i am very happy that the FCC clarified the issue. I use GMRS for local and family communications and having people coming in constantly from all over the us interfering with my signal is very annoying. If you want long range communication then go get a amateur license.
Hey Frank, yes, I agree with you and like I said, that was the intent of GMRS, its spelled out in its inception. At the same time, I think there is a happy middle ground that all users could take advantage of, it would just require some cooperation and organization.
I don't have to worry about linked repeats, but now what do I do with all the noise from FRS and even all the interference I received that I MUST accept but not cause? Pl tones work for this do a degree, but now are we not walking on their traffic?
@keem5143 I'm assuming you're using a repeater, so PLs block all other traffic. But you're not in a repeater and just going Point to Point. You can still use PLs without interference. I'm in NY, I never get outside interference when using PLs.
One thing that a lot of groups do is use mobile or portable repeaters. If you are having an event such as 4 wheeling, huuntinng, or many other activities, you can just park a car on a high point with a gain antenna or if your radios are below the repeater just use a 1/4 wave mobile antenna and you will be all set. Good post! Thanks!
Why does everyone believe that the purpose of linked repeaters are for "Making random contacts" etc... Linked GMRS repeaters absolutely have a value when managed properly, and DO help regionally with LOCAL communications. Many parts of our country are very rural and being able to connect small rural communities and areas where people recreate, travel, work, hunt, fish, live etc... Has already proven to be in the interest of the public and the communities linked repeaters serve.
As an Extra class HAM…for me it’s about the engineering challenge…how far can I reach with a half dipole that I cobbled together myself…or can we I grab that contact with a satellite? Fast scan TV? So the reaching for strangers is really not what it’s about, although a solid QSO is fun, it’s more about developing my amateur radio skill set…building my own vacuum tubes and transistors…GMRS is for hiking and chatting from the store and asking if you need another roll of TP if your cellphone is dead…I’ve toyed with lasers too…it’d be fun to see if we could link HAM repeaters with laser links…laser is unregulated
@@RANTStrategies most General and Extra Class HAMS tend to be…the ones I know…recently I became interested in making vacuum tubes…it’s not hard honestly
Making vacuum tubes isn’t hard, making ones that are good quality and last, as I’ve been learning to my chagrin is a bit harder…🤣 I’ve been trying to make small triodes…my shop trash cans are full of failures…I think I’ve finally got it figured out, but I still slip up here and there…especially since I’m designing them with specific engineering changes to fit in a small portable radio I’m building…
Just because you can doesn't mean you should. I agree with the FCC on this one. There isn't a lot of GMRS activity around here but I can see where it would become a problem where the is more activity.
I’m looking at GMRS for emergency communications within my family. With 5-watt HTs, we are too far apart, so I’m working with friends in the area to set up a repeater in the area that the family could use. Of course, I would want to make it useable to the public so anyone can benefit from it. I like the idea of strategic placement of repeaters, but pulling it off without some sort of philanthropy would be extremely difficult.
@@theredkitechannel3194 but at least you are already thinking about it and working on a plan. There’s a few ways to accomplish this, it would really just depend on your budget! Any insight I can offer I’d be happy to, so please don’t hesitate to reach out
Well the problem where I live in the mountains of Northern California is that we basically have 3 to 4 GMRS repeaters that all work pretty well on the ridgelines as you would expect. But in the canyons only one at a time if any will work and so for a person to keep in contacts with their buddies out on a hike or motorcycle ride works if you switch repeaters enough mostly but doesn't work going back to one's home so in this scenario the only one repeater works at home for most of us and if it was linked to the other three it would be amazing.
The FCC is not only there to police the frequencies, but to provide services in the interest of the public. GMRS is growing, it’s time for the FCC to recognize this growth and to provide enhancements to this service that allows everyone in the public space for communication. We need more channels, 8 repeater pairs aren’t enough in metropolitan areas. As far as rural, mountainous terrain where a lot of GMRS operations occur, the FCC should allow manufacturers to devise a means to get messages back home that we are safe. This could be by text messaging by satellite on a separate emergency channel. The FCC is currently allowing cellphone carriers to provide a satellite linkage for emergency purposes leaving Garmin and others out in the cold, charging exorbitant fees for this service. It’s time for GMRS and MURS frequencies to be combined into one radio giving MURS 5 watts and 10 more channels. The MURS VHF band is superior in forest lands, why must we carry 2 radios.
I love it, that would be fantastic and maybe the FCC will catch up, seems the service pay have just outpaced their regulation or understanding of the demand, but who knows. I'm going to go right back to what you said with the additional channels and then also pose, again, something that could be done right now, tomorrow, would be for the GMRS community to some together to create an understanding and try to make it much more organized to assist making some artificial "linked" repeater coverage.
Yes, I agree that something needs to be done with both services to bring things up to speed. When you look at business band frequencies and MURS, it becomes obvious that the VHF business band frequencies are being grossly underutilized. Personally, I don't see any reason why MURS couldn't be expanded to 22 channels, just like FRS. I also think that 5 watts on MURS is very reasonable. I think this could be done on a secondary user basis. There certainly ARE radio services that share their frequencies with other services on a secondary basis elsewhere, right now. But I doubt if the FCC will listen. 😕🤷
Lots to unpack here. First, "...the FCC should allow manufacturers to devise a means to get messages back home that we are safe," -- alluding to perhaps combining something like a SPOT or Zoleo or Garmin Inreach. Typically, the FCC doesn't do this, as it protects the separate industries from being obsoleted by someone that comes along with "one device to rule them all." The satellite SOS function that is being included in cell phones is exactly that, and it's not a full-on satellite communications device on purpose for this precise reason. In terms of combining services...I think you mentioned combining GMRS and MURS...FCC doesn't do this, either, as a matter of course. Now, there are often exceptions (i.e. FRS/GMRS radios); but generally the FCC doesn't allow cross-service radios. Incidentally, this applies to Amateurs, as well: we're not authorized to use Amateur rigs on, for instance, the CB band, as any radio used for operation on the CB band must be type-accepted for use on the CB band, and Amateur radio gear is not. Now, all that being said, although I'm not a GMRS licensee, I do believe there is a short-message data provision in the GMRS licensing scheme, right? Depending upon the emission types that are allowed, it could be that something like APRS could be stood-up on GMRS; and that might provide a rules-acceptable means to do what you are looking to do. On the topic of working VHF and UHF without the need to carry two radios: there already exists a radio service that allows for this. What is unclear to me is why folks that have clearly outgrown the provisions of FRS, GMRS, and MURS want the rules and provisions of these services to change, rather than these folks recognizing that they've perhaps outgrown these services and upgrade to an Amateur license. In terms of the limited frequency pairs for repeaters in the GMRS service: unlike in the Amateur service where there is close coordination on a regional level to de-conflict repeater inputs and outputs, there is no such coordination in the GMRS service. If GMRS repeater operators start doing the work of coordination, this may actually solve the issue; and if it doesn't, then that is the time to go to the FCC and petition for a larger allocation of frequencies.
@thebugg333 When the FCC builds a service band plan, most of the time, there are "extra" frequencies built in, i.e., the VHF Marine Band has many other frequencies/channels that are "in between" the current numerical channels. A few are earmarked for use by the Coast Guard, but I, a CG veteran, have never heard any traffic on them. As for MURS, those were initially Part 90 Itinerant Business/Color Dot frequencies. 154.600 still is. I for one wouldn't mind at all if the FCC wanted to add MURS to existing GMRS, or implement a GMRS Plus license adding MURS (increasing power to 5 to 50 watts), and 5 more "high power" VHF channels. Designate a few VHF repeater channels, add a few to UHF, throw in a half dozen digital channels on both U & and VHF, and increase the license fee accordingly. And IF such a thing came to pass, it wouldn't break my heart to see the "Big 3" (Motorola, Icom, Kenwood) to produce a dual band portable and mobile... built to Part 90/Marine & Aviation radio standards... where the actual operating specs are close to the advertised specs. Icom is already marketing a portable PMR/dPMR to the UK & EU.
This might be a double edge sword. I personally think the ability to link GMRS repeaters is nice especially if you're in an area where there's not much coverage due to terrain. On the other hand, linking can be bad. For me, living in Socal. GMRS is extremely popular and with only 8 pairs. It gets crowded over the airwaves up to the point where eveyrone is stepping over everyone. I think instead of allowing repeaters to be linked.They should give the GMRS community more bandwidth. Maybe 4 more pairs instead of the 8.
