Monitoring FRS Channel 1
Mark Derby (K8MHZ)
on
November 26, 2005
View comments about this article!
MONITORING FRS CHANNEL 1
There has been some talk in our area about monitoring FRS Channel 1 for emergency traffic. On the surface, this sounds like a great idea. But as we look closer at the way FRS and GMRS radios work, this may be both a formidable and frustrating task.
For brevity, I will combine both services under the moniker FRS.
Here is the scenario: Channel 1 is monitored and a distress call is heard. In order to hear all traffic on Channel 1 it is necessary to turn off the PL privacy codes in the monitoring radio. Do you realize that unless the caller has the PLs turned off there is no chance of them hearing a response? PLs are used as privacy codes on FRS radios. They shut the squelch off until the radio hears the proper PL to open it. If the codes are turned off to monitor all radios on that channel, they are also turned off to communicate with all radios on that channel except those with tones also turned off.
It gets even better….what if you have a grip on comms, and a radio that will tone scan and pluck the tone from the caller? No prob, eh? Wrong. PLs may not work properly in radios of different manufacture. My Audiovox base stations cannot communicate with my Uniden HTs when the tones are on. If I remember correctly, the base station will open the HT’s squelch, but not vice versa. I may have that backwards, but you get the idea. This becomes a problem even if the tone display is in hertz and a number is not assigned. If you are tone scanning, which has to be done on a ham rig, how do you know which to use? Example, my V7A gets a hit on 467.5625 tone 94.8. I need to grab my FRS rig to transmit. Which tone, 1-38 do I use? Which channel? And why can’t I hear them on my FRS rig? I sure could on my ham rig. Will they hear me if I transmit…..pumping out nearly half a watt of legal power?
It would be great if we could transmit all 38 at the same time, but I don’t think that is possible.
So, a person is making a distress call on an FRS radio and is being heard by several stations. The tones are on so the caller can’t hear any response, even though there are several stations listening and responding. The responding stations don’t hear replies, so assume they are out of range or have radio problems. Just think how frustrating it would be to hear a very close distress call that ignores your replies. So, being a good tech, you may think that the caller has the tones on. You are lightning quick and send out a message 38 times on each PL. What would the message be? “Turn off your privacy tone”? How many people in an emergency are going to know how to do that? “Tell me what tone you are using?”, Better, as it is usually displayed on the radio. They aren’t the same, however, on all radios. Tone 10 on one radio may be 22 on another. And what if you just have radios that are incompatible, like my Unidens and Audiovoxs?
The FRS service was never set up as an emergency service, as there would be stricter regulations for compatibility if it were. To let the public think that Channel 1 is a suitable emergency channel is giving them a false sense of security. If they don’t know enough to turn the privacy tones off they would be falsely led into thinking they were out of range of listening stations…..stations that could use RDF to find them, if needed.
And on top of all that, Channel 1 is not the same on all radios. It is on most, but not on all.
Now, back to the Audiovox rig. It has a button marked EMG. If you push it, you are taken to Channel 10-00, or 10 with no tone. It even displays EMG on the screen. With probably a million or more of these sold, shouldn’t we monitor Channel 10 as well? Are there other manufacturers that use even different channels? Just monitoring Channel 1 would probably be a bad idea then, right?
Bottom line, FRS is a poor choice of service for distress calls of any kind. Until the general public can be taught how to A) check that the frequency of their Channel 1 is the standard frequency of 462.5625 mHz and to B) never transmit a distress call with privacy tones turned on it will remain a poor choice.
If you want to monitor the FRS band, great, but do so well informed. Realize the shortcomings and be prepared to encounter them. Scan ALL the channels and when you get a hit, try to scan for tones. Still be prepared to be working with a deaf radio on the other end. If you have RDF capabilities, IMMEDIATELY start using them. Even if the caller tells you where they are, it may be incorrect. Most people don’t know where they are and even fewer can reliably tell someone else. RDF may be the only way.
DON’T tell the public to grab an FRS radio in an emergency to call for help. They have a better chance of being heard by screaming out an open window or leaning on a car horn. In fact, car horns have greater range than most FRS radios.
DO tell the public that if they do use FRS to TURN OFF THE PRIVACY TONES or THEY WON’T GET A REPLY! And keep in mind that most won’t know how to do that. Tell them to keep transmitting even if they get no reply. Tell them that each distress call should include a very accurate location (IMPORTANT!!!). And tell them that they may be wasting their time and batteries. In a true emergency that rig and those batteries may be better used in other areas.
FRS is not the tool for stand-by emergency comms. If it were there would be a set emergency channel standard in all rigs sold with no way to tone the squelch on that channel. The only way to reliably monitor FRS distress calls is to illegally modify a UHF ham rig to scan for and lock onto the privacy tones as well as transmit using those frequencies and tones. The FCC has made this a no-no, which tells me how they feel about said prospect.
Currently, FRS rigs are toys, and I feel they should be treated as such. I think as far as distress use they will cause more problems than solve them.
Try this once. Grab an FRS radio. Take a walk around the neighborhood. Go to channel 1 and transmit “This is a test of emergency communications. Can anyone out there hear me?” How many times will you have to do this to get a response? If you do get a response, try to find out how far away you are from the other radio. My guess is that the distance will be less than 200 feet. Actually, my guess is that you will get no response.
Better yet, hand someone an FRS radio and tell them to do the same. Don’t tell them about shutting off the tones, how many common folk would even think about it? How many even know how to go to Channel 1?
I think after trying this a few times you will get a better understanding of the FRS service.
If anyone has more experience in the area of FRS distress use (as opposed to point to point pre-arranged contacts in an emergency), and my information is incorrect, I sure would like to hear about it.
Mark Derby K8MHZ
This article has expired. No more comments may be added.
|
Monitoring FRS Channel 1
|
|
|
by N7BUI on November 26, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"Currently, FRS rigs are toys, and I feel they should be treated as such. I think as far as distress use they will cause more problems than solve them."
You said it Mark in this one paragraph. Great for hunting, some amusing scanning, but not for emergency work (though our local volunteer fire department uses them for on scene communications! Channel 1!!!).
Have you seen "Monitor FRS 1" on the back of your local sheriff's patrol vehicles?
George
N7BUI
|
| |
|
Monitoring FRS Channel 1
|
|
|
by ATOMICTHUMBS on November 26, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
I thought all you hams were like using special cellphons. Whats this about frs? isnt that like a walkietalkie?
|
| |
|
Monitoring FRS Channel 1
|
|
|
by KK8ZZ on November 26, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
...so... why not just set a standard of Channel 1, no tone??
|
| |
|
RE: Monitoring FRS Channel 1
|
|
|
by KC8VWM on November 26, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Interesting article.
Someone said that FRS was nothing but a kids toy.
Well before you close the book on FRS as a childs play toy, you might want to consider that average citizens taking CERT training are actively engaged in using this "toy" on the official level to conduct serious homeland security communications.
Also volunteer fire departments are also using this toy to communicate on the fireground.
...Why not? They are cheap, lightweight, easy to replace and take standard "AA" batteries that can be easily replaced in the field on the fly. So, how many commercial Motorola boatanchor brick radios do this?
