GMRS repeater linking and the FCC

[bill4long]

Given that someone with a Technician class amateur radio license could put up a repeater with a power output of 1500 watts as well as all kinds of linking features, maybe it's a good thing that some can't pass the test.

Edited to add that amateur radio repeaters do not have the same height above ground limitations that GMRS stations have.

Hehe. But what shall the stupid do?

 

[prcguy]

Hehe. But what shall the stupid do?

Link um, of course!

 

[KV4BL]

A petition? What exactly is there to petition? That there are only 8 repeater pairs and we whackers want to hoard them all leaving all the simplex/other repeater users with major interference?

There is a technical reason to this. These people need to find a different hobby, like the ham band most of them are already licensed for.

To challenge the petition by the twerp who wants to change GMRS to a linking free-for-all. Show the FCC that we support what they are trying to do.

 

[prcguy]

To challenge the petition by the twerp who wants to change GMRS to a linking free-for-all. Show the FCC that we support what they are trying to do.

This should be the opening statement of your petition. Go for it!

 

[RFI-EMI-GUY]

To challenge the petition by the twerp who wants to change GMRS to a linking free-for-all. Show the FCC that we support what they are trying to do.

Geez this is so silly. Do I need to get out the GMRS doll once again? Show the nice lady where the Linking GMRS repeaters hurt you.

 

[KV4BL]

Geez this is so silly. Do I need to get out the GMRS doll once again? Show the nice lady where the Linking GMRS repeaters hurt you.

Hopefully, you aren't really that oblivious. It is a waste of precious spectrum for 50w simplex and repeater channels (only eight, the same eight), as well as annoying having to listen to meaningless jabber 75 miles to thousands of miles away on a pair you would be able to use if not for the linking.

 

[MTS2000des]

Geez this is so silly. Do I need to get out the GMRS doll once again? Show the nice lady where the Linking GMRS repeaters hurt you.

The classic "victimless crime" straw man argument. By that logic, why have rules at all? Do away with it all and let's just have total anarchy. Oh wait, we pretty much do when enforcement is lacking.

It's been explained that GMRS isn't the appropriate service for wide area high capacity systems with only 8 channels. Heck my P25 trunking system has only 12 channels and that's for one county, with TDMA we're golden, with FDMA we get 80-90 percent loading. GMRS is a shared service which by rules means everyone has to share. Hard to accomplish when a single entity locks up all 8 pairs for hundreds of square miles.

 

[N4GEX]

For a couple of days now I've been monitoring the local linked repeater that I mentioned in a previous post, and all activity except for hourly automated ID'ing has dried up. I think the operator must've pulled the plug on the link. Makes me wonder if the repeater itself will stay up much longer. This area already had a non-linked GMRS repeater providing excellent coverage when the linked one came up a couple of months ago. Most of the locals here use the former one.

 

[AK9R]

If they refuse to take the test, then that is self inflicted and they suffer the consequences.

Interesting comments about amateur radio in one GMRS Facebook group.

"SCREW HAM"
"If it's so typical why are you here then .Uou already know it all .Go back to your bacon channels ham man."
"He’s got his Tech license now he’s an expert"

But, then, I noticed this one particularly cogent comment about GMRS repeater linking not being allowed:
"this particular rule becomes more important in time, so calling it antiquated does not support your end goal. GMRS has always been for 'short distance, two way communications.' GMRS was actually expanded in 2017 to allow for data transfer. The problem with linking is that there are so few repeater pairs available that linking will inevitably cause interference the bigger linked systems grow and/or limit the ability for individuals to have their own local repeater, which is allowed by rule."

Also, with regard to GMRS groups collecting (extorting ?) "dues" in order to get access to a linked system, one linked system owner said:
"you paid for the club access to the repeaters. Nobody said anything about linking repeaters." Another user commented "the whole point of [the GMRS group] was linking." That was followed with "Ask for a refund you paid for a service that can't be done legally." Yet another user has pointed out that there were something like 4000 members of this GMRS group. At $25 each, that would be $100,000 that the group took in.

 

[AK9R]

Link um, of course!

Can I use Steak-umms to link um?

 

[cavmedic]

I've asked this dozens of times and never get a logical answer. Just write it off to sad hams who don't feel "elite" enough using part 97 and want more "respect" in the whacker/prepper community and less crap about charging "membership fees" to access their illegal, frequency hogging gas bag network of repeaters. Maybe they can't get proper coordination on part 97? I know that can't be the case here in Georgia. There are plenty of pairs and paper repeaters as well as "real" part 97 repeaters in prominent locations that sit silent for days. Talk about sad.

The fact that a solid 85 percent of these folks implementing these systems and utilizing them are hams really makes a sad statement about the future of the amateur radio service. To see mission statements of GMRS organizations proclaiming themselves as "radio hobbyists" really shows the disconnect and misunderstanding about the basis and purpose of GMRS as a radio service.

