P25 TRS with same RFSS/Site No. but different SID

Status
Not open for further replies.

nd5y

Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
9,321
Location
Wichita Falls, TX
Can the database handle a P25 trunked system where all the sites are numbered RFSS 1 Site 1 but each site has a different system ID?
 

marksmith

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jun 20, 2007
Messages
4,259
Location
Anne Arundel County, MD
I don't think each site can have a different system ID. Would not make sense if part of same system.

536/436/ws1095/996p2/996xt/325p2/396xt/psr800/396t/HP-1/HP-2 & others
 

nd5y

Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
9,321
Location
Wichita Falls, TX
I don't think each site can have a different system ID. Would not make sense if part of same system.
There is a system in west Texas like that.
Each site shows WACN BEE00 RFSS 001 Site 001
The only thing that changes are the control channel frequencies and the system IDs.
I saw five sites this morning with SIDs 3E0, 3E1, 3E2, 3E3 and 3E4.
Most of the frequencies match up with this system https://www.radioreference.com/apps/db/?sid=8350 which doesn't even have a WACN or SID listed.
 

troymail

Silent Key
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
9,982
Location
Supply (Lockwood Inlet area), NC
There is a system in west Texas like that.
Each site shows WACN BEE00 RFSS 001 Site 001
The only thing that changes are the control channel frequencies and the system IDs.
I saw five sites this morning with SIDs 3E0, 3E1, 3E2, 3E3 and 3E4.
Most of the frequencies match up with this system https://www.radioreference.com/apps/db/?sid=8350 which doesn't even have a WACN or SID listed.
OK - I'm drifting a bit from the original question but that system - It shows no WACN or SYSID info (as you've stated) and none of the site frequencies are marked as primary or alternate CCs (so obviously all need to be considered as CCs)?

Yes - this one is odd to say the least.
 

nd5y

Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
9,321
Location
Wichita Falls, TX
none of the site frequencies are marked as primary or alternate CCs (so obviously all need to be considered as CCs)?
No. Each site I have seen only broadcasts one active primary CC and one alternate CC. It's not like a Harris system. The other strange thing is none of the sites broadcast a neighbor list.

That whole db entry has bad, missing or obsolete data. It's been that way from the beginning.
 

GTR8000

NY/NJ Database Guy
Database Admin
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
9,751
Location
BEE00
The answer is yes.

We can assign multiple SysID's and/or WACN's to a single trunked system, which are then assigned to each site.

Look at the JNCR example that Troy posted. You see a System ID List, with each of those ID's assigned to a site. There are numerous entries of RFSS 1, Site 1, however they have differing SysID's.
 

wa8pyr

Technischer Guru
Lead Database Admin
Joined
Sep 22, 2002
Messages
5,413
Location
Ohio
Oddball

This one is an oddball, even compared to Harris or Tait systems.

Can anyone confirm that the system is truly one single system, that it is networked, and that talkgroups can roam from one site to another?

Just shooting from the hip here, but do the participating local governments play nicely in the sandbox together when it comes to communications? It almost looks as though the system is actually comprised of a bunch of stand-alone systems which may be networked together; this would give each participating entity maximum control over their own destiny, and maximum control over what can roam to their site/system.

To the best of my knowledge, a master site can only host a single system ID. Normally, if you're creating a wide-area system like this, everybody shares the master site and limits access to their site/talkgroups/radio IDs by virtue of the security group settings in the master site. Costs less that way. However, this setup looks like everybody has their own master site which in effect means their own separate system.

If it's in fact a bunch of separate systems, we may have to list it as separate systems in the database, unless it can be confirmed that it's truly a single system.
 

nd5y

Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
9,321
Location
Wichita Falls, TX
All I know is what Unitrunker showed and there was no traffic at all when I was monitoring it.
Good luck on getting somebody in that area to confirm anything, otherwise the correct data would have been submitted already.
 

svfdchief

Newbie
Joined
Nov 28, 2006
Messages
3
Location
Sterling City, TX
This system has not been networked due to lack of funding. So each site is operational in Site Trunking and each site has its own system ID. I don't know when/if it will ever be connected to a switch. Concho Valley COG is the system licensee and it was originally intended to be a regional system. The site info listed in the database is correct for frequencies
 

mtindor

OH/WV DB Admin
Database Admin
Joined
Dec 5, 2006
Messages
8,670
Location
Carroll Co OH / EN90LN
This system has not been networked due to lack of funding. So each site is operational in Site Trunking and each site has its own system ID. I don't know when/if it will ever be connected to a switch. Concho Valley COG is the system licensee and it was originally intended to be a regional system. The site info listed in the database is correct for frequencies
Looks like everything current in the DB as of right now is directly off of an FCC license. Every frequency, even the FX1 frequencies (added as a site). No indication of a control channel. If it were in Site Trunking, there ought to be a control channel for each of those sites.

