Is there any info for western Colorado you can pass on?This is the second document I've seen where a due date in 2019 is applied to frequency use. I've heard from time to time that 2019 is also the date when 6.25 kHz spacing will supposedly be required. So many entities are having enough trouble meeting the 1/1/13 for 12.5 kHz spacing that I can't imagine trying to get everyone to replace radio systems within 6 years. The current situation for compliance could take up the majority of that 6 years.
Back to air to ground, the frequencies for them are labeled differently depending on what Geographic Area Coordination Center is involved. I recently found a document showing a standardized nomenclature in the Western and Eastern Great Basin, and Rocky Mountain GACCs. There are 38 air to ground frequencies and they are used all over this large area. The assignments, for example, may have the Color Country Interagency Comm Center in southern Utah with AG-14 for primary and AG-32 for secondary. The Richfield Interagency Comm Center north of it may have AG-36 for primary and AG-8 for secondary. This document stated that a nationwide allocation of air to ground frequencies with standard nomenclature was desired and that this one, covering 3 GACCs, was a start.
As of yet, there is no FCC mandate for 6.25 channel spacing in bands other than the 700 MHz band (currently 1-1-2017, with petitions to extend that date to 2023). If there is a 2019 mandate for 6.25, it would be a NTIA mandate for Federal users, and, I agree with you that it will be difficult to meet, considering that there are still 25 kHz Federal operations on the air, 7 years after the 12.5 kHz 'transition date.'This is the second document I've seen where a due date in 2019 is applied to frequency use. I've heard from time to time that 2019 is also the date when 6.25 kHz spacing will supposedly be required. So many entities are having enough trouble meeting the 1/1/13 for 12.5 kHz spacing that I can't imagine trying to get everyone to replace radio systems within 6 years. The current situation for compliance could take up the majority of that 6 years.
BLM falls under the "Federal" air-ground channels listed above.There are more air to ground freqs arent there? BLM? CalFire?
What indication do we have that the BLM air to ground frequencies are not assigned for use anymore? There were 4 of them assigned geographically in much the same manner as these new Forest Service frequencies.BLM air to ground went away last year, I think it was. CalFire still has theirs.
Do you have the 2012 CDF Kenwood load? You have a very good point here. If the BLM frequencies don't show up in the load then they could be defunct. I will be getting some federal information in a month or two for use in 2012. The 2011 info showed the four BLM frequencies as assigned for use. The Forest Service was authorized to use them as a secondary to 170.0000. The 2011 Kenwood load may not have included them because CDF and local agencies did not have narrow-banding completed yet. In the meantime I'm keeping them in my scanner.The current FIRESCOPE/CalEMA and CDF group 3 lineups for 2012 do not have any air to ground frequencies listed for BLM's exclusive use or labeled as BLM's.
There may be an internal federal agreement that BLM will be assigned a specific frequency that I am not aware of.
The new lineup has the new fed A/G freqs as well as Air Tactics 1,2&3 now being available for A/G use.
Bottom line is that there are plenty of air to ground channels available.
If there are still BLM air to ground frequencies, they aren't getting passed down to the state or local agencies.
When I started with the U.S. Forest Service in 1974 all air to ground traffic was on 168.625 which used to be called "air net." It was also used for air dispatch, flight following, air to air and even dispatcher-to-dispatcher between communication centers. The traffic of some the latter did not always involve aircraft. Example when I worked on the Kaibab National Forest in the 70's I heard traffic such as "Coconino, Kaibab, what azimuth does Turkey Butte (lookout) have on our new start near Sycamore Canyon." Often only fire management officers or an assistant FMO would have air net radios (yes a separate radio). The use of 168.625 is now restricted to air emergency and brief initial contact if contact on other frequencies cannot be made and it is called "Air Guard." In my working experience, which includes four states, four national forests, three Forest Service regions and firefighting in 5 additional states on a total of 108 fires air to ground has not been carried direct on forest, BLM district and NPS park nets. Tac nets have never been used for air to ground, again in my experience, with some exceptions. Air to ground on forest net direct would tie up the entire forest including dispatch for new initial attacks as well as the other functions that use forest net, i.e. law enforcement, recreation etc.Might it be a good idea to do all air to air traffic on AM, thereby freeing up a few more FM freqs for air to ground work? Does a/g traffic ever happen on 168.20 168.60 etc or on the forest nets? They dont seem to have a lot of FM a/g freqs in California. And they dont use PL IIRC.
Fire Net - maybe for IC to dispatch - or for all initial units responding to a first alarmExsmokey thanks alot for the information. Its good to get your historical perspective on the channel usage.
Fire Net - maybe for IC to dispatch - or for all initial units responding to a first alarm
Air To Ground - IC to "aircraft in charge" (my phrase)
Air to Air - AM - air tactics or air coordination - maybe mostly helicopters in practice
Service Net - coordination with USFS Engineering units or setting up fire camps?
If more resources are sent to the fire, then probably some portable repeaters will be put in place - UHF portable repeaters ("Logistics") at the fire camp - VHF portable repeaters ("Command") (maybe "NIFC") at the fire scene - the initial air to air channel and the initial tac channel might be given up also
I am not sure when the Region 5 tac channels would go into use - maybe if there is a shortage of tac channels.