• Effective immediately we will be deleting, without notice, any negative threads or posts that deal with the use of encryption and streaming of scanner audio.

    We've noticed a huge increase in rants and negative posts that revolve around agencies going to encryption due to the broadcasting of scanner audio on the internet. It's now worn out and continues to be the same recycled rants. These rants hijack the threads and derail the conversation. They no longer have a place anywhere on this forum other than in the designated threads in the Rants forum in the Tavern.

    If you violate these guidelines your post will be deleted without notice and an infraction will be issued. We are not against discussion of this issue. You just need to do it in the right place. For example:
    https://forums.radioreference.com/rants/224104-official-thread-live-audio-feeds-scanners-wait-encryption.html

New System for Bryan Utilities?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
651
Location
Stinkadena, TX
#2
I find the fact that the license is an STA a little bit odd, though.
Very typical for large-scale systems - it lets them get on the air faster. 12 channels across 6 sites is no small system! I notice also that several frequencies are former Houston channels or directly adjacent... good to see those being freed up for reuse in the region.

Kind of sad tho since BTU was one of the last big low band users in the region.
 

mfn002

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Apr 26, 2006
Messages
2,117
Location
Bryan, Texas
#3
Very typical for large-scale systems - it lets them get on the air faster. 12 channels across 6 sites is no small system! I notice also that several frequencies are former Houston channels or directly adjacent... good to see those being freed up for reuse in the region.

Kind of sad tho since BTU was one of the last big low band users in the region.
I don't know about BTU--they've been fairly resistant about giving up 48.28. I once asked a lineman who was working behind my house about it, and he said the reason was primarily because they got great coverage in the basement of City Hall. Keep in mind that BTU is actually our electric company.

I'm not sure about what will happen to the old Brazos County system. Bryan Utilities (Water/Wastewater, Transportation, Solid Waste and Environmental Services) was the last user of the system. It's a little over ten years old now, so I suspect it has reached the end of its life. I'm kind of baffled as to why they didn't go on TxWARN, since they have TGs for them on that system.

Now, I just have to contend with the unreliable LCN finder on my 536HP (I once left it on a very active two-channel CAP+ system for over 6 hours and it only found 1 of the 2 LCNs).
 

mfn002

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Apr 26, 2006
Messages
2,117
Location
Bryan, Texas
#5
Joined
Jun 19, 2009
Messages
79
Location
Mesquite TX
#6
Bryan Utilities (Water/Wastewater, Transportation, Solid Waste and Environmental Services) was the last user of the system. It's a little over ten years old now, so I suspect it has reached the end of its life. I'm kind of baffled as to why they didn't go on TxWARN, since they have TGs for them on that system.

Might be wanting total control.

Might be the hardware costs between P25 subscriber units vs TRBO.



In my area, they will have kittens when they realize the cost of outfitting all the utilities trucks with P25 vs the VHF analog conventional stuff they are using.
 

mfn002

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Apr 26, 2006
Messages
2,117
Location
Bryan, Texas
#7
Might be wanting total control.

Might be the hardware costs between P25 subscriber units vs TRBO.



In my area, they will have kittens when they realize the cost of outfitting all the utilities trucks with P25 vs the VHF analog conventional stuff they are using.
I suspect the ability to exercise total control of the system is more likely behind this.
 

mfn002

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Apr 26, 2006
Messages
2,117
Location
Bryan, Texas
#8
Interesting update:

Apparently, most of Public Works (except Sanitation and Environmental Services) are back where they were 12 or so years ago: using cell phones.
 
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
651
Location
Stinkadena, TX
#9
Interesting update:

Apparently, most of Public Works (except Sanitation and Environmental Services) are back where they were 12 or so years ago: using cell phones.
Monthly recurring costs on TxWARN could be a driving issue as well. IIRC they increased their per-radio rate substantially last year... from $12.75 to something like $41.
 

mfn002

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Apr 26, 2006
Messages
2,117
Location
Bryan, Texas
#10
That might explain it. Anyway, I just discovered that BTU is now on the system (I had entered one of the frequencies for the Sandy Point Road site as a conventional channel and heard it). Still no joy with the LCN finder on the site, though.

I just discovered that it is actually a single-channel DMR system, and not CAP+. That explains why the LCN finder isn't working.
 
Last edited:

mfn002

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Apr 26, 2006
Messages
2,117
Location
Bryan, Texas
#11
So far, BTU (TGID 11) has been the only user of the system. All sites appear to be Slot 1/Color Code 5. I'm still monitoring it as a single-channel system (which works fine for some reason).

Quick update: I just figured out that my TYT MD-380 can monitor this system, but my XPR5550 can't. Strange.
 
Last edited:

mfn002

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Apr 26, 2006
Messages
2,117
Location
Bryan, Texas
#12
Quick update: I just figured out that my TYT MD-380 can monitor this system, but my XPR5550 can't. Strange.
Scrap that comment about my XPR5550. I forgot to assign a group list.

The system has the data blips common with CAP+ systems but seems to be acting like a single-channel system.
 
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
651
Location
Stinkadena, TX
#13
IP Site Connect systems behave the same way. I would say listen to the ham repeater for the same thing, but it might not ever sit idle enough for you to hear the idle bursts.
 

mfn002

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Apr 26, 2006
Messages
2,117
Location
Bryan, Texas
#14
IP Site Connect systems behave the same way. I would say listen to the ham repeater for the same thing, but it might not ever sit idle enough for you to hear the idle bursts.
I'm still trying to figure out why one site (Sand Point Road) has over twice the number of frequencies than the other sites have. Is this typical of IP Site Connect systems?

By "ham repeater" are you talking about the local DMR-MARC System repeater around here? If so, I've never picked up an idle burst out of that (same goes for the Rudder Theater system). Both of those tend to be quiet for long stretches of time, especially late at night.
 

mfn002

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Apr 26, 2006
Messages
2,117
Location
Bryan, Texas
#16
I'm considering submitting this system to the DB. How should I submit it? Should I say it is a single-frequency system or something else? I'm concerned that if I submit it as a single-frequency system, the extra frequencies in each site might cause some confusion.
 

mfn002

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Apr 26, 2006
Messages
2,117
Location
Bryan, Texas
#17
I recently snagged a new TGID (12). Unfortunately, I was unable to identify who was using it because it was just a brief keyup and there was no voice. I did note that it was a slot 2 TG, and not slot 1 like the other.
 

mfn002

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Apr 26, 2006
Messages
2,117
Location
Bryan, Texas
#18
Can anyone pitch in here to answer some of my questions?

An interesting observation I've come across...
It appears that only three (453.050, 453.400 and 460.150) of the five frequencies on the Sandy Point Road site have data blips. It seems that 453.05 and 460.15 have the data blips most frequently, while 453.40 seems to put one out every few minutes or so. Does this mean anything?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top