scottyhetzel
Member
Anyone know why after all these years they are adding a p.l.? That will be a lot of programming for all agencies to add this requirement. Including all air ambulances..
I just got a new loadout today it also has vfire 22,23,24 and CalLaw1,2 and lLaw1 with the pl 156.7
Edit: It's Vfire10-26 all have pl 156.7
Transmit tone of 156.7 was added while I worked for the state (I left 8 years ago). Receive tone was added at narrow banding. The reason for tone is to reduce the interference from the non-public safety users operating scrambled radios in international waters (and in various coastal waters) as received by public safety users with any kind of elevation and a view towards the Pacific Firebreak.
Ummm,,, VCALL10, VTAC11-14, VFIRE21-26, CALAW1 (and CALAW2 hopefully at 10 watts or less) and VLAW31?
I've added the TX PL tone to all our radios, but I won't add it on the RX side, I'm leaving them all as CSQ. Just a recipe for disaster, all it takes is for one department to neglect it, or one radio to get missed, and I'll get blamed.
Maybe in a few years I re-visit this.
My sentiments exactly.
I program all the other tac channels tx and rx tones as specified, but Calcord I leave CSQ because I know how many organizations are out there that get their radios programmed every 5-10 years, if ever. I am not aware of any interference problems on 156.075 anyway, since it has been a statewide channel for as long as anybody can remember.
I hear what you are saying, but our site is at 800 feet overlooking the Monterey Bay and out to sea about 40 miles or so. Never had an issue with interference on CalCord. Actually, none of our guys hang out on CalCord, they switch to it when necessary, then switch back. Since it isn't a dispatch channel, there really isn't a reason for anyone to hang out on the frequency full time. Usage around here is fairly short and sweet, often hand held to hand held, or hand held to helicopter. Distances we are talking about are a few hundred yards at the most. It isn't used for long range stuff. Distant marine stations off shore likely won't be an issue.
I fully understand why they are pushing for PL tones, but I'm reluctant. With so many "privately owned radios", radios that get tucked away and forgotten, radios that go "missing" and suddenly show up, I'd be surprised if there isn't some issues here.
Like I said, I'll wait a few years and consider it.
Just checking on my ignorance here, if you don't mind, umm...
VLAW31 = 155.475MHz = old "NALEMARS" right?
and
VLAW32 = 155.4825MHz (found a reference in a 2008 document, not sure if it's still extant)?
Are both now supposed to be using 156.7Hz CTCSS?
??
-Mike
I've added the TX PL tone to all our radios, but I won't add it on the RX side, I'm leaving them all as CSQ. Just a recipe for disaster, all it takes is for one department to neglect it, or one radio to get missed, and I'll get blamed.
Maybe in a few years I re-visit this.
One of the big reasons for putting PL on Calcord was because Nevada Division Of Forestry (NDF) in their NWS region which is The Northwest area of the state changed their input frequency to their repeater system a couple of years ago to the same frequency as Calcord which was a big mistake when they did that with the proxcimity of that area to California, so that was the remedy.