That is definitely an option, imagine doing that and again the organizational structure I was throwing out there to really being some order to what is currently a little bit of chaos. I'm actually writing this from one of the Forks of Salmon in the Klamath right now, (Thank you Starlink) I've been monitoring MURS this entire time and I'm a little shocked to say in the last three days its been dead silent.
Try using a CB radio, there's 40 channels there. Suggesting that GMRS repeaters should be linked, is ridiculous and selfish. When someone keys a linked repeater, they deny others the use of multiple repeaters. If you want greater radio range, get an Amateur license, or use your cell phone.
IDK why people are complaining about GMRS repeater linking. The repeaters are only supposed to operate within a certain frequency range. There are a wide range of CTCSS or DTS codes to squelch them out with, if you really want to talk on the repeater frequencies.
Always pluses and minuses….. one of the big things about it though I brought up in the “potential huge oversight” video….. check that out and let me know what you think
COMPLETELY AGREE, that's why I was clear on what I like about GMRS, to the fact its not a "ham light" lol. One shouldn't be looked at as a replacement to the other, just added capabilities to have access to by utilizing both.
I use (legally) use CB, GMRS, and amateur radios on a regular basis. They form an easy progression that allow the vast majority of people to do what they want or need to do on air. If someone wants to use joined repeaters all they need to do is get a tech license. The test is easy! And the stuff on the test is well worth knowing. GMRS does just what it’s supposed to do: provide medium range clear and reliable communications to families and businesses as a reasonable price. Kind of a super FRS for the 21st century. What it really needs is more strategically placed local repeaters so that more people can use it effectively.
Also keep in mind that the FCC also attempts to keep services separate. The FCC is not going to diminish the purpose for a service just so users can avoid using another service. Yes, GMRS works for communication between friends and family and not just for making random contacts. However, repeaters and many other uses of GMRS will, in their opinion, reduce the ability of users to enjoy the spectrum for the reasons the service is provisioned. Ham radio also includes a lot of communications with people we know and often family members. Before cell phones, it seemed to be a lot more common to see whole families of hams. Hams schedule contacts with other hams and arrange nets with groups on predetermined frequencies. Local hams often have clubs that include their friends and they regularly chat over the radio. Ham radio has digital modes that create chat rooms and can signal individuals to open a 1:1 conversation. Ham radio is not just for making contacts with random people. The reason you don’t see it being used by the younger hams for personal chats is twofold: calling their ham friends on the cellphone is easier and it is private, and their non-ham friends are not as likely to want to become hams so they can communicate when cellphones exist. From an FCC viewpoint, this is fine since ham radio is not taking business away from cell phone carriers, and the activities within ham radio are serving the purposes they ascribed to it.
Hey Ken, you are correct and I'm not disagreeing with you, I guess ultimately my point was that I wished HAM was a little closer tied back to what its initial intent was, that being for recreation but with a strong tie to emergency communications, even more broadly, just having an objective on the reason for the communications being made. I was not putting HAM radio or the users down at all, I am one and I enjoy it. I just also see a value if there were more users of HAM a little more targeted on their focus and usage.
@@RANTStrategies agreed. A LOT of GMRS users even in this comment section would have a MUCH better understanding of radio and why "finding more frequencies" or "linking" or anything else isn't as attainable... and they'd have an area to have the hobby they're apparently looking for. I think most need to just find the KB6NU free study guide and take the 35 question test and would be pleasantly surprised.
"The General Mobile Radio Service (GMRS) is a land-mobile FM UHF radio service designed for short-range two-way voice communication ..." Wikipedia Linking repeaters defeats the intended Short Range design of this service. If you want longer range on GMRS try higher altitude antennas, low loss coax, and/or higher gain directional beam antennas. And has the additional effect of tying up larger areas of communications on the 8 repeater channels. Try license free CB where its now legal to talk long distance to others using Skip. Or study a bit and get your Ham license where you can talk as far as you like (depending upon the band) to more Technically oriented people all over the world, find groups of like minded people in Nets that meet weekly to daily and or hang out with friends on the radio in the comfort of your own home. There are study guides with only the questions and correct answers to the Ham license Question Pool that you can read through a few times and easily recognize the correct answer on the test. You can then learn more as you go if you choose to. I upgraded to Ham from CB back in '76 due to CB's limited range and modes. The Best Radio Service, is the One's That's Best For You! 🍺🍻 mike
I agree letter for letter with Frank2076: i am very happy that the FCC clarified the issue. I use GMRS for local and family communications and having people coming in constantly from all over the us interfering with my signal is very annoying. If you want long range communication then go get a amateur license.
i just wanna have comms with family in the places we need to travel to in an emergency....or leisure...if i can help someone in emergency..thats fine too...but these cb dudes from down south making noise is crazzzzeeeeyyy...once one person overwhelms the air then everyone has to pump up their cbs just to try to be on even playing field in that area...
Common courtesy and respect should be present no mater what band or mode you are operating on, whether its on a repeater or just using simplex. As soon as that is lost, it all just becomes noise and ruins the capability
I have thought it would be super cool if the FCC would allow a DMR digital mode on maybe one of the GMRS repeater pairs and then GMRS users could map out a plan with color codes and talk groups to reduces interface with other users, but still provide wide area coverage like people would like to have. I feel like that HAM guys are going about DMR all wrong (but then again it might be because of "encryption rules" on the ham band that are preventing it). I feel like the way DMR works users could device a plan that use the same repeater pair all across the country but separate the repeaters with color codes. Then you could even make private calls from one user to another small groups on that system and it would not bother anybody else. Just a thought :o)
@@briankendall1978 I love it! More organization for greater efficiency. I agree with you on HAM being able to do DMR better….. sigh, maybe one day lol. 🍻
@@RANTStrategiesbut that would also require our FCC overlords (in the words of NotARubicon) to allow it. And since it would probably cut in to the amount of profits they make off people buying commercial frequencies to do the same thing they will probably never allow it. It is almost always about someone making money off it somehow. But we can always ask and hope though.
Another thought might be to designate one of the low power simplex channels for digital simplex so that a person could configure his or her dmr hotspot to to connect to that nationwide network. Oh wait you can't connect the GMRS radios to phone/data lines. Rats so much for linking over the internet.
@@briankendall1978ah yes….. I recognized the NotaRubicon reference immediately……… sadly enough, it usually does boil down to simply following the money.
@ricdonato4328 well TH-cam won't let me say exactly what I want to say, so this is the most polite way of saying it, fcc has done nothing positive for the hobby has done nothing but create rules regulations and punishments, it is also an unelected body it is a agency appointed by the president, the government doesn't own the airwaves
GMRS is perfectly suited for event comms such as a local race, parade, or event where the distances are within the normal range of GMRS hand-held radio gear. Having a portable GMRS repeater in a convenient, higher elevation location, can go a long way in expanding the usable range for comms. This seems to be very much in line with the intent of the service. A portable repeater can also be placed on a hilltop without having to have a vehicle drive there. This opens a lot of possibilities for off-road groups who have several club events. Not everyone needs a GMRS license, as long as they are identified with the primary equipment the group or club is using. A club trustee can be responsible for the club license, and using the equipment. Hams have done this for many years. However, it is difficult to get enough volunteers to operate radios at a check point, roving first-aid vehicle, or other items as required. Not needing a license, anyone with a few minutes of training, can easily operate a GMRS radio. Good equipment is reasonably prices and easily afforded for a club or group.
There is no such thing as a "Club License" in GMRS, and every person transmitting on GMRS (especially through a repeater) must have a GMRS license( Or be a member of the family of the individual that holds an active GMRS License). This isn't ham, but even in Ham anyone transmitting must hold an Amateur License, or at least be transmitting under the in person, supervised control of the licensed Amateur user for teaching etc... A club license does not give permission to unlicensed members of a "club" to transmit under a club license. "A club station license allows members of an amateur radio club to have a station operating under a club call sign. The license is granted only to the trustee of the club. It conveys no operating privileges." §97.115 "Third party communications (b) The third party may participate in stating the message where: (1) The control operator is present at the control point and is continuously monitoring and supervising the third party's participation; and (2) The third party is not a prior amateur service licensee whose license was revoked or not renewed after hearing and re-licensing has not taken place; suspended for less than the balance of the license term and the suspension is still in effect; suspended for the balance of the license term and re-licensing has not taken place; or surrendered for cancellation following notice of revocation, suspension or monetary forfeiture proceedings. The third party may not be the subject of a cease and desist order which relates to amateur service operation and which is still in effect. (c) No station may transmit third party communications while being automatically controlled except a station transmitting a RTTY or data emission. (d) At the end of an exchange of international third party communications, the station must also transmit in the station identification procedure the call sign of the station with which a third party message was exchanged.
