Iowa Statewide Interoperability Communication System (ISICS)

[west-pac]

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

FCC Callsign WRNB690 (CLINTON COUNTY COMMUNICATIONS)

FCC Callsign WRNB690 (CLINTON COUNTY COMMUNICATIONS)

www.radioreference.com

FCC info for that CC in Clinton Co.

 

[maus92]

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

Likely this:

WRNB690 - Clinton County Communications

ULS License - PubSafty/SpecEmer/PubSaftyNtlPlan,806-817/851-862MHz,Trunked License - WRNB690 - CLINTON COUNTY COMMUNICATIONS - Locations Summary

Looks like a local enhancement to the statewide system.

 

[MCWKen]

Likely this:

WRNB690 - Clinton County Communications

ULS License - PubSafty/SpecEmer/PubSaftyNtlPlan,806-817/851-862MHz,Trunked License - WRNB690 - CLINTON COUNTY COMMUNICATIONS - Locations Summary

Looks like a local enhancement to the statewide system.

It does list other adjacent ISICS sites local to the network. No voice activity so far. And the location explains why the strong signal strength for me.

 

[MCWKen]

Also as of today, Clinton County has gone live (not patched) on ISICS. TG 23520.

 

[burner50]

Two towers in Calhoun County are under construction per Calhoun County EMA facebook page.

 

[patmcc24]

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

I am also getting full signal on my SDS100 indoors in Savanna..... I have Control as 858.0375 with SCC's of 857.0375 and 856.0375.....

 

[MCWKen]

I did notice in the last two days of logs, they did not have the new Clinton tower 100% set up. TG's such as R6Call61 have not shown up, instead R5Call51 has been noted.

And there is a microwave dish pointed at Dewitt.

 

[MCWKen]

I have noticed a few new items in the past week on the Muscatine/Scott tower. First was testing on TG 54701, radio ID 10820382 at 11:54, 3/16/22.

Next is what sounds like an industrial user with at least 13 radio ID's showing for TG 4191 and 4190.

 

[cubn]

There are two site 119's listed in the database. I became aware when I imported this system into my G4 and I encountered an error.

 

[maus92]

There are two site 119's listed in the database. I became aware when I imported this system into my G4 and I encountered an error.

There are some issues with the RRBD entry for the 800 frequencies.

 

[west-pac]

There are some issues with the RRBD entry for the 800 frequencies.

I noticed that. There are a lot of holes for that system in the RRDB. When I looked into that I noticed most of the sites are licensed on the statewide license, meaning no frequency or location data is available from the FCC. Some sites have individual licenses, but they might be licensed to the counties that wanted simulcast cells; I didn't dig that far into that theory. I did sift through the ICICS official documentation, and found something interesting. In the FAQs, it was asked if the state was going to monitor local TGs. The answer was No, they would use computer software to determine TGs and individual sites were working correctly. That question seemed a little odd to me. It's a state-owned radio system that they're allowing the counties to use for free; and the counties are concerned that the state is going to listen in on them(?).

 

[maus92]

Duplicate site numbers (and WACNs and Sysids) don't matter when programming consumer scanning radios, but they do matter to professional gear like Unication radios, and actual subscriber units. It would be nice for someone in the Sioux City / Woodbury County area to verify the RRDB site numbers and frequencies for the 700 / 800 channels, the current control channels, and the Sysid and site NACs. The upper 800 channels are still licensed to Sioux City, but this is not uncommon when a "local enhancement" is added to a statewide system. I suspect that both the 700 and 800 channels are resources of site 1-019, and there is a duplicate site entry in the RRDB - but this needs to be verified by someone who can receive the system and has a radio or software that can decode control channel info. The solution would be editing the RRDB to combine all channels into a singular site 1-019 entry. It would not matter to Sentinel / scanner users, but would enable proper programming of a Unication radio using their download feature.

