AMR San Joaquin County

[N5FDL]

As part of taking over the 911 contract, AMR has moved its San Joaquin County operations off 155.160 and onto a new PassPort trunking system (using only Motorola HT-1250LS talkies) they are calling "Lifecom." As in, "Lifecom, this is Medic 26..." "Go ahead, Medic 26, this is Lifecom."

I am trying to document the monitoring ramifications of this, but we really won't know until 5/1 when the new contract begins. It is not clear, for example, how dispatching will take place at that time. (Someone knows, just not me).

The UHF and VHF radios are still in the trucks, including the new ones.

 

[inigo88]

I didn't realize you posted in three places I'm trying to keep up haha. Start with 452.275 - Looks like its LifeCom's home repeater.

 

[digitaljim6]

It appears to be on a Lagorio Communications Passport system with part of it on Bear Mtn east of Stockton. AMR's dispatch center is moving (or moved) to Salida. San Joaquin County's area will be dispatched from AMR's center just like before only from a different town on different radios.

Interesting thing - the new system is not P25 capable or compatible, of course, since it is Passport (and the radios they supposedly got are analog only) - but the new contract requires P25.

Maybe someone needs to ask the Board of Supervisors why. Not sure I like the idea of my medical safety going to the lowest bidder, especially when the bid specs aren't honored and everyone seems to be looking the other way.

Check 452.0125 for the valley area. You are probably hearing 452.275 from another site closer to you that is networked to Bear Mtn on 452.0125. Diablo or Vaca, perhaps?

 

[BirkenVogt]

Just a wild arse guess but every ambulance has to be equipped with the UHF med net system. But I bet the requirement for P25 applies to VHF-high. So maybe they have a P25 radio but are just not using it, and are using one radio with both the trunking dispatch and UHF med programmed into it for both dispatch and hospital comms?

Birken

 

[digitaljim6]

The requirement applies to their dispatching system, at least according to the contract info I saw. They will be dispatching for some other local government agencies, too (like fire), and that's why the requirement is important.

I don't recall if the UHF med nets were mentioned. I believe the Mountain-Valley EMS Agency is responsible for that radio system so it would probably not be part of the contract.

"Dispatching system" would mean the UHF Passport radios they just installed. It is unlikely that they would combine radios. If the exchange with the hospital is lengthly on a Med Net (like in an ALS/paramedic situation), they would be out of contact with their dispatcher for too long unless their portables work well inside the ambulance.

Just a wild arse guess but every ambulance has to be equipped with the UHF med net system. But I bet the requirement for P25 applies to VHF-high. So maybe they have a P25 radio but are just not using it, and are using one radio with both the trunking dispatch and UHF med programmed into it for both dispatch and hospital comms?

Birken

 

[digitaljim6]

LTRDump/LTRTrunk preliminary results for AMR

In the San Joaquin County area so far on a Sunday morning. For explanation of terms, please see the Trunking, Trunker and LTR forums; and the Trunking and Trunked Radio Decoders Wikis.

Lagorio Callsigns:
WPSQ827
WPCF239

Bear Mountain (east of Stockton):
Passport DCC 3
Site 11 (0x0b)
Network 1
"SysID" 300b

Neighbors:
451.3250
451.7875
452.2625
454.1375
462.4250

Local Frequencies (AMR heard on each of these):
LCN 161 (0x00a1) 452.0125 (AMR Home)
LCN 335 (0x014f) 454.1875
LCN 888 (0x0378) 461.1000
LCN 1180 (0x049c) 464.7500

AMR Groups:
59913 (0xea09) SJ County units ("Medic xx")
59911 (0xea07) AMR private units ("AMR xx")

AMR Passport Radio ID numbers:
3218 Dispatch ("Lifecom" in Modesto/Salida)
3000-3099 field units ("Medic xx", "AMR xx")

Other Groups:
59578 Feed Company
59581 Trucking Company
59586 Unidentified

 

[kma371]

I want to try and monitor this system. I'm not familar with passport systsems, but can you monitor them with a 396? If so, what are the LCN #'s associated with each freq if you have it. Or better yet, do you have a UASD file for this system??

Bill
Elk Grove

 

[digitaljim6]

There is no scanner that can track a Passport system. For the time being, you must use a decoder/tracker program like LTRTrunk (see the Software Wiki). You can still listen to the traffic (it's analog) but you'll have to put up with other user's traffic and the Passport data key-ups every 2-3 seconds.

I want to try and monitor this system. I'm not familar with passport systsems, but can you monitor them with a 396? If so, what are the LCN #'s associated with each freq if you have it. Or better yet, do you have a UASD file for this system??