I CAN see a single repeater which would cover a wide area for a single group.... Linked repeaters... not so much, IF I want or need that I will use ham radio. Good video!
I did a video on this topic. But I agree you shouldn’t link repeaters all across the country. That said we had 3 repeaters in my county. 1 at a state park. 1 at a city. And one at a lake. They all used the same frequency and tone. There is no one location that will cover all 3 areas an all 3 are tied together. The state parks has camping, the lake has boating and fishing and the city supports both. The city has cell service the others don’t so it was nice if you are fishing to radio back to camp. Or your at camp and radio into town to your wife who is grocery shopping. The NRQZ has a lot of places where linking repeaters solves the problem of not having mountain access.
GMRS was designed to be short distance communications and targeted at families (hence the license for families). GMRS is headed to be CB 2.0 if it keeps going the way the users want it to go. GMRS radio service should stay in its lane and resolve itself to the fact that the users are not amateur radio operators. Hopefully the FCC will go ahead and act to force the unlinking of the GMRS repeaters. If these linked repeater businesses (and yes they are businesses) lose money because they did not follow the clear cut rules then so be it.
I got my Ham license to specifically use HF, being portable and being able to perform CW. I simply love talking, and i can see as well obtaining a GMRS license to use both services as a tool. Im still learning as a Technician, kind of wished id started with GMRS first this data and gps integrated stuff is above my head. I just sometimes wished being a ham operator would give use privileges to use GMRS having exemptions and not having to upgrade for each classification to go higher. But im just a dummy when it comes to this stuff. There is Sad Hams and Sad GMRS in these hobbies, i just dont care for using repeaters.
This GMRS and Amateur licensee has always been against the linking of GMRS repeaters. That defeats the intents and purposes of equal use of the frequencies. What I'd like to see (not holding my breath) is for the FCC to grant a few more channels for repeater and simplex comms... and the new simplex channels (should they - narrow band interstitial - come to pass) be strictly for GMRS licensees ONLY... NO FRS users. Possibly even designate a few new ones as "digital" like the UK & EU did with their unlicensed dPMR service.
I concur with your position, with regard to GMRS repeater linking. As an aside, repeater linking is both allowed and quite common in Amateur radio - so, if that's something one is into, this can be done at the most basic level of licensing in Amateur radio - the Technician license. I couldn't disagree with you more, however, with regard to Amateur radio; and what it comes down to is the stated purpose. The very first purpose listed in the regulations, when it comes to Amateur radio, is, "Recognition and enhancement of the value of the amateur service to the public as a voluntary non-commercial communications service, particularly with respect to providing emergency communications." This is not the case with GMRS -- nor with CB, FRS, or MURS, for that matter. Those "random" contacts, of which you speak, *could* be random contacts; or, they could, in the right hands, be an ongoing test of radio propagation. The Parks on the Air park activation could just be an excuse to go outside and play radio; or it could be an exercise in hasty field communications. Additionally, those, "random contacts" are a feature -- not a bug -- when one is discussing emergency communications. Why? --Because emergency communications don't just occur at the local level. They can very easily cross state, as well as national, borders. In this case, it may well be that one is reliant upon an initial set of "random" contacts to build an ad-hoc communications network, in order to get communications into and out of an area. One need only look as far back as the 2012 Indian Ocean earthquake and tsunami, or the 2015 earthquake in Nepal: in both these cases, Amateur radio played a key role in getting communications into and out of the affected areas. Also, it's not all just "random contacts," either - a great deal of Amateur communications is very specifically directed: look no further than one of the many DXpeditions - literally tens of thousands of stations worldwide all successfully making contacts with a small group of Amateur operators who go to great expense to put *very* remote places of the earth on the radio map for very short lengths of time. There's a DXpedition going on right now on St Paul Island (between Nova Scotia and Newfoundland), for instance -- they've logged over 70,000 contacts! Hardly "random contacts". And, make no mistake: DXpeditions are a test for both the operator trying to make the contact (pitting one's station against perhaps hundreds at a time), as well as the DXpedition participants (how on earth do you pick out individual callsigns among the hundreds at a time that are trying to make contact with you??"
Good afternoon sir and thank you for the critical thought. First off with it being common practice for HAM to have linked repeater systems, yes, absolutely, if you are into that, go that route. As far as disagreeing with me on its stated purpose.... reading this made me realize I was not as clear as I wanted to because I agree with what you are said whole heartedly. The stated purpose of HAM, with it being focused around emergency communications I am all in on. The issue is that through the advancements in radio tech, especially on the public safety side, HAM, in a lot of cases, not in all, but in a lot of cases, has drifted far away from this. Regarding the "random contacts" again, this is spot on to my feelings on the matter. You're next sentence of "when one is discussing emergency communications" is what I'm driving at here, have a purpose or an objective in mind when making these communications. Also, as I noted, I am a fan of SOTA and POTA, again, because there is an objective behind these... its not people talking aimlessly and relentlessly about nothing. That's all I was getting at with saying I was a fan of GMRS because there is a lot less of that on those channels. I was not trying to put HAM radio down in anyway, I use it and enjoy it, I just wish there was more people on it, apparently like you and I who value it as a tool much more than as a hobby. That was all, please don't think I was trying to insult anyone out there with what I said especially since I think you and I are much closer aligned in our thoughts than maybe as I initially came across. Love the convo though, thank you for the comment.
@@RANTStrategiesThanks for the response! I highlighted the very first purpose, as outlined in Part 97, mainly to differentiate Amateur radio from the other personal radio services. Personally, I think there's enough space in the ham bands to accommodate the wide gambit of interests - from those interested primarily in emergency communications to ragchewing to contesting. I don't spend a great deal of time in the phone portion of the bands, but that's just my preference. For those folks that find that phone QSOs scratch that itch, awesome. As long as they're on the radio, having fun and colouring inside the lines, rock on. For some folks, my understanding is that their ragvhew sessions are really the only thing they've got - lots of old-timers are in this position - so I ain't about to yuck their yum. In terms of emergency communications, there's a good bit of it on the bands, but one kinda has to know where to look. Many places have ARRL National Traffic System nets that provide some opportunity to learn and advance one's EmComm skills; there is also a digital modes version of this called NBEMS (Narrow-band Emergency Message System). Both of these find their proponent, as mentioned earlier, with the ARRL ARES/RACES program. There are also local / state-level voice and digital modes networks associated with AUXCOMM; which is a DHS/FEMA function. Now, some draw a distinction between the notion of "emergency communications for public service" -- which is what the aforementioned activities include -- and a different category: "communications for emergency preparedness." This second category encompasses ad-hoc communications networks for groups of people - not providing communications support for governmental organizations or NGOs like Red Cross. In this category of emergency communications, one might find groups like AMRRON, the S2 Underground's Ghostnet, the various Winlink networks like Winlink Wednesday and GLAWN (Great Lakes Amateur Winlink Networks) and other local/regional/national mutual aid groups. It is far more common (in my experience) to find groups in this category in the digital modes section of the band, rather than in the phone segment - although they're not necessarily exclusive to digital modes. In the GMRS band, I'm pretty sure that the Cajun Navy primarily uses FRS/GMRS, but I really can't speak to that as I'm not a GMRS operator. I couldn't even say whether the Cajun Navy adheres to the NIFOG frequencies for their operations, or it's way more informal than that.
The problem woth gmrs isnt fcc rulws, its users who dont comprehend the "nature amd purpose of gmrs" linking, extending the range, is wjat the fcc is trying to prevent. You want longer range go ham.
Unfortunately, the bigger and more popular these networks became, the more CB'ized they became too. There was always a certain group of people who just couldn't resist CB'izing GMRS. Apparently they thought it was funny or cute, but it was actually ruining it for many people. Then there were the ever-present kerchunkers, roger beeps, and other sound effects. I heard people starting fights and dropping the "F bomb" too many times. There are some people who have nothing to do but "camp out" on a repeater all day long and run their mouths about nothing, talking to be talking. Yes, even if the FCC hadn't shut it down, it was going downhill pretty fast anyways. I'd much rather see GMRS frequencies mostly dead than to see what was happening continue.
