Repeater capable GMRS with FRS channels?

[Rred]

"Good point. Although Baofeng/PoFung/MoDung actually did get a part 90 certification granted but it was for some bogus emission designator and at a power level that the radio can't even be programmed to operate at. "
AFAIK those radios, and their new replacements, can operate at either 1W or 4W and either of those power levels can be perfectly legal. Typically a Part90 handheld radio is limited to two watts, so setting the radio to 1W is in full conformance. Last time I tried to read all the permutations of Part 90 and power requirements my eyes got heavy and I fell asleep, but the 1W setting is legal and the 4W option can of course be locked out.
Baofeng's "games" should remind us that the FCC has some very convenient, but burdensome, ways to make users buy multiple radios when really, one could do many jobs if the rules (and the users) were changed just a little.

 

[mmckenna]

AFAIK those radios, and their new replacements, can operate at either 1W or 4W and either of those power levels can be perfectly legal. Typically a Part90 handheld radio is limited to two watts, so setting the radio to 1W is in full conformance.

Key part of your statement "AFAIK".

And, no, Part 90 radios are not "typically" limited to 2 watts. Not sure where you are getting this stuff from, but your source is lacking.

Baofeng's "games" should remind us that the FCC has some very convenient, but burdensome, ways to make users buy multiple radios when really, one could do many jobs if the rules (and the users) were changed just a little.

Again, not sure where you are getting this from, or if you are just making it up. There are more than a few FCC certified multiband radios out there, both portable and mobile. Motorola APX, Thales, etc.

##### Added in edit#####

This is a good place to learn and talk about radio, but making recommendations based on bad information isn't helpful to anyone. Several people have tried nicely to suggest your information is faulty. It's OK to be confused, mistaken or wrong, we all do it. Just listen to what the people above are trying to tell you. They are correct, and they have a lot of experience. There are a lot of opportunities to learn new things on this site.

 

[Rred]

"And, no, Part 90 radios are not "typically" limited to 2 watts. Not sure where you are getting this stuff from, but your source is lacking."
Go back and reread what I said. Part 90 HANDHELD radios have power limits. The same way that all radios have power limits.
One section of Part 90 restricts public safety radios, under some terms, to two watts maximum power. That's not an absolute limit on all Part 90 radios, nor is it a limit on all Part 90 handheld radios. But it is one of the limitations that appear in Part 90 for some radios and some licensees in some circumstances.

 

[mmckenna]

Part 90 HANDHELD radios have power limits. The same way that all radios have power limits.

The limitations on RF power for hand held transmitter is based of RF exposure limits, battery capacity and heat dissipation capacity. Is that what you are referring to?

One section of Part 90 restricts public safety radios, under some terms, to two watts maximum power. That's not an absolute limit on all Part 90 radios, nor is it a limit on all Part 90 handheld radios. But it is one of the limitations that appear in Part 90 for some radios and some licensees in some circumstances.

There are certain frequencies that are limited in power, true, but that shouldn't be confused with a limitation on the radio itself. All FCC licenses have ERP or TPO limitations.

 

[MTS2000des]

This is a good place to learn and talk about radio, but making recommendations based on bad information isn't helpful to anyone. Several people have tried nicely to suggest your information is faulty. It's OK to be confused, mistaken or wrong, we all do it. Just listen to what the people above are trying to tell you. They are correct, and they have a lot of experience. There are a lot of opportunities to learn new things on this site.

It's also becoming a place of caustic misinformation. When many people like the O/P ask a legitimate question, they are met with a cavalcade of cacophony from uninformed fiction writers who either have mental problems or are delusional or just full of fecal sputum.

Anyone who refuses to provide verification of their ridiculous statements should be ignored.

The one responder in this thread is clearly one of those people who makes stuff up as they go along. When challenged and asked to backup their statements with verifications, they are silent or post some more non-sequitur.

