Michael Black wrote:
Steve Calvin ) writes:
Sorry if this isn't the right group to ask this, if not and
someone know of a more appropriate group I'd appreciate a
pointer.

GMRS, FRS, CB and whatever are not amateur radio.

It amazes me that people can't grasp that, and continue to
post such questions here.

Doing a decent search on the newsgroups would find appropriate
newsgroups. Clearly you didn't, since you found this one
and not the proper ones.

Doing a decent search would have found the same question asked,
and answered, many times before. Chances are really good if
you "chose" this newsgroup because you found discussion of
GMRS in old posts here, the very posts that made you think
the question was "on topic" was the same question, and if you'd
just looked at the replies you would have had the answer without
adding yet another off-topic question to the newsgroup.

Michael VE2BVW

Well, EXCUSE ME Mr. High and Mighty Ham Operator.... woooooo
I'm just shaking here!

For your information asshole, I've been involved with
computers for the last 34 years and use DOS, WindoZe, AIX,
Unix, Solaris, HP, and pretty much any flavor of Linux you
can think of.

Searches are subjective and if you don't happen to enter the
right arguments you ain't gonna get the right answer. Shoot me.

I sincerely choke apologize for monopolizing your valuable
time.

To all of the other reasonable and helpful replies I
received, I thank you all very much.

Mr. Black can kiss my ass
--
Steve

In article , Steve Calvin wrote:
Michael Black wrote:
Steve Calvin ) writes:
Sorry if this isn't the right group to ask this, if not and
someone know of a more appropriate group I'd appreciate a
pointer.

GMRS, FRS, CB and whatever are not amateur radio.

It amazes me that people can't grasp that, and continue to
post such questions here.

Doing a decent search on the newsgroups would find appropriate
newsgroups. Clearly you didn't, since you found this one
and not the proper ones.

Right now there are probably a high percentage of hams using
FRS, perhaps not GMRS. There used to be a GMRS and FRS forum
which is gone, but the ham groups is probably the best informed and
also the boating people. Sometimes people post to a group they are familiar
with, and not necessarily the best for answering the question.
They may respect the answers with people they
are familiar with. Perhaps they also are looking for another channel in case normal
inspecting does not come up with results in a given time.
As always, your going to get all kinds of answers, but on Usenet, you
tend to get corrected in a short interval.

Doing a decent search would have found the same question asked,
and answered, many times before. Chances are really good if
you "chose" this newsgroup because you found discussion of
GMRS in old posts here, the very posts that made you think
the question was "on topic" was the same question, and if you'd
just looked at the replies you would have had the answer without
adding yet another off-topic question to the newsgroup.

Michael VE2BVW

Well, EXCUSE ME Mr. High and Mighty Ham Operator.... woooooo
I'm just shaking here!

For your information asshole, I've been involved with
computers for the last 34 years and use DOS, WindoZe, AIX,
Unix, Solaris, HP, and pretty much any flavor of Linux you
can think of.

Searches are subjective and if you don't happen to enter the
right arguments you ain't gonna get the right answer. Shoot me.

I sincerely choke apologize for monopolizing your valuable
time.

To all of the other reasonable and helpful replies I
received, I thank you all very much.

Mr. Black can kiss my ass

A person can search with any method they choose. Using search engines,
especially Google, is getting more difficult do to extreme advertising.
I'm not sure where computers came into the discussion, but I worked for Digital in 1969.

greg
N6GS

GregS wrote:

I'm not sure where computers came into the discussion, but I worked for Digital in 1969.

greg
N6GS

I dunno, he just ticked me off with the "holier than thou"
attitude. I was trying to convey that I'm not a computer
dummy. I'm very well versed in most software. I use
Micro$oft programs when necessary but try to avoil them. ;-)

IBM since '74

--
Steve

On Tue, 20 Nov 2007 19:39:12 -0500, Steve Calvin wrote:

Sorry if this isn't the right group to ask this, if not and
someone know of a more appropriate group I'd appreciate a
pointer.

I currently have GMRS radios that are rated at "16 miles"
(yeah, maybe on the salt flats or over water, ok, we all
know about that). The are rated at 2W on the GMRS freq's
and .5w on FRS.

Why are the new "25 mile" units still rated at 2W? What's
the difference in the two radios to justify the increased
distance claims?

Can't be frequency or a change to the privacy codes or they
wouldn't work with older radios.

Increased sensitivity/filtering? Hype?

With the "right" kind of propagation even .5W will do way over 100 miles but under normal
circumstances count on line-of-sight but no more than 1 mile when in build-up or bushy
areas. Your mileage may vary.

Repeater distances are usually line of sight (a repeater at 4.000 ft has a horizon of abt
80 miles if no obstructions in between. Draw an 80 mile circle around the repeater and
you'll get the area you can reach.

Note: There usually are obstructions (hilly terrain) and without any special propagation
signal strength at long distance will be less. Most FM type radio's do not have very
sensitive receiving stages and if squelch is on sensitivity becomes even less. Solution:
Use narrow band modulation such as SSB. Instead of spraeding your .5W over 15kHz put it
in 3kHz. You'll be stronger on the other end - however now we're talking how it works for
ham-radio: Do a lot with little power.....

iwouldntknow wrote:


With the "right" kind of propagation even .5W will do way over 100 miles but under normal
circumstances count on line-of-sight but no more than 1 mile when in build-up or bushy
areas. Your mileage may vary.

