NIFC/NIRSC command channels

[nd5y]

Are the NIFC/NIRSC command repeater channels in the db still good?

RadioReference Database

The most complete database of radio communications data

www.radioreference.com

Were the inputs/outputs swapped recently? or can they be swapped for speciific incidents?
Is 170.0000 still used? It's listed twice in the db.

 

[ko6jw_2]

My experience is that the best approach is to program all channels in the database and then scan that bank in a major fire and see what turns up. I then create a new bank with the active channels. They may change daily. Some repeaters are linked and you may hear the same traffic on multiple repeaters. I have the advantage in that I have access to the communication plans for large fires and have some inside info.

As for swapping inputs and outputs, I doubt it. This could create chaos and require reprogramming multiple radios. It could also endanger lives.

I have not seen 170.000 used recently in this area even though it is still in the database.

 

[Paysonscanner]

Are the NIFC/NIRSC command repeater channels in the db still good?

RadioReference Database

The most complete database of radio communications data

www.radioreference.com

Were the inputs/outputs swapped recently? or can they be swapped for speciific incidents?
Is 170.0000 still used? It's listed twice in the db.

It needs work. I've been trying to edit a huge amount of federal information, but have become a little bogged down. There is so much material that my late husband (county civil engineer and volunteer firefighter) and my Dad (retired U.S. Forest Service civil engineer) have collected for a few decades. I have a lot of current information in front of me so it will take some time to submit.

As for the two pages in the nationwide database, it should only be one page. The NIFC and NIRSC are one in the same, managed by the same shop and people, stored in the same warehouse in Boise, Idaho at the National Interagency Fire Center, so I think it should be called the NFIC page. My late hubby went on large fires for mutual aid on one of our local fire district engines. As a ham, a fire buff and a fire radio nerd, he went to the communications folks on large incidents and asked a lot of questions. He took extensive notes which became mine when he passed. He has a note with big asterisks next to it that the federal comm techs said it was all called the "NIFC system." One change from the last 2-3 years is shown on some written sources. I've found a list of five or six frequencies that can be used anywhere west of 95 degrees longitude for either air to air FM tactics or for air to ground uses. These can be assigned to large incidents. There is also a 80-90 channel initial attack air to ground frequency list with "National Channel" designations. It has been around for 3-5 years. I think nearly all of them meet the 2019 frequency allocation. They have been assigned to dispatch centers. If no interference is caused they can also be used on large incidents.

Yup some swapping of the command channels was done, the pairs did not meet the current (as of 1/1/19) federal VHF frequency allocation,. The new one (quick & dirty) is 162-166.5 repeater inputs, 166.5-169.5 simplex and 169.5-173.9875 repeater outputs. So NIFC swapped the inputs and outputs for some of the command repeaters. In some cases the inputs are in the simplex assignment range. They probably got a waiver to do this cause some of the input frequencie already had nationwide authorizations.

170.0000 is not longer an air to ground or an air to air FM tactics frequency. It is now the repeater output for Command 4. I sent in a preliminary submission for this in mid July and it hasn't been acted on yet. I think they are pausing because I stated that the whole thing should be called the NIFC system.

I'm not at all an expert on this stuff and have zero fire experience. I rely entirely on my late sweetheart's notes and my dad who has colleted radio info since the USFS used HF. Maybe I should kick this up on my priority list. I'm an in home elder care registered nurse so sometimes I have a lot of time and sometimes not. .

 

[nd5y]

As for the two pages in the nationwide database, it should only be one page. The NIFC and NIRSC are one in the same,

I sent in a preliminary submission for this in mid July and it hasn't been acted on yet. I think they are pausing because I stated that the whole thing should be called the NIFC system.

Yep. There is a lot of dumb stuff in the db. Don't hold your breath until it's corrected. One of our ex-members here on rr was a retired USFS employee. I think he quit in disgust when the db admins rejected his suggestions to fix some of this several years ago.

There is also a 80-90 channel initial attack air to ground frequency list with "National Channel" designations. It has been around for 3-5 years.

I read a few years ago that the list changes every year. Do you know if that's true?

Yup some swapping of the command channels was done, the pairs did not meet the current (as of 1/1/19) federal VHF frequency allocation,... So NIFC swapped the inputs and outputs for some of the command repeaters.

170.0000 is not longer an air to ground or an air to air FM tactics frequency. It is now the repeater output for Command 4.

Thanks. That answers my original main question.

 

[Paysonscanner]

Someone quit over problems with the database. I don't think my dad will and I don't think I would until I try to submit most of what my husband had in his notebooks. At 92 my dad is a curmudgeon though and wonders why things have not been fixed. But he is also a positive man and just tries to make things better. He sometimes focuses on the effort, no matter the result. My late husband was a member for a few years and wanted to fix things in the database, but quit back about 2010. He had different reasons for quitting, but some that were similar.

Most of the frequencies and channel labels on the national air to ground list have not changed. What has changed are those frequenices that fell into the repeater output and input ranges. Right now there are a lot of empty channels. It remains to be seen if NIFC can find authorizations for frequencies to fill in the blanks or if they just renumber the whole thing. The 2018 list is quite different than the 2019 list because of having to comply with the new allocations.

I'm glad I could answer your question. I've only been on hear since March and have been able to answer a question. LIttle old me, using my husband's stuff and the knowledge of my dad, with no fire experience answering a question. Goody gum drops!

 

[norcalscan]

The NIFC and NIRSC are one in the same, managed by the same shop and people, stored in the same warehouse in Boise, Idaho at the National Interagency Fire Center, so I think it should be called the NFIC page...

