What channels, if any, can I communicate on without using my call sign? KG-935G

[WRFH675]

At times I use the radios to communicate around the house. I’d like to do that without having to use my call sign if that’s possible. Channels 8-14 are set to low power, would those be the ones I should use?

[OffRoaderX]

According to the FCC, if you are using a GMRS radio, thou must use your callsign on all channels, regardless of the power-output you have set.

The question is, will they care if you dont.. and according to the FCC's enforcement database, they don't.

[aa7jc]

Yes, channels 8-14 would definitely be the way to go. 
Low power on the KG-935G on those channels with the rubber duck antenna is same as low power from any Walmart variety FRS radio on those same channels
...so I say why not.   
 

[back4more70]

4 hours ago, WRFH675 said:

At times I use the radios to communicate around the house.

Good, I thought I was the only one.  I'll tell my wife I'm not as big a radio dork as she thought

[SteveShannon]

1 hour ago, OffRoaderX said:

According to the FCC, if you are using a GMRS radio, thou must use your callsign on all channels, regardless of the power-output you have set.

The question is, will they care if you dont.. and according to the FCC's enforcement database, they don't.

It’s impossible for them to even know. It’s a victimless and harmless violation that can’t be detected. The very epitome of government uselessness. 

[WRFH675]

Thanks for the answer!

[TOM47]

5 hours ago, OffRoaderX said:

According to the FCC, if you are using a GMRS radio, thou must use your callsign on all channels, regardless of the power-output you have set.

The question is, will they care if you dont.. and according to the FCC's enforcement database, they don't.

ANY CHANCE THE KG-935G CAN BE UNLOCKED TO TRANSMIT OUTSIDE GMRS?

[SteveShannon]

7 hours ago, TOM47 said:

ANY CHANCE THE KG-935G CAN BE UNLOCKED TO TRANSMIT OUTSIDE GMRS?

Not that I’ve found, Tom, but the KG-UV8h appears to be a ham version that might be able to be used on GMRS frequencies also according to the comments accompanying this video:

 

[TOM47]

4 hours ago, Sshannon said:

Not that I’ve found, Tom, but the KG-UV8h appears to be a ham version that might be able to be used on GMRS frequencies also according to the comments accompanying this video:

 

I HAVE A FEW KG-UV9D MATE'S THAT WILL DO ALL AND MORE.  https://www.buytwowayradios.com/wouxun-kg-uv9d-mate-kit.html

Edited July 30, 2022 by TOM47
ADD LINK

[WRUE951]

If you were Trump, then they would track you down and get you but otherwise, they ain’t gonna waste their time

[MichaelLAX]

6 hours ago, WRUE951 said:

If you were Trump, then they would track you down and get you but otherwise, they ain’t gonna waste their time

And deservedly so!

[Lscott]

On 7/29/2022 at 7:36 PM, Sshannon said:

It’s impossible for them to even know. It’s a victimless and harmless violation that can’t be detected.

And if it's your careless neighbor down the street jamming your communications and interfering with your repeater, not so victimless. You would be surprised how far a low power radio will reach at times. I had to put up with a local family with kids that get on the air for hours. One night they picked the channel used by the local wide coverage GMRS repeater. That really F'ed up things. No call signs so maybe they were using FRS radios. If they had a GMRS license I could have looked them up on the FCC database, got their address, and sent them a note asking not to use the repeater channel unless they were using the repeater.

Then there is the even worse case of a house keeping crew who is using the exact same channel, with their own repeater no less!! The repeater NEVER ID's. It did use a different PL tone. Again no call sign was ever used and it required some effort and detective work on my part to figure out who it was. Discovered it was a local mall. Also discovered their license was expired from 10/2015 no less. They still use their radios. Still have the repeater, and still no license either. When the ding-dong that programmed their radios used a RX tone so they can't hear when there is traffic on the other repeater and just key up jamming it. I'm 4.5 miles LOS from the mall and I can hear them just fine. The GMRS repeater is just about the same distance away from me as well. Every once in a while I hear somebody complain about interference on the GMRS repeater and that happens when the house keeping crew uses theirs.