On another note, I thought that FRS channel 1 "No Tone" is already supposed to be recognized as the defacto national calling frequency.
Also, 462.675 (GMRS) is officially recognized by the FCC as the national emergency frequency.
Source:
http://www.gmrsweb.com/gmrstable.html
Again, interesting stuff. Perhaps today's FRS/GMRS operators are going to be tomorrows Radio Amateurs?
The ARRL might benefit from the idea of creating a special affiliate membership for these radio enthusiasts.
73 Charles - KC8VWM / WPSP389
|
| |
|
RE: Monitoring FRS Channel 1
|
|
|
by N4LI on November 27, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
FRS is a beautiful thing, but it must be used with its limitations in mind.
Is FRS going to save one's hide with a desperate call for help? That's unlikely. But, that's not what FRS was intended for.
FRS is intended for short-haul stuff -- things like shopping malls, theme parks, sporting events, and the like. I work in a tourist destination on Sundays -- you will often find a couple of FRS coversations going on at the same time. Great. For $20 +/- a pair that's a really nice deal, indeed.
There are even emergency uses for these cool radios, coordinating assets on-site. Heck, our troops have even used them in Iraq. But again, it's short haul stuff.
I have seen hams looking down their noses on FRS radios on boards in the past, and that's unfortunate. They have their place. Just keep it all in context.
Peter, N4LI
|
| |
|
Monitoring FRS Channel 1
|
|
|
by NA4IT on November 27, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I understand the author's concerns. However, no one has ever said this would happen without training the public. For it to work, it would take a massive ad campaign, and huge effort on the part of EMA departments to notify the public, and great cooperation on the part of radio manufactuers to include probably a special instruction sheet explaining the importance of having the radio set correctly.
It CAN work, but not by "assuming" it will.
A lot of folks "assume" cell phones work in disasters. A lot of folks "assume" the infamous ACU-1000 works in disasters. But until education happens first, neither will.
Why do cell phones work in disaters? Well, they will if you call another cellphone on the same tower, provided the tower is up. (I admit, that is "iffy".)
Why can the ACU-1000 work in a disaster? Well, if you study the manual and become familiar with it and all of your equipment, and how to hook it up, it will. (And here again, that is "iffy".)
By the way, if anyone see an ACU-1000 thrown in the garbage after an EMA manager gets tired of it, I want it. I believe we could to some really neat repeater linking with one! (Why? think about it, all of our newer 2M/70CM rigs have the SAME data jack on the back...one cable fits all...oops, I just told the secret to why the ACU-1000 doesn't work...)
|
| |
|
2 questions
|
|
|
by W1DUD on November 27, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
... 1. What the hell does this have to do with amateur radio? and 2. Who really cares? "73" THE DUD
|
| |
|
Monitoring FRS Channel 1
|
|
|
by AB0RE on November 27, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Good article. You make some great points about FRS's shortcomings in an emergency.
Ideally, if we were to try to set-up an FRS emergency service, three things would need to happen:
1) We'd need to have that channel be between 1 & 7. The first 7 channels are shared with GMRS so the user can transmit up to 5W, assuming he has a FRS/GMRS combo radio. Most of the radios bought today are the FRS/GMRS combo rigs that will transmit the extra power, despite the fact most buyers are not properly GMRS licensed.
2) We'd want to have the "emergency" channel have a PL Tone on it. We are *never* going to get everybody to stop using the "emergency" channel for everyday traffic. Setting a PL Tone specifically for the emergency traffic would allow those monitoring the frequency for emergency traffic to maintain their sanity by not having to listen to all the other garbage. And, of course, none of this would do any good if the user didn't know how to change PL tones.
3) Every manufacturer of FRS/GMRS radios would have to get on board. They'd have to publish in the manual what the emergency channel and PL Tone is and how to change it on the radio. Better yet, each radio could have an "emergency" button that would switch it to the appropriate channel and PL Tone, much like many CBs have with the channel 9 "emergency channel".
At it's current state using channel 1 in an emergency has too many drawbacks. If you're able to monitor the channel for emergency traffic by all means do so. You're much more patient than I am.
73,
Dan / AB�RE
WPWJ485
|
| |
|
Monitoring FRS Channel 1
|
|
|
by W8KQE on November 27, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Around these parts, the local Wal-Mart and Target stores use FRS for communication between staff! And often it is Channel 1.
|
| |
|
Monitoring FRS Channel 1
|
|
|
by SWANMAN on November 27, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
There was an article concerning this on Hamwave.
http://www.hamwave.com/cgi-bin/index.cgi?action=viewnews&id=813
|
| |
|
RE: Monitoring FRS Channel 1
|
|
|
by N4VOX on November 27, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Well before you close the book on FRS as a childs play toy, you might want to consider that average citizens taking CERT training are actively engaged in using this "toy" on the official level to conduct serious homeland security communications.
Now that is the biggest joke I have heard yet. Those people are useless.
|
| |
|
Monitoring FRS Channel 1
|
|
|
by W9RPE on November 27, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I think of all the silly things said here regarding FRS radios, by far the most disturbing is that some Fire Depts. use them for "on-scene" comms.
Depending on FRS in what could be life or death situations is just STUPID.
FRS...the next cb radio.
|
| |
|
RE: Monitoring FRS Channel 1
|
|
|
by W7TUX on November 27, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
A FRS is better than nothing. A couple of years ago some teachers took some teenagers up on Mt Hood in Ore, a storm came in and they were stuck on the mountin. They called out with a FRS and some children picked up the sig in Portland Ore and gave the radio to their dad. With out that sig no one would have known they were in trouble. The storm lasted for a couple of days and they were not properly equiped. All the kids died and the teachers got out. The point is no one would have known with out the Toy FRS. Take what you have and learn how to use it, also let some one know what your using.
|
| |
|
RE: Monitoring FRS Channel 1
|
|
|
by K4RAF on November 27, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Everything that does not require a license is ineffective & should never be compared to almighty amateur radio. This includes the documented fact that:
FRS doesn't work (millions in use daily)
MURS doesn't work (millions in use daily)
802.11 doesn't work (millions in use daily)
All other Part 15 devices are useless (billions in use everyday)
|
| |
|
RE: Monitoring FRS Channel 1
|
|
|
by N4LI on November 27, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I am not sure I understand the vilification of FRS radio. It's a tool like anything else. FRS radios are useful in situations envisioned by the FCC when they created the service. These "toy" radios were never intended to be long-distance communications devices. But, they work great short-haul.
Those who turn up their nodes at FRS either misunderstand its use or are simply elitist. It's not as if anyone -- and I mean anyone -- can't pass a 35-question test when they are provided the questions ahead of time.
Will FRS become the next CB? Of course not. 500mw with a stubby antenna just won't carry that far (and it's not intended to). But, so what if it did become the next "CB?" The general public often needs and deserves an easy means of personal communication. If FRS or GMRS fits the bill, great. That's what it's there for.
And, as far as small Fire Depts. using FRS on site? I am not sure I understand the problem with that. One might recall the communications problems at Ground Zero on 9-11. FRS will always work, as long as they are not interfered with. If they aid first responders, I couldn't be happier.
