WRUE951
-
Posts
458 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Gallery
Classifieds
Posts posted by WRUE951
-
-
Like Randy say's. The FCC 'doesn't care' and would rather sit on their desk sucking loli pops than come after violators, so fuk the lic.. Who needs one...... Besides,, GMRS and FRS is nothing but a free for all zoo anyway.. If you can't beat em' join em'
-
On 9/4/2024 at 12:29 PM, linx said:
Yes now that they clarified. I understand the rule never changed, but the rule itself is so poorly written it leaves room to speculate. It should have been written "Operation of a GMRS station with a telephone connection or other networks is prohibited".
Do you not understand that laws and rules can be interpreted differently by people? This is why terms of service for websites are 40 pages long.yea, they write those 40 pages for morons that refuse to understand simple language..
-
13 hours ago, marcspaz said:
I'm sure someone is going to point out that none of this is in the FCC PRS and/or GMRS rules... and I am aware.
That said. it looks like you need to be a lawyer to decipher this stuff. It doesn't help when the FCC doesn't define things like "wireline control link". The only place I can find that the FCC specifically mention a "control link" is in 47 CFR § 97.213 - Telecommand of an amateur station. It says "A control link using a fiber optic cable or another telecommunication service is considered wireline."
This is the definition the FCC provides for "telecommunication".
Telecommunication
Any transmission, emission or reception of signs, signals, writings, images and sounds or intelligence of any nature by wire, radio, optical or other electromagnetic systems.
Common Carrier
In the telecommunications arena, the term used to describe a telephone company.Network
Any connection of two or more computers that enables them to communicate. Networks may include transmission devices, servers, cables, routers and satellites. The phone network is the total infrastructure for transmitting phone messages.Telecommand
The use of telecommunication for the transmission of signals to initiate, modify or terminate functions of equipment at a distance.
Citations:
https://www.fcc.gov/general/glossary-telecommunications-terms
https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/47/2.1
https://www.fcc.gov/wireline-competition
https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/47/97.213
well no $hit
-
4 hours ago, linx said:
Yes now that they clarified. I understand the rule never changed, but the rule itself is so poorly written it leaves room to speculate. It should have been written "Operation of a GMRS station with a telephone connection or other networks is prohibited".
Do you not understand that laws and rules can be interpreted differently by people? This is why terms of service for websites are 40 pages long.very clear to me, i knew better.... I guess if you want to do something, your gonna find a way around something to do it...
-
2 hours ago, linx said:
I do understand the rule now, but even still, whoever is writing this is awful at their job. "Or other networks" should appear directly after "telephone connection" in "Operation of a GMRS station with a telephone connection is prohibited".
2 hours ago, linx said:I do understand the rule now, but even still, whoever is writing this is awful at their job. "Or other networks" should appear directly after "telephone connection" in "Operation of a GMRS station with a telephone connection is prohibited".
understanding now and not before??? The rules never changed...
-
1 minute ago, linx said:
It disagree, it was never clear until recently. No matter what way you put it, the internet is not a PSTN. I see the comments saying "With VoIP, there are no pstn lines anymore, VoIP is the new pstn" etc. It's simply not. They are completely different technologies. The FCC just never kept up with the changing technology and they are 30+ years late to the clarification. VoIP is older than I am, and I am more than 30 years old. Typical government speed.
Sorry, can't help you.. Common sense seems to be in demand for a few.. Good luck !
-
22 hours ago, linx said:
What I am most butthurt about is that I bought all this equipment to link repeaters, spent all that time setting it up, then the FCC clarifies the rules lol. Good thing I only bought 1 repeater and linking hardware.should have know better,, the rules have always been clear.. They never changed, same 'ole rules.. Put it on Ebay... Lots of UHF repeater stuff posted lately.. Good luck....
-
On 9/2/2024 at 12:16 PM, LeoG said:
I don't understand why they shut them down instead of just unlink them. The NY Reliance repeater system did the same thing months ago and haven't been put back on air. 3 independent repeaters are certainly better then no repeaters.
Funny,,, money don't grow on trees... these linking guys were dependent on membership money to keep alive and we know that evaporated. (buff) Now many of these linking guys, whom 'had' 20+ repeaters in operation are stuck with all this equipment.. Wondering if this is why EBay has an uptick of UHF repeater equipment recently.
