WROZ250

That statement is not entirely true... While admittedly not universal, there are still many ISPs that identify/correlate the router hardware address with the physical customer location. It may not be evident when one is shopping online and, for example, you click OK for them using your location (based on the IP address), to find the closest retail location. However, your location information is held by the ISP in some database which can be accessed/hacked. And while it isn't true these days, as @marcspaz pointed out, there once was a time when it was possible to not only locate a person's physical address, based on the IP and hardware address, in some large commercial buildings it was possible to actually find out, for example, what floor and network switch port the other computer was on. To do this required a level of knowledge and the right 'tools', but the data was there for the taking. The point is, even though much of that level of information isn't as openly accessible today the network systems, at least the major ISPs, still gather and store that kind of data. It's just a bit more difficult to get at now. All that said... In the bigger picture, it's rarely just one's address information that is a threat to one's privacy, it the reality is that virtually everything about an individual is stored online somewhere. All that need be done is to collect enough of that information on someone to gain access to their lives. You really don't believe these A-holes that commit identity theft got all their information online? Finally, and this is for OffroaderX.... You twisted my comment around a bit to dismiss it. No, the gateway/router does not itself directly provide the location, Rather the ISP that installed it and, as the industry buss word goes, 'partitioned it onto their network', maintains and keeps a record of the location of that device's hardware address (not the IP address) and, as I've already said, keeps that information in a database. So a minor technical error in my statement, but the end effect is the same. Just because you've never seen or experienced something personally, doesn't make it untrue or 'bullshit', nor does it make the person who you disagreed with wrong or a lesser open for ridicule. Quite frankly that 'standard response' to almost anything anyone says that you disagree with is a bit tiring. Maybe once in a while admit to yourself that you aren't the universal know it all. You're not 'gods gift to information' although it does make for an amusing shtick aspect to your videos, most of which are quite good. However, you do it so often, one can't help but begin to wonder if it isn't shtick at all, but the real you. Perhaps you're over compensating for something? To take a queue from Shakespeare Thou Protest Too Much Me Thinks. Give it a fracking rest already. ?

LOL! Personal privacy is dead, for all the previously mentioned reasons and then some. Even your Internet gateway/router and/or IP address will provide location information to whomever knows where to look for it. Feds, Hacker, stalkers... If they are determined, they can and will find you. Heck there are websites that for a couple of bucks you can get seriously details on just about anyone with just a few tidbits of what you do know about them. It's frickingn scary, but it's the world we live in. ?

You might want to also check the 'My Applications' tab, it should show you the status of your license application.

@marcspaz One last thing... With a vertical antenna, your best signal would be when a satellite is near the edge of your coverage and so the signal will likely will drop in strength when directly overhead. Short of a pair of small yagis (and the ability to aim them) the best antennas for sat work are Turnstiles and Eggbeater types. Both are relatively easy to make, but not really a beginner project, at least the eggbeater (phasing issues). If I were to suggest a DIY, it would likely be the Turnstile type. Eggbeater antennas are available from MFJ and M2, but getting a pair of them would be as much as a new radio. We did have one guy in our club use a single DIY Log Periodic antenna for satellite work. That however, is a somewhat complicated antenna for DIY. FWIW

Yeah, and as I mentioned, another newbie mistake is thinking you need QRO to get a satellite. BTW, When I mentioned less distortion on the closest part of the pass (due to Doppler), I meant when it is moving the least, relative to your position. That is usually at the apex of a pass for near overhead passes, or it can be when a sat is just over the horizon and/or nor coming or going away from your location. I hope that makes sense, kind of difficult to explain how and when Doppler becomes a PIA for FM satellites. The bottom line is Doppler is at it's worst when the sat is coming directly towards you and as it moves away. Higher frequency coming at you and lower as it moves away. The real bitch IMHO, is that you really only have a few minutes, on most sats, to tune and make contacts. It is, however, pretty cool!

