Culpeper/Fauquier system

[Skidmo]

I am wondering why the Culpeper system is being listed with the Fauquier system. I understand that the two counties are undertaking a joint communications venture but it seem to me that Culpeper talkgroups should be listed under Culpeper County and likewise with Fauquier County. If the two counties have common or shared talkgroups they could be listed under both counties.

 

[KT4HX]

I presume that was done by someone since Culpeper is coat-tailing on the Faquier system. However, I agree with you on that. I feel only those talkgroups specific to the county in question should be listed under that county's heading, and of course the shared talkgroups could be in both.

 

[ericcarlson]

The information that we have is that it is in fact one system and therefore it will be listed in the database as such. Because it is a single system, talkgroups from either county can show up on either simulcast zone at any time as necessary to provide coverage to users on those talkgroups.

-Eric

 

[radio]

RE: Culpeper Co and Fauquier Co listed together

These two couties are linked together because Fauquier County is the backup for Culpeper Co as Culpeper Co is the backup for Fauquier as the City of Fredericksburg answers 911 calls for Spotsylvania like they did the last couple of times Spotsy 911 radio system went down. However, one difference between Spotys and Fredericksburg is that Spotys dispatchers had travel to Fredericksburg with portable radios for operations in Spotsylvania County. Link is for the news article when Culpeper County announced their new system.

http://www.freelancestar.com/News/FLS/2003/112003/11062003/1158781/index_html

 

[Skidmo]

Okay, I think radio has a good point in that the two communication centers back each other up and apparently either center can perform the tasks of both. I have been for some time monitoring both systems on a PRO-96. The Culpeper control channels are in one bank and the Fauquier frequencies and talkgroup info are in a separate bank. Now I’m no radio tech but this seems a lot like two systems that happen to be connected by two cooperating jurisdictions.
Sorry if I’m beating a dead horse here.
S

 

[KT4HX]

I don't think it's a case of beating a dead horse. However, upon further reflection, I have to tend to agree with the current way of listing them. Take a look at the Central Planning District system, which is an EDACS network encompassing Lynchburg, Amherst County, and Bedford County. This is a five site system, and all talk groups are listed on the page for each of the member sub-systems. It does seem to be logical to list them this way, since they are inter-related. One merely has to place the sites in different banks (or groups if you have a 396), just as you have done. That way you can listen to whichever ones you desire and/or can pick up.

I think the Central Planning District is a better comparison than is Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania, which share little in common as far as their respective systems, other than some mutual aid capabilities. However, they do provide backup for one another should there be a catastrophic failure, just as Fauquier and Culpeper would do.

 

[n4jri]

Another characteristic of the Central Planning District system as well as the Richmond/Henrico/Chesterfield system is that certain TG's, most notably Police/Fire/EMS dispatch channels are broadcast on ALL control channels. In that case, it is definitely handy to have everything on one page. Does anyone know if the Fauquier and Culpeper systems will have 'regionwide' TG's?

73/Allen (N4JRI)

 

[KT4HX]

Another characteristic of the Central Planning District system as well as the Richmond/Henrico/Chesterfield system is that certain TG's, most notably Police/Fire/EMS dispatch channels are broadcast on ALL control channels. In that case, it is definitely handy to have everything on one page. Does anyone know if the Fauquier and Culpeper systems will have 'regionwide' TG's?

73/Allen (N4JRI)

Good point Allen, I forgot about the most obvious local example - Richmond/Henrico/Chesterfield. Though I don't have any info about Fauquier/Culpeper, I would venture to say they likely will structure their network in a similar fashion. Should be interesting to see how this pans out.

 

[fmon]

There is also a new joint 9600b system in James City CO, York CO and the city of Williamsburg, which the city of Poquoson will likely join in the future.

BTW, the always on top of the situation Eric, made the updates to Culpeper yesterday evening.

 

[Skidmo]

Culpeper

It sounds like Culpeper is moving to the new command center tomorrow.