Jump to content

BuyTwoWayRadios.com

Photo

Using UV-82C for Part 95E


  • Please log in to reply
54 replies to this topic

#41 Elkhunter521

Elkhunter521

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 211 posts
  • LocationWashougal Washington
  • GMRS Callsign:Ask

Posted 23 December 2019 - 01:48 AM

Oops, forgot this part. The Luiton is also either wide band or narrow. Its also capable of split pl tones. Sells for just a little over 1/2 the price of the Midland.
  • wrfr886 likes this

Be vewy vewy quiet.
I'm listening to my wadio!


#42 n4gix

n4gix

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 634 posts
  • GMRS Callsign:WQWU626
  • Ham Callsign:N4GIX

Posted 29 December 2019 - 12:35 PM

It was sent to Yaesu for review. My initial thought is the controller failed.

Oh my! Was the unit still under warranty or do you have to eat the repair costs?

#43 marcspaz

marcspaz

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 663 posts
  • LocationLocation Location

Posted 29 December 2019 - 01:29 PM

Oh my! Was the unit still under warranty or do you have to eat the repair costs?

The radio was only a few days old when it broke.  The Ham Radio Outlet gave me a brand new radio and sent the damaged one back for analysis.  It may be a month or so before we hear back.  They may never tell me what the result is... but at least the HRO took good care of me.


  • n4gix, Ian and RCM like this

#44 RCM

RCM

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 297 posts
  • LocationNorth Alabama
  • GMRS Callsign:WRCM718
  • Ham Callsign:KU4FL

Posted 29 December 2019 - 04:47 PM

The radio was only a few days old when it broke.  The Ham Radio Outlet gave me a brand new radio and sent the damaged one back for analysis.  It may be a month or so before we hear back.  They may never tell me what the result is... but at least the HRO took good care of me.

That means Yaesu took care of you. The reason I say that is I used to be in the business, and Yaesu was always good to take care of the dealers. Kenwood, not so much.

Don't get me wrong; I'm a fan of Kenwood commercial gear and also amateur gear from early '80s and back. But I worked for a full line dealer during the '90s, and Kenwood was dead last in customer service. Yaesu was first. Alinco ran a very close second.

We couldn't just replace a Kenwood that failed. If we did, we would likely have to eat it.


  • marcspaz likes this

#45 wrfr886

wrfr886

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 2 posts
  • GMRS Callsign:wrfr886

Posted 13 May 2020 - 12:19 AM

 

I have several users on my repeaters that use them and to be honest I plan to start revoking permission because of the poor audio and signal quality.

 

 

MY 2 cents, thats elitism. If you have a problem with them on the repeater, snatch up 'acceptable' radios on ebay and offer them to users at a cost + expense markup to gently encourage them.

I am a single dad with 3 kids and have a fleet of radios for camping/hiking. Should I spend $2k on radios or $200 for 3 HT's and a Mobile, or... i dunno, by clothes?


  • Hans and Elkhunter521 like this

#46 wrfr886

wrfr886

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 2 posts
  • GMRS Callsign:wrfr886

Posted 13 May 2020 - 12:22 AM


First... I have purchased several BTech / Baofeng radios and all failed within weeks. The extra time and money spent trying to get them to work was ridiculous.

what are you doing to them? seen one fail cause of a power switch. that is it.



#47 marcspaz

marcspaz

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 663 posts
  • LocationLocation Location

Posted 13 May 2020 - 02:16 AM

what are you doing to them? seen one fail cause of a power switch. that is it.

 

All of the mobiles are gone.  I have two Ham Radio handhelds that seem to work OK.  So, my son and I use them when we go 4-wheeling while out of the trucks.  If one of us mistakenly drops an HT in the mud or on some rocks, better dropping a $35 is better than dropping a $300+ high-quality HT.



