Now that you have all of this input from the scanner guys, here is the information you need. Contact the FCC Operations Center at (202) 418-1122. They will be able to assist you. The FCC has teams that do field work to deal with interference to public safety frequencies and they have the authority to mitigate the interference and deal with the offender if needed.
-
To anyone looking to acquire commercial radio programming software:
Please do not make requests for copies of radio programming software which is sold (or was sold) by the manufacturer for any monetary value. All requests will be deleted and a forum infraction issued. Making a request such as this is attempting to engage in software piracy and this forum cannot be involved or associated with this activity. The same goes for any private transaction via Private Message. Even if you attempt to engage in this activity in PM's we will still enforce the forum rules. Your PM's are not private and the administration has the right to read them if there's a hint to criminal activity.
If you are having trouble legally obtaining software please state so. We do not want any hurt feelings when your vague post is mistaken for a free request. It is YOUR responsibility to properly word your request.
To obtain Motorola software see the Sticky in the Motorola forum.
The various other vendors often permit their dealers to sell the software online (i.e., Kenwood). Please use Google or some other search engine to find a dealer that sells the software. Typically each series or individual radio requires its own software package. Often the Kenwood software is less than $100 so don't be a cheapskate; just purchase it.
For M/A Com/Harris/GE, etc: there are two software packages that program all current and past radios. One package is for conventional programming and the other for trunked programming. The trunked package is in upwards of $2,500. The conventional package is more reasonable though is still several hundred dollars. The benefit is you do not need multiple versions for each radio (unlike Motorola).
This is a large and very visible forum. We cannot jeopardize the ability to provide the RadioReference services by allowing this activity to occur. Please respect this.
Horrible Interference on repeater
- Thread starter jcefd10
- Start date
lenk911
Member
Not sure if the procedure remains the same but this will give you guidance.
A few years ago a public safety licensee in a major city reported to the FCC in Gettysburg that my client's radio system was interfering with them. The first action of the FCC was to notify the frequency coordinator for the service of the frequency reported. They contacted me as the engineer of the system.
My client's system was 250 miles away from the offended system. Their transmitter was on the same frequency as the offended's extensive voting receiver system's input. In the summer, my client was heard loud and clear even though both had different CTCSS tones. First thing I did was to verify my client's system was not emitting the wrong tone and it wasn't. Second, I requested the coordinator to have them verify their tone.
A few years ago a public safety licensee in a major city reported to the FCC in Gettysburg that my client's radio system was interfering with them. The first action of the FCC was to notify the frequency coordinator for the service of the frequency reported. They contacted me as the engineer of the system.
My client's system was 250 miles away from the offended system. Their transmitter was on the same frequency as the offended's extensive voting receiver system's input. In the summer, my client was heard loud and clear even though both had different CTCSS tones. First thing I did was to verify my client's system was not emitting the wrong tone and it wasn't. Second, I requested the coordinator to have them verify their tone.
lenk911
Member
Coordinators attitude as very parochial. This little rural system was wrong and the big city was right. First of all interference from 250 miles away was no brainer and the coordinator should have known better. Second of all, the big city's system had a tone squelch failure on a dominate site that they told nobody about. When I challenged the coordinator's conclusions he was going to report me to the FCC. I said bring it on!
Bottom lines:
1. The first investigator may have little qualification but play tough guy.
2. Make sure you're in the right before you report to the FCC.
3. Know your in the rights and know the FCC rules governing your system.
4. Never use a VHF base frequency as your input for a receiver voting system .
Bottom lines:
1. The first investigator may have little qualification but play tough guy.
2. Make sure you're in the right before you report to the FCC.
3. Know your in the rights and know the FCC rules governing your system.
4. Never use a VHF base frequency as your input for a receiver voting system .
I'll bet 250 miles is well outside the designed protection radius of even the highest power of VHF stations.
As if interference on the input/output from/to distant mobiles wouldn't be bad enough, they go ahead and reverse the split and put bases transmitting up where only receivers should be.
