Interesting comments being filed with the fcc on unused 46Mhz/49Mhz pairs

[WRXB288]

DELETE DELETE DELETE Docket No: 25-133

https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/10425259046292/1

Interesting comments on adding unused channels to the GMRS license
 

Quote

 

To Reallocate Underutilized or Abandoned ) 47 CFR Part 15 46/49 MHz Cordless Telephone, ) 49 MHz Low Power Walkie-Talkie, and ) 47 CFR Part 22 VHF Low Band Public Mobile ) Radio Services (PMRS) Paging Channels to ) the General Mobile Radio Service (GMRS) ) and Family Radio Service (FRS)

 Below is a revised chart with channel pairs 16 – 25, rearranged and renumbered as 01 – 10, illustrating such a reallocation to the GMRS. Proposed New 47 § 95.1763(e) & (f) – 46.610 - 49.990 MHz 100-Watt GMRS Allocation Channel Mobile Frequency (MHz)* Base or Mobile Frequency (MHz) 01 46.670 49.830 02 46.710 49.845 03 46.730 49.860 04 46.770 49.875 05 46.830 49.890 06 46.610 49.670 07 46.630 49.770 08 46.870 49.930 09 46.930 49.970 10 46.970 49.990 *These frequencies are for use only as repeater input frequencies This proposed 46.670 – 46.970 MHz & 49.830 – 49.990 MHz reallocation of former cordless telephone frequencies would be assigned to the GMRS as licensed, up to 100-watt, duplex repeater channels

 

These channels were licensed pairs for duplex portable phones and could be used for long range repeaters. They are no longer in use.

[OffRoaderX]

So you'd need two different radios, or one radio with two different antennas to make use of these and the existing GMRS channels?  Does not seem very user-friendly... If they are unused, throw 'em to the H.A.M.s.. they'll use it.. they'll use anything.

[FishinGary]

22 minutes ago, OffRoaderX said:

So you'd need two different radios, or one radio with two different antennas to make use of these and the existing GMRS channels?  Does not seem very user-friendly... If they are unused, throw 'em to the H.A.M.s.. they'll use it.. they'll use anything.

Yes, we'll take them. That's down near 6m territory.

[Radioguy7268]

Before you get too excited about the long range possibilities of a low band repeater, talk to anyone who has actually built one, or tried to use one.

Beyond the problems of skip, near-far, and antennas that can double as fishing poles, you also find out that you need to have one antenna tuned for the transmit frequency, and another tuned for receive. Typical bandpass cavities are 5 ft. tall, you will need enough space for at least 6, and you better keep them in a climate controlled environment, unless you want to keep a separate set tuned for each season.

You also need to know that a typical low-band mobile antenna is only good for about a 500 KHz spread while your proposed pair is 3 MHz apart. Noise is a huge problem, terrible at times. It's only gotten worse in the last 25 years.

There's a reason why Commercial (paying customer) Low-band has become a wasteland. Actually, there's many reasons beyond the ones I've mentioned. Most manufacturers have abandoned the band.

[WSHH887]

1 hour ago, OffRoaderX said:

So you'd need two different radios, or one radio with two different antennas to make use of these and the existing GMRS channels?  Does not seem very user-friendly... If they are unused, throw 'em to the H.A.M.s.. they'll use it.. they'll use anything.

Using existing radios, yes.  But if the frequencies were given over to GMRS I'm pretty sure someone would find a way to make one radio do both.

[Socalgmrs]

Not good idea.  

[WRUE951]

Actually, that would be very interesting considering the proposal is asking for 100 watts and repeater use in the 6M area.  Can you imagine the 'FARS' people would get.     This would open a whole new game..    I like the idea