Radio check?

Chat about non-hiking topics. The least serious of the forums on the site!
Jbar290
Posts: 35
Joined: December 24th, 2022, 2:41 pm

Radio check?

Post by Jbar290 » March 7th, 2023, 5:43 pm

The tradition of carrying walkies or having a 2 way radio in the car is mostly dead. I carry a talkbout for “emergency” but I literally have no use for it because every line is dead. The only success ive had is finding a school security channel.

Is there an established channel for hikers besides 1^1?

User avatar
retired jerry
Posts: 14398
Joined: May 28th, 2008, 10:03 pm

Re: Radio check?

Post by retired jerry » March 8th, 2023, 6:59 am

are you talking about CB radio? shortwave?

User avatar
dirtman
Posts: 62
Joined: August 8th, 2014, 9:14 am

Re: Radio check?

Post by dirtman » March 8th, 2023, 11:49 am

Please use VHF Channel 9 and do not use VHF Channel 16. VHF Channel 16 is not for the purpose of radio checks.

Jbar290
Posts: 35
Joined: December 24th, 2022, 2:41 pm

Re: Radio check?

Post by Jbar290 » March 9th, 2023, 1:35 am

retired jerry wrote:
March 8th, 2023, 6:59 am
are you talking about CB radio? shortwave?
Mostly walkies but ham/CB

jvangeld
Posts: 156
Joined: May 29th, 2018, 6:36 pm
Location: Proebstel, WA

Re: Radio check?

Post by jvangeld » March 9th, 2023, 11:20 am

I often have an FRS with me when I hike. But I don't monitor it when I am not hiking.
Jeremy VanGelder - Friends of Road 4109

User avatar
wildcat
Posts: 109
Joined: September 14th, 2021, 4:48 pm
Location: CN85RP

Re: Radio check?

Post by wildcat » March 19th, 2023, 2:18 pm

Without getting into a huge discourse on radio physics, RF absorbtion and all that rot, I'll just say VHF MURS (151/154 MHz) tends to work better in the forest than UHF FRS/GMRS (462/467 MHz). Five channels versus 22 or 30, depending if you're "that guy" who runs simplex on the repeater inputs, but there's a reason why it's called Mostly Unused Radio Service.

Oh, and don't use MARITIME VHF on your INLAND hiking trips, like dirtman hinted above. You'll probably just piss off the Coast Guard (they monitor 16/156.800 round the clock) and whatever hunters might be "illegally" using them. Just sayin'. Though throwing out a "radio check radio check radio check hello all stations hello all stations hello all stations; this is <insert "vessel" name here - just use your trail name or CB handle> for radio check, how copy channel one-six over" once in a great while from your UV5R or modded Yaesu HT, if only for amusement to see who'll bite, won't hurt anything. The key things are: don't wear out your welcome and don't be a dick.

EDIT: OP's "1^1" = FRS 1/Motorola convention CTCSS 1 (462.5625 MHz/CTCSS 67.0 Hz). The default setting on most mainstream FRS/GMRS handhelds.
Last edited by wildcat on December 5th, 2023, 10:14 am, edited 3 times in total.
Life in Chacos
nwhikers.net: thewildcat

User avatar
retired jerry
Posts: 14398
Joined: May 28th, 2008, 10:03 pm

Re: Radio check?

Post by retired jerry » March 19th, 2023, 3:04 pm

if you had an emergency in the wilderness where you can't get cell phone, would these radio frequencies allow you to reach someone so they could notify the authorities so they could rescue you?

User avatar
wildcat
Posts: 109
Joined: September 14th, 2021, 4:48 pm
Location: CN85RP

Re: Radio check?

Post by wildcat » March 19th, 2023, 3:30 pm

Potentially, if you know that someone within range is monitoring, but in all likelihood probably not, unless there was a Wal-Mart within range since they typically operate on MURS 4 (154.540 carrier squelch). This may be where one could actually be better served by 11m CB, though really hardly anyone, including probably 95% of hammies, routinely monitors two-way radio for emergencies in general any more outside of maritime VHF.

And this is where we get into a quandary (disclaimer: IANAL). The US Coast Guard, in most if not all areas where they have a base (like Portland) maintain watch of channel 16/156.8 since it's part of the Global Maritime Distress Signalling System (GMDSS). BUT inland use also runs afoul of terms of IIRC 47 CFR 80 (the FCC regulation that specifies and authorises marine VHF radio in the USA). So while they may be able to despatch search and rescue, there's also the possibility (if you believe all the fearmongering on sadham/oldham forums like Eham, Radioreference and /r/amateurradio) that they'll throw the book at you and 20+ years in supermax with no eligibility for parole when all is said and done, like the heinous subversive criminal scum you obviously are in our Glorious Nation of Laws, flag flag flag bible bible bible. I wouldn't exactly *count* on that, but this is the US federal government we're talking about. In reality, F¢¢ themselves probably couldn't care less, initially, and chances are can't be bothered to investigate it on their own unless prompted (meaning: bribed) to do so - they have higher priorities these days, like auctioning gigahertz-sized blocks of spectrum to the highest telecoms industry bidder, or shutting down 1/50-watt FM transmitters people use to transmit music around their houses out in the sticks, because NPRAudacyIheartCumulus LLC, depending on the level of broadcast industry consolidation the moment, scream blue murder about interference and decreased listenership.

Enter, the all-powerful Inreach.
Life in Chacos
nwhikers.net: thewildcat

User avatar
retired jerry
Posts: 14398
Joined: May 28th, 2008, 10:03 pm

Re: Radio check?

Post by retired jerry » March 20th, 2023, 5:50 am

hmmm... I seem to have stumbled into a controversial topic for you :) or maybe not you but that community

Yeah, Inreach works pretty good

I think there's even a way for two inreach users to communicate with each other

User avatar
wildcat
Posts: 109
Joined: September 14th, 2021, 4:48 pm
Location: CN85RP

Re: Radio check?

Post by wildcat » March 20th, 2023, 8:26 am

There's definitely a lot of FUD and fearmongering over it in that community, for sure. Perusing the Radioreference forum (mostly dominated by sadhams) can give me an headache.

I believe Inreach devices have been able to communicate between themselves since the beginning, if not directly then via satellite. And now Qualcomm have introduced an Iridium-based satellite messaging system. Between it, Motorola's Inmarsat system and that thing Elon Musk promised a couple weeks ago but likely can't be counted on to deliver, perhaps Garmin will finally be given a run for their money.

Remember the awkward position NSAT&T found themselves in after divestiture when the competitive long distance business exploded in the late '80s? Yeah, it's that again. Garmin, at present, effectively have a virtual monopoly over the satellite text messaging market, but not for much longer. (Yeah, there's Spot, but who even uses that?) Eventually they'll realise they seriously need to consider lowering their absurdly high Inreach service fees, if they intend to stay competitive as the well-heeled incumbent.
Life in Chacos
nwhikers.net: thewildcat

Post Reply