Last call for Pomona PD...

iepoker · #1 (**permalink**) 02-17-2006, 01:45 AM

Hey ya'll, just a heads up.

From a Pomona PD Officer today, the switch to Digital UHF trunking will be made in the next 2-3 weeks...

Get your VHF-Hi ya-ya's in while you can.

swest90 · #2 (**permalink**) 02-17-2006, 02:31 AM

Well this should be interesting, My whole setup is going to have to change!

Shawn

FireMan16 · #3 (**permalink**) 02-17-2006, 05:57 AM

Do we have the Freqs and the Talkgroups yet ? and are they joining on the ICIS system

brandon · #4 (**permalink**) 02-17-2006, 11:55 AM

Back in December I heard a UHF system being tested. The control channel was on 470.100.

I've listened to Pomona 155.550 from a good receiver in Corona which can hear the mobiles and I thought it sounded very good. I really like the sound of simplex. It's so clean.

But it will be nice to finally hear the mobiles from further away though. Has it been cofirmed they will be using P25 or will it be analog like Burbank PD?

iepoker · #5 (**permalink**) 02-17-2006, 06:10 PM

Being that I am strictly an analoger (as we have discussed, my home faces the Pomona Valley from about 1500 feet...), so I am not equipped to scan their new system unless I go buy a new scanner.

With that said, I know very little of the jargon associated with digital trunking. I do know that they are part of ICIS, and I do NOT know if they will be encrypted.

They had a motor unit go down yesterday, and from his level on the ground he could not be heard by the dispatcher... a nearby unit heard his call for help and advised dispatch... from what I understand it, he would still be laying there with the 'new' radio in his hand if they were not on simplex.

Pomona PD will be using 2 of the 3 transmitter sites they currently use, which are going to be the Resevoir around the corner from my house (Near Phillips Ranch and Hwy 60) as well as a resevoir that sits near the Fairplex (Near I10 and Fairplex drive, in the Ganesha Hills) Both sites are about 1500 feet. They will no longer be using the transmitter on top of the roof of the courthouse.

...as I have discussed, these guys are the last of the simplex mohicans that I can really monitor from my 'site' and I am really going to be bummed out by hearing repeater crap.

Any advice of which new scanner I should look at to go digital?

FireMan16 · #6 (**permalink**) 02-17-2006, 06:38 PM

I guess now we will here both sides of the convesation,instead being in the city

kd6ecz · #7 (**permalink**) 02-17-2006, 09:11 PM

The RR Database lists 470.025, 470.050, 470.075, and 470.100 being licensed to the City of Pomona. Is it safe to assume these are the frequencies for their new trunked system?

swest90 · #8 (**permalink**) 02-18-2006, 12:36 AM

They were doing testing on all four of those frequencies in the past yes. But until the system come online we wont know for certain. I think its kinda strange that they will be switching over when I havent even heard them doing much voice testing and I havent heard any p25 testing. Maybe I havent caught the testing at the right time. I expected the new system to be up and patched long before they did any switchover, but what do I know!

If they swith over, and go p25 before you get a digital scanner, I will setup a online feed from my 796.

Shawn

iepoker · #9 (**permalink**) 02-18-2006, 04:34 PM

If P25 means digital, then it will be P25. At least, that is what a beat cop told me. He said it was going to be a UHF digital trunked system... I was surprised that he knew that much, they must be teaching them about it, and how to use it.

...wouldnt it be ironic if they went from the most accessible type of system (VHF Hi, with 100 watt mobiles) to the most secure, if they went w/ full time encryption?

iepoker · #10 (**permalink**) 02-20-2006, 01:39 AM

Upon closer scrutiny of the FCC records, they will be having three transmitter sites.

The resevoir near Phillips Ranch & the 60, on top of the courthouse and a NEW site near the Kellog hill interchange of the 57 & the 10. The CHP and a bunch of cell sites are already at this site, and I am dumbfounded why they would not have just put it on johnstone... but I digress.

Now... which digi scanner to buy....

KMA367 · #11 (**permalink**) 02-20-2006, 02:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FireMan16

Do we have the Freqs and the Talkgroups yet ? and are they joining on the ICIS system

Yes, Pomona is apparently a full member of ICIS.

