RadioReference on Facebook   RadioReference on Twitter   RadioReference Blog
 

Go Back   The RadioReference.com Forums > Canada Radio Discussion Forums > Ontario


Ontario - Forum for discussing radio information in the province of Ontario.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #21 (permalink)  
Old 10-12-2018, 6:55 AM
Muxlow's Avatar
Member
  Shack Photos
Shack photos
Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Middlesex County
Posts: 1,257
Default

Iv also herd from some medics in a few regions that they were told last year they are getting a new radio system and their channels will be encrypted so they can give more info over the air and not everyone can hear. Now does that mean that TAC/Hospital patch groups will be enc and the normal ems operations groups will be in the clear.. who knows!
__________________
Muxlow
..Yeah iv got some radios
Reply With Quote
Sponsored links
  #22 (permalink)  
Old 10-12-2018, 7:48 AM
Member
  Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Canada
Posts: 609
Default

Interesting but will have to wait and see. I really don't like Ford at all. I only just got back into scanning with a new scanner capable of DMR and now I read this. Its always cat a mouse it seems trying to keep up with the changes.
Reply With Quote
  #23 (permalink)  
Old 10-12-2018, 10:34 AM
Member
   
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Ottawa, Ont.
Posts: 2,873
Default

Was anyone listening to EMS just after the tornadoes, if so what was the problem? I assume that local activity would have been on Kinburn Site 7. With 7 VCs would that be an issue?

Fire on P25 was intensely busy for several hours, that's what I heard.

Media reports were than cell towers were losing battery backup after several hours; that is a known situation (or should have been predicted). Fleetnet sites should have backup power for longer than a few hours, possibly damage at site was a factor?

Dave
Reply With Quote
  #24 (permalink)  
Old 10-12-2018, 2:07 PM
Jammin_Jay's Avatar
Member
   
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Peterborough
Posts: 676
Default

I never really understood that about fleetnet, if one of towers could not be affiliated too because backup battery didnot work or was damaged, wouldnt the radios just affiliate with the next closest tower, if it can obtain the control channel. Perhaps fleetnet tower distances in relation to the radio contours need to be revamped or add extra towers. And perhaps this is one of the things being looked at for the new system

Last edited by Jammin_Jay; 10-12-2018 at 2:59 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #25 (permalink)  
Old 10-12-2018, 3:56 PM
Jay911's Avatar
Member
  Audio Feed Provider
Audio Feed Provider
Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Bragg Creek, Alberta
Posts: 8,992
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jammin_Jay View Post
I never really understood that about fleetnet, if one of towers could not be affiliated too because backup battery didnot work or was damaged, wouldnt the radios just affiliate with the next closest tower, if it can obtain the control channel. Perhaps fleetnet tower distances in relation to the radio contours need to be revamped or add extra towers. And perhaps this is one of the things being looked at for the new system
What you say is what should happen most of the time, depending on how tightly the towers' footprints overlap. I admit I don't know much about the infrastructure of ON Fleetnet, so I don't know if you can pick up multiple sites from one location.

A situation I experience much more often than sites going completely down is what is known as site trunking. In that situation, the site stays online, but the links that connect it to the rest of the network fail. The site itself can still be used for local communications within its footprint, but comms will not be shared across to/from other sites in the network.

I don't know if radios are designed to consider a site that is in Site Trunking "less favored" than a more distant fully operating site.
__________________
--j.
@Jay91150 and @RMESFire | http://www.rmesfire.org
Reply With Quote
Sponsored links
  #26 (permalink)  
Old 10-12-2018, 11:09 PM
IdleMonitor's Avatar
Member
  Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: The Ottawa Valley - Eastern Ontario
Posts: 2,133
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveH View Post
Was anyone listening to EMS just after the tornadoes, if so what was the problem? I assume that local activity would have been on Kinburn Site 7. With 7 VCs would that be an issue?

Fire on P25 was intensely busy for several hours, that's what I heard.

Media reports were than cell towers were losing battery backup after several hours; that is a known situation (or should have been predicted). Fleetnet sites should have backup power for longer than a few hours, possibly damage at site was a factor?

Dave
I was briefly listening via the Kinburn site.

EMS Tac 5 was quite busy. From a listener stand point. I didn't notice anything wrong. Comms sounded busy but yet all in control.

Nothing seemed out of the ordinary to me and this was a few hours after the tornado event. Stupid me didn't turn on Kinburn in my site list. So I didnt catch comms until around 7pm even though I had been listening to all emergency services since about 4pm.

But then again I'm just Joe public that listens to scanner sounds as background noise most of the time anyways.

Last edited by IdleMonitor; 10-12-2018 at 11:17 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #27 (permalink)  
Old 10-13-2018, 7:37 AM
MikeOxlong's Avatar
Forums Manager/Global DB Admin/Commie
  RadioReference Database Admininstrator
Database Admin
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Central Ontario
Posts: 10,199
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay911 View Post
I don't know if radios are designed to consider a site that is in Site Trunking "less favored" than a more distant fully operating site.

