Which would you prefer?

[WRYF747]

Edit: ok, I'm bad at this game. It was very dumb to ask. Don't even answer it.

I never said It should happen or I wanted it to happen or it was going to happen, just a fanatic scenario question. I also should've re-worded some things.

You're right, we don't need anything that crazy, though I would at least like a couple more channels personally.

I just wanted to experiment and see what would you GMRS/FRS users would think if those situations happened...though they probably wouldn't be as extreme.

This is not fixing either, this is an addition.

Edited January 16 by WRYF747

[OffRoaderX]

If I am going to waste my very valuable time dreaming and fantasizing, I prefer to do it over something that matters..  Like Taylor Swift washing my dishes while wearing a Minnie-Mouse costume.

[WRYF747]

I'm about to get grilled for this am I?

[WRYZ926]

There are plenty of threads on the forum about changing GMRS and adding digital, etc, etc. A lot of us do not want GMRS to be made more like amateur radio with all of the digital modes.

GMRS already is Wideband and we are allowed to have up to 50 watts on mobiles as it is now.

More changes would be nice but at what expense. The available frequencies/channels have to come from somewhere. Do we take away from other bands to increase GMRS?

 

I'll add that I prefer how GMRS is now. If I want to play with digital modes, I will use one of my amateur band radios.

[SteveShannon]

For a service that has a very limited number of frequencies and that is intended to be an easy way for friends and families to communicate with each other adding a bunch of crap like that is a non-starter. 
I disagree that “the people” are asking for either scenario you posted as #1 or #2.  Saying “the people” implies there’s consensus but there just isn’t. 
Very few people who use FRS even know about #1 or #2, much less ask for them and only a few of the more serious GMRS folks who have their toes also in ham radio or commercial radio continue to propose such things. 

[WRYZ926]

And there are more of us that have both amateur and GMRS licenses that don't want GMRS to turn into HAM Lite.

[WRQC527]

What's wrong with leaving FRS/GMRS as is? "Listening to the people" implies that there is a majority of the hundreds of thousands of FRS/GMRS folks out there who have come to the conclusion that FRS/GMRS is flawed because it doesn't include the scenarios you put forth. Does that majority exist?

[WRYZ926]

And here is my reply to the exact same question asked on the Radio Reference forum:

The FRS side is definitely just like CB full of foul language and bad behavior. The good thing is that FRS radios can not access GMRS repeaters. Around me the active GMRS users are pretty good since most also have their amateur licenses. It's bad enough that FRS and GMRS share the same simplex frequencies. The FCC messed up on that one.

And as mentioned, where are the extra frequencies/channels going to come from. Public safety and Amateur radio operators are not going to want to give up their frequencies for GMRS use.

GMRS frequencies - 462.5625 MHz - 467.7250MHz
70cm band - 420.0MHz - 450.0MHz
Public Safety UHF frequencies are generally between 450MHz and 520MHz

[WRXR360]

Your "poll" was OK by me. I am fairly certain my vote was counted correctly this time. Come November, I won't be so certain. 

[wrci350]

2 hours ago, WRYZ926 said:

The FRS side is definitely just like CB full of foul language and bad behavior. 

YMMV.

Here?  A few kids during school breaks, a daycare center that is using FRS radios, and once in a while a road crew using them for flag people.

[WRYZ926]

9 hours ago, wrci350 said:

YMMV.

Here?  A few kids during school breaks, a daycare center that is using FRS radios, and once in a while a road crew using them for flag people.

This is true. It also depends on time of year and local activities. FRS is worse around here during deer season. 

[Guest]

15 hours ago, OffRoaderX said:

If I am going to waste my very valuable time dreaming and fantasizing, I prefer to do it over something that matters..  Like Taylor Swift washing my dishes while wearing a Minnie-Mouse costume.

I am completely confused and surprised -- you, sir, clearly fooled me !!!

All this time, I had you down as a paper plate guy ... 

[ULTRA2]

I think we should put this issue to rest once in for all. NO DIGITAL ON GMRS!!!!

[SteveShannon]

28 minutes ago, ULTRA2 said:

I think we should put this issue to rest once in for all. NO DIGITAL ON GMRS!!!!

I’m sure that settles it once and for all.

It’s fair game to discuss. Eventually I suspect GMRS will go digital; I plan to resist until there’s a clear path. 

[DominoDog]

There is no quick, easy, simple fix for everything. GMRS is almost universally-agreed upon to be a mess with the FRS interaction. If we want to clean up GMRS then FRS will suffer. Personally, I say we remove FRS completely out of GMRS frequencies. GMRS then loses one of its voice channels to strictly APRS-like digital position reporting, etc but gains all of the FRS shared channels for its own use.

