Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: Industry Canada announces GMRS service

Expand Messages
  • Lake Hodges Radio
    ... Surprisingly enough, Industry Canada doesn t really care what the average American thinks. They even consider themselves a separate county. Amazing, eh?
    Message 1 of 27 , Apr 1, 2004
      At 07:03 AM 04/01/2004 +0000, laggroup wrote:
      ><http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/epic/internet/insmt-gst.nsf/vwapj/sp462->http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/epic/internet/insmt-gst.nsf/vwapj/sp462-
      >467e.pdf/$FILE/sp462-467e.pdf
      >I find Canada's radio decision abhorrent, disgusting and careless.
      >This must be some sort of joke.

      Surprisingly enough, Industry Canada doesn't really care what the average
      American thinks. They even consider themselves a separate county. Amazing, eh?

      >They know darn well these radios
      >will propagate themselves into the US (which they more or less are
      >now anyways, vis a vis bubble packs) and/or cause an even greater
      >invasion of illegal non-licensed users.

      Uhhh... Those radios are already here. 16 million sold in the USA last
      year at Target, Sam's Club, Wallmart, Costco, Home Depot, etc.
      Also on eBay for as little as $10 each. These are not Canadian radios we're
      speaking about here. These were radios designed originally for the US
      market and mass produced mostly in Asia. Hundreds of thousands, perhaps a
      million or two have filtered into Canada from the US and elsewhere. Soon
      probably 50 or 100 million will be sold each year worldwide. Travel the
      world and you will see them everywhere. They even make GMRS watches now for
      $20. Kids in Mexico who can barely afford shoes have GMRS radios.

      I'm surprised that everyone is so surprised about Industry Canada's move.
      The US almost certainly will have a similar license free service within a
      few years. This is nearly the exact same non-license, up to 5 watts output
      concept that the FCC implemented on 27 MHz citizens band over 20 years ago.
      Nothing new here. They started warning business users in the 1980's to
      relicense and move to another band if hey were getting any interference on
      GMRS. The language in the Canadian documents looks very familiar... it may
      have originated at the FCC. Canada is merely being pragmatic.

      Look at Part 95 again and read between the lines. The intent has been
      clear for some time... starting with 95.1 and an emphasis on
      "short-distance two-way communications for families..."

      95.1 The General Mobile Radio Service (GMRS).
      a) The GMRS is a land mobile radio service available to persons for short-
      distance two-way communications to facilitate the activities of
      licensees and their immediate family members.

      >So ladies and gentlemen, what will we do with all of these repeaters
      >once the FCC decides to do this also?

      Ahhh, maybe switch them to 440 or 450 MHz? Or implement digital privacy
      codes that the cheap radios don't have. You still have up to 50 watts
      available to try and talk over all of the noise.

      >I'm sure the Notice of Rulemaking Proposal is just around the corner...

      You'd be surprised to learn how long ago it was drafted...

      >What does the FCC have to get out of this by delicensing GMRS. If they
      >aren't getting any more money from license fees, where will they collect
      >those lost funds from? Kickbacks or fees from type acceptace for those
      >new enhanced blister pack radios?

      You're assuming that someone at the FCC actually cares about GMRS. The
      resources devoted to Janice Jackson, cell phones and other politically
      pressing issues is 100,000 times greater than GMRS, amateur, etc. Try
      dialing the FCC hotline at random some day. Only about 2% of the FCC
      employees who answer the lines have even heard of GMRS.

      >I know just in my town alone, we've paid the FCC over 1500 in license
      >fees, and thats just for one little tiny town. What about those
      >larger cities with 100 or 200 or more licensees, all at 75.00 apice?

      Wow, $1,500? Add together all the GMRS licenses nationwide and that's still
      waaaay behind the urgency of the 8 or 10 million calls the FCC received
      about Janice Jackson alone. Members of congress are not elected by GMRS
      users, sorry.

      >I know someone on here posted how many licensees there are...whats
      >the sum of collections? Will they WANT to part with that money?

      It wouldn't even pay for one lunch for all of the people at the FCC working
      on other more politically expedient issues. This is a presidential election
      year and don't expect to hear a Kerry or Bush speech about saving GMRS.

      >Regardless, thank god I'm a ham also, at least when they shut down
      >the GMRS, there will just be more 440 repeaters popping up, and I'll
      >be one of them. Who knows, if the ham radio licensing gets easier
      >for people to get into the hobby, who needs GMRS?

