Pequannock Police DMR

Status
Not open for further replies.

RocketNJ

Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
955
Location
Pequannock, NJ
Put simply, DSD+ ignores the section of the header where RAS lives and goes on to decode the audio.
And DSD+ sees the voice call flag and starts decoding. The codec in the scanners (Uniden, Whistler) listen and when they se a stream of CRC errors it then says "yeah that is RAS" and decodes. I think UpMan had a write up on the Uniden Tech support forum on this site.

Since with RAS the header packet at beginning of transmission is variable the scanner cannot automatically ignore the RAS info and go on to decode. The Motorola radio on the other hand knows what to expect as far as the placement in the header and length of the RAS key so no problem there. You cannot decode the RAS key over the air. It is programmed into both the radio and repeater. Only a variable length CRC checksum is sent over the air.
 

RocketNJ

Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
955
Location
Pequannock, NJ
Just to finish up this thread, I verified with an officer of Company 2 that they use the DMR repeater for dispatch and Incident Command but use analog simplex fireground (channel 2) for units working at the fire. This is inline with NFPA and other recommendations. They are NOT using the DMR repeater for fireground at a working fire.
 

K2NEC

Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2017
Messages
1,602
I also talked to a firefighter on company 2 and he said that the department doesn't really like the new digital system. Oh well...
 

W2SJW

Senior Member
Moderator
Joined
Nov 22, 2001
Messages
3,237
Location
Northwest NJ
I looked at the updated data yesterday in the DB for fire - is that 100% correct that FD Response & FD Operations are BOTH sharing TS1 on separate TG's?

Seems like Operations should be on TS2 on that repeater. Has anyone noted any traffic on TS2 on that channel?
 

Phelanhome

Member
Feed Provider
Joined
Dec 25, 2015
Messages
39
Location
Pequannock Township NJ
You are both kind of correct. Fire ground is not normally used on working fires and fire ground is still digital. It is used more for drills and non-emergency operations. FD does not like digital because the pagers make a buzz saw sound after dispatch when everyone starts talking on digital. I listen to both PD and FD almost around the clock and can tell you how both department works when it comes to radio talk.
 
Joined
Jul 24, 2015
Messages
222
I looked at the updated data yesterday in the DB for fire - is that 100% correct that FD Response & FD Operations are BOTH sharing TS1 on separate TG's?

Seems like Operations should be on TS2 on that repeater. Has anyone noted any traffic on TS2 on that channel?
Yes, it appears that they share the same timeslot. It's very odd, but it appears that they can all hear each other, no matter which talkgroup is used. At least the FF's appear too, they always call dispatch on 3111.
 

K2NEC

Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2017
Messages
1,602
You are both kind of correct. Fire ground is not normally used on working fires and fire ground is still digital. It is used more for drills and non-emergency operations. FD does not like digital because the pagers make a buzz saw sound after dispatch when everyone starts talking on digital. I listen to both PD and FD almost around the clock and can tell you how both department works when it comes to radio talk.
No FD doesn't like digital because the coverage sucks and they don't like the "clarity" of digital.
 

Phelanhome

Member
Feed Provider
Joined
Dec 25, 2015
Messages
39
Location
Pequannock Township NJ
I have heard of some issues up the hill with digital. Different people say different things about the digital. Many are not happy that they can not listen after dispatch anymore and the pagers make a buzz saw sound when anyone is talking digital. Bottom line they are in a learning curve now.

But what would I know. I am not on the fire company.
 

K2NEC

Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2017
Messages
1,602
I wouldn't call it much of a learning curve if the users don't agree with what they are using. They need something to depend on and not crap out in the middle of a fire. A liability is what it is. If a firefighter presses their mandown they NEED to get to dispatch and not have to worry about their coverage if they are in range for dispatch to receive them or not.

"If it ain't broke don't fix it"
 

Alarmguy

Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
560
Location
Deep in the heart of Jersey
I wouldn't call it much of a learning curve if the users don't agree with what they are using. They need something to depend on and not crap out in the middle of a fire. A liability is what it is. If a firefighter presses their mandown they NEED to get to dispatch and not have to worry about their coverage if they are in range for dispatch to receive them or not.

"If it ain't broke don't fix it"
Yep kinda dumb to go DMR, when your county has a proven P25 Trunk System that is well designed and many county agencies use the system. Unlike Bergen Counties lousy farce of a trunk system that my towns EMS and PD are on.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
 

K2NEC

Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2017
Messages
1,602
Yep kinda dumb to go DMR, when your county has a proven P25 Trunk System that is well designed and many county agencies use the system. Unlike Bergen Counties lousy farce of a trunk system that my towns EMS and PD are on.
Or even NJICS
 
Joined
Jul 24, 2015
Messages
222
I don't think NJICS would have that great portable coverage in Pequannock, especially since the nearest site is several miles away. And the county system would work great, especially "up the hill" where a site is literally located several thousand feet away on a large water tower. At the very minimum it should have, and should still be considered a valid solution to the problem at hand. If Pequannock doesn't have them already, county would probably be more than happy to loan them a few portables to test out coverage.
 

NParkNJ

On the Road
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Dec 29, 2017
Messages
495
Location
Northern NJ
Forgive my un-knowledge with the Pequannock situation.

Someone please clarify for me with my 396xt(or analog scanner).

I can still hear dispatch? And they’ll continue to use their analog dispatch?

Only dispatch to a call? On scene, and say command terminated is DMR? Sorry guys, a little lost with this.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

K2NEC

Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2017
Messages
1,602
Forgive my un-knowledge with the Pequannock situation.

Someone please clarify for me with my 396xt(or analog scanner).

I can still hear dispatch? And they’ll continue to use their analog dispatch?

Only dispatch to a call? On scene, and say command terminated is DMR? Sorry guys, a little lost with this.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Analog is for dispatch only. All other comms are on digital.
 

rangers38

Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2008
Messages
179
Location
Morris County
Is anyone receiving transmissions from the updated Radio Reference/ Sentenial ??. I live less than 10 miles from the site, have a BCD536 with en external antenna line of site with Pequannock and not receiving anything. But- I downloaded from the Quick Import- Digital Frequency Search Site and can receive with that. The Sentinel does not allow you to view TGID's, Slots, when you download, just color code, so not sure when you import through that if everything is set correctly.
 
Last edited:

RadioDitch

Expatriate Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 24, 2010
Messages
2,660
Is anyone receiving transmissions from the updated Radio Reference/ Sentenial ??. I live less than 10 miles from the site, have a BCD536 with en external antenna line of site with Pequannock and not receiving anything. But- I downloaded from the Quick Import- Digital Frequency Search Site and can receive with that. The Sentinel does not allow you to view TGID's, Slots, when you download, just color code, so not sure when you import through that if everything is set correctly.
You have to manually enter each Pequannock frequency into Sentinel as a DMR One Channel. Sentinel will add it as a conventional frequency, which doesn't work properly. Uniden has yet to fix that. Also helps if you've purchased and validated the DMR firmware upgrade.
 

scan1000

Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2013
Messages
26
Can you recommend a inexpensive scanner that will hear DMR systems that are using RAS and not using RAS. I'm new to DMR and have searched around for towns using DMR that are within my range
and have found Rockaway and Hopatcong. From what I read Rockaway does not use RAS and Hopatcong does. One that receives slot1 and slot2 also as Hopatcong says both in database. I've read a Tytera MD380/390 does not do RAS. How about a RadioDity GD-77? My neighbor has a Whistle TRX-1 I could borrow that he says receives DMR. If I borrowed it would I program 2 conventional entries with same frequency one for slot1 and one for slot2? Thanks.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top