I believe the preference is to prefer a fully working site rather than a closer site that is crippled.
__________________
Mike.

Sorry but I don't accept PM's. Please use email instead.
Reply With Quote
  #28 (permalink)  
Old 10-13-2018, 9:12 PM
IdleMonitor's Avatar
Member
  Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: The Ottawa Valley - Eastern Ontario
Posts: 2,133
Default

Quite the map posted of all the current tower locations in this tweet. https://twitter.com/darylkramp/statu...507904/photo/1


Are they all listed in the database or are there some missing?
Reply With Quote
  #29 (permalink)  
Old 10-14-2018, 8:56 AM
Member
   
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Ottawa, Ont.
Posts: 2,873
Default

Not sure if Kinburn site went into site-trunking mode, or which if any scanners show that. I recall TREPORT
(when I used it more) emitted a loud`chirp when it detected site-trunking.

Did not occur at the time but PTAC (149.605) repeater is still active, and all I've heard
recently is radio checks, so it might have been used; although it's located downtown Ottawa.

As for Fleetnet site density and overlap, as a non-user, does not seem great around Kinburn/
Dunrobin, or anywhere for that matter. Nearest sites would be downtown Ottawa (6) and near
Kemptville (37). Adding traffic to those, which were no doubt busier than usual, doesn't
sound good.

Dave

Last edited by DaveH; 10-14-2018 at 9:01 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #30 (permalink)  
Old 10-14-2018, 11:27 AM
Member
  Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Arnprior, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 111
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tilt404 View Post
Interesting but will have to wait and see. I really don't like Ford at all. I only just got back into scanning with a new scanner capable of DMR and now I read this. Its always cat a mouse it seems trying to keep up with the changes.
You realize that they were probably going to replace Fleetnet and encrypt everything regardless of who is premier in this province?

It doesn't matter who the politicians are. The state doesn't want you listening to them.
__________________
Uniden BCD325P2 / BCD996P2 / BCD996T / BC125AT
Reply With Quote
  #31 (permalink)  
Old 10-14-2018, 3:32 PM
EJB's Avatar
EJB EJB is offline
Member
   
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Downtown Hamilton
Posts: 3,317
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Forts View Post
It's a no-brainer that OPP will be fully encrypted, and from what I've heard EMS will be too. Beyond that it's anyones guess. And Fleetnet went into service around what.... 2002 or so? So it's definitely due for an upgrade. It'll also be interesting to see if it stays VHF... I've heard rumblings that it might be 700mhz.
I found this website pretty much when Fleetnet was already in the process of being rolled out in the fall of 2002. At the time I had very little interest in monitoring the OPP. I lived in midtown Toronto and pretty much my world was centered around that. No need to ever go to Hamilton, up north. Heck, I rarely travelled west of the 427 or east past Bayview Ave.

But I met a lady from Waterdown and we moved in together in 2003, she is now my wife. But whatever.. Im drifting.

I couldnt afford one of the new Uniden 250 scanners but I bought a 245 and hoped to monitor EMS activities. It was a slow and steady roll out. Hamilton CACC went on Fleetnet in the spring of 2005. London North EMS coverage went on Fleetnet for good in August 2006.

What Im getting at here is that it took a long time to get Fleetnet up and running to the capacity it was designed for. Over 5 years.

So we will still have stuff to monitor for years. I worked for a communications company for a few years in 2012-3. The VP was a inflated egomaniac and he said that he built Fleetnet when he worked with Bell Mobility back then. What he did say that I believed was that communication systems life span is like a cat. 15 years.

We are just past 15 years. Its gonna happen.

What I did take issue with Ford is that there were failures with the system. The way he said it that the failures were adding up and it was time for our front line civil servants to be able to do their jobs. I dont know if there was mention of the system restricting communications between the OPP, EMS, MNR, Etc but anyone who is a member here and has been for a good period of time knows that this is something that isnt a big deal. The ability for the agencies to communicate with each other is initially an issue but how many times have you heard an OPP unit call in to Orillia or London and ask the MTO road crews to salt a road, or plow. Thats just one example.

Fleetnet was commisioned before the Liberals got into power in 2003. Anyone savvy enough with an opened mind will know that Fleetnet was probably an initiative with the Harris Tories, heck, maybe it was the Rae NDP that got the ball rolling on this, I dont know,

16 Years of monitoring Fleetnet with radios and scanners and Trunk 88 since 2008. Failures? Have anyone here known Fleetnet to fail that often? Radios bonk out at time to time. There is maintenance but it has stood up to a good deal of whatever mother nature throws at it. Ice storm of 2013, tornadoes here and there. Cold snaps, snow events that dump 200 cm of snow just 50 km north of Toronto. It seems to me that Fleetnet was well designed and has served its purpose well.

If this really matters to anyone he or she will email or call Ford or your MPP. There job is to respond, they will respond. Ask him or her about the failures. Send them your logs on whatever software you use to monitor fleetnet.