Their is a reason why call signs are required. Use them.

ULS_License_-_General_Mobile_Radio__GMRS__License_-_KAB1523_-_LA-job_178.pdf ULS_License_-_General_Mobile_Radio__GMRS__License_-_KAB1523_-_LA-job_252.pdf

[SteveShannon]

7 hours ago, Lscott said:

And if it's your careless neighbor down the street jamming your communications and interfering with your repeater, not so victimless. You would be surprised how far a low power radio will reach at times. I had to put up with a local family with kids that get on the air for hours. One night they picked the channel used by the local wide coverage GMRS repeater. That really F'ed up things. No call signs so maybe they were using FRS radios. If they had a GMRS license I could have looked them up on the FCC database, got their address, and sent them a note asking not to use the repeater channel unless they were using the repeater.

Then there is the even worse case of a house keeping crew who is using the exact same channel, with their own repeater no less!! The repeater NEVER ID's. It did use a different PL tone. Again no call sign was ever used and it required some effort and detective work on my part to figure out who it was. Discovered it was a local mall. Also discovered their license was expired from 10/2015 no less. They still use their radios. Still have the repeater, and still no license either. When the ding-dong that programmed their radios used a RX tone so they can't hear when there is traffic on the other repeater and just key up jamming it. I'm 4.5 miles LOS from the mall and I can hear them just fine. The GMRS repeater is just about the same distance away from me as well. Every once in a while I hear somebody complain about interference on the GMRS repeater and that happens when the house keeping crew uses theirs.

Their is a reason why call signs are required. Use them.

ULS_License_-_General_Mobile_Radio__GMRS__License_-_KAB1523_-_LA-job_178.pdf 462.01 kB · 3 downloads ULS_License_-_General_Mobile_Radio__GMRS__License_-_KAB1523_-_LA-job_252.pdf 490.3 kB · 3 downloads

The problem with quotes is that they don’t always reflect context. My statement was intended only to address transmitting on the FRS channels at FRS output levels but using a GMRS radio instead of an FRS radio. 

[Lscott]

5 hours ago, Sshannon said:

The problem with quotes is that they don’t always reflect context. My statement was intended only to address transmitting on the FRS channels at FRS output levels but using a GMRS radio instead of an FRS radio. 

If one is using a GMRS certified radio one is operating under GMRS rules. It doesn’t make any difference what power level is used.
 

If that weren’t the case nobody would bother to build and sell FRS radios, just make only GMRS certified radios, then instruct the customer to turn the power down with narrow band FM selected. But that’s not what the FCC allowed. They specifically prohibited combo GMRS/FRS radios, which effectively is what is being suggested here.

[SteveShannon]

2 hours ago, Lscott said:

If one is using a GMRS certified radio one is operating under GMRS rules. It doesn’t make any difference what power level is used.
 

If that weren’t the case nobody would bother to build and sell FRS radios, just make only GMRS certified radios, then instruct the customer to turn the power down with narrow band FM selected. But that’s not what the FCC allowed. They specifically prohibited combo GMRS/FRS radios, which effectively is what is being suggested here.

I understand the regulation. It’s stupid.

[wrci350]

9 hours ago, Sshannon said:

I understand the regulation. It’s stupid.

Perhaps, but it's also understandable, since the pre-2017 rules allowed for those combination FRS/GMRS radios, and somewhere in the manual that came with them there was a notice that a license was needed if you wanted to use the higher-power "GMRS" channels.  I'll bet the percentage of people who purchased those bubble-pack combo radios and got (or had) a GMRS license was in the single digits.

FRS radios are also not allowed to use repeaters, so it's not just bandwidth and power levels that differ between FRS and GMRS.

As far as the requirement to ID if using a GMRS radio (even on simplex), that certainly seems to be what the FCC regulations say.  Will anyone know and/or care if you don't?  Probably not.