Bill
Elk Grove

 

[BirkenVogt]

The requirement applies to their dispatching system, at least according to the contract info I saw. They will be dispatching for some other local government agencies, too (like fire), and that's why the requirement is important.

You mean they will be dispatching on 450 Passport or what? I understand they have a big comm center in Salida. We are actually entertaining the possibility of going to them from the local CDF center who dispatches us now (we are a municipal/rural fire/amb district). But I can't see how P25 would make a hoot of difference to them.

I don't recall if the UHF med nets were mentioned. I believe the Mountain-Valley EMS Agency is responsible for that radio system so it would probably not be part of the contract.

"Dispatching system" would mean the UHF Passport radios they just installed. It is unlikely that they would combine radios. If the exchange with the hospital is lengthly on a Med Net (like in an ALS/paramedic situation), they would be out of contact with their dispatcher for too long unless their portables work well inside the ambulance.

Maybe so but if you are giving report to the hospital then why would your dispatcher need to get ahold of you (immediately anyway)? You are at that point committed for at least another twenty minutes so anything the've got can wait. I believe Butte County does it this way though it's not Passport, it's just using Med 9 and 10 as they were intended, for dispatching, then they will give their pt. reports on 1-8 to the hospitals when necessary.

Not saying that your're wrong or anything, just that's how I would set it up if it was my system, no sense duplicating radios and the desense that you would get when transmitting with one UHF while listening with another would make comms unreliable during tx anyway so might as well save money and buy only one radio. But some of those big city places have more money than brains

Birken

 

[digitaljim6]

You mean they will be dispatching on 450 Passport or what? I understand they have a big comm center in Salida. We are actually entertaining the possibility of going to them from the local CDF center who dispatches us now (we are a municipal/rural fire/amb district). But I can't see how P25 would make a hoot of difference to them.Birken

No, I mean they have already moved their dispatching to Passport for the greater San Joaquin county area. Yes, their new center is in Salida. They call themselves "Lifecom" instead of "Modesto" now.

Using Passport makes a big difference if you want to talk to anybody else or get funding for radios. You become MORE incompatible with Passport. Nobody makes a Passport scanner so you can't monitor it without having one of their programmed radios. (You can't just go buy a Passport radio, program it and have it work unless they turn your radio's ESN on in their system) Anybody coming from out of area (like ALL THE TIME during fire season) won't be able to talk to them. If you're in Tracy, what about Alameda County or CDF? If you're in Stan County, what about Stan County and CDF? Oh, and did I mention that there may be probems with finding someone who makes a Passport-compatible pager?

You are also at the mercy of a commercial (read that NON-puiblic-safety) service provider for your infrastructure. It is unlikely that the Fisher/Lagorio system has sufficient back-up power to all of the equipment necessary to run things. You are on a system with trucking companies, farmers, etc., over which you have no control. There may be issues with taking a Passport portable in the helicopter with you because of the inteference potential with other systems on the same frequencies.

Just as an example, one of the four channels (452.0125) used in Stockton for the Passport system that AMR is using is also licensed to a company in Stockton that is not part of the Passport system! Another example is 464.750. It's part of yet another commercial system that is licensed in downtown Stockton, right in the middle of the coverage area for AMR's system. That does not happen when real public-safety channels are used.

You should take a serious look at how much vulnerability you are adding to your ops when you go to a non-public-safety system. Because you are on commercial channels, you have no greater standing when interference issues come up than the taxi company that is also on the same system with you. Another issue could be repair response time. Is the system operator willing to have someone on-call 24/7 with an immediate response time in the event of a failure? Most commercial systems I know don't get repaired until the next business day. Better hope nothing happens on Friday at 17:01.

Coverage-wise for portables, ask one of AMR's current Paramedics/EMTs how well they work or don't.

Maybe so but if you are giving report to the hospital then why would your dispatcher need to get ahold of you (immediately anyway)? You are at that point committed for at least another twenty minutes so anything the've got can wait. I believe Butte County does it this way though it's not Passport, it's just using Med 9 and 10 as they were intended, for dispatching, then they will give their pt. reports on 1-8 to the hospitals when necessary.
Birken

There could be many reasons, like coordinating air ambulance info so you know where to drive to, or answering LE enquiries. The last thing I'd want to have happen is for one of my ALS units to "drop off the map" for several minutes whether they are on a call or not.

Not saying that your're wrong or anything, just that's how I would set it up if it was my system, no sense duplicating radios and the desense that you would get when transmitting with one UHF while listening with another would make comms unreliable during tx anyway so might as well save money and buy only one radio. But some of those big city places have more money than brains
Birken

Since the med nets are administered by MVEMS in the SJ/Stan county area, you have to play by their rules. They may have a separate radio requirement. I believe there are also FCC requirements for having all of the med channels operational in the radio. I'm not sure how many channels their new radios can have. Another issue would be if a Passport radio can even be programmed to be narrowband Passport and wideband conventional at the same time.

