7/800Mhz InterOp channels

west-pac

Member
Joined
Nov 13, 2004
Messages
199
Location
Hartford City, IN
Are the 7/800mhz Tac 90's and such used much? I've never had them programmed into a scanner. Just curious if they get much regular use, and who uses them.
 

dfoutch

Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2004
Messages
2,479
Location
Anderson, Indiana
I've listened to the freqs listed in NIFOG for years and don't remember hearing anything. (My memory is getting shorter by the hour) I would think something would have to happen to bring a bunch of gov agencies in that would use these freqs.
 

cubn

Member
Database Admin
Joined
Dec 22, 2004
Messages
1,267
Location
Marion/Johnson County, IN
In July I was hearing 8TAC91 simplex quite a bit from Greenwood. It even popped up via CloseCall on my scanner! Never did figure out what agency was using it.

I heard Greenwood Fire once tell units to go to 7TAC71D (I didn't hear the units--must have been out of range from me).
 

WA9JGB

Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2005
Messages
421
Location
Johnson County, Indiana
In July I was hearing 8TAC91 simplex quite a bit from Greenwood. It even popped up via CloseCall on my scanner! Never did figure out what agency was using it.

I heard Greenwood Fire once tell units to go to 7TAC71D (I didn't hear the units--must have been out of range from me).
They are used quite a bit in Johnson County. It’s CH 16 in all of the Fire radios.
 

milf

Careful, I CAN hear you!
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Dec 18, 2002
Messages
13,671
Location
Indianapolis, IN
We have it in all IPSC codeplug programmed units. The 700's are local on scene mutual aid, and not running thru repeaters, so you will need to be pretty close. The 800's are thru the repeaters, but ISP can and will go direct on them for traffic ops.
 

DiGiTaLD

Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2005
Messages
722
Routine use? Not through the repeaters. A while ago (years) some detail was run on one of the Indianapolis conventional repeaters, I think it might have been some DNR personnel using 8TAC91. But its been a long time since I've heard anything like that.

Back before we had valid IPSC radio IDs (when IPSC was out of radio IDs before they went P25) if I was working and had to contact ISP, I would do it on 8CALL90. I am probably the only person who ever did this on purpose though. Now I just use H-MA1.

Most public safety has no idea these channels even exist, much less what they are for. It has been my experience that firefighters are much more knowledgable about mutual aid and radio. Law enforcement just wants to stay in their own little box and relay everything through their dispatcher. SOPs and training have to change if any of these interoperability options are ever going to be realized to their potential.
 

milf

Careful, I CAN hear you!
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Dec 18, 2002
Messages
13,671
Location
Indianapolis, IN
Its gotten a lot better at least in the "Indy Metroplex" lol... Everyone seems to be finally halfway decently in the know as to using the Mutual Aid TG's, and how to flip over to everyone else's TG's, and at least the Administration folks know about the conventionals. Yes, even IDPW knows about the assigned 700 MHz "countywide" freq. There is still a good ways to go on training, but it is a HE** of a lot better now than it was just 5 years ago.
 

WA9JGB

Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2005
Messages
421
Location
Johnson County, Indiana
Routine use? Not through the repeaters. A while ago (years) some detail was run on one of the Indianapolis conventional repeaters, I think it might have been some DNR personnel using 8TAC91. But its been a long time since I've heard anything like that.

Back before we had valid IPSC radio IDs (when IPSC was out of radio IDs before they went P25) if I was working and had to contact ISP, I would do it on 8CALL90. I am probably the only person who ever did this on purpose though. Now I just use H-MA1.

Most public safety has no idea these channels even exist, much less what they are for. It has been my experience that firefighters are much more knowledgable about mutual aid and radio. Law enforcement just wants to stay in their own little box and relay everything through their dispatcher. SOPs and training have to change if any of these interoperability options are ever going to be realized to their potential.
Yes routine. As in daily, several departments use the 7TAC71D as a car 2 car chit chat channel. I will also add that some of the radios utilize a 67.0 PL tone. There are a few different code plugs out there that use different PL tones on the same frequencies. Also most of the County Sheriff VHF back up radios use the input frequency to the repeater as a chit chat simplex channel. There’s a few using 103.5, but most have 203.5 as the PL tone.
 

milf

Careful, I CAN hear you!
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Dec 18, 2002
Messages
13,671
Location
Indianapolis, IN
Analog on the 700's is violation of SO MANY proper use guidelines, and the NIFOG. But yes some agencies have to have their own little "special" things. This is why interop in a true SHTF event gets FU... 1 ch, with ten different uses and ten analogs, and a digital... No way in he** that everyone goes to the right one when they get told to go to ch X. "Which cha X???" "I'm on ch X, can you hear me? Anyone" etc etc etc
 

WA9JGB

Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2005
Messages
421
Location
Johnson County, Indiana
Analog on the 700's is violation of SO MANY proper use guidelines, and the NIFOG. But yes some agencies have to have their own little "special" things. This is why interop in a true SHTF event gets FU... 1 ch, with ten different uses and ten analogs, and a digital... No way in he** that everyone goes to the right one when they get told to go to ch X. "Which cha X???" "I'm on ch X, can you hear me? Anyone" etc etc etc
So true! Agreed 100%
 

