SteveShannon

I don’t know who chose that configuration first, but Yaesu does the same thing on the FT-65 and FT-4X, and Alinco on the DJ-MD5. The way it’s recessed, it would be very difficult to break that pin.

Thanks for checking. Standards are great, aren’t they? My UV5R, GT5R, one Alinco MD5, plus two Yaesu handhelds (FT-65 and FT-4)all have the connector I show in that photo. But I have another Yaesu digital (FT5DR - also 2m/70cm) that has the opposite.gender. I think you’re right; they just want us to buy more.

Wait a second. Double check that connector. The connector on the Baofeng is a hybrid with a female threaded portion and a male center pin, so the antenna must have a male threaded portion and a female inner socket.

Well, off-road enthusiasts have adopted GMRS channel 16 because it's the product of 4 x 4. That's widespread. Highly popular YouTube Hobo (his terminology) Notarubicon has "decreed" channel 19 on GMRS as the highway frequency in a YouTube video, as discussed here: Obviously he has no "official" standing to do that, but he's a natural leader and s a lot of people who enjoy his videos support the adoption. Not everyone gets his humor, but personally I like it. The major reason to adopt it is the fact that the number 19 has been recognized for years in CB and GMRS is sometimes seen as CB 2.0. Unfortunately, a treaty with Canada results in a prohibition printed on all GMRS licenses against using channel 19 above Line A, which runs across top of the northern tier states and includes approximately 12 millions American citizens. Channel 20 has no such prohibitions, but channel 20 doesn't have the recognition that Channel 19 has nor the endorsement of Randy at Notarubicon - aka @OffRoaderX on this forum. From a purely practical perspective everywhere south of Line A Channel 19 is probably the first place to visit for highway contacts. History has proven that it's always a poor bet to be ignorant of groundswell movements. FCC no longer identifies any frequency as an emergency channel on GMRS as far as I know. So, if you're going off-roading, Channel 16 is probably the channel you'll end up using and if you want help on the highway try either 19 or 20, whichever works.

Yes, you got it. It really does help with clarity. I still haven't figured out how to get out of the quotes though, when I accidentaly post a reply with my comments inside them. Portables are a subset of mobiles. It's in the definition: Hand-held portable unit - A physically small mobile station that can be operated while being held in the operator's hand. It's a requirement embodied by the wording of the definition. The definition lists what types of stations base stations communicate directly with. Base station. A station at a fixed location that communicates directly with mobile stations and other base stations. Repeaters are not listed. It's a requirement of the requirements of the channels. Base stations are not allowed to transmit on the 467 Main channels that are inputs to repeaters. 467 MHz main channels. Only mobile, hand-held portable, control and fixed stations may transmit on these 8 channels... (I snipped the rest, but it doesn't change this answer.) That just doesn't exist within the GMRS regulations. That's up to you. I would hope they have someone on staff who answers these kinds of questions and I would really be interested in whatever response you get, but I doubt you will walk away less frustrated. I think your frustration stems from a desire to have a nice tidy set of rules that make sense to you, but we all think differently. What makes perfect sense to me might not make sense to you and vice versa. I just want to know if a "station" can fluidly change from one station type to another based on usage. I like rules. I like understanding rules. Ever since I started doing compliance work I sort of wished I had gotten a law degree in addition to my engineering degrees. Obviously you appreciate clear rules also. GMRS has relatively few rules though and those it has are sometimes difficult to fathom. There's no test of knowledge or qualifications and very little control over who can operate under one person's license. There's no limit on who in my immediate family can operate (not just use) a station under my license. My three year old grandkid can be a station operator (not just user). Of course I still bear the responsibility, but station operation by minors is permitted. Anyone can set up a repeater - no coordination required. Anyone can create a network using Fixed Stations. The FCC literally knows nothing about what each station is because stations are not licensed. And they know nothing about the capabilities of each licensee. I found this in the regulations: § 95.329 How to contact the FCC. For information about the Personal Radio Services, see the FCC's internet Web site (www.fcc.gov). To speak with an FCC representative about the Personal Radio Services, call the FCC's information line 888-CALL-FCC(888-225-5322). To write the FCC about these services, address the Federal Communications Commission, Attention: Mobility Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, at the address of the FCC's main office indicated in 47 CFR 0.401(a). [82 FR 41104, Aug. 29, 2017, as amended at 85 FR 64411, Oct. 13, 2020] D

