Midland petitions FCC for waiver to allow data Tx from non-handheld GMRS radios

[jeepsandradios]

For most part GMRS is already ruined. mygmrs forums are full of CCR super radios and a youtube expert who thinks he is god. The linking and junk equipment is whats ruining GMRS. For many of us that have used GMRS for many years it was a tool. now its easier to buy a GMRS license than take time to get a ham ticket so people go this route. I have no interest in nets and other ham stuff on GMRS. While I love technology also, I am first to say GMRS should never go to DMR.P25 or other formats. Keep it simple. Lots of places to go if you really need digital.

 

[DeoVindice]

Many of us have GMRS to stay in touch with friends and family. In some cases, there may be spotty or no cell coverage, so the GMRS is truly a lifeline. One of the big nationwide nets ties up a linked system I am aware of for at least an hour or two, maybe more, every Sunday night. Most of it, once the novelty wears off, is inane, purposeless, jabber. Someone wanting to contact a friend or family member via these repeaters during that time is SOL.

The normal linked status of that particular system is not bad as there is not too much traffic on it most times, but the net destroys any hope of using it for anything but the net during net time.

I disagree with you regarding digital - it offers enough benefits to be worth considering, particularly with regards to talkpaths, user aliasing, private/selective calls, and paging.

With that said, you're spot-on regarding nets on both GMRS and amateur systems. A great many of them are obnoxious, repetitive wastes of airtime that accomplish nothing.

Our GMRS linked system out here has DTMF link/delink commands which are sometimes very handy. It's worth asking your system admin/owner if these are available to you as well.

 

[bill4long]

NO! Keep it analog and no more digital garbage! Wanna know what GMRS will sound like in a couple of years if the FCC keeps easing restrictions on use, just scan the five MURS channels, with their non-stop beeps, boops, and buzzes.

You can use CTCSS or DSC to restrict what you hear. Digital poses no threat of additional interference.

Guys in one repeater's coverage area want to have a conversation. They do. They are local to each-other and friends. Guys in another area on another repeater in that linked system likewise want a convo, but cannot have it because the first set of guys are tying up not only the repeater in their area, but all others in the linked system. Without a publicly shared link/de-link code, you tie up multiple repeaters and pairs with one conversation. WHY????

Because they want to. Repeaters on the linked systems are put up by people who want their repeaters to be linked most of the time. People develop friends on the network, and even when two people are talking to each other on the same repeater, others listening on other repeaters in the network like to listen to the conservations. You may not like that they do this, but what they do certain has a valid purpose for them.

Many of us have GMRS to stay in touch with friends and family. In some cases, there may be spotty or no cell coverage, so the GMRS is truly a lifeline.... One of the big nationwide nets ties up a linked system I am aware of for at least an hour or two, maybe more, every Sunday night... Someone wanting to contact a friend or family member via these repeaters during that time is SOL.

All the nets I've heard prioritize emergency traffic just like ham nets. If you really need to make a call "as a lifeline", I'm sure they'd let you do it.

Most of it, once the novelty wears off, is inane, purposeless, jabber.

It might be the only socialization they get. Evidently it is filling a need for them. You're sounding a bit bigoted here.

IF someone MUST link their repeaters, they should provide for a link/de-link code available to all end users. Preferably, normal status would be de-linked, with linking via a DTMF code available when necessary or advantageous. Even if the operator feels the need for normally linked status, a de-link code for when you plan on using the closest repeater for strictly local (family, friends) comms would be a blessing.

You could suggest that to them. You could put up your own repeater or network of repeaters. Then you can do whatever you want with it.

 

[bill4long]

I checked the online Owners Manual and on 10/32 it states:

Data Terminal - not used in the MXT400

Now I am curious what other radios use that same chassis.

https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0531/2856/0817/t/10/assets/MXT400-Owners-Manual-OCT19.pdf?v=1619734290

Looks like a TYT-9000. For that radio, the data port is for programming the radio.

TYT TH-9000 Mobile Transceiver

 

[KC3ECJ]

You can use CTCSS or DSC to restrict what you hear. Digital poses no threat of additional interference.



Because they want to. Repeaters on the linked systems are put up by people who want their repeaters to be linked most of the time. People develop friends on the network, and even when two people are talking to each other on the same repeater, others listening on other repeaters in the network like to listen to the conservations. You may not like that they do this, but what they do certain has a valid purpose for them.



All the nets I've heard prioritize emergency traffic just like ham nets. If you really need to make a call "as a lifeline", I'm sure they'd let you do it.



It might be the only socialization they get. Evidently it is filling a need for them. You're sounding a bit bigoted here.



You could suggest that to them. You could put up your own repeater or network of repeaters. Then you can do whatever you want with it.

