Apco25 on GMRS?

0rlando · Post by **0rlando** » Thu Aug 03, 2006 6:33 am

I know Apco25 digital is used on the ham bands without issue, but can it be also used on GMRS?

k2hz · Post by **k2hz** » Thu Aug 03, 2006 7:05 am

No, Rule 95.631e prohibits digital emissions for GMRS.

RRrobby · Post by **RRrobby** » Thu Aug 03, 2006 7:14 am

Checking the Part 95:
95.631 lists the following types of emission permissable: A1D, F1D,

G1D, H1D, J1D, R1D, A3E, F3E, G3E, H3E, J3E or R3E-RRRobby

0rlando · Post by **0rlando** » Thu Aug 03, 2006 7:41 am

Thanks!

poser · Post by **poser** » Thu Aug 03, 2006 6:56 pm

So is that a go or a no go? Thanks

Will · Post by **Will** » Thu Aug 03, 2006 9:20 pm

No go, Rule 95.631e prohibits digital emissions for GMRS.

MRFLASHPORT · Post by **MRFLASHPORT** » Fri Aug 04, 2006 11:02 am

Who really cares? Even if you talk in digital mode on GMRS its going to be in simplex anyways!

No one is going to hear you, talk away and have fun!

Rayjk110 · Post by **Rayjk110** » Fri Aug 04, 2006 1:26 pm

"Mommy there's a wierd static noise on my channel!"

mmckenna · Post by **mmckenna** » Fri Aug 04, 2006 1:34 pm

MRFLASHPORT wrote:Who really cares? Even if you talk in digital mode on GMRS its going to be in simplex anyways!

No one is going to hear you, talk away and have fun!

Nice advice (not). What about those who are legally using GMRS, have money invested in repeaters and commercial grade equipment?

Just @^*& 'em, huh?

Josh · Post by **Josh** » Fri Aug 04, 2006 2:30 pm

As a licensed GMRS user, if I choose to use the frequencies with digital modulation, so be it (I do not own or operate any Astro gear on UHF however).

-Josh

N9LLO · Post by **N9LLO** » Fri Aug 04, 2006 4:10 pm

I was a licensed GMRS user and repeater operator for many years. When the FCC ruined the GMRS with the introduction of FRS and the bubble pack
GMRS radios I gave up just like the FCC and everyone else on the band.
What ever you want to do on GMRS is OK as it is a free for all now just like CB. I would say that APCO 25 digital would be a major improvement for the band.

Chris
N9LLO
ex KAD9453

Rayjk110 · Post by **Rayjk110** » Fri Aug 04, 2006 4:22 pm

Yeah GMRS is definately not the place to try and run a professional repeater/system anymore with the bubble-crap radios.

If you want a system where you and your friends can talk on, try ham. If not apply for a commercial license if you have a business or the like.

Josh · Post by **Josh** » Fri Aug 04, 2006 4:28 pm

Well, Ray. GMRS isn't for business anyhow, but a long time ago it was permissible, and can be used for it, but only if all users are licensed.

GMRS was meant as a service for people to use professional grade radios and repeaters on and have more-or-less "private" comms, unlike ham where repeaters are a free-for-all and the purpose is the all mighty QSO.

Long story short, Bubble pack units are not commercial grade, and are very unprofessional. Most don't do repeater splits anyhow, thankfully.

When my license expires in October, I have absolutely no intention of renewing and thus closes a small chapter in my radio history book, and one less use for me in the UHF-Band.

-Josh

AEC · Post by **AEC** » Fri Aug 04, 2006 6:03 pm

GMRS: Greatly Messed up Radio Service!

Too bad the FCC rules were written years before digital audio became a reality, I'll bet a rewrite is in the works though, to cover this obscure piece of T.P.

A rewrite is definately necessary!

OX · Post by OX » Sat Aug 05, 2006 9:08 am

When was the last time that the FCC "cleaned" up one of it's mistakes? The problem is the first letter "F" for Federal. The only thing my GMRS license is good for now is to annoy the little kiddies.

n1pfc · Post by **n1pfc** » Sat Aug 05, 2006 2:49 pm

Over in the FCC enforcement actions at the ARRL's web page, they are starting to send warning notices to GMRS users for using MDC1200 / fleetsync on GMRS now too.

