• 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.

Modern CB Upgrades

Status
Not open for further replies.

viper1833

Member
Joined
Sep 30, 2015
Messages
12
Location
Galesburg, IL.
Just a curious question to all who are interested in discussing. How many think its time for the FCC to change some of the rules on CB radio, and allow companies to start adding some modern features to 11 meters. Currently I use CB radio still, my wife, and brother use them for personal use. Also I am licensed GMRS (WQYB343). Myself, and brother use GMRS quite a bit, and where talking about some of the features that we can use on GMRS, such as CTCSS, DCS, and FM as carrier. These are some features we where discussing that would actually benefit 11 Meters. Granted I know some say CB is a wasteland, and what not, while I do agree alot of what you hear on CB is garbage, and we all know there are more illegal operators on 11 than there are legal. Me I prefer to stay legal, with 4 watts, and use type accepted radios, because personally I don't want to risk my GMRS license. However if some of these features where allowed it would let those who use 11 Meters legal some relief from others on the Band operating illiegally. Here is my wishlist for 11 meters.

1. FM/AM carrier, and more companies start adding USB, LSB to there radios.
2. DCS, and CTCSS
3. Keep 4 watts, we don't need more power, a proper antenna setup, and a solid radio works just fine.
4. Remote Head radios, to bring in line with Modern vehicles space restrictions. Something I really wish companies would start doing. Australia has them in UHF.

Note: I don't have my ham, please refrain from saying get your ham, which I plan on doing at some point down the road. This thread intended to be a discussion about 11 meters.
 

KD8DVR

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Apr 11, 2004
Messages
1,177
Location
Columbus, Ohio
I agree. Fm would make 11m more usable. Anyone can submit a proposal for rulemaking. The trick is composing it with the appropriate legalese and proper footnoting references.

AntiSquid disclaimer: All information provided is personal opinion only and may or may not resemble actual fact.
 

viper1833

Member
Joined
Sep 30, 2015
Messages
12
Location
Galesburg, IL.
Another Suggestion

I was thinking some more about this ealier, and came up with a couple of other ideas as well to add to the mix.

1. Keep 11 meter simplex, no repeaters this still ensures the Part 95 rules in keeping it Short Distance Comms.

2. Companies who market, and sell 11 meter radio's, should push and propose for some of these changes, Obviously they have more market pull to actually make some of these features happen. Just imagine a HT 11 meter radio, with modern design, and functions such as I proposed above. I have noticed a resurgence in the radio hobby as late. There is no doubt in my mind that there are alot of people that would be in the Market for this and, actually purchasing this kind of equipment, that is License by Rule. Plus in a way this would protect the GMRS Community, and our License's.
 

mmckenna

I ♥ Ø
Joined
Jul 27, 2005
Messages
14,377
Location
SNCZCA01DS0
I agree on FM, that would make CTCSS and DCS an option to filter out some of the crap.

And, other than the FCC rule side of this, it wouldn't be hard. Many countries already allow FM on CB or their version of CB. So, the radios exist, they just aren't sold in this country.

Keeping it cheap and simple would be best. We don't need DMR/digital, just AM/FM/SSB. Keep power levels as they are.
 

RFI-EMI-GUY

Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2013
Messages
4,185
I am 100 percent in agreement with all those proposals. I will add another one. FHSS. Frequency Hop Spread Spectrum is not an encryption mode, it is an interference mitigation mode. The numbers of Channels could be expanded greatly, and you could still have your channel 019 etc. This could be done cheaply, and an FM FHSS mode with CTCSS is possible as well. The software exists to skip occupied channels to avoid interfering with legacy AM radios.
 

ladn

Explorer of the Frequency Spectrum
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Oct 25, 2008
Messages
604
Location
Southern California and sometimes Owens Valley
I doubt the FCC cares enough about CB to consider new rules.

However, I frequently wonder why we don't see modern split mount CB radios, or even split mount "export" or 10-m radios.
 

KC2GIU

Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2016
Messages
146
As for USB and LSB, those already exist in the rules.

The problem is, the manufactures control what radios get what functions and capabilities. Bummer that there are so far and few with side-band ability.

I too would love FM in the band. And one step further, also allow the ability when needed PL tones. No, I don't want CB to become FRS, but to cut out all that skip garbage.
 

