Is FCC considering Digital on part of the GMRS band

[WRUE951]

Listening in on PAPA late last night and two ham guys were talking about the FCC considering splitting up the GMRS band, allowing Ch's 1-7 for digital service..  I knew it was just a mater of time. I personalty think they should consider 1-14 and allocate 7-14 for digital repeater use..   What ya think?  

[OffRoaderX]

I think that just because two ham guys were talking about it does not mean it is true or accurate, but assuming it is, just because the FCC is considering it does not mean it will ever happen, and if it does ever happen, it will likely take years before it is approved.  

 

[Sshannon]

20 minutes ago, WRUE951 said:

Listening in on PAPA late last night and two ham guys were talking about the FCC considering splitting up the GMRS band, allowing Ch's 1-7 for digital service..  I knew it was just a mater of time. I personalty think they should consider 1-14 and allocate 7-14 for digital repeater use..   What ya think?  

Unless the guys discussing it were actually from the FCC, it’s probably speculation. Regardless, I would be against it.  There are a whole bunch of unlicensed people out there who enjoy those frequencies for FRS..Taking nearly a third of the available frequencies for digital service would be bad enough; taking nearly two thirds for digital repeater use only leaves the eight channels that are available for analog repeaters now, effectively ruining the entire service for analog users when all those people are displaced from the first 14 channels to the upper 8 (15-23)

[kidphc]

Probably won't. I you want digital get an amateur ticket. The way the FCC acts, gmrs is a stepping stone into the amateur world.

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

[WRUU653]

I don’t see this happening if for no other reason it takes an act of congress to get the FCC to do something. 

[kidphc]

I don’t see this happening if for no other reason it takes an

to get the FCC to do something. 

Or $$$..

Mananafacturers pushed for FM on cb and digital in the GMRS world.

FCC appeased both (especially by limitting digital and giving it at the same time), wonder who got the pay off.

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

[WRYU400]

I would support digital voice on every GMRS channel for simplex use as it extends range and readability but not for repeaters. FCC should limit which digital voice modes could be used such as C4FM/FDMA. Using DMR/TDMA would be so confusing to GMRS users. This is just wishful thinking. I mean look how long it took for CB to get FM approved.
Fun topic though.


Sent using Tapatalk

[WRQC527]

47 minutes ago, WRUE951 said:

two ham guys were talking about the FCC

That right there is a red flag. I've heard reams of nonsense about the FCC being discussed by my ham contemporaries. 

[WRUE951]

I like the idea of digital repeaters on GMRS..  Just the ability to set up talk groups, i.e. family & friends makes sense..  Also getting more use out of the GMRS spectrum is a big plus.  I would/will support it.   

[radiozip]

Has there been any real push from manufacturers? FM on CB happened since those radios exist in other countries, DMR on FRS and/or GMRS doesn’t seem too far fetched. That said I don’t see it happening anytime soon. I think keeping GMRS/FRS “simple” is part of the service’s charm, get a family license with 22 channels (8 repeater) to easily use. 

[kidphc]

Has there been any real push from manufacturers? FM on CB happened since those radios exist in other countries, DMR on FRS and/or GMRS doesn’t seem too far fetched. That said I don’t see it happening anytime soon. I think keeping GMRS/FRS “simple” is part of the service’s charm, get a family license with 22 channels (8 repeater) to easily use. 

My question is who would manage the talkgroups and networks? The manafacturers?

Every family or group would want their own talk groups. Unfortunately, with gmrs/frs there are only so many carrier frequencies available.

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

[WRKC935]

Well, I am going to invite you to go back through my posts on the topic and consider my thoughts.  I certainly ain't typing all that again, other than say be careful what you wish for.  People that don't understand how TDMA / MOTOTRBO / DMR works are all wanting that technology so they can have twice the channels.  They don't know, don't understand or don't care about the interference issue it will create. 

[kidphc]

Well, I am going to invite you to go back through my posts on the topic and consider my thoughts.  I certainly ain't typing all that again, other than say be careful what you wish for.  People that don't understand how TDMA / MOTOTRBO / DMR works are all wanting that technology so they can have twice the channels.  They don't know, don't understand or don't care about the interference issue it will create. 

Going to have to read up, but not tonight.

It's in the amateur/lmr/public safety world for a good reason. At least with those groups it has admins, for good reason.