...I think they are pausing because I stated that the whole thing should be called the NIFC system.

Careful here - what was the NIFC system as we knew it for a long time in the fire comms world (national interagency FIRE center), is now actually referenced as NIRSC both internally and externally/officially. They've removed the word FIRE because these resources have been made available to all-hazard incidents now, which include law, sar, disaster response (hurricanes tornados quakes floods zombies...). At the same time this occurred, they expanded the channel list up to 12, including the first four VHF IR pairs to help with that nationwide interop capability for a Katrina-like event. All the other hazards have looked at Boise NIFC and said, "wow, they got their stuff together, and there are warehouses full of toys that sit unused off-season and slow seasons, maybe we shouldn't reinvent the wheel and just expand off that existing near-perfect system..."

Just like CLEMARS in California, it'll take a long time to remove habit for some folks. Everyone knows "niff-see" but nobody says "nur-see" yet in the comm tents. Also, NIFC is one less alpha numeric on radio displays .

Now to sit and wait for a LAWSCOPE to be created to cheerlead/support the law side of things, that FIRESCOPE has already solved decades ago...

 

[ecps92]

I've seen [sadly] some listed both ways, and it generally has been that the 205/217 was written for the REPEATER vs Portable/Base/Mobiles
and notation to the same not added to the documents.

Are the NIFC/NIRSC command repeater channels in the db still good?

RadioReference Database

The most complete database of radio communications data

www.radioreference.com

Were the inputs/outputs swapped recently? or can they be swapped for speciific incidents?
Is 170.0000 still used? It's listed twice in the db.

 

[Paysonscanner]

Careful here - what was the NIFC system as we knew it for a long time in the fire comms world (national interagency FIRE center), is now actually referenced as NIRSC both internally and externally/officially. They've removed the word FIRE because these resources have been made available to all-hazard incidents now, which include law, sar, disaster response (hurricanes tornados quakes floods zombies...). At the same time this occurred, they expanded the channel list up to 12, including the first four VHF IR pairs to help with that nationwide interop capability for a Katrina-like event. All the other hazards have looked at Boise NIFC and said, "wow, they got their stuff together, and there are warehouses full of toys that sit unused off-season and slow seasons, maybe we shouldn't reinvent the wheel and just expand off that existing near-perfect system..."

Just like CLEMARS in California, it'll take a long time to remove habit for some folks. Everyone knows "niff-see" but nobody says "nur-see" yet in the comm tents. Also, NIFC is one less alpha numeric on radio displays .

Now to sit and wait for a LAWSCOPE to be created to cheerlead/support the law side of things, that FIRESCOPE has already solved decades ago...

No matter what it is called, it is one system. Having the database list the tactical freqs under "NIFC" and the command under "NIRSC" is inaccurate as the system is still maintained and housed at NIFC. The comm shop at NIFC approves the use of the system, no matter when and where it is used. Both sets of frequencies should all be listed under NIRSC in the database then and that should be good in the future. It's housed and gets its annual maintenance at NIFC during the winter and is pre-positioned in various locations during the fire season. I read this on the NIFC website. I've yet to see an official frequency directory that doesn't use the letters "NIFC" for both the tacs and the commands, some of these from 2019.

The last fire my late husband went on was in 2016 where he asked around about the name. The system being used for non-fire incidents goes back 20-25 years, or so my husbands notes show. I don't think many know that Type 1 and 2 incident management teams are used on large incidents like hurricanes, floods and the like. He has a note that says it was used at both the Republican and Democratic national conventions in presidential elections sometime in the 1990's.

LERESCOPE would be the word to use for a law enforcement mutual aid coordinating group. FIRESCOPE stands for "Firefighting RESources in California Organized for Potential Emergencies" and LERSCOPE would be "Law Enforcement RESources in California Organized for Potential Emergencies." That is if logic is used.

 

[Paysonscanner]

Another note from hubby! Or at least some yellow highlighting on a page showing CLEMARS and CA Law 1 on a list. Some working group with a ton of initials came up with a standard to call all the nationally designated freqs. The files hubby wrote for our scanners have a mutual aid list with V Fire, V Med, V Law and U Tac, U Call, yada yada. I guess they must have told the states their mutual aid freqs had to be in a similar format? Or maybe they didn't and CA OES came up with it to be consistent with the nationwide standard?

 

[nd5y]

Another note from hubby! Or at least some yellow highlighting on a page showing CLEMARS and CA Law 1 on a list. Some working group with a ton of initials came up with a standard to call all the nationally designated freqs. The files hubby wrote for our scanners have a mutual aid list with V Fire, V Med, V Law and U Tac, U Call, yada yada. I guess they must have told the states their mutual aid freqs had to be in a similar format? Or maybe they didn't and CA OES came up with it to be consistent with the nationwide standard?

NPSTC has a working group that came up with a standardized national plan for naming interoperability channels a few years ago.

Channel Naming

CA was probably part of it.

 

[ecps92]

Google NIFOG

Another note from hubby! Or at least some yellow highlighting on a page showing CLEMARS and CA Law 1 on a list. Some working group with a ton of initials came up with a standard to call all the nationally designated freqs. The files hubby wrote for our scanners have a mutual aid list with V Fire, V Med, V Law and U Tac, U Call, yada yada. I guess they must have told the states their mutual aid freqs had to be in a similar format? Or maybe they didn't and CA OES came up with it to be consistent with the nationwide standard?