Part 95 rule changes. Finally.

[KC3ECJ]

Allowing FRS on the frequencies that are currently GMRS only would be very disappointing. What incentive would there be in having a GMRS licence? Not much.

 

[amphibian]

I was planning to watch it in the beginning of this but woke up too late. So is GMRS able to be updated to Digital to P25 or DMR?

Nope.... nope...nope.... Not this time.... but just wait a year or two more and they will....



Thanks,

William R Howell,
GMRS License Call Sign: WQYX489
CEO, USGMRS Repeater & Users Group Association
USGMRS Repeater & Users Group Association (usgmrsgroup.club)
FB Group Page: USGMRS Repeater & Users Group

 

[UPMan]

I was referring to the increase in power output of up to two watts as the greater potential to interference compared to what we have now....

There is no change in power level for the radios themselves. Combination GMRS/FRS radios have always been allowed to have 2W on 1-7 and 15-22. The wording of the rules is not incorrect, FRS is increased to 2W. However, the radios being sold have been GMRS on 1-7 and 15-22. Now they are FRS on all 22 channels (with 2W limit on 1-7 and 15-22; 8-14 keep .5W limit).

 

[NC1]

As a long time FRS radio user, I think these rules are a good step in the right direction. I don't understand why the FRS only channels keep the 1/2 watt power output though. Seems it would be better if everything was 2W across the board.

Looks like FRS is going to 2 Watts, if I am reading this sentence correctly:

"The amended rules eventually will eliminate combination FRS/GMRS radios for the most part, but allow up to 2 W PEP output for FRS transceivers."

Could be a whole bunch of new 2W FRS units will be hitting the shelves before Christmas.

 

[UPMan]

Allowing FRS on the frequencies that are currently GMRS only would be very disappointing. What incentive would there be in having a GMRS licence? Not much.

• Ability to have mobile units with detached antennas at up to 50W
• Ability to operate through a repeater for greatly enhance real range

Those two are pretty significant advantages over the FRS "walkie-talkie" only service.

 

[UPMan]

Looks like FRS is going to 2 Watts, if I am reading this sentence correctly:

"The amended rules eventually will eliminate combination FRS/GMRS radios for the most part, but allow up to 2 W PEP output for FRS transceivers."

Could be a whole bunch of new 2W FRS units will be hitting the shelves before Christmas.

I think we were typing at the same time, but to be clear, here is the new rule:

95.567 FRS transmit power.
Each FRS transmitter type must be designed such that the effective radiated power (ERP) on channels 8 through 14 does not exceed 0.5 Watts and the ERP on channels 1 through 7 and 15 through 22 does not exceed 2.0 Watts.

In other words, FRS radios are now limited to what virtually every GMRS/FRS combination radio was already doing. The rule for Canada's unlicensed FRS service already limited the channels to 2W max, so MFRs building radios for both markets (most of the MFRs) already limited the radios to 2W maximum ERP on those 15 channels.

 

[nd5y]

Looks like FRS is going to 2 Watts, if I am reading this sentence correctly:

Not on all channels. You didn't read all of it.

Could be a whole bunch of new 2W FRS units will be hitting the shelves before Christmas.

Nope. Maybe just some new packaging and documentation. Existing dual service 2W/.5W radios will be reclassified as FRS and not require a GMRS license.

 

[swen_out_west]

As a long time FRS radio user, I think these rules are a good step in the right direction. I don't understand why the FRS only channels keep the 1/2 watt power output though. Seems it would be better if everything was 2W across the board.

Interference to licensed GMRS. Don't feel bad, I've spent over a month trying to explain how FRS channels overlap GMRS channels and some (even if they are licensed Hams don't get it). Especially, when explaining the GMRS repeater inputs and 'FRS only' channels. A lot of people see FRS only and get hung up on the 'only' part.

Yes, 2 watts wouldn't really affect the edges much, not sure exactly how much, but I know for a fact that 1.2 watts into a 5.2 gain antenna, ERP=3.97, does (an illegal simplex repeater), I'm assuming his loss is a lot since I've seen his setup from a distance and I doubt he has lowered his insertion loss much, so I would be safe to say he's only around 2 watts ERP and that illegal simplex repeater wreaks havoc on the 2 adjoining GMRS channels.

Yes, switching to narrowband on the GMRS does significantly lower interference, but how many legal GMRS systems are out there running the old wideband. Do you make them replace their systems to accommodate non-licensed (read: non paying) FRS users.

I personally don't like the fact that they are authorizing use of licensed GMRS channels to non-license FRS, but at least I can blow through them at only 500mW ERP. The problem is that now non-licensed people will think that their handheld combo bought at Wal-Mart is authorized on all channels, which will still be too high ERP. Which will make my receive even more cluttered, yes I have a PL code so I don't hear it, but it's still there.

 

[NC1]

I guess, in the end, it will not change anything for the end user. They will just go about using any channel they wish and tossing the paperwork in the trash.

Of course that won't stop manufacturers from using borderline deceptive practices and touting the "New and Improved FRS High Power Talkies", resulting from "Sweeping changes in FCC Rules". I can almost see it now

 

[dmckean44]

I guess, in the end, it will not change anything for the end user. They will just go about using any channel they wish and tossing the paperwork in the trash.

