Debunking the MURS/GMRS/FRS Amplifier Myth
stewart
Alligators in the sewers - the GMRS/FRS/MURS high-power amplifier myth
just keeps making the rounds...
The myth - spread by hams having a strong "radio cop" slant - has
absolutely no basis in fact. The motivation for spreading the rumor
is somewhat complex - but, the main motivation appears be to maintain
some kind of "superiority complex" these hams harbor over "CB users".
A secondary motivation seems to be to stop the growth of these
wildly-popular radio services - as ham VHF/UHF usage has continued to
decline in recent years, these services are rapidly growing in
popularity.
There has never been a reported violation involving amplifiers on any
of these VHF/UHF frequencies; and, the fact is, there is simply no
real motivation for the average person to use amplifiers on these
frequencies.
THE BASIS FOR THE LEGEND:
Illegal amplifier use on 11m CB frequencies has been an ongoing
problem for many years. However, the dynamics of radio wave
propagation on HF CB vs. VHF MURS or UHF FRS/GMRS are quite different.
Sky wave, or "skip" propagation is commonplace on HF frequencies. To
take advantage of this propagation requires running more than the
legally-allowed 4W output allowed on 11m CB... as a result, many
truckers(and other citizens) have resorted to using illegal amplifiers
to raise the output of their radio stations to outrageosly-high
values; 500, 1000, 1500, even 2000 Watt amplifier use is commonplace -
allowing these individuals to communicate great distances(sometimes
1,000s of miles when the "skip is in"). A side result of this
"culture", has been that these individuals resort to a kind of
"entertainment" by jamming smaller-powered stations ("squashing") when
the "skip is out".
However, on VHF/UHF frequencies, greater than Line of Sight(LOS)
propagation is a fairly rare occurrance - so there is no initial
motivation for an average individual to run a high-powered amplifier
on these frequencies.
The fact that there has never been any direct proof of individuals
running amplifiers on these frquencies, seems to be of no consequence
to the professors of this urban legend. They will come up with all
kinds of contorted reasons why "The end is near", and "widespread
amplifier use on these frequencies is just a matter of time". Of
course, these are the same arguments these individuals have been
making for YEARS, and still - as there are no alligators in the
sewers, there are no high-powered amplifiers on GMRS/FRS/MURS.
Stewart Teaze - N0MHS
'Doc
Stew,
So far, you're the only one spreading these rumors, then
'debunking' them. A lot like the 'fire-bugs' who start a
fire, then report it to be a 'hero'. You need help, boy...
'Doc
'Doc
stewart,
Sorry, forgot to add this to the preceding post.
Your license proposal is a REAL stupid idea. Some
how, it 'fits' you.
'Doc
Jim Hampton
to promote. I've run phone patches from Guam to Webster, NY, running
only 15 watts! I've gotten into a cw net thousands of miles away -
running MILLIWATTS. Power is needed in VHF/UHF for some of the more
exotic modes. Meteor trails, moonbounce, some scatter work ... heck,
with my 6 double a alkalines, I can open repeaters close to 100 miles
away (well, one that is high - and that is when I'm up on the 23rd floor
of an apartment complex, but you get the idea). Problems happen when
unknowlegable folks apply the golden screwdriver. I've seen posts which
state you only have to turn a pot to make your FRS radio 'louder'. I
doubt going into deviation and descriminators would help as it is likely
over that user's head. Believe me, I've had a lot of fun back in the
early 70s with CB. The urban legends usually circulate amongst those
who don't know enough technology to know when something is simply not
true. I saw a post perhaps not a week ago on a board from someone
looking for a mod for a radio. Another guy posted a link to a website
with the mod. Sure enough, TWO DAYS LATER, the first guy posts again
with the subject 'HELP'. Seems he let the smoke out of the components.
Seems the radio is stuck on 28.500, won't transmit, and squeals when
the audio gain is turned up. You seem to think the amateurs are putting
people down. The problem is that some folks are being led into things
that they know nothing about - and it shows when some 27 MHz signals
are 50 KHz wide. Unless you are working moonbounce, a 3 dB signal
gain or loss won't usually amount to anything - yet people mod their
rigs to try and get that 3 dB extra, which is usually spread where they
don't want it. My guess is that the majority of amateurs are running
150 watts or less. The large majority. And working stations worldwide
every day. Why do you think one necessarily needs a linear? Sure, the
big gun DXCC guys run 'em (often with a mentality that is similar to
yours), but most don't honestly need 'em. Besides, going from a ground
mounted vertical to a 3 element beam up 60 feet will often gain you as
much or more than increasing from 100 to 1000 watts and cost less.
73 from Rochester, NY
Jim
"stewart" <horse...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:5f4fe4c2.0205...@posting.google.com
> Like any of the classic urban legands - LSD tattoos, Kidney theft,
> Alligators in the sewers - the GMRS/FRS/MURS high-power amplifier myth
> just keeps making the rounds...
>
> http://www.urbanlegends.com/
>
> The myth - spread by hams having a strong "radio cop" slant - has
> absolutely no basis in fact. The motivation for spreading the rumor
> is somewhat complex - but, the main motivation appears be to maintain
> some kind of "superiority complex" these hams harbor over "CB users".
> A secondary motivation seems to be to stop the growth of these
> wildly-popular radio services - as ham VHF/UHF usage has continued to
> decline in recent years, these services are rapidly growing in
> popularity.
