If they could all patch to NTIRN it would solve problems too many systems with interop calling makes it confusing agreed ?
GMRS interop
- Thread starter kmartin
- Start date
Project25_MASTR
TX-COMU
There is a system to system native interface within P25 but it is not very commonly used in Texas that is called Inter Sub-System Interface (there is a similar inteface specifically for consoles called the Console Sub-System Interface) that allows for native patching and talkgroup translations. It even allows for automatic subscriber roaming between systems (typically it relies on additional subscriber programming including system talkgroup translation info so the radio knows what talkgroups are related on the adjacent system). The problem with the interface as it was written, it is a 1-to-1 interface meaning one connection to one system and cannot relay/piggy-back through systems. That becomes someone problematic in Texas where nothing scales well due to the 50+ P25 trunking systems currently active in the state. To make all of those systems "roamable" would require 2500+ interconnections. Just to cover the 9 "regional" systems as identified by the state would take some 64 interconnections as each system has to connect to each other system individually). Even that is at a scale larger than what has ever been attempted. So at the end of the day, interoperability between the systems is always going to be an issue. If you have never heard the term before, Texas very much consists of a System of Systems and not a true statewide system.
The SOP should be, meet on the largest common denominator to interop. So if that were NTRIN, then NTIRN should've been where everyone met up but again, that takes training that isn't always "common sense" to a lot of agencies.
The SOP should be, meet on the largest common denominator to interop. So if that were NTRIN, then NTIRN should've been where everyone met up but again, that takes training that isn't always "common sense" to a lot of agencies.
GMRS is used widely in Northeast Dallas and surrounding cities/counties. Also, dispatchers use it a lot to talk to each other. I've heard Garland, Mesquite (of course), but also Richardson, Rockwall, Plano, NTTA, even a couple of Counties. On the mobile side, I hear Dallas, Garland and Mesquite quite a bit.
PAWMCo, Frisco and McKinney (I never mapped it out, but Denton County might be linked to Frisco as well for Little Elm) have several talkgroups that are linked across systems, allowing the Fire Departments to have a common mutual aid talkgroup for responses along the shared borders, so it does happen in this region.
I wonder if Texas will ever do like Many other states have done and use a state wide system for texas ?
8/29 11:15 PM Terrell PD was trying to raise Dallas PD on both GMRS and NTIRN and never got a reply on either law call channel you could actually hear the urgency turned to frustration in their voice
Today I learned the NTIRN Interop calling is down , I had heard several agencies trying to contact ft worth on I/O call with no response , a couple of hours later on one of the DPD channels I heard an officer ask if the I/O calling channel was working again , the dispatcher replied that they would check to find out and that they were maintenance done , but never heard the dispatcher say anything else
Heard DPS 101, Plano and Richardson on GMRS InterOp Calling yesterday assisting Allen chase green Charger down SB US 75 yesterday. In custody at Campbell Rd - very interesting.
I thought the NCTCOG system was supposed to serve as the interoperability layer for this kind of coordination across all these systems.
Based on the Dallas P25 / NCTCOG Trunking System, Dallas, Fort Worth Area, Texas and what I understand, that layer has largely been abandoned, with agencies moved to NTIRN and other systems instead.
It seems like DFW could have a shared core set of interop channels there on NCTCOG, patched on demand via ISSI from the other systems. That would be cleaner than maintaining separate IO groups across NTIRN, GMRS, PAWMCo, Denton, and others.
For example, if a pursuit started in Arlington and ends in Richardson, each involved agency could patch its working group on it's system into a single shared IO channel on that interop layer. And state units like DPS 101 and others could show up directly on NCTCOG
Based on the Dallas P25 / NCTCOG Trunking System, Dallas, Fort Worth Area, Texas and what I understand, that layer has largely been abandoned, with agencies moved to NTIRN and other systems instead.
It seems like DFW could have a shared core set of interop channels there on NCTCOG, patched on demand via ISSI from the other systems. That would be cleaner than maintaining separate IO groups across NTIRN, GMRS, PAWMCo, Denton, and others.
For example, if a pursuit started in Arlington and ends in Richardson, each involved agency could patch its working group on it's system into a single shared IO channel on that interop layer. And state units like DPS 101 and others could show up directly on NCTCOG
Last edited:
Yeah, I monitored that as well. The problem is that in a lot of these cases DPS 101 just unilaterally takes it upon himself to simulcast across multiple talkgroups, systems and agencies... so it works out but still sounds like a mess and there's all kinds of confusion.
NCTCOG probably doesn't have portable level coverage, so people switching over to there from their portables is going to be problematic from a coverage perspective, but air units could hang out there and switch direct to the IO channels, whereas agencies operating on their own systems could have their dispatchers setup on demand ISSI patches to NCTCOG.