1-010 / 1-017 duplicated
1-008 / 1-016 duplicated
1-007 / 1-015 duplicated
1-002 / 1-014 duplicated
1-004 / 1-013 duplicated
1-003 / 1-012 duplicated
1-005 / 1-011 duplicated
1-001 listing FX1 frequencies

Again, it looks like somebody looked at two licenses, and then made up everything on the fly based upon the licenses. As i recall, only _confirmed_active_ sites are supposed to be listed in the DB and sites_with_no_location are not supposed to be in the DB.

Either that whole thing is cobbled together in the worst fashion, or that database entry doesn't even deserve to be seen by the public due to errors and omissions. Yowsa.

Mike

PS: Yep, I'm far far away from Texas, but this mess caught my attention so I'm chiming in.
 

wa8pyr

Technischer Guru
Lead Database Admin
Joined
Sep 22, 2002
Messages
5,413
Location
Ohio
This system has not been networked due to lack of funding. So each site is operational in Site Trunking and each site has its own system ID. I don't know when/if it will ever be connected to a switch. Concho Valley COG is the system licensee and it was originally intended to be a regional system. The site info listed in the database is correct for frequencies
OK, I'll have to give this some thought. . . .
 

IAmSixNine

Member
Feed Provider
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
2,044
Location
Dallas, TX
Looks like everything current in the DB as of right now is directly off of an FCC license. Every frequency, even the FX1 frequencies (added as a site). No indication of a control channel. If it were in Site Trunking, there ought to be a control channel for each of those sites.

1-010 / 1-017 duplicated
1-008 / 1-016 duplicated
1-007 / 1-015 duplicated
1-002 / 1-014 duplicated
1-004 / 1-013 duplicated
1-003 / 1-012 duplicated
1-005 / 1-011 duplicated
1-001 listing FX1 frequencies

Again, it looks like somebody looked at two licenses, and then made up everything on the fly based upon the licenses. As i recall, only _confirmed_active_ sites are supposed to be listed in the DB and sites_with_no_location are not supposed to be in the DB.

Either that whole thing is cobbled together in the worst fashion, or that database entry doesn't even deserve to be seen by the public due to errors and omissions. Yowsa.

Mike

PS: Yep, I'm far far away from Texas, but this mess caught my attention so I'm chiming in.
I and another person in the DFW area are trying to get a bogus DMR system out of the DB but not having much luck.
 

nd5y

Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
9,321
Location
Wichita Falls, TX
The site info listed in the database is correct for frequencies
I missed this part the other day...

This statement is wrong. The database is doesn't have all the frequencies. CVCOG has several 152 MHz paging licenses. Last week there were two active control channels on 152 MHz that are not in the database.
 

GTR8000

NY/NJ Database Guy
Database Admin
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
9,751
Location
BEE00
It was called Airtime communications.
Heres a link to us discussing it.
https://forums.radioreference.com/t...cations-system-dmr-questions.html#post2659151
Link to system
https://www.radioreference.com/apps/db/?sid=9000
But it looks like its been removed from the Dallas county page.
I dont want to hijack this thread.
That system was flagged as "Deleted", so no links to it will appear anywhere nor will software download it. It is still directly accessible if someone saved the URL, but for all intents and purposes, it's gone.
 

mikewazowski

Forums Manager/Global DB Admin
Staff member
Joined
Jun 26, 2001
Messages
11,881
Location
Central Ontario
OK, I'll have to give this some thought. . . .

If you check the submissions, you'll notice that the submitter confirmed the system wasn't on the air yet. Seems more like a candidate for the Wiki until a local can confirm it's on the air.
 

nd5y

Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
9,321
Location
Wichita Falls, TX
If you mean the submission I made for the CVCOG system the other day, how the hell was I receiving it on a scanner and getting info from Unitrunker if it's not on the air?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top