#48 berkinet

berkinet

    Senior expert on absolutely nothing

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 811 posts
  • GMRS Callsign:WQYR510
  • Ham Callsign:WB6TAE

Posted 13 May 2020 - 04:08 AM

MY 2 cents, thats elitism. If you have a problem with them on the repeater, snatch up 'acceptable' radios on ebay and offer them to users at a cost + expense markup to gently encourage them.

I am a single dad with 3 kids and have a fleet of radios for camping/hiking. Should I spend $2k on radios or $200 for 3 HT's and a Mobile, or... i dunno, by clothes?

 

I think that is an unfair accusation. Corey's repeater is not a public utility or a public service. He owns the repeater and lets other people use it.  It is up to him to set whatever standards he wants to: technical, behavior, content, etc. If people don't like his rules, they don't have to use his repeater. Since he has already made the capital outlay to build, house and operate the repeater, I see no reason why he should now have to support the equipment needs of the people who wish to use the repeater.

 

OTOH, you should buy the equipment that meets your needs for communication, reliability and price. That is strictly your decision. Should your equipment need to meet the standards of a repeater operator, that is then one more item you need to factor in to your purchase decision.

 

Here is an example of a similar issue that may help make this clear. The Midland MXT400 is a popular GMRS certified radio. However, because of some design decisions on Midland's part, the MXT400 is not be able to operate with some repeaters. (Available PL tones; split PL operation; and only narrow-band transmission.)  If you own an MXT400 and cannot access a repeater, who's responsibility is it to address the problem? Should the repeater owner change their configuration to accommodate you, or should you change your radio to meet the repeater's requirements?

 

By the way. You present the situation as binary: CCRs, vs. expensive equipment. There is another option, high-quality, used equipment - Part90 and Part95.  For your same $200 budget you could find decent gear - perhaps with cosmetic or other minor issues.


  • n4gix, Elkhunter521, marcspaz and 1 other like this

Everything we hear is an opinion, not a fact. Everything we see is a perspective, not the truth.

-- Marcus Aurelius


#49 wayoverthere

wayoverthere

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 146 posts
  • Locationmiddle of CA
  • GMRS Callsign:ask

Posted 14 May 2020 - 12:19 AM

MY 2 cents, thats elitism.


while it may be an unpopular opinion, and I reach that conclusion for different reasons than wrfr886, i kind of agree with that sentiment....i'll explain below.

I think that is an unfair accusation. Corey's repeater is not a public utility or a public service. He owns the repeater and lets other people use it. It is up to him to set whatever standards he wants to: technical, behavior, content, etc. If people don't like his rules, they don't have to use his repeater. Since he has already made the capital outlay to build, house and operate the repeater, I see no reason why he should now have to support the equipment needs of the people who wish to use the repeater.

OTOH, you should buy the equipment that meets your needs for communication, reliability and price. That is strictly your decision. Should your equipment need to meet the standards of a repeater operator, that is then one more item you need to factor in to your purchase decision.

Here is an example of a similar issue that may help make this clear. The Midland MXT400 is a popular GMRS certified radio. However, because of some design decisions on Midland's part, the MXT400 is not be able to operate with some repeaters. (Available PL tones; split PL operation; and only narrow-band transmission.) If you own an MXT400 and cannot access a repeater, who's responsibility is it to address the problem? Should the repeater owner change their configuration to accommodate you, or should you change your radio to meet the repeater's requirements?


first, i 100% agree that it's the repeater owner's choice to set it up however they want, allow whoever they want (or not), etc.

the other side though: it's not a stretch to say that midland is probably one of the most visible off the shelf options, especially at a beginner's price point, so probably what most beginners are going to grab (at least those making an effort to be legal, rather than grabbing whatever radio from amazon that covers the frequencies). and midland certainly doesn't make their limitations clear in any of the materials, nor any of the listings that they're restricted that way (again, especially to beginners who likely won't know to watch out for such limitations).

the central issue: i forget if i saw it here or on r/gmrs, but it was stated by a repeater owner that they had configured their repeater with split tones with the intent to keep midland users off their repeater. while that's absolutely their right as the owner, it's hard not to see that as a form of elitism, be it directed toward the equipment, or at beginners.

