Why is there NOT a VHF or UHF CB in America , and Why is CB not Digital ?

[RFI-EMI-GUY]

The most exciting one I can think of is the creation of a carrier-free messaging platform that could be integrated into cell phones.
Imagine your cell phones having the ability to use peer-to-peer messaging (think FireChat, Beartooth, GoTenna) using an open source & end-to-end encrypted protocol, that also allows emergency messaging from local, state, federal government. It could be connected to the Internet, but also mesh network its way to the endpoint.
There is NO technical reason this couldn't happen, but I could spend days listing the political reasons it likely never will in my lifetime.
While I'm dreaming, let's just push for this to be an ITU all-regions allocation.

What about a mesh networking app that uses BT and WIFI to gather encrypted short messages from phones around it and then store and forward those messages via other phones and networks until the reach a specific recipient. It would propagate messages like a virus.

So let's say you are at a campground or other rural location. Your phone captures messages from a dozen other phones, and likewise they each capture those messages. Then you all go separate ways , on different days, using different forms of transportation. Say you fly to NYC and when there or on your way, your dozen messages are collected by 100 other travellers. Eventually, within days, some of your messages would reach a destination. The other messages from the campground will also reach destination via other travellers.

I know, it sounds a bit archaic, like sending post cards, but think of the possibilities if the grid is down and you just need messages to get into the next town or town 100 miles away.

Sent from my SM-T350 using Tapatalk

 

[radioman2001]

If you have a WiFi at a location you can use Zello, no carrier required. I don't know if there is a SMS type app out there, if not maybe I will have my son create one.

 

[ladn]

From what I've learned on Wikipedia, it looks like CB used to be in the 460-470MHz range when it was established in 1945; about 1957 it got moved to it's current frequency range.

Not exactly. CB radio had different classes. The 462/467 UHF CB was called "Class A" and "Class B" It is now known as GMRS. The 27 MHz CB frequencies were "Class D" . There were (are) also "Class C" frequencies that were used for radio control. The Class C frequencies were interspaced with the 27MHz Class D channels.

 

[WB9YBM]

Not exactly. CB radio had different classes. The 462/467 UHF CB was called "Class A" and "Class B" It is now known as GMRS. The 27 MHz CB frequencies were "Class D" . There were (are) also "Class C" frequencies that were used for radio control. The Class C frequencies were interspaced with the 27MHz Class D channels.

actually exactly. You might want to actually read my reference--you'll see it's almost an exact quote. I left out the "Class A" & etc. notes to avoid clutter/confusion.

 

[WB9YBM]

What about a mesh networking app that uses BT and WIFI to gather encrypted short messages from phones around it and then store and forward those messages via other phones and networks until the reach a specific recipient. It would propagate messages like a virus.

So let's say you are at a campground or other rural location. Your phone captures messages from a dozen other phones, and likewise they each capture those messages. Then you all go separate ways , on different days, using different forms of transportation. Say you fly to NYC and when there or on your way, your dozen messages are collected by 100 other travellers. Eventually, within days, some of your messages would reach a destination. The other messages from the campground will also reach destination via other travellers.

I know, it sounds a bit archaic, like sending post cards, but think of the possibilities if the grid is down and you just need messages to get into the next town or town 100 miles away.

Sent from my SM-T350 using Tapatalk

It sounds interesting--sort of like the "message in a bottle" approach. With so many people wanting instant gratification out there, I'm not sure how many would be patient enough to wait for days to get their message through. I like the "Daisy Chain" approach for campers (or others who are out of range of cell towers) so they can get messages (especially emergency calls) through--although in this case the Daisy Chain would need to be relatively quick...

 

[JasonTracy]

What about a mesh networking app that uses BT and WIFI to gather encrypted short messages from phones around it and then store and forward those messages via other phones and networks until the reach a specific recipient.

This is almost exactly how Firechat works. The problem is that the app itself is a bit buggy, it is hard to get people to see the value in it, and 2.4GHz is so short-ranged that it isn't really practical most of the time.
That's why I think having access to some of the lower bands in an ISM style allocation makes more sense. If you combined that with a protocol similar to Firechat, it would really make a difference.
Plus, people are really used to text messaging now. Sending some very short messages like this is so much more efficient than phone, so we wouldn't need a ton of bandwidth.
Long story short: Let's quit thinking of Citizens Band as only something for voice communications, and figure out how to make it more useful for text.

 

[krokus]

What about a mesh networking app that uses BT and WIFI to gather encrypted short messages from phones around it and then store and forward those messages via other phones and networks until the reach a specific recipient. It would propagate messages like a virus.

Interesting, but I see that whole system getting clogged, in a hurry. (Especially as messages take a couple hops, then come back to your phone, and keep looping around.)