So, I guess you can tell I'm not a big proponent of putting public-safety on non-public-safety systems.

 

[Kirk]

I'd lean way much more towards Jim's way of doing things.

Radios are expensive, but redundancy isn't a bad thing. When I was in EMS, we had a UHF radio in front, a UHF in back and a VHF in front. VHF was strictly for fire/mutual aid. We were dispatched on a med channel, and talked to hospitals on med channels. If, god forbid, the radio in front died, you could at least put your partner in back, or if the radio in back died, the driver could call the hospital. Plus, each employee (medic and EMT) carried a UHF portable.

The provider in my area (private) has a UHF company net frequency for tactical/intraagency use, but they're still dispatched by the County on a Med channel. They continue to have a UHF and VHF in front and a UHF in back.

If it were me, I'd make the UHF radio for the back a dual head unit, providing a second control head a mic up front. When you're not transporting and both of the crew members are up front, put the main UHF radio on dispatch and the other one on company net.

Certainly when the medic is giving his/her base station report, there may be some desense of the other UHF radio. You just cope with that. But that's maybe a minute, tops out of a transport, whereas having two radios allows you to continue to monitor the hospital in back in case they have additional orders/info, and the driver to keep a heads up as to what's going on in the county, as well as being available to talk to dispatch if something comes up.

Makes sense to me.

 

[BirkenVogt]

No, I mean they have already moved their dispatching to Passport for the greater San Joaquin county area. Yes, their new center is in Salida. They call themselves "Lifecom" instead of "Modesto" now.

Using Passport makes a big difference if you want to talk to anybody else or get funding for radios. You become MORE incompatible with Passport. Nobody makes a Passport scanner so you can't monitor it without having one of their programmed radios. (You can't just go buy a Passport radio, program it and have it work unless they turn your radio's ESN on in their system) Anybody coming from out of area (like ALL THE TIME during fire season) won't be able to talk to them. If you're in Tracy, what about Alameda County or CDF? If you're in Stan County, what about Stan County and CDF? Oh, and did I mention that there may be probems with finding someone who makes a Passport-compatible pager?

All of what you have said is true but I was not talking about my own department going to passport or 450 for that matter. We would have to stay on high band conventional and somehow link to Salida. That would be a problem for "down the road" if we do it at all, which I doubt.

But for AMR the Passport seems like an ideal solution. Fisher (I presume they are the carrier) supplies the backhaul and the infrastructure therefore Salida has to simply set up an antenna and log on and presto they are connected to their CoCo ambulances. Sure if there was a big disaster they would likely be out of contact with Salida but Salida would not be running things. The local fire department would and presumably the ambulance would still have the high band with the mutual aid channels in it. And they have to by law have the Med Net with channels 9 and 10 which are of course for dispatching. So the incident command would presumably dispatch ambulances on one or the other of those. In any case the ambulance's regular dispatch would not normally be used. And generally nobody else needs to come over to the ambulance's dispatch to talk anyway. So to me for daily operations Passport seems like a good enough solution. (FWIW I operate a commercial LTR system here locally)

Birken

 

[digitaljim6]

The "presumably" part is only valid if the alternate method of dispatching exists. AMR Salida has replaced, not augmented, the previous dispatch methods in the San Joaquin County area. "Lifecom" on the Fisher/Lagorio system is now THE dispatch method for its units. At least they stopped using the unlicensed 155.160 system in Stockton.

There is no requirement to use med 9 or 10 for dispatching of medical responses. The only requirement is that if med 9 or 10 are used, they are to be used for dispatching or intersystem-mutual aid. By the way, there are 32 med nets now since narrowband channels were added and mobiles must have all of them if they meet the date requirement. You can see all of it in 90.20 of the FCC rules.

AMR will be the 911 answer point (the FD, PD or SO won't be doing it anymore) for fire and EMS calls in the San Joaquin County area. If you are in Stockton and you call for fire, your call goes to AMR in Salida, gets relayed to Stockton and the city dispatches resources to you. Sounds like a step backward from the FD being their own answering point.

Even the FCC agrees that mixing public-safety and industrial/business is a bad idea. They have expended much effort over several decades to provide separate tables of frequencies and public-safety-specific rules. 800 MHz rebanding is being done to maintain physical separation. The new 700 MHz band very clearly keeps them separate. There are just too many things that make public-safety systems more appropriate for public-safety use than commercial systems.