#50 berkinet

berkinet

    Senior expert on absolutely nothing

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 811 posts
  • GMRS Callsign:WQYR510
  • Ham Callsign:WB6TAE

Posted 15 May 2020 - 05:06 AM

while it may be an unpopular opinion, and I reach that conclusion for different reasons than wrfr886, i kind of agree with that sentiment....i'll explain below....

...the central issue: i forget if i saw it here or on r/gmrs, but it was stated by a repeater owner that they had configured their repeater with split tones with the intent to keep midland users off their repeater. while that's absolutely their right as the owner, it's hard not to see that as a form of elitism, be it directed toward the equipment, or at beginners.

 

I think you may be missing a few things...

  1. You quote 1 repeater operator, and then use that as a basis for deciding some policy is elitist.
  2. Repeater owners do not need to use technical specifications to limit who can use their repeater, then can decide on any (legal) basis they want​. (I.e. they probably can't discriminate based on race, religion, etc.) But, even that is questionable since a private repeater is like a private club and not normally subject to such legal restrictions.
  3. It is quite possible that the base issue was narrow-band vs wide-band. In which case adding configuration settings to restrict the offending radios would be warranted.

In other words, as Groucho Marx said "...I don’t care to belong to any club that will have me as a member".


Everything we hear is an opinion, not a fact. Everything we see is a perspective, not the truth.

-- Marcus Aurelius


#51 kb2ztx

kb2ztx

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 203 posts
  • LocationEast Coast
  • GMRS Callsign:WQLY948
  • Ham Callsign:KB2ZTX

Posted 15 May 2020 - 05:28 AM

the central issue: i forget if i saw it here or on r/gmrs, but it was stated by a repeater owner that they had configured their repeater with split tones with the intent to keep midland users off their repeater. while that's absolutely their right as the owner, it's hard not to see that as a form of elitism, be it directed toward the equipment, or at beginners.

I have mine setup the same way at a couple of sites, for the reason of the illegal users that were continually using the repeater both unknowingly and knowingly. After 6 months of trying to keep the bubble pack and other folks off the repeater I changed to a DPL and PL mixed configuration. All my commercial gear allowed this and it stopped interference. I spent alot of money on a repeater, tower, hard line, antenna, electric and other associated costs to be at a tower. Its for me to decide who get to use my repeater. 

 

On similar subject I have another repeater that was at a county park. I got tons of complaints on how it worked. every time I did a PM it was rock solid. One of the complainers was a ski patrol guy from a mountain nearby who liked to use that cause there radios didn't work. after 3 trips to the repeater and doing all sorts of testing I asked to meet him and look at his radio. He had the midland mobile (dont remember model) and a handful of bubble pack radios. I explained to him this was indeed the issue and as i explained that also realized other than him no one else was licenced. I attempted to educate him on the issues with the "junk" he bought however could not convince him.I volunteered to leave him one of my older HT's to use that weekend. Everything was fine. The following week when i picked up the radio he said he planned to get one..until he found what it costs. He was bewildered he had to pay $100 for a radio to use the repeater when he could buy a 2 pack on amazon of some other radio for $35.00.....At this point I gave up. Repeater has since been removed due to said group of non compliment users,. Sad part was this was installed at the county park for users of the park.

 

At my new house I have 2 repeaters. I specifically have one in NB mode as my parents have a Midland radio. Its still not ideal but it works for them.I run my channel in WB and still use my commercial gear. In the end its what works for the users of the system, and who maintains the system.


  • berkinet and lrdchivalry like this

#52 wayoverthere

wayoverthere

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 146 posts
  • Locationmiddle of CA
  • GMRS Callsign:ask

Posted 15 May 2020 - 07:40 PM

I think you may be missing a few things...