> Stewart Teaze - N0MHS
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MURS-OPEN
--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG
luc...@eternal-flames.gov
>The motivation for spreading the rumor
>is somewhat complex - but, the main motivation appears be to maintain
>some kind of "superiority complex" these hams harbor over "CB users".
Not that difficult.... The average termite can justly feel superior
over a cb-er. :-)
stewart
Just like the CW code speed reduction idea, eh?
As I recall, you LOST that one BIG TIME... and you'll LOSE this one
eventually, too.
Yes - eventually the ARRL and the FCC will see the obvious - it is
only a matter of time. You can try to slow down progress - but
EVENTUALLY it will catch up to you and pass you by.
Tell me - why do you do it? Why do you fight progress? Go back and
think about all the arguments you made fighting the code speed
reduction - they are the same ones you'll make against opening up
1.25M to a new Novice Class. It's been quite a long time now since
restructuring, and NONE of the bad and evil things you predicted have
come true. Why are you so NEGATIVE? Don't you have ANY faith in your
fellow Americans?
> 'Doc
Stewart - N0MHS
stewart
I think you need better research... here I did some, myself:
Doc said on 5/3/2000:
As the 'old' saying goes, "If you can't do
the time, don't do the crime." ('Baretta' had it right
as far as I'm concerned).
'Doc/W5LZ (ex: AA5AN)
Nice 'hero' model, 'Doc. Maybe you need a new role model. BTW, I
think Baretta's 'new' saying goes something like; "If you can't do the
time, get a good lawyer."
Stewart - N0MHS
'Doc
stewart,
It's not progress you're talking about, it's
only change. Change, just for the sake of change
is one of the stupidest ideas going. If your ideas
had any merit, that would be different, but they
don't.
As to the code speed reduction, how would you
possibly know what my feelings are about it? I've
never expressed them to you, or this NG. If you
knew what they were/are, it might suprise you.
And what new 'novice' class are you talking about?
The one you proposed which was rejected, or did
something happen and no one told me about it? I
think you're mixing fantasy with reality Stew.
Do I have faith in my fellow Americans? Yes I
do, but what has that got to do with what we're
discussing? Just more 'smoke', and trying to focus
on a totally unrelated topic. You've really got that
'politician two-step' down almost pat!
'Doc
PS - I still think you need help Stew baby...
'Doc
Stew,
Now all you need to do is put that back
in context. As far as the 'hero' thing goes,
you still have no idea about what you're talking
about. Listen to the music Stew, no one's dancing
to the 'politician two-step' any more. Need to
do better than that...
'Doc
www.TimNebo.com
3922 and 3925 for all the complaints about the wide signals on both freqs.
maybe you should tell them how to cleanup there act jim.
>The problem is that some folks are being led into things
>that they know nothing about - and it shows when some 27 MHz signals
>are 50 KHz wide
Tim Nebo
Twistedhed
LOL! And nobody bitches about "change" more than cantankerous unhappy,
bitter old hammies. "Change" is constant. Adapting to it seems to be a
widespread problem among the angrys.
Aaron H. Voobner
> Sky wave, or "skip" propagation is commonplace on HF
>frequencies. To take advantage of this propagation requires
>running more than the legally-allowed 4W output allowed
>on 11m CB...
This will come as a shock to the many folks who have worked all
continents on HF using milliwatt QRP transmitters.
>However, on VHF/UHF frequencies, greater than Line of Sight(LOS)
>propagation is a fairly rare occurrance - so there is no initial
>motivation for an average individual to run a high-powered amplifier
>on these frequencies.
Right, CB'ers would NEVER think of running amps on FRS.......
-------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Paul Furbert (pfur...@ibl.bm)
Subject: FRS Amplifier
Newsgroups: rec.radio.cb
Date: 1998/11/16
Anybody make one yet?
235
-------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Scott W (dk...@dfkdk.ccc)
Subject: Re: Linear UHF Amp For FRS!
Newsgroups: rec.radio.cb
Date: 1999/12/03
In article <3845B53C...@hotmail.com>, upp...@hotmail.com says...
I'm looking for a UHF linear that
will take the 500milliwat imput.
Thanks.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Bill Eitner (kd6...@netzero.net)
Subject: Re: who has the amps for FRS?
Newsgroups: rec.radio.cb
Date: 2001-11-20 14:02:27 PST
> What's the URL for the web site that sells the linears that work on
> the FRS channels? I'm looking for about 250W out.
You might do a web search for "T-E Systems."
They make high power amps for VHF/UHF ham
applications. They may have an amp for the
450 MHz FM ham band that makes that much
power and only requires a few watts of drive
power. Hopefully you have an early FRS radio
that had the potential to make more than 3/4
of a watt. If not, you'll have to start with a low
power amp, see what the output is, and then
buy a suitable high-power amp designed to deal
with the amount of drive power that the low-power
amp produces.
Good luck.
-=[Bill Eitner]=-
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Dave Hall
>
> Like any of the classic urban legands - LSD tattoos, Kidney theft,
> Alligators in the sewers - the GMRS/FRS/MURS high-power amplifier myth
> just keeps making the rounds...
>
> http://www.urbanlegends.com/
>
> The myth - spread by hams having a strong "radio cop" slant - has
> absolutely no basis in fact.
But it does have a basis in history, and human nature, together with a
declining morality standard, and a general "up yours" attitude.
> The motivation for spreading the rumor
> is somewhat complex - but, the main motivation appears be to maintain
> some kind of "superiority complex" these hams harbor over "CB users".
