New Repeater Channels for GMRS in 2024

[intermod]

7 hours ago, Lscott said:

I’ll chime in here. What would likely be done is a mixed mode repeater. It auto detects the mode in use. That would still preserve the analog user’s ability to continue to use their equipment. I would DEFINITELY not recommend installing a digital only repeater.

Of course the tiny sticking point is getting the FCC to change the rules to allow ANY digital voice mode on GMRS. And I do have some thoughts on that.

GMRS Digital Voice - 20221009.pdf 286.2 kB · 4 downloads

4K0 dPMR is definitely much easier to fit in.   Even having several high elevation repeaters, I would not have any issue with 4K0 stations 12.5 kHz away from my inputs.   Even high power mobiles.  I likely get more interference from the narrowband analog radios there now, especially when they are within a few miles of the repeater.    The commercial frequency coordination standards originally allowed new 4K0 stations to be installed 12.5 kHz away from 20K0 (or like you mention 16K0) without getting any approval from the wideband users - even at the same repeater site.  So this is well established.   But that was also with tighter frequency stability standards.  

Maybe this is the first step to obtain acceptance of digital modes.   

[Guest]

Here is my "modest proposal" to make GMRS "great" again

(Disclaimer: This might include some "modest" sarcasm!)

It seems that the basic problem is that too many "normal" people (people who are not "us") and their children are on the FRS / GMRS frequencies. This traffic is majorly infringing on our ability to listen to the silence caused by nobody using those repeaters we like to keep for ourselves. - Maybe simplified but it might hit some of the issues

Back in the days (about the time that 'stranger things' is set in), CB was facing similar problems. Cheap HTs that somehow made it into the hands of "normal" folk and their children.

Today, no parent wants their child on CB mainly because of two reasons: The cost of C batteries and the fact that the language on those channels is not children friendly! I guess that the latter reasoning:

We will broadcast (yes, that is a violation of FCC rules, but we are "fighting" for our frequencies) on a regular basis a copy of George Carlin's "Seven Dirty Words" (more violations - but we are "fighting" for our frequencies!). My hope is that parents will hear the broadcast and snatch those radios that steal our airtime from their children and also dispose of theirs!

Remember: Those normal people and their children are stealing our frequencies and we have to fight to get them back!!!

If we can succeed, we do not need advanced technology to regain control over our airwaves and get back to listen to the silence of our unused repeaters and frequencies

Happy Bank Holiday !!!

 

[WRUU653]

Bravo @WRXD372 well done sir

[Lscott]

24 minutes ago, WRXD372 said:

We will broadcast (yes, that is a violation of FCC rules, but we are "fighting" for our frequencies) on a regular basis a copy of George Carlin's "Seven Dirty Words" (more violations - but we are "fighting" for our frequencies!).

People likely hear even worse language on the air. That’s in addition to various topics being discussed too. Either people forget talking on the radio is like a huge party line or they just don’t care.

[Lscott]

7 hours ago, intermod said:

the FCC's 2017 ruling that allowed unlicensed users on the 462 GMRS channels with two watts.  That was likely the industry's influence.

That’s the FCC being lazy. It was the easy way out to fix their F’up in the first place by allowing the sale of dual use radios, FRS/GRMRS. What was previously illegal is now just fine, no enforcement action need. Expecting people to read that slip of paper advising them not to use channels above 14 without a license mostly never happened considering the license cost at the time. For $29.95 for a pair of what looks like kids two-way radios all anyone cared about is how to turn it on and where you open it to stick the batteries in.

[KAF6045]

On 5/29/2023 at 4:10 PM, intermod said:

But from a really practical perspective, once the FCC permitted repeaters in GMRS, simplex users were no longer granted protection from repeater interference in any case.  They effectively became secondary, so they must accept interference or move to another channel (or use CTCSS for nuisance interference like DMR or analog).    

Pardon? "once the FCC permitted repeaters..."