FRS... it ain't ham radio. But, that's not it's mission.
|
| |
|
Monitoring FRS Channel 1
|
|
|
by KV4BL on November 27, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Sadly, the idea of a unified service on FRS was doomed from the start due to compatibility issues created by the various manufacturers. The author mentioned PL issues between his Uniden and Audiovox radios. Just as bad, or worse, is the one wherein Motorola radios are not compatible with other brands of radios. Other brands can hear a Motorola just fine, but a Motorola cannot clearly copy other brands due to some crazy speech compression or whatever protocol used in their FRS radios. It's a darn shame that this issue was ever an issue. Would have been nice if the FCC had specified that they would all use the Motorola audio or the other(s) on FRS so they would all be able to talk to each other. This, in and of itself, kinda makes the whole system useless unless you are commmunicating with others in your circle of contacts with equipment known to be compatible with yours. Also, the issue of the channel vs frequency and "Privacy Code" vs PL tone alignment on different brands has been raised. It'd be nice if the FCC stepped in and righted this mess right now so that a few years down the road, the vast majority of these radios might be able to talk to each other. 73, Ray KV4BL
|
| |
|
RE: 2 questions
|
|
|
by K8MHZ on November 27, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"... 1. What the hell does this have to do with amateur radio? and 2. Who really cares? "73" THE DUD"
Hey Dude,
(I don't know if you like being called Dud)
For some reason the fact that many amateurs are involved in emergency communications has eluded you. Also, if you read the intro, you would realize that amateurs are being asked to monitor FRS frequencies. This article is descriptive of both my thoughts and experiences with FRS radios. We actually tried to use them at public service events to no avail. The thought was to give a non-ham that was integral to the event an FRS radio instead of having a manned shadow. Every time we tried it, it failed miserably for different reasons. Sometimes the coverage was not sufficient. Most times people did not know how to operate the radios, pushing the wrong button and taking them off the air. There was equipment failure. In areas that had crowds, there were kids playing on them and jamming our communications. Sometimes the people would just ignore the fact that they had the radios. Sometimes they would sit them down and forget where they put them. And that was just under the stress of getting a parade or a walk under way. Just think how the stress of an emergency would affect the same people.
FRS, in it's present state, is just not a suitable adjunct to amateur communications. The potential exists, as they are nice small packages that can talk to each other in close proximity, but I think a misunderstanding of their usefulness can lead to serious problems in an emergency.
As for who cares, I believe that would be anyone that has given the subject rational thought.
73,
Mark K8MHZ
|
| |
|
Monitoring FRS Channel 1
|
|
|
by K0NR on November 27, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Clearly the FRS Channel 1 idea has limitations. Let's turn it around...when could it be useful?
A scenario that could make use of this is:
- when a visible disaster occurs such as a blizzard, tornado, hurricane, etc. (that is, not for an isolated individual getting into trouble)
- when short range (a mile or so) communication has value (such as being stuck at home during a blizzard with the phone out, or being trapped in an attic when the water is rising)
- when the normal comms infrastructure is broken
This leads to a philosophy of "when things get weird, listen to FRS channel 1" ......no CTCSS, of course.
The scenario I think of in my area is during a blizzard. If the phones go out, it would be really useful to fire up the FRS radio (everyone has one) and check in on the neighbors. Having at least one ham radio operator in the loop provides a comms link beyond the neighborhood.
73, Bob
|
| |
|
RE: 2 questions
|
|
|
by K4EAT on November 27, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
MUCH ADO ABOUT NOTHING...
The range of most FRS is less then a mile on a good day -- you will do better simply walking for help instead of trying to call someone. What are the chances of someone within a mile radius constantly monitoring channel one for rescue purposes? Better to just give everyone a cellphone that can only dial 911.
And of course most people illegally use GMRS because the higher power and range -- GMRS requires a FCC license yet FCC states that 97% of the personnel using GMRS is unlicensed.
Every electronic store in the world sells them.
And GMRS has turned into what 10 meters has.
Locally 10 meters has became the next CB since allot of folks are using it for local comms here with no license. And lets face it - with the FCC having no enforcement teams who is going to catch anyone.
I see 10 meters soon becoming a freeband.
So I am not really concerned about a national emergency channel for a radio that has less then a one mile radius at best ...
|
| |
|
RE: Monitoring FRS Channel 1
|
|
|
by K5LXP on November 27, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
You can't discount the usefulness of FRS radios, in the hands of those that understand their limitations. We use FRS radios in our ARES missions as links to officials, so a ham doesn't have to physically shadow them as they move about.
Weeks ago when I first read of the idea of an FRS1 as a national distress frequency, the first thing that came to mind is anyone that would have the intelligence to correctly use it, is intelligent enough not to need it. If you're going to entrust your life to a $5 radio, you need to rethink your preparedness philosophy. Yes,if I had nothing else at my disposal and all other means had failed, I'd be SOS'ing on FRS1. For some reason though, I can't picture myself on the roof of my house surrounded by flood waters during a hurricane with nothing more than my $5 Uniden FRS radio, thinking help is just a call away. They're handy in the go-bag but as anything other than ancilliary comms I think it's foolhardy to lull people into a false sense of security that having an FRS radio will save them. People can't seem to understand this with cell phones as it is.
Mark K5LXP
Albuquerque, NM
|
| |
|
Monitoring FRS Channel 1
|
|
|
by KG4YJR on November 27, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Here in Jacksonville, FL the ARES and CERT people think the PL privacy codes are a great idea, (only because a couple of people say they are and refuse to accept common sense ideology).
As others have mentioned, the quality of FRS radios are the equivalent to the toy space commander radios for the kids but the public doesn't know any better. Also, we know about things like privacy tones and how to change them but the average soccer mom who picked up a pair of FRS radios at Wal-Mart for $19.95 doesn't. I've stressed time and time again that privacy tones are not a good idea for simple, public service emergency comms. but the expert, ecomm. honchos here see it otherwise.
I told them (repeatedly) it would be a shame for a person and their family after a hurricane or several tornados, to be trapped in their car with a power pole laying on top of it screaming for help on their radios because they can hear the ARES and CERT folks about a quarter mile away giving themselves signal reports, saying how many cots and donuts they need, etc. but can't understand why they can't hear them and won't call someone to help them.
The frequent, intelligent and well thought out response to this type of scenario from these ecomm. experts every time is: "Well, they should learn how to use their radios then."
Myself, being a CERT member will continue monitor all the ham, CB and FRS calling channels with no PL tones.
BTW-There is a lot of FRS activity from kids, the local elementary school and various apartment managers on in my neighborhood.
73
Dave
|
| |
|
RE: Monitoring FRS Channel 1
|
|
|
by AA4PB on November 27, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I don't think the idea was for hams to use FRS for their own emergency communications or that FRS become a substitue for better means of communications. The idea is that there are many FRS radios around. If cell service is out, someone who is not into ham radio is more likely to find an FRS radio than anything else. If hams and others monitor a designated emergency channel/code then the odds of someone hearing the person in distress increases. FRS is not the communications method of choice if you are planning for emergency communications. However, it takes very little effort to monitor a designated channel/code during an emergency and you just might be able to help out one of your neighbors by doing so.
|
| |
|
RE: Monitoring FRS Channel 1
|
|
|
by AA4PB on November 27, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
we know about things like privacy tones and how to change them but the average soccer mom who picked up a pair of FRS radios at Wal-Mart for $19.95 doesn't
----------------------------------------------------
They don't understand the technology behind what they are doing but most users know that they have to set the proper channel and code to talk to someone. If you get the word out to use a particular channel and code to call for help during an emergency then you have one more tool to use - one that a lot of people have lying around.