Sent using Tapatalk

 

[NC1]

Digital modes on GMRS could be the death of GMRS. Think of all the people across the country that use it for family purposes, vacationers, campers, hikers, on and on and on. Those people pay for their licenses so they can use the frequencies. If you have a repeater somewhere that only has a range of 20 miles or so, it would essentially render useless that channel for everybody in a 40 mile radius. All they will hear is noise and scan mode is now completely useless. Add in a few more repeaters in the area and now everyone has to find a quiet channel that is usable.

That could be quite annoying to potentially hundreds of fellow licensees. Do you think they are going to renew their license? Nope. Now the fCC will lose their income stream and maybe look to auction off the frequencies since it is no longer profitable - and there goes GMRS.

Using digital modes has no real advantage over analog, it actually is worse in both voice quality and coverage. And also the equipment is more expensive for everybody, more difficult to program, and you need a computer to do that. I can almost guarantee 95% of licenses would not be renewed, and the FCC would not be one bit happy about it.

 

[RFI-EMI-GUY]

Interesting, but I see that whole system getting clogged, in a hurry. (Especially as messages take a couple hops, then come back to your phone, and keep looping around.)

Sent using Tapatalk

Messages would have headers and some sort of expiration date. If your phone saw a message it already passed along or a duplicate message in its RAM, it could ignore it. Old messages would expire just as IP packets don't continue to find there way aimlessly.

There could be features beyond a short message like locating a lost phone off network by remotely pinging it from another phone or sending an SOS from a phone out of range of a network but nearby other phones. Example a car runs off a bridge into a deep gully, yet motorists keep driving by overhead unaware. The hardware is there to make this happen. The coding of course would be the key.

 

[RFI-EMI-GUY]

It sounds interesting--sort of like the "message in a bottle" approach. With so many people wanting instant gratification out there, I'm not sure how many would be patient enough to wait for days to get their message through. I like the "Daisy Chain" approach for campers (or others who are out of range of cell towers) so they can get messages (especially emergency calls) through--although in this case the Daisy Chain would need to be relatively quick...

In dense urban areas, local messages could be delivered in an hour or so. But being slow in a remote area is not that detrimental. Messages to a nearby town could get there as soon as a day or less, faster than USPS.

 

[ko6jw_2]

All digital modes used in VHF and UHF are FM. P25, DMR, D-Star, C4FM etc are all FM.

CB users do have SSB which has lower bandwidth than FM. Yes you can use digital modes on HF that are not FM. Not voice modes, however.

I remember when SSB became available on CB radios and it was met with a lot of hostility because other non SSB users couldn't listen. The same would happen with digital plus the need to accommodate different digital modes.

In short, this is not going to happen - ever.

GMRS is the best UHF "CB" choice right now. Yes, you need to pay for a license (hopefully), but you can run up to 50 watts and have repeaters.

 

[Token]

From what I've learned on Wikipedia, it looks like CB used to be in the 460-470MHz range when it was established in 1945; about 1957 it got moved to it's current frequency range. Yeah, it would be nice to see CB advance a bit by utilizing other modes. Figuring out how they'd all get along without conflict on a limited number of channels would be a challenge, though. It might also be that the FCC wants to encourage people to get their ham license in order to make use of other modes and save CB as a type of simple, easy introduction to radio communication.

Many people have addressed the original question in various ways. My take on it all.

Although now commonly called Citizens Band Radio, the original name of the services in question was the Citizens Radio Service (CRS), before becoming the Personal Radio Service in 1976 (it is still the PRS today). Class A and B morphed into GMRS / FRS, Class C while still in legal existence has relatively little activity today, and Class D was added in 1958. Class D is what we call the Citizens Band Radio Service today, and is Subpart D of Title 47, Part 95. Today Subpart B is FRS, Subpart C is Radio Control, Subpart D is CB (11 meter), Subpart E is GMRS, and Subpart J is MURS.

The original Class A and Class B (UHF) CRS hardware was expensive, and almost killed the service leaving the gate. A couple of years later (or maybe only a year into the service, depending on who's timelines you read) the Citizens Radio Corporation brought out more affordable hardware, primarily for Class B. However the usage of Class A and B CRS was always pretty limited.

In September of 1958 the ham 11 meter band was removed from amateur use and transferred to Class D CRS, this is what most people mean when they say Citizens Band radio. Shifting to HF from UHF and AM from FM allowed the gear to be much less costly.

In other words, in the US we have HF (CB), VHF (MURS), and UHF (GMRS and FRS) options that are part of the Personal Radio Service. They may, in some cases, be handled slightly differently from Citizens Band Radio, but they are all part of the same service.

As for no digital, the problem there might, in part, be inertia. Yes, there were no digital modes when any of these services started, so each service has millions of radios in circulation incompatible with digital.

If a digital mode was introduced for each or any of these services they would probably be interfering with existing modes. Someone using a digital mode would wipe out the channel for someone using analog modes, and someone using analog modes would be increasing the bit error rates of the digital modes on channel. There are millions of existing analog mode radios out there, in use. In order to really add a digital component to these services, and have that digital mode rapidly accepted, it is likely they would have to be on separate frequencies, at least initially, until the new modes could be well adopted.