Thunderknight

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 31, 2008
Messages
1,962
Location
Bletchley Park
Analog on the 700's is violation of SO MANY proper use guidelines, and the NIFOG.
And the FCC rules...(emphasis mine)
90.535
(a) All transmitters in the 769-775 MHz and 799-805 MHz frequency bands must use digital modulation. Mobile and portable transmitters may have analog modulation capability only as a secondary mode in addition to its primary digital mode except on the interoperability channels listed in § 90.531(b)(1). Analog modulation is prohibited on the interoperability channels. Mobile and portable transmitters that only operate on the low power channels designated in § 90.531(b)(3) and (4) are exempt from this digital modulation requirement.
 

w9sar

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Dec 27, 2002
Messages
13
INDOT in the Bloomington area uses the 8TAC frequencies quite frequently for flagging, etc. Sometimes simplex, but frequently repeater. I was always under the impression the mutual aid frequencies were just for that - mutual aid, but apparently no one cares. I also occasionally hear FDs running drills/training and then there are the occasional "unidentified" transmissions (seemingly chit-chat that I can't identify the users). I'm retired LE and before I retired, I remember seeing a memo or SOP that said the *-MA-1 TGs were to be reserved for "hot" dispatches like ATLs, impaired drivers, wanted/missing persons, etc., but I frequently hear multi-agency incidents being ran on *-MA-1 instead of *-MA-2, 3, or 4, which ties up *-MA-1. FDs in Monroe Co. are notorious for using J-MA-1 for multi-FD incidents, even intra-county ones. Why tie up J-MA-1 when all FDs in the county have access to the five county fire ops TGs?
 

DiGiTaLD

Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2005
Messages
722
INDOT in the Bloomington area uses the 8TAC frequencies quite frequently for flagging, etc. Sometimes simplex, but frequently repeater. I was always under the impression the mutual aid frequencies were just for that - mutual aid, but apparently no one cares. I also occasionally hear FDs running drills/training and then there are the occasional "unidentified" transmissions (seemingly chit-chat that I can't identify the users). I'm retired LE and before I retired, I remember seeing a memo or SOP that said the *-MA-1 TGs were to be reserved for "hot" dispatches like ATLs, impaired drivers, wanted/missing persons, etc., but I frequently hear multi-agency incidents being ran on *-MA-1 instead of *-MA-2, 3, or 4, which ties up *-MA-1. FDs in Monroe Co. are notorious for using J-MA-1 for multi-FD incidents, even intra-county ones. Why tie up J-MA-1 when all FDs in the county have access to the five county fire ops TGs?
Training. Specifically lack thereof.

Johnson County was involved in some incident somewhere along I-70 in Hancock County the other day. There were ISP and Greenfield PD units on the incident with them as well. It must have been a pursuit that ran all the way out there. They were using it H-MA1, tying up a voice channel at every site in the zone plus one when they could have been on H-MA2, H-MA3, or H-MA4 saving system resources. But since there is very little to no training that actually explains this, nobody does it. I would also guess that maybe their codeplugs probably give them quick access to H-MA1 in their home zone but not the other talkgroups. Since they don't want to have to change zones, they just stay on H-MA1. I find this a lot with LEOs. Its like pulling teeth to get us to change channels, much less changing zones. I must just be weird because I've changed zones running hot up I-65 before to talk to ISP for an incident we were helping them with, but that's just me.

The 8TACs and 7TACs are great for short range operations or training. I see no reason why the INDOT flaggers couldn't use them in simplex mode, in fact I think that's a great idea if they are on simplex. But again, they probably aren't trained to do so. They just spin their channel selector until they can hear each other. Sometimes this means one of them is through a repeater and one of them is simplex. No training, so they don't know any better.

Simple problems like these compounded over time give the vendors vendor an opportunity to sell /\/\ore "Solutions" to a problem that could be solved a lot cheaper with more comprehensive radio communications training.

My opinion only.
 

jim202

Member
Joined
Mar 7, 2002
Messages
2,666
Location
New Orleans region
Use of the simplex frequencies is only as good as the incident commander. It boils down to training, command or supervisor understanding how it works and telling those under that person what channel to use. Then there is the problem of the end user knowing how to get their radio on the simplex channel they are requested to use.

You see more fire departments using the NIFOG channels because they do more training than any other agency. Their training is mandated by the state and insurance industry to maintain their insurance rating. The other public agencies don't have this mandate. This results in no training except for the law agencies that have mandated fire arms training. Training on radios is not considered important. This results in the radio users not having a clue what channels are in their radios except for the few they use every day. Don't even expect the users to even know how to change zones or banks on their radio.

Radio interop between different departments is great on a scene tool, but I will say it again, it only works as good as the incident commander and the user training.
 

w9sar

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Dec 27, 2002
Messages
13
Training. Specifically lack thereof.