As if interference on the input/output from/to distant mobiles wouldn't be bad enough, they go ahead and reverse the split and put bases transmitting up where only receivers should be.
kayn1n32008
ØÆSØ Say it, say 'ENCRYPTION'
These calculations should be done for EVERY receive and transmit frequency, and include ALL sites with in at least a half mile. Possibly a mile for high power transmitters.
This includes broadcast and cellular centre frequencies.
MTS2000des
5B2_BEE00 Czar
Yeah, I did that and all they did was write a letter to a building owner who's get her done BDA jammed my part 90 trunked radio system relied on by 4 PSAPs and 7,000 plus subscribers. The FCC is a joke. Better to engage local technical folks and track it down yourself, use local AHJ "tools" to gain compliance if resistance is encountered.
G7RUX
Active Member
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2021
- Messages
- 537
Absolutely so, I spend a remarkable amount of my time doing exactly this while planning systems. The vast majority of intermod problems occur with very local systems although you are correct in that further ones can be the culprit; the nearby ones, being much higher PSD, will tend to dominate.
speedway_navigator
Member
I thought tablets and NUCs were cool, then I bought a win 10 stick PC as Fry's called it, about $90. USB for power, I run quick books on it, carry it with me between summer and winter homes. It's about the length of a PC drive but half the width.
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2017
- Messages
- 186
Send me some info on this please. I do I face have internet at both sites and a VPN set up between the 2.
speedway_navigator
Member
Have you tried a tiny SA or RF explorer?
My RTL is still sitting on a shelf after umpteen years of "I"m going to try that real soon".
JustinWHT
Member
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2022
- Messages
- 225
I'll throw this in here. Could be either Miscellaneous Metallic Junction Intermodulation (MMJI) from a corroded metal.joint, or a defective transmitter or duplexer.
I had a paging frequency of 152.480 MHz and one of the two Denton, TX GTE VHF IMTS mobilephone channels (157.74 - 158.10 MHz) was going out on my 152.480. I did the frequency math and figured out which of their transmitters was at fault, stopped by their shop and they shut off that transmitter.
I had a paging frequency of 152.480 MHz and one of the two Denton, TX GTE VHF IMTS mobilephone channels (157.74 - 158.10 MHz) was going out on my 152.480. I did the frequency math and figured out which of their transmitters was at fault, stopped by their shop and they shut off that transmitter.
speedway_navigator
Member
My cousin and I had that in Indiana years ago as Paging USA.
When I was installing IMTS phones in San Diego we only had 3 or 4 channels. I think LA and Vegas had them all.
I came on just after MTS went to IMTS.
JustinWHT
Member
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2022
- Messages
- 225
Remember Ironsides in San Franciso with Raymond Burr using an MTS phone in his s van?
SF wilh it's hills had receivers on telephone poles fed to a central voting system.
With exception in Abilene everything west of Fort Worth was manual MTS.
sempai
Member
in my line of work, i am obliged to assume it's intentional. is there any equipment within 30 feet of your gear that you don't recognize or anything? is there any way somewhere else in the building or facility that anyone would be able to access that would give direct or indirect access to your own gear, or are you certain your equipment hasn't been tampered with?
i can think of a lot of reasons to intentionally interfere with EMS communications, and they're all terrible.
i can think of a lot of reasons to intentionally interfere with EMS communications, and they're all terrible.
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2017
- Messages
- 186
No sir. Nothing has changed. I'm all but certain its propagation. I was just up at the site and there was zero interference today.
I saw where the station I believe is causing it modified their license about 3 months ago, and that's when it started. I've been trying to dig in a little, but the FCC site is extremely slow if it works at all seems like.
JustinWHT
Member
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2022
- Messages
- 225
Because the FCC has priorities being with certifying Part 15 products.
FCC Priorities
/sarcasm mode on Now we know why it takes so long for FCC to investigate interference. They devote time on this!
MTS2000des
5B2_BEE00 Czar
Yep. They could give two dumps less about PS interference. I can personally attest. Interference like crippling/degrading a major trunked radio system not some guy not being able to use his HT at home stuff either. They don't care. Get up, get down, FCC is a joke in your town.