-
the way i look at it, SHTF would de a major emergency so having a radio capable of many bandwidths would be ideal (both portable and mobile). As you all know, during an emergency, Amateur Radio bands along with GMRS are open for emergency use without need of a license. Also having a few EMP bags around that can protect radio transceivers, laptops etc is a must have and easy to obtain through the 'right' channels. Also, keep a laptop you can easily stash in an EMP bag that has repeater sites, contact info, local police and emergency freqs, etc and other radio freq contact info for your immediate area. And old ammo can works well for storing extra batteries, chargers, some gold and extra pair of eye glasses.. Get her ready... Be prepared.
-
11 minutes ago, WRXP381 said:
Hey if you’re in so cal you should check out the mesa crest repeater club. Every one uses call signs. No one uses bad language. No one argues about politics and we do many activities through the year both official club stuff and non official get togethers. The club already as 2 repeaters that cover from Barstow to the high desert to north San Diego to Huntington Beach and all of the OC, LA and the San Fernando valley. With plans for more in the near future. We already have almost 200 members plus family that are all respectful and ready to support all members in any way possible,!from daily chit chat to emergency’s, to radios to home projects. It’s like a huge extended family.
Na,, Not into the 'fratty' stuff.. Arguments and Politics is what makes life spin.. If i can't enjoy what i want to talk about,, screw em'. Have fun. Even most HAM clubs are learning not to fuk with our freedom of speech... It is what it is..........................
-
Living in Southern Calif and around a ton of repeaters, i can tell you that a very low percentage use their dam call sign. Nada.. In fact the ones that do are the funny ones... They are the ones for the most part asking for radio checks or 'reporting in'. All the others are 'where the fuk are we gonna eat, i need fuking gas, the deserts sucks, that jerk that just passed me is gonna get a fuking ticking and so on.. And every once in a while you'll hear some chick say her hubby passed out and she is coming over
-
2 hours ago, RayDiddio said:
Don't forget that CB was license required until 1983.
- True, but do you remember many people that used their call sign? 396 out
-
55 minutes ago, WSDW308 said:
Pardon my limited knowledge, what is Zello? I searched but came up with some business org app as Zello.
Don't mind Randy he is fixated on using Zello to chat with this men friends, but Zello is basically a walkie talkie app. Better explanation here. https://www.tomsguide.com/us/zello-app-guide,news-25805.html
- MaxHeadroom and WSDW308
-
1
-
1
-
10 hours ago, WRXB215 said:
@WRUE951 that must be regional. I operate in the Houston area and the only unlicensed chatter I've heard is on simplex with a very weak signal which tells me they are on FRS radios.
we traveled further north from Houston. The highest GMRS traffic areas encountered were through Phoenix, Albuquerque, Oklahoma City, Tulsa, Kansas City, St. Louis. Ohio ,Penn and New York really bad. Also noticed a lot of trucker traffic along the long interstates. They like to hang out on 18 and 6.. I talked with a few truckers, they all seem to have both CB and GMRS radios and they chit chat on both. Many of them saying they prefer GMRS. Not a single Trucker i talked with had a GMRS lic and most said they wouldnt even bother with getting one.. I would say 70% of the traffic i listened to, didn't use a GMRS lic call signs. But i did notice the Traffic in parts of Ohio, all of Penn and New York did use call signs and many using phonetic alphabet. Just like the CB, you get all the foul mouth chatter in most areas. I could not use the scanner function during most of the trip, else it would drive you nuts.. I did program my radio to scan my 4 favorite ch's and those kept pretty busy.. Also used many repeaters through the trip and most of them worked pretty good.. Repeater traffic seemed most prevalent in parts of New Mexico, Oklahoma, Ohio, Penn and New York. GMRS traffic was definaly pretty busy for most of the trip and having the GMRS mobile radio kept Highway boredom from kicking in..
-
3 hours ago, WRXB215 said:
I know it can sometimes be rough hear and there but I don't think GMRS will ever be like CB. I think the fact that you have to get a license and your info is public keeps the biggest jerks away. It's easier to be a jerk anonymously on CB which makes people bolder on that service.
GMRS is full of un-licensed users and jerks are wild. . The further you get away form metropolitan areas the better and more decent GMRS gets.. A few months ago traveling east from Arizona showed just how bad GMRS linking really was.. Hopefully GMRS will now recover a little bit but nothing is going to keep the 'jerks' from using the bands to chit chat as if they were on a CB.. Half of them don't have a license and never will.