There are some excellent commercial systems out there...for commercial users.

All of what you have said is true but I was not talking about my own department going to passport or 450 for that matter. We would have to stay on high band conventional and somehow link to Salida. That would be a problem for "down the road" if we do it at all, which I doubt.

But for AMR the Passport seems like an ideal solution. Fisher (I presume they are the carrier) supplies the backhaul and the infrastructure therefore Salida has to simply set up an antenna and log on and presto they are connected to their CoCo ambulances. Sure if there was a big disaster they would likely be out of contact with Salida but Salida would not be running things. The local fire department would and presumably the ambulance would still have the high band with the mutual aid channels in it. And they have to by law have the Med Net with channels 9 and 10 which are of course for dispatching. So the incident command would presumably dispatch ambulances on one or the other of those. In any case the ambulance's regular dispatch would not normally be used. And generally nobody else needs to come over to the ambulance's dispatch to talk anyway. So to me for daily operations Passport seems like a good enough solution. (FWIW I operate a commercial LTR system here locally)

Birken

 

[BirkenVogt]

The "presumably" part is only valid if the alternate method of dispatching exists. AMR Salida has replaced, not augmented, the previous dispatch methods in the San Joaquin County area. "Lifecom" on the Fisher/Lagorio system is now THE dispatch method for its units. At least they stopped using the unlicensed 155.160 system in Stockton.

There is no requirement to use med 9 or 10 for dispatching of medical responses. The only requirement is that if med 9 or 10 are used, they are to be used for dispatching or intersystem-mutual aid. By the way, there are 32 med nets now since narrowband channels were added and mobiles must have all of them if they meet the date requirement. You can see all of it in 90.20 of the FCC rules.

Thanks for the reference. Yes I was aware they have added 30 more channels in between the original 10 (original 8 actually)...but what I am saying is in the case of a major disaster the incident will handle its own dispatching. Dispatch centers like Salida will continue to handle routine dispatching like they always do and incident dispatch centers will be set up using either the Med 9 and 10 (or 91, 92, 93, 101, 102, 103) freqs for ambulances on the incident, or more likely the white fire freqs or various tactical freqs or command pairs for dispatching the incident. Salida or any other centralized location will have nothing to do with it, it will all be done locally.

AMR will be the 911 answer point (the FD, PD or SO won't be doing it anymore) for fire and EMS calls in the San Joaquin County area. If you are in Stockton and you call for fire, your call goes to AMR in Salida, gets relayed to Stockton and the city dispatches resources to you. Sounds like a step backward from the FD being their own answering point.

Even the FCC agrees that mixing public-safety and industrial/business is a bad idea. They have expended much effort over several decades to provide separate tables of frequencies and public-safety-specific rules. 800 MHz rebanding is being done to maintain physical separation. The new 700 MHz band very clearly keeps them separate. There are just too many things that make public-safety systems more appropriate for public-safety use than commercial systems.

There are some excellent commercial systems out there...for commercial users.

I agree that if the initial daily dispatch system is the only communication system an ambulance or anyone else has, that is a very bad idea but when a significant event happens, the first thing that needs to happen is incident traffic needs to move off of that initial dispatch freq to other freqs to keep the initial freq open for the routine and daily traffic that will continue to come. One thing I have noticed with our trunking system is that when the $#!+ really starts hitting the fan weather-wise the total traffic load actually gets less. Sure the tow trucks start talking up a storm but the taxi cabs quit running, the buses quit running, plumbers, etc. all are not working on those kinds of days. I can't speak for Fisher et. al. but our system is on the same hill, using the same antenna, same power, same power supply, same or better equipment as the fire system.

But anyway my point is, a commercial system is as good as any, because as soon as a "real incident" breaks out, that is not where the action is going to be anyhow.

Birken

 

[digitaljim6]

Thanks for the reference. Yes I was aware they have added 30 more channels in between the original 10 (original 8 actually)...but what I am saying is in the case of a major disaster the incident will handle its own dispatching. Dispatch centers like Salida will continue to handle routine dispatching like they always do and incident dispatch centers will be set up using either the Med 9 and 10 (or 91, 92, 93, 101, 102, 103) freqs for ambulances on the incident, or more likely the white fire freqs or various tactical freqs or command pairs for dispatching the incident. Salida or any other centralized location will have nothing to do with it, it will all be done locally.
Birken

Hmmm. I don't know of anyone local that has boxes of equipment and supplies ready to go to do this for more than one location. Most agencies have THE major incident kit, not kit #1, kit #2, kit #3....