Repeaters have always been a part of GMRS (and precursor Class A Citizens Radio Service [Citizens Band used to be Class D Citizens Radio Service). And users only had access to TWO of the "main channels". The 7 intersitial channels are lower power (5W... HT level) simplex channels positioned between the main channels (there is just enough gap between channel (25kHz) and bandwidth (20kHz authorized, 16kHz deviation standard)) that the filters in the radios can "tune out" any actual overlapping traffic (cf: FM capture effect).

Many of the old repeaters were provided by companies (when GMRS allowed business licenses) and used controllers that could handle multiple CTCSS assignments -- so the company could configure different tones to different groups of users, including providing a tone just for (paid/approved) private users (GMRS equipment wasn't that common, and with only two main channels on the license one couldn't randomly search for repeaters). Granted -- protocol pretty much mandated that one use MONitor before touching the PTT to ensure that a different (higher priority group -- like the business itself) wasn't active on the channel.

[intermod]

2 hours ago, KAF6045 said:

Pardon? "once the FCC permitted repeaters..."

Repeaters have always been a part of GMRS (and precursor Class A Citizens Radio Service [Citizens Band used to be Class D Citizens Radio Service).

My wording could have been better.  My main point was that, when the FCC permits repeaters in a shared service, repeater users cannot always protect simplex users from interference (IX).  So when you are planning a repeater, digital or otherwise, while I try and work around a local simplex group that call a certain channel home, eliminating interference is not always possible.   Thus, simplex users cannot expect interference-free operation (except intentional IX).   

[WRUU653]

On 5/31/2023 at 2:18 PM, intermod said:

My wording could have been better.  My main point was that, when the FCC permits repeaters in a shared service, repeater users cannot always protect simplex users from interference (IX).  So when you are planning a repeater, digital or otherwise, while I try and work around a local simplex group that call a certain channel home, eliminating interference is not always possible.   Thus, simplex users cannot expect interference-free operation (except intentional IX).   

 

 You do come across as someone who might have an agenda.  just asking, do you?

 Do you actually have an experimental license? Are you in development to sell something?

  "simplex users cannot expect interference-free operation". It sure feels like someone is trying to sell me something I don't want. 

[intermod]

33 minutes ago, WRUU653 said:

  It sure feels like someone is trying to sell me something I don't want. 

Sorry that you have been triggered.  I have more quotes if you need them.  How much money do you have?

[WRUU653]

15 minutes ago, intermod said:

Sorry that you have been triggered.  I have more quotes if you need them.  How much money do you have?

I'm not emotional about it at all, it just feels like we're not getting the full story. Just like a salesman or politician to avoid the question with a lame redirect. 

[Radioguy7268]

I've said it before, I'll say it again. If you want to have your own repeater channel, don't bother trying to petition the FCC to change GMRS rules - just go set yourself up with a Private Carrier FB6 on a properly coordinated UHF business channel.

You won't need to convince anyone of your need, you just pay your money & go.

You can do Analog, DMR, NXDN, Encryption - whatever. Create your own special 10 codes, use speech inversion, whatever floats your boat. You can even crank out more than 50 watts on your repeater (although there are actual ERP limits to deal with).)

 

[intermod]

13 hours ago, Radioguy7268 said:

I've said it before, I'll say it again. If you want to have your own repeater channel, don't bother trying to petition the FCC to change GMRS rules - just go set yourself up with a Private Carrier FB6 on a properly coordinated UHF business channel.

You won't need to convince anyone of your need, you just pay your money & go.

You can do Analog, DMR, NXDN, Encryption - whatever. Create your own special 10 codes, use speech inversion, whatever floats your boat. You can even crank out more than 50 watts on your repeater (although there are actual ERP limits to deal with).)

 

But the government works for us...how could this be?   

Agree on the business approach - its very flexible.  But there is a community/social aspect to GMRS that is hard to replicate on business. 

What I have advocated is for CERT and other public safety groups consider business spectrum, or even public safety spectrum (many do qualify for it - its already happening).  These groups are more "insular" in a (positive) way - they have a very defined group of users, where many don't have a desire or need to meet others outside of that group or specific city/county.     

This would offload some of the co-channel issues.     