The best way to get the word out is to get the mfgs to agree on an emergency standard and put a button on the radio or at least mark it on the radios and in the manuals.
|
| |
|
RE: Monitoring FRS Channel 1
|
|
|
by AE7G on November 27, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Simply because a ham does something does not mean it is part of ham radio.
All hams eat food, and drink water, but, water purity, well drilling, using coupons while grocery shopping, checking water melons for ripeness, are not part of ham radio.
My view is that the same holds true for CB, FRS, GMRS, sign language, semaphore, and cell phones, not part of ham radio.
Bob
|
| |
|
RE: Monitoring FRS Channel 1
|
|
|
by AG4RQ on November 27, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Both GMRS and FRS were never created for the same kind of "party line" communications that are possible with ham radio and CB. The GMRS license is meant for yourself and other members of your family or other party. Communication with other licensees was never meant to be a part of GMRS. That is why every user on GMRS and its offshoot FRS use PL tones for privacy.
For homeland security purposes, its time that the FCC made provisions for an unlicensed GMRS channel to be used for emergency communications by the general public. The author mentioned 462.675 (GMRS) is officially recognized by the FCC as the national emergency frequency. This frequency should be designated as the official emergency channel for GMRS and FRS users at full GMRS power with no PL tones. Once such an FCC rule is established, all radios for GMRS and FRS use would have this channel at full power with no PL with a button similar to the "channel 9" button on some CB radios. Push the button and the radio would automatically go to 462.675 MHz at full GMRS power with no PL tones. No license (a la FRS) would be required to use the frequency.
|
| |
|
RE: Monitoring FRS Channel 1
|
|
|
by VE6BGM on November 27, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
One reason I have concerns about this is the fact that I could not be bothered to monitor FRS. Having scanned the FRS frequencies, it sounds like a modern day CB radio, thankfully, with a much shorter range. The language and stupidity that is too often heard on these frequencies makes it impractical to monitor. For one thing, I cetainly would not monitor with my family or friends present. Another reason would be that I hear too many people "crying wolf" a lot of the time. When would I know that one really does have an emergency? I do use FRS for hunting, and when you are away from populated areas, they can be a useful "toy". As soon as my son gets his Amateur license, then we will be on the "ham" bands. We musn't loose the fact that these radios were created by the manufacturers to increase their profit line. They were intended for "family" short range communication and never intented to be used by businesses nor EMS agencies. If they are used by these agencies, I certainly hope that they are not interferred with [PL may keep interference out when you are listening for a call, but once the PL is opened, others transmitting on the same freq. could interfere]. If my life depended on EMS radios, I certainly would hope that they would use one that is not FRS and one that is intended to be used on frequencies that have less potential to be interfered with in an emergency.
73 from Bob
|
| |
|
RE: Monitoring FRS Channel 1
|
|
|
by K3UD on November 27, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Much the same thing can happen with 2 meter FM radios.
IE: You are using a 2 meter FM rig that does not have tone capabilities, (ah, that old devil of incompatibility) or you have not needed to use tones on you 2 meter FM rig and you suddenly need to get on a repeater that requires a tone but you have no way of knowing what the tone is or even how to set one up because you have never had to do it. In my area most repeaters do not use tones. I would probably need to look at the manual if I even needed to program one.
73
George
K3UD
|
| |
|
RE: Monitoring FRS Channel 1
|
|
|
by W5GNB on November 27, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
The biggest problem I see with FRS is that to be FCC certified, the transceiver must not have an EXTERNAL antenna connection capability and it is limited to about 500-milliwatts of power. This greatly reduces the effective range to about a mile or two at most, Even CB gets out better than this.
FRS is a real convienent way to communicate for very short distances (this is what it was designed to do) but for an emergency monitoring setup I think the service is not really adapted for it and is not practical.
73's
Gary - W5GNB
|
| |
|
Monitoring FRS Channel 1
|
|
|
by KB9YGD on November 27, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Hello Mark & everyone.Although the frs equip works well it would not be the choice for serious comms because of several reasons.On a typical summer day listen to these freq`s every channel is full with many conversations one on top of the other.Kids in and out of the house etc this band is saturated as is the class d cb.I do keep 2 of these in the shack along with cb equip with generator and battery/inverter backup in case of ww3.Very good article.73,Norm.
|
| |
|
RE: Monitoring FRS Channel 1
|
|
|
by K1CJS on November 27, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"Sadly, the idea of a unified service on FRS was doomed from the start due to compatibility issues created by the various manufacturers."
How true. Even the various model radios made by the same manufacturer have compatibility issues. Some of those radios are strictly FRS while some are both FRS AND GMRS. It seems that the manufacturers label their channels from one to xx, no matter what the type radio is, while some leave out the channel numbers assigned to GMRS on their FRS only radios.
The other consideration voiced was the PL tones. Again, the tones are numbered from one to xx, but some tones are left out or jumped over. Result: When someone specifies PL tone 4, it is not the same on the different manufacturers radios--or sometimes the same manufacturers radio but a different model--and they can't hear each other.
Lets leave the FRS/GMRS radios where they are, as useful tools if needed for short range work--if they can be set up to work together--and keep amateur radio where it was before the FRS service came into being. We'll all be better off.
|
| |
|
RE: Monitoring FRS Channel 1
|
|
|
by W5HTW on November 27, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
In an emergency, anything goes, and I would attempt to use whatever means were at my disposal. I have even heard of people burning their house down, and I am not kidding, to attract attention. I know of one such incident personally.
FRS, GMRS, marine, CB, telephone, cell phone, flashlight, bongo drum, whatever works.
Here, as DEC, I have no qualms at all about using FRS radios for very short range communications. For example, I may be sitting in my vehicle, equipped with amateur radio, parked outside the emergency dispatch office, and using an FRS radio to relay communications to/from the police/fire dispatch. In this case it would be a useful interface.
My problem with all this comes in the attempt, and a largely successful one, by many newcomers and a few not quite so new, to blend all communications and call it ham radio. So many do not know the difference. We actually have hams who think cell phones are ham radio. Or that Ethernet connections are ham radio. We are expanding the definition of ham radio to cover any form of communication - "if it communicates, it is ham radio" - and that is going to be the death of this hobby/service.
So herewith, a short lesson:
An amateur radio license is NOT required to operate:
police
FRS
GMRS
Medical
Fire
Air/aviation
Marine
Taxi
construction
broadcast
CB
Forest Service
Military
Business, such as oil rigs
Wi-Fi
Ethernet
Telephone
Cell phones
Bongo Drums
Semaphore flags
tin cans with strings
Smoke signals
Public Safety
International Telephone
An amateur license IS required to operate:
Amateur radio
There. If we can keep that in mind, we can do our emergency work effectively, we can enjoy our hobby, work lots of DX, have plenty of fun, and keep ham radio alive for a few more years.