Back to the O/Ps question, you might also look at some of the Kenwood LMR radios such as the TK-350G, IIRC they are LMR radios but are also part 95 certified for GMRS. They work great on the 440 ham band too. Built very well, and I've seen them for as little as $10 at hamfests.

 

[mmckenna]

I agree. I was giving him an out, but he just keeps digging……

 

[mmckenna]

Icom F-4 is a good choice. Part 95 and the programming software/hardware is inexpensive. Easy to learn programming interface. They'll do 70cm, too.

 

[rapidcharger]

AFAIK those radios, and their new replacements, can operate at either 1W or 4W and either of those power levels can be perfectly legal /-/ so setting the radio to 1W is in full conformance. )))

OK now it just sounds like you're trying to prove me wrong.
Wasn't your original point...

An FRS is limited to 500mW and every schoolkid--yes, kids have lots of them--may be clowning around on them.

With Part90, I'm tied into county-wide mutual aid, high power repeaters, and professional partners. With FRS? Yeah, I can work around a hundred yards, in the clear, and try to compete with hundreds of other users. Some of them with nothing better to do than play AM radio stations over the air to jam their friends.
.

?

.So now you'll be content with 1 watt instead of half a watt? I thought the whole idea was to have access to repeaters and use professional equipment. Getting into "high power repeaters" on 1 watt is an invitation for problems such as static and unreadable signals. Then again, if a FRS radio can claim 50 miles range, I guess anything's possible.

Lets also take a closer look at the emission designator.
It's for 9.1 kHz bandwidth for FM voice which is unheard of. Either that's phoney baloney or you're going to have audio quality issues talking to the other users. Maybe that's why Baofeng users always seem to have low audio.

Your original point was...

I have heard from FCC personnel /-/ that drills and training /-/ should not be relying on ham radio and other services. /-/ Sooner or later, the FCC's patience and generousity will run out /-/

But that's OK, you keep on choosing to apply the most liberal possible interpretations. )))

And my point was it will take a liberal interpretation of epic proportions to consider the Uv5r or uv3r or even the more recent models which still have screwed up E.D.s to be part 90 certified for how you would suggest someone use it.

((( Typically a Part90 handheld radio is limited to two watts,)))

How have you arrived at that conclusion? "Handheld radios" can easily be double that and you seem to already know that as evidenced by the quote below.

((( Last time I tried to read all the permutations of Part 90 and power requirements my eyes got heavy and I fell asleep, but the 1W setting is legal and the 4W option can of course be locked out.)))

I have attached the FCC's OET certification grant below. It's very brief so hopefully you'll stay awake for it and so will everyone else so others know what we're talking about.

((( Baofeng's "games" should remind us that the FCC has some very convenient, but burdensome, ways to make users buy multiple radios when really, one could do many jobs if the rules (and the users) were changed just a little.

And that was all the OP was asking about from the very start!!
The OP simply asked about a radio that had two radio services in one that was capable of repeater operation.

Now going back to you...
You still haven't confirmed whether or not you just want to use the same frequency pools as law enforcement just so you don't feel like a child on the playground playing cops and robbers with a set of FRS walkie talkies. Just because there are some people misusing the radios ("FRS radios are not a toy," I always exclaim) and misuse the radio service, does not mean it is inappropriate for CERT.
Every radio service, including part 90 is misused and even commercial m-rolas are misused, even by children. They get stolen all the time and people try to make their ways onto trunking systems even. And I've got news for you.... there's an awful lot of children with baofengs.

((( /-/ compete with every sixth-grade in the county using the free radio services.

It's pretty clear you just don't want to feel like a 6th grader.
It's not the radio's fault nor is it the radio service's fault, nor is it even the FCC's fault nor is it Obama's fault that 6th graders use FRS. That doesn't automatically qualify one to use the public safety frequency pool.

 

[Rred]

Excuse me, if you want to construe it as "there are no power limits on the radio, there are only power limits on how the licensee may use that radio on those frequencies". That may be technically correct but the bottom line is still for a specific radio, used by a specific license, that radio had better somehow be controlled and restricted to a limited power.