If the FCC just flipped a switch and said "after today X, Y, and Z mode digital is allowed on GMRS, FRS, MURS, and CB" few existing users would buy in at first. Why replace perfectly good radios that are working for you today? It is likely the digital radios would be slightly higher cost than the analog radios would be, and that would push consumers towards analog. When a consumer sees two products for the same service, one is $25 and the other is $40, what will the majority of the consumers choose?

If the FCC mandated a change to digital, vs analog, how many consumers, particularly in the unlicensed services, using such radios would comply? I am betting not many. If the FCC said "these specific channels are digital, and these are analog", again, how many would comply?

T!

 

[mmckenna]

If the FCC just flipped a switch and said "after today X, Y, and Z mode digital is allowed on GMRS, FRS, MURS, and CB" few existing users would buy in at first. Why replace perfectly good radios that are working for you today? It is likely the digital radios would be slightly higher cost than the analog radios would be, and that would push consumers towards analog. When a consumer sees two products for the same service, one is $25 and the other is $40, what will the majority of the consumers choose?

Two things I'd point out in support of your post...

The price of digital radios has dropped considerably over the years. Many manufacturers on the LMR side are slowly moving away from analog only radios. Kenwood has a number of analog/digital capable radios well within the reach of hobby/low tier commercial/retail users.
I think your inertia statement is spot on. The CB manufacturers are basically riding along on technology that is well past retirement date. Not much in the way of new development, and if forced, new digital or FM capable CB radios would be quite expensive until the market took off. Not sure the market would ever "take off" again, though. I don't see a resurgence in the CB radio fad of the 70's and 80's.

The other big issue is regarding -which digital mode-.
There are a number to choose from, and the FCC likely wouldn't want to give the nod to any one specific manufacturer or specific mode.
So, it would rely on industry or some other well established group to push that.
Adding digital to CB is easy to say, but harder to do. For the non-hobbyist, any digital mode would need to be simple, "consumer proof" and easy to understand. Multiple bandwidths like in NXDN, time slots like DMR, or any of the other settings like RAN or color code, heck even DCS or CTCSS would need to be simplified for the end user. System Fusion is not well accepted, so little chance that would fly. D-Star is the same. P25 is costly and would be overkill.
To allow the random communications that are so popular on CB, it would really need to reflect the current "pick one of the 40 channels and push the button" approach. From the GMRS/FRS side, CTCSS/DCS can easily confuse consumers, and manufacturers have done little to ease that.

For CB, opening it up to FM would allow the manufacturers to use existing radios that are already sold in other countries to be used (provided type acceptance was granted) Even just FM without CTCSS would make life a bit more tolerable.

I think the big driver for all this will need to come from the manufacturers. For them to want to invest in the R&D will take enough demand from the consumers. My concern would be that other than a small group of hobbyists, there isn't a wide spread demand for much more than what we already have.

But, we can dream. FM on CB would be nice. Digital on MURS, FRS and GMRS would be nice….

 

[scanmanmi]

Around here I can hear hunters illegally using 2 meter radios for their parties. One day I was working at a construction site and noticed a hillbilly pick-up with a mag mount on the hood and a Yaesu inside. I played dumb and asked if that was some kind of ham radio. No No No he shook his head, that's a VHF CB!

 

[mmckenna]

No No No he shook his head, that's a VHF CB!

At work me and my team are (unfortunately) under the IT organization. One of our past directors kept referring to our various radio systems as "CB's". Nice guy, but limited breadth of knowledge. Not a hillbilly, either.

 

[FiveFilter]

For the hillbilly talking to his hunting party without the aid of repeaters, what advantage is 2 meters over 11 meters? The size of the antenna?

 

[magic_lantern]

Why in gods name would anyone want crappy digital quality audio over the fidelity of AM or SSB? there's nothing one can do to improve digital audio other than use a better modulation.

 

[krokus]

For the hillbilly talking to his hunting party without the aid of repeaters, what advantage is 2 meters over 11 meters? The size of the antenna?

Yes, along with easy access to radios with much higher transmit power.

Sent using Tapatalk

 

[NC1]

But, we can dream. FM on CB would be nice.

I could see FM on CB, and allow 25 watts. Of course it would have to be on something like channels 25 to 40 only since those seem to be the least used.
No repeaters, simplex only.

That could possibly revive the CB band somewhat. The FCC could charge a small fee $10 for 5 years (if they so desired), and the manufacturers would be busy cranking out these new units. It would not be that difficult to implement, but the license has to be minimal, and equipment can't be more than 1 1/2 times what it is now to make this succeed.

 

[buddrousa]

If you think family service is bad now just think 100 watt amps off frequency radios next to Police and Fire NIGHTMARE.
Hey goodbuddy you take a screw driver and turn that frequency thing a ma jig and get all new channels.