What's the deal with this? Moderate signal strength near the Domain.
464.5 P25 data NAC 131, system ID 13B, WACN DEE00, RFSS 10, Site 1
464.5 P25 data NAC 131, system ID 13B, WACN DEE00, RFSS 10, Site 1
Maybe this...I think there was a thread about that a few years ago. It may not be the same group but there was some ham/whacker group with a trunked system. I think it was in the Austin area on a combination of itinerant, GMRS and ham frequencies. I don't remember exactly and can't find the thread now.
Testing site on top of a building at UT. Its freq will be moved in a month or two.What's the deal with this? Moderate signal strength near the Domain.
464.5 P25 data NAC 131, system ID 13B, WACN DEE00, RFSS 10, Site 1
Finally.... After 2 years.... Someone finally got the joke lol.. (granted I kinda messed it up by not doing DEE09 13B)13B almost sounds like a jab at 13E. The fact it's on an itinerant frequency would suggest to me someone is playing with DVM Project (maybe the CenTex Trunking guys).
Only part 90 freqs as you can't legally link between all three. Plus we use AES on Unit to Unit calls and you can't exactly use that on ham.I think there was a thread about that a few years ago. It may not be the same group but there was some ham/whacker group with a trunked system. I think it was in the Austin area on a combination of itinerant, GMRS and ham frequencies. I don't remember exactly and can't find the thread now.
I got told essentially no as far as getting a Trunk itinerant would go Unless I was willing to put a truckload of cash down to argue it. So for now I'll be sticking with the current one, as it does legally cover everything for a small Conv, DVRS, or Single Control channel and Single Voice channel site.Did the FCC license ever get sorted out?