Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
I just bought a 2-way radio that supports both GMRS and FRS:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B000093IK8 I actually have no plan to use the GMRS channels at all. My question is: If I only use FRS, do I still need to apply for a license? When I placed the order, I was told: "GMRS channels require FCC license. ". I assume this means FRS channels do not require FCC license, unless the Amazon.com description is misleading. Please help me with this issue so that I can start to use my radio! Thanks! Thomas |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
The FCC page at URL:
http://wireless.fcc.gov/services/personal/family/ Will answer your questions Better to get it from the Horse's mouth rather than any guesses you may receive. Although you "actually have no plan to use the GMRS channels at all". Why not get the license and make full use of your radio ??? Comes the day you may want or need it. "thomas" wrote in message ... I just bought a 2-way radio that supports both GMRS and FRS: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B000093IK8 I actually have no plan to use the GMRS channels at all. My question is: If I only use FRS, do I still need to apply for a license? When I placed the order, I was told: "GMRS channels require FCC license. ". I assume this means FRS channels do not require FCC license, unless the Amazon.com description is misleading. Please help me with this issue so that I can start to use my radio! Thanks! Thomas |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Thank you!
I read the official FCC text carefully. But I'm now even more confused: "If you operate a radio that has been approved exclusively under the rules that apply to FRS, you are not required to have a license. FRS radios have a maximum power of ? watt (500 milliwatt) effective radiated power and integral (non-detachable) antennas. If you operate a radio under the rules that apply to GMRS, you must have a GMRS license. GMRS radios generally transmit at higher power levels (1 to 5 watts is typical) and may have detachable antennas." If my radio has been approved under both FRS and GMRS, the text above **seems** to suggest that I may need a license. Can you or someone clarifies for me? The only reason I don't want to use GMRS is the license fee. The radio is very cheap even with GMRS support. Thomas "AMHAM73" wrote in message news:ysjKa.79947$Pc5.13298@fed1read01... The FCC page at URL: http://wireless.fcc.gov/services/personal/family/ Will answer your questions Better to get it from the Horse's mouth rather than any guesses you may receive. Although you "actually have no plan to use the GMRS channels at all". Why not get the license and make full use of your radio ??? Comes the day you may want or need it. "thomas" wrote in message ... I just bought a 2-way radio that supports both GMRS and FRS: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B000093IK8 I actually have no plan to use the GMRS channels at all. My question is: If I only use FRS, do I still need to apply for a license? When I placed the order, I was told: "GMRS channels require FCC license. ". I assume this means FRS channels do not require FCC license, unless the Amazon.com description is misleading. Please help me with this issue so that I can start to use my radio! Thanks! Thomas |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
If you operate a radio under the rules
that apply to GMRS, you must have a GMRS license If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, you better get a duck license. "thomas" wrote in message ... Thank you! I read the official FCC text carefully. But I'm now even more confused: "If you operate a radio that has been approved exclusively under the rules that apply to FRS, you are not required to have a license. FRS radios have a maximum power of ? watt (500 milliwatt) effective radiated power and integral (non-detachable) antennas. If you operate a radio under the rules that apply to GMRS, you must have a GMRS license. GMRS radios generally transmit at higher power levels (1 to 5 watts is typical) and may have detachable antennas." If my radio has been approved under both FRS and GMRS, the text above **seems** to suggest that I may need a license. Can you or someone clarifies for me? The only reason I don't want to use GMRS is the license fee. The radio is very cheap even with GMRS support. Thomas "AMHAM73" wrote in message news:ysjKa.79947$Pc5.13298@fed1read01... The FCC page at URL: http://wireless.fcc.gov/services/personal/family/ Will answer your questions Better to get it from the Horse's mouth rather than any guesses you may receive. Although you "actually have no plan to use the GMRS channels at all". Why not get the license and make full use of your radio ??? Comes the day you may want or need it. "thomas" wrote in message ... I just bought a 2-way radio that supports both GMRS and FRS: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B000093IK8 I actually have no plan to use the GMRS channels at all. My question is: If I only use FRS, do I still need to apply for a license? When I placed the order, I was told: "GMRS channels require FCC license. ". I assume this means FRS channels do not require FCC license, unless the Amazon.com description is misleading. Please help me with this issue so that I can start to use my radio! Thanks! Thomas |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"thomas" wrote in message ...