At http://www.westerncity.com/index.jsp...t=&story=24564 it says, "The cities of Torrance, Culver City, Beverly Hills, Burbank, Glendale, Montebello and Pomona have formed a joint powers authority to operate the system. Several other entities are utilizing the network as subscriber agencies..."

Also see http://pomona.vpi.net/files/city_cle...03-website.pdf
and
http://www.ci.pomona.ca.us/press_rel...etails.php?185

Harry / N6URU

KMA367 · #12 (**permalink**) 02-20-2006, 03:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by iepoker

Upon closer scrutiny of the FCC records, they will be having three transmitter sites.

The resevoir near Phillips Ranch & the 60, on top of the courthouse and a NEW site near the Kellog hill interchange of the 57 & the 10. The CHP and a bunch of cell sites are already at this site, and I am dumbfounded why they would not have just put it on johnstone... but I digress.

Yea. In November Pomona notified the FCC that they were deleting the planned repeater sites at Ganesha Hill Reservoir (34-01-04.0 N, 117-46-33.2 W), and at 636 W Monterey (34-03-36.0 N, 117-45-39.2 W).

They've had so many problems, especially financial, getting this UHF system off the ground; the original FCC license was issued six years ago - 2/14/2000.

Harry

iepoker · #13 (**permalink**) 02-20-2006, 11:46 PM

Yeah, I know the town has a lot of financial troubles. I live in Chino Hills, but as I have stated, my backyard faces the city of Pomona from about 1500 feet... so I feel linked to Pomona somehow... even though I prefer my low-crime neighboorhood. You should see the PD headquarters... it is a dark, dank building that needs a lot more work than there amazingly good (but albeit, non-interoperable) VHF system

I am not surprised to see them can the site in Ganesha and move it over to Kellog. The Ganesha site really only served as an HT coverage site for the fair, and some of the far northern parts of town shadowed from Resevoir 12's coverage. The Ganesha site (Resevoir 4) probably would cover the fair better. I suppose Kellog is now going to pick up stuff at the fair, although they never used the site before, possibly for a good reason.

Now, as I mused earlier, Johnstone Peak would provide not only SUPERB coverage to the north part of town, but ICIS-wise it would surely fill in a lot of gaps in the East San Gabe valley (Azuza, Covina, Glendora etc.) Those cites are all on aging VHF-Hi systems, and would certainly seem to be candidates for ICIS. The only thing I would think of Johnstone being nixed is the blasting of signals far beyond the area of intended coverage, which the FCC hates.

Lets just say that if I was doing the system for Pomona, there would be a site on Johnstone(north of town ~2500 feet), a site at Resevoir 12 (near my house, about 1500 feet directly overlooking Pomona, south of town.) and possibly a voting site on top of the court house... but if they move headquarters to the south side of town where they have been talking about, then they would not need the site on the roof of the court... its only use was to provide HT coverage inside the PD and court.

Lastly, anyone reading these posts and wondering "Who the hell cares about podunk little Pomona"... the towns PD rips! This town has just the right balance of crime, dope, gangs and whores to keep these guys running all night long. Honestly, and no offense to the esteemed Mr Marnell, I would prefer to listen to them on a good night than LAPD anytime. From my elevation, I really get to hear everthing... stuff I am sure they WONT do once they are on a repeater... real loose talk from the field units... I will miss it.

iepoker · #14 (**permalink**) 02-22-2006, 08:01 PM

Today, on whim, I decided to call up the City of Pomona radio techs to asertain (prior to spending 500 smackers on a digital scanner) if they would be encrypted... I am now MORE confused then i was before calling him.

Acording to this tech, the system will go online 'within the month of March'. Upon asking him if it would be encrypted, he asked who I was yada yada... when he learned I was just John Q Public, he stated the following:

"Our system will be secure" OK, does that mean encrypted. "No, it is not called encryption, it is called secure... and no scanner will be able to follow us." Well, what about digital scanners? "No scannner will be able to follow us." Oh, so it will be encrypted... like LAPD tac channels. "Our tac channels will be encrypted as well as secure."

So, this guy seemed to intimate (numerous times) that no scanner would follow the new system. His other comment was more poignant, and ottered with bravado not usually encased within a radio tech: "At least you were smart enough to ask about it before you bought."

