Denver EDACS-Sum Ting Going On

Status
Not open for further replies.

Thayne

Member
Joined
May 1, 2002
Messages
2,145
Don't know if it is intentional or a problem, but Denver EDACS has got good signal strength but no audio or stopping on any channels.
Thought maybe they are testing the P-25 but I don't know.. Some LE calls are on P-25 but I have not programmed any groups just Wildcards---
 

f0urtyfive

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Aug 6, 2011
Messages
146

Thayne

Member
Joined
May 1, 2002
Messages
2,145
Maybe it's the old GRE PSR 500 scanners I have - ha!

Me too; but thanks to both of you for catching it.

I did hear one of those blurbs on the P-25 but with me being too lazy to program the P-25 (Because I am thinking they may just flip the ENC on) I was just getting whichever wildcard randomly came in.
 

captaincraig44

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 19, 2003
Messages
812
Location
Arvada
Thought maybe they are testing the P-25 but I don't know.. Some LE calls are on P-25 but I have not programmed any groups just Wildcards---

I probably missed something. I know that Denver is eventually going to a P-25 system, but I was unaware of there being anything already up and running. Is this on the MARC system, or is there another system that is not in the DB yet?
 

abqscan

DataBase Administrator
Moderator
Joined
Dec 8, 2002
Messages
2,877
Location
AOA

captaincraig44

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 19, 2003
Messages
812
Location
Arvada
I figured that was it. I scanned over the MARC entry a few days ago and only saw the Denver City Services TGs, so I was unsure.

Gratzi!
 

Spitfire8520

I might be completely clueless! =)
Joined
Jun 29, 2009
Messages
1,969
Location
Colorado
I probably missed something. I know that Denver is eventually going to a P-25 system, but I was unaware of there being anything already up and running. Is this on the MARC system, or is there another system that is not in the DB yet?

They have been testing on MARC for several years and exclusively use Site 6-006 Mount Morrison (Denver). There is a gateway in place for voice traffic between EDACS and MARC.

You can likely hear several of the DPD dispatch TGs active on the system when the EEB guys and some of the City Services guys listen in. A good number of City Services are actually already on MARC, and many of their TGs are in the DB. It is important to note that Denver Public Safety does not use P25 yet and will not always be heard on P25. EDACS is still the most reliable way to monitor public safety.

A good TG reference for DPD was created by Dan a bit ago and can be seen below.

EDACS TG..........P25 TG..........TG Name

529 (04-021)..........35072..........DPD D1 Dispatch
545 (04-041)..........35083..........DPD D2 Dispatch
561 (04-061)..........35094..........DPD D3 Dispatch
577 (04-081)..........35105..........DPD D4 Dispatch
593 (04-101)..........35116..........DPD D5 Dispatch
609 (04-121)..........35127..........DPD D6 Dispatch

In addition, TG 35225 is the DPD Citywide All Call Simulcast (EDACS TG 512 / 04-000).

Any of the TGs in the 35000 range are a Denver TG of some kind.
 
Last edited:

captaincraig44

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 19, 2003
Messages
812
Location
Arvada
Good info. Could we add this along with a note about EDACS being primary to the MARC system for easy reference?
 

K0RUSinCO

Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2016
Messages
42
Location
Littleton, CO
Good info. Could we add this along with a note about EDACS being primary to the MARC system for easy reference?

I identified quite a lot of the P25 groups earlier in the year by programming a list with just the one MARC site and the Public Services EDACS system and doing a lot of skipping back and forth to identify linked talkgroups. At the time I suggested that single MARC site should not really be considered part of the MARC system, as it's really just a new system that happens to be run by MARC for Denver. Didn't get traction on that, though.

I personally believe it should be in the database as a standalone trunk system called "City of Denver P25" or something to that effect, which will likely later have sites added to it as the main EDACS system is wound down.
 

Steve2003

Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
778
Location
Colorado
They are actually all one system, if you use Pro96Com you will see all the patches happening regardless of which site you are parked on (i.e. you will see Denver Patches on the Arvada site and Arvada patches on the Denver site).

They also have the same SystemID and WACN.

I identified quite a lot of the P25 groups earlier in the year by programming a list with just the one MARC site and the Public Services EDACS system and doing a lot of skipping back and forth to identify linked talkgroups. At the time I suggested that single MARC site should not really be considered part of the MARC system, as it's really just a new system that happens to be run by MARC for Denver. Didn't get traction on that, though.

I personally believe it should be in the database as a standalone trunk system called "City of Denver P25" or something to that effect, which will likely later have sites added to it as the main EDACS system is wound down.
 

N0GTG

Scanner programmer since 1997
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Apr 4, 2003
Messages
401
Location
Denver, Colorado
And when Denver switches to the P25 simulcast system from EDACS, we'll probably have the multipath distortion problem that exists now in Aurora. Signals arriving from multiple sites at slightly different times are not decoded properly, and can become unreadable. Supposedly scanner manufacturers are working on the problem, but it looks like that may be a big firmware upgrade to correct. Apparently commercial radios ($$$) are able to handle this, but so far scanners ($) are struggling.

Simulcast analog and simulcast digital are two different things with consumer grade scanners. See the Wiki page: Simulcast digital distortion - The RadioReference Wiki
 

K0RUSinCO

Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2016
Messages
42
Location
Littleton, CO
They also have the same SystemID and WACN.

Okay, I guess that's fair then - I'm speaking more of what a human sees and less of the technical SystemID part.

In practice, no non-Denver units are allowed to use the Denver site, or vice-versa as far as I'm aware. At minimum, I think there should be a note and link on the Denver County page much like the Denver Public Safety one, because if there aren't already agencies no longer using the Public Services EDACS system and only on P25, I'm sure there will be soon. And the uninitiated won't know to find them on MARC.

So, does that mean that Denver is likely planning to completely outsource their trunk system to MARC in the future?
 

Steve2003

Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
778
Location
Colorado
I'm thinking they are mainly restricting access on their site until they can get everyone switched over. Right now all the frequencies on their MARC site are being pulled off of their EDACS systems (seems to change up quite a bit as to which EDACS system they are using them from).

Once they get everyone migrated over to P25 and they have more frequencies to allocate that could change.

If this contract was executed to build the new Table Mountain site, then Denver owns all the equipment up there which all the other agencies but them have been using:

https://www.denvergov.org/sirepub/cache/2/qwi4dm45ar4k0h45qsqyhiux/78030608302016042813151.PDF

Okay, I guess that's fair then - I'm speaking more of what a human sees and less of the technical SystemID part.

In practice, no non-Denver units are allowed to use the Denver site, or vice-versa as far as I'm aware. At minimum, I think there should be a note and link on the Denver County page much like the Denver Public Safety one, because if there aren't already agencies no longer using the Public Services EDACS system and only on P25, I'm sure there will be soon. And the uninitiated won't know to find them on MARC.

So, does that mean that Denver is likely planning to completely outsource their trunk system to MARC in the future?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top