  1. You quote 1 repeater operator, and then use that as a basis for deciding some policy is elitist.
  2. Repeater owners do not need to use technical specifications to limit who can use their repeater, then can decide on any (legal) basis they want​. (I.e. they probably can't discriminate based on race, religion, etc.) But, even that is questionable since a private repeater is like a private club and not normally subject to such legal restrictions.
  3. It is quite possible that the base issue was narrow-band vs wide-band. In which case adding configuration settings to restrict the offending radios would be warranted.

In other words, as Groucho Marx said "...I don’t care to belong to any club that will have me as a member".

 

I have mine setup the same way at a couple of sites, for the reason of the illegal users that were continually using the repeater both unknowingly and knowingly. After 6 months of trying to keep the bubble pack and other folks off the repeater I changed to a DPL and PL mixed configuration. All my commercial gear allowed this and it stopped interference. I spent alot of money on a repeater, tower, hard line, antenna, electric and other associated costs to be at a tower. Its for me to decide who get to use my repeater. 

 

On similar subject I have another repeater that was at a county park. I got tons of complaints on how it worked. every time I did a PM it was rock solid. One of the complainers was a ski patrol guy from a mountain nearby who liked to use that cause there radios didn't work. after 3 trips to the repeater and doing all sorts of testing I asked to meet him and look at his radio. He had the midland mobile (dont remember model) and a handful of bubble pack radios. I explained to him this was indeed the issue and as i explained that also realized other than him no one else was licenced. I attempted to educate him on the issues with the "junk" he bought however could not convince him.I volunteered to leave him one of my older HT's to use that weekend. Everything was fine. The following week when i picked up the radio he said he planned to get one..until he found what it costs. He was bewildered he had to pay $100 for a radio to use the repeater when he could buy a 2 pack on amazon of some other radio for $35.00.....At this point I gave up. Repeater has since been removed due to said group of non compliment users,. Sad part was this was installed at the county park for users of the park.

 

At my new house I have 2 repeaters. I specifically have one in NB mode as my parents have a Midland radio. Its still not ideal but it works for them.I run my channel in WB and still use my commercial gear. In the end its what works for the users of the system, and who maintains the system.

 

 

I will concede i'm (perhaps over)generalizing based on that statement.  possibly some of it is a matter of perspective from where i sit on the inexperience end of things; i can definitely look back on other areas and notice how my perspectives have shifted some. 

 

to me, the "why" behind the statement/stance, is probably the biggest determining factor in how i view it, honestly. if it's a simple 'i don't want to deal with beginners', yeah, that's toward the stronger end of seeing it as an elitist attitude.  kb2ztx, the examples you bring up (in a general sense, yours berkinet, as well) illustrate the opposite end; had ongoing problems with users, and while perhaps not ideal to go that route, it's probably the only viable solution left to deal with users that weren't willing to help themselves.

 

i also still stand by the statement that regardless of my opinion of the motivation behind it, i still agree that it absolutely IS the right of the owner to configure however they see fit, include or exclude as they fit, and set whatever requirements they want; my opinion of their motivation has no bearing on that.

 

finally, i appreciate the time you've both put into this topic (and into educating and discussion on the forum overall), and that whether or not we agree, it can still be a civil discussion.



#53 berkinet

berkinet

    Senior expert on absolutely nothing

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 811 posts
  • GMRS Callsign:WQYR510
  • Ham Callsign:WB6TAE

Posted 16 May 2020 - 03:16 AM

... if it's a simple 'i don't want to deal with beginners', yeah, that's toward the stronger end of seeing it as an elitist attitude ....

 

Thanks. That helps understand your view of this.  May I suggest that you look at what GMRS is intended for.  From the regulations

47 CFR § 95.1703 - Definitions, GMRS

General Mobile Radio Service (GMRS). A mobile two-way voice communication service, with limited data applications, for facilitating activities of individual licensees and their family members, including, but not limited to, voluntary provision of assistance to the public during emergencies and natural disasters.

