Part 95 rule changes. Finally.

amphibian · May 18, 2017

RFI-EMI-GUY said:
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

I agree with you and feel like doing the same.... but I'm not going to...would be a waste of time in the end....

As I said prior, the only one that really benefits from this round of rule changes, in my opinion, are the manufactures and lets face it, even the manufactures are entitled to win one every now and them....

All in all it's cool though, we will deal with what has been handed to us today (as we have in the past), be professionals about it and not complain. We will take the knowledge we have learned from this as professionals to regroup and formulate a better and more professional plan of approach that will include how to handle the negativity and one way of thinking by those not wanting to see GMRS users make use of current and new technologies and of those with another group of users who feel they own GMRS. We will work to obtain a goal for the separation of FRS & GMRS combo radios. In addition, we will bond together in association like methods as the GMRS professionals that we are to work with manufactures to obtain the radios (GMRS radios) that benefit us as licensed GMRS users and not that of what benefits the manufactures.

Everything in life has it's ups and downs and in order to appreciate the great ups we have had we have to have a few downs every now and then.....

The only other thing left to say....It only gets better from here.......

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

mmckenna · May 18, 2017

And there it is:

https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/index.do?document=344944

KB7MIB · May 18, 2017

So, for licensed GMRS users, are we still permitted 5 watts ERP on channels 1-7? Or are we now limited to the 2 watts (TPO or ERP?) on those channels? Are small base stations, which could operate on channels 1-7, with an antenna height of no more than 25' AGL, still permitted?

John
WPXJ598
Peoria, AZ

dmckean44 · May 18, 2017

KB7MIB said:
So, for licensed GMRS users, are we still permitted 5 watts ERP on channels 1-7? Or are we now limited to the 2 watts (TPO or ERP?) on those channels? Are small base stations, which could operate on channels 1-7, with an antenna height of no more than 25' AGL, still permitted?

You can do everything you can now plus talk on the previously FRS-only channels at 500mW.

nd5y · May 22, 2017

Here is the Report and Order from May 19.
http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2017/db0519/FCC-17-57A1.pdf
I don't know yet if any changes were made the proposed one released on April 27.

n1das · May 22, 2017

stmills · May 22, 2017

Looks close to the previous versions- they did correct the bandwidth to what it had been for GMRS.

mainehazmt · May 22, 2017

NC1 said:
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.

now with the increased power can you imagine the distances they will now claim. 50 miles! 60 miles....

UPMan · May 23, 2017

There is no increase in power for the actual radios. The radios have used up to 2 watts on channels 1-7 and 15-22 for more than a decade. The change is that the channels are now redefined as FRS and not GMRS (but at no change in power level from when they were GMRS).

tj20 · May 23, 2017

mainehazmt said:
now with the increased power can you imagine the distances they will now claim. 50 miles! 60 miles....

lol. I can just see the packaging. "Radios now come with 1000 miles range"

*mountain top to mountain top (written in small print)

luckygecko · May 23, 2017

Grrrrrr.................... The expiration date of licenses issued before this rule change takes effect will not change. Only licenses granted or renewed on or after the effective date will have ten-year terms.

Yes, I know in 5 years, I will get 10 years @ renewal, BUT, Grrrrrrrrrrr

amphibian · May 23, 2017

luckygecko said:
Grrrrrr.................... The expiration date of licenses issued before this rule change takes effect will not change. Only licenses granted or renewed on or after the effective date will have ten-year terms.

Yes, I know in 5 years, I will get 10 years @ renewal, BUT, Grrrrrrrrrrr

It's always about the money..... follow the money if and when you can't understand the reasoning......

FCC, like other departments in our gov, is not about to give up any.......

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

dmckean44 · May 23, 2017

If the FCC needs money they should start enforcing the laws on the CB band.

tj20 · May 24, 2017

I think that ship has looooooooooooooong sailed

mmckenna · May 24, 2017

dmckean44 said:
If the FCC needs money they should start enforcing the laws on the CB band.

The problem is that their ability to enforce their own rules has been crippled by staff shortages. They just don't have the resources any more.

What little they do have is focusing on addressing more serious issues.
FCC washed their hands of CB decades ago. Unless someone is being extra stupid, the FCC isn't going to care.

luckygecko · May 24, 2017

As it Turns out, in my county, there are only two licensed GMRS users. (including me) In 742 sq. miles, the other license holder just happens to be on my road and 1 1/2 miles away. We have already cooperated and talked about frequency use. Enjoyed some chat.

I am glad the FCC did not totally wash their hands to GMRS also.

dmckean44 · May 24, 2017

mmckenna said:
The problem is that their ability to enforce their own rules has been crippled by staff shortages. They just don't have the resources any more.

What little they do have is focusing on addressing more serious issues.
FCC washed their hands of CB decades ago. Unless someone is being extra stupid, the FCC isn't going to care.

Decades ago it was ridiculously busy and impossible to police. There's not that much traffic on it now, it would be nice to reclaim it from the idiots.

NC1 · May 24, 2017

dmckean44 said:
Decades ago it was ridiculously busy and impossible to police. There's not that much traffic on it now, it would be nice to reclaim it from the idiots.

There are a lot of idiots out there too. It seems when the skip comes rolling in, every jerk with an amplifier takes a frequency, and splatters both adjacent channels doing it. That makes it virtually impossible for anyone using the legal limit to talk to anyone, even down the street.

The FCC could take a week or two and make some highly publicized examples out of these morons ruining the entire band. Take pictures of equipment being smashed like they used to do to barrels of Whiskey back during prohibition. And I don't mean 1 or 2 people either, I want to see 1 or 2 DOZEN crying in handcuffs. Maybe that just might put the fear in them that they are next.

All they need to do is take a random week here and there, and it should cut down quite a bit on the squatters taking up 3 (sometimes 5) channels.

RFI-EMI-GUY · May 24, 2017

dmckean44 said:
If the FCC needs money they should start enforcing the laws on the CB band.

I think any monies collected by the FCC simply go into the general fund.

The fines these govt agencies assess and collect are paltry. FCC fines run $7k to $14k and often go unpaid because they are collecting from dead beats. An OSHA fine for an employee crushed by a forklift run the same range. Go figure.

There are bigger fish to fry . Crack dealers, radical religious extremists, career politicians, political con men and traitors.

Sent from my SM-T350 using Tapatalk

mmckenna · May 24, 2017

NC1 said:
There are a lot of idiots out there too. It seems when the skip comes rolling in, every jerk with an amplifier takes a frequency, and splatters both adjacent channels doing it. That makes it virtually impossible for anyone using the legal limit to talk to anyone, even down the street.

The FCC could take a week or two and make some highly publicized examples out of these morons ruining the entire band. Take pictures of equipment being smashed like they used to do to barrels of Whiskey back during prohibition. And I don't mean 1 or 2 people either, I want to see 1 or 2 DOZEN crying in handcuffs. Maybe that just might put the fear in them that they are next.

All they need to do is take a random week here and there, and it should cut down quite a bit on the squatters taking up 3 (sometimes 5) channels.

Yeah, except it takes a lot longer that a week to build a case that'll stand up in court. Evidence must be collected. Proof that an actual violation happened, etc.

Simply owning an amplifier that covers 27MHz isn't a crime. Using it on CB is the crime. Getting proof that someone is actually using an amplifier and catching them in the act is a pretty tall order.

Part 95 rule changes. Finally.

Member

I ♥ Ø

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

In Memoriam

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

I ♥ Ø

Member

Member

Member

Member

I ♥ Ø

Similar threads