And how does one do that? Whether or not one operator is "superior" to
another would be easy to discern based on their overall achievements and
their dedication to their respective service. One does not need to
promote a superior attitude. The facts will speak for themselves.
> A secondary motivation seems to be to stop the growth of these
> wildly-popular radio services - as ham VHF/UHF usage has continued to
> decline in recent years, these services are rapidly growing in
> popularity.
Why would hams want to purposely halt the growth of another radio
service? For what gain? As a radio hobbyist, I welcome any and all
outlets for experimenting.
>
> There has never been a reported violation involving amplifiers on any
> of these VHF/UHF frequencies; and, the fact is, there is simply no
> real motivation for the average person to use amplifiers on these
> frequencies.
How about the "entertainment" that you spoke of, of "squashing" other
stations? How about for inproving their distance? How about the same
motivation that pushed most high powered Cbers, and that is the "king of
the hill" syndrome?
>
> THE BASIS FOR THE LEGEND:
>
> Illegal amplifier use on 11m CB frequencies has been an ongoing
> problem for many years. However, the dynamics of radio wave
> propagation on HF CB vs. VHF MURS or UHF FRS/GMRS are quite different.
> Sky wave, or "skip" propagation is commonplace on HF frequencies. To
> take advantage of this propagation requires running more than the
> legally-allowed 4W output allowed on 11m CB... as a result, many
> truckers(and other citizens) have resorted to using illegal amplifiers
> to raise the output of their radio stations to outrageosly-high
> values; 500, 1000, 1500, even 2000 Watt amplifier use is commonplace -
> allowing these individuals to communicate great distances(sometimes
> 1,000s of miles when the "skip is in").
So you think that "skip" is the sole reason that CBers run amps? You
obviously haven't spent much time on CB in the last 20 years. When the
"skip" is running, you can work the world with 10 watts. If the skip
isn't running, you can't work the next state with 5,000 watts. (Unless,
of course, the next state is less than 150 miles away).
I'll give you a clue. Amp usage on CB is about two things, either being
heard above the next guy, or preventing the next guy from overrunning
you. It's nothing more than a competitive spirit gone horribly wrong,
and there's no evidence to suggest that this same attitude would not
cross over to any other band available to these same undisciplined
people.
> A side result of this
> "culture", has been that these individuals resort to a kind of
> "entertainment" by jamming smaller-powered stations ("squashing") when
> the "skip is out".
A "side" result? I'd say that this is probably 50% of the activity on CB
during any given day. Just listen to Channel 6.
>
> However, on VHF/UHF frequencies, greater than Line of Sight(LOS)
> propagation is a fairly rare occurrance - so there is no initial
> motivation for an average individual to run a high-powered amplifier
> on these frequencies.
Sure there is. The attitude of being the big dog on the block is still
as strong on 154 Mhz, as it is on 27.
>
> The fact that there has never been any direct proof of individuals
> running amplifiers on these frquencies, seems to be of no consequence
> to the professors of this urban legend. They will come up with all
> kinds of contorted reasons why "The end is near", and "widespread
> amplifier use on these frequencies is just a matter of time". Of
> course, these are the same arguments these individuals have been
> making for YEARS, and still - as there are no alligators in the
> sewers, there are no high-powered amplifiers on GMRS/FRS/MURS.
One other thing is needed for this to happen; popularity. And then there
has to be someone willing to market these accessories to the people that
want them. FRS has deliberately been manufactured and marketed to
discourage amp usage, or modifications in general. MURS is still a
service in its infancy. It hasn't really caught on yet with the yahoo
crowd. As long as there is activity on 11 meter CB, what is the
incentive to move to MURS?
As long as these VHF/UHF services are marketed as short range, mostly
handheld units, there will be little incentive for the "big guns" to set
up shop. But give it time. Start offering fancy radios, cheaply, with
lots of knobs and gadgets, and billy bob will be on those bands
eventually.
Dave
"Sandbagger"
JJ
get their hands on.
stewart
> PS - I still think you need help Stew baby...
Thanks, I COULD use some... so how about helping me get 1.25M openned
up for a new Novice Class?
Stewart - N0MHS
stewart
While I'm pretty much a QRP-type operator, I really don't have any
argument with anything you are saying. But, all of this stuff really
doesn't apply to the services or the discussion at hand. The point
is, there have been ZERO actions by the FCC against any
individuals/entities for running high-powered amplifiers on the
MURS/GMRS/FRS frequencies; and there is(and never has been) the same
type of incentive to run these things, like there is on 11m. That's
all I'm saying.
> 73 from Rochester, NY
> Jim
Stewart - N0MHS
Randy A. Hefner
>
> However, on VHF/UHF frequencies, greater than Line of Sight(LOS)
> propagation is a fairly rare occurrance - so there is no initial
> motivation for an average individual to run a high-powered amplifier
> on these frequencies.
>
What you are failing to see is that rarely do two radio operators
operate strict line-of-site. Most, if not all radio communications
using VHF and UHF radios are sending a signal to the other radio
through vegitation, buildings, cars, people, etc!
Even when I am taking to repeaters on high locations, I have to
contend with objects between me and the repeater antenna. Higher
power DOES help you to overcome these obsticles.
When I use my FRS radios, I rarely can see the person I am talking to.
DO YOU?
'Doc
stewart,
Nope. I don't waste my time if I can help
it. I was speaking about your delusions, anyway.