It's not you, the Amateur radio service isn't a "hobby". Those who choose to misuse and abuse the FCC's Amateur Radio Service call it a hobby as an excuse to destroy the rules that fall under 97.113 (97.113, a, 5 in particular).
I don't think that it states in the FCC rules for Ham radio, GMRS or even Citizens Band radio that those services are intended to be a hobby. Nope. Nada.
I agree with the FCC on this one. If GMRS repeaters get linked then you'll end up with channels that are active with traffic from all across the country and won't be available for purely local use, or too busy and tedious to monitor. There are ham repeaters that do this and it's fine there; hell, I have two linked ham DMR repeaters. Amateur Radio (literally, love of radios) is where all this experimentation belongs. The beautiful thing about GMRS is that it allows the general public to deploy commercial grade equipment for local use, with a low licensing bar. 27MHz CB was never reliable at 4 watts to provide this type of service. If you want to play with radio, that's what ham radio is for. If you want solid comms for activities with non-nerds, then that's what GMRS is for. Nice shout out to SOTA and POTA. Those folk show what can be done with radio in remote locations without access to grid power. They are developing skills and knowledge that could help in a disaster, one of the shining examples of ham radio. 73 de w7com
Hey Joe, thanks for the comment. We are on the same page here and you are dead on about CB and I love the clarity on GMRS. Yes, that is exactly it, people have access to commercial grade equipment at a low licensing bar. 73s sir, stay safe out there!
What this fellow suggest, is the same thing Amateur radio battles, when it comes to gaining interest amongst younger people ! And that is simply their Cellphones ! Most people will spend a Grand or more for an iPhone, that does virtually anything ! And don't care to waste their time with radios that limit you to talk to a local group ! Just as with Amateur radio, it takes an individual that is interested in all aspects of communication. Amateur Radio was once listed as a Service ! Sadly, and mostly do to advancements in technology, many uniformed leaders in municipalities, have chosen to hand an untrained person a communications device, without considering the ramifications, if they have little to no knowledge of what it is, they are supposed to accomplish ! And unfortunately, as with many things being Dumbed down, you can see what a once well regulated and respected service has morphed into ! Sad commentary for what society has become !
In point of fact, although there has been something of a dip in new licenses issued over the last few years (2021-2024), there's actually been a steady increase in the number of new licenses issued year-on-year since the elimination of the Morse code requirement in 2007. That same year, the first iPhone was introduced - thus it is possible to grow both smartphone users *and* Amateur operators, simultaneously. It's not like there's some binary choice being made between the two in a zero-sum game. Also, this whole notion of, "getting the younger people involved," --this needs clarification, because it's not like teenagers were lining-up in their droves to get ham radio licenses in the 60's, 70's, or 80's; and the draw of being able to talk to random people over long distances really isn't the whiz-bang thing it used to be. In the 1960's, there was an emphasis on science and technology education, which has been renewed in the US over the last number of years to a certain extent. However, even though this re-emphasis isn't really goal-oriented to the extent it was during the Project Apollo era, there seems to be some renewed interest in areas like Arduino and the whole "maker" community, kit-building (QRP Guys, etc). Does it look like it did back in the days of Heathkit? No, nor would one expect that. Last I checked, Amateur radio is still a service; differentiated in many ways from the other personal radio services (CB, FRS/GMRS, MURS). As I pointed out elsewhere, nothing about 47 CFR Part 97.1(a) has changed, so I'm not really sure to what you're referring by saying, "Amateur Radio was once listed as a Service," --like something there has changed. Finally, I'm really not sure what you're talking about when you refer to "many things being dumbed down." I hear this quite a bit, and I'm not really sure from where this notion derives. In terms of Amateur radio, if you take a look at what enforcement actions have occurred since the Morse code requirement was eliminated, the vast, *vast* majority of the enforcement actions have taken place against hams that were first licensed back in the 70's and 80's: these are not newly-licensed operators coming in and trashing the joint, but mostly Boomers with way too much time of their hands. The "problem children" on 7200, for instance, aren't GenX'ers; neither were K1MAN, KZ8O, or VE7KFM. Does this "dumbing down" include, for instance, the enormous growth in use of digital modes like JS8, FT8, Olivia, Vara, VarAC, and Winlink? -- or the many, many operators adopting the use of the Raspberry Pi in their stations? -- or the splash the (Tr)uSDX made over the last couple years? From my point of view, there seems to be an awful lot of development going on these days across a wide swath of the Amateur community, and with it comes operating. One need look no further than how Parks on the Air developed.
This is what can happen when people don't respect the laws that correspond with the frequencies of interest ! And choose to do whatever they damn well please ! Just like Citizens Band ! It will likely be a battle to get these repeater owners, linked to other repeaters, to comply ! As it has long been a belief that the FCC is a paper Tiger, and without enforcement there will likely be little done ! IMHO !
There are reports of at least two of the “big” GMRS repeater operators taking them off line, so whatever warnings may have been issued have apparently skewed some, but in the grand scheme of things you are absolutely right
Speaking as one who has actually been on ops with the badge & gun carrying series 1811 FCC Special Agents... there's not a lot of them, but when they DO enforcement, you KNOW you've been "enforced."
If they're gonna stick with the no linking then i agree with others to give us extra channels but take them from FRS and limit them to 1:8 and give the rest to gmrs in some way
There is no spectrum available to allocate nationwide like that. Narrowbanding will only go so far when FRS frequencies are interstitial to the primary channels, and the 2017 update already de-regulated the bubble pack radios further than they used to be. There won't be any changes to the service that will magically make this "better" sadly.
@@zlildem0n326Most Amateur operators don't really give much thought to what happens (or doesn't) in the GMRS spectrum, much less spend their time hating on GMRS operators.
Purest @ its best , as gmrs is a great way to hook people into ham I am both gmrs is for safety as in shf and construction crews simplex but if shf more often than not repeter may have no power or usable purpose so gmrs can b used as rarrlegram and other useful things shf . But to say gmrs raido is only for trail rides and camping as many believe , but the conducted and use of gmrs is much more adapted to help because the hams in it are much younger people, we get sad hams old dun it all shit in every 1 nest destroy ham as project s and learning and lever rules that are not fcc but their rule push people who want to have fun w project s I will say I will help anyone weather or not have ham or gmrs license without the purist attitude of the sad ol fart group I so much hate as condemnation of the raido holy from cb all the way to 1st class phone license or extra
i am very happy that the FCC clarified the issue. I use GMRS for local and family communications and having people coming in constantly from all over the us interfering with my signal is very annoying. If you want long range communication then go get a amateur license.
Hey Frank, yes, I agree with you and like I said, that was the intent of GMRS, its spelled out in its inception. At the same time, I think there is a happy middle ground that all users could take advantage of, it would just require some cooperation and organization.
PLs work
I don't have to worry about linked repeats, but now what do I do with all the noise from FRS and even all the interference I received that I MUST accept but not cause? Pl tones work for this do a degree, but now are we not walking on their traffic?
@keem5143 I'm assuming you're using a repeater, so PLs block all other traffic. But you're not in a repeater and just going Point to Point. You can still use PLs without interference. I'm in NY, I never get outside interference when using PLs.
@@keem5143 you are absolutely walking on their traffic. This is why some additional
GMRS ONLY channels added would be nice for sure
Taking up the few frequencies GMRS has with repeater linking would seriously reduce the ability to use GMRS repeaters.
@@linuxman0 more frequencies need to be allocated, in guessing we will probably get into that on Monday night’s live
One thing that a lot of groups do is use mobile or portable repeaters. If you are having an event such as 4 wheeling, huuntinng, or many other activities, you can just park a car on a high point with a gain antenna or if your radios are below the repeater just use a 1/4 wave mobile antenna and you will be all set. Good post! Thanks!
Why does everyone believe that the purpose of linked repeaters are for "Making random contacts" etc... Linked GMRS repeaters absolutely have a value when managed properly, and DO help regionally with LOCAL communications. Many parts of our country are very rural and being able to connect small rural communities and areas where people recreate, travel, work, hunt, fish, live etc... Has already proven to be in the interest of the public and the communities linked repeaters serve.