      Good point. Ham radio exists mostly by self-enforcement by the ARRL, local
      Ham groups and individual Hams. However, licensed (more than 5 watt) GMRS
      will still be nice for family members who cannot or will not take the time
      to pass an Amateur test. Wife, kids, etc. My son and I talked over 50
      miles last weekend on a GMRS repeater. It will be a long while before he
      gets a Ham license and my wife never will. She can't even change a fuse in
      the car.

      >Nevertheless, I still enjoy GMRS for what it has to offer and would
      >hate to lose the "privelege" of being a licensee.

      Unless you want to run more than 5 watts or use a repeater, your GMRS
      license will become a collectors' item soon. Every kid on your block will
      be eventually be running 1 to 5 watts legally license-free. It's just a
      matter of time.

      Hang in there and good luck!

      -- Kurt





      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Tony Drake
      The only problem is that even if you have a 50 watt repeater and 50 watt mobiles, the FM capture effect will screw you up big time. As far as the radios
      Message 2 of 27 , Apr 1, 2004
        The only problem is that even if you have a 50 watt
        repeater and 50 watt mobiles, the FM capture effect
        will screw you up big time.

        As far as the radios already being in the US, thats
        where you are wrong. IC is specifically allowing
        simplex operations on the repeater inputs. This is
        currently not allowed in bubble packs in the US, and
        this is the big problem.

