS.

Two things I wish the radio companies would do. The first one is practical. Make the Roger Beep Off/On feature a "per-channel" feature. In other words, you could set the Roger Beep to be on or off on each channel and choose which Roger Beep option, just as you do CTCSS tones. That way, you could have it "off" on repeaters that prohibit its use and on for simplex and other repeater channels, rather than the global Roger Beep settings that they all have, currently. The second is a vanity thing, but make nature's original Roger Beep, the squelch tail (.5 to .75 seconds of white noise) as one of the ending Roger Beep options.

Thank You for the input!