 

[burner50]

Duplicate site numbers (and WACNs and Sysids) don't matter when programming consumer scanning radios, but they do matter to professional gear like Unication radios, and actual subscriber units. It would be nice for someone in the Sioux City / Woodbury County area to verify the RRDB site numbers and frequencies for the 700 / 800 channels, the current control channels, and the Sysid and site NACs. The upper 800 channels are still licensed to Sioux City, but this is not uncommon when a "local enhancement" is added to a statewide system. I suspect that both the 700 and 800 channels are resources of site 1-019, and there is a duplicate site entry in the RRDB - but this needs to be verified by someone who can receive the system and has a radio or software that can decode control channel info. The solution would be editing the RRDB to combine all channels into a singular site 1-019 entry. It would not matter to Sentinel / scanner users, but would enable proper programming of a Unication radio using their download feature.

At least for Motorola and Unication equipment, site frequencies aren't tied to the actual site when programming. The commercial device will scan a list of all control channels programmed into the radio.

I have combined these sites as it appears that they should be combined into one logical site for the RRDB.

 

[maus92]

At least for Motorola and Unication equipment, site frequencies aren't tied to the actual site when programming. The commercial device will scan a list of all control channels programmed into the radio.

I have combined these sites as it appears that they should be combined into one logical site for the RRDB.

Yup, I'm aware that the decimal frequencies aren't important for subscribers as they are calculated from channel numbers and band plan info. The Unications however need the control channel frequencies, and many scanner users like to have all the site frequencies as some scan these systems conventionally for whatever reason. The issue was having a duplicate site number in the RRDB entry which causes problems when using the Unication PPS.

 

[tfhphoto]

At least for Motorola and Unication equipment, site frequencies aren't tied to the actual site when programming. The commercial device will scan a list of all control channels programmed into the radio.

I have combined these sites as it appears that they should be combined into one logical site for the RRDB.

I've never heard anything (nor observed an active control channel) on what was listed as the Woodbury 700 MHz site. As far as I know - and confirmed with Pro96.com - the 700 MHz frequencies are not used as trunking frequencies on the Starcomm simulcast sites. The Starcomm simulcast sites existed before ISICS - they were tied into the ISICS core about a year-ish after ISICS became a thing. Very similar to West Des Moines' previously stand-alone Westcomm sites, except that Starcomm reprogrammed all its radios (twice!) to conform to ISICS talkgroup numbering conventions where Westcomm has not (so far).

 

[maus92]

I've never heard anything (nor observed an active control channel) on what was listed as the Woodbury 700 MHz site. As far as I know - and confirmed with Pro96.com - the 700 MHz frequencies are not used as trunking frequencies on the Starcomm simulcast sites. The Starcomm simulcast sites existed before ISICS - they were tied into the ISICS core about a year-ish after ISICS became a thing. Very similar to West Des Moines' previously stand-alone Westcomm sites, except that Starcomm reprogrammed all its radios (twice!) to conform to ISICS talkgroup numbering conventions where Westcomm has not (so far).

Strange that the Woodbury 700 channels never show on the 1-019 site.

 

[tfhphoto]

Strange that the Woodbury 700 channels never show on the 1-019 site.

Maybe they were they planned for use in an ISICS site that never got built out since Starcomm tied into the core?

 

[burner50]

Yup, I'm aware that the decimal frequencies aren't important for subscribers as they are calculated from channel numbers and band plan info. The Unications however need the control channel frequencies, and many scanner users like to have all the site frequencies as some scan these systems conventionally for whatever reason. The issue was having a duplicate site number in the RRDB entry which causes problems when using the Unication PPS.

I haven't put them in my Unication, but I can see where that would cause problems.

I checked my personal notes and I show 01-019 to be STARCOMM

 

[mws72]

Misleading Talkgroup Labels

This weekend I was copying traffic on TAC 6D for speed checks. Normally under labels usage of Suffix of D would be a direct frequency. But since Iowa has an Area D this is not a direct TAC channel. A bit misleading, I guess I never noticed before.

 

[MCWKen]

Misleading Talkgroup Labels

This weekend I was copying traffic on TAC 6D for speed checks. Normally under labels usage of Suffix of D would be a direct frequency. But since Iowa has an Area D this is not a direct TAC channel. A bit misleading, I guess I never noticed before.

It fits into the other LAW, TAC, and ETAC talkgroup formats on all 6 Areas on ISP. I noticed they used TAC 6C along I-35 near Mason City for air enforcement.