With regard to business spectrum,  it had been difficult to find a clear channel pair in the metro areas.  One previous poster noted that there should be quite a bit of VHF and UHF spectrum available as many businesses have moved to other bands and cellular, POC, etc.   I have not dug around for a few years so this might be possible.   

Edit:  Also - another possible drawback of using business or public safety spectrum is that the repeater site owners could start charging us much more for site rent unless I could convince them "its non-profit, just like GMRS or HAM".    But then again, maybe I just place a label on the business channel repeater that says "GMRS" and hope they don't check.     

[KAF6045]

4 minutes ago, intermod said:

With regard to business spectrum,  it had been difficult to find a clear channel pair in the metro areas.  One previous poster noted that there should be quite a bit of VHF and UHF spectrum available as many businesses have moved to other bands and cellular, POC, etc.   I have not dug around for a few years so this might be possible.   

Unlikely -- it seems any time a chunk of band becomes vacant the cell phone services bid for the spectrum to run more streaming video to distracted drivers...

[Lscott]

24 minutes ago, KAF6045 said:

Unlikely -- it seems any time a chunk of band becomes vacant the cell phone services bid for the spectrum to run more streaming video to distracted drivers...

[intermod]

I like cat videos. 

[gortex2]

15 hours ago, Radioguy7268 said:

I've said it before, I'll say it again. If you want to have your own repeater channel, don't bother trying to petition the FCC to change GMRS rules - just go set yourself up with a Private Carrier FB6 on a properly coordinated UHF business channel.

You won't need to convince anyone of your need, you just pay your money & go.

You can do Analog, DMR, NXDN, Encryption - whatever. Create your own special 10 codes, use speech inversion, whatever floats your boat. You can even crank out more than 50 watts on your repeater (although there are actual ERP limits to deal with).)

 

I say this over and over. At least once a year folks decide we need to change GMRS to suite their needs and who cares what others do. I have been in GMRS since we rented a repeater PL. Alot has changed but in the end not much really did. analog and simple has been the game. If you want DMR or other stuff go to ham or business. 

[Lscott]

17 hours ago, gortex2 said:

I say this over and over. At least once a year folks decide we need to change GMRS to suite their needs and who cares what others do. I have been in GMRS since we rented a repeater PL. Alot has changed but in the end not much really did. analog and simple has been the game. If you want DMR or other stuff go to ham or business. 

It's rather unreasonable to expect any service to remain static. Analog TV has gone basically extinct, 11M CB now has analog FM, auto manufactures are trying to eliminate AM radios in cars, the FM PMR446 license free service in the EU now allows two types of digital voice modes and so it goes.  

GMRS was limited in the number of channels it could use and the changes in 2017 added more, and a few headaches. It's going to change again. It's not a question of IF but WHEN and what those changes will look like. Some of the proposals here have little to no chance of happening while some do have merit.

If GMRS doesn't evolve it will just be another dinosaur looking for the nearest tar pit.

[Guest]

It has to be said:

Newer is not always better!

More advanced technology is not always better suited for the purpose!

... while in technology the credo seems to be "Better and more advanced NOW!", the reality is that the old HAM mantra is true: as little power (or modern tech) as needed to get the communication successfully completed!

I like new gadgets and my credit card and my wife will confirm this - but there are simple solutions that just work.

When it comes to innovation, we need top ask TWO questions:

- Can / could we?

- Should we?

And for change and speed: EU the standard CB mode has "always" been FM - hardly new

[Lscott]

1 hour ago, WRXD372 said:

It has to be said:

Newer is not always better!

More advanced technology is not always better suited for the purpose!

It's not just the technology. As usage changes the rules need to evolve too. That's why they were changed in 2017. The FCC was fixing their earlier F'up allowing dual use radios, GMRS/FRS, in one radio to be sold. Almost nobody got the required GMRS license to use the extra channels. So, the FCC changed the rules to make it legal, and now they don't have to screw around with the enforcement issue.

[WRQI583]

On 5/29/2023 at 12:38 PM, Lscott said:

just where do you locate the digital channels where they would result in the least interference to analog operations.

That means it would take coordination, something that doesn't currently exist on GMRS. It is hard enough to coordinate Ham radio let alone something that may become licenseless in another 20 years. 