        Tony
        --- Lake Hodges Radio <lakehodgesradio@...> wrote:
        > At 07:03 AM 04/01/2004 +0000, laggroup wrote:
        >
        ><http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/epic/internet/insmt-gst.nsf/vwapj/sp462->http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/epic/internet/insmt-gst.nsf/vwapj/sp462-
        > >467e.pdf/$FILE/sp462-467e.pdf
        > >I find Canada's radio decision abhorrent,
        > disgusting and careless.
        > >This must be some sort of joke.
        >
        > Surprisingly enough, Industry Canada doesn't really
        > care what the average
        > American thinks. They even consider themselves a
        > separate county. Amazing, eh?
        >
        > >They know darn well these radios
        > >will propagate themselves into the US (which they
        > more or less are
        > >now anyways, vis a vis bubble packs) and/or cause
        > an even greater
        > >invasion of illegal non-licensed users.
        >
        > Uhhh... Those radios are already here. 16 million
        > sold in the USA last
        > year at Target, Sam's Club, Wallmart, Costco, Home
        > Depot, etc.
        > Also on eBay for as little as $10 each. These are
        > not Canadian radios we're
        > speaking about here. These were radios designed
        > originally for the US
        > market and mass produced mostly in Asia. Hundreds of
        > thousands, perhaps a
        > million or two have filtered into Canada from the US
        > and elsewhere. Soon
        > probably 50 or 100 million will be sold each year
        > worldwide. Travel the
        > world and you will see them everywhere. They even
        > make GMRS watches now for
        > $20. Kids in Mexico who can barely afford shoes have
        > GMRS radios.
        >
        > I'm surprised that everyone is so surprised about
        > Industry Canada's move.
        > The US almost certainly will have a similar license
        > free service within a
        > few years. This is nearly the exact same
        > non-license, up to 5 watts output
        > concept that the FCC implemented on 27 MHz citizens
        > band over 20 years ago.
        > Nothing new here. They started warning business
        > users in the 1980's to
        > relicense and move to another band if hey were
        > getting any interference on
        > GMRS. The language in the Canadian documents looks
        > very familiar... it may
        > have originated at the FCC. Canada is merely being
        > pragmatic.
        >
        > Look at Part 95 again and read between the lines.
        > The intent has been
        > clear for some time... starting with 95.1 and an
        > emphasis on
        > "short-distance two-way communications for
        > families..."
        >
        > 95.1 The General Mobile Radio Service (GMRS).
        > a) The GMRS is a land mobile radio service available
        > to persons for short-
        > distance two-way communications to facilitate
        > the activities of
        > licensees and their immediate family members.
        >
        > >So ladies and gentlemen, what will we do with all
        > of these repeaters
        > >once the FCC decides to do this also?
        >
        > Ahhh, maybe switch them to 440 or 450 MHz? Or
        > implement digital privacy
        > codes that the cheap radios don't have. You still
        > have up to 50 watts
        > available to try and talk over all of the noise.
        >
        > >I'm sure the Notice of Rulemaking Proposal is just
        > around the corner...
        >
        > You'd be surprised to learn how long ago it was
        > drafted...
        >
        > >What does the FCC have to get out of this by
        > delicensing GMRS. If they
        > >aren't getting any more money from license fees,
        > where will they collect
        > >those lost funds from? Kickbacks or fees from type
        > acceptace for those
        > >new enhanced blister pack radios?
        >
        > You're assuming that someone at the FCC actually
        > cares about GMRS. The
        > resources devoted to Janice Jackson, cell phones and
        > other politically
        > pressing issues is 100,000 times greater than GMRS,
        > amateur, etc. Try
        > dialing the FCC hotline at random some day. Only
        > about 2% of the FCC
        > employees who answer the lines have even heard of
        > GMRS.
        >
        > >I know just in my town alone, we've paid the FCC
        > over 1500 in license
        > >fees, and thats just for one little tiny town.
        > What about those
        > >larger cities with 100 or 200 or more licensees,
        > all at 75.00 apice?
        >
        > Wow, $1,500? Add together all the GMRS licenses
        > nationwide and that's still
        > waaaay behind the urgency of the 8 or 10 million
        > calls the FCC received
        > about Janice Jackson alone. Members of congress are
        > not elected by GMRS
        > users, sorry.
        >
        > >I know someone on here posted how many licensees
        > there are...whats
        > >the sum of collections? Will they WANT to part
        > with that money?
        >
        > It wouldn't even pay for one lunch for all of the
        > people at the FCC working
        > on other more politically expedient issues. This is
        > a presidential election
        > year and don't expect to hear a Kerry or Bush speech
        > about saving GMRS.
        >
        > >Regardless, thank god I'm a ham also, at least when
        > they shut down
        > >the GMRS, there will just be more 440 repeaters
        > popping up, and I'll
        > >be one of them. Who knows, if the ham radio
        > licensing gets easier
        > >for people to get into the hobby, who needs GMRS?
        >
        > Good point. Ham radio exists mostly by
        > self-enforcement by the ARRL, local
        > Ham groups and individual Hams. However, licensed
        > (more than 5 watt) GMRS
        > will still be nice for family members who cannot or
        > will not take the time
        > to pass an Amateur test. Wife, kids, etc. My son
        > and I talked over 50
        > miles last weekend on a GMRS repeater. It will be a
        > long while before he
        > gets a Ham license and my wife never will. She can't
        > even change a fuse in
        > the car.
        >
        > >Nevertheless, I still enjoy GMRS for what it has to
        > offer and would
        > >hate to lose the "privelege" of being a licensee.
        >
        > Unless you want to run more than 5 watts or use a
        > repeater, your GMRS
        > license will become a collectors' item soon. Every
        > kid on your block will
        > be eventually be running 1 to 5 watts legally
        > license-free. It's just a
        > matter of time.
        >
        > Hang in there and good luck!
        >
        > -- Kurt
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been
        > removed]
        >
        >
      • A10382
        What does the FCC have to get out of this by delicensing GMRS. If they aren t getting any more money from license fees, where will they collect those lost
        Message 3 of 27 , Apr 1, 2004
          "What does the FCC have to get out of this by delicensing GMRS. If
          they aren't getting any more money from license fees, where will they
          collect those lost funds from? Kickbacks or fees from type acceptace
          for those new enhanced blister pack radios?"

          The Fees you pay are not retained in the FCC. They go to the treasury's 'general fund'. Same for monetary forfetures imposed. The FCC then operates on the budget approved by Congress. Increased fees do not result in any increased monies being available for enforcement or any other FCC use. That's the reason the gov't is so tickled pink about auctioning off sectrum.. BILLIONS of dollars in with virtually no cost out.



          Bye all! This will be an interesting time to see what our gov't
          officials do.

          It's my hunble opinion that the FCC commissoners frequently do not listen to their tech staffs. The Commpssoners themselves ARE NOT engineers or radio techs - they are 'merely' politically connected lawyers who were appointed - frequently as repayment for political favors like campaign efforts. The makeup is 2 Democratic appointees, 2 Republican appointees, and the Commissioner appointed by the White House. The current Commissioner, Michael Powell, is Secretary of State Powell's son.

          I think the FCC already knows thet cannot enforce GMRS.. and I do expect it to eventually become a 'license-by-rule' service like FRS, 27MHZ CB, and MURS. The samething happened years ago when 27MHZ CB became unmanageable.

