Speaker 1: How can someone actually justify linked repeaters in gmrs? How
Speaker 1: do you think this is okay? How do you think
Speaker 1: it's okay when the FCC has certainly said that it's
Speaker 1: not okay to link repeaters in gmrs. How do you
Speaker 1: think it's okay? How do you justify it? Let's talk
Speaker 1: about it, okay? So I kind of gotcha. That wasn't clickbait,
Speaker 1: because that's what we're gonna actually talk about right now.
Speaker 1: But I kind of gotcha because that's the title of
Speaker 1: the article. That wasn't a question I was asking. I
Speaker 1: wasn't saying, hey, how do you justify this? That's what
Speaker 1: the article says. So I'm going to try to be
Speaker 1: as even keeled and writing the fence as much as
Speaker 1: I can during this video. But right here, I found
Speaker 1: this article on Reddit, which is two months old at
Speaker 1: the time of this recording, and I actually found it
Speaker 1: a little time ago, and I kind of forgot about
Speaker 1: it quite frankly. So I wanted to read it to
Speaker 1: you today because I think it's relevant to a couple
Speaker 1: of other videos that I have done recently on the
Speaker 1: channel about GMRS repeater linking, which has been a hot
Speaker 1: topic as of late so the author of the original
Speaker 1: post rights. I am relatively new to the GMRS community. However,
Speaker 1: I recently encountered a YouTube channel which shall remain anonymous,
Speaker 1: put a comment in the blow who you think that is?
Speaker 1: Where the individual justified linking the repeaters by claiming they
Speaker 1: are still within the Part ninety five rules. I'm unable
Speaker 1: to comprehend how this is possible, and it appears that
Speaker 1: these individuals are also a licen inmateurs, which is quite perplexing. Okay,
Speaker 1: so if this I don't know who this channel he's
Speaker 1: talking about is. I said in a previous video, I
Speaker 1: mentioned that I supported linking of GMRS repeaters, and I
Speaker 1: don't think that they should disallow that. Okay, However, I'm
Speaker 1: not trying to justify it. Just say do it anyway,
Speaker 1: or you know, forget what they say. I'm not trying
Speaker 1: to justify that. No, it's actually, according to the FCC regulations,
Speaker 1: it is not legal to link GMRS repeaters together over
Speaker 1: the Internet. And we're going to read a little bit
Speaker 1: of this here in a minute. I don't know the
Speaker 1: stipulation behind linking them together over RF in other words,
Speaker 1: radio linking them together and not linking them over the internet.
Speaker 1: There might be a little difference there, a little different
Speaker 1: stipulation there. I'm not sure, but let's read on and
Speaker 1: see what these comments say, because these are the best part.
Speaker 1: The first comment here says, well, today, since the FCC
Speaker 1: is come down and said flat out that linking isn't allowed,
Speaker 1: I don't think anyone has been fined for the activity,
Speaker 1: and I think he's right on that. I may be
Speaker 1: wrong about that, though, it certainly ain't gonna happen during
Speaker 1: the current shutdown. Okay, so yeah, this was written during
Speaker 1: the forty three day government shutdown in twenty twenty five.
Speaker 1: People might want linked repeaters for any number of reasons,
Speaker 1: some of them are quite valid. The problem with gmrs
Speaker 1: is that the number of frequency pairs is extremely limited.
Speaker 1: We spoke about this in my last video, and my
Speaker 1: idea was to say, okay, let's allow linking on two channels.
Speaker 1: Let's say channel twenty one and twenty two or what
Speaker 1: I mean, pick two. I don't even care what they are.
Speaker 1: There's about eight repeater channels, and there's sixteen simplex channels
Speaker 1: and eight repeater channels in GMRS for a total of
Speaker 1: twenty two channels. So let's pick two of them that
Speaker 1: linking are allowed on, and the rest of them let's
Speaker 1: not link. I think that would be a good solution.