 

So, while there is nothing to prevent GMRS from being used as a general CB like service. That is not part of the basic intention. This is further supported by the identification requirements for repeaters... no repeater ID is required as long as all users operate under the license of the repeater owner.  The point of this is that most repeaters are formed by and for the use of limited numbers of users. Usually members of a family or small group and they usually have relationships outside of the radio world. As such, there is no broad community, and therefore, no real concept of new-comers or old-timers. At least not like there is in more open community services like ham and CB.  On the other extreme are GMRS repeaters for travelers, etc. In these cases many users are transient, and again the idea of new or old doesn't really apply.

 

To expand this a bit, look at ham radio, especially UHF/VHF repeaters. There you may often see tightly knit communities of people who's only relationship to each other is solely via the repeater. In these cases you do sometimes see people tagged as new-comers, and there are definitely elitist communities.

 

So, I'd say take an objective look at GMRS and then see if your feelings change.


Everything we hear is an opinion, not a fact. Everything we see is a perspective, not the truth.

-- Marcus Aurelius


#54 BoxCar

BoxCar

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 186 posts
  • LocationArden, NC
  • GMRS Callsign:WRCM737

Posted 16 May 2020 - 07:46 AM

If one takes a look at the FCC's description for the Citizens Band Radio Service you will  note a statement that GMRS serves a similar type of service. Stating GMRS is meant primarily for communications between members of the same family as intended in the rules does not agree with the statements in other sections of the same rules. Just as CB was originally intended for communications between licensed stations much as amateur radio continues to be it is still an open system that can be used by any operator to communicate as desired. Sometimes it is better to read the rules and their wording for intent using a shovel than a scalpel. There are many areas of the rules that are to be taken exactly as written but determining intent of a particular section often has to be taken broadly and compared to other sections. 


Old and wise infers you were once young and stupid


#55 wayoverthere

wayoverthere

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 146 posts
  • Locationmiddle of CA
  • GMRS Callsign:ask

Posted 17 May 2020 - 01:29 AM

Thanks. That helps understand your view of this.  May I suggest that you look at what GMRS is intended for.  From the regulations

47 CFR § 95.1703 - Definitions, GMRS

General Mobile Radio Service (GMRS). A mobile two-way voice communication service, with limited data applications, for facilitating activities of individual licensees and their family members, including, but not limited to, voluntary provision of assistance to the public during emergencies and natural disasters.

 

So, while there is nothing to prevent GMRS from being used as a general CB like service. That is not part of the basic intention. This is further supported by the identification requirements for repeaters... no repeater ID is required as long as all users operate under the license of the repeater owner.  The point of this is that most repeaters are formed by and for the use of limited numbers of users. Usually members of a family or small group and they usually have relationships outside of the radio world. As such, there is no broad community, and therefore, no real concept of new-comers or old-timers. At least not like there is in more open community services like ham and CB.  On the other extreme are GMRS repeaters for travelers, etc. In these cases many users are transient, and again the idea of new or old doesn't really apply.

 

To expand this a bit, look at ham radio, especially UHF/VHF repeaters. There you may often see tightly knit communities of people who's only relationship to each other is solely via the repeater. In these cases you do sometimes see people tagged as new-comers, and there are definitely elitist communities.

 

So, I'd say take an objective look at GMRS and then see if your feelings change.

Bearing Boxcar's point in mind (taking the statements in the regulations broadly, rather than as strictly binding) that does make a definite difference in perspective.

 

I've been looking at the broad amount of information available on repeaters, the sort of "community" in the linked repeaters and the nets, and people sharing their stories of communications, combined with the marketing of GMRS in offroad communications, and I've been thinking of GMRS as a sort of "Ham-lite". 

 

I guess the reality that "community" is a lot smaller piece of the big picture of GMRS than it seemed, and both in intent and largely in practice, GMRS is actually a lot closer to being "FRS-plus". 

 

I think I've also missed the context a lot of these stories are part of; that most people have a lot more "connections" than i do, that some of this "community" fits into, be it friends, family, or social groups/clubs.


  • berkinet and Downs like this




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users