Just run DES-XL or DVP-XL and get it over with

Kurt

AEC · Post by **AEC** » Sat Aug 05, 2006 5:40 pm

n1pfc wrote:Over in the FCC enforcement actions at the ARRL's web page, they are starting to send warning notices to GMRS users for using MDC1200 / fleetsync on GMRS now too.

Just run DES-XL or DVP-XL and get it over with

Kurt

That figures, let's penalize folks who use ANI on a non commercial system.

What real 'harm' is being done using MDC/ANI or ANY signalling anyhow?

And WHY is it such a big deal to begin with?

Aftter all, FRS uses odd sounds and that's okay, so what is the problem with MDC or any signalling being used by LICENSED operators over the non licensed ones?

Can anybody answer this one with fact, I sure can't.

Leave it to the FCC to screw things up, but to be honest, is the FCC doing ANYTHING for the people instead of simply lining their pockets with OUR tax money?

n1pfc · Post by **n1pfc** » Sat Aug 05, 2006 5:49 pm

Well with the ANI it comes down to the fact that they are transmitting a 'digital' signal. Rules say no digital. Period.
I think morse code is exempt, but it's a digital signal too if you want to get technical

Kurt

Rayjk110 · Post by **Rayjk110** » Sat Aug 05, 2006 6:41 pm

Yeah, WTF is up with that. Sure the moto courtesy "Rodger-Beep" tone is ok, but to hell with MDC, that's a no-no.

And reguarding those warning notices, is there any legal action even taken with those?, or is it just a slap-on-the-wrist "no no" letter?

Wicho · Post by **Wicho** » Sat Aug 05, 2006 7:21 pm

Hey everyone,

Check out the below. This came from the PRA section of the popularwireless website.

"Use of digital protocols like MDC1200. The ONLY F2D digital protocol allowed on GMRS is device and company specific. One company, Garmin has a waiver to allow data bursts from GPS devices on the GMRS. (Note the PRA is ACTIVELY looking at whether or not to propose acceptance of administration protocols like MDC1200. Visit the PRA forum at PopularWireless.com for more information and to offer your opinions. These protocols are digital and currently NOT ALLOWED in the GMRS regardless of what we think of the usefulness of the protocol or the silliness of the rule. We are however exploring the idea of asking the Commission to allow its use.) In 2006 the FCC OET told Association researchers that MDC1200 and like protocols were NOT considered F2D and are therefore PERMISSABLE in the GMRS."

I've spoken with people that are active in GMRS and they told me that MDC1200 is indeed allowed in GMRS, so...it looks like you can use MDC1200 to your heart's content.

n1pfc · Post by **n1pfc** » Sat Aug 05, 2006 7:22 pm

Rayjk110 wrote:Yeah, WTF is up with that. Sure the moto courtesy "Rodger-Beep" tone is ok, but to hell with MDC, that's a no-no.

And reguarding those warning notices, is there any legal action even taken with those?, or is it just a slap-on-the-wrist "no no" letter?

The warning notice is pretty much a 'cease and decist' order. If you continue doing what prompted the warning notice then you actually face fines, public stoning, etc.

and this is all over ANI. I say we use DTMF for alert tones now

Post by Pj » Sat Aug 05, 2006 7:31 pm

Wheew... I guess I'll have to fire up MODAT on GMRS again...Not that you can tell with all the other tones..

AEC · Post by **AEC** » Sat Aug 05, 2006 10:46 pm

Permissible or not, I've always used MDC on GMRS and continue to do so, and actually, it doesn't fall into a 'digital' mode as it is only a numeric identifier and carries no information that is usable to anyone except the decoders.

Aside from that, MDC, MODAT and QC-II can not be used to communicate with as there is no voice channel associated with any of these protocols, so the point is moot.

The FCC needs to go away, plain and simple...they serve NO purpose but to squander money, and still perform no beneficial service to the people, only corporate america....Zeig Heil Bush*spew*!

wa2zdy · Post by **wa2zdy** » Sun Aug 06, 2006 12:32 pm

95.181 (g) and (h) would seem to permit MDC. I can't imagine MDC being considered anything that isn't allowed by those two paragraphs.