[SteveShannon]

37 minutes ago, wrci350 said:

Perhaps, but it's also understandable, since the pre-2017 rules allowed for those combination FRS/GMRS radios, and somewhere in the manual that came with them there was a notice that a license was needed if you wanted to use the higher-power "GMRS" channels.  I'll bet the percentage of people who purchased those bubble-pack combo radios and got (or had) a GMRS license was in the single digits.

FRS radios are also not allowed to use repeaters, so it's not just bandwidth and power levels that differ between FRS and GMRS.

As far as the requirement to ID if using a GMRS radio (even on simplex), that certainly seems to be what the FCC regulations say.  Will anyone know and/or care if you don't?  Probably not.

Understandable?  No, it’s a waste of regulatory authority, creating a rule for which a violation cannot be detected and which causes no problem. 

Here’s the scenario:  Rick the radio guy has a commercial handheld that’s type 95 certified.  Using CPS he configures it to transmit only on the FRS frequencies and only at FRS power levels.  

Does he have to have a GMRS license and use his GMRS call sign?

I’ll check on the answers tonight. 

[wrci350]

6 hours ago, Sshannon said:

Understandable?  No, it’s a waste of regulatory authority, creating a rule for which a violation cannot be detected and which causes no problem. 

Here’s the scenario:  Rick the radio guy has a commercial handheld that’s type 95 certified.  Using CPS he configures it to transmit only on the FRS frequencies and only at FRS power levels.  

Does he have to have a GMRS license and use his GMRS call sign?

I’ll check on the answers tonight. 

Apparently "the regulation" you don't agree with isn't the one I thought you were talking about.  I was specifically addressing FRS/GMRS combo radios.

By "only on the FRS frequencies" I'm guessing you mean the simplex FRS/GMRS channels, since there aren't any FRS-only frequencies.

I believe that any Part 90 radios that have grandfathered Part 95 certifications are considered "GMRS" radios, so as the rules are currently written, yes, a GMRS license is required, and yes, IDing is required.

Do I care?  No, I don't.  On paper, the FCC does.  In reality, they don't either.

[KAF6045]

8 hours ago, wrci350 said:

By "only on the FRS frequencies" I'm guessing you mean the simplex FRS/GMRS channels, since there aren't any FRS-only frequencies.

Only since the 2017 reorganization -- which resulted in FRS being allowed up to 2W and access to simplex GMRS main channels; all to cater to the pre-2017 bubble-pack buyers who never read the license needed for specific channels. And didn't cover two of my ancient bubble-pack sets (A Midland set with THREE power levels, where High is >2W, and a Motorola set with repeater access capability).

Original FRS was only allowed on the GMRS 462MHz interstitials AND on what was then FRS-only 467MHz interstitials -- using NFM, and half watt.

After the reorganization, GMRS HTs with a low-power setting of 0.5W are allowed on the 467MHz interstitials, using NFM. (Technically 0.5W ERP, so having a gain antenna violates that regulation | and regulations also applied an ERP criteria for the 5W GMRS interstitials, but I haven't seen any "real" GMRS radio that prevents a gain antenna [the Retevis RA85 has a fixed antenna -- making it a glorified over-powered bubble pack radio )

[Lscott]

12 hours ago, wrci350 said:

Do I care?  No, I don't.

You should. Otherwise why have any rules at all, for anything?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons
 

In our case the “commons” is the limited RF spectrum EVERYONE must share.

[SteveShannon]

49 minutes ago, Lscott said:

You should. Otherwise why have any rules at all, for anything?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons
 

In our case the “commons” is the limited RF spectrum EVERYONE must share.

I agree. We should all care. Bad rules weaken respect for rules overall. For that reason we should all point out bad rules so that good rules, which I do fully support, are obeyed. 
Any rule for which noncompliance cannot be detected is a bad rule. 

[Lscott]

8 hours ago, Sshannon said:

I agree. We should all care. Bad rules weaken respect for rules overall. For that reason we should all point out bad rules so that good rules, which I do fully support, are obeyed. 
Any rule for which noncompliance cannot be detected is a bad rule. 

