dosw

This is how this thread has gone: OP: Has anyone tried these? Others: Those won't have a very good ground plane, and that will hamper your signal propagation. OP: But this is what I want to do. Others: *shrug* then why did you ask?

You'll maybe need to show a picture demonstrating how an NMO mount on top of the 3rd brake light has a full 360 degree ground plane. Three or four feet below inside the truck bed is not acting as a ground plane. So if that's what you're expecting to consider as your ground plane, no photo needed. It's not doing what you think. Now, it may *work* to have an antenna mounted there. You'll be able to transmit and receive. But your SWR will be a little high, and your propagation in the aft 180 degrees will be relatively lousy.

I have a new-to-me F150 Lariat with SuperCrew cab. It's a 2014. The front console seems pretty full, though there's a "SYNC" panel at the base of the front panel that may have space behind it; I'm not sure. It's possible I could find room under the seat if I use a detachable faceplate style radio such as a KG1000G Plus (GMRS) or the KG -UV980P (amateur). I'm looking for examples of successful installations that seem not too intrusive or not to have that "I bolted this thing to my dashboard" look. Additionally, examples of antenna mounting would be useful. I already can't park the truck in the garage, but would prefer not becoming so tall that I also can't pull into commercial or municipal parking garages. On my 95 Bronco a hood lip-mount works great because the cowling aft of the hood is also metal, so I'm able to achieve a good ground plane. But on the F150 the cowling aft of the hood is plastic, so the ground plane would be poor with that type of mount. Cab-top is probably ideal from a functionality standpoint, but a compromise in terms of what kind of antenna I can put up there (it would pretty much be the Ghost, or frequent swapping to accommodate height obstructions).

When the radio is set in VFO mode, and you turn the knob on the right, it will move up or down through its frequency range. Step is how far it jumps with each click. If you set up the radio for GMRS, you probably wouldn't use this setting much. But it's there in case you want to move around through the frequencies to listen to things, such as in the 70cm amateur band.

240m at best, when it passes directly overhead at 17,000 miles per hour. With a decent antenna I start hearing it about 1100 miles away, a little above center frequency, and stop hearing it about 1000 miles away at a slightly lower than center frequency, due to the Doppler shift associated with its speed. It's pretty amazing, really. And it fades in and back out again not because of the miles but because of the curvature of the earth. Mariners have used line of sight formulas for centuries, of course. RF line of sight formulas are only slightly different from visual.

Line of Sight, explained You have to account for the fact we live on a spheroid.

The 701 was nothing special when I had one. 771s are great.

And it must also have a 200 mile range any time, rain or shine.

This is great information. I have a Ghost antenna (MXTA25) that I don't really use, but this would be ideal for a boat or RV where ground planes are difficult. Laird TE TRA4500N. Thanks for sharing that.

You weren't trying to call your minions in his part of the country to coordinate their burglarizing efforts, since his X post made him obviously not home to defend the place?

I have the Surecom SW102, and the NanoVNA. Advantages to the NanoVNA: You don't just get SWR, you can get an SWR curve showing you where the dip in the curve is, and can identify immediately whether the antenna is too long or too short. With just an SWR meter you have to take multiple samples and plot your own curve. Also the NanoVNA does a LOT more than just SWR. Advantage of the SW102 - It tells you the power level being transmitted. And it's very simple to use. But for accurate power, and to avoid annoying people you'll need a dummy load, too.

From The Importance of Being Earnest: It seems like whether one is a rag chewer on an amateur repeater, or on a GMRS repeater, or a rag chewer here in online forums, we're talking about the fools clever people, of course, which makes us all clever fools.

Exactly. The people with "skin in the game" are the ones who adopt this. And they're relying on someone's layman theory, not iron clad findings.

But you're experimenting with other peoples' liability, without an actual legal consultation on the issue, and other associated due diligence. That is irresponsible. And people are justified in being skeptical. People who adopt are trusting your discussion with a friend who practices law not pertaining to communications law, putting themselves at risk.

I've re-read the FCC Part 95 Subpart E language several times over. I've watched the video twice. I've re-read the FCC language, and followed all the references in Subpart E through to the other documents they refer to. And still I don't see any new information here that would change my mind that the FCC has explicitly disallowed what the video is claiming to be legal.