If it is a major disaster, ANYTHING that is working will be used. Last year's hurricanes pointed that out in dramatic fashion. On-scene traffic is going to be tactical and related only to that scene. Dispatching for all new incidents needs to continue. Once resources are enroute or on-scene, that incident can become detached from the dispatch center. This is standard practice as you know in the fire services - ICS. The incident handles its own tactical traffic - it doesn't dispatch for other incidents.

I agree that if the initial daily dispatch system is the only communication system an ambulance or anyone else has, that is a very bad idea but when a significant event happens, the first thing that needs to happen is incident traffic needs to move off of that initial dispatch freq to other freqs to keep the initial freq open for the routine and daily traffic that will continue to come. One thing I have noticed with our trunking system is that when the $#!+ really starts hitting the fan weather-wise the total traffic load actually gets less. Sure the tow trucks start talking up a storm but the taxi cabs quit running, the buses quit running, plumbers, etc. all are not working on those kinds of days. I can't speak for Fisher et. al. but our system is on the same hill, using the same antenna, same power, same power supply, same or better equipment as the fire system.
Birken

As you point out, the type of traffic depends on what kind of customers you have but it also depends on what kind of incident is happening. Case in point this past weekend is the levee problems. There was more traffic on the Fisher/Lagorio system from the trucking companies hauling material to the affected areas than there was from AMR's ambulances and AMR fortunately wasn't involved in that incident. The trucking activity was continuous for multiple days. If fields had flooded, the farmers would have been active, too, then come the medical and search and rescue folks (ambulance and fire), then construction companies, road maintenance, etc.

If the poor mobile signal strength I've been hearing is any indication of "normal", the loading on the trunked system will be higher than one would expect because of ongoing repeat requests. Two units become the loading equivalent of 4 or 5 when they have to occupy a channel for more than twice the amount of time than would be needed with a "good signal". Having double the loading in practice compared to design is a serious issue that needs to be resolved before a major event makes it painfully obvious - busy signals when you can tolerate them the least.

Is your system transmitter-combined with fire's antenna system? Is this on Mt. Oso?

But anyway my point is, a commercial system is as good as any, because as soon as a "real incident" breaks out, that is not where the action is going to be anyhow.
Birken

I disagree. Perhaps for the scanner/monitor hobbyist, that's the case. The users of the system have different needs and priorities. The dispatch center and its infrastructure become even more critical during a "real incident". The center needs to continue to answer the phone (911 and calls to/from other agencies) and dispatch new incidents. The call volume increases because people make non-emergency curiosity calls but it also increases because there are more legitimate incidents to handle and more mutual aid conversations with other agencies.

The center also needs to do the legwork to find and position resources to fill the drawdown caused by the increased number of previous incidents as well as fill the ongoing resource needs of the major incident(s). They may engage in less radio traffic only because they are busier doing non-radio tasks. The field people also talk less because they are busier. Both sides know that and cut each other some slack so they both can handle the increased workload.

I don't know of a single ECC that sends communicators home during a major incident. The only time that happens is if something makes it impossible for them to stay and do their jobs.

 

[BirkenVogt]

Hmmm. I don't know of anyone local that has boxes of equipment and supplies ready to go to do this for more than one location. Most agencies have THE major incident kit, not kit #1, kit #2, kit #3....

If it is a major disaster, ANYTHING that is working will be used. Last year's hurricanes pointed that out in dramatic fashion. On-scene traffic is going to be tactical and related only to that scene. Dispatching for all new incidents needs to continue. Once resources are enroute or on-scene, that incident can become detached from the dispatch center. This is standard practice as you know in the fire services - ICS. The incident handles its own tactical traffic - it doesn't dispatch for other incidents.

Right you are. However the hurricanes are a bad example because those parts of the country, from what I gather, are not used to any sort of incident that is "out of the ordinary." Not to sound arrogant but we do extraordinary incidents here all the time. I am confident our overhead can handle much greater magintude incidents than the overhead of other states.

I was not saying that the incident would dispatch ambulances (since that is mainly what we are discussing here) for other incidents. Rather, if it was an ongoing incident it would order the ambulances it needed (over the telephone prefarably) and then continue to dispatch those resources it had assigned over Med 9 or 10, or one of the CDF command repeaters, or possibly one of the portable NIFC kit repeaters, or maybe a simplex freq. I know that if somebody called my shop that within a day we could have a repeater operating on whatever freq was required on top of any mountain that was accessible. It's not a big deal really.

Anyway what I am saying is...well here is my sequence of events. Big disaster occurs. Inital confusion results. Command structure is set up. Resources are ordered and assigned as are both tactical and repeater freqs on the incident. At this point the incident is supposed to more or less cease to exist as far as the outside world is concerned. They handle all their own stuff. They are completely off the Fisher/Lagorio system within a day or two and it reverts back to its normal function, dispatching and responding the remaining non-assigned ambulances to normal medical aids all over their normal area.