DMR makes it harder to know the nature of the interference.

 

[bill4long]

DMR makes it harder to know the nature of the interference.

Not a strong argument, IMO. Causual users will just go to another channel regardless of the interference. Serious users who put up repeaters usually have the technical know how to find the source of interference regardless of what it is.

 

[K4APR]

As an avid APRS user and a GMRS license holder, I wouldn't mind seeing a specific channel standardized for doing data, in this case specifically APRS. I think it would be pretty neat to see a GMRS based APRS network built up. Pick a channel for nationwide use, like we use 144.390 in the amateur 2 meter band. Plenty of hardware out there that will work with GMRS equipment with no modification.

 

[jeepsandradios]

I find it interesting that so many folks want to the change the GMRS when there are many other services for most of this stuff. APRS works fine on ham. No need to add that to GMRS also. DMR, P25, Fusion all can be used in Ham radio and commercial and public safety bands. I realize some folks don't want to take a "test" for ham but its pretty simple at this point. Unless the FCC is going to add more channels (never happen) I dont see a need for a change of a working service. Its hard enough to get folks to get the license to use the service let alone change formats and such.

 

[rescue161]

Some people have no desire to get into radio or the theory. They just want to push the button and talk. DMR just adds double the amount of current talk paths, so more folks can use the service. If you don't want to embrace technology, that is fine. I'm sure it will eventually happen. If we didn't progress, we'd still be using a key over copper wires to communicate. Imagine if the people who didn't want that to change had their way and we never had the opportunities that we have today with wireless technology.

 

[jeepsandradios]

I get the idea behind DMR, but its up to each person. Personally I want P25 but thats me. I know its already in use all over so I guess its just a matter of time before the FCC just drops the license and folks do what they want. I'd love to spin up a P25 trunked system in ham but apparently rules wont allow it there either.

 

[rescue161]

You can do a DMR trunked repeater on ham. As a matter of fact, I need to change mine to CAP+. Single repeater, two talk paths and talkgroups are trunked across both time slots. Only CAP+ radios can be used, but that is okay with me.

 

[jeepsandradios]

Some people have no desire to get into radio or the theory. They just want to push the button and talk.

I agree. Good or bad my wife falls in that boat. But she took the test after studying for a month on her phone and passed (better than my score too...) and has yet to do anything other than talk on her APX with her call sign to me. I do all the programming, installs and everything needed. She talks on the radio. Thats it. She got her call as required by passing the test.

 

[jeepsandradios]

You can do a DMR trunked repeater on ham. As a matter of fact, I need to change mine to CAP+. Single repeater, two talk paths and talkgroups are trunked across both time slots. Only CAP+ radios can be used, but that is okay with me.

So if we can do DMR TRUNKING on ham they why do folks go off the deep end when we mention P25. I would see no difference in either format. Anyway we are way off topic now so maybe this is a better discussion under the ham radio digital area.

 

[rescue161]

My wife would never in a million years commit to getting her license. She just isn't interested at all. Heck, nobody in my family is, except for my uncle. He got his ham call and we have talked a few times, but everybody else would prefer to use GMRS.

 

[jeepsandradios]

My wife had no interest other than she wanted to talk to me on another radio vs the P25 TLMR system. She does SAR with me so it was more of a "training" in her mind. But I get the point.

 

[rescue161]

Because trunking in P25 requires a dedicated control channel and multiple frequencies. It is random which freq you will land on, so you cannot guarantee that you will say your callsign on the freq that you were using, unless you said your call after every single transmission. That would get old very quickly. On CAP+ trunking, you can have a single frequency (2 time slot) system. Since it is the same freq, you can use the standard ham callsign rules.

 

[rescue161]

It would be similar to a single channel LTR system, except you'd have two talk paths, vs one with LTR.

 

[nd5y]

DMR just adds double the amount of current talk paths, so more folks can use the service.

Only when two talkgroups are on the same repeater.
If it's a private repeater that you and your buddies aren't allowed to used then it doesn't double the channel capacity,
it's just like FM and other users have to wait until the DMR signal stops.

 

[rescue161]

And the same argument can be used for private repeaters that use FM. You'd still have to wait for them to finish their conversation before you could use the channel. You could use CTCSS or DCS to block them, so you didn't have to hear them. That goes for analog or digital. I'm out though, so you all have fun. No point in arguing anymore.

 

[AK9R]

So if we can do DMR TRUNKING on ham they why do folks go off the deep end when we mention P25. I would see no difference in either format. Anyway we are way off topic now so maybe this is a better discussion under the ham radio digital area.

Yes, discussion of trunking using either DMR, P25, or any other mode is off topic for a thread about Midland wanting to transmit data on GMRS.