Speaker 1: Using all of them in one area for a single
Speaker 1: link system is extremely rude, particularly if you're going to
Speaker 1: charge for access. This is actually happening in some areas still,
Speaker 1: So that's another thing we talked about. And a couple
Speaker 1: of you sent me an email about the North Georgia
Speaker 1: GMRS repeater system and I got some and now I
Speaker 1: don't have any I have no dog in this fight
Speaker 1: at all. I don't know these guys. I've never met them,
Speaker 1: never talked in this repeater system. But I'm told through
Speaker 1: a lot of emails and a lot of comments that
Speaker 1: I got on that last video that these guys are rude.
Speaker 1: They link all the channels together into the same system,
Speaker 1: which is dumb. Why would you do that. That's a
Speaker 1: stupid thing to do. You've got eight different repeater frequencies
Speaker 1: you can use for GMRS repeaters. Why would you tie
Speaker 1: all of those into the same system. Why would you
Speaker 1: do that? Now you've got one channel, You've taken eight
Speaker 1: frequencies and tie them all, tying them all in together
Speaker 1: to the same linked repeater system over the Internet and
Speaker 1: tying them across several states. So you've got one channel
Speaker 1: on GMRS that you can use on all these areas
Speaker 1: in all these channels effectively because they're all tied together.
Speaker 1: So you've taken away the possibility to use different channels
Speaker 1: for different groups and f the same time now they're
Speaker 1: all linked together. It's a stupid idea. I don't know
Speaker 1: why anyone would do that, why anyone would like using
Speaker 1: a system like that. And then the reply here says
Speaker 1: many have received letters and stopped. I would like to
Speaker 1: see the evidence for many have received letters and stopped
Speaker 1: because I am not aware. I'm I know that the
Speaker 1: FCC has come down on a few people and said no,
Speaker 1: you can't do this anymore, and they stopped. But I
Speaker 1: know a few others kind of after all that, those
Speaker 1: are the people who didn't want to make waves. Kind of,
Speaker 1: after all that happened, then it wasn't you know. There's
Speaker 1: a lot of groups that are still doing it and
Speaker 1: they don't care what the FCC says. So I wonder
Speaker 1: which group he's talking about there. The opinion held by
Speaker 1: some YouTube rando doesn't really matter. That's true. The only
Speaker 1: opinion right now that counts is in the US is
Speaker 1: the one held by the FCC until their legislation or
Speaker 1: litigation compels them to change their position. This person can
Speaker 1: always take steps to attract the FCC's attention in order
Speaker 1: to set themselves up as a test case to be
Speaker 1: able to fight it out in court if they so choose,
Speaker 1: considering the courts have overturned that Chevron deference, it would
Speaker 1: depend on the Congress set forth in the Communications Act
Speaker 1: of nineteen thirty four and other legislation. Okay, good, this
Speaker 1: was an arrando. This was the owner of said link
Speaker 1: systems who was also a Ham. I'm not sure who's
Speaker 1: he talking about that owns a link system on GMRS
Speaker 1: refuses to unlink him as also a Ham. I'm not
Speaker 1: sure who that is. Sounds like a randu who clearly
Speaker 1: doesn't know what they're talking about. This person was a
Speaker 1: Ham and the owner of a link Gumborus Peter Sism
Speaker 1: I agree they are making stuff up. That doesn't make
Speaker 1: the person a Rando. Okay, they're talking about his identity there. Okay,
Speaker 1: so here we go. GMRS Emission Types Part ninety five.
Speaker 1: Why doesn't everyone just forget about the silly repeater linking.
Speaker 1: Realize that AM is actually allowed on GMRS. Imagine that
Speaker 1: AM and single sideband on GMRS would be awesome. I
Speaker 1: don't think that this is true. Where are you seeing
Speaker 1: this in Part ninety five? Okay, let's look at this.
Speaker 1: Maybe I'm wrong ninety five dot one seven seven to
Speaker 1: one GMRS emission types. Each GMRS transmitter type must be
Speaker 1: designed to satisfy the emission capabilities rules in this section.
