Iowa Statewide Interoperability Communication System (ISICS)

[Dockjockey53]

I was asking about digital paging on fire and ems last night in Iowa and today Fremont county started test it on their fire frequencies. Mills county was first in this area to page on digital frequencies now it looks like Fremont is following suit.

 

[MidwestRadioListener]

I was under the impression that base ISICS network was completed - the lead Motorola construction engineer has moved on some time ago. Perhaps the state is running a coverage improvement program, or some individual jurisdictions are adding sites to improve portable on-street talk-in performance. The system did pass its coverage testing program using the mobile on-street in 95% of accessible areas standard.

The Statewide system project is done. There are lots of builds outs and local addition projects that are ongoing and likely will be for years.

 

[Dockjockey53]

down here in sw iowa almost all paging is on analog and the digital is for talk. Last night I posted the previous message and only Mills Co. was paging on digital, this morning Fremont started testing pager tones on the fire frequencies. (ask and ye shall receive)

 

[burner50]

We tried that for awhile... It was highly annoying... Had to carry two radios, and couldn't hear pages in our truck.

More than once we were pulling into the station and got a phone call "are you going to take that next call?"

 

[MCWKen]

I have been seeing/hearing traffic on TG's 23531 and 23546 in the last few days via the Scott (Muscatine) tower. TG 23531 appears to be Clinton County fire, and 23546 was said to be Wheatland fire. I did not have the VHF radio handy to see if those TG's were patched to the old radio.

 

[MCWKen]

I have a question for Eastern Iowa users. On R6Call61, I have noticed that several different agencies have the same Radio ID's, specifically, 5700000. Not all counties show that for example Clinton County which is 230990x ( I suppose due to the counsel used). I had thought each agency has it's own specific RID's.

Thanks in advance.

 

[timkilbride]

I have a question for Eastern Iowa users. On R6Call61, I have noticed that several different agencies have the same Radio ID's, specifically, 5700000. Not all counties show that for example Clinton County which is 230990x ( I suppose due to the counsel used). I had thought each agency has it's own specific RID's.

Thanks in advance.

5700000 is originating from the SARA system. SARA system users doesn't actually leave the SARA system to use the ISICS regional call/tac talkgroups.

Tim

 

[thatoneiowan]

Agree with Tim. I think one of them is 5700064 or something. I just label them as SARA Patch. There are a couple SARA agencies that have unique RIDs (Story County) but the vast majority don't afaik

 

[MCWKen]

J-Com, Blackhawk, Johnson, Jones, Iowa, Scott, Cedar, and Linn counties are the ones I made note of using 5700000. All the other counties in Region 6 and 5 have unique RID's. I also noticed that all those agencies are encrypted, I take that is standard on that system?

Thanks for pointing that out to me.

 

[timkilbride]

J-Com, Blackhawk, Johnson, Jones, Iowa, Scott, Cedar, and Linn counties are the ones I made note of using 5700000. All the other counties in Region 6 and 5 have unique RID's. I also noticed that all those agencies are encrypted, I take that is standard on that system?

Thanks for pointing that out to me.

Those counties you listed are all SARA users with the exception of Cedar county. All those counties are also located in Region 6. Cedar County may have something special as they do a lot of interop with SARA users.

I'm not quite following your encryption comment???

The other region 6 and 5 RID's you are seeing are actual ISICS users with a ISICS RID. The 5700000 is the patch RID (or whatever technology they are using to bring the two systems together) between ISICS and SARA.

Tim

 

[thatoneiowan]

The encryption on the SARA Network seems to be standard out in Eastern Iowa. Central Iowa not so much. There's a few things that are but I wouldn't say it's the norm. I also agree with the radio ID Tim had I think I got confused when I mentioned 5700064 earlier - I think that one is an isics patch on the SARA system.

 

[TJK50010]

I noticed that Ames dispatch is in the database as TE. Did they go full channel encrypted?

 

[MCWKen]

Good afternoon folks. Had TG 4270 show up as an encrypted group. The Radio ID's were 15000104 and 15000095 which looked familiar. It showed up on both Muscatine and Clinton (Site 122) at 14:33:41 if that helps those who log.

Regards.

 

[mws72]

Good afternoon folks. Had TG 4270 show up as an encrypted group. The Radio ID's were 15000104 and 15000095 which looked familiar. It showed up on both Muscatine and Clinton (Site 122) at 14:33:41 if that helps those who log.

Regards.

I have seen that at times in the past. No ideas or guesses at this time. Also seen on Muscatine/Scott

 

[mws72]

Those counties you listed are all SARA users with the exception of Cedar county. All those counties are also located in Region 6. Cedar County may have something special as they do a lot of interop with SARA users.

I'm not quite following your encryption comment???

The other region 6 and 5 RID's you are seeing are actual ISICS users with a ISICS RID. The 5700000 is the patch RID (or whatever technology they are using to bring the two systems together) between ISICS and SARA.

Tim

Well Cedar County has signed with RACOM for SARA. Just having a problem finding tower sites. I have seen & heard Scott County using both 5700000 and 8200000 on the Region 6 Call TG.

 

[MCWKen]

Well Cedar County has signed with RACOM for SARA. Just having a problem finding tower sites. I have seen & heard Scott County using both 5700000 and 8200000 on the Region 6 Call TG.

I noted in the press that very question of tower sites. I had though however, that RACOM performed the due-diligence and paid for the towers. The article read as if the County was doing all the work and paying for the sites. $9 million is quite a big price.

I have seen that at times in the past. No ideas or guesses at this time. Also seen on Muscatine/Scott

I need to correct myself, I have noted the traffic on the Scott tower (I am a bit far away to get any usable signal from Muscatine).

Thanks,

 

[mws72]

I noted in the press that very question of tower sites. I had though however, that RACOM performed the due-diligence and paid for the towers. The article read as if the County was doing all the work and paying for the sites. $9 million is quite a big price.

I need to correct myself, I have noted the traffic on the Scott tower (I am a bit far away to get any usable signal from Muscatine).

Thanks,

Scott & Muscatine towers are simulcast so the same traffic on both.

 

[MCWKen]

Scott & Muscatine towers are simulcast so the same traffic on both.

I am still having a hard time understanding Simulcast. Specifically, how two transmitters operating on the same frequency do not cancel each other out or create an awful noise.

Yes, I have read the Wiki, but it never addressed noise or overlapping signals.

 

[maus92]

I am still having a hard time understanding Simulcast. Specifically, how two transmitters operating on the same frequency do not cancel each other out or create an awful noise.

Yes, I have read the Wiki, but it never addressed noise or overlapping signals.

Precise transmitter timing, a waveform designed to tolerate slightly out-of-sync signal timing at the receiver, and generally higher quality receivers. Simulcast is the prevalent technology used in systems in the eastern part of the country, particularly in (but not limited to) dense urban areas where there is a need for better in-building penetration. The other major driver is frequency efficiency to preserve a limited resource.

 

[MCWKen]

Good morning peoples. I noted a new site on ISICS. Control channel is 858.0375; NAC 0x4c9; WACN Bee00; RFSS 2; Site 23. It showed up on my Adjacent Sites list last night on OP25. The control channel has a very high signal strength here in Clinton. Unknown tower location............yet. Will monitor the CC for a few hours this morning.

Ken