Boonton Township / Mt. Lakes FD Dispatch

Status
Not open for further replies.

SCPD

QRT
Joined
Feb 24, 2001
Messages
65,126
Location
Virginia
The last two night's, i heard Morris County Comm Center doing the nighty tests for both of these FD's. I guess they took over Dispatch for them?
 

SCPD

QRT
Joined
Feb 24, 2001
Messages
65,126
Location
Virginia
Correct, 46.42 PL 186.2

I heard a rumor that both PD's are on MIRS, but not sure if the dispatchers are gone and they're using the county now.

Anyone with a digi scanner confirm this? I'm monitoring their VHF channel now.
 

Pursuit

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 23, 2007
Messages
216
just heard 25 cars on 33808 .. dosent this tg got enough on it allready. and just heard boonton fd get toned out on 46.42 and now they calling in service on tg 34416
 
Last edited:

Pursuit

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 23, 2007
Messages
216
also hearing 42 cars on 33808 this sounds like denville ?
 

SCPD

QRT
Joined
Feb 24, 2001
Messages
65,126
Location
Virginia
Pursuit said:
just heard 25 cars on 33808 .. dosent this tg got enough on it allready. and just heard boonton fd get toned out on 46.42 and now they calling in service on tg 34416

25- Mtn. Lakes

Boonton Twp. uses 41,42,43, etc. as their patrol car ID's. I was under the impression they would use their municipal code number as their car numbers like the rest of the PD's dispatched by the county.
 

Pursuit

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 23, 2007
Messages
216
res148cue said:
25- Mtn. Lakes

Boonton Twp. uses 41,42,43, etc. as their patrol car ID's. I was under the impression they would use their municipal code number as their car numbers like the rest of the PD's dispatched by the county.
ahh ok that would make more sence...
 

SCPD

QRT
Joined
Feb 24, 2001
Messages
65,126
Location
Virginia
RocketNJ said:
Boonton Twp is using 42 instead of 02.

County to 42 cars sounds better than County to 2 cars.
Okay. IMPO Boonton Twp isn't worth listening to anyway. They could use Car 54 for what it's worth!
 

SCPD

QRT
Joined
Feb 24, 2001
Messages
65,126
Location
Virginia
kenisned said:
Wow....things are moving to MIRS quickly.

Gonna have to add a fourth digital scanner for my office at this rate!
My guess is that they are moving smaller towns to MIRS. Why I don't know.

If you remember Ken we we're told MIRS was not going to replace municipal radio systems already in place. Have they changed their mind.

I can't see the Comm Center absorbing a Morristown or even a Mount Olive for that matter.
 

kenisned

Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2005
Messages
626
Location
Unincorporated Arapahoe
res148cue said:
My guess is that they are moving smaller towns to MIRS. Why I don't know.

If you remember Ken we we're told MIRS was not going to replace municipal radio systems already in place. Have they changed their mind.

I can't see the Comm Center absorbing a Morristown or even a Mount Olive for that matter.
I think this was in relation to those not being dispatched by the county already. I guess that some towns wanted to migrate sooner.

We were told last year that those agencies being dispatched by the county would be migrating to MIRS over the course of this year.

I can see the county dispatching for some of the other towns, but it would have to be in some way regionalized and the bigger (or busier) towns might have to have their own talkgroup.

There was a meeting with the county and municipal authorities to discuss the idea of a county dispatch center and the eventual consolidation of dispatch services.

At that point it was said that does not mean that all agencies would use MIRS.

You brought up Mt Olive. I could see our dispatch channel in some way patched to MIRS. It would be much more cost effective than buying 200 MIRS portables (or some other crazy number), when the system we have works and works well (even though Flanders has some issues, it would only be worse on MIRS) and the hardware is in place.

Many counties do county run dispatching well. What will be critical is that the end using agencies have a say. Not solely the politicians.


Last point.... I do NOT want to see any digital fireground channels. That would be a HUGE mistake. Many agencies are struggling and I don't think that should be the place to experiment. I'm even leary of a digital dispatch channel.
 

