• To anyone looking to acquire commercial radio programming software:

    Please do not make requests for copies of radio programming software which is sold (or was sold) by the manufacturer for any monetary value. All requests will be deleted and a forum infraction issued. Making a request such as this is attempting to engage in software piracy and this forum cannot be involved or associated with this activity. The same goes for any private transaction via Private Message. Even if you attempt to engage in this activity in PM's we will still enforce the forum rules. Your PM's are not private and the administration has the right to read them if there's a hint to criminal activity.

    If you are having trouble legally obtaining software please state so. We do not want any hurt feelings when your vague post is mistaken for a free request. It is YOUR responsibility to properly word your request.

    To obtain Motorola software see the Sticky in the Motorola forum.

    The various other vendors often permit their dealers to sell the software online (i.e., Kenwood). Please use Google or some other search engine to find a dealer that sells the software. Typically each series or individual radio requires its own software package. Often the Kenwood software is less than $100 so don't be a cheapskate; just purchase it.

    For M/A Com/Harris/GE, etc: there are two software packages that program all current and past radios. One package is for conventional programming and the other for trunked programming. The trunked package is in upwards of $2,500. The conventional package is more reasonable though is still several hundred dollars. The benefit is you do not need multiple versions for each radio (unlike Motorola).

    This is a large and very visible forum. We cannot jeopardize the ability to provide the RadioReference services by allowing this activity to occur. Please respect this.

"Fixing GMRS" - an Editorial (AKA everyone's GMRS ideas go here)

russbrill

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 5, 2020
Messages
258
Location
Sacramento, CA
This band plan proposal will get the FCC smack down any day of the week. You must provide a reasonable explanation to the FCC on why your proposed changes would benefit current users as well as benefit the Govt. Just the fact that they would have to change all of the Code of Federal Regulations from GMRS to CRS will kill it. What would be the benefit to me, a current licensed GMRS user, if this plan was implemented? P.S. Highway Chat Channel PL/DPL not allowed ROTFLMAO
Okay, keep laughing... I do have some reasoning for the new service, reasoning I'm not going to argue about for another 150+ posts, but I do have an argument for the new service..
 

tweiss3

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Apr 24, 2020
Messages
65
Location
Ohio
I am not for Fixing GMRS, I'm for Flushing it and FRS.. The tittle of the thread is a little misleading...
The thing you don't get is you can't just flush a commercial system. As stated previously in this thread, there are 67,899 people that paid for this fixed group of spectrum to work within this fixed set of rules. Are you going to convince the FCC to refund that $4.7 million in license fees to scrap the system?

GMRS is not like ham at all. Close one frequency in ham, they can move on as they please to another frequency, because they have such a wide range of frequencies to choose from. GMRS has a fixed set of frequencies.

There are 1701 listed repeaters (I bet including unlisted, that number more than doubles), with some of those being in the listed 187 linked repeater groups. Is the FCC going to buy back those station equipment at $5,000-20,000 each?

You need to let go of the scrapping GMRS. FRS and bubble packs can be a pain, but I don't even look at those channels. If I did need to use those channels, 5W will easily overpower the 0.5W bubble pack crap, so my communication won't be interrupted.

If you want to discuss going narrow-band to double the frequencies available, lets talk. I'm not in favor of it, but its something we can talk about. Heck, if you want to talk about going digital, I'd be willing to talk. As stated, there would need to be a type chosen by the FCC, because a free for all would cause more issues than going digital would fix. Other ideas that would improve GMRS, lets discuss them, but the idea of scrapping GMRS, or cutting it in half in favor of something else is not something that should be discussed, just let it go.
 

AORradiofan

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Oct 27, 2007
Messages
266
Location
East Coast
Okay, keep laughing... I do have some reasoning for the new service, reasoning I'm not going to argue about for another 150+ posts, but I do have an argument for the new service..
I'm not looking to argue. I just would like to know how you think established GMRS repeaters with many licensed operators will just fold so you can have your simplex highway chit chat channel.
 

bill4long

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Aug 6, 2012
Messages
1,031
Location
Indiana
I'm not looking to argue. I just would like to know how you think established GMRS repeaters with many licensed operators will just fold so you can have your simplex highway chit chat channel.
I wouldn't get worked up about it. Any such proposal would go right into the circular file at the FCC.
This is all just verbal m********n, if I may be so indelicate. (<--- I censored myself there.)
 

mmckenna

I ♥ Ø
Joined
Jul 27, 2005
Messages
12,882
Location
SNCZCA01DS0
Okay, keep laughing... I do have some reasoning for the new service, reasoning I'm not going to argue about for another 150+ posts, but I do have an argument for the new service..
If we promise not to laugh, would you let us in on whatever secret is destroying GMRS?

Seriously, it's been asked many times, what part of GMRS is broken that needs to be fixed?
 

W8UU

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Nov 22, 2007
Messages
121
Location
Wellston Ohio USA
I don't believe GMRS is broken. As others have mentioned, the service is unique and fills the need of at least a hundred thousand (licensed and unlicensed) users.

What could make it better?
  • Move FRS radios elsewhere
  • Have a specific FCC database and frequency coordination for repeaters
  • Clarify by rule that Part 90 type accepted UHF radios that can operate in wideband mode and with (=/-) 50 watts be automatically considered Part 95 compliant
None of those are deal-breakers. None would infringe on current licensees (assuming existing active repeaters would be grandfathered). Moving the FRS crapola elsewhere would eliminate a lot of low level interference. And the Part 90 thing might encourage other manufacturers to market existing LMR products to GMRS users since the added cost of getting a second type acceptance approval is no longer needed. This helps with the complaint about Midland and the CCR radios being the only game in town for new equipment.

No need to start a war over this stuff. We're just a bunch of GMRS users who want what's best for the service but have different opinions about what, if anything, needs done.
 

willjr75

Simplex Kid
Joined
Dec 10, 2015
Messages
53
You must have missed the literally dozens of threads he has opened on the exact same subject. You would literally open this forum and there were 6 different threads with exactly the same thing. Then the CB forum was involved. It's just silly and ridiculous. The information is fine, it's just that he opens tons of threads on the same thing, and then hijacks everybody else's threads with his BS.

This is a HOBBYIST forum. Nobody here to my knowledge works for the FCC in any sort of capacity to make legislative changes. The place for all these stupid proposals is with the FCC. He has been told that over and over and over again, yet he continues to bring these proposals here. What he needs to do is take them to the FCC, and they need to tell him to go pound sound, which is exactly what they will do.
So what? I guess other issues on this forum of wishes and wants should be scrapped as well?
 

alcahuete

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jul 24, 2015
Messages
972
Location
Antelope Acres, California
So what? I guess other issues on this forum of wishes and wants should be scrapped as well?
Of course not. But the other people are not opening dozens of threads and hijacking everyone else's threads with such ideas. And instead of continuing with his initial thread, he just keeps opening more and more on the EXACT same thing. I can't even tell you how many threads he has created and hijacked with his plans, because the moderators have moved/locked/deleted so many.

He does the same thing on other forums as well, until the users and moderators send him packing.
 
Top