Johnson County was involved in some incident somewhere along I-70 in Hancock County the other day. There were ISP and Greenfield PD units on the incident with them as well. It must have been a pursuit that ran all the way out there. They were using it H-MA1, tying up a voice channel at every site in the zone plus one when they could have been on H-MA2, H-MA3, or H-MA4 saving system resources. But since there is very little to no training that actually explains this, nobody does it. I would also guess that maybe their codeplugs probably give them quick access to H-MA1 in their home zone but not the other talkgroups. Since they don't want to have to change zones, they just stay on H-MA1. I find this a lot with LEOs. Its like pulling teeth to get us to change channels, much less changing zones. I must just be weird because I've changed zones running hot up I-65 before to talk to ISP for an incident we were helping them with, but that's just me.

The 8TACs and 7TACs are great for short range operations or training. I see no reason why the INDOT flaggers couldn't use them in simplex mode, in fact I think that's a great idea if they are on simplex. But again, they probably aren't trained to do so. They just spin their channel selector until they can hear each other. Sometimes this means one of them is through a repeater and one of them is simplex. No training, so they don't know any better.

Simple problems like these compounded over time give the vendors vendor an opportunity to sell /\/\ore "Solutions" to a problem that could be solved a lot cheaper with more comprehensive radio communications training.

My opinion only.
My problem with INDOT using the 8TAC channels is, one, they're supposed to be reserved for mutual aid, and, two, the crap I hear from INDOT is downright embarrassing at times, not to mention would most likely be an FCC violation. Just my opinion too. (thanks for everyone's input).
 

magic_lantern

Member
Joined
Jun 2, 2013
Messages
79
Training. Specifically lack thereof.

Johnson County was involved in some incident somewhere along I-70 in Hancock County the other day. There were ISP and Greenfield PD units on the incident with them as well. It must have been a pursuit that ran all the way out there. They were using it H-MA1, tying up a voice channel at every site in the zone plus one when they could have been on H-MA2, H-MA3, or H-MA4 saving system resources. But since there is very little to no training that actually explains this, nobody does it. I would also guess that maybe their codeplugs probably give them quick access to H-MA1 in their home zone but not the other talkgroups. Since they don't want to have to change zones, they just stay on H-MA1. I find this a lot with LEOs. Its like pulling teeth to get us to change channels, much less changing zones. I must just be weird because I've changed zones running hot up I-65 before to talk to ISP for an incident we were helping them with, but that's just me.

The 8TACs and 7TACs are great for short range operations or training. I see no reason why the INDOT flaggers couldn't use them in simplex mode, in fact I think that's a great idea if they are on simplex. But again, they probably aren't trained to do so. They just spin their channel selector until they can hear each other. Sometimes this means one of them is through a repeater and one of them is simplex. No training, so they don't know any better.

Simple problems like these compounded over time give the vendors vendor an opportunity to sell /\/\ore "Solutions" to a problem that could be solved a lot cheaper with more comprehensive radio communications training.

My opinion only.

In my area the big problem more so than training is egos, we once had a extremely talented civilian radio engineering/ technician group that due to attrition and positions not being replaced by competent people the troopers started taking a bigger role in the management of the system. When we try to explain the technical limitations of the system we always get overridden because they know more than us because that's what the instructors told them at the academy. "troopers right......civilians wrong...." System loading is the first victim of this type of idiotic management. Our statewide system is in the process of a complete upgrade and they have already steered the ship into the path towards the waterfall.

They make all troopers utilize the statewide system rather than V-tac, U-tac, 700/800 tac frequencies so that some bored captain or major can listen 125 miles away at HQ's that 2 troopers directing traffic on a lane closure telling each other what the last car is so they can shut down and alternate traffic. than the calls come in complaining about system busy's .
 
Last edited:

DiGiTaLD

Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2005
Messages
722
In my area the big problem more so than training is egos, we once had a extremely talented civilian radio engineering/ technician group that due to attrition and positions not being replaced by competent people the troopers started taking a bigger role in the management of the system. When we try to explain the technical limitations of the system we always get overridden because they know more than us because that's what the instructors told them at the academy. "troopers right......civilians wrong...." System loading is the first victim of this type of idiotic management. Our statewide system is in the process of a complete upgrade and they have already steered the ship into the path towards the waterfall.

They make all troopers utilize the statewide system rather than V-tac, U-tac, 700/800 tac frequencies so that some bored captain or major can listen 125 miles away at HQ's that 2 troopers directing traffic on a lane closure telling each other what the last car is so they can shut down and alternate traffic. than the calls come in complaining about system busy's .
Just out of curiosity, what state?

From an LEOs perspective, sometimes we have to use the system even for short-range stuff (like directing traffic or special details) because it enhances officer safety. For instance, if something pops off while you are directing traffic or on a detail, in most situations, if you are on a 7TAC or 8TAC simplex, you won't be able to talk to your dispatch/control/post right now. In a perfect world, yes, we would immediately switch back to whatever talkgroup gives us communications with our dispatcher, but often times that's not practical from a programming standpoint in the way the radio's codeplug is set up. If something real bad were to happen, and your only option was the emergency button, you'd be screwed.

I would agree though, its more training than anything. For instance, I know in my codeplug, I have a 7LAW simplex talkaround in a certain position of the home zone. Getting people to use or understand why they should use it is another thing entirely.
 
Top