Repeater distances are usually line of sight (a repeater at 4.000 ft has a horizon of abt
80 miles if no obstructions in between. Draw an 80 mile circle around the repeater and
you'll get the area you can reach.

Note: There usually are obstructions (hilly terrain) and without any special propagation
signal strength at long distance will be less. Most FM type radio's do not have very
sensitive receiving stages and if squelch is on sensitivity becomes even less. Solution:
Use narrow band modulation such as SSB. Instead of spraeding your .5W over 15kHz put it
in 3kHz. You'll be stronger on the other end - however now we're talking how it works for
ham-radio: Do a lot with little power.....

Thanks. I'm familiar with SSB, skip, etc. But I can't talk
others into going that route.

We use these for hunting in the northeast and I was just
perplexed how with the same power and what looks like
basically the same specs. then got a theoretical 8 mile
gain. I say theoretical because they *may* end up working a
mile in the woods but that would surprise me.

--
Steve

"Steve Calvin" wrote in message
...
Sorry if this isn't the right group to ask this, if not and
someone know of a more appropriate group I'd appreciate a
pointer.

I currently have GMRS radios that are rated at "16 miles"
(yeah, maybe on the salt flats or over water, ok, we all
know about that). The are rated at 2W on the GMRS freq's
and .5w on FRS.

Why are the new "25 mile" units still rated at 2W? What's
the difference in the two radios to justify the increased
distance claims?

Can't be frequency or a change to the privacy codes or they
wouldn't work with older radios.

Increased sensitivity/filtering? Hype?

Hype and poor/deceptive advertising. Probably the advertising dept. is clueless
as to actual specs.

2W on a unity gain antenna should have a maximum range of 1.4km (or 0.878 miles)
given the standard receive sensitivity of 0.2u.

GMRS is CB, and therefore, your better group by topic would have been
"rec.rado.cb." However, I agree with other responses that you would probably
get a better quality response here.

D. Stussy wrote:
"Steve Calvin" wrote in message

Increased sensitivity/filtering? Hype?

Hype and poor/deceptive advertising. Probably the advertising dept. is clueless
as to actual specs.

2W on a unity gain antenna should have a maximum range of 1.4km (or 0.878 miles)
given the standard receive sensitivity of 0.2u.

GMRS is CB, and therefore, your better group by topic would have been
"rec.rado.cb." However, I agree with other responses that you would probably
get a better quality response here.


Thanks again to you all (with one notable exception ;-) ).
You've confirmed what I suspected all along but didn't
have/know the technical details enough to debunk the claims.

--
Steve

"D. Stussy" wrote in message
...
"Steve Calvin" wrote in message
...
Sorry if this isn't the right group to ask this, if not and
someone know of a more appropriate group I'd appreciate a
pointer.

I currently have GMRS radios that are rated at "16 miles"
(yeah, maybe on the salt flats or over water, ok, we all
know about that). The are rated at 2W on the GMRS freq's
and .5w on FRS.

Why are the new "25 mile" units still rated at 2W? What's
the difference in the two radios to justify the increased
distance claims?

Can't be frequency or a change to the privacy codes or they
wouldn't work with older radios.

Increased sensitivity/filtering? Hype?

Hype and poor/deceptive advertising. Probably the advertising dept. is
clueless
as to actual specs.

2W on a unity gain antenna should have a maximum range of 1.4km (or 0.878
miles)
given the standard receive sensitivity of 0.2u.

GMRS is CB, and therefore, your better group by topic would have been
"rec.rado.cb." However, I agree with other responses that you would
probably
get a better quality response here.


GMRS is NOT CB. See URL:
http://wireless.fcc.gov/services/ind...general_mobile

GMRS frequencies are UHF- FM and requires a license and a fee for
application (~ $75 ?). Use is sharply defined. Repeater operation is
permitted. There are severe penalties for non-licensed users.

Lots of details at URL:
http://www.provide.net/~prsg/wi-gmrs.htm

Lamont

In article ,
The Shadow wrote:

GMRS is NOT CB. See URL:
http://wireless.fcc.gov/services/ind...general_mobile

GMRS frequencies are UHF- FM and requires a license and a fee for
application (~ $75 ?). Use is sharply defined. Repeater operation is
permitted. There are severe penalties for non-licensed users.

Out of curiosity - are you aware of any actual enforcement actions
in the past few years, taken against people using GMRS frequencies
without a license?

From what I can see, GMRS licensees are receiving next to no support
from the FCC in this regard. The GMRS-only frequencies seem to be
suffering from widespread interference from owners of the dual-mode
(FRS/GMRS) radios, using the GMRS frequencies without bothering to (or
even being aware of the legal requirement to) get a license.

--
Dave Platt AE6EO
Friends of Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior
I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will
boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads!

Dave Platt wrote:
snip
From what I can see, GMRS licensees are receiving next to no support
from the FCC in this regard. The GMRS-only frequencies seem to be
suffering from widespread interference from owners of the dual-mode
(FRS/GMRS) radios, using the GMRS frequencies without bothering to (or
even being aware of the legal requirement to) get a license.

I believe you are correct. They seem to be going the way CB
licenses. They finally realized that no one was getting the
license due to the inability or desire to track non-licensed
users. Except in some extreme cases, where the operator had
a stationary base station and was running high power.



--
Steve