LMRN Technical Data Discussion

[mikewazowski]

I've got Wasaga, Craigleith and Awenda already active.

 

[pokey]

Has anyone found that the signal strength on the new system is poor? In Mississauga, I only get signal using my G5 when fairly close to the tower, and in the Milton area I barely get a signal off of Ballinafad, even when I’m up that way in Halton. So basically, no coverage in Milton.

 

[mciupa]

Depends where you are trying to monitor from. I have a robust signal here in Toronto as you can see in the picture. That is on 142.680 MHz.
Mississauga on 142.665 and Ballinifad on 142.605 don't show any peaks with the gain set to the max.

 

[Enjoi19]

Has anyone found that the signal strength on the new system is poor? In Mississauga, I only get signal using my G5 when fairly close to the tower, and in the Milton area I barely get a signal off of Ballinafad, even when I’m up that way in Halton. So basically, no coverage in Milton.

It may be more to do with the G5 antenna than the system. With a 1/4 wave on my vehicle, in good spots I can pull in a huge chunk of the GTA, like 6-7 sites easy. Keeping in mind the G5's VHF antenna is a small strip along the side, basically.

 

[pokey]

That’s a good point, I never thought of that!

It may be more to do with the G5 antenna than the system. With a 1/4 wave on my vehicle, in good spots I can pull in a huge chunk of the GTA, like 6-7 sites easy. Keeping in mind the G5's VHF antenna is a small strip along the side, basical

 

[rneals]

I'm seeing St Catharines MTO units in the Niagara 2052 TG regularly using the Ontario LMRN Pontypool tower, and I don't believe they are on a patch. (Pontypool is between Oshawa and Peterborough)
This sequence of transmissions pertained to Lake Street and the QEW in St Catharines, which is west of the Garden City Skyway.






Coverage map of Pontypool.

 

[Enjoi19]

I see some encrypted comms and affiliations with the 140xx series talkgroups, which I have not noticed before. 600xxx RIDs.

 

[gary123]

The towers are lower powered although they can be turned up. My understanding is they they think that this will allow the mobiles to roam to stronger sites rather than remain on a site that may be less than optimum for the area the unit is in. There may or may not be a thought that this may also balance the number of units over a larger tower set. I do not think the last is the right way to think of it. More units on more towers means that each site may need more voice channels to accommodate a unit roaming on and off the site. Time will tell.

 

[mapleradio]

The towers are lower powered although they can be turned up. My understanding is they they think that this will allow the mobiles to roam to stronger sites rather than remain on a site that may be less than optimum for the area the unit is in. There may or may not be a thought that this may also balance the number of units over a larger tower set. I do not think the last is the right way to think of it. More units on more towers means that each site may need more voice channels to accommodate a unit roaming on and off the site. Time will tell.

Same theory as a WiFi network.... less output power but better CCQ as APs are closer to the users. "5G" networks are utilizing this principal... with minimal success in Ontario IMHO.
It works well on a contained campus, but at wide areas, I believe it loses it's technical ability to chooch packets.

 

[mciupa]

Me too. This is what I put into the Wiki page

14002 Toronto (RIDs: 600002, 600005,600007)

 

[icarus1963]

Me too. This is what I put into the Wiki page

14002 Toronto (RIDs: 600002, 600005,600007)

Im getting 14000 in Brantford,
RIDs: 600018, 600021

 

[exkalibur]

The towers are lower powered although they can be turned up. My understanding is they they think that this will allow the mobiles to roam to stronger sites rather than remain on a site that may be less than optimum for the area the unit is in. There may or may not be a thought that this may also balance the number of units over a larger tower set. I do not think the last is the right way to think of it. More units on more towers means that each site may need more voice channels to accommodate a unit roaming on and off the site. Time will tell.

I'm curious about the only neighbor Toronto has being King City, despite the old neighbours being online. I did notice a lot of radios that would jump back and forth between Mowat and Fonthill, so perhaps this is their way of avoiding that.

 

[mikewazowski]

Saw 14001 and 14002 off of Edgar. The other thing to note is that the encryption key ID hasn't been seen in the past.

 

[rneals]

I'm curious about the only neighbor Toronto has being King City, despite the old neighbours being online. I did notice a lot of radios that would jump back and forth between Mowat and Fonthill, so perhaps this is their way of avoiding that.

Toronto is a new site, and has a smaller coverage than King City. Probably contained fully within the broader coverage of King City.
I suspect that they think Toronto is going to be an "underlay" to King City, and that all mobiles should move to King City before moving to any other site.

Generally speaking, you don't want mobiles moving frivolously between sites because every site move creates registration traffic.
That drives up signalling load in the network, and can congest control channels and central servers.

However, we are in 2024 and AI would be much better at analyzing core system log data and calculating the site adjacency broadcasts than doing it manually.

 

[mciupa]

Reading that Toronto is a new site made me do some looking back. Toronto may appear that it is new as it was off-line for quite a while.
I have been keeping track of the Toronto site since June 5, 2023. Talkgroups 2051, 2052 and 2058 (2058 which is un-id as of today) were tested as far back as Nov. 2022 off of the Mississauga tower.

 

[mbstone99]

Checked my logs and seeing TG 14001 (RID 600009, 11, 22 & 28) and 14002 (600007) here in Hamilton.

Matt

 

[rneals]

Reading that Toronto is a new site made me do some looking back. Toronto may appear that it is new as it was off-line for quite a while.
I have been keeping track of the Toronto site since June 5, 2023. Talkgroups 2051, 2052 and 2058 (2058 which is un-id as of today) were tested as far back as Nov. 2022 off of the Mississauga tower.

New physical location. Fleetnet Toronto was on the roof of Mowat Block at Queen's Park.
My understanding, which is non authoritative, is that the 700 MHz Queens Park LMRN site is at Mowat and the LMRN Toronto VHF site is somewhere in north nearer the 401 / Downsview.

 

[mciupa]

Saw 14001 and 14002 off of Edgar. The other thing to note is that the encryption key ID hasn't been seen in the past.

I see that Key ID today with an alpha of "D" used for 14002 off of Toronto tower. They use a similar ID but with an alpha of "E" Key ID down Sarnia way, which was EMS and Hospital related. The 600000 RID is being used up here where the 750000's where used down in western Ontario with talkgroups in the 23000's.

 

[gary123]

it does appear that the 14xxx GTA is used in the GTA area. I do not see is showing on the Oxford or London sites.

 

[EJB]

New physical location. Fleetnet Toronto was on the roof of Mowat Block at Queen's Park.
My understanding, which is non authoritative, is that the 700 MHz Queens Park PSRN site is at Mowat and the PSRN Toronto VHF site is somewhere in north nearer the 401 / Downsview.

Maybe the MTO complex at Keele/401 or the Forensic building there also. They had Bell infrastructure at the Forensic building, I was the buyer for the company that did the job.