SCPD

QRT
Joined
Feb 24, 2001
Messages
65,126
Location
Virginia
kenisned said:
I think this was in relation to those not being dispatched by the county already. I guess that some towns wanted to migrate sooner.

We were told last year that those agencies being dispatched by the county would be migrating to MIRS over the course of this year.

I can see the county dispatching for some of the other towns, but it would have to be in some way regionalized and the bigger (or busier) towns might have to have their own talkgroup.

There was a meeting with the county and municipal authorities to discuss the idea of a county dispatch center and the eventual consolidation of dispatch services.

At that point it was said that does not mean that all agencies would use MIRS.

You brought up Mt Olive. I could see our dispatch channel in some way patched to MIRS. It would be much more cost effective than buying 200 MIRS portables (or some other crazy number), when the system we have works and works well (even though Flanders has some issues, it would only be worse on MIRS) and the hardware is in place.

Many counties do county run dispatching well. What will be critical is that the end using agencies have a say. Not solely the politicians.


Last point.... I do NOT want to see any digital fireground channels. That would be a HUGE mistake. Many agencies are struggling and I don't think that should be the place to experiment. I'm even leary of a digital dispatch channel.
I never had any issues in Flanders, not even with portables. If MO ever went that way I doubt the county would allow a patch. They would want you to buy the mobiles and portables. I am wondering if they would let you use the existing XTL2500's alredy in the apparatus. The only thing with that is you could not monitor or use the MIRS TG's and be on the municipal TG as well. Don't forget Mtn. Lakes and Boonton Twp. have the money, MO does not.
 

kenisned

Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2005
Messages
626
Location
Unincorporated Arapahoe
res148cue said:
I never had any issues in Flanders, not even with portables. If MO ever went that way I doubt the county would allow a patch. They would want you to buy the mobiles and portables. I am wondering if they would let you use the existing XTL2500's alredy in the apparatus. The only thing with that is you could not monitor or use the MIRS TG's and be on the municipal TG as well. Don't forget Mtn. Lakes and Boonton Twp. have the money, MO does not.
I'm sure you would use the existing mobiles.... that's not the expense I am worried about.

We currently have a portable for every seated position on the apparatus and a bank in the tactical unit. That's over 50 portables.

THAT is the expense i'm worried about.

Why not a patch?
 

RocketNJ

Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
892
Location
Pequannock, NJ
I would think you don't need portables on the County system for every seated position in the vehicle, just one for each vehicle for IC communications back to the Comm Center.

The appartus Mirs radios are capable of scanning the dispatch talkgroup and MIRS talkgroups so only one mobile radio is really needed.

I hope they are programming the FDs that switch to UHF fireground to use analog communications for FG operation. Digital is fine for response.
 

RocketNJ

Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
892
Location
Pequannock, NJ
As far as a patch, that would work but again you don't need the FG communications to be patched to the trunked system, just the Incident Command needs to talk to the Comm Center, so he could use his Mirs mobile/portable radio for that and use his existing VHF/UHF radio for fireground. You wouldn't want the IC to use the same radio for communications to the Comm Center and FG operation at the risk of missing an important call (example: talking to Comm Center when a firefighter on FG calls MayDay.)
 

kenisned

Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2005
Messages
626
Location
Unincorporated Arapahoe
RocketNJ said:
As far as a patch, that would work but again you don't need the FG communications to be patched to the trunked system, just the Incident Command needs to talk to the Comm Center, so he could use his Mirs mobile/portable radio for that and use his existing VHF/UHF radio for fireground. You wouldn't want the IC to use the same radio for communications to the Comm Center and FG operation at the risk of missing an important call (example: talking to Comm Center when a firefighter on FG calls MayDay.)
There are many instances where the on scene commander did not hear a mayday.

There could be instances where the person with a portable needs to reach dispatch.

I would hate to see a "new" system have less features and options then the near perfectly functioning "old" system.

You know what I mean?

I believe, and I haven't looked up the regulation, but the new regs from the Div of Fire Safety states that maydays will be handled on a repeated channel.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top