          One thing the FCC does smartly do is to coordinate regs and frequency assignments with Canada .. so this was not done by RCI in a vacumn. It IS, as you noted, probably the first step in deregualting GMRS. The FCC already has a goal to deregulate some parts of the spectrum (and some of that is a good thing) while maximizing fees from the BIG users via auctions for PCS, Cell, etc.

          =====
          Frank


          ---
          Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
          Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
          Version: 6.0.642 / Virus Database: 410 - Release Date: 3/24/04


          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • kvsp1160@aol.com
          In a message dated 04/01/2004 00:14:42, lakehodgesradio@cox.net writes:
          Message 4 of 27 , Apr 1, 2004
            In a message dated 04/01/2004 00:14:42, lakehodgesradio@... writes:

            << Every kid on your block will
            be eventually be running 1 to 5 watts legally license-free. It's just a
            matter of time. >>

            I agree with many of these replies, but if you think in mass, most of the
            "5-mile" radios are in simplex. Very few have duplex (repeater) capabilities. And
            if they do, what - only 3w vs 50w. I don't think that this will be an issue
            for the Canadians. Unless your repeater is near "Lines A & C", then you have no
            worries. But I stand strong with the rest of you who will and already do have
            those problems.

            I know we talk about trying to stop the FCC from making these stupid
            decisions, etc. But do we ever do something? There are about 3-4 other GMRS groups
            here on Yahoo alone with at least 50 members, along with our 980 members. Could
            we start a website that has a "guestbook" and use it at a petition? Then send
            it to the FCC with our thoughts and concerns. What a great resource this would
            be, and think of the many hits we would get in 2-3 months alone. I could help
            start the webpage, but need your support (and a web server). =c)

            Anyways, just another great thought. But we can do it. Hang in there. 1200+
            Yahoo GMRS members should tell Canada something...

            73's,
            Ryan
            WPUI299
            San Jose, CA
          • laggroup
            Well, contrary to the doom and gloom which has plauged us for a while, I see no more need to beat this one down. I ll believe it when I see it. We all know
            Message 5 of 27 , Apr 2, 2004
              Well, contrary to the doom and gloom which has plauged us for a
              while, I see no more need to beat this one down. I'll believe it
              when I see it. We all know GMRS enforcement is literally non-
              existent, although when information and proof is brought to the
              enforcement branch (case in point, California guys and gals) they do
              something about it. If self enforcement is what has kept ham radio
              well, which it has, then instead of "Oh well, they will delicense the
              service and we can do nothing about it" has to go away and we must
              start to do the same thing. There's enough of us who are hams, and
              some more who have experience in enforcement and interference
              procedures, to make sure we vehemently protect what little spectrum
              we have. We should take example of the California group who went out
              and found unlicensed users and interference causers, and do the same
              thing. Record them, hunt them down, and report them. It has to
              start somewhere and we cannot take a lax standpoint on this. Maybe,
              just maybe, we'll be okay for a while.

              BTW, does Canada have an FRS similar to ours and this is an ADDITION
              to it, or is this Canada's version of our FRS? Is it the same
              principle or are they doing away with the licensing for everything
              and not allowing repeaters, etc. I guess what I'm asking is do they
              have the same GMRS as we have set up here, or are we worried they're
              going to call their "FRS" "GMRS"? What are the clear similarities
              and differences? Thanks!

              Chris
              LAG Group
            • Lake Hodges Radio
              ... -- Agreed! ... It s easier for the FCC to say we have to do this after Canada has already done it... -- Kurt [Non-text portions of this message have been
              Message 6 of 27 , Apr 2, 2004
                At 03:14 PM 04/01/2004 -0500, A10382 wrote:
                >I think the FCC already knows thet cannot enforce GMRS.. and I do expect
                >it to eventually become a 'license-by-rule' service like FRS, 27MHZ CB,
                >and MURS. The samething happened years ago when 27MHZ CB became
                >unmanageable.


                -- Agreed!


                >One thing the FCC does smartly do is to coordinate regs and frequency
                >assignments with Canada .. so this was not done by RCI in a vacumn. It
                >IS, as you noted, probably the first step in deregualting GMRS.


                It's easier for the FCC to say "we have to do this" after Canada has
                already done it...

