Talk:Two-way radio

message: The frequency-response figure is baffling.  There's too much specialized jargon too early in the article. Organization is poor (talk about conventional *before* trunked, clearer that way and the motivation for trunking becomes easier to explain).  How about some *H*I*S*T*O*R*Y, darn it?  The first two-way system applied to police cars was in the US in the '20s, I think...got to find more.  If someone wants to read about FRS or GMRS or other services there's LINKs to follow - we don't need to beat this to death here. I'm putting this one on my to-do list. --Wtshymanski 23:12, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Cleanup needed

message: Can anyone please explain why Walkie-talkie and Two-way radio have distinct articles when they both seem to describe the same technology?  It is my opinion that is is redundant, confusing, and that content from the walkie-talkie article be merged to two-way radio article.--Kevin586 18:56, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  February 2007 Merge discussion 

message: I've learned never to call anything on Wikipedia the "first" but can anyone give me a reference for the anon addition which I've just moved here:
In 1930 the first three cities debuted two-way police radios. The Pasadena, Berkley, and Tulare Police Departments added police band radios. These were licensed as KSW 2410kc and WPDA 1712 kc.
This isn't what the IEEE milestones site says, though they refer to "high frequency". These two frequencies would be called "medium wave" or medium frequency. --Wtshymanski 17:56, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: First

message: This article is very informative on the technical side. As a lay person with an interest in how schools could use 2-way radios in day-to-day operations as well as in communicating with first responders in an emergency (i.e., when an active shooter is on the premises), I was hoping an article on Wikipedia would include a section that focuses on the human side of using 2-way radios. How do you "get the hang of it?" Why use 2-way radios if we all have cell phones? How does the technology shape the communication experience between or among the users? Does it shape what to say, how to say it, when to say it?
Also, I'm interested in interoperability issues and just how seriously they're taken. For instance, here in Colorado, when first responders from different agencies arrived on the scene at Columbine during the student shooting rampage, they were unable to communicate with one another, and this caused considerable confusion related to chain of command. I'm finding out in my private discussions that many schools using 2-way radios can only afford units that come nowhere near the sophistication of the 2-way radios used by professional law enforcement, firefighters and other responders. As a result the schools' systems cannot communicate with first responders arriving on the scene for any emergency.
In addition, the lack of interoperability seems to go hand-in-hand with the human use of the 2-way radios in the school system. Schools may develop their own codes or jargon that cannot be understood by professional responders. Slowly, schools are being required to follow National Incident Management System guidelines or become NIMS-compliant, which means they must follow Incident Command System (ICS) doctrine. ICS includes rules on the use of "clear text" instead of any jargon at all. So this brings us back to the topic of The Human Side of 2-Way Radios -- namely, what part does the technology play in building a team or a community?
Any suggestions on whether to include this in the general article? Thank you for your comments.
12.42.161.3 (talk) 16:35, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: In Practice?

message: Its worth mentioning that in the Northern Ireland "Troubles" the British army radios upset the ROI TV signal, so people knew when a raid was coming. This was a major issue at the time.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.36.121.12 (talk) 12:32, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  UHF vs VHF 

message: Please include VoIP over Wifi/WiMax as a alternative see http://www.webopedia.com/DidYouKnow/Internet/2005/voIP_WiFi.asp  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.246.175.36 (talk) 09:57, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Alternatives

message: I'd like to read in the article more about the history of hand-helds. Can someone savvy add that with dates? Thanks! (Btw, Is there also a Suggestion section here?) Misty MH (talk) 21:20, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: There's a lot of history (continually edit-warred, so you know you're getting the very best information) at Walkie-talkie. If it doesn't have a link here, I'll add one.  --Wtshymanski (talk) 15:39, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  History of hand-helds 

message: I came here to find out when radios in aircraft became practical. In the History section we're told that they did, but not when. The previous para refers to vehicle use in 1923, and the following para refers to 1933. Some more info needed here, pleaseDean1954 (talk) 08:19, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Radio was first used in aircraft just prior to World War 1, first zeppelins then in the biplane.  Civilian zeppelins had radio first (they trailed a wire antenna called a "zepp") but the war really sparked development of light radio sets that could be carried by heavier than air craft.  The first radio transmission from an airplane was August 1910, I think by the US Navy. The first aircraft radios transmitted by radiotelegraphy, so they required 2 seat aircraft with a 2nd crewman to tap on a telegraph key to spell out messages by Morse code.  During World War 1 AM voice two way radio sets were made possible by the development of the triode vacuum tube, allowing the pilot in a single seat aircraft to use the radio.  Here's a timeline of the first experiments in aviation radio.  This info should probably be in one of the aviation articles, maybe Avionics. --ChetvornoTALK 14:43, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aircraft use 

message: I am moving the following uncited material here until it can be properly supported with inline citations of reliable, secondary sources, per WP:V, WP:NOR, WP:CS, WP:NOR, WP:IRS, WP:PSTS, et al. This diff shows where it was in the article. Nightscream (talk) 15:38, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Uncited material in need of citations

message: ... between a tranceiver and a two-way radio? This is not a joke! - Roxy the dog  18:15, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Probably just a historical one at this stage. In the early days of radio, transmitters and receivers would have been separate pieces of equipment. A transceiver would have been an integration of the two with the transmitter and receiver in the same case as the technology evolved. Jmccormac (talk) 21:55, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is the difference ...?