You see that as a significant difference, but I see that as the difference between a black cat and a white cat. As Chinese Chairman Mao Tse Tung said in his little red book, "Black cat, white cat, ALL SAME. All catch mice."

Part90 is still the structure providing the licensing, and the allocation of channels and power limits. To me, that's all a Part90 regulatory matter.

Rapidcharger,
I never said I was content with one watt versus 500mW. Just that one cheap radio, the BF, provided one watt when the FCC allowed for two watts. And that was one cheap solution for some users. A brand name commercial radio will triple or quadruple that price but give you the two watts allowed.

But if you stopped to read the certificate you just posted? Apparently the radio that BF refers to as "one watt" low power? Puts out nearly two watts in that mode anyhow. 1.78 watts on UHF, much closer to two watts than one.

When your goal is catching mice, arguing over the color of the cat doesn't accomplish much at all. Except perhaps to drive the OP away.

FRS? GMRS? Pick all you want, they're still not the radio service that the FCC will tell you is "proper" and "advised" for public safety operations. Try asking them the same question, they'll give you the same answers they gave me.

 

[MTS2000des]

FRS? GMRS? Pick all you want, they're still not the radio service that the FCC will tell you is "proper" and "advised" for public safety operations. .

At what time did the O/P say anything about using FRS/GMRS for public safety operations?

Answer: Never. Because he asked about what models of GMRS/FRS radios were repeater capable, as he intended to integrate such into CERT, which is not public safety.

Then you launched off with this off-topic fecal vomit about part 90, your super secret contacts with the FCC, and other musings that have nothing to do with the O/P's question or the topic at hand.

Classic troll.

Try asking them the same question, they'll give you the same answers they gave me.

What answer was that? Please post actual, factual content not hearsay.

Oh that's right, you've already said you won't do that.

Nothing to see here...back to the topic at hand.

 

[rapidcharger]

As Chinese Chairman Mao Tse Tung said in his little red book, "Black cat, white cat, ALL SAME. All catch mice.")))

See if that one holds up in court. :wink:
He's probably the same guy who wrote the instruction manual for the UV5R and the programming software...

Program radio: insert white cat into black cat, press 5 say hello. Cat barks hello number 5. Window open to number 5 cat radio program white black cat frequency. Hello cat. Radio now program.
​

(((
But if you stopped to read the certificate you just posted? Apparently the radio that BF refers to as "one watt" low power? Puts out nearly two watts in that mode anyhow. 1.78 watts on UHF, much closer to two watts than one.)))

What I said was....

... a power level that the radio can't even be programmed to operate at.

Can the radio be programmed to operate at 1.78 watts?

FRS? GMRS? Pick all you want, they're still not the radio service that the FCC will tell you is "proper" and "advised" for public safety operations. .

First of all, we're not talking about public safety operations, we're talking about CERT.
Second of all, I'm still anxiously awaiting the "citations" that you spoke of with some FCC official who has chimed in on what radio services are proper and advised for CERT to use.

 

[KC8ESL]

Rred, are you referring to 2 watts max on MURS, which is a Part 95 service? Part 90 and 95 are two different animals.

 

[rapidcharger]

Rred, are you referring to 2 watts max on MURS, which is a Part 95 service? Part 90 and 95 are two different animals.

That crossed my mind too but he couldn't be.
After he suggested using repeaters et cetera. No repeaters with murs

 

[Rred]

Oh, CERT is not public safety? That's news to FEMA and DHS and the Citizen's Corps, all of which actually create and supervise all CERT programs, under the aegis of a local emergency operations sponsor or similar authority, as a public safety operation.

MTS, do yourself a favor and put me on your squelch list, as I'll do with you. Do your selective reading and have a good time. I'll continue to believe what real FCC commissioners and CERT management have told me, as to what is and isn't appropriate. You have a good time now, presumably the OP is smart enough to query the same real sources for the same real information.