There are at least two ways. You can select just the part you want to quote and then click “quote selection” or you can copy and paste the message and then select the part you want placed in a quote box and click on the quotation mark format symbol. I think most people would agree with you, but again, the regulations can only be enforced based on what is written and the definition of a Control Station doesn’t go that far. To make this easier I’ll insert the definition of a Control Station here: Control station. A station at a fixed location that communicates with mobile stations and other control stations through repeater stations, and may also be used to control the operation of repeater stations. Clearly the word “may” in that definition means that the control station has the technical capability to control a repeater. Simply being able to talk through a repeater doesn’t imply control. To your point, within Subpart E, the FCC makes a point of distinguishing between “Using” and “Operating” a station. I think we can agree that talking through a repeater is simply using it, but if you have the ability to change the way it operates you are an Operator. Operating a station is controlling it. Again, I agree; most folks would call a radio in a house with a rooftop antenna a base station. But the regulations simply say: Base station. A station at a fixed location that communicates directly with mobile stations and other base stations. Base stations do not communicate through repeaters. If those DTMF tones shut down the repeater or change the operation of it, that’s certainly control, far more than simply using a repeater, but even so, that ability isn’t necessarily required by the regs. If you’re linking and unlinking repeaters, of course you are controlling them. The technology is identical. The regs aren’t. I agree, and I want to be compliant, but I don’t want to invite additional regulations. It’s a case of being careful what we ask for.

I understand that you want more, but the regs are good enough for me. The fact that FCC hasn’t locked it down more leaves us with greater latitude. Yes, they seem confusing, but I have no problem complying with the as written regulations.

I’m sorry, I don’t. I just bought a small SDR (receiver only) to play with. I’ll be watching to see what you do!! ?

That’s what I’ve done also. I picked up a UHF to almost anything adapter kit from R&L when I bought the NanoVNA and I purchased an SMA adapter kit with my SDR Kit and separately I bought a general purpose SMA kit. I still find an oddball connector combination but usually I can put together some way to adapt.

Can any of those be remotely controlled using DTMF? Especially #2 - Transit Function?

To target well behaved licensees? You seem almost giddy at the prospect, but the fact is the FCC has never been eager to prosecute innocent mistakes.

I bought mine from R&L also. Mine is a model that received good reviews. Later, I discovered the claims about clones. The one I have has some nice hardware advantages, such as N connectors rather than SMA. I trust R&L more than I trust the company making wild accusations.

Nice!

What would you deem a control station? What differentiates it from a mobile station in a stationary location? Is it the hardware design or the usage? What hardware features must a station possess for you to deem it a Control Station? The ability to send DTMF? If it’s mounted on a desk in building, with a 120Vac power supply and a roof mounted folded dipole antenna, is that still just a mobile in a stationary location? In the definitions, only the usage varies. The definitions don’t require different features or capabilities; they just describe different uses of the same physical radio features. As far as the manufacturer marketing is concerned, there are only two configurations of radios being sold: hand-held portables and mobiles. Every radio has the ability to send DTMF tones, so every radio has the potential to be a Control Station. Every radio has the ability to be used from a fixed location. Every radio has the ability to be used from a vehicle, while moving or from a stationary location. The only type of radio that is easily distinguishable is the hand-held portable. FCC type certification is the only limitation to the capabilities of a radio. Once a radio has been certified to 95E, the only difference is usage and user intent and it’s highly doubtful that a well behaved licensee will ever hear from the FCC and even less likely that they would be singled out for a violation.