Now you NEED to watch - th-cam.com/video/PkDXtUPK2jU/w-d-xo.htmlsi=_aZS9ScfHwGvFHel
Couldn’t agree with you more!
Its not meant to link communities that's why.
@@robertm1672 GMRS is the perfect tool to link communities, and we will work hard to see the FCC accommodate that need, regardless of your opinion.
As an Extra class HAM…for me it’s about the engineering challenge…how far can I reach with a half dipole that I cobbled together myself…or can we I grab that contact with a satellite? Fast scan TV? So the reaching for strangers is really not what it’s about, although a solid QSO is fun, it’s more about developing my amateur radio skill set…building my own vacuum tubes and transistors…GMRS is for hiking and chatting from the store and asking if you need another roll of TP if your cellphone is dead…I’ve toyed with lasers too…it’d be fun to see if we could link HAM repeaters with laser links…laser is unregulated
@@marksmadhousemetaphysicalm2938 you are a mad scientist mark! I like it!!!
@@RANTStrategies most General and Extra Class HAMS tend to be…the ones I know…recently I became interested in making vacuum tubes…it’s not hard honestly
Making vacuum tubes isn’t hard, making ones that are good quality and last, as I’ve been learning to my chagrin is a bit harder…🤣 I’ve been trying to make small triodes…my shop trash cans are full of failures…I think I’ve finally got it figured out, but I still slip up here and there…especially since I’m designing them with specific engineering changes to fit in a small portable radio I’m building…
Just because you can doesn't mean you should. I agree with the FCC on this one. There isn't a lot of GMRS activity around here but I can see where it would become a problem where the is more activity.
I’m looking at GMRS for emergency communications within my family. With 5-watt HTs, we are too far apart, so I’m working with friends in the area to set up a repeater in the area that the family could use. Of course, I would want to make it useable to the public so anyone can benefit from it. I like the idea of strategic placement of repeaters, but pulling it off without some sort of philanthropy would be extremely difficult.
@@theredkitechannel3194 but at least you are already thinking about it and working on a plan. There’s a few ways to accomplish this, it would really just depend on your budget! Any insight I can offer I’d be happy to, so please don’t hesitate to reach out
@@theredkitechannel3194 be sure to check out this video as well…. th-cam.com/video/PkDXtUPK2jU/w-d-xo.htmlsi=8woVSgwhiCEoozEJ
If you just need local communication on GMRS don't turn on a repeating channel just use what it is .
Well the problem where I live in the mountains of Northern California is that we basically have 3 to 4 GMRS repeaters that all work pretty well on the ridgelines as you would expect. But in the canyons only one at a time if any will work and so for a person to keep in contacts with their buddies out on a hike or motorcycle ride works if you switch repeaters enough mostly but doesn't work going back to one's home so in this scenario the only one repeater works at home for most of us and if it was linked to the other three it would be amazing.
@@adambatchelder4121 YUP!!!! Check out the “potential huge oversight” video…. You may even recognize some of the terrain
The FCC is not only there to police the frequencies, but to provide services in the interest of the public. GMRS is growing, it’s time for the FCC to recognize this growth and to provide enhancements to this service that allows everyone in the public space for communication. We need more channels, 8 repeater pairs aren’t enough in metropolitan areas. As far as rural, mountainous terrain where a lot of GMRS operations occur, the FCC should allow manufacturers to devise a means to get messages back home that we are safe. This could be by text messaging by satellite on a separate emergency channel. The FCC is currently allowing cellphone carriers to provide a satellite linkage for emergency purposes leaving Garmin and others out in the cold, charging exorbitant fees for this service. It’s time for GMRS and MURS frequencies to be combined into one radio giving MURS 5 watts and 10 more channels. The MURS VHF band is superior in forest lands, why must we carry 2 radios.
I love it, that would be fantastic and maybe the FCC will catch up, seems the service pay have just outpaced their regulation or understanding of the demand, but who knows. I'm going to go right back to what you said with the additional channels and then also pose, again, something that could be done right now, tomorrow, would be for the GMRS community to some together to create an understanding and try to make it much more organized to assist making some artificial "linked" repeater coverage.
Yes, I agree that something needs to be done with both services to bring things up to speed. When you look at business band frequencies and MURS, it becomes obvious that the VHF business band frequencies are being grossly underutilized. Personally, I don't see any reason why MURS couldn't be expanded to 22 channels, just like FRS. I also think that 5 watts on MURS is very reasonable. I think this could be done on a secondary user basis. There certainly ARE radio services that share their frequencies with other services on a secondary basis elsewhere, right now. But I doubt if the FCC will listen. 😕🤷
Lots to unpack here. First, "...the FCC should allow manufacturers to devise a means to get messages back home that we are safe," -- alluding to perhaps combining something like a SPOT or Zoleo or Garmin Inreach. Typically, the FCC doesn't do this, as it protects the separate industries from being obsoleted by someone that comes along with "one device to rule them all." The satellite SOS function that is being included in cell phones is exactly that, and it's not a full-on satellite communications device on purpose for this precise reason.
In terms of combining services...I think you mentioned combining GMRS and MURS...FCC doesn't do this, either, as a matter of course. Now, there are often exceptions (i.e. FRS/GMRS radios); but generally the FCC doesn't allow cross-service radios. Incidentally, this applies to Amateurs, as well: we're not authorized to use Amateur rigs on, for instance, the CB band, as any radio used for operation on the CB band must be type-accepted for use on the CB band, and Amateur radio gear is not.
Now, all that being said, although I'm not a GMRS licensee, I do believe there is a short-message data provision in the GMRS licensing scheme, right? Depending upon the emission types that are allowed, it could be that something like APRS could be stood-up on GMRS; and that might provide a rules-acceptable means to do what you are looking to do.
On the topic of working VHF and UHF without the need to carry two radios: there already exists a radio service that allows for this. What is unclear to me is why folks that have clearly outgrown the provisions of FRS, GMRS, and MURS want the rules and provisions of these services to change, rather than these folks recognizing that they've perhaps outgrown these services and upgrade to an Amateur license.
In terms of the limited frequency pairs for repeaters in the GMRS service: unlike in the Amateur service where there is close coordination on a regional level to de-conflict repeater inputs and outputs, there is no such coordination in the GMRS service. If GMRS repeater operators start doing the work of coordination, this may actually solve the issue; and if it doesn't, then that is the time to go to the FCC and petition for a larger allocation of frequencies.
When I researched frequencies, the only way to add more channels is to take away existing business frequencies..or allow dmr type time slots.
@thebugg333 When the FCC builds a service band plan, most of the time, there are "extra" frequencies built in, i.e., the VHF Marine Band has many other frequencies/channels that are "in between" the current numerical channels. A few are earmarked for use by the Coast Guard, but I, a CG veteran, have never heard any traffic on them. As for MURS, those were initially Part 90 Itinerant Business/Color Dot frequencies. 154.600 still is. I for one wouldn't mind at all if the FCC wanted to add MURS to existing GMRS, or implement a GMRS Plus license adding MURS (increasing power to 5 to 50 watts), and 5 more "high power" VHF channels. Designate a few VHF repeater channels, add a few to UHF, throw in a half dozen digital channels on both U & and VHF, and increase the license fee accordingly. And IF such a thing came to pass, it wouldn't break my heart to see the "Big 3" (Motorola, Icom, Kenwood) to produce a dual band portable and mobile... built to Part 90/Marine & Aviation radio standards... where the actual operating specs are close to the advertised specs. Icom is already marketing a portable PMR/dPMR to the UK & EU.
This might be a double edge sword. I personally think the ability to link GMRS repeaters is nice especially if you're in an area where there's not much coverage due to terrain. On the other hand, linking can be bad. For me, living in Socal. GMRS is extremely popular and with only 8 pairs. It gets crowded over the airwaves up to the point where eveyrone is stepping over everyone.
I think instead of allowing repeaters to be linked.They should give the GMRS community more bandwidth. Maybe 4 more pairs instead of the 8.
That is definitely an option, imagine doing that and again the organizational structure I was throwing out there to really being some order to what is currently a little bit of chaos. I'm actually writing this from one of the Forks of Salmon in the Klamath right now, (Thank you Starlink) I've been monitoring MURS this entire time and I'm a little shocked to say in the last three days its been dead silent.
Try using a CB radio, there's 40 channels there. Suggesting that GMRS repeaters should be linked, is ridiculous and selfish. When someone keys a linked repeater, they deny others the use of multiple repeaters. If you want greater radio range, get an Amateur license, or use your cell phone.