As far as rigs go, keep in mind there are rigs that transmit cross-band, but cannot actually receive while transmitting (Like my FT-818). Most rigs that can be configured to be a cross-band repeater can listen on one band while transmitting on the other 'duplex', so watch the specifications closely. Just because a rig is dual band doesn't mean it does duplex. I know the IC-9700 can do this (it better given the price tag! LOL!) and, you also get the option of working the SSB/CW satellites. Duplex isn't strictly necessary, but it helps to be able to hear yourself in the down link, because that is likely where others hearing your signal will answer you! Ironically, one of the widest coverage sats is AO-7 which is back from the dead and, only when it is full sunlight (Batteries croaked). It isn't an FM satellite though, only SSB/CW, but even with it's 40 year old decaying orbit, you can work half to 3/4 of the country during a pass. Have fun!

@marcspazI just reread your earlier comment. It would be a very (very) odd event for the ISS repeater to overload your receiver and/or peg the S-meter. I'm wondering if perhaps a newbie might have been transmitting on the down link frequency (i.e. they got the split wrong/reversed). We have a small group out here who work the sats somewhat often and even one guy with an 11 element yagi on the down link (into an HT) who has never experienced anything near an overload on the down link. Food for thought

The distortion is due to Doppler and, it's an FM repeater. I've tracked the ISS on my SDR, and depending on the pass (relative to my location), the Doppler can be as much as +/- 10KHz from the down link center frequency. So if your radio has a tight bandwidth, there will be distortion for all except the closest part of the pass. I use my FT-818 because my tuning rate isn't fixed at 5KHz. You leave your transmit signal alone and simply tune the receiver as the pass progresses. The FT-818 isn't a 'Satellite" rig, but it's better than using an FM HT. Sadly, rigs that offer full cross-band duplex can get expensive. That said, the Alinco DR-735 and my Yaesu FTM-400 will do cross band duplex and more refined tuning steps than simply 5 KHz, so at least for the FM satellites they are an option. Basically, any dual band radio that can do/work as a cross band repeater is usable for FM satellite. As far as power, don't ever use more than about 10W. Not because it will cause distortion, but rather you overload the repeater. It doesn't take a lot of power to access any of the satellites.

In the very early days of MURs, repeaters were legal. However, that was quickly rescinded by the FCC because people ran with it and the situation was making the intended use of MURS impossible. Was kinda stupid on the part of the FCC to have overlooked that in the first place, especially when one is talking about an unlicensed service. IMHO

The roger beep may or may not be any indication of the problem. That said, assuming the roger beep is set to a normal level, the next thing you might want to look at is to see if there is a setting for microphone gain. Not all radios have it, but many do and that could perhaps be your issue. Still, the fact that your simplex sounds good kind of suggests the microphone gain is not low or, it could also be a perception thing and that the mod is low but on simplex it might not sound low (I'm assuming you are using your other radio to monitor simplex?).

Not necessarily enough information to go on here so... Q1. Is your repeater channel and simplex channel the same channel with talk around enabled or, do you have separate channels programmed, one for repeater and one for simplex? If the latter, start by checking the bandwidth selection on the repeater channel as it may (may) be set to narrow which would cause it to sound like low modulation (because on narrow it would be lower). You might also not want to assume the repeater is working properly and try a test on a different repeater to see if the problem persists. Alternatively, you could listen to your HT on another radio set to monitor the input frequency/channel of the repeater.

See, that's the fundamental issue. It doesn't matter what some POS government agency says "Made In America" means, it's the general perception and expectation of what that means, or rather what it once use to mean, which included ALL of the components, not just the completed unit. It was the slow migration of manufacturing leaving the country. If you're old enough, there was a time when almost everything was made in America, and it had nothing to do with nationalism or patriotism. It was about jobs and pride in the work, about making a quality product. Those days are, sadly, all but completely gone, no matter how much people wave their flags and scream for nationalism and patriotism. Words won't fix the issue, bringing actual (competitive) manufacturing and innovation back to America will. Until then, accept the reality that virtually all of your communications equipment (and their components) is made in a foreign country, no matter what 'American' company name is on it. Yeah, you too Motorola. (sorry for the rant)

WOW! I was searching for mods to that radio and while I didn't find any (soft) mods, I'm sorry to report that what I did come across is that this is one of those genuine CCRs! The final amplifier (physical layout) is an extremely poor design (actually beyond poor) and, prone to failures due to completely inadequate heat sinking (virtually zero). Seriously, you have to see the photos to believe it. They used a piece of regular foam to attached the already paltry heat sink to the PA! As one (of many) posted, 'to put it mildly, it's a F'ing joke', and if the radio is keyed for any length of time it will fail. I wondered why I found so many articles and video on replacing the finals! You get what you pay for I suppose. ?