I'm all for it!
Ed
|
| |
|
RE: Monitoring FRS Channel 1
|
|
|
by K2LES on November 27, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
F - Family
R - Radio
S - Service
The F = Family. Nuff said. These rigs are a step up from the 49 MHz radios that used to be all the rage at Radio Shack.
Anyone who thinks they could use one of these radios to summon the calvary to come to their rescue is taking a huge risk.
Long ago, channel 9 was designated as the emergency channel on CB. CB also had (at the time) only 23 channels + sideband an authorized range of what - 25 miles?
FRS has a usable range of a mile... and 570 possible "channels" (14 channels, 38 PL tones and no tone). Good luck getting help with one of those things.
|
| |
|
Monitoring FRS Channel 1
|
|
|
by KB1EHE on November 27, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
LOVE IT, OR HATE IT, I'm the fellow you can attribute to the www.NationalSOS.com Web site and the recent discussions about using "FRS Channel 1" as an emergency calling frequency for FRS users.
The communication chaos that occurred after Hurricane Katrina, and the resulting massive loss of life, really got me upset. Seeing people die from thirst and hunger -- simply because they had no way to tell rescuers where they were -- inspired me to try to figure out a way to help avoid or minimize future catastrophes. Because, unfortunately and inevitably, there will be another national emergency (whether natural or manmade). And I just couldn't sit idly by...and watch more people die.
The idea came to me when I noticed the density of hams in just about every town in America. Just type in town names or zip codes at http://www.qrz.com/i/names.html and you'll see what I mean.
As far as FRS radios, there are millions of them. By some estimates, 100 million in the U.S. So there are essentially dozens in almost every town in America. And they're being sold at a rate of 12.2 million PER YEAR.
Yes, as has been pointed out in this message thread, they DO have very limited range. But I did a little real-world research. I've found (albeit with some very crude, non-scientific testing) that ham radio HTs can receive the 500mW FRS signals at surprising ranges...far beyond what the companion FRS radios have been able to receive. Even driving around my town (which is quite hilly), I was able to hear my wife's test messages on FRS 1 for up to a couple of miles. I was listening via my Alinco DJ-V5 HT that I purchased about four years ago. Here's a link to the HT's specs: http://www.wavehunter.com/DJ-V5T.html
I should mention that I was NOT using a roof-mounted antenna on my car with my HT. Just had the Alinco, with its manufacturer-supplied little whip antenna (about 6.5" long), sitting on the passenger seat of the car (so I could listen as I was driving). I'm sure with a car roof-mount antenna or, better yet, with an HT hooked up to an antenna on the roof of a house, the reception range would even be better.
Anyway, after my range-test experiment, I thought I'd put this idea out in the public to energize a debate. I registered the NationalSOS.com domain name...and then started writing HTML code and preparing the Web site. It's all my words on the Web site. It's even my hand you see in the photo on the home page holding the FRS radio. ;-)
It's a total one-man operation. Just me. So I apologize in advance if I don't respond promptly to posts in this forum. I have my hands full responding to all the posts, e-mails, Web changes, etc. on www.NationalSOS.com. I don't get much sleep anymore. Kind of like a continuous, online Field Day. ;-)
But I believe there is a germ of an idea here. An idea that can save lives in times of crisis. So I'm game to stick my neck out with the idea...and see what comes of it.
I've been a ham for 31 years. I got started when my dad saw a newspaper story about Ham Radio classes being held at the American Red Cross in New Haven, CT. Since then I've always admired how this hobby brings out the very best in people. People who give up their time and energy -- and are always at the ready to help in times of emergency. I admire you all. And I hope that I can contribute in some small way with this concept.
In case someone thinks there might be some money motivation: nope. Helping to save lives is far too important to profit from. I could care less if I even get a mention about this idea...or whatever it evolves to. I just want ** something ** like this to take shape -- so we can give people the power to help save their own lives.
F.Y.I., the concept as it is currently envisioned is not to change the use of FRS radios in any way. Only when a crisis strikes would hams (and others) tune to listen for emergency communications on FRS 1. I have recommended FRS 1, with no tone, as this is the default power-on configuration for most FRS radios out of the box. (I think we have to assume that the ordinary citizens have extremely limited radio knowledge...so operations have to be very simple.) A bunch more information on the basic logic and recommendations is available on my Web site (particularly in the forums).
I chimed in here at eHam.net simply to say "thank you" for the vigorous discussions and ideas. Even the negative comments and critiques are appreciated; only with a free flow of ideas will the best overall plan emerge.
Ham radio operators have the spirit, knowledge, and -- most importantly -- the "can do" attitude when confronted with tough challenges. The bottom line is to come up with a solution that helps save lives.
I KNOW THIS CONCEPT HAS LOTS OF FLAWS. It's far, far from perfect. But I'm hoping the brilliant minds out there can help come up with a real, workable solution to an important problem.
In my mind, the ideal solution would be something that:
(1) uses currently available resources,
(2) involves and mobilizes the general public as part of the solution to their particular predicament (vs. relying on government agencies to perform),
(3) doesn't require new laws or legislation, and
(4) can be implemented quickly (ideally, in some rudimentary form, before next year's hurricane season).
Again, I apologize if I don't respond quickly to posts here. I'm maxed out over at my Web site. Feel free to visit and contribute to the forums there. Your ideas will be extremely appreciated! Here's a short cut: http://nationalsos.com/ideas/viewforum.php?f=3
Also, I've recently (this morning) updated the site with a scrolling page of incoming suggestions, critical points, and rapidly evolving ideas for "guidelines": http://www.nationalsos.com/guidelines.html
And the home page www.NationalSOS.com has a good, general overview of the project.
Thanks, in advance, for your brainstorming and ideas. Together, let's make a difference!
73
Eric Knight
KB1EHE
www.NationalSOS.com
|
| |
|
Monitoring FRS Channel 1
|
|
|
by W1WJB on November 27, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
A couple of small points on FRS:
Many of those suggesting FRS has some emergency uses
are only suggesting hams monitor during an emergency
condition---not all the time. As several have pointed out, FRS is chaotic and often used by kids during normal times; but during a widespread emergency such as a blizzard or a "shelter-in-place" event of one kind or another, the kids will be outvoted by parents and adults. Frankly, most kids seem to get the idea just fine of FRS being pretty useful at special times.
You have neighbors. You care about your neighbors.
A goodly percentage of them already have FRS radios.
Wouldn't it be good to be able to talk to them when the power and phones are out, and maybe the weather is
horrible? The useful range of FRS needn't be thought
of in miles, but for this kind of use should be thought of as having a range of "one neighborhood". Hams are everywhere. My small town has 92 of us. A circle a thousand feet in radius drawn anywhere on the map will include at least one or two of us. (Some active, some not, of course,)
All you have to do is tell your neighbors, "Channel One, NO codes". If a hurricane or a blizzard is coming, you can even wait to tell them till just before it hits. Or, if like me, you've already talked with your neighbors about it as a form of positive public relations for Ham Radio, you can remind them of the easy-to-recall mantra, "Channel One, NO codes".