Thank you! I read the official FCC text carefully. But I'm now even more confused: "If you operate a radio that has been approved exclusively under the rules that apply to FRS, you are not required to have a license. FRS radios have a maximum power of ? watt (500 milliwatt) effective radiated power and integral (non-detachable) antennas. If you operate a radio under the rules that apply to GMRS, you must have a GMRS license. GMRS radios generally transmit at higher power levels (1 to 5 watts is typical) and may have detachable antennas." If my radio has been approved under both FRS and GMRS, the text above **seems** to suggest that I may need a license. Can you or someone clarifies for me? The only reason I don't want to use GMRS is the license fee. The radio is very cheap even with GMRS support. Thomas Look - the GMRS feature on these radios is a USELESS GIMMICK. Forget about using those frequencies or getting a license for them. |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
G. M. Alf writes:
With all that power super-gain antenna I don't want to take any chances. : ) I hesitate to post this, as it's about ham radio gain antennas, but it _is_ about a super-gain antenna, so I'll yield to temptation. ````````someone else's report```````````` Subject: Antenna Design Greetings from Tokyo and all the members of TIARA (Tokyo International Amateur Radio Association). I know I promised you a series of articles on Japanese amateur radio, but there is something so exciting I just have to take a break and tell you about it. It all started with the work that Ed Coan (AH7L/7J1AAE) did on antenna pattern plotting using his personal computer and the A-to-D converter in his FT-1000. The circular, and even backward antenna patterns of some of our local TIARA club members brought home the point that what a good station needs is a good antenna. Ed's antenna looks great and the results verify it. He works regular schedules into Colorado and Maine, just like sunspots don't mean anything. My mini-beam just could not compare. Well, I got to thinking about what we Tokyo apartment dwellers could do and realized that space is THE problem. How do you fit a full-sized beam on a balcony? Loading coils are the answer and the problem at the same time -- the antenna radiation resistance drops as reactance is substituted for length. High current loops develop and the power is dissipated in the antenna instead of being radiated. If only the antenna didn't dissipate the power. Hmmm....let's see, P=3DE2 /R; now if R were 0 then... From my work, I have some contacts in research groups over at Tokyo University. Better yet, I knew a Japanese ham that is a graduate student there. The thought running through my head was to build a super-conducting antenna. This requires cryogenics, i.e. temperatures around minus 279 degrees Centigrade. I was able get the university folks interested in the project and we built a 10-meter dipole test silicon wafer. They put together a lot of serial coils by "re-work" on the wafer; they were able to connect them so we had a super-conducting yagi. I took my TS-930 transceiver down to the lab for the first tests, but before we could test it, actual measurements showed it was resonant on 3.126 MHz. It seems that the normal equations for inductance don't work with super-conducting materials =97 you need a lot fewer turns to get the same results compared to room temperature. Many measurements and trials later, we had a ten-meter resonant wafer. This time we put a 40-element beam on each wafer and stacked 4 wafers in the same assembly. That made a 160-element array on 10-meters in less than a half-foot cube (15 cm3). The first test didn't go too well. I connected my TS-930 to the super-conducting wafer antenna and tuned it for 10 meters. At room temperature, we couldn't hear anything. Using a heat pump, the lab technicians started lowering the antenna's temperature toward the super-conducting region. I was really impressed by how small the equipment is, and started thinking it might all fit in the shack. Just then, the TS-930 froze solid, which had a negative effect on its operating characteristics. This wouldn't be so easy after all; the coax connection would need some study! We reworked the wafers to put inductive coupling on them, but I could find no way to efficiently couple to it from the conducting array. Fortunately the lab technicians came up with a new ceramic material that passed RF but not heat. Probably, something that Kyocera invented just for this use. I sent the TS-930 to the ham shop in Akihabara and asked them to touch it up for me. My friend Suzuki-San, JH1WWC (store manager at the ham shop), asked exactly how the paint had been peeled off around the coax connector -- lightning maybe? No, I assured him -- just low temperature exposure, without saying how low the temperatures were. The project had to stay secret and besides, Suzuki-San can repair anything! Since it looked like it might be a while before the TS-930 would be repaired, I brought out my TS-940. I had already placed an order for a Yaesu FT-1000 anyway. After verifying that in the super-onducting range the antenna was resonant on 10-meters, we connected the TS-940. The ceramic material worked and the rig operated well as we began the cooling cycle. The band seemed dead even with the antenna at -150 degrees C. It took another 10 minutes to get to the super-conducting range -- then the TS-940 blew up. It seems our antenna had a bit more gain than the TS-940 front-end could take. Later measurements showed 500 volts coming out of the coax. A little hard to believe, but then what do I know about cryogenic LSI antenna technology? The TS-940 was also returned to Suzuki-San, but this time he frowned a bit -- the front-end board did look like it had been hit by lightning. Not to worry, Suzuki-San can repair anything! The FT-1000 arrived just in time to be able to continue experiments. We built a QSK attenuator to protect the