RFI-EMI-GUY

Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2013
Messages
4,185
Albrecht makes quality CB's for the European market. They have 2 models with FM and CTCSS that coincide with US channels. I believe they also have models with detachable heads. Unfortunately, none of this is legal to import to US.
 

RFI-EMI-GUY

Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2013
Messages
4,185
As for USB and LSB, those already exist in the rules.

The problem is, the manufactures control what radios get what functions and capabilities. Bummer that there are so far and few with side-band ability.

I too would love FM in the band. And one step further, also allow the ability when needed PL tones. No, I don't want CB to become FRS, but to cut out all that skip garbage.
I think the solar cycle is going into a null, so the skip garbage might fix itself.
 

viper1833

Member
Joined
Sep 30, 2015
Messages
12
Location
Galesburg, IL.
I agree on FM, that would make CTCSS and DCS an option to filter out some of the crap.

And, other than the FCC rule side of this, it wouldn't be hard. Many countries already allow FM on CB or their version of CB. So, the radios exist, they just aren't sold in this country.

Keeping it cheap and simple would be best. We don't need DMR/digital, just AM/FM/SSB. Keep power levels as they are.
I agree, thats the thing that bugs me the most that these radio's actually do exist in other countries, yet we don't have them here. The biggest issue that I have with all of this is its not like allowing the tech that already exists on our 11meter band is going to cause problems with other services here in the States. If anything, it will eliminate alot of problems on the band. It comes down to the FCC, actually allowing these changes. Greatest country in the world yet we still use an unmodern system. The people in the CB Community that stays legal as a whole would welcome these changes with open arms. Minus those who operate illegally, but to me that is the whole point. Its not like we are asking for super powerful ham rigs. Just some technology, that people can use on GMRS, and FRS already.
 

cmdrwill

Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2005
Messages
3,849
Location
So Cali
We used FM on CB 27 band back in 1969 and found much better range over AM, No sideband back then.
Liked FM so much that we got a business freq just above ch 23 licensed, and ran Motorola Twin V and T Power radios.

One problem with FM on 27 CB is the occupied bandwidth is greater than AM. Narrow band FM, 2.5K Deviation, would probably work well.
 

Token

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jun 18, 2010
Messages
2,155
Location
Mojave Desert, California, USA
1. FM/AM carrier, and more companies start adding USB, LSB to there radios.
2. DCS, and CTCSS
3. Keep 4 watts, we don't need more power, a proper antenna setup, and a solid radio works just fine.
4. Remote Head radios, to bring in line with Modern vehicles space restrictions. Something I really wish companies would start doing. Australia has them in UHF.
A couple of your requests are already possible and allowed by rule, however the manufacturers don't seem to find enough market depth to bother.

FM would be nice.

The lack of USB/LSB on radios is probably market driven. SSB adds cost to the radio, and in a market where the casual user see's a 25% markup on one radio vs another they are likely to pick the cheaper radio without an understanding of why the more expensive radio is so, pennies count. Plus, many serious users will run modded ham gear, shuning CB gear, so they will not buy it either. Higher prices, smaller market, less demand, higher prices, etc.

DCS/CTSS might be nice, but I bet not very useful for weeks at a time during solar cycle peak.

Remote heads have been done on CB, and they always sold relatively poorly. The people who wanted them really wanted them, but the majority of the folks did not care, so again, a niche market within a niche market.

T!
 

JayMojave

Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2007
Messages
690
Location
Mojave Ca
Hello All: Got to remember that the CB Band is a informal use band for the mass's. So after the last FCC action adding extra channels to 40 channels, I would believe that the FCC would need to be shown a better way.

FM would be a good improvement, say adding 10 more channels below CH 1 or above CH40. With the DCS/CTSS stuff.

I always thought a "Smart Squelch" in a receiver would be a neat o keen o thing to have, breaking the squelch on a signal and not noise. Maybe a smart DSP designed in or added by a mod.

A Radio designed to sell cheap for the market, and to be modified with digital modifications and such. Including more better and bigger IF Filters and such. Supported by a web site maintained by the manufacture, showing alignments, repairs, trouble shooting technics, and modifications that the radio was designed for coming out of the design gates. They could throw in radio class's and such, giving lessons on the radio communication, radios, antennas, and the such leading into their product line of Amateur Radios and class's for the Amateur Radio License. Got to think outside the box. I would want to be a instructor with a eye patch, and large fly swatter to discipline students.

