LMRN vs. FleetNet reception

[Muxlow]

Seems a lot of people have reported lower output off the towers on LMRN over FleetNet. I use to be able to pick off a good 7 sites during the day and a couple more at night. Now, I'm lucky if I can get 7 at night time.

 

[gary123]

I can confirm that the LMRN towers are lower power. Also the reuse of frequencies is a lot more prevalent on the towers. It's not uncommon to see freq 142.XXX used as a control channel and the same freq used as a voice channel just a couple of sites away. I would not be surprised to see some sites get a higher power output and at the same time see some frequency assignments shift on near towers.

 

[w3rwn]

I can confirm that the LMRN towers are lower power. Also the reuse of frequencies is a lot more prevalent on the towers. It's not uncommon to see freq 142.XXX used as a control channel and the same freq used as a voice channel just a couple of sites away. I would not be surprised to see some sites get a higher power output and at the same time see some frequency assignments shift on near towers.

The base stations are likely GTR8000 which have adjustable power between 2 to 100 Watts.
P25 Phase II modulation (6000 baud) is commonly found to have less range/coverage than P25 Phase 1 which was 4800 baud.
Shannon, amount of information, channel width yada yada.

 

[VA3ADP]

I've noticed much weaker reception from most of the GTA area towers. I always thought it was due to interference with FleetNet. Now, with FleetNet almost or completely decommissioned you'd think the output power would be much stronger.

 

[EJB]

I've noticed much weaker reception from most of the GTA area towers. I always thought it was due to interference with FleetNet. Now, with FleetNet almost or completely decommissioned you'd think the output power would be much stronger.

I used to be able to receive the FleetNet Brantford tower in my apartment with a regular antenna, and had no trouble getting the LMRN Brantford tower with a decent antenna until recently.

Now even with good height and a decent 1/4 whip, Nada. I was also able to receive in addition to Hamilton of course, LMRM Woodlawn, Kitchener, Ballinifad, Niagara Falls, Mississauga, Toronto and Whitby until recently.

Last night Woodlawn and KW were weak, Mississauga came through a few times. When these current conditions blow through and we return to an atmosphere with weather moving west-east maybe it improves.

But for some reason out of the blue my BCD 325P2 now "gets" LMRN. Success!

Terrified to make any changes and tag any of the encrypted talkgroups just to put tags on talkgroup numbers, I might just do this to my 436 and leave my other scanners alone. Don't wanna screw up listening to the MTO, so exciting!

 

[icarus1963]

I used to be able to receive the Fleetnet Brantford tower in my apartment with a regular antenna and had no trouble getting the LMRN Brantford tower with a decent antenna until recently.

Now even with good height and a decent 1/4 whip Nada. I was also able to receive in addition to Hamilton of course, LMRM Woodlawn, Kitchener, B-fad, Niagara Falls, Mississauga, Toronto and Whitby until recently.

Last night Woodlawn and KW were weak, Mississauga came thru a few times. When these current conditions blow thru and we return to a atmosphere with weather moving west-east maybe it improves?

But for some reason out of the blue my 325p2 now "gets" LMRN. Success!

Terrified to make any changes and tag any of the encrypted talkgroups just to put tags on talkgroup numbers, I might just do this to my 436 and leave my other scanners alone. Don't wanna screw up listening to the MTO, so exciting!

I notice the same thing with the Cayuga and Simcoe towers. They both used to boom through and now I have to crank up the gain on the SDR just to get a decent signal.

Glad you got your 325 working with LMRN. My 200 still will not hear the MTO or anything for that matter.

 

[exkalibur]

There's for sure a difference with LMRN and FleetNet. The closest tower to me (King City) used to come in nice and strong, now with LMRN it is noticeably weaker. I never did a proper signal strength comparison and it's obviously too late now.

 

[Enjoi19]

I never did a proper signal strength comparison and it's obviously too late now.

Slightly anecdotal one here, when I was logging both systems on Unitrunker I'd have a receive level (I cannot remember what Unitrunkers measurement of choice is) of about 50 for Fleetnet, and closer to 42-43 for LMRN. This was on the Whitby site.

 

[gary123]

I did several signal level checks as the LMRN sites went online. The LMRN sites currently are 1/2 to 2/3 as strong. Sorry for the nontechnical 1/2 math LOL. I did notice that when the sites were first set up the LMRN signal was equal to the FleetNet but as the sites were placed into Idle Mode the signal dropped considerably. The signal strength then stabilized at a level that remained constant as the site went 'active'.

 

[VA3DBJ]

The signal is so low now, I can't even monitor MTO off Whitby like i used to on the SDS200. I might be forced to get an external, but I might be pushing it as this is a rental. Never had issue prior to the change. I can only monitor on the SDR's.

 

[exkalibur]

Rumour has it, they're also experiencing a lot of complaints from tow operators not being able to hear the "first available" channels very well. The King City site used to come in very well in Toronto but now it has a horrible signal.

 

[EJB]

The Tow channels here are pretty low volume here as well in Hamilton

I notice the same thing with the Cayuga and Simcoe towers. They both used to boom through and now I have to crank up the gain on the SDR just to get a decent signal.

Glad you got your 325 working with LMRN. My 200 still will not hear the MTO or anything for that matter.

Andy:

I didn't make any changes, when the control channel went to 142.35 on Hamilton everything opened up. Scared to make any changes to it for fear I will be right back before I started.

Can I ask anyone here if they monitor the Brantford tower for LMRN. The database lists 3 channels, 2 CC, including 142.590 and 1 alternate, and 1 VC.I'm wondering if Icarus's problem is that he's missing out on voice channels and that's why he can't scan Brantford on his SDS.

Can a tower such as Brantfords only have 1 voice channel? I've been monitoring for close to 20 years on FleetNet, it's relatively busy, most of the VC were busy. There has to be something with the frequencies on this particular tower.

Anyone here can look back at my troubles this summer with LMRN but when they changed the CC to 142.35 and shut off FleetNet all 3 of my radios work.

Perhaps Icarus, can you monitor any other towers? Are you a subscriber of the site and is that how you are doing programming?
Maybe try to program manually and add in all the frequencies yourself. Maybe lock out the other control channel.

I can't hear the Brantford tower anymore from my place, Bell or whomever cut the power too much. My waterfall function is useless for it also.

 

[icarus1963]

The channel line-up for the Brantford tower is as follows. 142.590 flashes between CC and SCC, 142.005 voice, 143.400 voice, 142.890 voice
(appears when the tower is busy). Yesterday 142.395 was being used as a data only channel, single slot, no voice.

I have tried both methods to program in the system, manually and using the Sentinel import.

 

[EJB]

I think I saw 142.89.

I'll try again to see if any CC or VC's I can pick up.

I see FleetNet has been deleted pretty much from the database, I don't know if I wrote down any of VC's from Brantford FleetNet.

Your running DSD I guess, so you know exactly what VC's are on this tower.