'Doc
TooManyRadios
horse...@yahoo.com (stewart) writes:
>Sky wave, or "skip" propagation is commonplace on HF frequencies. To
>take advantage of this propagation requires running more than the
>legally-allowed 4W output allowed on 11m CB
Hmmm....funny how I have childhood memories of talking all across the U.S. and
Canada with a 4-watt Midland 23-Channel mobile on a power supply and a Radio
Shack 1/4 wave on the roof.
Scott Sixnine
BTW, I never wrote this. I have no need to boost an FRS radio.
I didn't even get my own set of Cobra FRS 105 until last month.
They will have cost $10 each when I receive my rebate check.
D. Stussy
This is amateur radio, CB radio, or FRS, depending on the newsgroup
cross-posted to, not MURS.
MURS has no purpose. It was an FCC wet dream to clean after a radio
manufacturing mistake - and it will never be more than that.
Dan Martin
amps( no I've never owned a linear) Why is it so bad ( besides illegal) to
run 100-200 watts on 27mhz, but ok to run 1500 on 28 and 29 ?
"Aaron H. Voobner" <aaron_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:7314c094.02052...@posting.google.com...
JJ
Mopar...@hotmailnospam.com wrote:
>
> JJ <radio...@mailcity.net> wrote:
> >>The cb'ers will make a sewer pit of any radio spectrum they can
> > get their hands on.
> >
> You have NEVER used a CB radio?
Exactly, and never intend to.
stewart
> As long as these VHF/UHF services are marketed as short range, mostly
> handheld units, there will be little incentive for the "big guns" to set
> up shop. But give it time. Start offering fancy radios, cheaply, with
> lots of knobs and gadgets, and billy bob will be on those bands
> eventually.
I respect all the points you have made. However, because of the fact
that we already have had GMRS and FRS for a great number of years(and
GMRS does allow external antennas, and does share freqs with FRS, and
will allow you to run easily obtainable Part 90 eqpt.), and these
types of antics are not going on - I stand by my basic premise that
the CB culture is FIRMLY ENTRENCHED and QUITE HAPPY on 11m... these
'ol boys can't just "reach out and knowingly squash somebody" for an
extended period of time over in the next county - now matter how many
WATTS they pump out. Oh sure, they could squash the conversation of
little Billy or Susie on FRS for about 30 seconds, while they were
passing thru town, or interfere with a business inventory being taken
on MURS for a minute or so - but that is NOTHING compared with the
HOURS OF PURE ENJOYMENT these CLOWNS can get on CB.
> Dave
> "Sandbagger"
Stewart - N0MHS
Aaron H. Voobner
> Subject: Re: Linear UHF Amp For FRS!
> Newsgroups: rec.radio.cb
> Date: 1999/12/03
> In article <3845B53C...@hotmail.com>, upp...@hotmail.com says...
>
> I'm looking for a UHF linear that
> will take the 500milliwat imput.
> Thanks.
>
Sorry Scott. I snipped out your response to this dope, but forgot to
snip out the article attribution which contaned your email address.
Got my dopes mixed up. Easy to do in rrcb.
Apologies,
-A
stewart
> horse...@yahoo.com (stewart) wrote:
>
> > Sky wave, or "skip" propagation is commonplace on HF
> >frequencies. To take advantage of this propagation requires
> >running more than the legally-allowed 4W output allowed
> >on 11m CB...
>
> This will come as a shock to the many folks who have worked all
> continents on HF using milliwatt QRP transmitters.
Oh, COME ON, these people are also running high gain antennas on bands
not INFESTED with the level of noise present on 11m. With the type of
antennas these 'ol boys typically run, they need the watts to be heard
thru all the noise, and to overcome the ineffeciencies in their
antenna systems, and to communicate with the other good 'ol boys
running a similar power level and antenna system at the other end of
the link.
> >However, on VHF/UHF frequencies, greater than Line of Sight(LOS)
> >propagation is a fairly rare occurrance - so there is no initial
> >motivation for an average individual to run a high-powered amplifier
> >on these frequencies.
>
> Right, CB'ers would NEVER think of running amps on FRS.......
Of course they are going to try to extrapolate their knowlege of 11m
to 70cm... but IT DOESN'T WORK - because of LOS limitations, because
of the increased imporatance of transmission line loss and antenna
gain, and because of the fact that nobody else runs a
similarly-powered system, the clowns get NO REASONABLE FEEDBACK, and
so they slink back to the 11m slimefest, where they can interfere with
conversations of thousands over a five county area, instead of the
sheer boredom of only being able to interfere with little Billy or
Susie's conversation down the block for a few seconds - who just end
up putting on CTCSS, and don't even know that they are being
interfered with. There just isn't the same THRILL.
This is why we haven't been seeing this kind of activity on
GMRS/FRS/interstitials. If this high-powered amplifier activity were
REALLY occuring on these services, wouldn't you think the UHF and VHF
amps would be being sold right there alongside all of those HF amps at
the truckstops?
Stewart - N0MHS
stewart
> Here's a bit of a response to all the hams who seem to bash cb'ers with
> amps( no I've never owned a linear) Why is it so bad ( besides illegal) to
> run 100-200 watts on 27mhz, but ok to run 1500 on 28 and 29 ?
The biggest problem is the sort of "arms race" mentality that has
developed. It leads to a kind of "nuclear winter" in which the whole
band is so over-saturated with RF energy, that nobody except the ones
with the largest amplifiers can cut thru the noise to communicate.
Things are ESPECIALLY BAD on the HF bands(like 11m CB), because of
skip - as the noise gets propagated ALL OVER THE WORLD!