As you point out, the type of traffic depends on what kind of customers you have but it also depends on what kind of incident is happening. Case in point this past weekend is the levee problems. There was more traffic on the Fisher/Lagorio system from the trucking companies hauling material to the affected areas than there was from AMR's ambulances and AMR fortunately wasn't involved in that incident. The trucking activity was continuous for multiple days. If fields had flooded, the farmers would have been active, too, then come the medical and search and rescue folks (ambulance and fire), then construction companies, road maintenance, etc.

If the poor mobile signal strength I've been hearing is any indication of "normal", the loading on the trunked system will be higher than one would expect because of ongoing repeat requests. Two units become the loading equivalent of 4 or 5 when they have to occupy a channel for more than twice the amount of time than would be needed with a "good signal". Having double the loading in practice compared to design is a serious issue that needs to be resolved before a major event makes it painfully obvious - busy signals when you can tolerate them the least.

Is your system transmitter-combined with fire's antenna system? Is this on Mt. Oso?

You sure are right about that part. That much is up to the system operator to make it robust enough to handle the traffic though. I wonder why anybody goes with them if their signal strength is poor though. Being in competition with Nextel, we have to make sure our coverage is superb, and also our prices are cheap, because we do not have name recognition. Our system is over in the Sierras though

I disagree. Perhaps for the scanner/monitor hobbyist, that's the case. The users of the system have different needs and priorities. The dispatch center and its infrastructure become even more critical during a "real incident". The center needs to continue to answer the phone (911 and calls to/from other agencies) and dispatch new incidents. The call volume increases because people make non-emergency curiosity calls but it also increases because there are more legitimate incidents to handle and more mutual aid conversations with other agencies.

The center also needs to do the legwork to find and position resources to fill the drawdown caused by the increased number of previous incidents as well as fill the ongoing resource needs of the major incident(s). They may engage in less radio traffic only because they are busier doing non-radio tasks. The field people also talk less because they are busier. Both sides know that and cut each other some slack so they both can handle the increased workload.

I don't know of a single ECC that sends communicators home during a major incident. The only time that happens is if something makes it impossible for them to stay and do their jobs.

Well you are right that the ECC and its channels are going to be heavily loaded in the initial stages but that is the way it will always be, no way around it. But what needs to be done is to spin off any major incident traffic ASAP so the normal ECC can get back to the normal incidents that will still continue to come in. Our ECC has an "expanded dispatch" right next door that is a separate building to handle that sort of stuff if you wanted to continue to dispatch the incident from inside a building, but many large fires use a trailer or tent on location instead.

Birken

 

[digitaljim6]

Right you are. However the hurricanes are a bad example because those parts of the country, from what I gather, are not used to any sort of incident that is "out of the ordinary." Not to sound arrogant but we do extraordinary incidents here all the time. I am confident our overhead can handle much greater magintude incidents than the overhead of other states.
Birken

??? Regular hurricanes (yes, they have many each year), large fires during our winter season when you can't get gasoline to burn here, regular (like daily/nightly) severe lightning, tornados, ice storms....and that's just the natural disasters. Oil refinery fires, explosions/rescues on off-shore drilling platforms, train derailments with hazmat.... I think they have their share of trouble that goes beyond what we see regularly here.

I was not saying that the incident would dispatch ambulances (since that is mainly what we are discussing here) for other incidents. Rather, if it was an ongoing incident it would order the ambulances it needed (over the telephone prefarably) and then continue to dispatch those resources it had assigned over Med 9 or 10, or one of the CDF command repeaters, or possibly one of the portable NIFC kit repeaters, or maybe a simplex freq. I know that if somebody called my shop that within a day we could have a repeater operating on whatever freq was required on top of any mountain that was accessible. It's not a big deal really.
Birken

That is true after several days have gone by. What about during those several days? CDF or NIFC is only going to happen on a fire incident unless there is a wide-area disaster and it is clear that it will be a long-term thing. Until then, the dispatch centers have to do all of the resource work and message relaying.

Anyway what I am saying is...well here is my sequence of events. Big disaster occurs. Inital confusion results. Command structure is set up. Resources are ordered and assigned as are both tactical and repeater freqs on the incident. At this point the incident is supposed to more or less cease to exist as far as the outside world is concerned. They handle all their own stuff. They are completely off the Fisher/Lagorio system within a day or two and it reverts back to its normal function, dispatching and responding the remaining non-assigned ambulances to normal medical aids all over their normal area.
Birken

Not necessarily so. The incident is still dependent on the dispatch center for resources until the fire camp (or whatever the resources are that will handle that aspect) arrives. Again, we're talking several days.

