Multi use radios?

[TNFrank]

I understand radios are approved for certain use cases(HAM, GMRS, MURS, etc.)but why can't a radio be designed to be "legal" for use on any/all Bands so you can simply program it for what you want/need to use it for. 

I know many use HAM HT's "out of Band" on GMRS and MURS so why not come up with a "one and done" radio that'll be compliant on everything?  Is there some reason this can't be done? 

[WRUE951]

25 minutes ago, SteveShannon said:

 

Yes, tactical channels.

everything is 'tactical'...     

[tcp2525]

3 hours ago, WRUE951 said:

everything is 'tactical'...     

I'm throwing civility out the window. Screw the rules, I'm going to use a spark gap transmitter no matter who likes it or not. And mine will definitely be certified with a label affixed to it stating FCC TYPE NOT ACCEPTED.

[GreggInFL]

5 hours ago, WRUE951 said:

But I'll bet you a dollar and a six pack of Modelo, even in Montana they have one or more encrypted channels to resort to.  

You're going to have to do better than Modelo. Steve has very high standards when it comes to beer.

[WRUE951]

54 minutes ago, GreggInFL said:

You're going to have to do better than Modelo. Steve has very high standards when it comes to beer.

Budweiser ??  

[nokones]

7 hours ago, WRUE951 said:

good luck with getting around their digital encryption protocol.    Ain't going to happen  

True. If I was so inclined to transmit on a public safety channel under said conditions, I would use a mutual-aid or  interoperability channel, especially if the respective agency's radio system is a 700/800 Meg trunk system.

I don't do 700/800 Megs and trunking.

[AdmiralCochrane]

In central MD all public safety is migrating to P-25 encryption.  Most law enforcement has been completely encrypted for a few years now.

[WRYZ926]

We still have a few hold out departments using analog. My county is one of them. Though they are currently working on getting on P25 and the state wide system.

All of the old ladies and busy bodies will be upset once the county goes all digital as they won't be able to listen in with their scanners. 

The county is still a hold out when it comes to using Winlink too. I've been working with one of the SD lieutenants that manages their coms on this. It helps that he also holds his amateur license. 

People resist change and government is no different.

On topic. Yes I do have a few unlocked radios. And I made sure they are setup to meet power output regulations as best as I can. I won't use those radios outside of the GMRS or amateur bands unless absolutely needed. 

[LeoG]

My old lady will be very upset when analog goes away too.

[WRTC928]

11 hours ago, WRYZ926 said:

On topic. Yes I do have a few unlocked radios. And I made sure they are setup to meet power output regulations as best as I can. I won't use those radios outside of the GMRS or amateur bands unless absolutely needed. 

I only recently learned that the Baofeng 5RM/5RH series will rx and tx on marine frequencies. The probability that I will ever need those frequencies is low but not zero. The 5RM has 999 memory slots and the 5RH has 640, so I programmed them in. It's only a violation of regulations if I transmit on them, and if I'm in a situation dire enough to resort to marine channels, I won't be concerned about getting a nasty letter from the FCC.

I had a pair of MURS radios about 15 years ago and lost them somewhere along the way. I've literally never keyed up on MURS since then, but I have it in most of my radios which can use it. I'm conscientious about keeping the power and bandwidth within regs on the radios which can go that low. 

[MarkInTampa]

21 hours ago, WRYZ926 said:

All of the old ladies and busy bodies will be upset once the county goes all digital as they won't be able to listen in with their scanners. 

 

A friends daughter used to work for a disaster recovery chain cleanup company as a sales person. She was more or less an ambulance chaser but for flooded or fire damaged homes and businesses. The company monitored the scanner for fire dispatch the next county over and would dispatch her to try and sell their services. I asked why she didn't work in our county, her answer was "because we can't scan the fire department" (our county is all P-25 encrypted).

[WRYZ926]

My county is one of the last holdouts on switching to P25. One city in the next county is Las still on analog even though the rest of that county went digital. That city happens to be the county seat and the biggest town in that county too.

[WRTC928]

On 12/24/2025 at 9:43 AM, nokones said:

It appears to me that during such disaster, if I need to report life or property in imminent peril, I can legally program a public safety channel in my personal radio and report such emergency as long that I did not interrupt any ongoing transmission. Once that transmission and report is done, I would not have any legal reason to key up on that public safety channel again unless there is a need to report another incident whereas a life and property are in imminent peril.

If I understand the rules correctly, it still wouldn't be legal, but it would almost certainly be forgiven. There's a long-standing understanding in US jurisprudence that some situations are a justification for infractions. When I was in the Air Force in North Dakota, a guy's truck ran off the road in a blizzard. Cell phones didn't exist in those days. He climbed over the fence into a nuclear missile facility and set off all the alarms knowing someone would come to check it out. He got handcuffed and taken to the launch control facility and he eventually had to appear before a judge where the US Attorney recommended the charges be dropped, which they were. Using a public safety frequency if lives are in danger would probably end similarly. Just ask John McClane.