 

[rapidcharger]

Oh, CERT is not public safety?

That's right. That's what I'm saying.
Or at least.... it'll take a reeaaaaallllyyy "liberal interpretation!"

CERT is a training program for civilian citizens.

That's news to FEMA and DHS and the Citizen's Corps

Apparently it is news to them.

CERT is about readiness, people helping people, rescuer safety and doing the greatest good for the greatest number. CERT is a positive and realistic approach to emergency and disaster situations where citizens will be initially on their own and their actions can make a difference. Through training, citizens can manage utilities and put out small fires; treat the three killers by opening airways, controlling bleeding, and treating for shock; provide basic medical aid; search for and rescue victims safely and organize themselves and spontaneous volunteers to be effective.(1)​

1. https://www.fema.gov/community-emergency-response-teams/about-community-emergency-response-team

 

[Jimru]

CERT is "public safety" the same way ARES is; which is to say, they aren't! At best, as has been explained here; these are auxiliaries in support of the real public safety; PD, FD & EMS.

 

[Rred]

Jim, a key difference between CERT and ARES, is that ARES is a private organization administered by a non-governmental body (the ARRL) while FEMA says "The agency sponsoring the CERT program is creating a volunteer resource that is part of the community's operational capability following a disaster. That agency should develop training standards for CERT personnel and protocols for their activation and use." Note, that "agency" is usually the community's official emergency management agency, and as such, the CERT teams are responsible to, and operate under the aegis of, a government agency. Typically, by definition, a "public safety" department. Not a private club or organization.

.Yes, CERT members are still civilians just like volunteer firemen, with all the mixed blessings of volunteer groups. As George Washington wrote from Valley Forge, the militia (his volunteers) were his greatest strength and greatest weakness, because they were hard fighters, but they would leave and go home for the harvest, because they were also largely farmers.

CERT members can quit and go home whenever they want to. But if they respond and deploy, and they are on duty for a government agency that is sponsoring them? I don't think anyone has fully explored that can of worms yet. Eventually the courts will apply some logic and consistency there, because DHS and FEMA are behind the program. In fact, it is quite possibly not just coincidental that many places started to sponsor CERT teams when DHS changed their grant terms, about 6-8 years ago. DHS used to say that any agency not in compliance with the national plans had to submit a letter stating why they weren't in compliance, or they'd lose all DHS grant funding. Then they changed the policy and said anyone not in compliance would lose their funding, period. And all of a sudden, professional agencies that wanted nothing to do with civilians and scabs and wannabees, started sponsoring CERT teams.

Pure coincidence, I'm sure. (G)

But please go ahead, ask the Corps, ask FEMA, ask DHS. Let me know if they tell you that you can have a CERT program without a sponsoring agency, and whether that has to be a public safety or emergency operations agency.

While you're at it, ask them what is the most appropriate radio service to use. Just bear in mind, of course, that the FCC has the sole and final word in all radiocommunications matters, in case they give a different answer.

Once you understand that many agencies have sponsored CERT programs because they had to do so in order to avoid losing all DHS funding, it becomes easier to understand why those same agencies have often been reluctant to provide budgets and equipment (including radios) to their CERTs. I've seen that change as CERT teams have proven their value and earned respect. That's just the way it is done: earned, or not.

I know at least one municipal agency that specifically calls their CERT team "first responders". Other sponsors say their CERT teams are emergency responders and force multipliers, but specifically never "first" responders. With over 2000 sponsored programs (according to FEMA) it isn't surprising that there are some differing opinions, and the standards aren't all worked out yet.

 

[Jimru]

Jim, a key difference between CERT and ARES, is that ARES is a private organization administered by a non-governmental body (the ARRL) while FEMA says "The agency sponsoring the CERT program is creating a volunteer resource that is part of the community's operational capability following a disaster. That agency should develop training standards for CERT personnel and protocols for their activation and use." Note, that "agency" is usually the community's official emergency management agency, and as such, the CERT teams are responsible to, and operate under the aegis of, a government agency. Typically, by definition, a "public safety" department. Not a private club or organization.