I would assume the same problem holds true on the HF ham bands to a
certain extent. However, hams are taught to use only as much power as
necessary to maintain a contact(I don't know how many follow the rule,
and how far they will go in interpreting it, but I'm going to assume
most follow it to a certain degree - although it isn't the "prime
directive" of each and every ham).
Stewart - N0MHS, a VHF/low power-oriented Amateur Extra
stewart
Of course not - RF LOS propagation is different than Visual LOS
propagation.
Why don't you take a gander at this:
http://www.ictp.trieste.it/~radionet/2000_school/lectures/carlo/linkloss/INDEX.HTM
... pay particular attention to Huygens' Principle, all right?
And while you're at it - why don't you look into upgrading that
Technician Class license, Randy?
Now - if you all would stop spreading this high-power GMRS/FRS/MURS
amplifier bullshit, I'll stop having to debunk it. Fair enough?
> Randy
> http://www.frs-usa.com
Stewart - N0MHS
Arf! Arf!
> amps( no I've never owned a linear) Why is it so bad ( besides illegal) to
> run 100-200 watts on 27mhz, but ok to run 1500 on 28 and 29 ?
Because it is the law. What part of "illegal" do you not comprehend?
'Doc
stewart wrote:
----clipped----
> I respect all the points you have made. However, because of the fact
> that we already have had GMRS and FRS for a great number of years(and
> GMRS does allow external antennas, and does share freqs with FRS, and
----clipped----
Stew,
"A great number of years"... Are you sure that
FRS has been around for a great number of years?
How about 1 year (I think).
You know, the way you re-arrange facts to fit the
argument you're making, I think you're a politician.
Are you getting paid by the 'word', or by the pound of
fertilizer that you post?
'Doc
'Doc
So far, Stew baby, you're the only one 'spreading'
it. And the only reason you're doing that is so you
can 'debunk' it. You know, one of those, "make a problem
so you can cure the problem and be a hero" kinda things.
You ned help Stew...
'Doc
Robert Casey
stewart wrote:
>
>
> I would assume the same problem holds true on the HF ham bands to a
> certain extent. However, hams are taught to use only as much power as
> necessary to maintain a contact(I don't know how many follow the rule,
> and how far they will go in interpreting it, but I'm going to assume
> most follow it to a certain degree - although it isn't the "prime
> directive" of each and every ham).
I suspect that the "minimum power needed for the contact" is
observed by hams at the "order of magnitude" level. Can't reach that
interesting DX on 20 with just the 100 watts your transceiver
puts out, well, fire up the kilowatt linear.
KØHB
"stewart" <horse...@yahoo.com> wrote
> there are no high-powered amplifiers on GMRS/FRS/MURS.
There are any number of "opened up" 2M mobile rigs running on MURS. You can
find them advertised as "MURS Ready" on EBay any time you like. Just did a
search on "MURS" and found 50W Icom IC-2100H available, with prominent
mention that it would work on the "new MURS" CB service.
Sunuvagun!
73, de Hans, K0HB
ôżô SOC # 291 http://www.qsl.net/soc/
Phil Kane
>Why would hams want to purposely halt the growth of another radio
>service? For what gain? As a radio hobbyist, I welcome any and all
>outlets for experimenting.
The Class D Citizens Radio Service was never intended for hobby or
experimental use. It became that way by default. Because of
laziness as a resault of a well-known-inside pizzing contest between
certain managers at the FCC - it was easier to just nake thw rules
conform to what the outlaws were doing than to enforce them.
The GMRS and the FRS and the MURS were never intendced to be for
hobby or experimental usage. But alas, the same throwing-up-of-the-hands
that overcame the FCC with the CBRS overcame them for these, too.
FRS was a pet project of Radio Shack to sell lots of junky
throw-away radios and MURS was a pet project of EF Johnson to sell
more JobComm radios than its competitor could sell Color-Dot radios
which both were selling when a Business Radio License was required
for their usage. But the outlaws walked into CostCo or Wal-Mart,
bought the radios and used them unlawfully and the FCC again changed
the rules rather than enforced them.
If you think that these companies had the good intentions of "making
communications more accessible for the average person", I have a bridge
for sale that may be of interest to you....
Wanna do hobby? Wanna do experimenting? Get a ham license....it's
much easier now than when the CBRS and GMRS were first founded.
---
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane
From a Clearing in the Silicon Forest
Beaverton (Washington County) Oregon
G. M. Alf
>
>
>stewart wrote:
>----clipped----
>> I respect all the points you have made. However, because of the fact
>> that we already have had GMRS and FRS for a great number of years(and
>> GMRS does allow external antennas, and does share freqs with FRS, and
>----clipped----
>
>Stew,
> "A great number of years"... Are you sure that
>FRS has been around for a great number of years?
>How about 1 year (I think).
The Family Radio Service was established by the FCC on May 14, 1996, a
mere 6 years ago.
> You know, the way you re-arrange facts to fit the
>argument you're making, I think you're a politician.
>Are you getting paid by the 'word', or by the pound of
>fertilizer that you post?
> 'Doc
Seems to be a common practice.
Mike
Dave Hall
>
> On Wed, 29 May 2002 14:26:51 -0400, Dave Hall wrote:
>
> >Why would hams want to purposely halt the growth of another radio
> >service? For what gain? As a radio hobbyist, I welcome any and all
> >outlets for experimenting.