What crap. First there was a design in the USA that was open source. The some other people in the USA improved that design. Then a guy in Japan improved that design. Then a guy in China took that design and created a commercial product but he also made the software and hardware open source. However they tried to claim both proprietary design while taking advantage of improvements made by users. Other companies have taken that design and modified it, sometimes for the better and sometimes not, but to claim that everyone else is somehow violating their original design is an exaggeration. Casting aspersions by speculating that the “clones” could be constructed of lower quality components is simply innuendo.

Correct Well, FCC doesn't number GMRS channels, but they do number FRS channels (Subpart B - FRS - paragraph 95.563). Obviously manufacturers have chosen numbers for the GMRS channels. Wikipedia identifies them as well, but nothing I have found in FCC regs identify GMRS channels by any numbers other than those used for FRS. FRS Channels 1-7 are the 462 MHz GMRS Interstitial channels. Of GMRS stations, only mobile, hand-held portable, and base stations may transmit on these channels and only at 5 watts or less ERP. FRS channels 8-14 are the 467 MHz GMRS Interstitial channels. Only hand-held portable GMRS stations may transmit on these seven channels and at no more than 0.5 watts ERP. FRS channels 15-22 are the 462 MHz GMRS main channels. Of GMRS stations, only mobile, hand-held portable, repeater, base and fixed stations may transmit on these channels. Fixed stations must not exceed 15 watts on any channels where they are allowed to transmit. Mobile, repeater, and base stations are allowed up to 50 watts. The only numbers that are left are 23-30, so those might be the right numbers to use for the 467 MHz main channels, but I don't want to assume. Only mobile, hand-held portable, control, and fixed stations may transmit on these eight channels, but for different purposes: Mobile, hand-held portable, and control stations may use these channels to communicate through a repeater or for brief test transmissions. Fixed stations may only use these channels to directly transmit to other fixed stations. I confess this fascinates me because it certainly makes it technically feasible to construct a full duplex communications network with one fixed station transmitting on a 462 main channel and the other transmitting on a 467 main channel. I apologize if I am making this more complex than it should be. I have no idea why FCC has defined these different types of stations.

That response for the Comet is impressive.

If my Rino antenna ever breaks, I’ll remember this! I appreciate the background.

Mostly that’s a convenient way to view it, but there are some fine details that differ. Base stations may communicate with both base stations or mobile stations. Base stations may not communicate on the any of the 467 frequencies, whereas fixed stations may communicate with each other on the 467 main channels.

No reason to apologize. These regulations could have been written more clearly. That’s the reason I put the definition and all of the regulations in Part 95 that mention Fixed Stations into a single document. I’ve considered making a matrix but I could get messy.

This is where the FCC rules are mum. A station is just a radio. The definitions describe specific uses, but the only license is for the user. There’s no license for the station that limits it to a particular use, so there’s nothing that prevents a radio from being used as a base station and then switching to a fixed station. That’s the confusing part of the regulations.

Technically you can, but the definition limits it only to communicating with other fixed stations.

First, I don’t know, but are you using this software: https://www.ameradio.com/product/13182/description.html

Really, you shouldn’t allow anything that KAF6045 or I said to cause doubts. Hang the antenna like you first thought. Listen to HF on it while you learn. Before you start transmitting you might want to look over the exposure calculations, but I suspect many people never do. We’re supposed to look at that for GMRS as well, but almost nobody does. What radio are you going to use for HF? What’s the output power? As a reference point, there are a lot of HOA hams with antennas in their attics who don’t have RF exposure issues. A dipole on your roof is extremely unlikely to fail the calculation unless you’re running a linear amplifier. Hams sometimes get way too caught up in minutiae, for whatever reasons. Antennas are fascinating and as you study for your license you’ll pick up a lot. Off-grid power systems are fascinating also. The path towards self reliance has many interesting subjects and amateur radio fits in with them. I found that HamStudy.org worked great for me to learn, but everyone learns a little differently.

I don’t have experience with the RT97, but I do have experience figuring out poorly written manuals. If you list all of the options they give you as answers, that usually makes it easier to understand what the question means.