What do we do with FRS, then? If I were in charge, it would be merged with MURS. All the little blister-packs of FRS radios are hereby banned from manufacture. Those on store shelves can be sold and those out in the wild can be used, but no more can ever be made and none can be repaired. Once they're gone they're gone. We will just need to bite that bullet and deal with thirty years of FRS blister pack radios till they all naturally break or get lost, etc.

My suggestion is basically that we delete FRS. Anyone that doesn't want a license and doesn't want to fool with one can go buy MURS. The only issue was that we "already have so many FRS blister packs" to that I say we just need to rip the bandaid off and ban their manufacture and hope people just lose them or break them quickly.

I agree, there is nothing wrong with discussion.

There won't be a clear path. One will have to be forged and any direction anyone chooses will have others naysaying the whole decision. Look at Amateur radio, they can't even figure out their digital modes. There's Fusion, DStar, DMR, several others and apparently none of them play together well. Interoperability is not something humans do well. They don't do it at all without careful planning and only then if compelled by government to do so.

[Lscott]

25 minutes ago, Sshannon said:

I’m sure that settles it once and for all.

It’s fair game to discuss. Eventually I suspect GMRS will go digital; I plan to resist until there’s a clear path. 

By some reports it's already happening, unofficially. I guess FCC will have to deal with this sooner or later. One can either get on the bus, get run over by the bus, or just get the heck out of the way.

[SteveShannon]

14 minutes ago, DominoDog said:

Look at Amateur radio, they can't even figure out their digital modes. There's Fusion, DStar, DMR, several others and apparently none of them play together well. Interoperability is not something humans do well.

No reason exists to try to make them play well together. Ham radio promotes the ability to try many things, just for the sake of trying. 
But what’s learned there might affect decisions elsewhere. 

[UncleYoda]

3 hours ago, DominoDog said:

Personally, I say we remove FRS completely out of GMRS frequencies.

But that should have happened in the 2017 revamp.  I don't see FCC doing it now.

[kirk5056]

I believe that FRS/GMRS interoperability is a strong point for both services.  I use the same channel for a few groups.  Our Jeep group is all GMRS, the deer hunting group has mostly switched to GMRS, but not completely.  The group around my cottage (mostly golfcart-golfcart) is mostly FRS.

The fact that un-licensed people can legally communicate in each group is a good thing. At my cottage I have the channel NFM on my KG1000, KG905 and KG UV=9GX for the times that I dont use on of my FRS (very old Motorolas), I just have to remember to TX my FCC call sign.

If you have a problem with FRS on your channel then use a different channel or different PL filter.  If you are scanning all channels with no PL filter so that you will hear everything, then dont be surprised when you DO hear EVERYTHING.

[DominoDog]

Well it seems like the interoperability is more useful than I may have realized at first glance. That makes sense.

[Lscott]

12 hours ago, kirk5056 said:

The fact that un-licensed people can legally communicate in each group is a good thing. At my cottage I have the channel NFM on my KG1000, KG905 and KG UV=9GX for the times that I dont use on of my FRS (very old Motorolas), I just have to remember to TX my FCC call sign.

I have one zone on my commercial radios programed for narrow band specifically to communicate with FRS users too.

[ULTRA2]

On 1/16/2024 at 1:15 PM, DominoDog said:

Personally, I say we remove FRS completely out of GMRS frequencies

This wouldn't been an issue if the FCC knew what they were doing to GMRS by combining the 2 services together and see what a mess it caused, and now they want to put DMR on GMRS oh hell no!!!

[WRYC373]

5 hours ago, ULTRA2 said:

This wouldn't been an issue if the FCC knew what they were doing to GMRS by combining the 2 services together and see what a mess it caused, and now they want to put DMR on GMRS oh hell no!!!

FCC Messing up GMRS one rule revision a time. Heres the thing I think GMRS to FRS is very useful but there was a better way.

[SteveShannon]

16 hours ago, ULTRA2 said:

This wouldn't been an issue if the FCC knew what they were doing to GMRS by combining the 2 services together and see what a mess it caused, and now they want to put DMR on GMRS oh hell no!!!

This has nothing to do with what the FCC wants. Some guy proposed this. He’s a ham, but he doesn’t represent anyone other than himself. 

[WRYZ926]

This topic and similar ones have popped up on a few forums and the answer is pretty much the same each time. The majority of people do not want to see any changes to GMRS to include adding digital modes. As mentioned this one was proposed by a single person that wants to turn GMRS into HAM lite.