I have FRS radios from four different manufacturers,
including a new pair from Motorola, and they all talk to each other just fine as long as no codes are set. I don't know anything about special compression schemes, but these all are interoperable---and one simply can't cover every imaginable base. One does what one can with what one has on-hand when the "fun" begins...
FRS is ready to use right now. No FCC action is needed, no ARES coordination, no blessing from ARRL or anybody else is needed. The ONLY thing needed is for us, the experts, to explain to our neighbors how to use the thing in an emergency. Channel One, NO codes, don't shout, think before you talk, use simple normal language, don't make long transmissions, listen before you talk, and be polite---will cover it to get them started.
Talking to your neighbors is good P.R. for Ham Radio, and "cross-connects" us to our public in a useful and a needful way. Even if you never use it, chances are they will appreciate your outreach and your readiness to be of community service. You might end up creating some new hams. We could sure use the new blood....
Do not make the "perfect" the enemy of the "useful" by putting a lot of structure on it that the untrained general public will not be able to handle.
Think and organize in terms of a Neighborhood Radio
Watch. And talk it over with your neighbors.
That will be useful.
73,
W1WJB
Reference: www.NationalSOS.com
|
| |
|
Thanks for clarifying...
|
|
|
by AB0RE on November 27, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Thanks for your post to clarify the intent of monitoring FRS #1 in the case of emergency. I think a lot of people did not approve of the idea because they thought your intention was to monitor the frequency 24/7 instead of just when there is an emergency. I see nothing wrong with monitoring channel 1 during an emergency.
You brought up a good point, too, that with external antennas (preferrably a base station antenna with a decent amount of gain and height above surrounding structures) the range of FRS/GMRS will be greatly extended. Any holder of a GMRS license would also be allowed to talk back to the distressed individual as long as the radio was type-accepted and the 5W maximum power limit was observed.
Still, the biggest obstacles are getting agreement and publicity for your idea. Also, it'd be a shame if somebody heard about your idea and purchased and FRS radio instead of taking actual steps to prepare for an emergency (real communiction, food/water, shelter, first-aid, power, etc.).
73,
Dan / ab0re
|
| |
|
RE: Monitoring FRS Channel 1
|
|
|
by KB1MSK on November 27, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
The idea of having a bunch of FRS radios for neighborhood communication is the best one I have heard yet. I think that is a terrific thing to have in an emergency which takes the phones out., Just need a lot of AA batteries as well..
|
| |
|
RE: Monitoring FRS Channel 1
|
|
|
by KC0USQ on November 27, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Shur, if u want to, go ahead and monitor channel 1, but all u will ever find is kids who think that they own that channel, and anything gos. The same thing goes with gmrs. today, u can go down to walmart and pick up a cheap frs/gmrs radio for around 30-40 bucks, so pretty much every single kid at my middle school has one. They dont know that u need a lisence to operate on the gmrs channels, so u can amagine the kind of things that u can hear on there. The privacy codes can be nice, but they can also be a major pain, 1, they are hard to set.
2, its hard to talk to talk to other people on that channel if you dont know there pl number.
3,they are good for buisness that need a little privacy, but its not to hard for someone to find you pl, and start making trouble.
so really that whole gmrs/frs system is for kids and familys, I think. If u need emergency communications, then spend a few more bucks and go with something in the buissness band, and something in the M.U.R.S band.
|
| |
|
Monitoring FRS Channel 1
|
|
|
by TG9AKH on November 27, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
(1) "In fact, car horns have greater range than most FRS radios."
Smart! And, please note, you can switch to CW operation using a car horn, which increases its range even further! Question: how can I build a narrow filter for CW car horn reception?
(2) I spent a couple of weeks in Orlando last year and all I could hear in FRS/GMRS frequencies started with the unfortunate f*** word, with lots of kids yelling obscenities at each other. CB sounds like highly dignified, gentlemanly conversation when compared with FRS!
Chances are that an emergency call in FRS Channel 1 will be met by high-calibre, rapid-firing verbal weaponry of the deadliest kind. Personally, I would be very afraid of receiving a RESPONSE in any FRS channel--fortunately my FRS radio has something like a twenty ft range, so the likelihood of being gratuitously insulted by a complete stranger is actually very low.
|
| |
|
RE: Monitoring FRS Channel 1
|
|
|
by N6AJR on November 27, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
frs radio are small low power, great for talking between 2 cars driving together to som place, or for use around a campsite. They are good for point to point local communications, like 1/2 mile in normal conditions.
they do not have the range or ability to be a reliable rescue rig unless you are in close contact or line of site with a second person interested in "saving you".
lets not make these into something they arenot. they don't have the power, ranfe, infrastructer, as necessary for a RELIABLE safety net.
no repeaters, no national frequency, and just not good for this use.. Heck, you can't even hang a fan dipole on them..
YMMV
|
| |
|
RE: Monitoring FRS Channel 1
|
|
|
by K6AER on November 27, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
The most used emergency radio in the world is the Cell Phone. If you can not get help on a cell phone a FRS radio will be useless. You are much better buying a tri-band cell phone with built in GPS than any other communications device.
I know it is fun to think ham radios will be the savior in an emergency but it is very rare when the ham radio is all that is available.
|
| |
|
Monitoring FRS Channel 1
|
|
|
by KG6THI on November 27, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
The parent post states that even if "you have a grip on comms" and are able to pick the transmitting PL tone, it can't be set for a reply. I think that this is bull puckey.
Just looking online, one can find some good compatibility lists of PL tones between radios. Since you'll already have the PL tone of the caller, you should know the PL tones of your own radio.
In an emergency, amateurs are permitted to transmit out of band, right? So couldn't we use high gain antennas and modest (5W-20W) power to reach a bit further.
In reality, I think that something like MURS is a better solution.
Cheers,
Jonathan (KG6THI)
|
| |
|
Thanks for making my point
|
|
|
by W1DUD on November 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
."... 1. What the hell does this have to do with amateur radio? and 2. Who really cares? "73" THE DUD"
Hey Dude,
(I don't know if you like being called Dud)
For some reason the fact that many amateurs are involved in emergency communications has eluded you. Also, if you read the intro, you would realize that amateurs are being asked to monitor FRS frequencies. This article is descriptive of both my thoughts and experiences with FRS radios. We actually tried to use them at public service events to no avail. The thought was to give a non-ham that was integral to the event an FRS radio instead of having a manned shadow. Every time we tried it, it failed miserably for different reasons. Sometimes the coverage was not sufficient. Most times people did not know how to operate the radios, pushing the wrong button and taking them off the air. There was equipment failure. In areas that had crowds, there were kids playing on them and jamming our communications. Sometimes the people would just ignore the fact that they had the radios. Sometimes they would sit them down and forget where they put them. And that was just under the stress of getting a parade or a walk under way. Just think how the stress of an emergency would affect the same people.
FRS, in it's present state, is just not a suitable adjunct to amateur communications. The potential exists, as they are nice small packages that can talk to each other in close proximity, but I think a misunderstanding of their usefulness can lead to serious problems in an emergency.
