Ohio MARCS - IP (Project 25 System) - Page 22

Sportster77 · #**421** (**permalink**) 10-01-2012, 8:59 PM

Ed

I know that, that is why I posted the info.
They were doing a drill for getting air sample readings from around the power plant and dealing with the EOC in Kirtland. There may be some more activity tommorow from what I could gather as they were finishing up today around 4:00pm.
I was headed from a customer in P'ville back to our shop in Wickliffe and it was coming up on the wildcard I have in my PSR 800.

Ed_Azalea · #**422** (**permalink**) 10-01-2012, 10:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sportster77

Ed

I know that, that is why I posted the info.
.

OK got it. The 4 digit number doesn't match up with the P25 system numbers and is out of place in the regular MARCS system. So my "statement" was more rhetorical than anything.

eorange · #**423** (**permalink**) 10-02-2012, 7:01 AM

Just got my PSR-500 up to date with the Cuyahoga and Lake Co sites. So about the talkgroups: are Lake Co. TGs just supposed to be associated with the Lake Co. site, and same for Cuyahoga TGs?

I ask because...I have a System defined with just the Cuyahoga site, and I'm hearing some Lake Co. TGs on there. I realize this could be due to affiliation, but I'm wondering how the TGs and Sites are supposed to be organized and associated.

mtindor · #**424** (**permalink**) 10-02-2012, 9:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eorange

Just got my PSR-500 up to date with the Cuyahoga and Lake Co sites. So about the talkgroups: are Lake Co. TGs just supposed to be associated with the Lake Co. site, and same for Cuyahoga TGs?

I ask because...I have a System defined with just the Cuyahoga site, and I'm hearing some Lake Co. TGs on there. I realize this could be due to affiliation, but I'm wondering how the TGs and Sites are supposed to be organized and associated.

Unless specifically prohibited by some internal protocol, I think pretty much all of those agencies are free to / capable of roaming around. The only thing that would stop them from doing so is if the admins determined that the particular agency is not to have roaming privileges.

I'd guess that, at least for those agencies operate on the border of one of the counties, they will likely be able to freely roam into the other county and thus may be heard on either any of the sites.

So to answer your question -- You shouldn't assume that Lake Co TGs will _only_ be heard on the Lake Co simulcast sites. Same with Geauga / Cuyahoga. I think you could only safely assume that _most_ of Lake Co traffic will be on the Lake Co simulcast.

Mike

eorange · #**425** (**permalink**) 10-02-2012, 9:49 AM

Sounds reasonable & kinda what I suspected. This changes the way I listen a little bit.

"In the past", I had the Lake Co. and Geauga Co. trunked systems and TGs in separate scanlists, so I could listen to either/or. And, always used a wildcard to pick up any new TGs.

Now...this will make new TG hunting for, say, Lake Co, a little more challenging. The wildcard will now be picking up ANY new TG, not just that for Lake Co.

Not a showstopper, but clouds things a bit. Guess this comes with the territory for multi-county trunked systems.

OHIOSCAN · #**426** (**permalink**) 10-02-2012, 9:12 PM

774.78125 replaced by 774.53125
766.01875 replaced by 765.97125

Mike

Ed_Azalea · #**427** (**permalink**) 10-02-2012, 9:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OHIOSCAN

774.78125 replaced by 774.53125
766.01875 replaced by 765.97125

Mike

Where did 766.01875 come from? I don't see that in the RRDB list.
~~~~
Also the scanner (996) won't take 765.97125. Makes it 765.9700.

OHIOSCAN · #**428** (**permalink**) 10-02-2012, 9:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ed_Azalea

Where did 766.01875 come from? I don't see that in the RRDB list.
~~~~
Also the scanner (996) won't take 765.97125. Makes it 765.9700.

