Linking GMRS Repeaters

[BoxCar]

20 hours ago, CentralFloridaGMRS said:

I'm working on getting my Ham now. I passed all the mock test. I know nothing about DMR however. 

Don't worry about knowing about DMR or any of the other modes for the ham tests until you reach the Extra level. DMR is not an easy protocol to program as there are 3 elements to sync for every contact you want to use.

[WRUE951]

1 hour ago, BoxCar said:

 DMR is not an easy protocol to program as there are 3 elements to sync for every contact you want to use.

programing is the easy part, getting the DMR info is more work..

[WRUE951]

43 minutes ago, WRUE951 said:

programing is the easy part, getting the DMR info is more work..

Funny..  All these people that brag of blocking me,  seep through the cracks.. They must love me..   Way to go SteveShannon..    

[SteveShannon]

2 hours ago, BoxCar said:

Don't worry about knowing about DMR or any of the other modes for the ham tests until you reach the Extra level. DMR is not an easy protocol to program as there are 3 elements to sync for every contact you want to use.

This is absolutely correct.  In traditional DMR programming you end up with a channel for every combination of talkgroup and repeater.  It’s not uncommon to have a hundred different channels for every repeater. Then, in order to use any channel it must be added to a zone.  It’s much, much easier in OpenGD77/OpenUV380.  You build talkgroup lists and then you simply associate each repeater to a talkgroup list.  Fortunately, extracts or even the entire database of talkgroups are very easily downloaded.

But as @BoxCar said you don’t need to know anything about how DMR works to take any of the ham exams.  If it’s even mentioned on the Extra exam I don’t remember it.  There might be a question about digital modes in general, but if you never learn anything about it you can still easily pass the test.

[BoxCar]

52 minutes ago, SteveShannon said:

But as @BoxCar said you don’t need to know anything about how DMR works to take any of the ham exams.  If it’s even mentioned on the Extra exam I don’t remember it.  There might be a question about digital modes in general, but if you never learn anything about it you can still easily pass the test.

The only protocols mentioned in the last expired EXTRA question pool were PACTOR and one other. Nothing about what they were or how they were formatted, just about what equipment was needed.

[WRUE951]

On 9/25/2024 at 11:03 AM, marcspaz said:

 

They're not outlaws... rule breakers at best, but no laws broken.

#3 will apply 

[marcspaz]

2 hours ago, WRUE951 said:

#3 will apply 

 

 

LOL...  I'm in trouble.

[WRUE951]

17 minutes ago, marcspaz said:

 

 

LOL...  I'm in trouble.

bad boy, bad boy, what you gonna doo....  

[devmrs]

Question: There are a couple of ways to setup a repeater. 1) Co-locate transmitter & receiver using a duplexer and a single antenna. 2)Separate the transmitter & receiver due to RF "pollution" at the transmitter site because of the number of the number of transmitters at the site. A repeater might even have multiple receiver sites due to terrain, etc. 

My question is, would a GMRS repeater that uses a remote receiver(s) be illegal? You would have internet audio being transmitted over the GMRS system. Are only co-located transmitter/receiver repeaters allowed on GMRS?

[gortex2]

10 hours ago, devmrs said:

My question is, would a GMRS repeater that uses a remote receiver(s) be illegal? You would have internet audio being transmitted over the GMRS system.

With the latest clarifications I believe it would be illegal. That is very similar to the system in NY that was up. My own GMRS system was setup with "voting" recievers to help hand helds. Its now just standalone. And mine was done to LMR standards and not internet linking like many. 

 

[WRXS592]

Please consider putting the link below on the MyGMRS website.

I encourage everyone to sign this petition.

https://www.change.org/p/demand-fcc-to-allow-all-network-connections-to-gmrs-repeaters-and-radios

Demand FCC to Allow All Network Connections to GMRS Repeaters and Radios

 

[AdmiralCochrane]

1 hour ago, WRXS592 said:

Please consider putting the link below on the MyGMRS website.

I encourage everyone to sign this petition.

https://www.change.org/p/demand-fcc-to-allow-all-network-connections-to-gmrs-repeaters-and-radios

Demand FCC to Allow All Network Connections to GMRS Repeaters and Radios

 

Once you propose how to prevent hogging all repeater channels I will sign.  Without the hogging limitation, this just solves one thing and presents a new problem in its place.  Ursula K. Le Guin's Lathe of Heaven

[WRUU653]

1 hour ago, WRXS592 said:

Please consider putting the link below on the MyGMRS website.

I encourage everyone to sign this petition.

https://www.change.org/p/demand-fcc-to-allow-all-network-connections-to-gmrs-repeaters-and-radios

Demand FCC to Allow All Network Connections to GMRS Repeaters and Radios

 

pass

[WRXL702]

PASS - Best Thing That Ever Recently Happened, Is That The FCC Mobility Division Clarified A Long Over Due Ruling On The Linking Of GMRS Repeater Stations......

Like It Or Not - GMRS Repeater Linking Is Only & Mostly Supported By Those With Small Roof Top Repeaters Wanting To Talk Distances, Those That Are Unable To Take Or Pass A Ham License Test, Or Repeater Owners Wanting To Engage In A "For Profit" GMRS Operation.

Time For All To Get Over This.......

[Woodspinner]

No thank you !  Ham radio has everything you are looking for. No need to change the intended use of GMRS.

The ham test for tech is very easy.