I've used MDC on GMRS and will continue to do so as needed.

mmckenna · Post by **mmckenna** » Sun Aug 06, 2006 2:57 pm

I second the MDC thing, it was discussed with the FCC and they said it was OK, many repeater owners are using it today.

I do have a ham license, but some in my family are not interested in getting their tickets, so GMRS does the trick. Like it or not, I'm going to use it for its intended usage, and I'll do what I can to keep it useable.

Don't like all the kiddie crap, use DCS, you should all know how to do that....

As for commercial systems, I run a few at work, but I have no interest in paying a license coordinator to sit on thier rears while I do all the frequency research for them, all for something I can, and should legally be able to do on GMRS.

Yeah, FCC has screwed all of us over in one way, shape, or form, no doubt. I say throw the bums out!

I'm also sick and tired of the kiddie bubble pack users, but I'm more pissed off with the commercial shops who are using GMRS as a dumping ground for commercial users who belong somewhere else. Anyway, if you want to run P25, do it on HAM, leave GMRS alone, you aren't doing anything to help.

I must say I really did expect better from the people on this site, especially from some of my fellow ham operators. Funny how some will jump all over BPL, but when it suits them, the rules always apply to someone else, not them.

wa2zdy · Post by **wa2zdy** » Sun Aug 06, 2006 4:28 pm

Yep. That's exactly what we use GMRS for in this family. I don't think we should coerce the whole family to get ham tickets anyway if all they will use it for is family business. We call them "cell phone hams." This is what GMRS is for.

I agree with you also on the rules. Hams have traditionally been self-policing and law abiding. It really does disappoint me to see the suggestions to "just do . . . " whatever.

n1pfc · Post by **n1pfc** » Sun Aug 06, 2006 5:50 pm

mmckenna wrote:I second the MDC thing, it was discussed with the FCC and they said it was OK, many repeater owners are using it today.

I do have a ham license, but some in my family are not interested in getting their tickets, so GMRS does the trick. Like it or not, I'm going to use it for its intended usage, and I'll do what I can to keep it useable.

Don't like all the kiddie crap, use DCS, you should all know how to do that....

As for commercial systems, I run a few at work, but I have no interest in paying a license coordinator to sit on thier rears while I do all the frequency research for them, all for something I can, and should legally be able to do on GMRS.

Yeah, FCC has screwed all of us over in one way, shape, or form, no doubt. I say throw the bums out!

I'm also sick and tired of the kiddie bubble pack users, but I'm more pissed off with the commercial shops who are using GMRS as a dumping ground for commercial users who belong somewhere else. Anyway, if you want to run P25, do it on HAM, leave GMRS alone, you aren't doing anything to help.

I must say I really did expect better from the people on this site, especially from some of my fellow ham operators. Funny how some will jump all over BPL, but when it suits them, the rules always apply to someone else, not them.

I actually agree with you. I'm just posting what I know about the way that they are handling complaints on the ANI stuff. APCO25 is digital. period. not permitted according to the rules until they change. I'm joking around with the DES / DVP, hence the

.

I actually run MDC1200 ANI on ham all day long. Some people like it, some people dont. I've even people complain when I was running APRS data squirts as well, which there is *NO* question that it is legal.

I think this whole thing is a case of the squeaky wheel getting the grease. They only typically send out letters when people complain about something.

The FCC is typically just a paper pusher these days anyways. Case in point, I know of an agency that received their license on a friday for two repeaters, 20km mobile coverage. The following monday they issue a license for the same frequency, same city, 2 miles down the road for 10km mobile coverage. Gotta love that.

bellersley · Post by **bellersley** » Sun Aug 06, 2006 9:10 pm

Analog is OLD and outdated. Digital and encryption is the new thing. I use ham radio almost every day... how much of that do you think isn't encrypted? Both the FCC and IC just don't care about ham, GMRS, CB or FRS.

wa2zdy · Post by **wa2zdy** » Mon Aug 07, 2006 7:17 pm

n1pfc wrote: I actually agree with you. I'm just posting what I know about the way that they are handling complaints on the ANI stuff. APCO25 is digital. period. not permitted according to the rules until they change. I'm joking around with the DES / DVP, hence the :D .