Speaker 1: Operation of GMRS stations must also be in compliance with
Speaker 1: these rules. Each GMRS transmitter type must have the capability
Speaker 1: to transmit F three E or G three E transmissions
Speaker 1: only emissions types. All of these numbers here are authorized
Speaker 1: for GMRS. Equipment for which certification is sought under subpart
Speaker 1: may have capabilities to transmit other emission types intended for
Speaker 1: the use of other services, provided that these emission types
Speaker 1: are deactivated when the equipment's used. GMRS A three E
Speaker 1: is AM voice and J three E a single sidebandvoys.
Speaker 1: And this guy replies and says, after doing some checking,
Speaker 1: the FCC has never certified, nor has any plans to sertify,
Speaker 1: any SSB equipment the GMRS band, So at this point
Speaker 1: in time. The use of SSB or any mode other
Speaker 1: than F three G three is illegally use type acceptance.
Speaker 1: That's kind of tricky. These emissions are allowed the reason
Speaker 1: that there aren't any type of accepted equipment because nobody
Speaker 1: has ever made any. I don't think that this is correct.
Speaker 1: These emissions are allowed. And the reason that there aren't
Speaker 1: any type accepted equipments because nobody's ever made any. If
Speaker 1: this type was actually allowed, then the Chinese would be
Speaker 1: all over it, because the Chinese is the only ones
Speaker 1: making GMRS radios anyway, and they make a lot of
Speaker 1: CB radios in China, and a lot of CB radios
Speaker 1: will do AM and single sideband. And the FCC has
Speaker 1: not certified any so they're going back and forth here
Speaker 1: talking about the FCC hasn't certified any that's why there
Speaker 1: aren't any. Says well, but it's still legal even though
Speaker 1: nothing's certified. It's illegal as a fallible statement. I don't
Speaker 1: know what that word is. The lack of GMRS type
Speaker 1: exerveted rigs capable of AM single sideband leaves no legal
Speaker 1: means there's no ambiguity there. We don't have to qualify
Speaker 1: it by saying except perhaps sometime potential in the future. Okay,
Speaker 1: So I don't know if this is correct. In A
Speaker 1: three E and J three E is A three e's
Speaker 1: AM and J three E is sideband A three E transmissions?
Speaker 1: All right, here's Google's Actually this is braves Ai. The
Speaker 1: term A three E transmission appears to be a confusion
Speaker 1: between two distinct concepts, a radio emission designation and a
Speaker 1: vehicle transmission. And the context of radio, a three E
Speaker 1: refers to a double sideband full carrier single, which is
Speaker 1: of course AM, the designation used here in amateur radio
Speaker 1: and other communication. Okay, so it looks like that is correct,
Speaker 1: and then A three is a type of transmission in
Speaker 1: an AUTI Okay, so let's just take that at face value.
Speaker 1: Then I have not heard of A three E or
Speaker 1: J three E. But uh, okay, J three E is
Speaker 1: single sideband voice, okay. A three is double sidemand which
Speaker 1: is AM. Good. Okay. And then they go on to
Speaker 1: talk about other stuff here and inside of justification for
Speaker 1: linking inside of GMRS, Well, let me tell you something.
Speaker 1: If you really want to link repeaters and have a
Speaker 1: lot more space and a lot more channels, go get
Speaker 1: your hand radio license. Now he's saying that a lot
Speaker 1: of these guys are hands, and there are a lot
Speaker 1: of Ham radio operators on GMRS. Pretty Much every time
Speaker 1: I get on in one of the GMRS repeaters here
Speaker 1: in the North Texas Dallas Fort Worth area, I talk
Speaker 1: to at least one or two other people who are
Speaker 1: Ham radio operators as well. So there are a lot
Speaker 1: of Hams on GMRS. But GMRS is still a great
Speaker 1: place to talk, a great other. It's just another frequency
Speaker 1: to talk on, another place to talk, another place to
Speaker 1: meet people, and it's a great stepping stone to get
Speaker 1: into amateur radio. And if you want to get into
Speaker 1: amateur radio, I recommend Ham Radio Prep. Ham Radio Prep
Speaker 1: you can always get a twenty percent discount on all
Speaker 1: of their courses with the coupon code of Jason twenty.
