Los Angeles Regional Interoperable Communications System (LA-RICS) - Master Thread

Peter_SD911

Scan Sexy
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 16, 2010
Messages
119
Location
Norcal-Socal
Also, keep in mind that they already have allocated their talkgroup ID's for LACOFD. Its going to happen. Its already been allocated for their fleetmap
Fleetmaps are always being allocated and un-allocated Fleetmaps are dynamic and mean nothing unless deployed in real-time. , it only takes a few keystrokes to edit them.
The biggest problem with early fleetmaps is bloat.
I know of a few very small California cities that have more assigned talkgroups for various city departments ,then they have actual employees or radios.

Follow the money...
I would suggest you look at the RFP's and other budget documents to see what is actually paid for and funded at this point. That's the only way you really know what is planned for. All the design and budget documents are public records, and anyone can request to see them via the California Public Records act...but most it's all posted on-line if you have time to look, and know how to de-cipher the docs.

L.A County is broke ...and public safety is not a giant priority for the Board of Supervisors.
There is no reason to rip out the existing analog legacy system as it's pretty robust and cost a lot less to maintain.
It's also mutual aid friendly. You also want to avoid the TRS crashing during a huge event where the cops and fire folks are fighting for open talkgroups.

Let the cops use LARICS during SHTF situations, the FD is fine on analog/conventional in LA.

What funds are approved AND allocated at this point?
Nothing else matters but the money.

Scan Sexy...
But ya gotta pay first.
 

tsalmrsystemtech

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Apr 22, 2020
Messages
411
Fleetmaps are always being allocated and un-allocated Fleetmaps are dynamic and mean nothing unless deployed in real-time. , it only takes a few keystrokes to edit them.
The biggest problem with early fleetmaps is bloat.
I know of a few very small California cities that have more assigned talkgroups for various city departments ,then they have actual employees or radios.

Follow the money...
I would suggest you look at the RFP's and other budget documents to see what is actually paid for and funded at this point. That's the only way you really know what is planned for. All the design and budget documents are public records, and anyone can request to see them via the California Public Records act...but most it's all posted on-line if you have time to look, and know how to de-cipher the docs.

L.A County is broke ...and public safety is not a giant priority for the Board of Supervisors.
There is no reason to rip out the existing analog legacy system as it's pretty robust and cost a lot less to maintain.
It's also mutual aid friendly. You also want to avoid the TRS crashing during a huge event where the cops and fire folks are fighting for open talkgroups.

Let the cops use LARICS during SHTF situations, the FD is fine on analog/conventional in LA.

What funds are approved AND allocated at this point?
Nothing else matters but the money.

Scan Sexy...
But ya gotta pay first.
I think everybody on the this thread is missing the long term point about this Phase II TDMA system. Public Safety is always a high priority with The Board of Supervisors and security and safety. Then you get some yahoo on this thread going off point about LACOFD not moving over to LA RICS> What a joke. LA-RICS is taking a very conservative approach to slowly adding talkgroups as the system grows. See how the Trunking Sites work for each area of LA County. Yes LACOFD is on a conventional system that works and will continue to work as long as they support the conventional UHF sites. As time will go they will move over. This is not the first time a system has slowly moved over PD and Sheriffs offices. There is no mystery to this switch over that is going to happen.

Keep in mind nobody is broke when it comes to government if the money is needed for Public Safety and Security. That money will never get turned down if the project has already budgeted for the money. If I was the lead project manager making these huge decisions I would never just switch everybody over all at once.

Think about it. Why just LA-TACS for right now. Because its secondary to their main dispatch channels. If they need to switch zones and go back to conventional it can happen in a hot minute. Nobody in their right mind would switch their main dispatch channels and tacticals all at once on a such a large scale project. If needed they can open up the patch on their dispatch channels and drop LA-RICS talkgroups on LA-RICS in a hot minute if needed. Move L-TACS and see how it works for the next three to six months. Then keep moving along. Fire will catch up. Like the old saying goes. At the end of the day there is a method to all of their madness. Can you guys just put it all to rest. Its going to happen and the testing will continue as the back end build out continues.

Also, off point and its been said on Twitter that The OCFA Fire Chief was going to reserve Fire Department encryption and look its been 4 long years now and its not happening. These government officials or some yahoo from some fire department says one thing and things always change. The encryption with OCFA was never going to happen anyways even though the chief said it was and he wanted. He got turned down by OCSD. Period the end.
 

tsalmrsystemtech

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Apr 22, 2020
Messages
411

avascan522

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Sep 28, 2013
Messages
249
Location
Los Angeles County, CA
Heard testing yesterday on some of the new UHF config analog channels for fire. LAC D-2 (LA Basin) and LAC D-5 (Catalina) had stored speech sporadically playing throughout the day. Also heard Moto techs discussing the tests over TG 37 (Test 1) on RICS. Spoke with a technician later on who said they were testing range on both the new UHF frequencies and also some LARTCS frequencies.
 