There could even be a shared portal for NCTCOG that could show the status on demand of channel and their assignments - currently people have to call Fort Worth on IO Call to get an assignment, and I think Garland assigns GMRS channels. A shared web portal that all the dispatch agencies in the metro area, run by NCTCOG, could just reserve channels for a specific time period (i.e. some task force sees IO-LAW-9 is available and they reserve it for 4 hours or something)
Yes, Garland assigns IO channels on GMRS. Agencies along the Garland/Dallas/Dallas County/Collin County borders have been using GMRS IO channels for several years, prior to NTIRN. I think they're just used to "what works". InterOp channels on NTIRN, GMRS, PAWMCo should be linked together. I never heard a lot of InterOp on NCTCOG - It was used more by base ops rather than mobiles (though sharper dispatchers could've patched NCTCOG to their local channels.
Last edited:
I'd postulate that what needs to happen in DFW is the IO channels get consolidated, and that they be organized by a single genre model. Not "Fire, Law, Public Works, etc." as separate pools. Just one calling channel and then something like 24 general IO channels behind it.
Here's roughly how I'd structure it:
1. NCTCOG runs and manages it.
2. There's an online portal for channel reservations, or a "take it" style interface where any DFW-area dispatcher, for any agency, can grab a free channel on demand for an incident.
3. The core for the IO channels lives on the NCTCOG P25 interop layer.
4. NTIRN, GMRS, and PAWMCo, Denton County and others can mirror these channels, ISSI patch to them, and so on, but everywhere they're known by one naming convention:
- "COG IO Call"
- "COG IO 1," "COG IO 2," and so on.
5. Every DFW-area system dispatcher knows about these and either patches a local agency working channel (say "DPD 5 NW," "Irving Fire FG2," or "Arlington Spec Event 1") to a COG IO channel, or tells units to "switch to COG IO 5." The workflow could simply be "All units in the pursuit, we're patching to COG IO 3" - then over COG IO Call the dispatch can say "Arlington PD to Dallas PD we're in pursuit of a BMW M5 EB IH-30, we're patched to COG IO 3" and then the handoff is complete.
6. NCTCOG can also run conventional patches out to the simplex and repeater interop resources already deployed for out of town/state resources
7. Overlay agencies and units, DPS and DPS 101, CareFlight, and air units like FWPD Air and DPD Air-1, can just live on the NCTCOG overlay for interop instead of carrying those $50K six-headed radios that simulcast across eight different systems at once and probably have to be reprogrammed once a month. Carrying eight radios isn't interop, it's a workaround for the lack of it.
8. Run training for every dispatcher on how this works, and pull the complexity off the end users as much as possible. When I hear DPD units randomly coming up on GMRS IO Call to ask for help, I'm generally impressed and dismayed at the same time, because they're a distinct minority and it's ad-hoc interop by the end users rather than something the system actually delivers.
Here's roughly how I'd structure it:
1. NCTCOG runs and manages it.
2. There's an online portal for channel reservations, or a "take it" style interface where any DFW-area dispatcher, for any agency, can grab a free channel on demand for an incident.
3. The core for the IO channels lives on the NCTCOG P25 interop layer.
4. NTIRN, GMRS, and PAWMCo, Denton County and others can mirror these channels, ISSI patch to them, and so on, but everywhere they're known by one naming convention:
- "COG IO Call"
- "COG IO 1," "COG IO 2," and so on.
5. Every DFW-area system dispatcher knows about these and either patches a local agency working channel (say "DPD 5 NW," "Irving Fire FG2," or "Arlington Spec Event 1") to a COG IO channel, or tells units to "switch to COG IO 5." The workflow could simply be "All units in the pursuit, we're patching to COG IO 3" - then over COG IO Call the dispatch can say "Arlington PD to Dallas PD we're in pursuit of a BMW M5 EB IH-30, we're patched to COG IO 3" and then the handoff is complete.
6. NCTCOG can also run conventional patches out to the simplex and repeater interop resources already deployed for out of town/state resources
7. Overlay agencies and units, DPS and DPS 101, CareFlight, and air units like FWPD Air and DPD Air-1, can just live on the NCTCOG overlay for interop instead of carrying those $50K six-headed radios that simulcast across eight different systems at once and probably have to be reprogrammed once a month. Carrying eight radios isn't interop, it's a workaround for the lack of it.
8. Run training for every dispatcher on how this works, and pull the complexity off the end users as much as possible. When I hear DPD units randomly coming up on GMRS IO Call to ask for help, I'm generally impressed and dismayed at the same time, because they're a distinct minority and it's ad-hoc interop by the end users rather than something the system actually delivers.
Last edited:
That would be the best way to set interop for multiple users / cities , county's .
But also as many have mentioned the training on how to get everyone used to using the interop seems to be an issue
Whospoonbill
Member
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2015
- Messages
- 367
- Reaction score
- -11
I half to be on martin on this like it or not it sounds like a encryption issue but we will never know if it’s encryption or training unless you foa or whatever it’s called there stuff which = more money for agency however dps is open. Regardless. If it is encryption it’s gonna suck for people who are pro encryptionist
mmckenna
I ♥ Ø
You're guessing.
