RadioReference on Facebook   RadioReference on Twitter   RadioReference Blog
 

Go Back   The RadioReference.com Forums > U.S. Regional Radio Discussion Forums > Connecticut Radio Discussion Forum

Connecticut Radio Discussion Forum Forum for discussing Radio Information in the State of Connecticut.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #61 (permalink)  
Old 04-21-2010, 8:06 PM
y10kiscoming's Avatar
Member
  Audio Feed Provider
Audio Feed Provider
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Groton, CT
Posts: 224
Default two things

#1 I know I have seen a coverage map of the Waterford system somewhere. It is public on the internet. Does anyone have it bookmarked?

#2 thom, have you tried re-creating the entire system? I had two working BCD396T's listening to the system. Played around with one, and wouldn't ya know it, it stopped working. Shows its scanning, shows excellent signal, just does not pick up anything. Hold on control channel gives no system info. I downloaded the programming into my computer and only noticed a couple differences in the systems. The 'Ignore End Code' and 'Ignore Status Bit' on the one that works is set to Enabled. I really don't know how I ended up changing those. Just something to try.

EDIT: Open the USD file in Notepad. Look for: SystemT,SEARCH,Enabled,Enabled,DECIMAL,OFF,OFF,AUT O,DEFAULT,0

Last edited by y10kiscoming; 04-21-2010 at 8:19 PM.. Reason: Added info about USD file.
Reply With Quote
Sponsored links
  #62 (permalink)  
Old 04-22-2010, 2:44 PM
Member
  Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 88
Default

y10kiscoming, for a coverage map go to the "Waterford Public Safety" listing, under System Freqs click on "Simulcast", which will bring you to the coverage map.

After being unsuccessful with the 996, I loaded my 396 with various settings like you said, and drove over to Waterford. Can you believe no luck? Like you stated, it shows a great signal but will not capture the control. I've never had such a problem.
Reply With Quote
  #63 (permalink)  
Old 04-22-2010, 4:06 PM
Member
  Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 88
Default

I solved my problem! I had it set for Moto type 2, instead of Moto APCO 25. Thanks to all.
Reply With Quote
  #64 (permalink)  
Old 04-22-2010, 5:37 PM
y10kiscoming's Avatar
Member
  Audio Feed Provider
Audio Feed Provider
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Groton, CT
Posts: 224
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by thom View Post
y10kiscoming, for a coverage map go to the "Waterford Public Safety" listing, under System Freqs click on "Simulcast", which will bring you to the coverage map.

After being unsuccessful with the 996, I loaded my 396 with various settings like you said, and drove over to Waterford. Can you believe no luck? Like you stated, it shows a great signal but will not capture the control. I've never had such a problem.
Thanks for the map, but I've seen a different one. I swear. I *think* it was on an "official" page. It looked like it was generated using the software Radio Mobile. I'll keep looking. I even checked through my browser history and couldn't find it.

Odd about the radios (I saw in your next post you fixed the issue). I don't remember setting it to 800mhz. Maybe I wrote over a bad copy somehow. Either way, yes, I overwrote one radio with the working one and both mine are working again too.
Reply With Quote
  #65 (permalink)  
Old 04-29-2010, 1:02 PM
Member
   
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1
Default

Can anyone point me in the right direction?? My mom has been listening to waterford PD for years on the Radioshack Pro-2052 and Pro-95 scanners...Are either one of these scanners able to get the new system?? If not any suggestions as what to do or get?? If they can get the new system- any help out there how to program it?? Neither one of us know much about it..My mom is 70 years old and its her main hobby. .just trying to help her..sorry Im not more knowledgeble...any help would be greatly appreciated.
Reply With Quote
Sponsored links
  #66 (permalink)  
Old 04-30-2010, 4:11 PM
Member
   
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 95
Default

Those scanners will not get the new system. the new system is trunked and digital, Niether of those scanners will do digital format.

I'd reccomend getting a used uniden bcd396t, or possibly a new bcd396xt.
Reply With Quote
  #67 (permalink)  
Old 05-01-2010, 11:17 AM
Harryjr's Avatar
Member
   
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Southeastern CT
Posts: 31
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rplais9058 View Post
Can anyone point me in the right direction?? My mom has been listening to waterford PD for years on the Radioshack Pro-2052 and Pro-95 scanners...Are either one of these scanners able to get the new system?? If not any suggestions as what to do or get?? If they can get the new system- any help out there how to program it?? Neither one of us know much about it..My mom is 70 years old and its her main hobby. .just trying to help her..sorry Im not more knowledgeble...any help would be greatly appreciated.
She can still get the FD on simulcast for the time being. For the PD she'll need a digital trunking scanner (approx $500). She'd probably like that better than flowers for Mother's Day next Sun.
Reply With Quote
  #68 (permalink)  
Old 05-09-2010, 1:28 AM
Member
   
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 95
Default

OK, So I was in Groton today, Monitoring the waterford system, and I set my Digital scanner (monitoring ID 218 on the system) side by side with my other scanner, Which was monitoring New London Police on 453.275. And what do you know, They are both the same thing.

I've submitted this correction to the database as well, Just wanted to let everyone know here since it'll prolly take a day or so to get corrected, It was listed as a patch to NLFD. It is NLPD.
Reply With Quote
  #69 (permalink)  
Old 05-09-2010, 8:44 AM
cg cg is offline
Member
  Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 1,997
Default

Just a thought that it could be a patch to a New London radio in the console and it is dispatcher selectable...

chris
Reply With Quote
Sponsored links
  #70 (permalink)  
Old 05-09-2010, 11:00 AM
Member
   
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: S.E. Ct.
Posts: 442
Default

Here is a list of talkgroups found on the system from my Pro-106 and on other scanners I have. The 25XX talkgroups are used for fire dispatch. (Don't know why they use multiple TGs for fire dispatch. Also there is a distant FD bleeding thru the FD TG 201 (which currently patched to 33.94). The last number for each TG is the hits picked up with the Pro106.

