LMRN Technical Data Discussion

[IdleMonitor]

I didn't add anything to the database. The frequency in question here VR04 was already in the database. If you'll notice, the latest update included the other frequency mentioned in this thread which is

772.05625

RM

131.8 PL

MOH 700VR3

VR03 Mobile Repeater

FMN

EMS Dispatch

I just add frequencies to my own personal programming based on observations mentioned in these threads. It was just noticed when I put them in the order mentioned, it looks like it matched the same as FleetNet with 5 VR's for EMS.

I haven't confirmed nothing, this system hasn't even reached my part of Ontario yet.

Looks like those were added to the database based on your post so you can't really go by them.

Have you confirmed any of those frequencies or was it just an educated guess?

 

[Muxlow]

I can confirm that EMS VR03 771.89375 (PL 127.3) and EMS VR05 773.03125 (PL 136.5) have been active in Sarnia.

I know these are VR03 and 05 since the UHF side was still going the day they were doing installs and testing. Truck on VR03 UHF was coming thru VR03 700 MHz on 771.89375. The same goes for VR05.

 

[gary123]

Thanks to the winter storm, there has been a lot of activity on FleetNet and LMRN DVRS frequencies. I have noticed that the DVRS radios have a distinctive chirp on key up. I am now hearing the same chirp on EMS patches. The chirp is not a repeated chirp from the mobile but is coming from the hospital side. Conclusion, the patch configuration is being updated.

 

[mikewazowski]

Thanks to the winter storm, there has been a lot of activity on FleetNet and LMRN DVRS frequencies. I have noticed that the DVRS radios have a distinctive chirp on key up. I am now hearing the same chirp on EMS patches. The chirp is not a repeated chirp from the mobile but is coming from the hospital side. Conclusion, the patch configuration is being updated.

Throw DSD+ on the frequency and you'll see the chirps are actually P25 packets.

 

[gary123]

Hi Mike. No they are not data packets. Its a short 1000Hz 125ms burst on key up. I am researching the conditions when this burst appears.

Thanks to the holidays, I should have a few hours to monitor FleetNet EMS TAC and the DVRS frequencies at the same time. Its not being heard from the EMS unit to the hospital but from the hospital to the EMS. I do not recall hearing it today but I am working today so it's being squeezed in when the opportunity is there.

 

[gary123]

Minor update. I did the simultaneous monitoring today. The DVRS was active although the EMS was using the vehicle radio. I did not hear the beep. I started to think I was hearing things LOL. I put the unit back in full scan and just before I made this post I heard the beep on a different TAC and EMS coverage area. New conclusion it might be a single console doing it??? Again research continues.

 

[mrweather]

FWIW, I was driving the 401 yesterday through London and would hear a semi-regular chirp on an OPP VR as well.

 

[bluwest]

And what kind of pattern are you seeing?

 

[gary123]

It's highly intermittent. Some patches have it, some do not. It does not appear to be from a specific facility or unit. Right now I am checking Middlesex, Oxford and Perth sites. I am also doing a regular check of all users on the sites listening for a beep. I did hear it on a OPP unit who was on his portable. This was not unusual for a DVRS user.

To catch the patch beep it means sitting on the individual sites and only scanning the patches and listening for the beep. Personally I do not care about the contents of the patch. My interest is in how the infrastructure works. I am keeping it in mind this may just be an aberration of some type and totally irrelevant.

 

[ATCTech]

Time to add 142.650 to the 1038 Hz test tone list. Cedarwoods or *maybe* Sunderland from my location? Anybody in the Guelph/K-W area confirm a nice solid P25 signal up there on this frequency? Sunderland would be a stretch given the signal level I'm seeing.

 

[mbstone99]

What your seeing is the normal 'Idle' test for the site. Both timeslots are active with the 1038 Hz tone. A radio on the site would hear the tone no matter what slot is entered or assigned.

DSD should also provide a Site ID and some info on the CC.

Still not seeing any site info yet but I will keep an eye out for when it does.

Matt

 

[Muxlow]

142.2900 have the test tone
Assume this is Leamington (or area) as its a very hot signal in town

 

[32dave]

Looks like the new system is active again in Oxford 142.5300 is active and showing control on SDRTrunk. I was hoping the techs were wrong, Heard them talking on a tac channel a few months ago and they said the system is supposed to be up Jan 31st

 

[Forts]

142.905 in London (Byron) is now showing network info and as site 18. Not showing any neighbour info at this time..

 

[ATCTech]

Forts finding inspired me to check the GTHA sites and just like that we seem to have a site #12 on 142.410 now in place of the test tone. As with GTHA site 9 and Forts' finding, no neighbours here yet either.

Site 12 on FleetNet of course is Woodlawn but as I've noted previously there's been P25 activty on some of the old Guelph Site 2 frequencies. This one does indeed seem to confirm they're using at least some of the old frequency assignments, presumably at Woodlawn.

 

[ATCTech]

The 142.410 P25 signal was shut down at 15:40 EST.

 

[gary123]

A new BEAT repeater has been located. Thanks to the original poster.

770.91875 PL 97.4. If the current naming convention is accurate this should be BEAT04. I would expect that other areas with a BEAT repeater may soon have activity in the 700 band too.

 

[IdleMonitor]

Heh, I named it Beat 00 in my list. Due to it being numerically first in order of the others.

A new BEAT repeater has been located. Thanks to the original poster.

770.91875 PL 97.4. If the current naming convention is accurate this should be BEAT04. I would expect that other areas with a BEAT repeater may soon have activity in the 700 band too.

 

[gary123]

Idle I agree. It is looking more and more that the channel names are not in numerical frequency order but in the PL tone order. EMS seems to follow the PL tone pattern and the currently known BEAT frequencies do as well. I do agree it is always risky just guessing a channel name. More research and time will fill in the blanks for us all.

 

[phyberoptics]

Idle I agree. It is looking more and more that the channel names are not in numerical frequency order but in the PL tone order. EMS seems to follow the PL tone pattern and the currently known BEAT frequencies do as well. I do agree it is always risky just guessing a channel name. More research and time will fill in the blanks for us all.

The entry with naming for BEAT04 is accurate.