Is there an emergency channel on GMRS/FRS?

[kayn1n32008]

There is such a thing. It's called a PLB, Personal Locator Beacon... Issue is that most people can't be bothered. They'd rather hack their amateur radio.

you hit the nail on the head.

Where the heck is the like button!!!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[kayn1n32008]

I would hope that if, for example, I ever keyed up on a public safety frequency to seek help (in a real emergency) that it would be considered acceptable and life saving.

Yea... I bet it would be...


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[CaptDan]

95.407 paragraph (b)

In case you need more info verify what nd5y said ......


Title 47 › Chapter I › Subchapter D › Part 95 › Subpart D › Section 95.407 paragraph (b)

 

[Project25_MASTR]

95.407 paragraph (b)

I see it now. And also see how I missed it earlier. Thanks for the reference.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[CaptDan]

There is such a thing. It's called a PLB, Personal Locator Beacon. Little brother to an EPRIB, works the same way. You can purchase one for $200 bucks and change at most sporting goods or boat supply stores. It works 24x7, radios in your GPS derived position and requires no subscription fees, licenses or special training.

Issue is that most people can't be bothered. They'd rather hack their amateur radio.

It is not a question of hacking anything, and while I googled and found the information about the PLB very educational - it is completely different than someone that already owns a radio, and is able to program that radio to be able to transmit on an a first responders frequency.

The PLB needs to be registered with NOAA and in the event of an emergency the United States Air Force Rescue Coordination Center in Florida receives the notification - investigates the request - coordinates with federal, state, and local officials, and determines the type and scope of response necessary.

I might invest in one for the family, I can afford the $200.00, not everyone can. Even so - I have to be honest - I have 40 years as a emergency first responder - 35 as a paid professional - even so, in my experience, the only disaster I encountered that would have qualified or justified people coming onto government first responders frequencies to call for assistance was during and the immediate aftermath of Super Storm Sandy.

PLB's are described as a device of last resort - I would suggest that transmitting on a radio frequency that one is not licensed or authorized to operate on is just one step below or prior to transmitting a PLB signal.

Thank you for the information about PLB's they certainly have their place - especially out in the wilderness but it is not something that most people - even radio type people - would be carrying with them routinely everyday - while many people have their 2 way radio with them each day.

 

[DaveNF2G]

If you knew how poorly the public comprehends the concept of "emergency" as demonstrated by their misuse of 9-1-1, then you would not advocate for opening up any professional communications system to untrained civilians.

 

[03msc]

If you knew how poorly the public comprehends the concept of "emergency" as demonstrated by their misuse of 9-1-1, then you would not advocate for opening up any professional communications system to untrained civilians.

That was what I was eluding to earlier about knowing how to use the radios to properly communicate. As I've thought about it more I wish there was some way of there at least being some sort of provision or coordination for amateur radio operators to be able to communicate with local emergency dispatchers, not necessarily on one of their PS channels but on a channel that they monitored solely for that. I can think of a few times where it would be so much easier to key the radio on that channel and report something than call them (on the non-emer line) and give them the info that way. Even more so with life-threatening situations.

 

[mmckenna]

If you knew how poorly the public comprehends the concept of "emergency" as demonstrated by their misuse of 9-1-1, then you would not advocate for opening up any professional communications system to untrained civilians.

Exactly, and that's why I recommended the PLB when the cell phone does work.
I run a trunked system that has both public safety and non-public safety users. We have a couple of dedicated talk groups for the non-public safety folks to talk to the PSAP dispatchers. When it comes time to reporting an emergency, most people are not smart enough to shut their traps and listen to the trained dispatchers. All too often the emergency reporting turns into a 45 second monologue full of all kinds of useless information while the poor dispatchers are trying to figure out specific pieces of information so they can dispatch.
That group of people that can't follow dispatcher directions includes people that I know are "trained" amateur radio operators.
Knowing when to shut up and answer the question in simple terms is lost on many people.

 

[SteveC0625]

When it comes time to reporting an emergency, most people are not smart enough to shut their traps and listen to the trained dispatchers. All too often the emergency reporting turns into a 45 second monologue full of all kinds of useless information while the poor dispatchers are trying to figure out specific pieces of information so they can dispatch. That group of people that can't follow dispatcher directions includes people that I know are "trained" amateur radio operators. Knowing when to shut up and answer the question in simple terms is lost on many people.