Engine104

Member since 2005
Joined
Jul 6, 2005
Messages
553
Location
Winnetka, CA
Heard testing yesterday on some of the new UHF config analog channels for fire. LAC D-2 (LA Basin) and LAC D-5 (Catalina) had stored speech sporadically playing throughout the day. Also heard Moto techs discussing the tests over TG 37 (Test 1) on RICS. Spoke with a technician later on who said they were testing range on both the new UHF frequencies and also some LARTCS frequencies.
If they were using a frequency just below LASD Lost Hills/West Hwd L-Tac, then I can confirm that. I've heard it a few times and wondered what it was. It was someone reading seemingly random phrases.
 

avascan522

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Sep 28, 2013
Messages
249
Location
Los Angeles County, CA
If they were using a frequency just below LASD Lost Hills/West Hwd L-Tac, then I can confirm that. I've heard it a few times and wondered what it was. It was someone reading seemingly random phrases.
I mainly heard 482.6625 and 482.7875, but there were also a few other frequencies with audio testing happening that were much weaker. There is 483.900, which is LA-RICS U-6, but it was using PL 151.4 last I heard. It was not one of the frequencies that I heard stronger, but I can confirm I've heard it used. Seems to have transmitters on Catalina, and maybe elsewhere.
 

avascan522

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Sep 28, 2013
Messages
249
Location
Los Angeles County, CA
Los Angeles County, California (CA) Scanner Frequencies and Radio Frequency Reference also shows 482.6625 as being used for LACoFD/EMS MDTs. Is this no longer the case, or is there a typo in one or the other? The other 4 sequential 25 kHz MDT channels are not duplicated like this.
I can say I haven't heard any data sent over the air since the bandplan was released for the new UHF and I started listening to those frequencies - I've only heard occasional testing and voice audio with the PL 151.4 indicated in the database. Listened without a PL as well and didn't hear anything other than analog voice from my location (south county).
 

LAflyer

Global DB Admin
Moderator
Joined
Mar 4, 2009
Messages
1,827
Location
SoCal
In 2021 county fire received funds to purchase new Panasonic toughbooks MDCs that will utilize the LARICS data network and not the standalone data frequencies.

As the LARICS transition continues, a bunch of existing UHF frequencies will be reallocated for uses such as the new fire radio plan configuration.
 

jbella

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
81
Location
Nth. Cent. Mass
Let me ask a question. Why would The County of Los Angeles invest hundreds of millions of dollars to build out a system over the past 10 years to only bring over LASO?

Lets see if somebody can stab at this question.



LA County FD says they'll use the system for logistics and special events.

The reason is that time and again, for fireground operations, conventional analog and to a lesser degree digital has proven safer and more resilient for fireground operations.

Police use radios and systems in different ways now than firefighters. The abiity to have multiple paths of data aren't as important when you're crawling down a hallway or venting a roof and need 1 line of almost foolproof communications. It's logistics and subsidiary branches that have a need for data and gee whiz sparkles that TDMA systems offer.

Soemtimes common sense prevails in safety issues over "OMFG they spent X dollars." Hopefully, like the city of Boston and FDNY which both use trunked systems for administrative purposes, this is the path LA County FD is going.
 
Joined
Aug 16, 2013
Messages
89
Location
LACC
LA County FD says they'll use the system for logistics and special events.

The reason is that time and again, for fireground operations, conventional analog and to a lesser degree digital has proven safer and more resilient for fireground operations.

Police use radios and systems in different ways now than firefighters. The abiity to have multiple paths of data aren't as important when you're crawling down a hallway or venting a roof and need 1 line of almost foolproof communications. It's logistics and subsidiary branches that have a need for data and gee whiz sparkles that TDMA systems offer.

Soemtimes common sense prevails in safety issues over "OMFG they spent X dollars." Hopefully, like the city of Boston and FDNY which both use trunked systems for administrative purposes, this is the path LA County FD is going.

Careful. They'll call you a liar! ;)
 

jbella

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
81
Location
Nth. Cent. Mass
I've been called a lot worse by a lot better.

Is there a rough deployment schedule for the new UHF channel plan? (I won't be back out your way for while yet)
 

bcorbin

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 14, 2004
Messages
250
Location
Los Angeles
Looking at the new LAC lineup... "U1" (countywide dispatch) is LARICS U2 (regional simulcast north) with a new PL and "U2" (countywide admin) is LARICS U1 (regional simulcast north) . Is LARICS ACVRS dead?
 

avascan522

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Sep 28, 2013
Messages
249
Location
Los Angeles County, CA
Looking at the new LAC lineup... "U1" (countywide dispatch) is LARICS U2 (regional simulcast north) with a new PL and "U2" (countywide admin) is LARICS U1 (regional simulcast north) . Is LARICS ACVRS dead?
I'm also confused on some of the fleetmap assignments. The new UHF lineup has a "Catalina & Coastal" dispatch and 3 command channels. The ACVRS is supposed to have 22 channels, but only 17 are recorded in the Database as well as in RICS BoD meeting agendas. There was mention of 5 channels being built out to serve Catalina Island that will be known as "TRO-5 Catalina." It would make sense that the remaining ACVRS channels are the Catalina channels that haven't been released yet.
Anyway, the overlap between U-1 and U-2 between ACVRS and "new UHF" is curious.
 

tsalmrsystemtech

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Apr 22, 2020
Messages
411
Is the LACOFD Heliocopters going to have their own channel on the new UHF-2 Lineup too or work off of LA-RICS TRS

I was just wondeing if they are going to have their own dispatch and tac channel
 
Top