New NIFOG v 1.6.1

Status
Not open for further replies.

PACNWDude

Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2012
Messages
1,347
Thank you for posting the link. I still use this often foremergency response situations. My hard copy versions are older though, so some pen and ink changes are sometimes done.
 

ecps92

Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2002
Messages
14,428
Location
Taxachusetts
The Author generally has links to where you can download the various PDF versions
ie; Large 8 1/2 x 11, as well as pocket size for printing at your local Staples etc

https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/nifog/info


Thank you for posting the link. I still use this often foremergency response situations. My hard copy versions are older though, so some pen and ink changes are sometimes done.
 

BenScan

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
May 12, 2001
Messages
885
Location
D/FW
I see that the RadioReference database was updated. It appears now that some of the VHF National Interoperability channel names are now duplicated, because they can be either analog or P25. I wonder if I'm missing something. It seems like if you have two VCALL10 channels, but one is digital and one is analog, radio users might have some trouble making a connection with each other. Likewise, on the VTACs. Hopefully, I'm just missing something, and this is not a huge mistake on the planners' part. Can anyone please explain the change or correct me?

http://www.radioreference.com/apps/db/?aid=7742
 

ecps92

Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2002
Messages
14,428
Location
Taxachusetts
I don't recall P25 being allowed on the VHF/UHF ( Non-Federal VHF National Interoperability Channels ) Part 90 Interops, and can't find that info in the NIFOG either.

P25 is par


I see that the RadioReference database was updated. It appears now that some of the VHF National Interoperability channel names are now duplicated, because they can be either analog or P25. I wonder if I'm missing something. It seems like if you have two VCALL10 channels, but one is digital and one is analog, radio users might have some trouble making a connection with each other. Likewise, on the VTACs. Hopefully, I'm just missing something, and this is not a huge mistake on the planners' part. Can anyone please explain the change or correct me?

National Interoperability Scanner Frequencies and Radio Frequency Reference
 

nd5y

Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
11,299
Location
Wichita Falls, TX
I don't recall P25 being allowed on the VHF/UHF ( Non-Federal VHF National Interoperability Channels ) Part 90 Interops, and can't find that info in the NIFOG either.
I think it was in there several years ago and was removed in the past couple years.
Back about 15 years ago Texas decided all interop channels were going to be P25 by 2015 but ditched that idea around 2012. Maybe some other state is doing it now and somebody submitted their local plan.
 

ecps92

Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2002
Messages
14,428
Location
Taxachusetts
I was thinking that, as there are LOCAL Options (PL/DPL) in some states on what by Freq only would be the 800 Tacs, but need to be labeled with the Local Naming Conventions

I think it was in there several years ago and was removed in the past couple years.
Back about 15 years ago Texas decided all interop channels were going to be P25 by 2015 but ditched that idea around 2012. Maybe some other state is doing it now and somebody submitted their local plan.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top