Dear god in heaven, you just summarized that problem extremely well. Give me an untrained 9-1-1 caller every time. I can't begin to tell you how many times I had to tell a "trained radio operator" to stop with the useless information and just answer my questions without rambling.

 

[03msc]

When it comes time to reporting an emergency, most people are not smart enough to shut their traps and listen to the trained dispatchers. All too often the emergency reporting turns into a 45 second monologue full of all kinds of useless information while the poor dispatchers are trying to figure out specific pieces of information so they can dispatch.
That group of people that can't follow dispatcher directions includes people that I know are "trained" amateur radio operators.
Knowing when to shut up and answer the question in simple terms is lost on many people.

Dear god in heaven, you just summarized that problem extremely well. Give me an untrained 9-1-1 caller every time. I can't begin to tell you how many times I had to tell a "trained radio operator" to stop with the useless information and just answer my questions without rambling.

What frustrates me to no end is calling to report something and clearly and succinctly giving all of the pertinent information, in a clear yet quick manner, and then they say "OK so you're reporting an accident? What's the location?" Gee...already answered! They could have people on the way but they want to ask 20 questions that were just answered. Extremely frustrating. Just listen lol

 

[SteveC0625]

What frustrates me to no end is calling to report something and clearly and succinctly giving all of the pertinent information, in a clear yet quick manner, and then they say "OK so you're reporting an accident? What's the location?" Gee...already answered! They could have people on the way but they want to ask 20 questions that were just answered. Extremely frustrating. Just listen lol

The problem here is that you don't know how the 911 call taker handles the info that you give them. First, understand that they are typing information into multiple fields of a Computer Aided Dispatch entry form. While you think you've done a great job of rattling off all the info in one burst, all you have really done is overwhelmed and confused the intake of the info. I'll pretty much guarantee you that you can't precisely record the all of info that you spit out yet you expect the 911 call taker to do it without error or question. I know because we tested it over and over and over when we created our training program for new employees. It's far better and much faster to state what you are reporting and then let the call taker lead the interview. As they ask a location, they are setting their cursor in that field. When you answer with an address or intersection, they are typing that info into the field and then tabbing to the next field and repeating the process until they have all the info recorded properly and ready to shoot it into CAD. And don't be surprised or annoyed that they ask you to repeat the location later on in the interview. It's verification and confirmation. You would be surprised how many callers don't give the same location twice in a single interview. And, believe it or not, it's faster to do this than to dump it all out in a single blast.

Been there, done that for nearly 30 years. True fact: "Trained" amateur radio operators are some of the worst callers into 911 centers. They think they know it all when they really don't have a clue.

 

[mmckenna]

What frustrates me to no end is calling to report something and clearly and succinctly giving all of the pertinent information, in a clear yet quick manner, and then they say "OK so you're reporting an accident? What's the location?" Gee...already answered! They could have people on the way but they want to ask 20 questions that were just answered. Extremely frustrating. Just listen lol

A couple of answers for you:

1. CAD,
Computer Aided Dispatch. Dispatchers are sitting at a computer and are having to type information in to specific fields. The caller doesn't know what order the fields are in, and most dispatchers are being bombarded by a huge amount of input. Letting the dispatcher -ask- you the questions in the order they need them really helps the process a whole lot. When they answer the phone and say "911, what is your emergency?", you should be answering with no more than about 4 words. Anything else is just information overload. This is what I meant about the 45 second monologue. Short answers to the specific questions you are asked.

2. The dispatcher you are talking to on the phone isn't necessarily the one that is on the radio passing the information.
Often the "call takers" are typing the info into a computer and then route it to the appropriate dispatcher. In big centers they may have radio dispatchers assigned to the different services/districts/agencies/beats, etc. That means the person you talk to isn't going to be able to recite all that over the radio.

3. Prioritization.
This is the -BIG- issue. When someone calls 911 (or pipes up on a public safety radio channel they shouldn't be on) they are assuming that their specific emergency is tip-top priority for everyone involved. Often, it isn't. I've sat in our 911 center and listed to this happen more than a few times. The dispatchers job is to prioritize the incoming calls and get the right resources to the right places as quickly and safely as possible.