                -- Kurt



                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • Lake Hodges Radio
                ... There s already a group that might be able to support that... http://www.provide.net/~prsg/ But stopping the FCC from implementing a decision that has
                Message 7 of 27 , Apr 2, 2004
                  At 02:20 AM 04/02/2004 -0500, kvsp1160@... wrote:
                  >I know we talk about trying to stop the FCC from making these stupid
                  >decisions, etc. But do we ever do something? There are about 3-4 other
                  >GMRS groups
                  >here on Yahoo alone with at least 50 members, along with our 980 members.
                  >Could
                  >we start a website that has a "guestbook" and use it at a petition?


                  There's already a group that might be able to support that...

                  http://www.provide.net/~prsg/

                  But stopping the FCC from implementing a decision that has probably already
                  made is a formidable task.

                  20 to 30 million unlicensed FRS/GMRS users versus a few thousand of us with
                  GMRS licenses. Which will congress find a more attractive source of votes?

                  -- Kurt


                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • John H. Guetherman
                  ... ADDITION to it, or is this Canada s version of our FRS? Is it the same principle or are they doing away with the licensing for everything and not allowing
                  Message 8 of 27 , Apr 2, 2004
                    --- In GMRS@yahoogroups.com, "laggroup" <laggroup@y...> wrote:
                    > BTW, does Canada have an FRS similar to ours and this is an
                    ADDITION to it, or is this Canada's version of our FRS? Is it the
                    same principle or are they doing away with the licensing for
                    everything and not allowing repeaters, etc. I guess what I'm asking
                    is do they have the same GMRS as we have set up here, or are we
                    worried they're going to call their "FRS" "GMRS"? What are the clear
                    similarities and differences? Thanks!
                    >
                    > Chris
                    > LAG Group

                    The U.S. and Canadian FRS are exactly the same.

                    Canada does not yet have a "GMRS" [they have a GRS, see below], those
                    frequencies are business band. At least two of our frequency pairs
                    cannot be used here in the U.S. within 70 or so miles of the Canadian
                    border because of that.

                    However, if their proposal goes through, they'll have 16, 5 watt ERP,
                    simplex only frequencies, whereas we have 8, up to 50 watt TPO,
                    simplex/repeater output frequencies, and 8, up to 50 watt TPO,
                    repeater input only frequencies.

                    If their proposal goes through, it could cause problems for repeater
                    owners and users on any channel within range of the border. It'll be
                    an even bigger problem if those radios start coming across the
                    border, legally or otherwise. Even if not certified by the FCC for
                    use in the States, they could show up in areas with Canadian snowbird
                    populations, like Florida and Arizona.

                    [Canada also has an identical 27MHz allocation to our Citizens Band
                    Radio Service, however they call it the General Radio Service, if I
                    recall correctly. They don't have anything like our 151/154MHz Multi-
                    Use Radio Service yet.]

                    I'm not opposed to a Candian GMRS. But their service needs to be
                    exactly like ours. And no, I don't mean our service being exactly
                    like theirs, either.

                    John H. Guetherman
                    KB7MIB/WPXJ598
                    Peoria, AZ.
                  • Lake Hodges Radio
                    ... Thanks, John. Please read this again... http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/epic/internet/insmt-gst.nsf/vwapj/sp462-467e.pdf/$FILE/sp462-467e.pdf It s very clearly
                    Message 9 of 27 , Apr 2, 2004
                      At 03:57 AM 04/03/2004 +0000, John H. Guetherman wrote:
                      >Canada does not yet have a "GMRS" they have a GRS.



                      Thanks, John.

                      Please read this again...

                      http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/epic/internet/insmt-gst.nsf/vwapj/sp462-467e.pdf/$FILE/sp462-467e.pdf

                      It's very clearly called GMRS... General Mobile radio Service.

                      And what about those of us within 30 miles of the Mexican Border? Lots of
                      kids in Tijuana have FRS/GMRS radios now.

                      Best,

                      -- Kurt, San Diego

                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    • Lake Hodges Radio
                      ... John, Interestingly enough, a lot of Canadians don t care what Americans think. Some of them even consider Canada to be a separate country with its own
                      Message 10 of 27 , Apr 2, 2004
                        At 03:57 AM 04/03/2004 +0000, John H. Guetherman wrote:
                        >I'm not opposed to a Candian GMRS. But their service needs to be exactly
                        >like ours.


                        John,

                        Interestingly enough, a lot of Canadians don't care what Americans think.
                        Some of them even consider Canada to be a separate country with its own
                        separate rules and laws. (-:

                        -- Kurt




                        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                      • A10382
                        Canada already has FRS - the same 14 frequencies that we are authorized in the US at the same .5 W (500 mw). ._._. ... From: Lake Hodges Radio To:
                        Message 11 of 27 , Apr 2, 2004
                          Canada already has "FRS" - the same 14 frequencies that we are authorized in the US at the same .5 W (500 mw).
                          ._._.