Personally I don't want to see the mess that has been created on Ham Radio when it comes to digital, Yaesu Fusion being one of those messes. Sure, you can use analog and digital on the same repeater, as long as someone with digital doesn't come along and walk right over you. How about those who can barely afford analog radios? Now the much more expensive digital comes into play and those with analog either spend the money and upgrade or get bumped out. I can say from experience, no one, unless they are rich and have money to blow on radios for fun is going to want to spend money on digital radios. I can buy a Yaesu VHF analog radio for about $175. If I just wanted to upgrade to digital (Yaesu Fusion), that price tag now goes up to close to $400 or more.

Simply put, there are only 8 repeater pairs. If people want to operate digital,  join Ham Radio. Ham Radio has tons of digital repeaters that don't get used and there is so much space on the VHF/UHF bands that no one uses. All it takes is memorizing the answers to a bunch of questions and passing a test and people can play digital all they want as long as they don't get sucked down the HF rabbit hole.

[WRQI583]

On 5/29/2023 at 2:25 PM, intermod said:

Agree that having a set of new frequencies for any digital technologies would avoid some conflicts.  VHF and UHF is getting really quiet.  I wonder if you just found win-win between GMRS licensees and the business frequency coordinators (BFC).  If the BFCs can make ~$35 per licensee (as opposed to $200-$300 for one license over a large area), they may make more money supporting GMRS.   But it seems that building coalition of interested GMRS licensees to lobby for digital would be more attainable.  

We have been using a DMR repeater on GMRS since 2016 (at 2200' elevation).   Its runs dual mode (analog an digital).  We have had no formal complaints, and I am aware of a few other GMRS systems also running DMR.  So presenting the FCC with several successful DMR trials seems like an easier approach.  

Not sure I understand how the flood of bubblepack radios impact digital.  Do you mean there are too many existing analog radios to change them all out?   I am not suggesting analog be eliminated - we would allow digital to-co-exist with analog.  99% of those bubblepack radios come pre-programmed with tone squelch activated so they never even hear the digital signals or anything else for that matter.   And digital signals are not bothered much by analog or other digital signals.  

 

I am not familiar with DMR and analog used on the same repeater. I know Yaesu Fusion has that capability and it is a nightmare. I have a bunch of Yaesu Fusion repeaters in my state, quite a few within range of me where they work better than some analog. I will not even program them in any radio because analog never gets used on them. They also happen to be linked together digitally, so when someone on another repeater wants to run digital decides to jump on and start talking to someone, they will walk right over me. I could just upgrade but I barely use the radio as it is, so a $400-$500 price tag for something I barely use is a bit much to choke on. I would hope a DMR/analog repeater doesn't behave the same way?

When it comes to the bubble pack radios, digital would impact them. Tone squelching them wouldn't matter. If a digital signal comes across, it is still occupying that frequency causing the signals between the bubble pack radios to be diminished to the point where they wont be able to use them, just like I could take an analog radio and jam a digital signal if I am closer to their radio than the transmitting station. I am not saying this would happen all over the place, but with no coordination or the lack of studying who would get negatively impacted, someone out there would be out on their communications.

The other thing with digital is that it doesn't work as well as analog. I have been in so many situations where my signal either didn't get through, or it was so garbled no one could understand me. On analog, the other person could have at least heard me through the static. With digital, either you are there or you are not, there is no middle ground. Digital should be left to Ham radio, OR petition the FCC to create another GMRS like band. There are a lot of abandoned frequencies over the country ever since they rebanded things and many public safety agencies went up into the 700/800 MHz band. Personally, I would love the FCC to make those left behind frequencies available to those who want to play with them.

[WRQI583]

On 5/29/2023 at 2:04 PM, intermod said:

If I replaced my analog repeater with a digital one, how would that cause more interference that my analog repeater if my analog did not interfere today?  

The digital would interfere with the analog. It wouldn't cause more interference, just interference to those still running analog. We aren't talking about Ham radio or a specific licensed frequency assigned to only you. We are talking about 1/8 repeater pairs, of which can be use in simplex mode by licensed and unlicensed people. Now if everyone caught on and started making their repeaters digital, GMRS would be unusable in analog mode in many places.