-
On 8/30/2024 at 8:05 AM, SteveShannon said:
What do you mean by “large-scale”?
i would say he is refering to electronic warfare which will undoubtedly be the aftermath of a nuclear war. We all know the effects and purpose this level of an attack will have on our the ability to communicate with other people across wide areas.. Yes you can stash your portables in a lead bag but what good will those radios do when all 'mountaintop repeater' is useless.. I think a lot of people underestiamae the potential this 'large-scale' event is feasible and i won't say what i think of those 'fools' Anyone with an open eye can see we are closer now then ever in history of pretty much total destruction. I do have a few portables and batteries stashed in lead bags which i acquired from someone that has easy access to them.. Do i really relay on them to communicate in event of a 'large scale' electromaganitic event.. NOPE, not really but doing a little is better than doing nothing.. just sayin..
-
On 8/27/2024 at 8:40 AM, WSDD439 said:
And just maybe they actually listen to the repeater system, and find out that no one is being denied access to any of the frequencies…..
Na,, they listen to Randy more then listening to the repeaters.
-
On 8/25/2024 at 4:36 PM, MaxHeadroom said:
Agreed. It has never been in the spirit of GMRS or any of its rules for any sort of repeater linking, via RF or otherwise. The community took what they thought was a loophole, exploited it, and are now big-mad when the FCC (very politely) tells them they're wrong.
What makes it more absurd is seeing the comments on a Change.org petition (which is not the mechanism for pushing change with the FCC) acting like GMRS is amateur radio and all the comments about "making new connections" and such... sheesh.
I am all for wide area coverage, but with a much more intentional way of doing it, and as others have said on here there's a way to accomplish it but GMRS community will have to suck up some things as well (like narrowbanding the service).
FCC will never sacrifice the GMRS band for repeater linking. There are places in the Amateur Radio Band with tons of bandwidth to accommodate the Hobby.. Way too much would be needed to allow it in the GMRS arena, The only way i see them allowing it is allocating the GMRS band to the Amateur Radio Band and require at minimum a Technicians Lic.. I don't see that happening and one reason i among many people have wrote the FCC objecting to any such moves.
-
Four listed nearby you (4=11 miles. One appears to be offline
-
1 hour ago, Suburbazine said:
Basically Sevierville, TN. Decent repeater coverage but somehow two very powerful repeaters on line of sight mountaintops got shared tones and frequencies. One of them has strong audio and near instantaneous propagation, the other has weak audio (strong signal) and a slight delay on propagation. This lead to very garbled transmissions when they both picked up a signal and rebroadcast it. It actually took me 2 days to figure out what was wrong as prior commenters had also mentioned garbled audio. Pulled out the trusty SDRs and a couple of antennas and went hunting for interference. Only after I found an unexpected second repeater did I cross-reference MyGMRS and found it, updated 2 days ago.
I found some other interesting things that I wasn't expecting, like someone running a Pirate DMR in apparently simplex (encrypted, no less!) on 467.725 in the nearby area. -
4 hours ago, WRYS709 said:
...
that's exactly what Randy (eee) said...
-
3 hours ago, Davichko5650 said:
And as the enforcement Atty from the FCC explained on the "Chinese Buffet" (sounds like a Guns n Roses album) video, the complaints they receive are not part of the public record unless they are included in an NAL or other action actually posted to the Enforcement Database. So anyone can claim a specious (sorry Randy, not "spurious") amount of complaints have been filed w/o having to back up the claims!
Randy is not smart enough to realize that
-
6 hours ago, Suburbazine said:
So what's the correct way to address a repeater conflict? Where I'm at seems to have 2 active repeaters on 550 141.3 and any transmits are coming back heavily stepped on in the region between. Is there an official way to contact both owners that isn't going to offend them? WRJZ925 and WRFL895
EDIT: WRFL seems to have noticed my comment and deconflicted.
PS: It seems like this would be a great chance for MyGMRS to do something really cool and check their database automatically for conflicts when new repeaters are listed. Don't know how complicated checking estimated range overlap would be, though.Where?? New York, New Jersey?? if so, understandable
-
9 hours ago, WRKC935 said:
Well, here is the argument against that. While users can go buy dirt cheap (less than 100 bucks) radios for talking on a repeater. Repeaters are NOT cheap and are out of reach for many. So the repeater owners are the ones that fill the need for repeaters in the GMRS service.
It's not the lack of channels in most area's. It's a lack of repeaters at all in those area's.
Tell that to the large handful of multiple repeater owners (some having nearly 30 repeaters under then license) You're right, repeaters are not cheap and apparently 110K+ is not out of reach for some.. OH,,, you think they are making a buck or two on the GMRS band the operate?? Also, can you imagine the handful of channels they consume in the 100 sq miles they operate. I have nothing against the group you identify, but i have problems with the group I identify.
Linking GMRS Repeaters
in FCC Rules Discussion
Posted
common sense is really not that hard to come by,, A little goes a long way.. Try it some time..