I actually run MDC1200 ANI on ham all day long. Some people like it, some people dont. I've even people complain when I was running APRS data squirts as well, which there is *NO* question that it is legal.

Your post is confusing. APCO25 is perfectly legal on the ham bands but not on GMRS. Your reference to using MDC on the ham band makes no sense. The question about MDC was in reference to GMRS. MDC is also legal on the ham bands.

I don't know of many repeaters that require MDC on the ham bands, and there have been a few too many wacker hams who've enabled MDC to sound "cool." I don't find anything "cool" about it. In fact I find it annoying to listen to. But if it's serving a purpose, fine. Again though, if not, it's just an annoyance. But MDC is indeed legal on the ham band. And I, as others here, maintain it is legal on GMRS too.

Bellersly said:

"Analog is OLD and outdated. Digital and encryption is the new thing. I use ham radio almost every day... how much of that do you think isn't encrypted? Both the FCC and IC just don't care about ham, GMRS, CB or FRS."

I don't know of much encryption being used on the ham bands. I myself have never heard anything I would interpret to be encryption. I suspect FCC might take a stand on that one though. Winlink is raising quite a stink about what many are calling encryption and FCC is going to be dragged into that one soon. Homeland security issues will also become a factor if someone is caught using encryption on the ham bands.

You're right overall though, FCC for the most part has washed its hands of ham, GMRS, CB and FRS. Riley Hollingsworth has made a dent in some of the more obvious ham problems with the full support of the law abiding ham community. We don't care for the black eye we all get when a doofus makes ham radio look bad.

As for IC I cannot comment but I've heard their attitude is very similar.

wazzzzzzzzup · Post by **wazzzzzzzzup** » Mon Aug 07, 2006 7:27 pm

Rayjk110 wrote:Yeah GMRS is definately not the place to try and run a professional repeater/system anymore with the bubble-crap radios.

If you want a system where you and your friends can talk on, try ham. If not apply for a commercial license if you have a business or the like.

or you can invest in some UHF LTR radios among your friends and get service on a local LTR system, its like having your own PRIVATE Repeater among yourself and your buddies. if you are all hams, great! if you have some hams and some non, thats fine too as its commercial band.

FOR many years myself and some other ham friends were on a 800Mhz moto type 1 system. it was great! basically like a private ham repeater with better coverage than ANY ham repeater in the area!!!!!

Rayjk110 · Post by **Rayjk110** » Mon Aug 07, 2006 8:26 pm

I've been thinking about that, actually.

Just didn't know rules, how it works, fees, etc. Actually I think there may be a local system, however I'm not 100% certain.

mr.syntrx · Post by **mr.syntrx** » Mon Aug 07, 2006 10:43 pm

There's an 800MHz Smartnet system here, operated by Motorola itself. I should find out what's involved in getting access to that.

We're on a UHF MPT1327 system at the moment (Telstra Fleetcoms.) It's a little on the expensive side, and 1327 talkgroup operation just plain sucks.

wazzzzzzzzup · Post by **wazzzzzzzzup** » Tue Aug 08, 2006 12:39 pm

Rayjk110 wrote:I've been thinking about that, actually.

Just didn't know rules, how it works, fees, etc. Actually I think there may be a local system, however I'm not 100% certain.

locally service is 17.00 a month per unit with a 25.00 programming fee and a 1 time activation fee per tower. some companys provide free setup and programming of your radios. but doing the following, i found that a particular company in the area that offered free programming and activation, really didn't have good coverage for my area, after listening to the frequencies.

i would sugest, if you are going to consider ltr service, to use a scanner (doesnt have to be A trunked scanner) , listen for active, strong UHF LTR frequencies in your area you can identify them by the data pulse every 5 to 10 seconds when nobodys talking (i would sugest take the scanner around town to find the best overall coverage of each frequency), then, go to http://www.radioreference.com and punch in the freqs that sound strong to the "unidentified" frequency search for your state, and you should come up with the owner of the site(s). radioreference also has a look up option that once you find a listing for a provider, you can click on thier license, then it takes you to google and shows you a satellite image of the tower location. as well as the ability to find tower height, and number of system channels on the same location.

