Garmin To Marry GPS with FRS/GMRS

zornorph writes "Garmin is set to come out with the Garmin RINO in June, which integrates FRS and GMRS radio with a GPS unit, which will give it up to a 5 mile range of communication. Garmin has a unique twist though, to quote their site: "What really separates the Rino from the rest of the FRS herd is the ability to "beam" your exact location to another Rino user within a two-mile range using the FRS spectrum." However, there are concerns about the implementation of this "beaming", as it causes interference with GMRS users."

Comments

Those who do not study Amateur radio...

[wowbagger]

Those who do not study Amateur radio are doomed to reinvent it.

We've had this "location beaming" capability for some time - it's called
APRS (Automatic Position Reporting System).

We've also had interference problems, a**holes on the bands, and repeaters causing interference. That's why we have licenses and are held accountable by the FCC - so that if somebody starts doing this, they get hit with a $8000 fine.

Just look at Children's Band (CB) - one big heterodyne squeal from end to end. Why did this happen? Because the FCC allowed anybody to use CB without a license, and stopped enforcing the law there. Now Chicken Band is like reading at -1.

If they want to stop this, the FCC needs to enforce the law. Go after anybody causing interference, require radio manufacturers to show their nifty new features don't cause harm, etc.

Otherwise, FRS will be CB at a higher frequency.

(And personally, I'm glad there's a place for these morons to play that isn't where I am trying to communicate.)

(Of course, many BPOFs (brass pounding old farts) will say the same about me, since I am a DSNCT (dirty stinking no-code tech).)

Re:data over FRS illegal

[josecanuc]

They got permission.

http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2000/10/18/1/#gar min

Re:Except that the FCC Does NOT enforce...

[per unit analyzer]

I don't know the specific's of Dave's situation, but in many cases the amateur radio operator is operating with the FCC regulations. Consumer devices are not protected from harmful interference from other devices and most consumer radio products have a sticker right on them that say so. Problem is most consumers buy poorly designed products and then hold the ham responsibilty for interference when it's really the manufacturer of their device who's at fault. But it's easier to put pressure on 'the radio nut' down the street rather than complain to the manufacturer of the poorly shielded product that already cost them $250.

As for cable, if the amatueur radio operator is getting into CATV, that means CATV is leaking and possibly interfering with other radio systems like public safety two-way and aircraft radio systems. The cable company should clean up their system or risk running afoul of the FCC. A properly operated CATV system will not suffer ingress from an amateur radio operator.

Telephone interference is in the same vein; if the ham's signal is getting into the phone network (as opposed to the neighbors' $9.95 phones) the telephone company is responsible for cleaning their plant up. However, chances are that the telephones themselves (even wireline) aren't properly shielded ...

Broadcast interference *may* be the responsibility of the ham to clean up, but again without knowing the specifics, it's hard to tell. Part of the problem may be that the ham is using ungodly amount of power when low power would do. Maybe if the ham turned down the power things would get cleaned up. Who knows? Has anyone tried working with the guy instead of just trying to make him go away?

A lot of folks would rather not work with the ham to understand what interference modes are present. Chances are they complain about interference but really have a problem with the huge monstrosity of an antenna in the back yard. It's not uncommon for neighbors of a ham with one of these huge antennas to be suffering all sorts of interference problems even when the ham is not operating. There are two sides to every story.

-z