The current terchnology is towards Encryption and Phase 2. But what do we know? Maybe in 2027 there will be some new standard of communications that we dont know anything about. Its silly then to speculate on something, its fun but honestly I doubt that 99% of us here could say that 'this will be this and that will be that" .

I hope to have 1 more scanner left in me. Im 50 years old, Im hoping that if I live long enough to see this new radio system in that there is something to listen to.
Reply With Quote
  #32 (permalink)  
Old 10-14-2018, 6:20 PM
Member
   
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 27
Default

This project was in the works long before the Ford Government. this project has been on the go for years, weve been doing work to identify needs of the new system for a few years now. It is exciting for me and where I work but sad that encryption is inevitable
Reply With Quote
  #33 (permalink)  
Old 10-14-2018, 7:08 PM
Air11's Avatar
Member
   
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Mississauga, Ontatrio Canada
Posts: 249
Default

Are you a tech with the system?

Sent from my SM-G950W using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #34 (permalink)  
Old 10-14-2018, 7:18 PM
Air11's Avatar
Member
   
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Mississauga, Ontatrio Canada
Posts: 249
Default

Hopefully we won't see what has been carried on In BC and Quebec. Hopefully Ontario can balance out the ENC.

However, my major question is what is the OPP going to do about their first available system?

How is Orrilia PCC going to get that message across by communicating with the tows?

If you ask me, they are a great asset to the OPP and vice versa with the tows. Nevermind the municipal police services. Twitter isnt going to cut it. Maybe enoght pressure from the tows and media might see a specific first available TG? simlair to the MAC freqs.

And I have spoken with a few Peel paramedics and that they will be going to a mobi CAD style system simlair to Toronto. York already has the toughbooks installed in their trucks. I wouldn't see a point if EMS was ENC. 90% of the call details arent going to be on the air anyway.





Sent from my SM-G950W using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #35 (permalink)  
Old 10-15-2018, 7:10 AM
Member
   
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 86
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Air11 View Post
However, my major question is what is the OPP going to do about their first available system?

How is Orrilia PCC going to get that message across by communicating with the tows?
This problem existed early on with FleetNet. The availability of Astro-capable scanners was limited. They created a series of Analog "media channels" that were available. The dispatcher would multi-select these channels as needed to make broadcasts along side the Ops talkgroup. In the early days these were heavily used, I haven't checked them lately. But they are likely still in use.

My expectation is this would continue, and again the outside users would be referred to the media channels. The problem was solved about 18 years ago.

Cheers,
SD.
Reply With Quote
  #36 (permalink)  
Old 10-16-2018, 7:15 AM
MikeOxlong's Avatar
Forums Manager/Global DB Admin/Commie
  RadioReference Database Admininstrator
Database Admin
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Central Ontario
Posts: 10,199
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mmisk View Post
"Crumbling Public Safety Radio Network" ?? Give me a break. How old is fleetnet?
Keep in mind that Premier Ford's speech was written by a Communications Department in the government. Their job is to make the government look like heros by trashing the old system and playing up the new system. These people have no idea what the current systems status is or what the new system will do.

We all know that Fleetnet is dated. Is it crumbling? Not likely.

Will the new system give first responders the interoperability they need? Not likely.

Do current provincial government agencies have interop problems? Nope. With the exception of the MNR lowband stuff, agencies already on Fleetnet already have interop capabilities. Does the MNR have problems communicating during forest fires? Not that I heard when listening to the fires up north this year. Heli-tacs, bird-dogs and ground crews communicated just fine on lowband.

If Fleetnet 2.0 had been rolled out about 10 years ago, perhaps municipalities would have migrated to it. By now, they've all replaced their systems with current technology and the chances of them moving to Fleetnet will only happen if someone gives them the equipment and airtime for free. Is that going to happen? Nope. I've heard that the government does not want non-government agencies on Fleetnet 2.0. That's why towns such as Guelph moved off of Fleetnet and rolled out their own system.

The presser was held in New Tec. Will New Tec FS move to Fleetnet 2.0? No way. They just rolled a new DMR system about a month ago.

This presser was nothing more than a show for the non-communications savvy public. The government looks like heros and we can sleep happy knowing our tax dollars are being well spent.
__________________
Mike.

Sorry but I don't accept PM's. Please use email instead.
Reply With Quote
  #37 (permalink)  
Old 10-18-2018, 5:19 AM
Member
   
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 27
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Air11

Are you a tech with the system?

no just a user.

Last edited by mciupa; 10-18-2018 at 6:18 AM.. Reason: Added question QUOTE for context
Reply With Quote
  #38 (permalink)  
Old 10-18-2018, 9:59 AM
Member
   
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 966
Default

The current system works fine. There are a few 'tweaks' and coverage holes need to be addressed. ENC is just a matter of adding in the modules. With the increased use of MPS (terminals) system voice traffic is already lower. Replacing the whole system would just be a waste of $$$.
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 3:49 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
All information here is Copyright 2012 by RadioReference.com LLC and Lindsay C. Blanton III.Ad Management by RedTyger
Copyright 2015 by RadioReference.com LLC Privacy Policy  |  Terms and Conditions