I would want the merchandise rights, Ball caps, Tee Shirts, Coffee Cups, B itchen guy Flight Jackets, custom tennis shoes with led lights, sleeve holder up things, sweat shirts and more.
Hope this is a help.

Jay in the Great Mojave Desert
 

Rred

Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2014
Messages
830
Part of the rationale behind CB is that it IS a simple service for the untrained public. An appliance that you plug in and talk on.

Now, once you get that ham license and participate in any VHF/UHF network event, you will find that every time, someone can't get their radio to work because those "options" like tone squelch (and no one can agree on what to call that, which initials to use) are not clearly stated and easily mis-set, so they can't communicate.

There's something very much to be said about KISS and having radios that are "just" AM without any frills or complications. Want the frills? OK, as the OP said, they're available on plenty of other services. Use the ones that keep you happy, and leave the simple appliances for folks who don't want to know about programming.
 

k8krh

Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2009
Messages
373
FM sounds good on 11 meters. I know it isn't authorized, and I do not have it but a few guys NORTH of me use it for a number of years, and when you compare am signals on the meter s 4 and fm s5 to 6 a big difference, I believe ENGLAND use to be all FM at one time.
DOCTOR/795
 

SnowWalker

Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2016
Messages
136
Location
Rossland, BC
I agree that FM would do a lot to bring CB usage back. I also would favour FM in a CB be licensed and some sort of system in place that could eliminate some of the idiots who insist on ruining CBing for other CBers. That's how I started with CB and it didn't break my bank account.

Mind you, my first CB weighed almost ten pounds (1958).
 

FiveFilter

Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2016
Messages
238
Part of the rationale behind CB is that it IS a simple service for the untrained public. An appliance that you plug in and talk on.

Now, once you get that ham license and participate in any VHF/UHF network event, you will find that every time, someone can't get their radio to work because those "options" like tone squelch (and no one can agree on what to call that, which initials to use) are not clearly stated and easily mis-set, so they can't communicate.

There's something very much to be said about KISS and having radios that are "just" AM without any frills or complications. Want the frills? OK, as the OP said, they're available on plenty of other services. Use the ones that keep you happy, and leave the simple appliances for folks who don't want to know about programming.

I use CB because it is simple, requires no training, is an appliance that I plug in and talk on. The KISS approach is what I need.

I don't want the frills.

For me, CB as it exists today is perfect. It is a device that without fuss and muss and a big budget, I can put in my vehicle to get and give advice on traffic conditions, dangerous road hazards, malfunctioning equipment, blown-out tires, and the occasional speedtrap warning. I need this information where it is useful, ie, within a few miles of where I am at any given time.

For me, the CB is perfect. If and when I want more out of a radio, I'll study up, buy the equipment and become a ham. All those options are available right now. I don't need CB to be modified to get them.
 

KD8DVR

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Apr 11, 2004
Messages
1,177
Location
Columbus, Ohio
I use CB because it is simple, requires no training, is an appliance that I plug in and talk on. The KISS approach is what I need.

I don't want the frills.

For me, CB as it exists today is perfect. It is a device that without fuss and muss and a big budget, I can put in my vehicle to get and give advice on traffic conditions, dangerous road hazards, malfunctioning equipment, blown-out tires, and the occasional speedtrap warning. I need this information where it is useful, ie, within a few miles of where I am at any given time.

For me, the CB is perfect. If and when I want more out of a radio, I'll study up, buy the equipment and become a ham. All those options are available right now. I don't need CB to be modified to get them.
FM wouldn't be a frill or bell and whistle. Just a cleaner, crisper signal. Yes. I agree, it has to be plug and play. Simple for every non technical person.

AntiSquid Disclaimer: All comments made are personal opinion only and may not indicate actual fact.
 

Rred

Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2014
Messages
830
"FM wouldn't be a frill or bell and whistle. Just a cleaner, crisper signal. "
Cleaner?
It would be totally incompatible with the existing user base (10 million units? 20? 40?) and pretty much a total waste for anyone wanting to interact with them. Requiring all existing users to throw out their older equipment, to work with the new ones.
So who's going to volunteer to pass out all the new free equipment to the existing users? That's the only way they are going to vote for it. The majority will call it a waste of time and money, the folks who want "more" from their radios, can always upgrade to a "more" service.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top