some good basic radios that work well, P1225LS (basic handheld doesnt do ham) about 120.00 each on ebay or HT1250LS (good handheld does ham if you get the 403-470 split) about 200-300.00 on ebay
looking for a mobile, then a good basic model is the M1225LS 40 watts in a small package doesnt do ham, avg price on ebay 100-130.00
a nice mobile is the CDM1550LS lots of options and does ham if you get the right 403-470 split. avg price on ebay is 150-250.00

wazzzzzzzzup · Post by **wazzzzzzzzup** » Tue Aug 08, 2006 12:41 pm

mr.syntrx wrote:There's an 800MHz Smartnet system here, operated by Motorola itself. I should find out what's involved in getting access to that.

you are SOOOO lucky to have an 800 SMR system in your area, I would be on that in a second if it were local...

OX · Post by OX » Tue Aug 08, 2006 1:50 pm

That's because he ain't in the US where Nextel bought and sloughtered most of the 800 SMR systems.

There used to be a 800 SMR here with 28 channels and very good coverage. Monthly access was $10 per ID and you had multiple subfleets available to you (the one my company was on had 3 subfleets). Phone calls were billed at $0.35 each. I don't think you can find that now on any system...

n1pfc · Post by **n1pfc** » Tue Aug 08, 2006 4:44 pm

wa2zdy wrote:
n1pfc wrote: I actually agree with you. I'm just posting what I know about the way that they are handling complaints on the ANI stuff. APCO25 is digital. period. not permitted according to the rules until they change. I'm joking around with the DES / DVP, hence the .

I actually run MDC1200 ANI on ham all day long. Some people like it, some people dont. I've even people complain when I was running APRS data squirts as well, which there is *NO* question that it is legal.
Your post is confusing. APCO25 is perfectly legal on the ham bands but not on GMRS. Your reference to using MDC on the ham band makes no sense. The question about MDC was in reference to GMRS. MDC is also legal on the ham bands.

I don't know of many repeaters that require MDC on the ham bands, and there have been a few too many wacker hams who've enabled MDC to sound "cool." I don't find anything "cool" about it. In fact I find it annoying to listen to. But if it's serving a purpose, fine. Again though, if not, it's just an annoyance. But MDC is indeed legal on the ham band. And I, as others here, maintain it is legal on GMRS too.

Bellersly said:
"Analog is OLD and outdated. Digital and encryption is the new thing. I use ham radio almost every day... how much of that do you think isn't encrypted? Both the FCC and IC just don't care about ham, GMRS, CB or FRS."
I don't know of much encryption being used on the ham bands. I myself have never heard anything I would interpret to be encryption. I suspect FCC might take a stand on that one though. Winlink is raising quite a stink about what many are calling encryption and FCC is going to be dragged into that one soon. Homeland security issues will also become a factor if someone is caught using encryption on the ham bands.

You're right overall though, FCC for the most part has washed its hands of ham, GMRS, CB and FRS. Riley Hollingsworth has made a dent in some of the more obvious ham problems with the full support of the law abiding ham community. We don't care for the black eye we all get when a doofus makes ham radio look bad.

As for IC I cannot comment but I've heard their attitude is very similar.

My point on MDC on the ham bands is that people dont like to listen to it. Even though it may be perfectly legal to use it, hence why people complain about it. Same goes for GMRS. People dont like to listen to it, so they complain. This is the reason why I threw in the stuff on APRS data at the end of transmition.

Encryption on the ham bands is ILLEGAL. PERIOD. read 47CFR97.113 sometime. 'Messages encoded for the purpose of obscuring meaning' pretty much says to me if you're using pig latin or some other code (read encryption) that you've come up with to obscure what you're trying to say, then you are illegally operating.