.Yes, CERT members are still civilians just like volunteer firemen, with all the mixed blessings of volunteer groups. As George Washington wrote from Valley Forge, the militia (his volunteers) were his greatest strength and greatest weakness, because they were hard fighters, but they would leave and go home for the harvest, because they were also largely farmers.



CERT members can quit and go home whenever they want to. But if they respond and deploy, and they are on duty for a government agency that is sponsoring them? I don't think anyone has fully explored that can of worms yet. Eventually the courts will apply some logic and consistency there, because DHS and FEMA are behind the program. In fact, it is quite possibly not just coincidental that many places started to sponsor CERT teams when DHS changed their grant terms, about 6-8 years ago. DHS used to say that any agency not in compliance with the national plans had to submit a letter stating why they weren't in compliance, or they'd lose all DHS grant funding. Then they changed the policy and said anyone not in compliance would lose their funding, period. And all of a sudden, professional agencies that wanted nothing to do with civilians and scabs and wannabees, started sponsoring CERT teams.



Pure coincidence, I'm sure. (G)



But please go ahead, ask the Corps, ask FEMA, ask DHS. Let me know if they tell you that you can have a CERT program without a sponsoring agency, and whether that has to be a public safety or emergency operations agency.



While you're at it, ask them what is the most appropriate radio service to use. Just bear in mind, of course, that the FCC has the sole and final word in all radiocommunications matters, in case they give a different answer.



Once you understand that many agencies have sponsored CERT programs because they had to do so in order to avoid losing all DHS funding, it becomes easier to understand why those same agencies have often been reluctant to provide budgets and equipment (including radios) to their CERTs. I've seen that change as CERT teams have proven their value and earned respect. That's just the way it is done: earned, or not.



I know at least one municipal agency that specifically calls their CERT team "first responders". Other sponsors say their CERT teams are emergency responders and force multipliers, but specifically never "first" responders. With over 2000 sponsored programs (according to FEMA) it isn't surprising that there are some differing opinions, and the standards aren't all worked out yet.

Rred,

That being said, is there indeed a mandate that states specifically what radio service or frequencies a CERT team MUST use?

It's sounding to me then, that you are saying CERT would be closer to RACES for comparative purposes.

I honestly don't know enough about CERT to know that. I've always thought of them as vollies not unlike ARES.

73,
Jim

 

[MTS2000des]

Rred, you are the classic delusional whacker. Please seek help immediately.

Straight from:

https://www.fema.gov/community-emergency-response-teams

The Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) Program educates people about disaster preparedness for hazards that may impact their area and trains them in basic disaster response skills, such as fire safety, light search and rescue, team organization, and disaster medical operations. Using the training learned in the classroom and during exercises, CERT members can assist others in their neighborhood or workplace following an event when professional responders are not immediately available to help. CERT members also are encouraged to support emergency response agencies by taking a more active role in emergency preparedness projects in their community.

This right there spells out what the intent and purpose of FEMA's CERT program is: to give CITIZENS, aka CIVILIANS (read: NON GOVERNMENT) basic skills and training to take care of themselves and their immediate community until...wait for it...PROFESSIONAL RESPONDERS arrive.

It's sounding to me then, that you are saying CERT would be closer to RACES for comparative purposes.

Jim,

You are asking someone who has no understanding what CERT is to give you their warped, whacker infused interpretation. FEMA created CERT to give ordinary civilians basic skills to be better prepared for disasters.

Some local EMAs use their CERT teams for other purposes, the same way some EMAs use hams in other capacities than passing ham radio traffic yet still call it ARES.

Regardless at the end of the day, FEMA makes it clear exactly what it is.