                          ----- Original Message -----
                          From: Lake Hodges Radio
                          To: GMRS@yahoogroups.com
                          Sent: Saturday, April 03, 2004 12:44 AM
                          Subject: [GMRS] Re: Industry Canada announces GMRS service


                          At 03:57 AM 04/03/2004 +0000, John H. Guetherman wrote:
                          >Canada does not yet have a "GMRS" they have a GRS.



                          Thanks, John.

                          Please read this again...

                          http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/epic/internet/insmt-gst.nsf/vwapj/sp462-467e.pdf/$FILE/sp462-467e.pdf

                          It's very clearly called GMRS... General Mobile radio Service.

                          And what about those of us within 30 miles of the Mexican Border? Lots of
                          kids in Tijuana have FRS/GMRS radios now.

                          Best,

                          -- Kurt, San Diego

                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


                          Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
                          ADVERTISEMENT





                          ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                          Yahoo! Groups Links

                          a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
                          http://groups.yahoo.com/group/GMRS/

                          b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                          GMRS-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

                          c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



                          ---
                          Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
                          Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
                          Version: 6.0.642 / Virus Database: 410 - Release Date: 3/24/04


                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        • kvsp1160@aol.com
                          Well, I got bored (and couldn t fall asleep), so I designed a website (7-page) that is ready to go. Just need a web and form-mail server. You can email me
                          Message 12 of 27 , Apr 3, 2004
                            Well, I got bored (and couldn't fall asleep), so I designed a website
                            (7-page) that is ready to go. Just need a web and "form-mail" server. You can email
                            me and view the demo version if you're interested. If we feel that we can't use
                            it, maybe then have it available for something else. Just let me know and,
                            like I've mentioned before, I'll always be ready to help in any way that I can.

                            Think about it and email me on the side... 73's,
                            Ryan
                            WPUI299
                            San Jose, CA
                          • John Miller
                            If the Canadian government allows the input repeater frequencies doesn t that mean that if they decide to add repeaters then this will in essence screw
                            Message 13 of 27 , Apr 3, 2004
                              If the Canadian government allows the input repeater frequencies doesn't
                              that mean that if they decide to add repeaters then this will in essence
                              screw everything up for their repeaters.

                              _________________________________________________________________
                              Free yourself from those irritating pop-up ads with MSn Premium. Get 2months
                              FREE*
                              http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines
                            • Tony Drake
                              yes it will ... http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines
                              Message 14 of 27 , Apr 3, 2004
                                yes it will
                                --- John Miller <johnmiller9116@...> wrote:
                                > If the Canadian government allows the input repeater
                                > frequencies doesn't
                                > that mean that if they decide to add repeaters then
                                > this will in essence
                                > screw everything up for their repeaters.
                                >
                                >
                                _________________________________________________________________
                                > Free yourself from those irritating pop-up ads with
                                > MSn Premium. Get 2months
                                > FREE*
                                >
                                http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines
                                >
                                >
                              • John H. Guetherman
                                Their GMRS is slated to be opened as early as September of this year, it is not yet open. Their version of our Citizens Band Radio Service, is called the
                                Message 15 of 27 , Apr 3, 2004
                                  Their GMRS is slated to be opened as early as September of this year,
                                  it is not yet open.

                                  Their version of our Citizens Band Radio Service, is called the
                                  General Radio Service, or GRS.

                                  Canada does not yet have a "GMRS", they have a GRS.

                                  John H. Guetherman
                                  KB7MIB/WPXJ598
                                  Peoria, AZ.

                                  --- In GMRS@yahoogroups.com, Lake Hodges Radio <lakehodgesradio@c...>
                                  wrote:
                                  > At 03:57 AM 04/03/2004 +0000, John H. Guetherman wrote:
                                  > >Canada does not yet have a "GMRS" they have a GRS.
                                  >
                                  > Thanks, John.
                                  >
                                  > Please read this again...
                                  >
                                  > http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/epic/internet/insmt-gst.nsf/vwapj/sp462-
                                  467e.pdf/$FILE/sp462-467e.pdf
                                  >
                                  > It's very clearly called GMRS... General Mobile radio Service.
                                  >
                                  > Best,
                                  >
                                  > -- Kurt, San Diego
                                  >
                                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.