IDK why people are complaining about GMRS repeater linking. The repeaters are only supposed to operate within a certain frequency range. There are a wide range of CTCSS or DTS codes to squelch them out with, if you really want to talk on the repeater frequencies.
Always pluses and minuses….. one of the big things about it though I brought up in the “potential huge oversight” video….. check that out and let me know what you think
Great video. Thank you.
The purpose for GMRS, as you mention, is for localized communications. It does that quite well and should be used as such in my opinion.
People shouldn't be hamming on gmrs it happens here all the time in my location.
COMPLETELY AGREE, that's why I was clear on what I like about GMRS, to the fact its not a "ham light" lol. One shouldn't be looked at as a replacement to the other, just added capabilities to have access to by utilizing both.
I use (legally) use CB, GMRS, and amateur radios on a regular basis. They form an easy progression that allow the vast majority of people to do what they want or need to do on air. If someone wants to use joined repeaters all they need to do is get a tech license. The test is easy! And the stuff on the test is well worth knowing. GMRS does just what it’s supposed to do: provide medium range clear and reliable communications to families and businesses as a reasonable price. Kind of a super FRS for the 21st century. What it really needs is more strategically placed local repeaters so that more people can use it effectively.
Also keep in mind that the FCC also attempts to keep services separate. The FCC is not going to diminish the purpose for a service just so users can avoid using another service.
Yes, GMRS works for communication between friends and family and not just for making random contacts. However, repeaters and many other uses of GMRS will, in their opinion, reduce the ability of users to enjoy the spectrum for the reasons the service is provisioned.
Ham radio also includes a lot of communications with people we know and often family members. Before cell phones, it seemed to be a lot more common to see whole families of hams. Hams schedule contacts with other hams and arrange nets with groups on predetermined frequencies. Local hams often have clubs that include their friends and they regularly chat over the radio. Ham radio has digital modes that create chat rooms and can signal individuals to open a 1:1 conversation. Ham radio is not just for making contacts with random people. The reason you don’t see it being used by the younger hams for personal chats is twofold: calling their ham friends on the cellphone is easier and it is private, and their non-ham friends are not as likely to want to become hams so they can communicate when cellphones exist. From an FCC viewpoint, this is fine since ham radio is not taking business away from cell phone carriers, and the activities within ham radio are serving the purposes they ascribed to it.
Hey Ken, you are correct and I'm not disagreeing with you, I guess ultimately my point was that I wished HAM was a little closer tied back to what its initial intent was, that being for recreation but with a strong tie to emergency communications, even more broadly, just having an objective on the reason for the communications being made.
I was not putting HAM radio or the users down at all, I am one and I enjoy it. I just also see a value if there were more users of HAM a little more targeted on their focus and usage.
@@RANTStrategies agreed. A LOT of GMRS users even in this comment section would have a MUCH better understanding of radio and why "finding more frequencies" or "linking" or anything else isn't as attainable... and they'd have an area to have the hobby they're apparently looking for. I think most need to just find the KB6NU free study guide and take the 35 question test and would be pleasantly surprised.
@@MotoAlexE For sure! If nothing else, I wouldn't say one should replace the other, its just an added capability to have access to.
Be glad that in the USA GMRS can use repeaters. In Canada, GMRS radios are limited to 2 watts, no removable antennas and no GMRS repeaters.
@@bwillan oh wow, ok, so your GMRS is pretty much on par with our FRS stuff…. Interesting
"The General Mobile Radio Service (GMRS) is a land-mobile FM UHF radio service designed for short-range two-way voice communication ..." Wikipedia
Linking repeaters defeats the intended Short Range design of this service. If you want longer range on GMRS try higher altitude antennas, low loss coax, and/or higher gain directional beam antennas. And has the additional effect of tying up larger areas of communications on the 8 repeater channels.
Try license free CB where its now legal to talk long distance to others using Skip.
Or study a bit and get your Ham license where you can talk as far as you like (depending upon the band) to more Technically oriented people all over the world, find groups of like minded people in Nets that meet weekly to daily and or hang out with friends on the radio in the comfort of your own home.
There are study guides with only the questions and correct answers to the Ham license Question Pool that you can read through a few times and easily recognize the correct answer on the test. You can then learn more as you go if you choose to.
I upgraded to Ham from CB back in '76 due to CB's limited range and modes.
The Best Radio Service, is the One's That's Best For You!
🍺🍻 mike
@@CriticalThinker-42 absolutely Mike! 👍
You must not live near any mountain ranges.
@@oregongmrs did you happen to watch this one yet? th-cam.com/video/PkDXtUPK2jU/w-d-xo.htmlsi=_aZS9ScfHwGvFHel
I agree letter for letter with Frank2076: i am very happy that the FCC clarified the issue. I use GMRS for local and family communications and having people coming in constantly from all over the us interfering with my signal is very annoying. If you want long range communication then go get a amateur license.
i just wanna have comms with family in the places we need to travel to in an emergency....or leisure...if i can help someone in emergency..thats fine too...but these cb dudes from down south making noise is crazzzzeeeeyyy...once one person overwhelms the air then everyone has to pump up their cbs just to try to be on even playing field in that area...
Common courtesy and respect should be present no mater what band or mode you are operating on, whether its on a repeater or just using simplex. As soon as that is lost, it all just becomes noise and ruins the capability
I agree with all he said. We need a radio tool rather then a radio hobby. Keeping it short range will help keep it from going the way of the CB.
Linked Repeaters can ABSOLUTELY be a tool, and many have proven already to be a useful tool serving the interest of the public.
@@oregongmrs I didn't say that they weren't. Only that GMRS shouldn't be useing them.
@@WRKG321 ummmmm... no... That's not what you said. but enjoy your day...
@@MrBailey414 Yes it is. When I said short range, I am referring to single repeater hop.
I have thought it would be super cool if the FCC would allow a DMR digital mode on maybe one of the GMRS repeater pairs and then GMRS users could map out a plan with color codes and talk groups to reduces interface with other users, but still provide wide area coverage like people would like to have. I feel like that HAM guys are going about DMR all wrong (but then again it might be because of "encryption rules" on the ham band that are preventing it). I feel like the way DMR works users could device a plan that use the same repeater pair all across the country but separate the repeaters with color codes. Then you could even make private calls from one user to another small groups on that system and it would not bother anybody else. Just a thought :o)
@@briankendall1978 I love it! More organization for greater efficiency. I agree with you on HAM being able to do DMR better….. sigh, maybe one day lol. 🍻
@@RANTStrategiesbut that would also require our FCC overlords (in the words of NotARubicon) to allow it. And since it would probably cut in to the amount of profits they make off people buying commercial frequencies to do the same thing they will probably never allow it. It is almost always about someone making money off it somehow. But we can always ask and hope though.
Another thought might be to designate one of the low power simplex channels for digital simplex so that a person could configure his or her dmr hotspot to to connect to that nationwide network. Oh wait you can't connect the GMRS radios to phone/data lines. Rats so much for linking over the internet.
@@briankendall1978ah yes….. I recognized the NotaRubicon reference immediately……… sadly enough, it usually does boil down to simply following the money.
So do you think GMRS users would have a chance by petition the FCC or petition Congress make the FCC change the rules to allow such a network?
GMRS uses the UHF area of wave length. That limits the distance.
Linking repeaters kind of deviates from the spirit of limited range.
Please tell us all when you're going to advocate for eliminating 440 Amateur Linked repeaters, Linked UHF Commercial repeater systems etc...
The FCC can pound sand and kick rocks
Wow, an educated insightful comment.
@ricdonato4328 well TH-cam won't let me say exactly what I want to say, so this is the most polite way of saying it, fcc has done nothing positive for the hobby has done nothing but create rules regulations and punishments, it is also an unelected body it is a agency appointed by the president, the government doesn't own the airwaves
GMRS is perfectly suited for event comms such as a local race, parade, or event where the distances are within the normal range of GMRS hand-held radio gear. Having a portable GMRS repeater in a convenient, higher elevation location, can go a long way in expanding the usable range for comms. This seems to be very much in line with the intent of the service. A portable repeater can also be placed on a hilltop without having to have a vehicle drive there. This opens a lot of possibilities for off-road groups who have several club events. Not everyone needs a GMRS license, as long as they are identified with the primary equipment the group or club is using. A club trustee can be responsible for the club license, and using the equipment. Hams have done this for many years. However, it is difficult to get enough volunteers to operate radios at a check point, roving first-aid vehicle, or other items as required. Not needing a license, anyone with a few minutes of training, can easily operate a GMRS radio. Good equipment is reasonably prices and easily afforded for a club or group.