As for who cares, I believe that would be anyone that has given the subject rational thought.
73,
Mark K8MHZ.....Mark. I got the call sign (vanity) because too many hams take themselves too serious and wanted to bring some levity to the airways. Yes I am aware of emergency communications on amateur radio, it ain't my thing. Finally, my walkie talkies my parents gave me for Chistmas 1967 had better range...lol........."73" THE DUD
|
| |
|
Monitoring FRS Channel 1
|
|
|
by KB9YUR on November 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
As others have said, FRS has its very limited place/usage. I use a pair to communicate
between the garage and house with the Mrs when working on the car. Looking at
www.reactintl.org, I see that CB's channel 9 REACT program is alive and well after
40+ years of operation. Maybe this solution which is already in place would be a better
alternative to monitoring FRS Channel 1?!?
|
| |
|
RE: Monitoring FRS Channel 1
|
|
|
by AA4PB on November 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I suppose it depends on the area you are in but I think a lot of you are underestimating the FRS radios. I have a couple that we take to the beach every year. We are able to communicate between cars during the trip. The kids take one with them when they go down to the beach and are able to communicate back to the room or to us when we try to locate them on the crowded beach. They are cheap. If someone drops one into the water its no big deal.
When family goes to a hamfest with me we take them along. I am able to go about my business and still communicate with and locate them when I need to. FRS doesn't have all the intermod problems like trying to use a ham HT at a hamfest.
I have used them to communicate with a partner while crawling thru the attic pulling cable. I have used them to communicate with a ground person while working up on a tower. I even used them to communicate with my daughter when she was living in an apartment about 3/4 mile away and didn't have a phone.
I seldom hear any activity on the FRS, even at a crowded beach. Most of the kids in my area are carrying cell phones these days. It wouldn't be cool to carry an FRS radio :-)
|
| |
|
Monitoring FRS Channel 1
|
|
|
by KU4UV on November 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
The list of communications devices I would first try in the event of an emergency in the middle of nowhere:
1. My cell phone
2. 2 meter HT or HF ham radio
3. Channel 9 or 19 on a C.B.
4. An FRS/GMRS radio
73,
KU4UV
|
| |
|
RE: Monitoring FRS Channel 1
|
|
|
by KA4KOE on November 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Ahhhh.....49 MHz radios......"all the rage" at Radio Shack.
I remember fondly the Channel 14 superregen SpacePatrol Sets that the shack sold, 100 mW of pure undadulterated POWER!!!!!!
Get the walkie talkie base station with integral morse key and AM radio and you were cooking with gas.
Gettin' old ain't for sissies.
PHILILP
|
| |
|
RE: Monitoring FRS Channel 1
|
|
|
by AI4KK on November 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
About the only use I've found for FRS is in a shelter situation where you can either give them out to the key shelter staff (remember, our job there is communications, not necessarily ham radio operator) or if they have their own radios like many do these days, to use yours to communicate with them without sending a runner to chase them down.
Other than that, we don't even use them for family communications since my wife and 16yo got their tickets.
|
| |
|
RE: Monitoring FRS Channel 1
|
|
|
by K4JSR on November 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
YAWN!
Getting old ain't so good for us Old Pharts, either!
73 from The World Famous "Forget-Me-Not Rest QTH".
Where do Old Pharts carry their FRS Talkies???
Depends!
|
| |
|
Monitoring FRS Channel 1
|
|
|
by WR8Y on November 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
The article makes some valid and good points.
But don't write off FRS too quickly. I hike in FDR State park in GA often (10-15 times a year.) FRS #1 is the de-facto distress channel, and I listen when I am on the trail. I have assisted several people who (foolishly) went into the woods without water, food or a map.
I have managed to talk almost 2 miles radio-to-radio, and while 2M FM sure works better, the average hiker or club member is not a ham.
FRS has it's problems (and Motorola is a problem EVERYWHERE YOU GO, their incompatibility with other radios is INTENTIONAL.)
I use FRS with 2M FM: Let someone call me on FRS and I will use 2FM or my cellphone to get help for them.
FRS is not useless.
WR8Y
|
| |
|
Monitoring FRS Channel 1
|
|
|
by KU4UV on November 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I remember my twin brother and I got a pair of old 49MHz G.E. walkie-talkies for our 6th birthday back in 1980. On a clear day you could maybe talk about 100 yards. They made FRS radios look like high powered stuff!
73,
KU4UV
|
| |
|
RE: Monitoring FRS Channel 1
|
|
|
by W5AOX on November 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I agree that ANY kind of electronic comm ability is better than NOTHING.
Watching videos of rescue choppers hovering over a guy standing on his roof above Katrina's floodwaters, they cannot hear each other, one of the chopper crew VOLUNTEERS to wade through hip deep slop, after landing, to tell the guy THEY HAVE NO FOOD FOR HIM.... What a waste of time, risk, and effort that could have been taken care of in seconds had there been an FRS radio (or any other kind for that matter) on each end. Talking to an aircraft overhead does NOT take REAL HAM power levels.
I think anyone who thinks he is an emergency communicator should have all possible varieties of radios available, whether it is a 706 that will talk to and hear almost anything except a cell phone, or a $20 FRS HT and a couple CB units as well. After all, these kinds of radios can be had for $5 or less, often free, at swapfests etc. and cost maybe 20 bucks brand new. You're not going to go broke being prepared for talking with such devices.
|
| |
|
Monitoring FRS Channel 1
|
|
|
by WA0ZZG on November 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Has anyone found a FRS model that could have the
synthizer shifted to operate on Amateur frequencies?
And maybe add a 5MHz shift to the Tx frequency?
Dave
WA0ZZG
|
| |
|
RE: Monitoring FRS Channel 1
|
|
|
by KC8VWM on November 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I have a little interesting story to share with everyone.
My wife and I use FRS/GMRS radios while camping.
We were camping here in Ohio at a State Park. I always bring my FRS radios so my wife and I can communicate (She sometimes gets losts after finding the bathroom scenario)
One day I had my FRS radio turned on monitoring channel 1 listening for my wife who was wandering around the campground looking for the facilities as usual. I was setting up my tents and unloading the cooler from the car etc..
Suddenly I heard people talking and heard a description of a lost child being broadcast over the FRS radio! Then there was a police vehicle and a police officer patrolling the campground. What was interesting was that he was carrying an FRS radio!?
Later, I observed someone (and simultaneously heard on channel 1) at a nearby site repeating that same description on the FRS radio.
I decided to take my FRS radio for a walk around the campsite to see what I could see. Apparently I wasn't the only person doing this. I observed that there were literally dozens of people toting FRS radios around the campground walking around and looking for this same lost child. The parents of the missing child was given an FRS radio by a nearby camper to listen to.
About 10 minutes later I heard someone say "We found her!" over the FRS radio. The parents heard this and were instantly relieved. It turns out that the child had found a "new friend" and wandered off to a different section of the campground to play with them.
So, to answer the question,
"Do FRS radios work in an emergency?"
The parents of that lost child seems to think so.
..and quite frankly, after what I observed that day and seeing how everyone joined forces to search for that missing child using these "toy" FRS radios at the campground, I am inclined to think that they seem to work too.