>
> The Class D Citizens Radio Service was never intended for hobby or
> experimental use. It became that way by default. Because of
> laziness as a resault of a well-known-inside pizzing contest between
> certain managers at the FCC - it was easier to just nake thw rules
> conform to what the outlaws were doing than to enforce them.
No arguement there. You are correct, but it doesn't change history. Be
that as it may, the CB band, the FRS band, and I'm sure the MURS band
are open to be used by THE PUBLIC, for whatever usage they seem to see
fit. GMRS is also (sadly) heading down the same road, now that
blister-pack GMRS radios are available to clueless people that think
they are just higher powered FRS radios.
>
> The GMRS and the FRS and the MURS were never intendced to be for
> hobby or experimental usage. But alas, the same throwing-up-of-the-hands
> that overcame the FCC with the CBRS overcame them for these, too.
They were never intended, but nonetheless are, the cheap and dirty way
to play with radio without taking a test.
>
> FRS was a pet project of Radio Shack to sell lots of junky
> throw-away radios
Some would say Motorola also had a stake in this.
> and MURS was a pet project of EF Johnson to sell
> more JobComm radios than its competitor could sell Color-Dot radios
> which both were selling when a Business Radio License was required
> for their usage. But the outlaws walked into CostCo or Wal-Mart,
> bought the radios and used them unlawfully and the FCC again changed
> the rules rather than enforced them.
That seems to be a common thread for the FCC. "If you can't beat 'em,
change the rules". Had the FCC's presence been stronger, 25 years ago,
we wouldn't be having this conversation. But it's water over the dam
now.
>
> If you think that these companies had the good intentions of "making
> communications more accessible for the average person", I have a bridge
> for sale that may be of interest to you....
Oh no, I'm far from naive. Any commercial venture has as it's primary
goal, the advancement of their profits. Clever marketing types will look
to find any new niche, that they can exploit for monetary gain. Why do
you think companies like Uniden and Yaesu, made ham radios that (Wink
wink) could be easily modified for 11 meter usage? That was no accident,
and their sales demographics proved it, even though they ended up
flooding the market with gear that was destined for illegal usage. But
their bottom line was much better....
>
> Wanna do hobby? Wanna do experimenting? Get a ham license....it's
> much easier now than when the CBRS and GMRS were first founded.
Seems almost too easy doesn't it? Why would someone play arounf with
services like MURS, and FRS, when ham radio offers so much more? The
theory test is disgustingly easy these days, so there's really no good
technical reaason why someone would not go the ham route.
But many seem to harbor a deep rooted hatred for hams and the service in
general. This is likely due to bad exposure to "stuffed shirt" types
that feel that "real hams" operate DX on HF with at least 75% of all
contacts on CW. The bad taste left has turned away many prospective
radiko hobbyists. Maybe that's why there's interest in these other
services.....
Dave
Dave Hall
I agree that there always will be some that have no desire to leave the
11 meter band. But there are also others that like to test new waters.
Many upgrade to ham radio. Many find other avenues.
In my opinion, the only reason that GMRS has stood the test of time, is
that the service was not (Until very recently), widely marketed to the
public in places like Wal-Mart. Gear for GMRS was largely made up of
converted business radios, which are fairly expensive, and not always
easy to find, unless you cruise around in the radio world. In other
words, you had a need.
CB was also not very popular before the 70's, when the mass media
coverage of the "convoy" phenomenon, catapulted CB into every household,
and many companies started cranking out radios and selling them in
places like auto parts stores and 5 & 10 stores.
What will ultimately kill GMRS is the increasing marketing of cheap
"bubble pack" radios, with the predictable resultant rise in illegal
activity. The FCC, will once again run rather than fight, and will most
likely deregulate the band, and that will be the final death knell for a
once usable band.
Dave
"Sandbagger"
Dave Hall
>
> While I'm pretty much a QRP-type operator, I really don't have any
> argument with anything you are saying. But, all of this stuff really
> doesn't apply to the services or the discussion at hand. The point
> is, there have been ZERO actions by the FCC against any
> individuals/entities for running high-powered amplifiers on the
> MURS/GMRS/FRS frequencies; and there is(and never has been) the same
> type of incentive to run these things, like there is on 11m. That's
> all I'm saying.
And this is where your reasoning is flawed. Because the FCC hasn't
publically flogged someone for running excessive power on MURS or FRS,
you assume that it isn't happening. If I were to apply that logic to 11
meter CB, I'd conclude that since there are only a handfull of people
getting NAL's from the FCC, that there are only a FEW people running
illegally there. Anyone that's familiar with 11 meters, knows what a
crock that is. The FCC isn't going to bust someone unless they are
causing interference problems, that bring the illegal to their
attention. If you can run a few more watts on MURS/FRS, and no one
notices, do you think the FCC would care, or even know?
On the other hand, there is a certain amount of circumstantial evidence
that would suggest that there is at least the intention or interest in
running higher power equipment on the FRS and MURS band. I see radio
mods for ham VHF/UHF radios that specifically address usage on those
respective bands. I see radios for sale that mention being usable on
FRS/GMRS/MURS. I guess it's a major selling point to have a single dual
band radio handle 2 meter ham, MURS, the marine band, 440 ham, FRS, and
GMRS. So why mention it, if it wasn't a desired feature by some?
Higher power operation on FRS and MURS wouldn't be particularly
noticable either, due to the band's propagation (or lack thereof). Would
you be able to tell the difference at a glance, between a 2W MURS
station feeding a 10 element beam, 500 feet HAAT from a 50 watt mobile
on the same frequency? Descrete use of ham gear on these frequencies
will not attract much attention. But once Billy Bob finds out, it won't
be so descrete.