ID 101 PD Group 101 272
*ID: 102 Group 102 1
*ID: 105 Group 105 1
*ID: 111 Group 111 1
ID 201 Fd OPS Group 201 50
*ID: 203 Group 203 2
ID 207 FD Group 207 7
*ID: 217 Group 217 4
Police Activ 218 Group 218 1
ID 219>33.96 Group 219 0
*ID: 220 Group 220 0
ID 221>159.3 Group 221 0
*ID: 222 Group 222 3
*ID: 401 Group 401 139 Probably DPW
ID 503 Group 503 0
*ID 950 Group 950 1
*ID 951 Group 951 0
*ID 960 Group 960 0
*ID: 2512 Group 2512 16
Link>33.94 2513 Group 2513 16
ID 02522 Group 2522 0
*ID: 2525 Group 2525 2
*ID: 2526 Group 2526 1
*ID: 2540 Group 2540 0
Fire Disp 2591 Group 2591 0
Reply With Quote
  #71 (permalink)  
Old 05-09-2010, 2:08 PM
cg cg is offline
Member
  Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 1,997
Default

I think the FD low band is the same PL as Simsbury FD. Since you are now hearing the signal off the Waterford tower, I would guess it is fron them.
Reply With Quote
  #72 (permalink)  
Old 05-09-2010, 9:11 PM
Member
  Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Washington DC
Posts: 1,935
Default P25 trunked PS systems...

Used to be that the main problem with new P25 trunked systems was that the community didn't have the money to build the entire system as designed, so they'd build part of it, such as two instead of four towers, and then everyone got mad when the coverage was crappy. You don't hear much about that kind of problem any more so maybe the vendors got honest and came clean by telling the buyers to either buy the whole thing or save up until they could afford to buy the whole thing.

Don't ever believe what you read about P25 systems problems in the news media. They always get it wrong because almost all of the reporters and editors haven't a clue about the various factors in the systems that can cause problems. Best to just go by the headline and leave it at that ("Village has problem with new radio system.") I read a story from York PA in which the reporter wrote that the interoperability problems between the city and county were caused by "bandwidth." Whatever the causes of the problems, one of them certainly wasn't bandwidth. A lack of coordination and proper programming, probably, but maybe those things don't sound as jazzy in a news story as "bandwidth."

It would seem that, after seeing so many P25 systems be sold and installed, that the more money that's poured into the project up front the fewer problems will occur as the system gets going. The system must be built as designed, and the design should be done by a systems consultant, not by the local fire chief and radio dealer's local engineer. These latter two parties have a place in the scheme, but it involves review and approval after the basic system is designed and budgeted. Oftentimes no funds are provided for personnel training whatsoever, and everyone expects that the field personnel will somehow magically know how to use the new portable radios as soon as the radios are handed out. Personnel have to go to classes to learn this stuff, if only for the reason that their lives may depend on knowing how to use the system, and this means time off from regular duties, perhaps even overtime pay, but it's an absolute necessity if the system is going to work. Remember that the system may be working fine, but if the dispatchers and field personnel don't know how it works inside and out the system is virtually worthless.

One last thing. NFPA has made a strong recommendation that fireground communications be made using regular simplex (non-repeater) FM analog radio transmissions, but many departments are ignoring this advice despite the very good reasons for the recommendation. Some agencies are using their new digital repeater systems for fireground communications despite the lessons learned at the WTC on 9/11 as well as other events. It's a proven fact that digital voice communications sound distorted and can be useless when there is a lot of background noise. The digital signal works best with conversational level voice inputs, and when the users start raising their voices, or an air pack alarm is sounding on a firefighter's back, or a siren is wailing in the background the digital signal deteriorates instantly and the voice part is easily lost. A direct, analog, FM radio channel should be in use on all firegrounds at all times, and anyone who thinks that fireground comms work better when the digital signal has to find its way to the repeater and then back again to the command post at the site isn't considering the risks involved.

These are my personal thoughts after seeing so many people repeat the mistakes of others over the past five years or so, but also they're the result of seeing several agencies do it right and end up with systems that are virtually glitch free.
Reply With Quote
  #73 (permalink)  
Old 05-09-2010, 10:54 PM
w1haf's Avatar
Member
  Shack Photos
Shack photos
Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Waterford, CT.
Posts: 71
Default

Well said, I absolutely agree with your comments. Waterford is keeping a VHF analog fire ground system for just the reasons stated. You must separate dispatch and operations or you are just asking for trouble

Right now the poorer quality signals that are heard over the new system come from reception on the old frequencies being patched in. The scratchy tones and signals are from Tolland County on 33.94 which uses the same pl 179.9. The sooner they stop patching that frequency the better. They still need to tone alert on 33.94 due to all the pagers out there. That is all they should use that frequency for.

They have many patch groups and share them for police and fire. A good example is #217 which is a link to any New London frequency and is user selectable by the Dispatcher. The can bring up PD or FD as needed. They also have a link to East Lyme FD and PD, Montville FD, CSP, Millstone, and the Coast Guard. This was a well thought ought and planned 5 site interoperability system.

I agree that it is now up to training for the users to be able to use the system to its fullest abilities.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 7:15 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
All information here is Copyright 2012 by RadioReference.com LLC and Lindsay C. Blanton III.Ad Management by RedTyger
Copyright 2011 by RadioReference.com LLC Privacy Policy  |  Terms and Conditions