NYPD new radio system?

Status
Not open for further replies.

tbendick

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
411
Location
Nyc
Last thing in the news was that they didn't want to switch to narrow band
 

62Truck

Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2005
Messages
1,465
Location
Uranus
Last thing in the news was that they didn't want to switch to narrow band
I don't think they really have a choice, By January of 2013 every one on VHF and UHF (excluding Ham service, and I think GMRS) has to be Narrowband. They wouldn't have to change freqs they would just have to make sure all their radios are Narrowband compliant meaning witch all the sabers are going to be taking out of service, and making sure the repeaters are NB compliant and just having everything switch from 25,20 to 12.5 bandwith. Within the last couple of years they have been buying a bunch of Vertex portables VX-800's for detectives I believe and VX530's for uniformed officers.
 

coolrich55

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Nov 26, 2008
Messages
489
Location
connecticut
Well, from what I could understand in reading the article again is the 700 mhz system is for broadband data and not voice? At least not voice yet?
 

902

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Nov 7, 2003
Messages
2,391
Location
Downsouthsomewhere
The narrowbanding waivers - IF the Commission chooses to grant them - will only allow for delaying compliance with narrowbanding. The waivers WILL NOT be a dispensation to not have to narrowband. In order to get one, the applicant would have to demonstrate some movement toward compliance. Maybe the FCC will consider waiting for LTE vaporware to mature, but they may not.

Thousands of other agencies would benefit from frequencies became available - either through NYC narrowbanding, or through moving elsewhere and giving all of the resources back so they may be reused by those other agencies.
 

radioman2001

Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2008
Messages
2,795
Location
New York North Carolina and all points in between
Thousands of agencies? What thousands, there might be 100 if that many that could use any T-band frequencies (50 mi max from Columbus circle only). Keep dreaming, NYC will never give up any frequency it doesn't have to, and you can be rest assured NYC will get a waiver, if not from the FCC it will come outright from Congress, just as the TV channel 16 came from.
I also don't think there are any analog Sabers left out there, havn't seen one for years except as a desk queen monitor.
 

rbm

Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2005
Messages
1,394
Location
Upstate New York
Since the the new radios have been in use in my area (Broome/Tioga/Chenango Counties) I've been hearing them using the old 'Special Detail' frequencies 'apparently' for the in-car repeater. I hadn't mentioned it sooner because I wanted to verify what I was hearing.

I've been logging close call hits for the last few weeks and the other night was listening (and logging) for an extended period of time.

I've verified this using 5 radios (2 * IC-R7000, BCT15X, BCD396XT, and a PRO-2006, using four different antennas.

The active frequencies I've heard so far: (listed in order of most active)
853.9375
853.9750
853.9625

During long transmissions you can hear a 'ticking' sound similar to the old ham radio 'simplex auto-patch' boxes.

Years ago I used to hear surveillance activity on those frequencies but nothing for the last few years.

Rich

Edit: I should have also mentioned that they're CSQ. No PL/DCS tones

Edit: Attached a sample SCANREC log file.
Those entries with just an S-meter reading and no decimal point in the frequency are CloseCall hits.
 
Last edited:

GTR8000

Well Known Member
Database Admin
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
7,535
Location
BEE00
Since the the new radios have been in use in my area (Broome/Tioga/Chenango Counties) I've been hearing them using the old 'Special Detail' frequencies 'apparently' for the in-car repeater. I hadn't mentioned it sooner because I wanted to verify what I was hearing.

The active frequencies I've heard so far: (listed in order of most active)
853.9375
853.9750
853.9625
Those frequencies all fall under WNNM915, which is a statewide 800 MHz conventional license for NYS.

ULS License - PubSafty/SpecEmer/PubSaftyNtlPlan,806-817/851-862MHz,Conv License - WNNM915 - NEW YORK, STATE OF
 

902

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Nov 7, 2003
Messages
2,391
Location
Downsouthsomewhere
Thousands of agencies? What thousands, there might be 100 if that many that could use any T-band frequencies (50 mi max from Columbus circle only). Keep dreaming, NYC will never give up any frequency it doesn't have to, and you can be rest assured NYC will get a waiver, if not from the FCC it will come outright from Congress, just as the TV channel 16 came from.
I also don't think there are any analog Sabers left out there, havn't seen one for years except as a desk queen monitor.
So, if we're holding to the old 90.305 locations, how did Nassau County end up with a Channel 19 trunked system? Okay, maybe my thousands of agencies is a bit hyperbolic, but there are a number of agenices that have no resources to expand capacity or build out. Economics will catch up and regionalization will release some of those resources without NYC, but a "give back" should be a stipulation of a waiver grant. And, all those subscriber units, repeaters, and voting receivers are already narrowband capable. The only limitation would be the expense of labor and logistics.

Another thing that's on my mind is DOITT's choice of 6-1/4 offsets (like 700 MHz channels) for frequencies (look at WPPU442 for an example) making it pretty difficult for others to license around them.

I don't know - but giving out a waiver 'just because' sends the message to every other Part 90 licensee that they wasted their money and effort by doing the right thing and narrowbanding. In the end, you're probably right and politics will prevail.
 

radioman2001

Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2008
Messages
2,795
Location
New York North Carolina and all points in between
There is a push to make TV channels 14 through 22 public safety frequencies. This is a result of a number of things that have happened over the last 10 years. I believe that Wayne New Jersey got frequencies in the CH19 or 20 band, and this was a result of doing what NYC did, they went to DC with a lot of lawyers and representatives and basically got Congress to free up those channels. Once NYC and Wayne got their allocations, the flood gates were open. South New Jersey got allocations for their trunking systems, Penn did too, but at a price TV interference when the band opens. If you want to pay for it, and there are a lot of agencies that are too cheap to do it, you can get TV channels allocations. Even bussiness band has gotten allocations outside the 50 mi radius of NYC, I have gotten them too. So there are enough channels to go around, IF you want to pay for them. Instead everybody including the co-ordinators wants NYC splinters. I don't see it as a fix for those that want additional channels. Let them go the route that a lot of agencies did, including Suffolk County, and pay for the coordination and the waivers required.
 