You realize that in the same paragraph that the FCC wrote about linking, they said radio hobbiest in the description off GMRS.

 

[MTS2000des]

You realize that in the same paragraph that the FCC wrote about linking, they said radio hobbiest in the description off GMRS.

None of this translates to linking being unauthorized. GMRS. As far as the hobby use, just like traditional citizens band radio on 27MHz, has been practiced as a hobby for over 5 decades or more nowhere is it stated in the rules that the basis and purpose of the service is a hobby. For that matter, part 97 never uses the word "hobby" but many people utilize part 97 radio operation as a hobby. The difference is that amateurs respect the rules (for the most part).

 

[Wicho]

No repeaters, but I now love my DTR700 radios and the lack of interference even more.

 

[cavmedic]

None of this translates to linking being unauthorized. GMRS. As far as the hobby use, just like traditional citizens band radio on 27MHz, has been practiced as a hobby for over 5 decades or more nowhere is it stated in the rules that the basis and purpose of the service is a hobby. For that matter, part 97 never uses the word "hobby" but many people utilize part 97 radio operation as a hobby. The difference is that amateurs respect the rules (for the most part).

You are missing the point. You are gripping onto the paragraph that says no linking and taking that as the gospel, but completely ignoring the same paragraph saying it is hobbies and complaining about it being used as such.

My question is this, do YOU use GMRS?

 

[RFI-EMI-GUY]

The classic "victimless crime" straw man argument. By that logic, why have rules at all? Do away with it all and let's just have total anarchy. Oh wait, we pretty much do when enforcement is lacking.

It's been explained that GMRS isn't the appropriate service for wide area high capacity systems with only 8 channels. Heck my P25 trunking system has only 12 channels and that's for one county, with TDMA we're golden, with FDMA we get 80-90 percent loading. GMRS is a shared service which by rules means everyone has to share. Hard to accomplish when a single entity locks up all 8 pairs for hundreds of square miles.

So you are admitting you are not a victim. You are just vocal about linking because it offends your "technological sensibilities". The co-channel issue can be mitigated by simple CSQ activity timer on repeater RX and transmitter lock timer out added to the linked repeater. This is a proven technology and done in Part 90.

 

[RFI-EMI-GUY]

You are missing the point. You are gripping onto the paragraph that says no linking and taking that as the gospel, but completely ignoring the same paragraph saying it is hobbies and complaining about it being used as such.

My question is this, do YOU use GMRS?

That is so funny that the FCC included "hobbyist" in the "approved" activities. That must be getting those Sad Hammy's all riled up.

 

[cavmedic]

That is so funny that the FCC included "hobbyist" in the "approved" activities. That must be getting those Sad Hammy's all riled up.

Plenty on this thread.

 

[Coffeemug]

People can enjoy that right now with their Amateur radio license.

Why drive in the wrong lane when there is a perfectly good one right next to it?

I have to respect your opinion, because you have every right to disagree with me.

People can enjoy that right now with their Amateur radio license.

Why drive in the wrong lane when there is a perfectly good one right next to it?

I must respect your opinion, because you have every right to disagree with me. However, at the same time, you should extend me the same courtesy. Not everyone has a serious desire to take an examination to become a Licensed Amateur Radio Operator, but as long as those individuals that aren't really interest HAM obtain their GMRS license, should allowed to connect repeaters together. Just maybe they're want to get into Amateur Radio once they get a taste.

 

[MTS2000des]

You are missing the point. You are gripping onto the paragraph that says no linking and taking that as the gospel, but completely ignoring the same paragraph saying it is hobbies and complaining about it being used as such.

My question is this, do YOU use GMRS?

I guess you missed it- I have three repeaters. So yes, I use it. Not that has a damn thing to do with following rules. I get it, no one likes being told NO- including you. What part of linking is prohibited is not understood?

 

[MTS2000des]

So you are admitting you are not a victim. You are just vocal about linking because it offends your "technological sensibilities". The co-channel issue can be mitigated by simple CSQ activity timer on repeater RX and transmitter lock timer out added to the linked repeater. This is a proven technology and done in Part 90.

Again, the 8 channels are for LOCAL COMMUNICATION which is even spelled out: 1-25 miles. Not hundreds, not a replacement for your Verizon cellphone (that's right they finally axed CDMA so you can't cling to your flip phone), or part 22, part 90 or even part 97.

The bottom line is there is no logical need to be simulcasted all over the state if the basis and purpose is LOCAL communications. I don't keep my P25 trunking system tied up with needless ISSI connections to remote parts of the state because Thomasville Police in south Georgia don't give a rats butt what's going on in Johns Creek and certainly don't need it wasting resources on their core and sites so why do GMRS'ers think they are special tying up just 8 pairs with "my piss bag needs changing" on a statewide link?