For a complete description of what CERT is about, check out the FEMA CERT website:

https://www.fema.gov/community-emergency-response-teams/about-community-emergency-response-team

 

[mmckenna]

Rred,

I think this might be the paragraph in Part 90 you are referring to, correct me if I'm wrong:

§90.20 Public Safety Pool.
(a) Eligibility. The following are eligible to hold authorizations in the Public Safety Pool

(2) Persons or organizations other than governmental entities are eligible to hold authorizations in the Public Safety Pool to operate radio stations for transmission of communications, as listed below. When requesting frequencies not designated by a “PS” in the coordinator column of the frequency table in paragraph (c)(3) of this section, applications must be accompanied by a statement from the governmental entity having legal jurisdiction over the area to be served, supporting the request:

(vii) Organizations established for disaster relief purposes having an emergency radio communications plan for the transmission of communications relating to the safety of life or property, the establishment and maintenance of temporary relief facilities, and the alleviation of the emergency situation during periods of actual or impending emergency, or disaster, and until substantially normal conditions are restored. In addition, the stations may be used for training exercises, incidental to the emergency communications plan, and for operational communications of the disaster relief organization or its chapter affiliates. The initial application from a disaster relief organization shall be accompanied by a copy of the charter or other authority under which the organization was established and a copy of its communications plan. The plan shall fully describe the operation of the radio facilities and describe the method of integration into other communications facilities which normally would be available to assist in the alleviation of the emergency condition.



There are "low power" frequencies available in the "Public Safety Pool" that are limited to 2 watts:
§90.267 Assignment and use of frequencies in the 450-470 MHz band for low power use.
None of that limits radios to only 2 watts, it only says that on those specific frequencies, 2 watts is the highest allowed ERP. It also doesn't single out specific frequencies for CERT use.



The FCC rules are very convoluted and can be quite confusing. Having read through them, there isn't any place where CERT is singled out or given specific frequencies. Looking at 90.20, a CERT team could possibly qualify for Part 90 frequencies, but this doesn't negate the need for frequency coordination, licensing, or following the technical rules. In fact, it specifically says:
"applications must be accompanied by a statement from the governmental entity having legal jurisdiction over the area to be served, supporting the request:"
It also doesn't give CERT teams access to any and all frequencies in the public safety pool. Licenses will still apply to specific listed frequencies.

Your local agencies may welcome CERT being on their primary frequencies, they may even supply radios, but this is not standardized across the nation. CERT teams cannot just purchase radios and program them up on public safety frequencies without authorization. The rules regarding licensing still apply. Under normal (non-emergency or STA's) your CERT group would be required to have an FCC license, or direct written permission from any licensee granting you use of their system.

There are NO frequencies set aside for CERT specifically. There is a public safety pool of frequencies, but these require specific licensing. There are also "interoperability" frequencies, but these also have requirements.

I'd caution against taking bits and pieces of the rules and fitting them together to suit assumed needs. There is nothing in the FCC rules that allow CERT groups to operate independently of the rules, without proper licensing or without properly type accepted radios. It would be appropriate and highly recommended to talk to a public safety frequency coordinator about your CERT teams needs. This should also include discussions with your agency sponsor.

There are certainly frequencies that are commonly used. That includes the 155.160 Search and Rescue frequency, as well as VFire, VLaw, VMed, VTac and VCall, as well as their similar channels in the VHF Low, UHF, 700 and 800MHz bands. These still have specific rules that apply to their usage, and are not open for everyone and anyone to use.

If your local CERT team has the money for all this radio gear, your group would certainly be in the minority. Most volunteer organizations are poorly funded, and need what little funding they do have to purchase specific gear. While radios are useful, they certainly shouldn't be the only tool in a CERT teams toolbox. A radio doesn't do much to provide for the immediate needs of the victim, and shouldn't be the only tool you carry. A good first responder can do their job without a radio. In an emergency, communications are important, but so is a lot of other skills. Don't loose site of this and just focus on the radio.