Proposal to FCC for VHF Low Band Channels on GMRS and FRS

[nd5y]

The old AAA frequencies really aren't used anymore. There is only one license on them in the entire state of California.

What about the rest of the country? Nobody cares about CA.

 

[kc2asb]

I haven't seen a car that a bumper mount would work on in decades. Quarter wave antennas for 49 MHz are just under 5 feet tall, so with coil loading they can be made pretty small.

Probably not since the early 80's, as chrome bumpers were being phased out for plastic. I agree - just go with a 1/4 wave. Performance should be fine.

To do a 1/2 wave properly, you need something like this old Dodge Monaco that Fred Dryer drove on "Hunter".

 

[ecps92]

Probably not since the early 80's, as chrome bumpers were being phased out for plastic. I agree - just go with a 1/4 wave. Performance should be fine.

To do a 1/2 wave properly, you need something like this old Dodge Monaco that Fred Dryer drove on "Hunter".

View attachment 188134

Where is Dee Dee ?

 

[WB5UOM]

Back when, theTexas Railroad Commission had a very robust low band repeater network with db base load antennas on trunk deck...
worked pretty dang well with ge mastr II's.

 

[K6GBW]

What about the rest of the country? Nobody cares about CA.

Considering that California has a population of 44 million and is the fourth largest economy in the world, 1.3 trillion dollars larger than Texas, I imagine quite a few people actually do care. Can we just talk about radio please?

 

[mmckenna]

Thanks for the responses- i think the point i was trying to illustrate is, "reliable em-comms for my (non technical) family" that has actual real world range of operation is what a lot of people want, but it simply doesn't exist. er-go, get your ticket, as others have illustrate, the ham bands solve many, if not all the problems pretty readily if one is willing to put in the work.

I do appreciate a lot of the technical comments because i definitely was of the camp thinking, heck, i can slap together some VHF-lo gear and make it work.......but it wont!

Well, it DOES exist. The issue was that you put conditions on it that essentially negated every option -but- amateur radio.

What you want exists, just not within those limitations. If you want to discuss that more, I'd recommend opening a new tread to just focus on that question. There are several options if you are willing to be a bit more flexible.

 

[mmckenna]

The need for a real-world usable radio service makes sense. The problem we keep running into is that some people will take a service meant for communicating within a limited 5-10 miles range and they try and turn it into something else. GMRS was really meant to be a small repeater radio service to cover limited areas. But, people started linking them and creating havoc. The CB radio was meant to do the same, but the guys with the need to compensate bought huge amps and destroyed it.

True. Cut-n-paste this into about half the posts on this site.

 

[KF0NYL]

I have found half wave antennas too finicky for mobile use. I would not consider one for low band VHF, which is the subject at hand.

A 1/2 wave whip antenna for 46-49 MHz or the 6m band would be no worse than a 1/4 wave CB antenna. The 1/2 wave antenna for VHF low would only be less than a foot longer than a 1/4 wave CB antenna.

Granted a 1/4 wave antenna with a good ground plane will work just fine.

 

[prcguy]

A 1/2 wave whip antenna for 46-49 MHz or the 6m band would be no worse than a 1/4 wave CB antenna. The 1/2 wave antenna for VHF low would only be less than a foot longer than a 1/4 wave CB antenna.

Granted a 1/4 wave antenna with a good ground plane will work just fine.

I consider myself a radio geek to the extreme and these days I won’t trash out my vehicle with a 7 or 9ft tall antenna unless I park far away from society and then put the antenna on. Last time I did this was at a ham radio swap meet and the YouTube “Ham radio crash course” guy zeroed in on me and put a video on YouTube about my antenna. I don’t think you’ll will find many people these days willing to install huge antennas like in the 1970s.

 

[KF0NYL]

A half wave antenna will definitely attract attention now days due to the overall length.

I run a short Comet SBB1 antenna on my 2023 Ford Escape because I park it in the garage with 7 ft doors and 8 ft ceilings. Plus I go to the VA a lot and the parking garage is pretty low. I run a Comet 2x4SR on my 2010 Ford F150. The 2x4SR is around 38 inches long.

There is no comparison between the two antennas. While the SBB-1 definitely works, the bigger 2x4SR outperforms it by quite a bit. I would love to run the 2x4SR or similar antenna on the Escape but I also don't feel like having to get out all the time to lay the antenna down either. So I compromised by going with the SBB-1.

An 1/8 wave antenna for 46 MHz would be around2,5 ft long. Yes it will definitely work, but not as well has a bigger antenna. Then some will run into the same issues I have with the 2x4SR trying to get into my garage or parking garages.

We sometimes have to make compromises in what mobile antennas we use. Go with what is going to work the best for your situation.

 

[Don_Burke]

A 1/2 wave whip antenna for 46-49 MHz or the 6m band would be no worse than a 1/4 wave CB antenna. The 1/2 wave antenna for VHF low would only be less than a foot longer than a 1/4 wave CB antenna.

Granted a 1/4 wave antenna with a good ground plane will work just fine.

What I am saying is that a half wave vertical does not perform well.

 

[K6GBW]

Probably not since the early 80's, as chrome bumpers were being phased out for plastic. I agree - just go with a 1/4 wave. Performance should be fine.

To do a 1/2 wave properly, you need something like this old Dodge Monaco that Fred Dryer drove on "Hunter".