Local p25 repeater got replaced with a dmr capable repeater. It was down grade (older repeater unit) so it could run a fn pi unit to handle dmr traffic. Pissed a lot of us off. Since, now I have to reprogram 6 of my radios with useless talkgroups to use p25. Only work around we could find, adding 6 p25 local talkgroup to each radio. Complete bs... still isn't being used for dmr.



Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

[Flameout]

There's a guy in my area that was testing DMR on a GMRS frequency. He supposedly had an experimental license from the FCC. This was a month or so ago and I haven't heard much more about it, so maybe it fizzled out

 

 

[WRKC935]

5 minutes ago, Flameout said:

There's a guy in my area that was testing DMR on a GMRS frequency. He supposedly had an experimental license from the FCC. This was a month or so ago and I haven't heard much more about it, so maybe it fizzled out

 

 

I work for a Motorola service shop. So I work with TRBO/DMR a TON. 

I will say this.  It works on ham because early on someone created a management system and database for it.  They assign ID's and GroupCall (talkgroup) numbers and keep the thing going with some measure of organization.  If it wasn't for those folks, it would have failed miserably. 

D-Star uses ham calls as the ID, so there is nothing to 'assign'.  While GMRS users also have call signs, DMR uses a decimal number for the radio ID and someone would need to create a database for that.  Coupled with the fact that Motorola radio's at least only allow ONE ID for the radio, if you tried to operate on say the Midwest link. If New York is doing their own thing, we couldn't link them with DMR since there could be duplicate ID's.

"expermenting' on GMRS with DMR is NOT going to tell the whole story.  Having a single repeater running two talk paths and otherwise disconnected isn't going to pose much of a issue for experimenting with it.  The problems show up when folks travel, or link multiple repeaters.

 

[WRYU400]

I work for a Motorola service shop. So I work with TRBO/DMR a TON. 
I will say this.

How would DMR work on GMRS for simplex only? Would C4FM be a better option? Just program call sign and select digital modes DN or VW and no networks, databases or talk groups needed. C4FM would not allow two time slots though.


Sent using Tapatalk

[radiozip]

3 hours ago, kidphc said:

My question is who would manage the talkgroups and networks? The manafacturers?

Every family or group would want their own talk groups. Unfortunately, with gmrs/frs there are only so many carrier frequencies available.

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk
 

Only existing example I can think of is PMR446 in the EU.

[WRKC935]

31 minutes ago, WRYU400 said:

How would DMR work on GMRS for simplex only? Would C4FM be a better option? Just program call sign and select digital modes DN or VW and no networks, databases or talk groups needed. C4FM would not allow two time slots though.


Sent using Tapatalk

For simplex it would extend the talk distance a bit,  outside that it's not going to be much different.

C4FM is better in my opinion in all cases.  But I am biased.

For the cheap DMR radios, yes they would communicate without the additional configuration like TG's and such.  The Motorola radios 100% require that stuff to be configured or they will not even transmit

 

[WRYU400]

I am biased for C4FM (YSF specifically) as well. Especially the error correction in digital narrow mode. I used to run a simplex net on 2 meters. I’d have stations beacon in GM mode to get checked in early. GM mode beacons your call every 15 seconds and displays calls received. It worked really well. GMRS could use something like that since it’s UHF only.
Thanks for the reply.


Sent using Tapatalk

[Lscott]

15 hours ago, WRUE951 said:

Listening in on PAPA late last night and two ham guys were talking about the FCC considering splitting up the GMRS band, allowing Ch's 1-7 for digital service..  I knew it was just a mater of time. I personalty think they should consider 1-14 and allocate 7-14 for digital repeater use..   What ya think?  

I’ve posted this a few times before.

 

GMRS Digital Voice - 20221011.pdf

[Lscott]

7 hours ago, WRKC935 said:

Coupled with the fact that Motorola radio's at least only allow ONE ID for the radio,

That is a pain.
 

However the few Kenwood NX-1300DUK5 radios I have allow me to assign a different radio ID per zone, and the radio can have up-to 128 zones. I can have different ID’s all dependent on what I need to do. The radios I have are the 400-470MHz band split. I can program in Ham repeaters in their own zones with my registered Ham DMR ID, and Part 90 frequencies, if necessary, with different ID’s in other zones without having to reprogram the radio. Very convenient.

I haven’t run across another manufacturer’s models, outside of the new Kenwood ones, that allow this. Likely they exist, just I have seen any.