axorlov

That's weird. Are you sure that you understood correctly? It supposed to be like "when you are using channels 8-14, make sure you limit power to 0.5W". FRS and GMRS radios and operators are absolutely allowed to talk to each other on all simplex channels. FRS operators can't use repeaters, FRS operators (radios) are limited to narrowband. But other than that, channels 1 - 22 can be used by both GMRS and FRS, taking power limits in account. The old what you call "hybrid" FRS/GMRS radios are now FRS radios. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Mobile_Radio_Service

When speaking of repeater antenna, the target range for transmitting is 462.550 - 462.725. Middle is 462.6375. This antenna will receive just as good on 467.650 - .725. I usually gloss over signatures, but thanks for the hint from 653. This is a dickhead, indeed.

That's a ZING! Nail in the head! But let's discuss the "Roger Beep" vs "Over Beep". This topic will be much more interesting and revealing. And not enough attention was ever diverted to this very important aspect of communications. How the community survives without clear understanding and separation of what's "roger" and when it's "over". It is a mystery behind the veil, wrapped in enigma.

Buyao-feng. (不要 - buyao - do not want)

The $3000 HF rig and $600 mobile serve different purposes. Indeed it hurts my liver to spend $600 on dual-band mobile, but it looks like I will be spending it.

1) It's allright. 2) It's allright. GMRS can be used for whatever purpose by anyone. Being this kids, cute moms of said kids, ugly angry fathers of said kids, sad hams, road flaggers, valet parking lots, you name it. It's a free country. 3) No, there is not. However, there is sort-of an agreement, explained by gortex2. And there is a certain youtube influenzer pushing something else. It is a free country. But you can always use a scan feature of your radio.

I can't find the rule, so I must be imagining things, or it was pre-2017 rule.

You're welcome. Just remember, it appears to be against the rules, being store-forward device. Be considerate to others, do not deploy it without the tones (radio should have RX tone set). I program it to not repeat at all till DTMF "0" is sent to it. So, most of the time it does not pollute airwaves with unneeded noise, and only repeats when asked to do so.

I used BCD235XLT for years, till all the law enforcement, fire, EMT, and even city comms in my area went to P25 Phase 2. I gave away this scanner, it was good, but a bit tedious to program: everything must be done from the front panel. It also had a NiMH battery pack, that was easy to replace. Just a few days ago I found a deal on ebay that I can't pass, for the BCD325P2 scanner, beaten up but working. These P25 scanners are expensive. It also a breeze to program from computer using regular mini-USB cable. The difference between scanner and regular HT is that scanner is scanning much faster, so less chance to miss communication, and a lot of them, even cheap ones, can also scan trunked systems

I use Argent Data SR-1.

There is no privacy in GMRS, see what KAF6045 said. "Privacy tones" don't bring you any privacy. If privacy is needed, the Motorola DTR/DLR radios is much better choice, with its 10000 hopsets and talkgroups, and no easy way to scan them. Check 900MHz forum here. They do have their own limitations, though.

Two things, mostly, make one cable less lossy than another. First: geometry, the thicker the cable (more distance between central conductor and shield) the less the loss in dielectric material. Second: the dielectric material. Thicker cables have more of copper in them (and everything else), thus they are more expensive. Times Microwave developed their formulation of the foam dielectric 30 years ago, and continues to make money on that RND investment.

This is the label on my DLR1060, that I bought off ebay few years ago. That DLR1060, and it's twin, is accessed and modified by CPS downloaded from Motorola, and I can't tell you the version, it's installed on a different computer that I don't have access at this moment. The FCC ID is visible, and if you do the search (https://apps.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/GenericSearch.cfm) it will return Part 15C with 0.995W on 900MHz. Anything like this on Brazilian (South American) DLR1060?

I'd guess that if radios have label with FCC ID, they are allowed to be used in US. It is a matter of finding correct CPS for them, which may be a big problem.

You may need to expand your horizons just a tiny bit. Engineering types and techno-fetishists are known to not be able to see the forest behind all the trees, but your specific case is remarkable. Especially, after bringing mine and yours exchange from the other thread, where I explain to you what stands behind today calibration of S-meter and where the root of all of this. Read it again. Good luck and good bye. Edit: By the way, changing topic name and changing text/wording for the contested theme is dishonest. I'm not going to waste my time for you anymore.

11 hr marcspaz changed the title to What are Signal Reports? What is an s-unit? Why does this matter? (2 days later): Marc chose to change the topic name. It used to say "What are the RST reports, and why does it matter". Who knows what else he decided to change postactively, I'm not reading. He is now in the same bucket as a certain dude whose name ended with ..LAX.

