V-Tac, U-Tac, I-Tac Frequencies... UTac21?

[k6scm]

My current understanding of the V, U & ITac nationwide common/interoperability frequency assignments is as follows:

V-Call 155.7525
V-Tac 1 151.1375
V-Tac 2 154.4525
V-Tac 3 158.7375
V-Tac 4 159.4725

U-Call 453.2125 (458.2125)
U-Tac 1 453.4625 (458.4625)
U-Tac 2 453.7125 (458.7125)
U-Tac 3 453.8625 (458.8625)

ITAC channels. All the below use a PL of 156.7 Hz nationwide & and are pre-"re-banding."

I-Call 866.0125 (821.0125)
ITAC 1 866.5125 (821.5125)
ITAC 2 867.0125 (822.0125)
ITAC 3 867.5125 (822.5125)
ITAC 4 868.0125 (823.0125)

Yesterday, I observed some interesting radio traffic from a local No. Cal law enforcement agency in my area. Basically, a 'county' IT support tech was in the process of assisting in the setting up of a dispatcher's console desktop while communicating with the dispatch office from separate mobile unit, in two-way communication with the dispatcher on a secondary frequency of the agency. The tech was instructing the dispatcher on how to select & assign to the Motorola Centracom desktop console used by the dispatch, an icon for a specific channelization selection assignment for "UTac Twenty-One."

I am unable to locate any reference to a "UTac21," much less any FCC listings or usage anywhere near my location, or elsewhere. It doesn't appear in the UTac frequency table under the Common/Shared group, nor in the FCC Database under PW - Public Safety Pool, Conventional. Does anyone recognize this, or have familiarity or similar reference point for/with UTac 21?

[kk6dj]

The following link may be of some help. The newer naming convention begins on page 4 with a table on page 7.

http://www.oes.ca.gov/WebPage/oeswebsite.nsf/PDF/National%20Public%20Safety%20Telecommunications%20 Council%27s%20Channel%20Naming%20Report/$file/NPSTC%20Channel%20Naming%20Report.pdf

[Mick]

I can only locate three UTAC channels:

UTAC41 National Interop Tac 453.4625 156.7 458.4625 156.7
UTAC42 National Interop Tac 453.7125 156.7 458.7125 156.7
UTAC43 National Interop Tac 453.8625 156.7 458.8625 156.7

I'll keep looking for a UTAC21 and post it if I do.

[jlanfn]

Originally Posted by kk6dj

The following link may be of some help. The newer naming convention begins on page 4 with a table on page 7.

http://www.oes.ca.gov/WebPage/oeswebsite.nsf/PDF/National%20Public%20Safety%20Telecommunications%20 Council%27s%20Channel%20Naming%20Report/$file/NPSTC%20Channel%20Naming%20Report.pdf

I had a problem with the link, but here is an appendix from the December 2007 California Statewide Communications Interoperability Plan. The only 21 channel in the NCC/NPSTC linup is "VFire21."

[ColoradoRedlands]

Originally Posted by jlanfn

I had a problem with the link, but here is an appendix from the December 2007 California Statewide Communications Interoperability Plan. The only 21 channel in the NCC/NPSTC linup is "VFire21."

Note that the 800Mhz freqs in this book are the "Re-banded" freqs. Here in Colorado we are completely rebanded in 800, so we use those in the book.

California will still be using the 860mhz ITACS until the various systems go thru your eventual rebanding.

[Exsmokey]

Here is a reference that might be helpful:

http://www.npstc.org/documents/NIFOG...04-14-2008.pdf

Note that the channel numbering is such that a given channel number is not repeated. Thus all the 40 series are UHF, etc.

Hope this helps.

[ecps92]

Here it the NEW Version [errors in Ver 1.2]
http://www.npstc.org/documents/NIFOG_1_3.pdf

Originally Posted by Exsmokey

Here is a reference that might be helpful:

http://www.npstc.org/documents/NIFOG...04-14-2008.pdf

Note that the channel numbering is such that a given channel number is not repeated. Thus all the 40 series are UHF, etc.

Hope this helps.

[k6scm]

Originally Posted by ecps92

Here it the NEW Version [errors in Ver 1.2]
http://www.npstc.org/documents/NIFOG_1_3.pdf

Excellent post. Thanks!

[k6scm]

Thanks to all of you who posted replies for your input. Great info! I still believe it was a UTAC "two-one" I heard and not a "four-one" that was being discussed at the time. Who knows though, as my ears are aging... Hi Hi. I might of had it wrong.

The same agency was really busy with a major drill exercise with units afield and that engaged a mobile command unit, the radio operator of which was going down "the list" and conducting radio checks on CLERS, CLEMARS, CSERS with both the agency and CALEMA at the same time. I believe they had trouble with the mobile units radio check to the dispatch on the UTAC and that is what they were trying to resolve.

[ecps92]

Many Agencies have the ability to PATCH the 3 TAC channels.
V to U to 800 for a Tri-Band Rptr network

Originally Posted by k6scm

Thanks to all of you who posted replies for your input. Great info! I still believe it was a UTAC "two-one" I heard and not a "four-one" that was being discussed at the time. Who knows though, as my ears are aging... Hi Hi. I might of had it wrong.

The same agency was really busy with a major drill exercise with units afield and that engaged a mobile command unit, the radio operator of which was going down "the list" and conducting radio checks on CLERS, CLEMARS, CSERS with both the agency and CALEMA at the same time. I believe they had trouble with the mobile units radio check to the dispatch on the UTAC and that is what they were trying to resolve.

[Exsmokey]

Originally Posted by ecps92

Here it the NEW Version [errors in Ver 1.2]
http://www.npstc.org/documents/NIFOG_1_3.pdf

Thanks ecps, I have V1.3 saved to my desktop files and a hard copy in my field notebook but could not find the link to it. Here on my laptop I only have V1.2, so my foggy memory led me to believe it was the current version.

I'm glad we have so many knowledgeable people here so we get the information correct.

[nd5y]

We have all of that on a handy Wiki page too. Common Public Safety - The RadioReference Wiki

[Exsmokey]

I can't find my source material right now but there are new medical channels beyond the long time standard 10, numbered 12, 22, 32, 42, 52, 62, 72, 82, 92 and 102. They are narrow band pairs in the 462/467 and 463/468 range, just like the original 10. I may have found them in the FCC regs that were updated to reflect the new 700 MHz band and narrow banding. This is somewhat difficult to find but should be known by those who hunt and peck for such things.

I have one scan list common to all my PSR-600 files that I call the "Interoperability" list which I keep in the radio's list 20. I've written all the fed and non-fed frequencies, the med channels, and some other frequencies I've picked up here and there such as the federal law enforcement nationwide common. I have a large fire list which I keep in' the radio's list 19. That way I can listen to different types of large incidents, no matter what type, and not be frantically trying to program from a list that probably won't be in the car at the time.

[nd5y]

Originally Posted by Exsmokey

there are new medical channels beyond the long time standard 10, numbered 12, 22, 32, 42, 52, 62, 72, 82, 92 and 102. They are narrow band pairs in the 462/467 and 463/468 range, just like the original 10

Here you go. The med channel numbers are on page 269 of
http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_20...47cfr90.20.pdf

[ecps92]

It's called Team Work and Share the knowledge. WE can't remember it all, plus there is so much of a difference east/west of the Mississippi !

Originally Posted by Exsmokey

Thanks ecps, I have V1.3 saved to my desktop files and a hard copy in my field notebook but could not find the link to it. Here on my laptop I only have V1.2, so my foggy memory led me to believe it was the current version.

I'm glad we have so many knowledgeable people here so we get the information correct.