Erie County P25 System

[maus92]

I've heard some non-scrambled in the 200's also on SDS100. It would be nice if I could select only certain TG's like (now) old-fashioned scanners, maybe that's coming.

Not sure why you cannot do this with a Favorites list.

 

[jonwienke]

You can ignore the programmed nac in the settings, and see if that changes anything

 

[chuck043rr]

That's a good point. P25 Trunk system from RR has 'NAC Search' for 'Countywide Simulcast' and 'Urban (City) Simulcast' rows at the P25 NAC column. There is no P25 NAC column when programming P25 X2. So you're suggesting something specific instead of 'NAC Search' in the P25 Trunk system?

 

[Drachen_Fire]

Yeah, that option seems a bit much. The 996 doesn't have that either.

 

[n3obl]

TG 231 is active now. It is shown as EFD Special Events 1 in the database. But it sounds like a traffic setup for speeders. Also, all the county FD's Special Events TG's are shown in the 200's. Seems like it doesn't fit, since all 200's were thought to be encrypted PD's?

Im leaning toward the special channels are multiagency interop channels and not fire specific hence hearing police traffic and not being encrypted.

 

[scnrfrq]

Anyone else hearing that really annoying interference on County Paging today, 453.950? Comes and goes every few minutes and lasts for a couple seconds. Sounds kinda shrieky....

Still hearing the noise - all day. I have an audio file I can send if someone has an idea.

 

[Railbender]

The NAC for the system is 819h, not sure why it is not in the data base.

 

[n3obl]

The NAC for the system is 819h, not sure why it is not in the data base.

Its listed by site. the urban site is known. county is not listed

updated

 

[maus92]

The NAC for the system is 819h, not sure why it is not in the data base.

The NAC Search feature is for Site NACs, not "system NACs". The Site NAC for the Urban Simulcast Site is published in the RRDB as 019 - but I cannot verify if it is correct. The Site NAC for the Countywide Simulcast Site is not listed in the RRDB. "NAC Search" basically allows any Site NAC to be valid; if a Site NAC is specified in programming and a different Site NAC is detected on the control channel, the radio will not receive traffic for that site.

 

[maus92]

That's a good point. P25 Trunk system from RR has 'NAC Search' for 'Countywide Simulcast' and 'Urban (City) Simulcast' rows at the P25 NAC column. There is no P25 NAC column when programming P25 X2. So you're suggesting something specific instead of 'NAC Search' in the P25 Trunk system?

"NAC Search" will allow any Site NAC value to be valid.

 

[GTR8000]

There is no such thing as an overall "System NAC". Every P25 system has the NAC assigned on a per-site basis, not on a systemwide basis. Now of course all sites may happen to use the same NAC, but even then it wouldn't be technically correct to call it the "System NAC". Nitpicky? Probably, but sometimes it's helpful to clarify the little things.

 

[Drachen_Fire]

Did the airport fire operations & dispatch move over as well, or are they still on their own VHF system?

 

[scnrfrq]

Did the airport fire operations & dispatch move over as well, or are they still on their own VHF system?

No, they used common sense. They are still in the clear on 154.98 digital.

 

[Drachen_Fire]

Digital? You have a NAC on that? I still had it programmed as analog.

 

[scnrfrq]

Digital? You have a NAC on that? I still had it programmed as analog.

It's 293.

 

[mfullererie]

Still hearing the noise - all day. I have an audio file I can send if someone has an idea.

I've been hearing it as well on old scanner at work as well as my pager. It's really annoying.

The other thing that surprises me with the paging is that they didn't put at TX PL on the frequencies and then program the pagers with that tone to eliminate any interference, as well as not having to hear the Morse ID if you're on the monitor mode on the pagers....

 

[scnrfrq]

I've been hearing it as well on old scanner at work as well as my pager. It's really annoying.

The other thing that surprises me with the paging is that they didn't put at TX PL on the frequencies and then program the pagers with that tone to eliminate any interference, as well as not having to hear the Morse ID if you're on the monitor mode on the pagers....

John Grappy has given me this explanation. They are looking into it.
"The interference is from the “former” Millcreek West Repeater. This frequency was repurposed for the new radio system for analog paging.
The former Millcreek West Repeater was disabled yesterday afternoon. I have not heard any feedback from our first responders.
We will follow up with our radio vendor (EF Johnson). "

 

[n3obl]

Also a good use to have pl on the paging freq is to have a backup channel in case of catastrophic system failure. Nothing works better than plain old analog.

 

[scnrfrq]

Im leaning toward the special channels are multiagency interop channels and not fire specific hence hearing police traffic and not being, encrypted.

I think you may be right on here. On the TG Assignments Chart John Grappy sent out on 9/1, the Special Events TG's are listed at the bottom of each zone column. That's after all PD and FD's. I'm going to check a little more, but I guess we can't lockout all 200's TG's after all. I would say these are inter-agency TG's by zone.

The other Inter-agency TG's for PD, FD, County, and CW Special 1 and 2 would be across multiple zones.

 

[Railbender]

I have to question how a lot of that talk group data meets the criteria for submission in the first place. From the RR Database Submission Guidelines; "We are interested in the following information that you have personally gathered and confirmed to be accurate, either on your own or as a group: ". How can a person gather and confirm the accuracy of encrypted data?