[gortex2]

People complain about buying a quality GMRS radio. If tomorrow the FCC says yup you can use digital what are folks going to use. DMR has been huge in for years now and other than the CCR world none of the big three make a DMR ham rig. So this means CCR junk on GMRS.  Additionally same as ham if they don't specify a format folks will use whats suites them. For me P25 is the way to go. This just adds to the cluster. We can't get wideband/narrowband figured out on GMRS and folks want to add more complexity. 

 

[Lscott]

1 hour ago, gortex2 said:

People complain about buying a quality GMRS radio. If tomorrow the FCC says yup you can use digital what are folks going to use. DMR has been huge in for years now and other than the CCR world none of the big three make a DMR ham rig. So this means CCR junk on GMRS.  Additionally same as ham if they don't specify a format folks will use whats suites them. For me P25 is the way to go. This just adds to the cluster. We can't get wideband/narrowband figured out on GMRS and folks want to add more complexity. 

 

https://forums.mygmrs.com/topic/5720-new-repeater-channels-for-gmrs-in-2024/page/2/#comment-57605

 

[Sshannon]

2 hours ago, WRQI583 said:

I am not familiar with DMR and analog used on the same repeater. I know Yaesu Fusion has that capability and it is a nightmare. I have a bunch of Yaesu Fusion repeaters in my state, quite a few within range of me where they work better than some analog. I will not even program them in any radio because analog never gets used on them. They also happen to be linked together digitally, so when someone on another repeater wants to run digital decides to jump on and start talking to someone, they will walk right over me. I could just upgrade but I barely use the radio as it is, so a $400-$500 price tag for something I barely use is a bit much to choke on. I would hope a DMR/analog repeater doesn't behave the same way?

When it comes to the bubble pack radios, digital would impact them. Tone squelching them wouldn't matter. If a digital signal comes across, it is still occupying that frequency causing the signals between the bubble pack radios to be diminished to the point where they wont be able to use them, just like I could take an analog radio and jam a digital signal if I am closer to their radio than the transmitting station. I am not saying this would happen all over the place, but with no coordination or the lack of studying who would get negatively impacted, someone out there would be out on their communications.

The other thing with digital is that it doesn't work as well as analog. I have been in so many situations where my signal either didn't get through, or it was so garbled no one could understand me. On analog, the other person could have at least heard me through the static. With digital, either you are there or you are not, there is no middle ground. Digital should be left to Ham radio, OR petition the FCC to create another GMRS like band. There are a lot of abandoned frequencies over the country ever since they rebanded things and many public safety agencies went up into the 700/800 MHz band. Personally, I would love the FCC to make those left behind frequencies available to those who want to play with them.

Our local Hytera 70cm repeater is both DMR and analog.  It seems to work well.  The repeater give preference to analog communications. Our Monday  evening 2 meter net has moved to this repeater using 70 cm analog because our 2 meter Yaesu DR1 is locked up and the mountain top site is not accessible without a helicopter. People watching the mountain have noticed that avalanches have taken place.

It’s first come, first served, like any repeater. When people are using the repeater for analog both time slots of DMR are blocked. When people are using either time slot for DMR no analog transmissions can take place. Technically that’s probably not considered interference; it’s just the limitations of the technology. After all, when a person is on an analog repeater no other analog transmissions can take place either. The coordination that you mentioned is all of our responsibility; we should not hog the repeater. The vulnerability to being blocked is something that currently exists.  Changing to DMR would not change that.

My only objections to the OP’s initial post are that four DMR channels cannot fit into the space of one analog channel (only two can, but that’s still a benefit) and that using DMR is not a realistic preferential alternative for someone who finds learning enough to pass the technician test difficult. 

Currently emission type F1D, F3E, and F2D are all permitted (along with quite a few others). Two slot DMR can be done on F1D and F2D.  I’m not sure what part of the regulations make it prohibited to use DMR on GMRS frequencies now, but I suspect I just don’t recall the right paragraph.