You sure are right about that part. That much is up to the system operator to make it robust enough to handle the traffic though. I wonder why anybody goes with them if their signal strength is poor though. Being in competition with Nextel, we have to make sure our coverage is superb, and also our prices are cheap, because we do not have name recognition. Our system is over in the Sierras though
Birken

Ice to an Eskimo. Remember when the first cellular providers lied to the public about their calls being uninterceptible as a selling point? Salespeople's favorite line: 'Oh sure, it'll .... No problem.'

Some providers think that if they can hear their system, that means there is coverage. You can't expect a system on Bullion or Meadow Lakes to give good portable or pager coverage inside buildings in Modesto or Fresno. There just isn't enough signal density from that distance given the power. That's why paging companies don't use anything weaker than 250 watt transmitters and many use 500. It's also why they locate in town as well as on the hilltops. One of the best tests is talking from the radiology department or O.R. of a hospital.

Well you are right that the ECC and its channels are going to be heavily loaded in the initial stages but that is the way it will always be, no way around it. But what needs to be done is to spin off any major incident traffic ASAP so the normal ECC can get back to the normal incidents that will still continue to come in. Our ECC has an "expanded dispatch" right next door that is a separate building to handle that sort of stuff if you wanted to continue to dispatch the incident from inside a building, but many large fires use a trailer or tent on location instead.
Birken

True, but it takes time and bodies to set that up. Even with the equipment at hand, you have to find 6-8 people to staff the thing (to make up at least two shifts), and someone to set it all up, especially if you have lots of technology like satellite, MDC, CAD in the equipment. Not many battalion chiefs or paramedics know how to align an earth station.

The days before that infrastructure is operational need to be considered in the system planning and provisioning.

 

[BirkenVogt]

FWIW talking to an ambulance salesman who lives down in Stanislaus county, and usually has his ear to the ground, they are going to the Passport system even for hospital patient reporting...apparently the hospitals don't like them using phones for that. Now to me that is a poor use of the Passport system.

Birken

 

[kma371]

Hearing "Lifecom" traffic on 463.2125 DCS 054 and 464.725 DCS 043. Keep hearing the ker-chunk that's typical of LTR systems, but the DCS tone is throwing me on what this may really be.

Maybe this is a control link? Don't seem to be missing any conversation and I'm not sure how these "Passport" systems work.

Bill
Elk Grove

UPDATE: Well, I wasn't listening close enough. Both of these are simulcasting the same traffic, however 463.2125 is just the dispatcher and 464.725 is the dispatcher and the unit.

UPDATE2: Also hearing 463.6625 which I assume is also part of this Lifecom system for the Stockton/Modesto area. No tones, so you have to listen to the ker-chunk. This is being called "Control 2" and is being used for BLS transports.

 

[inigo88]

Ok guys I finally completed Eric Cotrell's data slicer and have LTR Dump and LTR Trunk up and running. I live in Marin county which is just north of San Francisco in the bay area, and I've been listening to the Fisher/Lagorio sites for this system in this area. The beauty of it is the entire thing is networked (even though not all sites carry all traffic from other sites), so I can listen to AMR Lifecom from here via Site 55 on Mt Diablo.

Here is what has been submitted for the system so far: http://www.radioreference.com/modules.php?name=RR&sid=3761

Digitamjim6 did you submit that? It's a great start and I'd be happy to help figure it out from over here in the bay area.

I'll start with what I've figured out for Site 55, Mt Diablo. I've left the neighboring sites out (which are embedded in the idle bursts every 2 seconds, also called "neighbor bursts"). There are a lot of adjacent sites because the system is so big so I'll add them later, but I was more concerned with confirming what was actually part of the site.


Mount Diablo
------------------
DCC: 3 (this is like the area bit on LTR standard for Passport)
Network 1
Site 55 (Mount Diablo)


Here are the freqs in order as listed on LTRDump:

LCN 994 - 462.425 Mhz
LCN 230 - 452.875 Mhz
LCN 986 - 462.325 Mhz
LCN 182 - 452.275 Mhz (This is AMR home, if there is a home repeater for passport!)

The database also lists 451.1125, 452.4625, 462.30 and 464.35 as part of Site 55, but I wasn't able to confirm their use , and they were never listed as free channels. I also couldn't hear any idle bursts on them. Could they be neighbor freqs instead?