I've been doing this for nearly 30 years now. It's training, it's almost always training.
If by some chance it was encryption, it's not the fault of encryption, it's whoever programmed and keyloaded the radio. Which goes back to the training issue.
Been there, done that, got the t-shirt.
Whospoonbill
Member
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2015
- Messages
- 367
- Reaction score
- -11
Also your using military graded encryption i can tell you military isn't talking to someone on multiple other channels or having to share thousands of keys in like Iran or Afghanistan. even if it's Harris or Motorola it's was meant for the MILITARY. the issue with encryption is you have dps talking with other agency, fire and ems sometimes wanting to talk to pd and other agency and some agency don't share keys. So going to your key loaded radio statement this isn't the military this is law enforcement that needs to talk to each other and I'm kinda glad they don't share key they select who they do and don't cause it higher the chance of them having to reopen. So regardless you may like encryption but i can tell you it's gone prove deadly one day and it actually already almost has. But until people start talking to senators, governor, mayor, and president, nothing will happen what might happen is like with these flock cameras just getting shut down if people start turning on agency that went encrypted and other people see that agency. They might and most likely will unencrypt for transparency reason just like most agency's said there reasoning was for shutting down flock cameras.
Oh my, we are getting off in to the weeds now.
Like mmckenna said, Ive been doing this a long time too, and a lot of what he said is fact.
But I still maintain for all the
others on here, Dallas Tx, 635, in a chase is no time to be trying to change channels/tg unless its a 2 man unit.
The persuing agency dispatch should have locked that tg down to emergency traffic only related to the chase, notified other related agencies of the IO tg they would use ( as lblanton described) to either update all others on that IO group or patch the traffic to it...
the officer, no matter his training,or his radio is putting himself in danger fumbling with a radio in a chase.
I actually found myself riding in a Sheriffs patrol car one night many years ago when that deputy got into a chase going in to another County..
So I kinda saw what was going on in the persuit
Like mmckenna said, Ive been doing this a long time too, and a lot of what he said is fact.
But I still maintain for all the
others on here, Dallas Tx, 635, in a chase is no time to be trying to change channels/tg unless its a 2 man unit.
The persuing agency dispatch should have locked that tg down to emergency traffic only related to the chase, notified other related agencies of the IO tg they would use ( as lblanton described) to either update all others on that IO group or patch the traffic to it...
the officer, no matter his training,or his radio is putting himself in danger fumbling with a radio in a chase.
I actually found myself riding in a Sheriffs patrol car one night many years ago when that deputy got into a chase going in to another County..
So I kinda saw what was going on in the persuit
mmckenna
I ♥ Ø
Our county has one of the SO channels assigned as the mutual aid resource for events like this. All of our radios have it set as the first click over from our own dispatch channel. Same on mobiles and portables. Other agencies in the county are set up the same way, I believe.
So, no eyes off the road, one click over.
I'm using Harris, and the screen backlight is programmed to change to red, so they don't even have to read the channel name on the screen.
Console patch, or program the radios to support an easier switch. Technology will support this, training will reinforce it.
Wilrobnson
Rock or Something
Literally confused by whatever Bill posted above.
Having been in more than a few pursuits/critical incidents/etc, I can say the literal last thing anyone is going to be able to do while driving 120mph/aim in and return fire/whatever is necessary, is to scroll through zones or change channels.
Units waiting for the chase to thunder past them have the time to find Zone 3/Ch 4 for the primary agency, or Zone 7/Ch 12 for some interop TG; whereas the units doing 120mph down the highway/turnpike/etc are a little preoccupied.
If you have a dispatch that can't or doesn't know how to patch/bridge through ISSI/LTE, you're going to be doing your business on primary, end of story.... Until some scanner bunny cries about it on the internet.
I've known plenty of cops who never deviated from Channel-1, and more than a few dispatchers who, even looking at their consoles (!) didn't know alternate channels existed.
TL;DR- radios need better fleetmaps for tense situations, everyone needs more training (to include dispatch).
90% training, 10% violence of action.
Having been in more than a few pursuits/critical incidents/etc, I can say the literal last thing anyone is going to be able to do while driving 120mph/aim in and return fire/whatever is necessary, is to scroll through zones or change channels.
Units waiting for the chase to thunder past them have the time to find Zone 3/Ch 4 for the primary agency, or Zone 7/Ch 12 for some interop TG; whereas the units doing 120mph down the highway/turnpike/etc are a little preoccupied.
If you have a dispatch that can't or doesn't know how to patch/bridge through ISSI/LTE, you're going to be doing your business on primary, end of story.... Until some scanner bunny cries about it on the internet.
I've known plenty of cops who never deviated from Channel-1, and more than a few dispatchers who, even looking at their consoles (!) didn't know alternate channels existed.
TL;DR- radios need better fleetmaps for tense situations, everyone needs more training (to include dispatch).
Yes someone switching the channels, the dispatcher or someone else at the base end off the radio system instead of the officers involved in the chase ,