New Jersey Interoperability Communication System (NJICS)

Status
Not open for further replies.

rr60

Active Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2005
Messages
1,991
Union County is still showing Hunterdon as a peer in the database, which is why I was inquiring as to a submission.

As to the list, not sure, but I cleared the peers on start like always. I thought it was weird also, which is why I mentioned holding off. Possible Unitrunker issue of some kind? I mean, I wouldn't think so, but... (shrug)
Here is my Site 07 peers list,it was just refreshed. Note Hunterdon does not appear. I will now look at 08 and 28, suspect it will be there.
FA5C2873-0B16-45DF-86A1-D0E713BD0DCB.jpeg
 

RadioDitch

Field Operations Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 24, 2010
Messages
3,091
Location
Wandering Around
From little brother, @RadioNerd90...

BEE00-39A/1-6 Cape May Simulcast
Site Location: No change.
Site Configuration: No change.
Frequencies: No change.
Peers: Add Site 18 (Millville) (Submitted)
Remarks: 7A1-04, JEMSTAR South, State Park Police, DOT, DHS Police, expected Cape May County groups.

1598400785165.png
 

RadioDitch

Field Operations Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 24, 2010
Messages
3,091
Location
Wandering Around
BEE00-39A/1-5 Hammonton Simulcast
Site Location: No change.
Site Configuration: No change.
Frequencies: No change.
Peers: No change.
Remarks: 7A1-14 GSP South, 7A1-16 AC Expy, JEMSTAR South, NJTPD South Patrol.

Sean noted that it appears that the entire length of the GSP is being carried basically full-time on the NJICS now. It's been the case with 7B2-14 GSP North for a while, but he said he didn't even use 800 the whole way down and isn't on the way back up now either and doesn't believe he missed anything.
 

RadioNerd90

Deactivated
Joined
Aug 22, 2020
Messages
31
Location
Garwood, NJ
No changes to Bordentown Simulcast. It's still showing Site 37 trailer as a valid but inactive peer. I did clear the peer list before making that observation.
 

rr60

Active Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2005
Messages
1,991
This is how we roll. Between the two “7“‘S and only a couple miles from lazy 21.

New 150’ monoplole this week for public safety. 😂

C3EE642E-EB3D-4E1C-A28B-939C0CEE387C.jpeg
 

RadioDitch

Field Operations Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 24, 2010
Messages
3,091
Location
Wandering Around
BEE00-39A/1-2 Hunterdon Simulcast
Site Location: No change.
Site Configuration: No change.
Frequencies: No change.
Peers: No change.
Remarks: None.

BEE00-39A/1-20 Portland
Site Location: No change.
Site Configuration: No change.
Frequencies: No change.
Peers: No change.
Remarks: No change.

BEE00-39A/1-19 Delaware Water Gap (Foxtown Hill)
Site Location: No change.
Site Configuration: No change.
Frequencies: No change.
Peers: No change.
Remarks: Site NAC updated from 390 to 393 (Submitted).

DWG NAC.PNG

BEE00-39A/1-35 Delaware Water Gap Bridge (DRJTBC Building)
Site Location: No change.
Site Configuration: No change.
Frequencies: No change.
Peers: No change.
Remarks: Site NAC updated from 390 to 393 (Submitted).

1598572827324.png
 
Last edited:

RadioDitch

Field Operations Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 24, 2010
Messages
3,091
Location
Wandering Around
BEE00-39A/1-8 New Brunswick Simulcast
Site Location: No change.
Site Configuration: No change.
Frequencies: No change.
Peers: Update current peer list to 2, 3, 7, 23, 28 & 31. (Submitted).
Remarks: None

Confirmed with provider that the peer list was cleared before conclusion and screenshot.

1598645432345.png

With all the peer changes recently across multiple sites, it appears some time of realignment (for lack of better terms) is taking place.
 

RadioDitch

Field Operations Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 24, 2010
Messages
3,091
Location
Wandering Around
BEE00-39A/1-38 Stockton
Site Location: No change.
Site Configuration: No change.
Frequencies: No change.
Peers: No change.
Remarks: None.
 

RadioDitch

Field Operations Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 24, 2010
Messages
3,091
Location
Wandering Around
Somehow I missed these regards the Passaic and Sussex Simulcasts, but not surprised as to the content. Yearly update letters. Spoiler alert, the content is identical so you only need to read one.

Passaic: https://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsEntry/...tachmentKey=20838971&attachmentInd=applAttach

Sussex: https://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsEntry/...tachmentKey=20854068&attachmentInd=applAttach

Best I can find, the October 20th implementation date hasn't changed, nor has another extension on either license been filed for.
 

GTR8000

NY/NJ Database Guy
Database Admin
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
16,056
Location
BEE00
Somehow I missed these regards the Passaic and Sussex Simulcasts, but not surprised as to the content. Yearly update letters. Spoiler alert, the content is identical so you only need to read one.

Best I can find, the October 20th implementation date hasn't changed, nor has another extension on either license been filed for.
Same story with the Hunterdon and Mercer licenses.

I've seen this play out a bunch of times over the years with these SY licenses. Barring them miraculously getting all of those sites online within the next 50 days (seems unlikely), one of two things is bound to occur: a) last minute requests for extension pushing the buildout deadline well into 2021, or b) magically all four licenses will have required notifications filed claiming that the sites are built out, regardless of the actual status.

I'd like to think that the state is better than to go the shady option b route, however judging by the lack of proper licensing of a few 800 sites on both systems, I certainly wouldn't be surprised.
 

RadioDitch

Field Operations Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 24, 2010
Messages
3,091
Location
Wandering Around
I'd like to think that the state is better than to go the shady option b route, however judging by the lack of proper licensing of a few 800 sites on both systems, I certainly wouldn't be surprised.

And on the Passaic Simulcast license it still shows Bearfort Mountain fire tower as a site. Again...there's no power, no access, and no actual site. You'd have to helicopter everything up, run power up the mountain from scratch including pole/towerline in/over rock, then build the pad/tower/house. In 50 days? Yeah, no. So either the license is wrong or someone was smoking some reallllllly good stuff when they put that as a subsite location.

Either way, it further substantiates the possibility of Option B.
 

Attachments

  • 38582322020831924226.pdf
    14.6 KB · Views: 16
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top