Talkgroups:
----------------
I'm going to put these in the full format (DCC# - Site # - Talkgroup ID #), so you guys can go back to the database and see which talkgroups are being used by which site (and then simulcast on most of the rest). This has been useful in identifying talkgroups because if someones talking on site 11 (Bear Mountain), and I hear it on Diablo, I can still tell they're talking on Bear Mountain. Note that only the talkgroup ID has been listed previously in this thread and the same talkgroup can be used on different sites (which is why the system is networked!).

AMR Talkgroups:

3-11-59912 --- AMR Lifecom in Salida, but this is now being called "Control 2." All the units seemed to be in Stockton, and I heard a lot of "AMR" unit IDs, like "AMR 2" or "AMR 8".

The dispatcher's radio ID was 011-3218, confirming most of the users were using site 11 on Bear Mtn.

3-63-59913 --- AMR Lifecom in Salida, this channel was called "Control 1." I heard more "Medic" units on here, like "Medic 8" "Medic 11" etc., but it also had "AMR" units. This was also Stockton area, as both talkgroups talked about San Joaquin General Hospital and St Mary's Medical Center. In addition to Site 63 (which is listed as Mt Oso), I also saw some units on site 68, which is as of yet unknown.

I heard mostly BLS transport traffic on both channels with some code 3 calls (and a lot of code 7 requests getting denied hahaha).

Onto the fun part - The rest of the talkgroups:
-----------------------------------------------------

3-11-59582 --- Appeared to be road construction or possibly some kind of agricultural trucking. Talked about Hwy 99 at Mariposa. Later heard them on site 60.

3-11-58799 --- Guys singing and screwing around in spanish.

3-57-59946 --- Unknown (site 57 is also undetermined)
3-57-59948 --- Unknown

3-60-59937 --- Law Enforcement type traffic, possibly private security. (unit IDs like "Henry 32" and "Henry 38").

3-60-59980 --- Law Enforcement type traffic, possibly private security. (unit IDs beginning with "6L")

3-60-59955 --- Shuttle service between the terminals and parking lots at San Jose Int'l Airport (SJC). I used to hear these guys alot when conventionally scanning the 450-470 band and wonder who the heck they were. They talk about the "white lot" and the "red lot", etc.

3-65-59888 --- Guys singing in spanish and being screwing around in the middle of the night. The spanish ones appear to be agricultural / farm related.

3-68-59895 --- Telemetry / Data.

3-68-59961 --- Unknown

3-68-59962 --- Lady telling Olga to go make her runs.

We'll have to figure out where Site 68 is I guess... As of yet no local traffic heard on Diablo (belonging to Site 55).

Also listened to Site 53, whose location is still unknown, but it comes in strong here in Marin County. Possible candidates could be Mt Tamalpias (Mill Valley, CA), Big Rock Ridge (Novato, CA), San Pedro Ridge (San Rafael, CA), or other high up locations within Marin, Sonoma, Napa or Contra Costa Counties. I'll update it when I have more concrete frequency information, but here's what I've gotten out of it so far:

Site 53
DCC: 3
Network 1

LCN 164 - 452.05 Mhz
LCN 940 - 461.75 Mhz
LCN 1080 - 463.50 Mhz
LCN 990 - 462.375 Mhz

451.30 Mhz (LCN 104) is also part of site 53, I just need to observe more traffic on it to determine where it fits in and if there are any more free channels.

Monitored Site 54, also unknown location. 451.575 comes in well here, but then the traffic on 464.80 is a little fainter. Judging by ear I'd place the system in Contra Costa or Alameda county, although it could be closer (464.80 was licensed to a security company in Marin but has since gone silent so it could have been bought up by Fisher and put in Marin). Here are the freqs:

Site 54
DCC: 3
Network 1

LCN 158 - 451.975 Mhz
LCN 222 - 452.775 Mhz
LCN 1184 - 464.80 Mhz
LCN 946 - 461.825 Mhz

LCN 126 - 451.575 Mhz also says it's on this site via its idle burst, I just need to observe traffic on it to confirm where it fits with the rest of the freqs (which don't list it as their free channel).

In conclusion, I sure am happy to be able to hear LTR Passport. We have a lot of systems around the bay area and northern california! I've also already discovered two sites for a DCC: 0 system with a couple of AAA tow truck companies on it (in Marin county - Redhill Towing, and Berkeley). Searching for licenses for these systems to determine the operator absolutely sucks, because a lot of the freqs arent licensed when searching FCC ULS, but the system has a freq licensed to either Empire Communications or Crystal Communications, so they could be likely candidates. I'll post it in a seperate thread when I have more info. Also, since this was originally an AMR thread, I'll let you guys know if I see any ambulance to hospital traffic moved onto the system.

Does anyone mind if I post these updates to the database? (Digitaljim6 if you submitted the system originally?)

-Inigo