Rebanding in Sacramento or Roseville

Status
Not open for further replies.

NWtoSFO

Member
Joined
Dec 3, 2006
Messages
312
Location
Citrus Heights, CA
The RS800 will indeed pick up Rocklin PD and PCSO, just not very well where I work. I get each agency fine at my home in C. Heights. I seem to start losing RV's system as soon as I cross the city line, no matter which antenna I have, although I do like these overcast days ;) .
 

avtarsingh

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Nov 3, 2004
Messages
610
Location
Cyberspace
i dont get in roseville system very well at all where i am

but i have been meaning to look at the spectrum analyzer to see if nextel or other digital crap is hosing my receive

its always possible when all of the stuff hasnt been migrated away from the freqs they still share
 

crucialcolin

Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2008
Messages
176
i dont get in roseville system very well at all where i am

but i have been meaning to look at the spectrum analyzer to see if nextel or other digital crap is hosing my receive

its always possible when all of the stuff hasnt been migrated away from the freqs they still share
I would not be surprised especially if you are outside roseville?

Infact I happen to have a nextel phone myself...trying running one of those next to your scanner..lots of clicking interference ;)
 

Markinsac

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Nov 18, 2007
Messages
128
Location
Sacramento, CA
I would not be surprised especially if you are outside roseville?

Infact I happen to have a nextel phone myself...trying running one of those next to your scanner..lots of clicking interference ;)
It isn't just Nextel phones - just about any cell phone from the major companies will have an effect if placed next to a receiving radio - it is a form of desense. I can hear my ATT phone through the speaker of my scanner if I have it near it.

Remember, many cell phones still have the ability to use parts of the 800Mhz band, although it is usually secondary to the 1900Mhz band.

I do agree that picking up the Sacramento system in Roseville will be problematic - the nearest two towers in the new system would be Greenback or Gibson Park. Most units are going to use direct frequenices or mutual aid frequencies when out of their primary area. Additionally, by focusing the output of the towers into the primary coverage area, you reduce any possible harmonic or adjacent channel interference next door. I know that it might not be a full issue right now since Roseville has rebanded, but Sacramento will be doing it too in the future, so planning to avoid problems makes good relationships.
 

scannerboy02

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Nov 16, 2004
Messages
1,306
I do agree that picking up the Sacramento system in Roseville will be problematic
Why would this be?

Roseville was on the 866-868 frequencies before rebanding and I never had a issue with picking up the SRRCS in Roseville so why would that change when the SRRCS is rebanded?

the nearest two towers in the new system would be Greenback or Gibson Park
Will SRRCS not be rebanding the old and new towers?
 

Markinsac

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Nov 18, 2007
Messages
128
Location
Sacramento, CA
Why would this be?

Roseville was on the 866-868 frequencies before rebanding and I never had a issue with picking up the SRRCS in Roseville so why would that change when the SRRCS is rebanded?

Will SRRCS not be rebanding the old and new towers?
Let me re-phrase my comment from earlier - people who already have had issues with picking up signals probably will not see any changes. If you are receiving signals OK, then you either have a better location or a better reception array.

The Sacramento system is set up to efficiently serve the primary area. As such, the towers are going to be set up to radiate more of the signal into the coverage area, not outside.
 
Last edited:

avtarsingh

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Nov 3, 2004
Messages
610
Location
Cyberspace
as mark said - it depends on what sites are near you

i mentioned nextel because nextel has historically been the cause of most of the interference (but not the sole source)

i only mentioned nextel because i am in between 2 nextel sites so what might not have been a problem before MIGHT be a problem now

i am too lazy to get out the monitor just to see why i cant hear roseville on my handheld :)

i just listen to roseville (when i am trying to fall asleep ) on my outside antenna and works ok
 

Markinsac

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Nov 18, 2007
Messages
128
Location
Sacramento, CA
I had programmed my unit with control channels only for the new Roseville system, and a few days ago found that I couldn't receive anything - unit was searching for a control channel. I reprogrammed with all channels the next day, but it was on one of the identified control channels at that time. I put all the fequencies into my system.

Tonight, I was checking, and found that 852.3750 is also being used as a control channel. I've submitted a ticket in the database updates, but thought I'd mention it here as others might also be having problems.

I also found that the database page link has the correct new FCC license, but that the link takes you to a page with what appears to be the old frequencies. I noted that in the update ticket as well.
 

gmclam

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Sep 15, 2006
Messages
5,402
Location
Fair Oaks, CA
I seem to start losing RV's system as soon as I cross the city line, no matter which antenna I have...
You must be using a Uniden scanner. I'm not trying to put my brand against yours or anything like that, but I monitor a LOT of stuff in a very large area both from a base location as well as mobile. I get Roseville just fine from Fair Oaks (or farther) and it is now even better since being rebanded. I will say that reception varies depending on brand/model of scanner. The sensitivity on my PRO-92 is not as good as my PRO-95s or PSR-300.