First it was RST report (look at the topic name!), and now it is "modern signal report"? I explained why using S-meter in context of RS/RST scale with FM voice is meaningless and misleading. I also explained why the original RS/RST is still in use for AM-SSB voice today. Not any "modern signal report", but very original RS scale, extended to 9 levels of "S" in 1936. But if you feel that it is Period End Of Discussion, so be it. Edit (2 days later): Marc chose to change the topic name. It used to say "What are the RST reports, and why does it matter". Who knows what else he decided to change postactively, I'm not reading. He is now in the same bucket as a certain dude whosE name ended with ..LAX.

If this map is a real map and if I read it correctly, your base camp is at the same altitude as vehicles and not blocked by terrain. This condition is close to ideal, you may not even need 50W to have clear comms. But 50W will not hurt. The mobile mounted in the camper should also have an advantage of better antenna and better receiver than on HTs, so it also should hear better than HT. Other areas might be blocked, like Gibbon Picnic Area in the north, because it's in the dip behind the hill.

I think I explained well, but I summarize one more time. On FM, signal strength (what S-meter shows) has nothing to do to with "S" on RS scale. On FM, signal strength (what S-meter shows) has everything to do with "R" on RS scale. Bringing S-meter into conversation when talking about RS scale on FM is a silly fetishism. You ether talk about RS report or talk about what S-meter shows. These two things are not mixable on FM, like kerosene and hazelnuts. You are incorrect on this. RST scale is absolutely used as designed 90 years ago for the same purpose it was designed 90 years ago, in the same exactly way as it was designed 90 years ago, on AM, SSB and CW. Innumerable articles, starting with ARRL Handbook will tell you that.

To defend my statement from the other thread, that RST scale is all about psycho-acoustics, here is the link to QST from November of 1934, with article from the inventor of RST scale, page 18: http://www.rsp-italy.it/Electronics/Magazines/QST/_contents/QST 1934_10.pdf Notice, there are no microvolts, and his proposed S scale had only 5 steps. Only decades later the current scale was adopted (50 uV over 50 Ohm over 9 steps). RST was developed for report on CW, and later adopted to voice modes AM and SSB by dropping the "T". It's all good, because on AM and it's derivatives (CW and SSB), the "R" is not directly related to the strength of the signal, and the "S", the strength of the aural, is directly proportional to the strength of the signal. The bigger, fatter the signal, the louder the voice you hear. Funny thing, the RST/RS scale is not applicable to FM. Or better to say, RS is applicable, but S-meter will not tell you the strength of aural. When working with FM, the "S" part, the strength of the aural has nothing to do with the strength of the signal. With signal strength above certain threshold, S is always 9. And if your correspondent sounds too quiet, it means he is on Baofeng with it's trademark 5K0F3E emission, or maybe he should blabber louder. However, the "R" part has everything to do with the strength of the signal.

Sort of, yes. The question was about terrain blocking. In the Pinnacles scenario there is no line of sight between either of the operators, somehow we still have communications. And car with mobile radio did not have any elevation advantage, it is was actually parked lower than the trails. But, yes, this trip made me to get simplex repeater (which appears to be against the rules, so shhh don't tell anyone). It works like a charm and saves the day every time when we use it.

Another real life example. Operator 1 walks on the east-west trail, over the ridge. Operator 2 walks on the level trail that goes around. Op1 and Op2 hear each other only in few spots. But Operator 3 sits in the west location in the parking lot with mobile radio and hears both 1 and 2 all time very clear, and can relay messages. But only on mobile, the HT at Op 3 location does not hear neither Op1 nor Op2, HT transmitting by Op3 is not heard by Op1 and Op2.

Cannot be predicted in advance. Round top of the hill will block better than sharp rocky edge. Also, signal does not have to travel the shortest distance, it can be reflected around your hill by the nearby hills. Below is an example of fairly reliable communications between two HTs, with a lot of static. Top of the hill is sharp, and there are other taller mountains around, some with granite faces. If there is a mobile radio used from the parking lot at the west location, instead of HT, then static completely goes away.

<dupe>

Lolwhut? No, I'm not. S-meter calibration is different for HF and VHF. On HF frequencies S1 is 0.2uV, S2 is 0.4uV, S3 is 0.79uV and so on. On VHF it is 0.02uV, 0.04uV, 0.08uV... Why the 10x difference? Because it's not about microvolts at all. Strength scale (the "S" in the RST): Faint—signals barely perceptible Very weak signals Weak signals Fair signals Fairly good signals Good signals Moderately strong signals Strong signals Extremely strong signals Where are the microvolts? It is all about acoustics.