[tcp2525]

On 12/24/2025 at 10:02 PM, AdmiralCochrane said:

In central MD all public safety is migrating to P-25 encryption.  Most law enforcement has been completely encrypted for a few years now.

MD State Police are still unencrypted, but I don't know how long they will stay that way. One of my friends worked as a radio tech for them. Now he's officially retired.

[AdmiralCochrane]

7 minutes ago, tcp2525 said:

MD State Police are still unencrypted, but I don't know how long they will stay that way. One of my friends worked as a radio tech for them. Now he's officially retired.

Kurt is always helpful.

[tcp2525]

1 minute ago, AdmiralCochrane said:

Kurt is always helpful.

He's definitely the go to man!!!

[73blazer]

On 12/19/2025 at 11:02 PM, LeoG said:

 At least your every conversation and text isn't being stored in the Utah facility. 

Uh...I'd bet my next paycheck they are! They have listening posts everywhere, all recorded. In the name of our safety....naturally. 

[LeoG]

Being sarcastic.  Of course every digital communication is being stored for normal infrastructure.  They went to digital so they could do this and then make it index-able and searchable.  Not to many people recording GMRS conversions and digitizing them and storing.

[nokones]

6 hours ago, WRTC928 said:

If I understand the rules correctly, it still wouldn't be legal, but it would almost certainly be forgiven. There's a long-standing understanding in US jurisprudence that some situations are a justification for infractions. When I was in the Air Force in North Dakota, a guy's truck ran off the road in a blizzard. Cell phones didn't exist in those days. He climbed over the fence into a nuclear missile facility and set off all the alarms knowing someone would come to check it out. He got handcuffed and taken to the launch control facility and he eventually had to appear before a judge where the US Attorney recommended the charges be dropped, which they were. Using a public safety frequency if lives are in danger would probably end similarly. Just ask John McClane.

Why wouldn't it be legal for me to come up on a public safety channel to report an emergency whereas property or life is in imminent peril during those disasters cited in Part 90.407?  What part of 90.407 would I be violating?

Now for the guy that jumped over the fence to intentionally set off the alarm to summon help/aid, was there any exemptions in statute that would exempt him from being prosecuted for his/her act? Although, I agree that not prosecuting him for trespassing was in the interest of justice.

In his case, there was no emergency with life or property in imminent peril.  After the vehicle came to rest from losing control of the vehicle it was only a property damage collision event with the primary collision factor being driving at an unsafe speed for conditions that was not reasonable and prudent, and the non-injury collision event does not constitute an emergency nor does being in a blizzard at that time.  

[WRTC928]

2 minutes ago, nokones said:

Why wouldn't it be legal for me to come up on a public safety channel to report an emergency whereas property or life is in imminent peril during those disasters cited in Part 90.407?  What part of 90.407 would I be violating?

To the best of my knowledge, there's no exemption for an unlicensed user to transmit on a public safety frequency. 

2 minutes ago, nokones said:

Now for the guy that jumped over the fence to intentionally set off the alarm to summon help/aid, was there any exemptions in statute that would exempt him from being prosecuted for his/her act? Although, I agree that not prosecuting him for trespassing was in the interest of justice.

In his case, there was no emergency with life or property in imminent peril.  After the vehicle came to rest from losing control of the vehicle it was only a property damage collision event with the primary collision factor being driving at an unsafe speed for conditions that was not reasonable and prudent, and the non-injury collision event does not constitute an emergency nor does being in a blizzard at that time.  

Being miles from anywhere with a disabled vehicle and no means of communication in a North Dakota blizzard is very much a life-threatening situation. 

[nokones]

3 minutes ago, WRTC928 said:

To the best of my knowledge, there's no exemption for an unlicensed user to transmit on a public safety frequency. 

Being miles from anywhere with a disabled vehicle and no means of communication in a North Dakota blizzard is very much a life-threatening situation. 

Individual users are not licensed; stations are licensed in Part 90.  Part 90.407 is pretty clear that would allow me to come up on a public safety channel under does imminent peril conditions. You should reread the rule again.

[WSEZ864]

On 12/26/2025 at 10:06 AM, tcp2525 said:

MD State Police are still unencrypted, but I don't know how long they will stay that way. One of my friends worked as a radio tech for them. Now he's officially retired.

Kurt?

[tcp2525]

7 hours ago, WSEZ864 said:

Kurt?

Of course, who else?

[AdmiralCochrane]

I guess we are all friends of Kurt.  I was once nominated to be a friend of Brian even though Jack was excluded from that list (Brian was pulling Jack's leg).

[tcp2525]

8 hours ago, AdmiralCochrane said:

I guess we are all friends of Kurt.  I was once nominated to be a friend of Brian even though Jack was excluded from that list (Brian was pulling Jack's leg).

Yep, you got that right. He's definitely a good friend and a person that will help anyone. Best part, he's a neighbor just a couple miles up the road. He did let his GMRS license expire many years ago and we talked about him getting back into it.