Dave
Dick Carroll
> Wanna do hobby? Wanna do experimenting? Get a ham >license....it's
> much easier now than when the CBRS and GMRS were first founded.
>
As someone once said, "Well, there you have it..."
Straight from as prominent an authority as you will ever find on rrap. Ham
radio testing today IS much easier today than before.
Twistedhed
If it was merely that simple then those that self-profess the virtue of
legal radio behavior would never have to resort to the usual BS lies
such as cb interference to emergency ops., cancer induced from RF
spewing linears, false attributions to folks that have a difference of
opinion, etc., etc.,
Twistedhed
much easier now than when the CBRS and GMRS were first founded. <<
>Seems almost too easy doesn't it? Why would someone play arounf with
services like MURS, and FRS, when ham radio offers so much more?<<
How one can live to be as old as you and still not fathom how another's
interest can be different than yours is nothing short of absolutely
astounding. They are separate services and you seem to have come up
against a lonely brick wall judging merely by your past and repeated
efforts to blend and mesh cb and ham. Now you're attempting at adding
FRS and MURS into the mix.
Using your illogic why would one drive an import when they can drive
American? Why drive a car when one can drive a truck? Why drive when one
can fly? Your question is circular and makes sense only to you. One has
nothing to do with the other.
> The theory test is disgustingly easy these days, so there's really no
good technical reaason why someone would not go the ham route.<<
Ahh, but most do not share your failure at comprehending such matters.
>But many seem to harbor a deep rooted hatred for hams and the service
in general.<<
More bullshit direct from the source. The opposite holds more true among
these pages and you are part of the problem by sewing thes falsehoods
(read: LIES).
> This is likely due to bad exposure to "stuffed shirt" types that feel
that "real hams" operate DX on HF with at least 75% of all contacts on
CW. <<
Absolute ignorance if you truly believe that.
>The bad taste left has turned away many prospective radiko hobbyists.<<
Agreed. One needs merely to tune in here to see hammies like yourself
badgering unlicensed ops for no reason other than to bitch and whine
about generalities, innuendos, and what-if scenarios, rather than
anything with substance..
> Maybe that's why there's interest in these other services.....
Dave<<
And you just can't figure out why the flocks never come.
Twistedhed
publically flogged someone for running excessive power on MURS or FRS,
you assume that it isn't happening.<<
Ths is your flawed reasoning.
Since the DX is slipping away you need something else to attack. You're
grasping, nothing more.
> If I were to apply that logic to 11 meter CB, <<
Another flawed reasoning attempt on your behalf. One of your dilemmas
appears to be in recognizing the services are all separate and not
inherent to each other. It is amusing that you are unable to do so,
despite your numerous attempts.
>I'd conclude that since there are only a handfull of people getting
NAL's from the FCC, that there are only a FEW people running illegally<<
(snip)
Well, then let's try your logic for a moment and apply it as you would.
Judging from the minute number of cbers getting NAL's, there must be
only a handful of cbers running illegally.
Ridiculous.
You can not pigeon-hole separate radio services no matter how you
attempt to do so.
>Anyone that's familiar with 11 meters, knows what a crock that is. The
FCC isn't going to bust someone unless they are causing interference
problems, that bring the illegal to their attention. If you can run a
few more watts on MURS/FRS, and no one notices, do you think the FCC
would care, or even know?
On the other hand, there is a certain amount of circumstantial evidence
that would suggest that there is at least the intention or interest in
running higher power equipment on the FRS and MURS band. I see radio
mods for ham VHF/UHF radios that specifically address usage on those
respective bands.<<
The mere contention that this should somehow upset you has deeper
meaning.
> I see radios for sale that mention being usable on FRS/GMRS/MURS. I
guess it's a major selling point to have a single dual band radio handle
2 meter ham, MURS, the marine band, 440 ham, FRS, and GMRS. So why
mention it, if it wasn't a desired feature by some?
Higher power operation on FRS and MURS wouldn't be particularly
noticable either, due to the band's propagation (or lack thereof). Would
you be able to tell the difference at a glance, between a 2W MURS
station feeding a 10 element beam, 500 feet HAAT from a 50 watt mobile
on the same frequency? Descrete use of ham gear on these frequencies
will not attract much attention. But once Billy Bob finds out, it won't
be so descrete.
Dave<<
And Lord knows, the angry hammies keep this guy alive among our pages.
After all, you did create him so it's only fair you nourish him.
Joe Bramblett, KD5NRH
<nospam...@idirect.com> wrote:
>Here's a bit of a response to all the hams who seem to bash cb'ers with
>amps( no I've never owned a linear) Why is it so bad ( besides illegal) to
>run 100-200 watts on 27mhz, but ok to run 1500 on 28 and 29 ?
Ham amps don't tend to be intentionally set up to splatter across half
their band.
Joe Bramblett, KD5NRH
kd5...@kd5nrh.net
http://www.kd5nrh.net
Glenn
<64573B2757C0D1AD.C79CD7A1...@lp.airnews.net>,
kd5nrh-...@kd5nrh.net says...
> On Wed, 29 May 2002 19:07:23 -0400, "Dan Martin"
> <nospam...@idirect.com> wrote:
>
> >Here's a bit of a response to all the hams who seem to bash cb'ers with
> >amps( no I've never owned a linear) Why is it so bad ( besides illegal) to
> >run 100-200 watts on 27mhz, but ok to run 1500 on 28 and 29 ?