View attachment 188134

That big 440 engine could pass anything on the road…..except a gas station.

 

[vagrant]

When I was a teen I had either a 74’ or 77’ Monaco. Those barrels kicked in when you mashed it. It would also float like a boat…when I got it up to 120 MPH once. Anyways, I had a spring mount and short antenna on the back for a CB. It worked very well for direction finding with all that ground plane in front of the trunk.

Oh lordy, I just remembered how roomy the front and the back seats were.

 

[K9KLC]

I would think a second set of MURS channels would be a better use for this.

This would also be a great opportunity to lighten up on the MURS type-acceptance rules.

Something in that frequency range would be better. In the mid 90's, we did some testing between a bunch of us between 6 meters and 2 meters for talking base to base, base to mobile and mobile to mobile and 2 meters won every time. Yes a couple of us had the 1/4 wave 6 meter antennas and to make it fair we switched to 1/4 wave 2 meter antennas on the mobiles. Also there was way more noise on 6 meters in most vehicles and areas. Also there is DX on those bands. It's not as common as 10 meters obviously, but you ought to see 6 meters light up where there are people actually there, during say a contest of some kind perhaps.

I don't expect a few MHz to make much difference between the frequencies proposed now and 6 meters. Also, as has been stated I don't see people putting full size 1/4 antenna's on vehicles these days, look at the crap they want to try and use to talk on cb or even some ham frequencies.

 

[K9KLC]

I can tell you from personal experience

Exactly. 39.5 MHz for some years as a deputy from 79-81 and a fair amount on 6 meters. I already posted our experiences between 6 meters and 2 meters. If our county didn't have its tower on the top of one of the highest places in the county back then, it would have been virtually useless. Just in our county, which had a fair size hill in the middle, cars couldn't talk 8 or so miles from the east side to the west side, had to rely on relay from dispatch.

 

[kc2asb]

That big 440 engine could pass anything on the road…..except a gas station.

Yep! A cop motor, like Elwood Blues said. A lot of these cars were destroyed on shows like Hunter and in numerous films. Not many of them left today, and they command good prices.

 

[Don_Burke]

Something in that frequency range would be better. In the mid 90's, we did some testing between a bunch of us between 6 meters and 2 meters for talking base to base, base to mobile and mobile to mobile and 2 meters won every time. Yes a couple of us had the 1/4 wave 6 meter antennas and to make it fair we switched to 1/4 wave 2 meter antennas on the mobiles. Also there was way more noise on 6 meters in most vehicles and areas. Also there is DX on those bands. It's not as common as 10 meters obviously, but you ought to see 6 meters light up where there are people actually there, during say a contest of some kind perhaps.

I don't expect a few MHz to make much difference between the frequencies proposed now and 6 meters. Also, as has been stated I don't see people putting full size 1/4 antenna's on vehicles these days, look at the crap they want to try and use to talk on cb or even some ham frequencies.

I was referring to making the VHF low channels another MURS band. The nonlicensed aspect was what I was looking at, something I am having second thoughts about.

VHF high is still pretty popular and getting more VHF high MURS channels is going involve a turf war with an established user base.

The petitioners seem to be convinced that VHF low simplex is going to solve at least some of their problems. I strongly suspect they are going to need repeaters whether they want them or not. The noise problems you found in your tests are going to be very limiting.

Interestingly, National Capitol Communications has a VHF low license with callsign WSGP583 that they have held since January 2025.

In the petition, there are ten pairs identified in the 46 up and 49 down region that have zero users licensed. I suspect they would be better served applying for a license for at least some of those frequencies for 2000 mobile units and 100 or so base units nationwide and, if they can make that work, petition it to be made into a second GMRS band or a completely new service.

 

[kc2asb]

Something in that frequency range would be better. In the mid 90's, we did some testing between a bunch of us between 6 meters and 2 meters for talking base to base, base to mobile and mobile to mobile and 2 meters won every time.

With a 2m Cushcraft Ringo Ranger up on the roof, I had good luck communicating with mobiles on simplex out to about 15 miles, IIRC. It seems MURS frequencies could work for what the REACT guys are asking for in the petition, as others have stated.

I don't expect a few MHz to make much difference between the frequencies proposed now and 6 meters. Also, as has been stated I don't see people putting full size 1/4 antenna's on vehicles these days, look at the crap they want to try and use to talk on cb or even some ham frequencies.

Consumers are going to want something that can be carried in the car, and deployed when the need arises. Something along the lines of the old emergency CB radios, which came with a cheap magnet mount, radio, and lighter plug cable. A setup like this is not going to provide reliable, long range communications. As others have stated, a low band GMRS service is not going to be a hit with the non-technical public.

 

[AK9R]

Interestingly, National Capitol Communications has a VHF low license with callsign WSGP583 that they have held since January 2025.

In the petition, there are ten pairs identified in the 46 up and 49 down region that have zero users licensed. I suspect they would be better served applying for a license for at least some of those frequencies for 2000 mobile units and 100 or so base units nationwide...

Oh, you mean they should use the Part 90 rules as they currently exist to get what they want rather than ask the FCC to change the rules to suit them? Got it.

 

[kc2asb]

Oh, you mean they should use the Part 90 rules as they currently exist to get what they want rather than ask the FCC to change the rules to suit them? Got it.

This makes too much sense.