Kurt

wa2zdy · Post by **wa2zdy** » Tue Aug 08, 2006 5:51 pm

bellersley wrote:Analog is OLD and outdated. Digital and encryption is the new thing. I use ham radio almost every day... how much of that do you think isn't encrypted? Both the FCC and IC just don't care about ham, GMRS, CB or FRS.

And N1PFC said:

Encryption on the ham bands is ILLEGAL. PERIOD. read 47CFR97.113 sometime. 'Messages encoded for the purpose of obscuring meaning' pretty much says to me if you're using pig latin or some other code (read encryption) that you've come up with to obscure what you're trying to say, then you are illegally operating

That was my point in reply to Bellersly's post. Bellersly leads one to believe he is aware of much encryption on the bands. He's in Canada and maybe IC handles that differently but I think FCC would crack down on it.

bellersley · Post by **bellersley** » Tue Aug 08, 2006 7:48 pm

There is quite a number of encryption enabled hams around here. What I was getting at is that I talk on ham all the time, most of which you can't hear on a scanner.. It's not to be a rebel, but It's nice not having some old coot interrupting.

Post by Pj » Tue Aug 08, 2006 9:13 pm

Then again, there has been the argument that if you publish the key, then its sorta ok. Then again, you have to look at the spirt of the regulations vs technical interputation.

Either way, its a debate that isn't going to be solved here.

bellersley · Post by **bellersley** » Tue Aug 08, 2006 9:59 pm

Good point. As for identification, my soft id is my call sign. I've toyed with going on the commercial uhf ltr system here.. coverage is amazing.. 100 miles, easy. I wonder what is worse. Out of band, or encryption on hammie...

Rayjk110 · Post by **Rayjk110** » Tue Aug 08, 2006 10:04 pm

That would be kinda interesting, tho

And this is WB9XXX for ID with DES-OFB KEY OF 2102491241021 every 10 minutes.

mr.syntrx · Post by **mr.syntrx** » Tue Aug 08, 2006 11:43 pm

OX wrote:That's because he ain't in the US where Nextel bought and sloughtered most of the 800 SMR systems.

Yep.

There won't be a Nextel anytime soon, either, fortunately. There are three major cellular carriers in .au, all of which pretty much have nationwide coverage, and loads of money. Nobody has the capital to start an operation like Nextel, and compete with them at the consumer level.

There used to be a 800 SMR here with 28 channels and very good coverage. Monthly access was $10 per ID and you had multiple subfleets available to you (the one my company was on had 3 subfleets). Phone calls were billed at $0.35 each. I don't think you can find that now on any system...

We pay about $25/mo for Fleetcoms.

bellersley · Post by **bellersley** » Wed Aug 09, 2006 3:34 am

Just publish your key on a website, and quote that site.. Then again... all the old techno-dumb hammies would no doubt kick and scream... Hell, they already do when I use MDC!

mr.syntrx · Post by **mr.syntrx** » Wed Aug 09, 2006 6:42 am

They yell and scream if you even use PL. F'em.

poser · Post by **poser** » Wed Aug 09, 2006 8:57 am

Nextel is to cease using 800Mhz after 2010, according to rumors.
I wish there was a nice trunked system around here

George · Post by **George** » Wed Aug 09, 2006 12:58 pm

It's like this...I don't use encryption, I use digital transmissions that require a key to listen that is publically available because I publish my key. I don't cite a web site, I publish it in the business section of the Pillager, Minnesota shopper.

There! It's public. If it's public, it's not encryption because I have made the means of listening to my transmission available to the general public. If they don't know where to look, that's not my problem.

I never say encryption, I say digital.

George

N9LLO · Post by **N9LLO** » Wed Aug 09, 2006 1:15 pm

George,
Your whacked man. Dont use it on part 97 freqs. Encryption hardware is encryption period! Already been decided by the MAN. Email Riley if you dont understand.

Chris
N9LLO

Post by Pj » Wed Aug 09, 2006 1:44 pm

Alrighty...I think this has pretty much taken its course. For futher discussion I recommend taking it up on the Batlounge, Radiorefence, a laywer, coffee shop (Starbucks for the westcoasters) and Besty the Cow.

Apco25 on GMRS?

Apco25 on GMRS?

GMRS Modulation

MDC1200 on GMRS