Speaker 1: They have like a ninety nine point six pass rate,
Speaker 1: so and they guarantee that if you don't pass, you'll
Speaker 1: get your money back. So if you don't want to
Speaker 1: get your m radio license because you think you won't pass,
Speaker 1: or you think it's too complicated, get Ham Radio Prep.
Speaker 1: Try it out. If it doesn't work out, they'll refund you,
Speaker 1: but you will most likely pass your test because they
Speaker 1: do such a great job getting people licensed and upgraded
Speaker 1: in Mateur radio. Check out the link in the description
Speaker 1: below and really appreciate them sponsoring this channel. So I
Speaker 1: like this comment right here, this guy a Meadman one
Speaker 1: twenty seven. See if I can make that a little
Speaker 1: bit bigger. Okay, the intent of gmrs is to facilitate
Speaker 1: short range local area communication. He is correct. Is correct,
Speaker 1: and it says that in Part ninety five, linked repeater
Speaker 1: systems tend to cover half a state or the entire state,
Speaker 1: thus no longer facilitating local area communication. With the Internet,
Speaker 1: link repeaters can enable cross country communication. Most of the
Speaker 1: links repeaters I'm aware of for GMRS use the Internet
Speaker 1: for the link. Yeah, like an all Star type system.
Speaker 1: That's correct. They're only eight repeater pairs for GMRS, and
Speaker 1: the outputs are shared with Simplex. With Simplex use some
Speaker 1: areas there are were link repeters on all eight pairs,
Speaker 1: make it impossible for someone to set up their own
Speaker 1: repeter that is not part of a link system, or
Speaker 1: to use the outputs of the Simplex Jones. I personally
Speaker 1: see no reason to link GMR recipeaters when ham Radio
Speaker 1: allows the use of link repeater systems, while they are
Speaker 1: a limited number of repeater pairs and Ham radio sort of,
Speaker 1: especially if you follow the AARA bandplan. There's a lot
Speaker 1: more repeater pairs available on HAM radio than gmrs, so
Speaker 1: limited numbers. So what he's saying here, I think, while
Speaker 1: there are a limited number of Peter pairs and Ham radio, yes,
Speaker 1: because on the four forty band you can only link
Speaker 1: between four hundred and forty four hundred and fifty megahertz.
Speaker 1: On the two meter band you can only link from
Speaker 1: like one forty five mega hurts and up. I think,
Speaker 1: but we have multiple bands. You've got six meters ten
Speaker 1: meters two meters two twenty mega hurts, one point two
Speaker 1: five meters seventy centimeters, nine hundred mega hurts, one point
Speaker 1: two one point two gig hurts. So there's more places
Speaker 1: to link repeaters together in HAM radio because we just
Speaker 1: have more frequencies. Don't forget that the HAM world repeaters
Speaker 1: are generally coordinated with the regional authority. Yes, Ham radio
Speaker 1: repeaters typically are coordinated by the local repeater coordinator. It
Speaker 1: isn't required to go through the report coordinator, it's just
Speaker 1: good practice to use him. He's completely correct there. It's
Speaker 1: not required, but if you're in a dense repeater area,
Speaker 1: it's usually a good idea to go through the coordination.
Speaker 1: So that is so, and then they go on here
Speaker 1: and they talk about back and forth ideas like that,
Speaker 1: which some good points there. Case in point right here
Speaker 1: in GGMRS, which is North Georgia. GMRS covers almost three states.
Speaker 1: I've found one repeater not linked to them, but no
Speaker 1: one talks on it due to limited range, good catch.
Speaker 1: There are three to four repeaters in that area that
Speaker 1: aren't linked. What's wild about n GGMRS is that many
Speaker 1: of them are hams. Yeah, so if they're hams and
Speaker 1: they're linking the repeaters together, then they're technically not doing
Speaker 1: legal things. So a lot more comments here. Some of
Speaker 1: these comments are good, some of them are not so good.