>
> Ham amps don't tend to be intentionally set up to splatter across half
> their band.
>
Unlike CB amps that are "intentionally set up to splatter across half
their band"? Do the CB mags run articles on how to intentionally set
up an amp to splatter across half the band? Is there a splatter per
MHz spec for 27 MHz stuff?
You have to love this hobby, you learn something new every day. Thanks
Joe for carrying on the ham radio tradition. The world most
certainly is our oyster!
73,
Glenn
Phil Kane
>> I respect all the points you have made. However, because of the fact
>> that we already have had GMRS and FRS for a great number of years(and
>> GMRS does allow external antennas, and does share freqs with FRS, and
> "A great number of years"... Are you sure that
>FRS has been around for a great number of years?
>How about 1 year (I think).
FRS was created by rules effective July 8, 1996.
MURS was created by rules effective November 13, 2000.
GMRS (Formerly Citizens Class A) has been around for about 50 years.
Dan Martin
besides" do YOU not understand.
Have a great day. Dog
Dan
"Arf! Arf!" <Doggi...@Liberalz.com> wrote in message
news:ad433u$a7b$0...@pita.alt.net...
Twithed Is Crazy
http://www.geocities.com/keyclownslappa/twistworld.jpg
to see what twistedhed is all about.
twist...@webtv.net (Twistedhed) wrote in message news:<22332-3CF...@storefull-2313.public.lawson.webtv.net>...
Twithed Is Crazy
http://www.geocities.com/keyclownslappa/twistworld.jpg
to see what twistedhed is all about.
twist...@webtv.net (Twistedhed) wrote in message news:<22333-3C...@storefull-2313.public.lawson.webtv.net>...
> From: Doggi...@Liberalz.com (Arf!?Arf!)
Vito
> > Because it is the law. ....
> >
Good thing Adams, Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, Washington, et al had a
somewhat different attitude. :o)
Yes, this like the rest of the thread is a mindless troll sent to
captivate the clueless ...
73 K3DWW
Twistedhed
Jane Doe
"Twistedhed" <twist...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:15251-3CF...@storefull-2311.public.lawson.webtv.net...
No one mentioned brands.
*****************************************************************
He didn't either stupid he said Ham amps, you know the ones who must meet
spectral requirements. Unlike Keyclown amps
Cris
On Fri, 31 May 2002 08:48:09 -0400, Vito <vi...@crosslink.net> wrote:
>Yes, this like the rest of the thread is a mindless troll sent to
>captivate the clueless ...
if it is such a mindless thread, that captivates the clueless,
it must be a embarrassment for you, being at the top of the list.
>73 K3DWW
Randy A. Hefner
A very narrow look at this! The men you quote all were for laws.
They were just for laws that was balanced by representation!
Talk about spin!
Vito
>
> Vito <vi...@crosslink.net> wrote
> > Somebody said:
> > > > Because it is the law. ....
> > > >
> >
> > Good thing Adams, Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, Washington, et al had a
> > somewhat different attitude. :o)
> >
> > Yes, this like the rest of the thread is a mindless troll sent to
> > captivate the clueless ...
> >
> > 73 K3DWW
>
> A very narrow look at this! The men you quote all were for laws.
> They were just for laws that was balanced by representation!
>
> Talk about spin!
One fish in the basket ... any more?
uncola
Thats true no one mentioned brands, whats your point dimwit?
Dave Hall
>
> On Thu, 30 May 2002 07:37:07 -0400, Dave Hall <nojunk...@worldlynx.net>
> wrote:
>
> >What will ultimately kill GMRS is the increasing marketing of cheap
> >"bubble pack" radios, with the predictable resultant rise in illegal
> >activity. The FCC, will once again run rather than fight, and will most
> >likely deregulate the band, and that will be the final death knell for a
> >once usable band.
>
> in the late '70s, I heard the all too familiar rigs with amps ("You have a
> Blue Flame", god I hate that bastard to this day). I just wonder, as the
> vast majority of GMRS and FRS units being sold are hand held, is there
> really a concern that a large number of these units will one day be
> walking around with amps strapped to them? I could see it with CB, since
> most units were either base or mobile mounted, but with GMRS or FRS, it
> just doesn't sound like a practical thing to do even from a CB'er mindset.
Well, time will tell. While I don't expect kilowatt stations to take
over GMRS, there will most likely be a vast increase in the "noise
level" on once quiet frequencies.
The whole CB "phenomenon", is mainly made up of a bunch of different
people, looking for different things. GMRS lacks the DX potential, so
those type of people will not be attracted to GMRS. But people looking
to broaden their radio horizons (without having to take the "cursed" ham
test) may be attracted to this alternative.
The people who will be attracted to GMRS will be the same people that
became interested in FRS, namely those who want clear quiet
communications, or who want to yack it up with the locals. The range on
FRS is a bit dismal, so the allure of higher power GMRS radios (not all
of which are handheld), may be enticing.
Since most legal GMRS users belong to a community repeater system to get
the best coverage from their handheld radios, illegal GMRS users, will
have to "Go it alone" on simplex. The only alternative to a repeater
system, is to run higher power. With UHF, terrain makes a big
difference, and high power doesn't always guarantee a huge jump in
range, but that won't stop some people from trying. Higher power is a
bit more expensive at UHF frequencies, but I wouldn't be surprised to
see people running power in the 100 to 300 watt range.
But like I said before, time will tell..
Dave