This is the issue I have with amateur radio operators, GMRS operators, CB'er's, etc. all assuming that they need special treatment from the public safety field. The assumption that a 35 question multiple choice test or a paper license somehow makes an individual suddenly more knowledgeable than everyone else and able to assign priorities in situations where they have a little tiny slice of the picture is dangerous.

What would be an -awesome- solution is that if the Amateur/GMRS/CB community took on this task themselves. Amateurs could monitor 146.52 or high-site repeaters. GMRS operators could monitor 462.675, CB'ers could monitor channel 9. Heck, one guy with an amateur license and a GMRS license could do all this themselves. It would be a great club project, or a job for retired amateurs.

Expecting the already overloaded, stressed, overwhelmed dispatchers to take on yet another role is expecting quite a bit. They are already having to take on SMS/Text Messages, which isn't fun.


This is why I recommended a PLB as a solution. It's a proven tool and it's affordable. It doesn't cost anymore than a new mobile radio. It follows the protocols that already exist, and it doesn't require building out any more infrastructure.

 

[mmckenna]

Been there, done that for nearly 30 years. True fact: "Trained" amateur radio operators are some of the worst callers into 911 centers. They think they know it all when they really don't have a clue.

Gasp! What's this you say? Blasphemy!
You mean to say that someone that took a 35 question multiple choice test and bought a $40 Chinese radio off e-Bay isn't a public safety expert? Geeeze. They have a reflective vest! They have a speaker mic! Some of them even have badges with their call signs on them!

Blasphemer. The radio gods at ARRL are going to swing their mighty hammer at you!
(that was sarcasm.....)

But seriously, I'll agree with you 100%. I'm not a 911 dispatcher and I'm not a fire fighter, police officer or EMT, but I have sat in our 911 center working on equipment and talking with dispatchers off and on for nearly 20 years now. Amateur radio operators are the worst, shortly followed by off duty PD, Fire, EMT's .

 

[Project25_MASTR]

A few years ago some friends of mine wanted to have some sort of emergency communications methods for their amateur repeaters (located on mountain tops). What I suggested they do was take an old school autopatch and connect it through a GSM terminal (those are beginning to go away now). The reasoning, emergency calls must be allowed, so a $35 terminal with no monthly subscriptions or what not could be the answer to what they were looking for).

Then we got to thinking about how to interpret the rules to allow for an emergency only phone patch in GMRS...never could figure out a way to fit it within the rules.

 

[DaveNF2G]

I've been on both sides of this environment as well. I agree with Steve. I also have to point out that even a trained dispatcher in one jurisdiction is not automatically going to know the local protocols when calling in an event to another dispatch center. Hopefully, such an individual will have the sense to do what they want civilians to do at their home center - follow the call-taker's lead. That saves more time than any amount of caller cleverness.

Also, even if you are part of the "official" community, there is a low probability that any given call-taker is going to recognize you. The smartest pros would be the ones who assume nothing when they call and let the operator do their job.

 

[03msc]

Interesting points made. I'll keep it in mind.

 

[Tech1]

FRS/GMRS combined channel chart - The RadioReference Wiki The link I just posted hopefully will clear up any questions. I myself monitor all FRS/GMRS and MURS frequencies and I just received my GMRS License by email.

 

[KB7MIB]

The discussion has gotten way off topic. The question was answered on page 1.

There is no official FRS or GMRS emergency channel.

Unofficially, FRS/GMRS 1 (462.5625), and GMRS 462.675/467.675 with the 141.3 Hz tone, are suggested as calling and emergency/travelers assistance channels.

If there is no club/group/organization in your area that actively monitors either/or channel, you yourself could do so.

If you have the means, and one doesn't already exist, put a repeater up on the 675 pair with the 141.3 Hz tone. If you don't have the means, monitor 462.675 simplex.

Remember, GMRS licensees can use a detachable antenna mounted up to 25' AGL or above the structure it's mounted on, and up to 5 watts ERP on FRS/GMRS channels 1-7, giving a licensee a much better signal on those channels than a typical bubblepack radio user would.

John
WPXJ-598
Peoria, AZ