receiver. With the LSI wafer antenna still inside the lab, we decided to try to make a contact on 10-meters. What a shock when we got it working! The first thing we heard was a couple of W2's talking locally on 10 meters and that was with 80 dB of attenuation. We had the antenna array on a rotatable mount; I moved it about a half-degree and the W2's disappeared. What beam width! We tuned them in again, and they were just about to sign off, so we thought we would try to work them. The rig was tuned up at 50 watts on a dummy load; we switched in the wafer antenna and gave N2BA a call. The noise was unbelievable -- an ionized ray shot out from the antena and hit the wall of the building. Before we knocked a hole in the band, we took a piece out of the lab wall! Ever wonder what an antenna pattern looks like in three dimensions? There was a oval hole in the wall of the lab -- about 1-cm high by 2-cm wide. We cut power quickly. N2BA came back on frequency a few minutes later and said he was using his back-up rig; something had taken his main rig off the air. For some reason, the station he was talking to never came back, so we decided not to transmit again until we knew for sure what was going on. As near as we can tell, the antenna array has 620-dB gain over a dipole, but with a beamwidth of 0.75 degrees using the 60-dB points. With 50 watts output, the effective radiated power is 55 quadrillion watts at the center of the beam (5.5 with 13 zeroes). As soon as the University realized what we had built, the entire project was taken away from us and turned over to the Japanese Self-Defense Force. Amateur radio "tinkering" has contributed to something, but I am not exactly sure what. I haven't the slightest idea what was in those wafers or how to build another set. Do you think someone may be interested in this idea for Star Wars/SDI?? What I'd give to use a much smaller set in the next CQ World Wide Contest! A few months later, the University contacted all of us and asked just how close we had been to the antenna when operating. As best as I can figure, we were in the null behind the array. From what has been said so far, it looks like a secondary use for our antenna may be as a mass sterilizer, but confirmation will have to await the results of our medical tests. If our antenna ever hits the market, it looks like remote operation may be desirable. As I am writing this, I have been informed that my friend Suzuki-San can't fix everything after all. He's written off the TS-930 and TS-940, and I just found out that before the university terminated the project, they tried one more time with my FT-1000, but without the 100-dB attenuator to protect the receiver. Its front-end now matches the 940's and it looks like it will be a while before I am on the air again. ``````````end of someone else's report```````````` I'm sorry to say the reporter never specifies if he's using dBi. -- Philip Stripling | email to the replyto address is presumed Legal Assistance on the Web | spam and read later. email to philip@ http://www.PhilipStripling.com/ | civex.com is read daily. |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Do they perform as well as the FRS only radio's? They do look small enough.
"G. M. Alf" wrote in message ... On 25 Jun 2003 18:16:28 -0700, (stewart) wrote: Look - the GMRS feature on these radios is a USELESS GIMMICK. Forget about using those frequencies or getting a license for them. I just renewed my GMRS license (for the second time) so I could use my new T4500. With all that power super-gain antenna I don't want to take any chances. : ) Mike |
#9
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Wed, 25 Jun 2003 14:34:10 -0400, "thomas"
wrote: Thank you! I read the official FCC text carefully. But I'm now even more confused: "If you operate a radio that has been approved exclusively under the rules that apply to FRS, you are not required to have a license. FRS radios have a maximum power of ? watt (500 milliwatt) effective radiated power and integral (non-detachable) antennas. If you operate a radio under the rules that apply to GMRS, you must have a GMRS license. GMRS radios generally transmit at higher power levels (1 to 5 watts is typical) and may have detachable antennas." If my radio has been approved under both FRS and GMRS, the text above **seems** to suggest that I may need a license. Can you or someone clarifies for me? The only reason I don't want to use GMRS is the license fee. The radio is very cheap even with GMRS support. Thomas On FRS channels 8 - 14 the radio IS an FRS radio. You do not need a license to operate it on those channels. Mike |
#10
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"thomas" wrote in message ...
Thank you! I read the official FCC text carefully. But I'm now even more confused: "If you operate a radio that has been approved exclusively under the rules that apply to FRS, you are not required to have a license. FRS radios have a maximum power of ? watt (500 milliwatt) effective radiated power and integral (non-detachable) antennas. If you operate a radio under the rules that apply to GMRS, you must have a GMRS license. GMRS radios generally transmit at higher power levels (1 to 5 watts is typical) and may have detachable antennas." The "FRS" channels were interstitial frequencies of the GMRS in the first place. That's why GMRS can still use them. Only a radio specifically designed for FRS applications may be used license free. Any other radio is GMRS and must be licensed. If my radio has been approved under both FRS and GMRS, the text above **seems** to suggest that I may need a license. Can you or someone clarifies for me? The only reason I don't want to use GMRS is the license fee. The radio is very cheap even with GMRS support. I agree with Phil...Pop for the GMRS license...One day you'll need it and it will save your bacon...Or at least save you from an FCC NAL! 73 Steve, K4CAP |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|