766.01875 Been active for awhile out this way

Mike

Sportster77 · #**429** (**permalink**) 10-02-2012, 10:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ed_Azalea

OK got it. The 4 digit number doesn't match up with the P25 system numbers and is out of place in the regular MARCS system. So my "statement" was more rhetorical than anything.

I wonder if it was a Fed, NRC, or HSD TG installed for temp use during the drill?

Ed_Azalea · #**430** (**permalink**) 10-03-2012, 10:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Unit6817

After a few delays, the official start date for the usage of this system by Solon PD/FD and Chagrin FD/PD is October 3, 0900

Well that didn't seem to happen. More delays I guess.

Unit6817 · #**431** (**permalink**) 10-03-2012, 11:07 AM

No it did not, shooting for next Wednesday10/10

GHF · #**432** (**permalink**) 10-03-2012, 2:36 PM

In my travels I have noted that the New Lake System TG's can only be heard if the mobile is within the hearing distance of the New Marcs system.

In other words if a Lake County TG on the Cuy System is not with-in the range you will not hear. (out of range)

Seems to be the same for the Cuy County TG's on the Lake System.

So.....If you live in Parma you will more than likely not hear the New Lake County System unless you have programed the Control Chanels for the New Lake System and can hear the Control Channel.

mtindor · #**433** (**permalink**) 10-03-2012, 2:38 PM

Hmm, somebody posted [and then somebody (else?) deleted] a message containing an interesting MARCS announcement about the zone controllers and rebanding in October - from the ohioapco site.

So what gives?

Mike

GHF · #**434** (**permalink**) 10-03-2012, 2:48 PM

Pd bentleyville , chargrin falls, orange and woodmere

can anyone confirm.

Ed_Azalea · #**435** (**permalink**) 10-03-2012, 2:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mtindor

Hmm, somebody posted [and then somebody (else?) deleted] a message containing an interesting MARCS announcement about the zone controllers and rebanding in October - from the ohioapco site.

So what gives?

Mike

Got moved out of the MARCS IP to Ohio MARCS rebanding outage

Ed_Azalea · #**436** (**permalink**) 10-03-2012, 2:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GHF

Pd bentleyville , chargrin falls, orange and woodmere

can anyone confirm.

I see hits on that and 14494 and 14498 but can't confirm anything but testing.

See my post above - 11:18 AM and the response.

mtindor · #**437** (**permalink**) 10-03-2012, 3:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ed_Azalea

Got moved out of the MARCS IP to Ohio MARCS rebanding outage

Thanks, Ed!

Mike

budevans · #**438** (**permalink**) 10-03-2012, 6:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ed_Azalea

I see hits on that and 14494 and 14498 but can't confirm anything but testing.

See my post above - 11:18 AM and the response.

On TG14494 at 6:50 pm I heard back to back dispatches to Chagrin Medic and Orange Squad.

budevans · #**439** (**permalink**) 10-03-2012, 6:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ed_Azalea

Where did 766.01875 come from? I don't see that in the RRDB list.
~~~~
Also the scanner (996) won't take 765.97125. Makes it 765.9700.

Ed,

766.01875 has been in use since the first build out of the MARCS Cuyahoga system. It was an active control channel, but it was not being advertised by the system. Until just recently I was getting half of my CC hits on 766.01875 and the other half on 774.78125.

If you ran a program like Unitrunker and looked at the data from 774.78125 or 766.01875 you would not see 766.01875 listed as a control channel. Since it was not listed in the control channel data stream, 766.01875 was not listed in RR as a control channel .

Swipesy · #**440** (**permalink**) 10-03-2012, 7:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by budevans

On TG14494 at 6:50 pm I heard back to back dispatches to Chagrin Medic and Orange Squad.

I have been camped on 14494 since 6:00 PM this evening. I also am monitoring Chagrin's UHF band on another scanner at the same time. While I too have heard reference to Chagrin on the 11494 TG the traffic is not mirroring the UHF band at all. Not sure yet just what 14494 is all about but it definetly is FD/Med.

John