WRKL858/KK4THK

[CaptainSarcastic]

[DONE]

On 10/5/2024 at 4:56 PM, AdmiralCochrane said:

Once you propose how to prevent hogging all repeater channels I will sign.  Without the hogging limitation, this just solves one thing and presents a new problem in its place.  Ursula K. Le Guin's Lathe of Heaven

Actually I have, multiple times.  It's just htat no one actually listens to what anyone is saying on this topic because they have some preconceived notion that it's just more of the same.  And in truth, much of it is. 

Go back and look at my posts about NOT having more than one repeater that's linked to a system in any given operating area.  Read the part about a requirement that ANY linked repeater owner MUST insure that a non-linked repeater with similar coverage footprint must exist where they have a linked repeater. While that is a certainty that 2 pairs will be consumed, it also ensures that a local repeater will exist for the locals to use that's not just some garage repeater with a 40 foot high antenna while the linked repeater covers 4 counties.  And part of that requirement is the local repeater should have similar or greater public access. 

The interference thing is simple enough to deal with.  Receivers at the transmit sites of the linked repeaters keeping them from transmitting if the frequency is in use locally.  Simple enough to do.

 

My take is to build it better, not just toss something on the air and hide behind the 'equal use' regulations about repeater frequencies. 

But I agree, it can't be 3 or 4 repeaters in a single area on different frequencies all linked together.

Hell I even put in that the only way to do infill for coverage is true simulcast transmit on a single frequency, or don't do it at all.  But, that's not gonna happen either.  None of the linking will come back.... you have a better chance of winning the lottery than seeing the FCC change it's tune on this.

 

And for the record.  I never ask for a DIME to access any of my repeaters, linked or otherwise.  And argued the point with others about charging.  SO that don't fly with me either.

 

 

[DONE]

On 10/5/2024 at 5:50 PM, Woodspinner said:

No thank you !  Ham radio has everything you are looking for. No need to change the intended use of GMRS.

The ham test for tech is very easy.

WRKL858/KK4THK

Except people to talk to.  The FM bands are dead.

 

[LeeBo]

9 hours ago, WRKC935 said:

Except people to talk to.  The FM bands are dead.

 

Maybe where you are. Here in Upstate SC they are non stop.

[SteveShannon]

1 hour ago, LeeBo said:

Maybe where you are. Here in Upstate SC they are non stop.

I agree that’s based on location.  In my area we don’t even have a GMRS repeater yet.  There are ham repeaters in almost every town bigger than 10,000 people.  Looking at repeaterbook there are 160 amateur repeaters in Montana and only 8 GMRS repeaters.  MyGMRS lists 10 repeaters for Montana, but that’s still 16 times as many amateur repeaters.  I realize wrkc935 was comparing traffic, rather than numbers of repeaters, but without repeaters, there is no traffic.

[LeeBo]

I agree that’s based on location.  In my area we don’t even have a GMRS repeater yet.  There are ham repeaters in almost every town bigger than 10,000 people.  Looking at repeaterbook there are 160 amateur repeaters in Montana and only 8 GMRS repeaters.  MyGMRS lists 10 repeaters for Montana, but that’s still 16 times as many amateur repeaters.  I realize wrkc935 was comparing traffic, rather than numbers of repeaters, but without repeaters, there is no traffic.

Absolutely right. Here we have an upstate SC GMRS group that consists of 5 repeaters, two of which I can hit from my front porch with an HT, and the third I have to be using the mobile unit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[gortex2]

I can hit 4 repeaters (HAM) from my house. I scan all of them. I rarely hear anything on them. One of them has some net one night. The one in my county never has anyone on it. Its litterly dead. 

[AdmiralCochrane]

I can hit more than a dozen repeaters from my house.  Might be able to do 8 or 9 with an HT.

[AdmiralCochrane]

22 hours ago, WRKC935 said:

Actually I have, multiple times.  It's just htat no one actually listens to what anyone is saying on this topic because they have some preconceived notion that it's just more of the same.  And in truth, much of it is. 

Go back and look at my posts about NOT having more than one repeater that's linked to a system in any given operating area.  Read the part about a requirement that ANY linked repeater owner MUST insure that a non-linked repeater with similar coverage footprint must exist where they have a linked repeater. While that is a certainty that 2 pairs will be consumed, it also ensures that a local repeater will exist for the locals to use that's not just some garage repeater with a 40 foot high antenna while the linked repeater covers 4 counties.  And part of that requirement is the local repeater should have similar or greater public access. 

The interference thing is simple enough to deal with.  Receivers at the transmit sites of the linked repeaters keeping them from transmitting if the frequency is in use locally.  Simple enough to do.

 

My take is to build it better, not just toss something on the air and hide behind the 'equal use' regulations about repeater frequencies. 

But I agree, it can't be 3 or 4 repeaters in a single area on different frequencies all linked together.

Hell I even put in that the only way to do infill for coverage is true simulcast transmit on a single frequency, or don't do it at all.  But, that's not gonna happen either.  None of the linking will come back.... you have a better chance of winning the lottery than seeing the FCC change it's tune on this.

 

And for the record.  I never ask for a DIME to access any of my repeaters, linked or otherwise.  And argued the point with others about charging.  SO that don't fly with me either.

 

 

I missed the part about repeater coordination and who gets dibs on 2 channels in each locale

[WRQD922]

On 10/6/2024 at 10:25 PM, WRKC935 said:

Except people to talk to.  The FM bands are dead.

 

You have the power to change that. Getting a ham ticket is easier now then ever. Take the plunge you’ll be happy you did.