Just curious, anyone try the 'hold the V/M button and power it on' to see if the frequency range can be changed? 99% of these cheaper Chinese rigs can be 'unlocked' with the 'secret sequence'. Just sayin

About the best anyone can hope for these days, and not just radios, is 'Assembled in America' which, sadly, has been extrapolated with a label that reads 'Made In America'. Seems like nothing is actually made here anymore. ?

Bootlegged Badge! That call does not come back to John Smith! LOL! ?

All I can say is don't touch a Bridgecom repeater, despite their Part 95 claim. The repeater and especially their policies are crap. (Personal/First Hand Experience) The Retevis is only 5W, so unless you put it up on a mountain or tall building with a killer antenna, it's not going to help coverage much (IMHO) As I've said elsewhere, while I don't advocate operations outside of the rules, if I've come to any conclusion, it is to not get too hung up on Part 95 type acceptance. That said, two KG-1000G mobiles can be (easily) connected to form a repeater and they are Part 95. You'll still need a duplexer which can be $$$ (depending on the quality).

Naw! QRP (especially with CW) can go quite the distance with a decent antenna, even a modest one, depending on conditions. Power isn't everything and, personally, I find snagging some DX with a couple of watts a lot more rewarding than doing it with 100+. The challenge with the Pixie is that it is an extremely rudimentary transceiver, especially the receiver portion. It is definitely not for a beginner to use as it would indeed become frustrating.

I have a QCX mini (20M) still in the box (unbuilt). I also have one of the original QCX (40M). The Mini may be too small IMHO which is why I have not built it. In hindsight, I kinda wish I had purchased the current QCX+ as it has room for easy modifications, and for ease of building. Not knocking the Mini, it's just too small for my tastes and I don't need small (not that small anyway). All that said, the QCX is really is a great radio (regardless of version) even at the current prices. Prior to the QCX, I built two of the 1Watter transceivers (a 20M & 40M) from Kits and Parts which is, in some ways, a better sounding radio (IMHO) but is limited in frequency coverage due to a VXO verses the VFO in the QCX and, it's not a direct sampling receiver. What Hans did with the QCX is genius. There are a lot of good kits out there! Personally, I just enjoy building so... ?

When invoking the 'any frequency and time' rule in an emergency (as @WRKC935pointed out) it doesn't matter the type acceptance of the radio. The valid invocation of the rule/loop hole has to do with it being a genuine life at risk AND there is absolutely no other means to contact help. Really, it's pretty simple to understand this, but as others have pointed out, there is a cross section of many radio hobbyists who fancy themselves as authorized auxiliary police, fire, and rescue personnel who constantly self justify the use of the rule/loophole. If you look at the cases where people have been cited by the FCC, virtually all of them had zero justification to do so. As far as ham radio, yes, in an emergency you may use any mode/frequency within the ham bands, including those beyond your license class. That said, like the 'any frequency any time' rule/loophole, your actions will still need to be justified to avoid a NAL