So... my question to ya'll is simple: Is this guy pulling my leg? If a system is not encrypted, but digital, the PRO96 can monitor it... right? So what the hell does all this mean, and if monitoring the Pomona cops was my main reason for wanting to go digital... should I can that idea?

swest90 · #15 (**permalink**) 02-22-2006, 09:28 PM

Just wait until the system is online and they begin to use it, as of now I havent even heard voice testing. Its possible that they could use encryption on all of the PD talk groups like Orange County. The majority of the PD groups on the ICIS system are not encrypted. But the individual cities have control over their sites, so they can encrypt what ever, when ever they decide its appropriate. I did notice the radio bid sheet, and it was required that the radios had the encryption modules. It would be a sure be a shame for us if they decided to encrypt all of their traffic. 99% of the sensitive stuff (Detectives, Narcotics, Task Force, chit-chat) goes over nextel anyway and has for years with dept issued phones. Best bet is just to take a wait and see approach, I wouldnt buy anything yet.

I also noticed the power rating from the base will now be 45watts, with the 35watt mobiles. I hope its not going to be a situation like Ontario where they can only get about 7 miles west (IS 10 near White) outside their city before they lose radio coverage. Several weeks ago Pomona was looking for a kidnapping victim (which turned out to be a fake call) and the units could easily be heard by both dispatch and my roof antenna when they were in El Monte. And I have heard several pursuits that have gone far east or south down the 15 freeway almost to San Diego county before getting cut off. Overall I think the current VHF system has performed very well for them. Its a shame they never added another voting site or two to eliminate the well known HT dropout zones. But it doesnt much matter now.

Hope for the best,
Shawn

KMA367 · #16 (**permalink**) 02-22-2006, 09:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by iepoker

So... my question to ya'll is simple: Is this guy pulling my leg? If a system is not encrypted, but digital, the PRO96 can monitor it... right? So what the hell does all this mean, and if monitoring the Pomona cops was my main reason for wanting to go digital... should I can that idea?

What he says doesn't really make any sense. It's hard to say exactly, but it could be that he's not authorized by his employer to give out any solid information, and he was just having a little fun with you. Or it could be that even he isn't familiar with what scanners can and can't do. I learned lots of neat goodies in my time with the cities I worked for, that I couldn't share with anyone. My paycheck was kinda important to me.

If I were you I'd just hold on until after Pomona's been on the air a little while and see how their system is set up. It could turn out that you'll be able to hear/follow them with what you have now, or that you WILL need a digital scanner, or even that it's all encrypted. At worst you may miss a couple days or weeks of hearing them.

They could open up analog to see that everything works, and then switch to digital, or who knows. Good try with calling the guy, though.

Harry

iepoker · #17 (**permalink**) 02-22-2006, 10:27 PM

HARRY: He has always been very helpful over my years of scanning... even confirming that their main tx/rx site for the high band system was practically in my backyard... then gave my locations of the other sites... but when i mentioned encryption, he did indeed clam up pretty good.

SHAWN: I did not know of any bad areas or problems with the system other than it being old and non-interoperable. The cops all like the system they are on, but the field guys I talk to are indeed interested in the new system because its... well, new.

swest90 · #18 (**permalink**) 03-22-2006, 06:01 PM

At 9:30 this morning they fired it up and a control channel has been rotating on 470.0250 and 470.1000. Have only seen one tg come up for a brief second but no voice. Just a heads up to those interested. Time to get trunker going...

Shawn

brandon · #19 (**permalink**) 03-22-2006, 06:11 PM

Sweet! Thanks for the heads up. I know in December the control channel signal came in really good even at my crappy radio location

Look forward to testing trunker on it this evening.

karldotcom · #20 (**permalink**) 03-22-2006, 07:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by iepoker

If a system is not encrypted, but digital, the PRO96 can monitor it... right? So what the hell does all this mean, and if monitoring the Pomona cops was my main reason for wanting to go digital... should I can that idea?

I would definitely wait to see how the system plays out before you upgrade to a $500 scanner. In other news, I was in Oxnard last Saturday and was picking up Burbank and Glendale TGs with better reception that in Burbank! Even the digital groups! The Oat Mtn repeater is pointed towards Ventura County and Santa Clarita (to officers homes?)