I think people totally misunderstand the requirement for call signs and the necessity of ID'ing. It has very little to do with being a rule that is stupid. I'm very sure that people at times have wondered who is that on the air. Without being required to ID, or recognizing the voice, you just don't know. The station maybe jamming, interfering, with other traffic on the frequency and may not be aware it. With a call sign it's fairly easy to look up their address, home, P.O. Box, etc and contact them about the problem so it can be resolved. Otherwise it just a PIA to try and DF them or through other means. I gave a perfect example earlier in this thread about a local mall's house keeping repeater. No ID from it, and the users never ID'ed either. It took weeks to finally figure out who it was and notified the trustees of the GMRS repeater being interfered with who to contact. The whole process would have been so much simpler if a call sign was used.

Then is it a bad rule if it can't be detected? Well it's like being pulled over for speeding and the Cop notices you're not wearing a seat belt. So you get a ticket for that too. Same thing with failure to ID. The FCC contacts you about another issue by then they have likely noticed you haven't been ID'ing either so you get screw for that rule violation as well.

[SteveShannon]

11 minutes ago, Lscott said:

I think people totally misunderstand the requirement for call signs and the necessity of ID'ing. It has very little to do with being a rule that is stupid. I'm very sure that people at times have wondered who is that on the air. Without being required to ID, or recognizing the voice, you just don't know. The station maybe jamming, interfering, with other traffic on the frequency and may not be aware it. With a call sign it's fairly easy to look up their address, home, P.O. Box, etc and contact them about the problem so it can be resolved. Otherwise it just a PIA to try and DF them or through other means. I gave a perfect example earlier in this thread about a local mall's house keeping repeater. No ID from it, and the users never ID'ed either. It took weeks to finally figure out who it was and notified the trustees of the GMRS repeater being interfered with who to contact. The whole process would have been so much simpler if a call sign was used.

Then is it a bad rule if it can't be detected? Well it's like being pulled over for speeding and the Cop notices you're not wearing a seat belt. So you get a ticket for that too. Same thing with failure to ID. The FCC contacts you about another issue by then they have likely noticed you haven't been ID'ing either so you get screw for that rule violation as well.

You are misunderstanding me.  I have no problem using my ID or requiring an ID on a service which requires licensing.

What I’m saying is that when you are transmitting at the lower FRS power levels on one of the frequencies that an FRS radio is allowed to transmit on, nothing is accomplished by requiring a call sign if they’re using a GMRS radio but not if they’re using an FRS radio.  Nobody listening can possibly discern which type of radio they’re using.

[gortex2]

And lets face it 90% of the folks on those channels are using baofengs from amazon and don't have a license anyway. Don't sweat the small stuff. Worry about the high power channels and repeaters. 

[SteveShannon]

42 minutes ago, gortex2 said:

And lets face it 90% of the folks on those channels are using baofengs from amazon and don't have a license anyway. Don't sweat the small stuff. Worry about the high power channels and repeaters. 

Exactly!

[Lscott]

42 minutes ago, gortex2 said:

And lets face it 90% of the folks on those channels are using baofengs from amazon and don't have a license anyway. Don't sweat the small stuff. Worry about the high power channels and repeaters. 

You do understand those FRS type interstitial channels sit between the main repeater input channels? That's why they are limited to narrow band and 0.5 watts. The potential for interference isn't trivial. 

The main repeater channels are on a 25KHz channel spacing with a 20KHz authorized bandwidth emission. That leaves just 5KHz guard band between the channels. Now stick a narrow band FM signal, which is 11KHz, in there. Now you have some overlap from the low power channel to the high power repeater input channels above and below the low power one. So you have somebody with a 0.5 watt radio a few blocks from the repeater using one of the interstitial channels adjacent to the repeater's input channel at the same time a distance station is trying to use the repeater the results might not turn out so good.

FRS-GMRS Channels Layout.pdf