Considerations about linking GMRS repeaters.

[mmckenna]

That's exactly what my clients are doing now with GMRS. Out here even CB is somewhat usable as long as you stay away from 19.

With young impressionable children, CB just became a non-option after a while. GMRS with a PL tone made life much easier. I can clearly remember the last time we used CB as a family. Some individual deciding that the channel we were using was his, and he was going to cuss us out every time we transmitted. Changing channels didn't make a difference.
Leaving CB to the lowest common denominator was a good choice, and I never looked back.

 

[RFI-EMI-GUY]

License by rule will kill 50 watt GMRS entirely. It becomes radio for dummies. This means the FCC will then look at the MPE/SAR as being GENERAL POPULATION / UNCONTROLLED EXPOSURE. This results in a much lower ERP from the radio. Essentially 2 watts ERP. When licensed, it is presumed to be an OCCUPATIONAL radio used by knowledgeble people like us idiots, so we can use 50 Watts TPO, gain antennas etc. .

 

[smittie]

I still use CB on the highway but turn it off when transiting any kind of urban areas. The main motivation for CB is the fact that some of the people I going off-roading with still use it.
In a lot of off-road groups I am the comm fusion cell; CB, GMRS and VHF itinerant.

 

[smittie]

License by rule will kill 50 watt GMRS entirely. It becomes radio for dummies.

God bless Grandfather.

Not that it will really make a difference. People will continue to buy Part 90 radios as they do now. Same as using 10 and 11 meter radios on CB service.

 

[mmckenna]

I think the FCC neutering GMRS is a real possibility, but I don't think its going to happen any time soon.

The FCC recently (last 5 years) went through and revisited all the GMRS rules and redid everything, they did specifically look at license by rule, reduced power, and generally making it an extension of FRS. I doubt they'll be willing to tackle it again in the near future. Just too much else on their plate to bother with it for a while. No one is complaining (currently) and I doubt Midland would stand for someone infringing on their cash cow for a while.

 

[KB0VWG]

Well Hams are idiots. You don't see many GMRS hot spots.

You Might want to re think what you said, There are Gmrs hotspots also just open your eyes

 

[RFI-EMI-GUY]

You Might want to re think what you said, There are Gmrs hotspots also just open your eyes

Not many, a couple dozen or so.

 

[bill4long]

Here's one thing I'll add,

When you're on your death-bed, something tells me you won't give a crap about GMRS.

Word to the wise.

 

[RFI-EMI-GUY]

Here's one thing I'll add,

When you're on your death-bed, something tells me you won't give a crap about GMRS.

Word to the wise.

Here I am very sick today and I read this!

 

[pandel]

Rules?
I already hear guys bragging about running 100+ watts on one of the local GMRS repeaters and talking about working 20 meters. I didn't know Technicians had voice privileges on 20 or that you could run over 50 watts on GMRS.
You learn something new every day.

 

[mlidikay]

I have given up on comments as these seem to be a done deal whenever those /\/\anufacturers have wined and dined in Gettysburg. I tried to stir up some consensus when MRA was asking FCC to give them the first and last 4 KHz of both Part 95 GMRS blocks but was met with resistance, from surprisingly GMRS old guard folks, "oh that's just guard band, surely if they interfere I can tell FCC I was there first". MRA tried this first with the 450 MHz Part 74 broadcast RPU band and the FCC rightfully told them that they could not pass over from Part 90 to Part 74. But then when they asked to do same the Part 95, it was like, sure give it a whirl.

Has there been a problem? I am not aware of any being reported.

 

[bill4long]

Here I am very sick today and I read this!

twoops - get well soon

 

[Craigmoe]

Here's one thing I'll add,

When you're on your death-bed, something tells me you won't give a crap about GMRS.

Word to the wise.

Inappropriate...

 

[RFI-EMI-GUY]

twoops - get well soon

Thanks.

 

[Echo4Thirty]

Agree with you @RFI-EMI-GUY . Licenses will keep the service alive.

Licenses didnt prevent 27 MHz CB going to License By Rule.

 

[RFI-EMI-GUY]

Licenses didnt prevent 27 MHz CB going to License By Rule.

The LACK of licenses is what caused FCC to go license by rule. During the oil crisis zillions of CB radios were sold, were mostly unlicensed, and there was a lot of abuse. FCC could not contain it.

 

[mmckenna]

Licensing alone isn't enough.

Look at MURS. I think the issue there was that every home depot sold Motorola Spirit radios either on VHF or UHF and any random dude off the street could now buy them. Most didn't bother with the license. FCC realized there were so many unlicensed users that there was no way to fix it. CB was the same thing, anyone could buy a CB radio at Radio Shack, auto parts store, JC Penneys, Sears, etc. Got to the point that most didn't bother with licensing.

My surprise is that the FCC hasn't "MURS'ified" the UHF itinerant channels, also.

 

[smittie]

Much like CB licensing in the late '70s, GMRS licensing is not enforceable. It's an honor system. A shared frequency/channel system with FRS which does not require a license makes GMRS licensing even more unenforceable.

Out here in the hinderland, MURS is actually pretty good, pretty usable. No one uses it because no one knows about it.

 

[gman4661]

Regarding the original topic, linking GMRS repeaters:

Recently, we lost power for about 8 hours one evening due to a weather event. I decided to scan some freqs with my CCR which I use only as a basic handheld scanner. Almost all of the GMRS freqs were transmitting the same very long-winded conversation. I realized that the the source was probably a very large, well known GMRS network which apparently has linked repeaters. Their nearest repeater is about 80 air miles from me, yet I was hearing identical transmissions on most of the GMRS freqs. I understand that weather was the biggest factor, but it did seem that the GMRS network was monopolizing the airwaves over a large geographical area.

I had always thought of GMRS as a somewhat local means of communicating with people, not folks a couple hundred miles away. If it was one freq blasting across the state, maybe that would be OK. Tying up several (numerous?) repeaters is very different. If my understanding of this is not correct, please enlighten me.

 

[RFI-EMI-GUY]

Regarding the original topic, linking GMRS repeaters:

Recently, we lost power for about 8 hours one evening due to a weather event. I decided to scan some freqs with my CCR which I use only as a basic handheld scanner. Almost all of the GMRS freqs were transmitting the same very long-winded conversation. I realized that the the source was probably a very large, well known GMRS network which apparently has linked repeaters. Their nearest repeater is about 80 air miles from me, yet I was hearing identical transmissions on most of the GMRS freqs. I understand that weather was the biggest factor, but it did seem that the GMRS network was monopolizing the airwaves over a large geographical area.

I had always thought of GMRS as a somewhat local means of communicating with people, not folks a couple hundred miles away. If it was one freq blasting across the state, maybe that would be OK. Tying up several (numerous?) repeaters is very different. If my understanding of this is not correct, please enlighten me.

Playing devils advocate here. Lets say that you or family were out during this weather event and had car trouble in some desolate spot (no phone coverage), would it not be a miracle if you could reach out on GMRS and contact someone via the nearest of those linked systems? If not for some folks using ingenuity and plenty of money from own pockets, these repeaters would not exist.