902

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Nov 7, 2003
Messages
2,391
Location
Downsouthsomewhere
There is a push to make TV channels 14 through 22 public safety frequencies. This is a result of a number of things that have happened over the last 10 years. I believe that Wayne New Jersey got frequencies in the CH19 or 20 band, and this was a result of doing what NYC did, they went to DC with a lot of lawyers and representatives and basically got Congress to free up those channels. Once NYC and Wayne got their allocations, the flood gates were open. South New Jersey got allocations for their trunking systems, Penn did too, but at a price TV interference when the band opens. If you want to pay for it, and there are a lot of agencies that are too cheap to do it, you can get TV channels allocations. Even bussiness band has gotten allocations outside the 50 mi radius of NYC, I have gotten them too. So there are enough channels to go around, IF you want to pay for them. Instead everybody including the co-ordinators wants NYC splinters. I don't see it as a fix for those that want additional channels. Let them go the route that a lot of agencies did, including Suffolk County, and pay for the coordination and the waivers required.
Before Channel 16 was waivered for NYC, the waivers for Channel 19 use through waiving 90.305 began in 1994 with the former NJ APCO guy who worked as a communications engineer for the NJSP. We started to see the first systems in 1995; these systems were given WIL/WIM callsigns.

NPSTC has a petition out which would extend T-Band, but wouldn't necessarily make it available nationally. We're still stuck with the Commission's 70s standard metropolitan statistical areas as centroids. We also still have to protect "ghost stations" (TV stations that have vacated their NTSC channels and migrated to their digital homes) as though they were still there. It's not overtly stated, but (IMO) this is partly a white space issue and partly the friction between Media and PSHSB. The FCC doesn't really know what they want to do with these spaces, but they still want them protected as if they were still on the air. The coordinators can waiver 90.305 to exceed the 50 miles from stations in 90.303, but they still have to demonstrate non-interference to co-channel and adjacent channel stations by drawing Carey contours. The funny thing is that when the stations migrated to digital, the old analog records to comply with in ULS were wiped out.

So, you can see extended areas, but because of these stipulations, you won't see something like one Bergen County borough being able to get licensed on a 506 MHz frequency because it was too close to a co-channel TV station and way far from the Philadelphia extended center (even though it was on the air for years and never had an iota of interference). It changed to a NYC splinter, where it could be licensed, but there were some big limitations in power because contours were held to fall short of NYC. They'd have to retain a Washington insider communications attorney, and the FCC would still take Y E A R S to act.

There is also the situation where there is so much political pressure for 700 MHz broadband "D Block" allocation directly to public safety. The dynamics are that the politicians are asking for (and the talking heads are willing to) give back of "LMR" frequencies to raise revenue - because "everyone will be using LTE on the D Block." I won't hold my breath. That lack of unified voice just makes for gestures with questionable sincerity. There's also this thought running through Congress and special interests' minds (cellular mostly... and we can repackage them as "broadband" now) that public safety has "too much spectrum" and should give some up... I sat down and added up all the public safety bandwidth in different frequency bands (we have the most available bandwidth in lowband... and that's the least frequently used now). It's nonsense, but it's great hyperbole to jump on the broadband wagon with.

What we probably need (more than "Public Safety Telephone" and streaming video from everything/everywhere) is T-Band and standardized 3 MHz pairs on TV Channel 7, along with "rightsizing" systems, requiring NPSPAC-like areas of operation (jurisdictional boundaries + 3 miles, not 25 miles in all directions), loading standards, and trunking for more than 4 channel pairs. But we'll get Droid and Windows Mobile radio and pager emulation apps instead.
 

radioman2001

Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2008
Messages
2,795
Location
New York North Carolina and all points in between
Not to hijack this thread, but since it already has gone South, I go with re-allowcating CH-7 analog as a solution to relive channel congestion in the Tri-State area. There are lots of departments that would rather use VHF than UHF-T. Also if a small Bergen County department wants a freq, why not go on the regionalized system Bergen County is building. You get interop, and you own talk-groups in one package with a subsidized price. The FCC wants consolidation of services to a common radio system, here is a way to do both.
Now hypotheretically if as part of an extended plan, NYC were to give up lets say the upper channels (CH-15) for a broad band plan on the lower channels (CH-14) that would make more sense, but only if these channels were used in a large area trunking system. Onezie twozie I don't agree with.
 

callsignme

Newbie
Joined
Nov 12, 2011
Messages
2
IM LOOKING FOR NEW FREQS FOR POLICE IN QUEENS/ 111 ,109, 107 pcts CAR TO CAR,ESU,AND ALL THE FREQS FOR QUEENS IN THAT AREA BAYSIDES AND FLUSHING /PLUS ID#S/ IM USEING A PRO 164 SCANNER
 

KC2zZe

Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2011
Messages
494
Location
Mid-Hudson Valley, NY
Unless your records are older then August of last year, there are no new frequencies for any of the commands or functions that you are looking for. You will find all the you seek at www.n2nov.net with special attention to the "NYPD, FDNY and EMS Frequencies" hyperlink. Some IDs can be found from the "NYPD Car Assignments" and "NYPD ESU Truck & Supervisor Numbers" hyperlinks.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top