73 Charles - KC8VWM / WPSP389
|
| |
|
Monitoring FRS Channel 1
|
|
|
by AA9YH on November 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
When FRS first came out, I bought several $110 FRS radios from a reputable manufacturer. I had bad experiences driving around with them with the PL tone off. I believe the PL Squelch is used as a substitute for poor receiver design. My multiband HTs have no trouble side-by-side with FRS radios (on the same FRS frequency), but the FRS radios with PL tones off will break squelch and squeal from all manner of radio signals. I already have some FRS frequencies in my normal scan mode (with a proper radio). It seems like the chances of being heard are very small, but if it's all you've got...
|
| |
|
Monitoring FRS Channel 1
|
|
|
by WR6MTR on November 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I don't know if anyone has mentioned this yet,
but, FRS radios are narrow band 2.5KHz FM
and Ham rigs are 5KHz. While a Ham rig
can "hear" an FRS radio, most FRS radios have
very distorted audio when receiving from
a Ham rig.
Just a little more fuel for the fire...
WR6MTR
|
| |
|
RE: Monitoring FRS Channel 1
|
|
|
by K6LCS on November 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
>>...Also, 462.675 (GMRS) is officially recognized by the FCC as the national emergency frequency...
I do not believe this is true. Although 462.675 has been described as - and has been published in books as being "the national GMRS emergency frequency - I do not believe the FCC has designated it as such.
Clint Bradford, K6LCS / KAF3359
|
| |
|
RE: 2 questions
|
|
|
by WW0H on November 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
W1DUD said - ... 1. What the hell does this have to do with amateur radio? and 2. Who really cares? "73" THE DUD
I became interested in amateur radio because of CB. I passed the 20 wpm test (for all those who wonder if I'm an "extra lite.") It could be that FRS users will get interested in amateur radio because of their interest in FRS.
As to emergencies, I heard of some mountain climbers using FRS for their group when one of them was injured. A kid several miles away heard their call for help and was able to send assistance.
As amateurs, I feel we should support any and all types of radio communication. We are supposed to be the "pool of trained radio operators" and so should be ready to help, regardless of mode, band, or the training level of those we may help.
John - WW0H
|
| |
|
RE: 2 questions
|
|
|
by WB2WIK on November 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Range on my pair of Motorola FRS handies is a lot longer than my car horn. I gave one to my college daughter, which she sat on her desk in her dorm room up 19 floors, and I drove around the city with the other one and we never lost each other, even when I was 5-6 miles away. Location-location-location...
We take them to Vegas on family vacations so we can find each other in those enormous casinos. Yes, we bump into others doing the same thing, but it's a lot better than nothing.
First time I took them on a ski trip, I had one in my pocket at 11,000 feet atop Mammoth Mountain and "Channel 1" was full of signals from other ski resorts. I think I heard somebody say there were at Northstar at Tahoe, which was 75 miles away. Of course, she was probably also up 10,000 feet. I was actually glad to hear the QRM, I figured if I wiped out I'd probably raise somebody before the ski patrol found me.
They work amazingly well for $99 a pair, or whatever.
WB2WIK/6
|
| |
|
Monitoring FRS Channel 1
|
|
|
by AD5FD on November 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
hoe about the deception of advertisers sayig frs radios have gigamiles of coverage...i just laugh.
|
| |
|
Monitoring FRS Channel 1
|
|
|
by K2LES on November 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Judging from the responses, I dare say that since FRS was introduced, that it has saved more lives than CW!
|
| |
|
RE: Monitoring FRS Channel 1
|
|
|
by AA4PB on November 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
While a Ham rig can "hear" an FRS radio, most FRS radios have very distorted audio when receiving from
a Ham rig.
-----------------------------------------------------
You shouldn't be using your ham rig to transmit on FRS frequencies anyway. You should be using another FRS radio that is certified for use on that service.
By the way, many of the newer ham rigs can be switched to narrow band (+/-2.5KHz). I think many repeaters outside the U.S. use the narrow mode.
|
| |
|
RE: Monitoring FRS Channel 1
|
|
|
by KC8VWM on November 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I do not believe this is true. Although 462.675 has been described as - and has been published in books as being "the national GMRS emergency frequency - I do not believe the FCC has designated it as such.
Clint Bradford, K6LCS / KAF3359
-------
Let me clarify the intention of my earlier statement with regard to the FCC rules "recognizing" emergency related communications including the use of the national and well recognized 462.675mhz. GMRS "emergency" frequency.
FCC Part § 95.181 GMRS rules states the following:
<snip>
(d) A station operator for any GMRS licensee may communicate two-way voice messages concerning:
(1) Emergencies (see §95.143);
(2) Rendering assistance to a motorist; and
(3) Civil defense drills, if the responsible agency requests assistance.
Source:
http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&rgn=div5&view=text&node=47:5.0.1.1.5&idno=47#47:5.0.1.1.5.1.137.9
73 Charles - KC8VWM / WPSP389
|
| |
|
RE: Monitoring FRS Channel 1
|
|
|
by KC8VWM on November 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
First time I took them on a ski trip, I had one in my pocket at 11,000 feet atop Mammoth Mountain and "Channel 1" was full of signals from other ski resorts.
---------
Hmmm.. Contesting on FRS bands are we?
How about these distance records using 500mw FRS radios:
England to Netherlands, 535.8km (333 miles) :
"Tues Aug 05, 2003,
In Spain, the record is 326km (202 miles).
Poland, May 2004 - 224km or 140 miles
Wed Aug 06, 2003 - Jersey (British Isles) - 214km (133 miles)
March 30th 2001 - North Carolina, USA - 123.5 miles (198.7km)
Gives you a new perspective on QRP doesn't it?
73 Charles - KC8VWM
|
| |
|
RE: 2 questions
|
|
|
by WA2JJH on November 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I agree whole heartly with Steve(WIK). The quality of the Motorola GMRS/FRS are great.
Unlike some of the EL-Cheapo's 22 channel GMRS/FRS
H-T's, Motorola' hard wired to throttle down on the FRS
channels down to 500mw. I have seen GMRS/FRS radio's that will output as much as 5W!
One certainly can use/abuse 5W. The coolest feature are the psuedo-submersible H-T's that will beep then RX only to the strongest Coast Guard channel in your
area.
Sure enough just as the GMRS/FRS radio goes into the emergency RX mode, a lightening storm would occure minutes after these TOY/PRO H-T's would occure.
For under $99/pair, one certainly gets one fine UHF
transceiver. Some even have DPL as well as CTSS PL.
In the FRS mode, some radio's have 3 different modes of simple inversion transcription. I think that is a great idea for FRS. Families can have some protection
against over preditor sick-ola's.
Good Artical.
|
| |
|
RE: 2 questions
|
|
|
by WA2JJH on November 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
The ones that claim have Giga-miles of range, use companding. The newer radio's have the ability to disable the companding. Thus one may loose mucho-miles,
Some GRMS/FRS radio's also have a transmit function for HIGH/LOW TX audio. In the High mode, one will get 4-5khz's of FM audio.
As for the ultra range claims, I have made 25 mile hops over water! This | |