Of course that won't stop manufacturers from using borderline deceptive practices and touting the "New and Improved FRS High Power Talkies", resulting from "Sweeping changes in FCC Rules". I can almost see it now

The FRS/GMRS combo radios are so popular is because they work. They're just powerful enough to be really useful hiking in the woods or driving down the freeway with two cars. It's pretty obvious from the traffic I've heard on these frequencies over the years that about two order of magnitude more people use FRS than GMRS. FRS was just really successful and now it needs more spectrum.

 

[UPMan]

It will change things for the end user. They will no longer get paperwork (i.e. notification that they need a license) so will have nothing to throw into the trash.

The only things I currently have planned are to remove all mention of GMRS from the packaging and manual and say "No license is required to use this product." instead of the long license required notice we currently put on the package (that no one reads before tossing into the trash).

 

[cmdrwill]

It will change things for the end user. They will no longer get paperwork (i.e. notification that they need a license) so will have nothing to throw into the trash.

The only things I currently have planned are to remove all mention of GMRS from the packaging and manual and say "No license is required to use this product." instead of the long license required notice we currently put on the package (that no one reads before tossing into the trash).

Not correct, FRS IS Licensed by Rule.... so that is NOT "No License is required". The users MUST follow the rules.

 

[UPMan]

Even the FCC uses the language "no license required" to refer to the license-by-rule services.

 

[swen_out_west]

Not correct, FRS IS Licensed by Rule.... so that is NOT "No License is required". The users MUST follow the rules.

In an ideal world. Stop enforcing speed limit/traffic laws and make it 'licensed by rule' and see how that works out.

The lack of enforcement has already made it what it is. As I've said in a previous post, the idea of license by rule, is simply to ignore the fact that very few even follow the rules as is.

 

[AK9R]

Other than Chairman Reily...

Michael O'Rielly is an FCC Commissioner, not the Chairman. Ajit Pai is the Chairman of the FCC. There is a third Commissioner, Mignon Clyburn. There are currently two open positions on the Commission.

 

[AK9R]

The only things I currently have planned are to remove all mention of GMRS from the packaging and manual and say "No license is required to use this product." instead of the long license required notice we currently put on the package (that no one reads before tossing into the trash).

So, this rule change is a benefit to the manufacturer/importer. The change will have little effect on the users.

 

[RFI-EMI-GUY]

• Ability to have mobile units with detached antennas at up to 50W
• Ability to operate through a repeater for greatly enhance real range

Those two are pretty significant advantages over the FRS "walkie-talkie" only service.

GMRS permits +/- 5KHz deviation which in itself is a 3 dB advantage when using REAL GMRS radios.

Sent from my SM-T350 using Tapatalk

 

[RFI-EMI-GUY]

I guess, in the end, it will not change anything for the end user. They will just go about using any channel they wish and tossing the paperwork in the trash.

Of course that won't stop manufacturers from using borderline deceptive practices and touting the "New and Improved FRS High Power Talkies", resulting from "Sweeping changes in FCC Rules". I can almost see it now

Unfortunately, that will likely be the case. I am tempted to file a complaint with the FTC regarding the "32 mile" and "100's of private channels" claims.

Sent from my SM-T350 using Tapatalk

 

[RFI-EMI-GUY]

Interference to licensed GMRS. Don't feel bad, I've spent over a month trying to explain how FRS channels overlap GMRS channels and some (even if they are licensed Hams don't get it). Especially, when explaining the GMRS repeater inputs and 'FRS only' channels. A lot of people see FRS only and get hung up on the 'only' part.

Yes, 2 watts wouldn't really affect the edges much, not sure exactly how much, but I know for a fact that 1.2 watts into a 5.2 gain antenna, ERP=3.97, does (an illegal simplex repeater), I'm assuming his loss is a lot since I've seen his setup from a distance and I doubt he has lowered his insertion loss much, so I would be safe to say he's only around 2 watts ERP and that illegal simplex repeater wreaks havoc on the 2 adjoining GMRS channels.

Yes, switching to narrowband on the GMRS does significantly lower interference, but how many legal GMRS systems are out there running the old wideband. Do you make them replace their systems to accommodate non-licensed (read: non paying) FRS users.

I personally don't like the fact that they are authorizing use of licensed GMRS channels to non-license FRS, but at least I can blow through them at only 500mW ERP. The problem is that now non-licensed people will think that their handheld combo bought at Wal-Mart is authorized on all channels, which will still be too high ERP. Which will make my receive even more cluttered, yes I have a PL code so I don't hear it, but it's still there.

There is no reason a licensed GMRS station should be forced to suffer narrow band for the sake of FRS operations, especially FRS that are non compliant.

Sent from my SM-T350 using Tapatalk

 

[AK9R]

Other than Chairman Reily, what a clown show that was.... One would think it would have been a little more professionally presented....

Apparently, the media wasn't happy with their treatment at the meeting:

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy...anhandled-by-fcc-guards-for-asking-questions/