Speaker 1: Some of them are kind of argumentative, and people get
Speaker 1: kind of heated in some of them. But you know,
Speaker 1: I will put a link to this article in the
Speaker 1: description below. But I'd like to know what you think.
Speaker 1: I've asked this question before on previous videos, and I'd
Speaker 1: like to know what you think. What justification do you have?
Speaker 1: Let me put it this way, The point of This
Speaker 1: article is to the question the original poster is asking,
Speaker 1: is how can you justify this when the FCC has
Speaker 1: clearly said it's not allowed, okay, and people are like, well,
Speaker 1: screw that, I'm just gonna do it anyway. And a
Speaker 1: lot of these guys are hams according to this article, Okay, sorry,
Speaker 1: you're breaking the lot. It's not allowed. You shouldn't be
Speaker 1: doing that, and the FCC should come and find you
Speaker 1: if you're doing something you're not supposed to do. Okay.
Speaker 1: I am talking about should it be disallowed or should
Speaker 1: it be allowed? Okay. The fact that it is not
Speaker 1: allowed right now is no bearing on the fact that
Speaker 1: should we discuss this and petition the s to make
Speaker 1: it allowed? Okay. I'm not saying that, Oh well, it's
Speaker 1: it's not allowed, but do it anyway. Nobody cares. Some
Speaker 1: people do care. And apparently these idiots that are linking
Speaker 1: all eight repeater channels together across a wide area that effectively,
Speaker 1: like I said, turn eight channels into one channel so
Speaker 1: that you get on GMRS and everyone all the frequencies.
Speaker 1: Is the same conversation going on. Give me a break,
Speaker 1: Why would you do that? That completely defeats the purpose
Speaker 1: of having multiple channels on GMRS. So, but leaving that
Speaker 1: aside for the moment, should we petition the FCC to allow,
Speaker 1: like I said, one or two channels. Say, okay, we
Speaker 1: can do channels twenty one and twenty two or eighteen
Speaker 1: and nineteen or whatever. Pick two. Okay, maybe just one,
Speaker 1: just channel twenty two, Just link channel twenty two together,
Speaker 1: leave everything else alone. Okay, But I would like to
Speaker 1: see at least one or two where linking is allowed,
Speaker 1: and then everything else used for local comms the way
Speaker 1: that GMRS was originally intended to do, and keep using
Speaker 1: it so that it's actually beneficial. Because if you're linking
Speaker 1: several states together and linking all the channels together to
Speaker 1: just have a conversations your system that you've spent hundreds,
Speaker 1: maybe thousands of dollars on, that's not beneficial to anybody. Yeah,
Speaker 1: you can talk to your buddies a couple of states over, great, Okay,
Speaker 1: but that's not benefiting. It's general mobile radio service, Okay,
Speaker 1: it's not your personal radio service. You want to get
Speaker 1: a personal radio service, go get your own frequency pair
Speaker 1: and do whatever the heck you want to do with it.
Speaker 1: You can encrypt it. You can do all kinds of
Speaker 1: stuff with a frequency pair that you purchase of your own, Okay,
Speaker 1: but for gmrs, that's not really what it's for. It's
Speaker 1: supposed to be for local comms. What do you guys
Speaker 1: think about linking gmrs? Should we petition the FCC? Should
Speaker 1: we have one or two frequencies? Should we say nope,
Speaker 1: it should not be allowed and these guys should be fine.
Speaker 1: Or should we just open it up as a free
Speaker 1: for all for everybody. I would like to know what
Speaker 1: you think in the comment section. Blow Thanks for watching,
Speaker 1: and if you enjoyed this video, check out these over here.
Speaker 1: And one of them is going to be that previous
Speaker 1: video that I linked for GMRS comments that I've seen
Speaker 1: up until now. Seventy three guys, we'll catch you next time.