There is no such thing as a "Club License" in GMRS, and every person transmitting on GMRS (especially through a repeater) must have a GMRS license( Or be a member of the family of the individual that holds an active GMRS License).
This isn't ham, but even in Ham anyone transmitting must hold an Amateur License, or at least be transmitting under the in person, supervised control of the licensed Amateur user for teaching etc... A club license does not give permission to unlicensed members of a "club" to transmit under a club license.
"A club station license allows members of an amateur radio club to have a station operating under a club call sign. The license is granted only to the trustee of the club. It conveys no operating privileges."
§97.115 "Third party communications
(b) The third party may participate in stating the message where:
(1) The control operator is present at the control point and is continuously monitoring and supervising the third party's participation; and
(2) The third party is not a prior amateur service licensee whose license was revoked or not renewed after hearing and re-licensing has not taken place; suspended for less than the balance of the license term and the suspension is still in effect; suspended for the balance of the license term and re-licensing has not taken place; or surrendered for cancellation following notice of revocation, suspension or monetary forfeiture proceedings. The third party may not be the subject of a cease and desist order which relates to amateur service operation and which is still in effect.
(c) No station may transmit third party communications while being automatically controlled except a station transmitting a RTTY or data emission.
(d) At the end of an exchange of international third party communications, the station must also transmit in the station identification procedure the call sign of the station with which a third party message was exchanged.
I CAN see a single repeater which would cover a wide area for a single group.... Linked repeaters... not so much, IF I want or need that I will use ham radio. Good video!
I did a video on this topic. But I agree you shouldn’t link repeaters all across the country. That said we had 3 repeaters in my county. 1 at a state park. 1 at a city. And one at a lake. They all used the same frequency and tone. There is no one location that will cover all 3 areas an all 3 are tied together. The state parks has camping, the lake has boating and fishing and the city supports both. The city has cell service the others don’t so it was nice if you are fishing to radio back to camp. Or your at camp and radio into town to your wife who is grocery shopping. The NRQZ has a lot of places where linking repeaters solves the problem of not having mountain access.
@@JDubbsadventure absolutely, I get the argument on both sides……more channels would help this out greatly.
GMRS was designed to be short distance communications and targeted at families (hence the license for families). GMRS is headed to be CB 2.0 if it keeps going the way the users want it to go. GMRS radio service should stay in its lane and resolve itself to the fact that the users are not amateur radio operators. Hopefully the FCC will go ahead and act to force the unlinking of the GMRS repeaters. If these linked repeater businesses (and yes they are businesses) lose money because they did not follow the clear cut rules then so be it.
I got my Ham license to specifically use HF, being portable and being able to perform CW. I simply love talking, and i can see as well obtaining a GMRS license to use both services as a tool. Im still learning as a Technician, kind of wished id started with GMRS first this data and gps integrated stuff is above my head. I just sometimes wished being a ham operator would give use privileges to use GMRS having exemptions and not having to upgrade for each classification to go higher. But im just a dummy when it comes to this stuff. There is Sad Hams and Sad GMRS in these hobbies, i just dont care for using repeaters.
This GMRS and Amateur licensee has always been against the linking of GMRS repeaters. That defeats the intents and purposes of equal use of the frequencies. What I'd like to see (not holding my breath) is for the FCC to grant a few more channels for repeater and simplex comms... and the new simplex channels (should they - narrow band interstitial - come to pass) be strictly for GMRS licensees ONLY... NO FRS users. Possibly even designate a few new ones as "digital" like the UK & EU did with their unlicensed dPMR service.
I like that a lot! Had no idea the UK had theirs set up that way
I concur with your position, with regard to GMRS repeater linking. As an aside, repeater linking is both allowed and quite common in Amateur radio - so, if that's something one is into, this can be done at the most basic level of licensing in Amateur radio - the Technician license.
I couldn't disagree with you more, however, with regard to Amateur radio; and what it comes down to is the stated purpose. The very first purpose listed in the regulations, when it comes to Amateur radio, is, "Recognition and enhancement of the value of the amateur service to the public as a voluntary non-commercial communications service, particularly with respect to providing emergency communications." This is not the case with GMRS -- nor with CB, FRS, or MURS, for that matter.
Those "random" contacts, of which you speak, *could* be random contacts; or, they could, in the right hands, be an ongoing test of radio propagation. The Parks on the Air park activation could just be an excuse to go outside and play radio; or it could be an exercise in hasty field communications.
Additionally, those, "random contacts" are a feature -- not a bug -- when one is discussing emergency communications. Why? --Because emergency communications don't just occur at the local level. They can very easily cross state, as well as national, borders. In this case, it may well be that one is reliant upon an initial set of "random" contacts to build an ad-hoc communications network, in order to get communications into and out of an area. One need only look as far back as the 2012 Indian Ocean earthquake and tsunami, or the 2015 earthquake in Nepal: in both these cases, Amateur radio played a key role in getting communications into and out of the affected areas.
Also, it's not all just "random contacts," either - a great deal of Amateur communications is very specifically directed: look no further than one of the many DXpeditions - literally tens of thousands of stations worldwide all successfully making contacts with a small group of Amateur operators who go to great expense to put *very* remote places of the earth on the radio map for very short lengths of time. There's a DXpedition going on right now on St Paul Island (between Nova Scotia and Newfoundland), for instance -- they've logged over 70,000 contacts! Hardly "random contacts". And, make no mistake: DXpeditions are a test for both the operator trying to make the contact (pitting one's station against perhaps hundreds at a time), as well as the DXpedition participants (how on earth do you pick out individual callsigns among the hundreds at a time that are trying to make contact with you??"
Good afternoon sir and thank you for the critical thought. First off with it being common practice for HAM to have linked repeater systems, yes, absolutely, if you are into that, go that route.
As far as disagreeing with me on its stated purpose.... reading this made me realize I was not as clear as I wanted to because I agree with what you are said whole heartedly. The stated purpose of HAM, with it being focused around emergency communications I am all in on. The issue is that through the advancements in radio tech, especially on the public safety side, HAM, in a lot of cases, not in all, but in a lot of cases, has drifted far away from this.
Regarding the "random contacts" again, this is spot on to my feelings on the matter. You're next sentence of "when one is discussing emergency communications" is what I'm driving at here, have a purpose or an objective in mind when making these communications.
Also, as I noted, I am a fan of SOTA and POTA, again, because there is an objective behind these... its not people talking aimlessly and relentlessly about nothing. That's all I was getting at with saying I was a fan of GMRS because there is a lot less of that on those channels. I was not trying to put HAM radio down in anyway, I use it and enjoy it, I just wish there was more people on it, apparently like you and I who value it as a tool much more than as a hobby. That was all, please don't think I was trying to insult anyone out there with what I said especially since I think you and I are much closer aligned in our thoughts than maybe as I initially came across.
Love the convo though, thank you for the comment.
@@RANTStrategiesThanks for the response!
I highlighted the very first purpose, as outlined in Part 97, mainly to differentiate Amateur radio from the other personal radio services.
Personally, I think there's enough space in the ham bands to accommodate the wide gambit of interests - from those interested primarily in emergency communications to ragchewing to contesting. I don't spend a great deal of time in the phone portion of the bands, but that's just my preference. For those folks that find that phone QSOs scratch that itch, awesome. As long as they're on the radio, having fun and colouring inside the lines, rock on. For some folks, my understanding is that their ragvhew sessions are really the only thing they've got - lots of old-timers are in this position - so I ain't about to yuck their yum.
In terms of emergency communications, there's a good bit of it on the bands, but one kinda has to know where to look. Many places have ARRL National Traffic System nets that provide some opportunity to learn and advance one's EmComm skills; there is also a digital modes version of this called NBEMS (Narrow-band Emergency Message System). Both of these find their proponent, as mentioned earlier, with the ARRL ARES/RACES program. There are also local / state-level voice and digital modes networks associated with AUXCOMM; which is a DHS/FEMA function.