The 'exemption' is not necessarily for amateur radio specifically. Anyone can do this if they meet the (extremely strict) defined conditions. That said, hams are the least likely to be able to justify doing this, given the bands and modes available to them. Most hams would be hard pressed to not have some way of summoning help virtually anywhere. The rule pertaining to the 'any frequency' is outdated. When the rule originated (and I do not know when exactly), the specific conditions under which one can do this were potentially more likely. There were no cell or satellite phones for example. Indeed, I would consider this exemption/loop hole (take your pick) to be ll but completely obsolete today. Taken on basic face value: Condition #1 'is this a case of imminent threat to human life?' (as in will somebody die if assistance is not obtained immediately. Also note that property damage or loss is not considered here, only human life). Condition #2 "is there absolutely no other means of communication available to summon assistance? Key wording, 'absolutely no other means'. There are other lesser stipulations in the rule/loop hole, but those are the big two conditions and are next to impossible to satisfy in modern times. Also note, that the rule does not permit anyone to arbitrarily assist (as in without specifically being requested by authorized persons to do so) in public safety communications. Ergo, you cannot simply defend your actions because you wanted to help. Similarly, the so called "MARS" modification requires that one be officially registered with the Military Affiliated Radio Service (MARS), which usually includes being provided with a MARS callsign. One's Amateur license is not enough to justify the mod in your radio. Call it what it really is, a Freeband/CB frequency modification. All that said, when it comes to the MARS mod, unless you actively make use of it to, for example, talk on CB, nobody will likely notice. Indeed, I hear 'Freebanders' all the time talking about their prized FT101Es and even some talking about their current model, high end ham transceiver, and bragging about using them. Sure it's illegal, but unless you interfere with a licensed service, the truth is nobody cares including (apparently) the FCC. Case in point, here is some guy running several KW on 27.025 (AM), but his signal splatters almost 25-35KHz. He's been operating there for years and no apparent action against him has ever been taken to the best of my knowledge. As to the primary thread, pick up the mic and start yammering on a public safety or worse, a federal government frequency, as a previously post linked, and you will get the attention of the FCC. Again as I stated above, the any frequency and time loop hole has 'conditions' which in 99.999% of situations today cannot be legally satisfied. That said, whether this dipshit clown ultimately ends up paying the fine is another story. Enforcement of the rules (and they are rules not law as Randy points out) is all but non existent. You really have to do something extreme to get noticed, let alone fined. In most of these publicized cases, that is exactly what the clown in question did. To be sure, I am not advocating anyone break the rules, but I will say that worrying, for example, if your GMRS radio is part 95e compliant isn't worth worrying about. Finally, I will reiterate that this 'bad behavior' is not exclusive to amateur radio operators. Indeed, hams are more likely to be the lowest percentage of offenders when it comes to illegal radio related activities.

OK, so now we just generalize because a few people have had bad experiences with a few idiots? I do agree that there are, unfortunately, a few 'hams' who are idiots and can't wait to fling their newfound 'expertise' in people's faces (even if they have it incorrect which is, admittedly, frequently). However again, that is just a (very) few people overall and, it seems to be only people like yourself who they tend to gravitate towards. That said, many times people bait them (intentionally and unintentionally). I find your videos, for example, entertaining and informative. But for those not familiar with your style(?) and/or the few miscreant idiots who can't wait to show their 'intelligence', they come across as anything but entertaining and, the idiots are certainly not really interested in your point, despite the fact it is valid. They wouldn't know that because the idiots stopped listening the moment they heard something they believed to be wrong. However again, despite your own (and others) negative experiences with a few miscreant 'hams', they certainly do not represent the vast majority of 'hams'. Indeed, there are quite a few GMRS 'aficionados' who can't seem to wait to expound about their expertise (to other GMRS users) based on a single personal experience, despite the fact that they have no idea whatsoever what they are talking about. Shall we call out all GMRS users because these few?? I suppose my point here is that such idiots are not exclusively (or even predominately) 'Hams', and so when people make blanket negative comments, it's just rude IMHO and unnecessary. There are plenty of other non-ham idiots who jump in with their 'expertise', do we start generalizing about people in general? How about the newbies who don't meet the average knowledge level? Do we respond with 'These newbies are always so stupid...'? It just doesn't belong in a forum that is suppose to foster open discussion. Too many times I've see valid technical discussions go completely off the rails and/or a post hijacked because somebody generalizes and/or feels compelled to comment about the poster rather than the topic. It just doesn't belong in these conversations. Just one opinion.

BTW, you're not likely to get 1W with the CCTs (Cheap Chinese Transistors) it comes with (more like 200-300mW). If you search around the web, there are a couple of articles on replacement transistors that will give at least 1W if not a bit more.

The Pixie is OK, but you really need to be a seasoned operator to have any success with it. It is what it is (not intended as a disparaging remark) and can be a lot of fun. I think the biggest problem the Pixie has is that too many beginners get one (for the price) thinking they're going to be working DX and find they can't even work the neighborhood! I have a couple of them I built years ago, laying around the shack (somewhere) LOL! ?