Now, some draw a distinction between the notion of "emergency communications for public service" -- which is what the aforementioned activities include -- and a different category: "communications for emergency preparedness." This second category encompasses ad-hoc communications networks for groups of people - not providing communications support for governmental organizations or NGOs like Red Cross.
In this category of emergency communications, one might find groups like AMRRON, the S2 Underground's Ghostnet, the various Winlink networks like Winlink Wednesday and GLAWN (Great Lakes Amateur Winlink Networks) and other local/regional/national mutual aid groups. It is far more common (in my experience) to find groups in this category in the digital modes section of the band, rather than in the phone segment - although they're not necessarily exclusive to digital modes.
In the GMRS band, I'm pretty sure that the Cajun Navy primarily uses FRS/GMRS, but I really can't speak to that as I'm not a GMRS operator. I couldn't even say whether the Cajun Navy adheres to the NIFOG frequencies for their operations, or it's way more informal than that.
The problem woth gmrs isnt fcc rulws, its users who dont comprehend the "nature amd purpose of gmrs" linking, extending the range, is wjat the fcc is trying to prevent.
You want longer range go ham.
Unfortunately, the bigger and more popular these networks became, the more CB'ized they became too. There was always a certain group of people who just couldn't resist CB'izing GMRS. Apparently they thought it was funny or cute, but it was actually ruining it for many people. Then there were the ever-present kerchunkers, roger beeps, and other sound effects. I heard people starting fights and dropping the "F bomb" too many times. There are some people who have nothing to do but "camp out" on a repeater all day long and run their mouths about nothing, talking to be talking. Yes, even if the FCC hadn't shut it down, it was going downhill pretty fast anyways. I'd much rather see GMRS frequencies mostly dead than to see what was happening continue.
@@radiohobbyist13 that is EXACTLY why I am for the licensing aspect…. Just to help stop that from happening. It sucks that it happens at all.
It's not you, the Amateur radio service isn't a "hobby". Those who choose to misuse and abuse the FCC's Amateur Radio Service call it a hobby as an excuse to destroy the rules that fall under 97.113 (97.113, a, 5 in particular).
I don't think that it states in the FCC rules for Ham radio, GMRS or even Citizens Band radio that those services are intended to be a hobby. Nope. Nada.
thanks
I agree with the FCC on this one. If GMRS repeaters get linked then you'll end up with channels that are active with traffic from all across the country and won't be available for purely local use, or too busy and tedious to monitor. There are ham repeaters that do this and it's fine there; hell, I have two linked ham DMR repeaters. Amateur Radio (literally, love of radios) is where all this experimentation belongs. The beautiful thing about GMRS is that it allows the general public to deploy commercial grade equipment for local use, with a low licensing bar. 27MHz CB was never reliable at 4 watts to provide this type of service. If you want to play with radio, that's what ham radio is for. If you want solid comms for activities with non-nerds, then that's what GMRS is for.
Nice shout out to SOTA and POTA. Those folk show what can be done with radio in remote locations without access to grid power. They are developing skills and knowledge that could help in a disaster, one of the shining examples of ham radio.
73 de w7com
Hey Joe, thanks for the comment. We are on the same page here and you are dead on about CB and I love the clarity on GMRS. Yes, that is exactly it, people have access to commercial grade equipment at a low licensing bar. 73s sir, stay safe out there!
What this fellow suggest, is the same thing Amateur radio battles, when it comes to gaining interest amongst younger people !
And that is simply their Cellphones !
Most people will spend a Grand or more for an iPhone, that does virtually anything !
And don't care to waste their time with radios that limit you to talk to a local group !
Just as with Amateur radio, it takes an individual that is interested in all aspects of communication.
Amateur Radio was once listed as a Service !
Sadly, and mostly do to advancements in technology, many uniformed leaders in municipalities, have chosen to hand an untrained person a communications device, without considering the ramifications, if they have little to no knowledge of what it is, they are supposed to accomplish !
And unfortunately, as with many things being Dumbed down, you can see what a once well regulated and respected service has morphed into !
Sad commentary for what society has become !
In point of fact, although there has been something of a dip in new licenses issued over the last few years (2021-2024), there's actually been a steady increase in the number of new licenses issued year-on-year since the elimination of the Morse code requirement in 2007. That same year, the first iPhone was introduced - thus it is possible to grow both smartphone users *and* Amateur operators, simultaneously. It's not like there's some binary choice being made between the two in a zero-sum game.
Also, this whole notion of, "getting the younger people involved," --this needs clarification, because it's not like teenagers were lining-up in their droves to get ham radio licenses in the 60's, 70's, or 80's; and the draw of being able to talk to random people over long distances really isn't the whiz-bang thing it used to be. In the 1960's, there was an emphasis on science and technology education, which has been renewed in the US over the last number of years to a certain extent. However, even though this re-emphasis isn't really goal-oriented to the extent it was during the Project Apollo era, there seems to be some renewed interest in areas like Arduino and the whole "maker" community, kit-building (QRP Guys, etc). Does it look like it did back in the days of Heathkit? No, nor would one expect that.
Last I checked, Amateur radio is still a service; differentiated in many ways from the other personal radio services (CB, FRS/GMRS, MURS). As I pointed out elsewhere, nothing about 47 CFR Part 97.1(a) has changed, so I'm not really sure to what you're referring by saying, "Amateur Radio was once listed as a Service," --like something there has changed.
Finally, I'm really not sure what you're talking about when you refer to "many things being dumbed down." I hear this quite a bit, and I'm not really sure from where this notion derives. In terms of Amateur radio, if you take a look at what enforcement actions have occurred since the Morse code requirement was eliminated, the vast, *vast* majority of the enforcement actions have taken place against hams that were first licensed back in the 70's and 80's: these are not newly-licensed operators coming in and trashing the joint, but mostly Boomers with way too much time of their hands. The "problem children" on 7200, for instance, aren't GenX'ers; neither were K1MAN, KZ8O, or VE7KFM. Does this "dumbing down" include, for instance, the enormous growth in use of digital modes like JS8, FT8, Olivia, Vara, VarAC, and Winlink? -- or the many, many operators adopting the use of the Raspberry Pi in their stations? -- or the splash the (Tr)uSDX made over the last couple years? From my point of view, there seems to be an awful lot of development going on these days across a wide swath of the Amateur community, and with it comes operating. One need look no further than how Parks on the Air developed.
This is what can happen when people don't respect the laws that correspond with the frequencies of interest !
And choose to do whatever they damn well please !
Just like Citizens Band !
It will likely be a battle to get these repeater owners, linked to other repeaters, to comply !
As it has long been a belief that the FCC is a paper Tiger, and without enforcement there will likely be little done !
IMHO !
There are reports of at least two of the “big” GMRS repeater operators taking them off line, so whatever warnings may have been issued have apparently skewed some, but in the grand scheme of things you are absolutely right
Speaking as one who has actually been on ops with the badge & gun carrying series 1811 FCC Special Agents... there's not a lot of them, but when they DO enforcement, you KNOW you've been "enforced."
If they're gonna stick with the no linking then i agree with others to give us extra channels but take them from FRS and limit them to 1:8 and give the rest to gmrs in some way
Or both, and open up the frequency add two or three more repeater pairs and allow linking on two pairs.
There is no spectrum available to allocate nationwide like that. Narrowbanding will only go so far when FRS frequencies are interstitial to the primary channels, and the 2017 update already de-regulated the bubble pack radios further than they used to be. There won't be any changes to the service that will magically make this "better" sadly.
@@MotoAlexE You did not read what i said at all
@@adamreynolds8270 It would be nice but they won't let that happen as long hams keep hating on gmrs
@@zlildem0n326Most Amateur operators don't really give much thought to what happens (or doesn't) in the GMRS spectrum, much less spend their time hating on GMRS operators.
Purest @ its best , as gmrs is a great way to hook people into ham I am both gmrs is for safety as in shf and construction crews simplex but if shf more often than not repeter may have no power or usable purpose so gmrs can b used as rarrlegram and other useful things shf . But to say gmrs raido is only for trail rides and camping as many believe , but the conducted and use of gmrs is much more adapted to help because the hams in it are much younger people, we get sad hams old dun it all shit in every 1 nest destroy ham as project s and learning and lever rules that are not fcc but their rule push people who want to have fun w project s I will say I will help anyone weather or not have ham or gmrs license without the purist attitude of the sad ol fart group I so much hate as condemnation of the raido holy from cb all the way to 1st class phone license or extra