Markinsac said:
I do agree that picking up the Sacramento system in Roseville will be problematic - the nearest two towers in the new system would be Greenback or Gibson Park.
If you were talking about the Sacramento City system, then I'd agree as the closest sites are south of the American River. But if you're having troubles picking up the Sacramento County sites (not including some dead spots) in Roseville, you have a problem.

Markinsac said:
Let me re-phrase my comment from earlier - people who already have had issues with picking up signals probably will not see any changes. If you are receiving signals OK, then you either have a better location or a better reception array.
Based on the improvement saw when Roseville rebanded, I totally disagree with this statement. Also, because these signals will not be sharing the exact same spectrum with Nextel/etc, our receivers will be better able to pick them up. The presence of other signals can desensitize reception.

Markinsac said:
I had programmed my unit with control channels only for the new Roseville system, and a few days ago found that I couldn't receive anything - unit was searching for a control channel. I reprogrammed with all channels the next day, but it was on one of the identified control channels at that time.
This is why I always program in ALL frequencies for a TRS, not just those listed as being control channels, especially when the system is new and/or less than 4 frequencies are listed as control channels on a MOT system.
 

scannerboy02

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Nov 16, 2004
Messages
1,306
I few things I found in the NAPCO Newsletter that may be worth discussion.

"Other successful agencies that have started or completed Rebanding work include City of Vacaville, Elk Grove Unified School District, and the City of Davis, including University of California, Davis radio system. City of Roseville’s Rebanding work is also starting to begin."

We know the City of Vacaville, Elk Grove Unified School District and the City of Roseville have rebanded. Anyone know if the Elk Grove Unified School District is still using the rebanded system or have they abandoned that system? I know they have TG's on the SRRCS. Can anyone confirm the status of the City of Davis and the University of California Davis systems? I am not able to pick up the City of Davis system and I don't get out that way very much but I do still get the University of California Davis on the old frequencies.

"In several counties, including Alameda, San Francisco, and Sacramento, the 800MHz State mutual aid repeaters will be crossbanded with both old and new frequencies through the entire Rebanding process."

Has anyone heard anything from Sacramento on the 800MHz State mutual aid repeaters? I have them in a old miscellaneous frequency scanner but have not heard anything, I have now programed them into my main 800MHz scanner and will keep an ear on them.
 

Sac916

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
1,400
Has anyone heard anything from Sacramento on the 800MHz State mutual aid repeaters? I have them in a old miscellaneous frequency scanner but have not heard anything, I have now programed them into my main 800MHz scanner and will keep an ear on them.


They are still around and the County Operator can turn on/off repeater sites.
Direct mode is always available though.

Some are available as back up in case of total SRRCS failure.
 

Markinsac

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Nov 18, 2007
Messages
128
Location
Sacramento, CA
If you were talking about the Sacramento City system, then I'd agree as the closest sites are south of the American River. But if you're having troubles picking up the Sacramento County sites (not including some dead spots) in Roseville, you have a problem.
We will differ on this - while systems MAY be set to overlap, many municipalities choose to direct most of the energy from their systems into their primary area.

Based on the improvement saw when Roseville rebanded, I totally disagree with this statement. Also, because these signals will not be sharing the exact same spectrum with Nextel/etc, our receivers will be better able to pick them up. The presence of other signals can desensitize reception.
Many radios in other bands will pick up spurious signals - my 450Mhz portable will often pick up the noise of a cell phone talking with the tower. I often know when I'm getting a incoming call based on what I hear on my radio earpiece.

This is why I always program in ALL frequencies for a TRS, not just those listed as being control channels, especially when the system is new and/or less than 4 frequencies are listed as control channels on a MOT system.
I chose NOT to do this originally as it was a new system - I only programmed them all in when I found that scanning wasn't working on the system. As such, I've found TWO new control channels - the Roseville system just changed control frequencies at 10PM local, and went to another new frequency - 852.5500. I've just submitted a ticket for a database update.

I don't usually program in all the frequencies for multiple reasons - one, I like to keep my channel count down (even though my unit will support 25,000 channels). Two, with the proper control channels programmed, the system will tell the radio what channel the radio needs to used based on the channel plan and offsets.

I know that we have differing opinions and approaches - neither is really wrong. I just choose to follow my own way, and I'll let others do the same. I don't begrudge other approaches, but I also don't want to be told that my way is wrong.
 

gmclam

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Sep 15, 2006
Messages
5,402
Location
Fair Oaks, CA
We will differ on this - while systems MAY be set to overlap, many municipalities choose to direct most of the energy from their systems into their primary area.
My point is that I have no problems picking up the Sacramento County sites from Roseville.

Many radios in other bands will pick up spurious signals
Yes they do. The better the radio, they better they are at filtering unselected bands.

I chose NOT to do this originally as it was a new system
I chose to program them all because it is a new system. When the system changed I was not in the area. When I came back and realized the change, I got the new frequencies from the DB. None of them at that time were marked as being control channels. By putting all of them in, I didn't miss anything like you did.

I don't usually program in all the frequencies for multiple reasons - one, I like to keep my channel count down (even though my unit will support 25,000 channels). Two, with the proper control channels programmed, the system will tell the radio what channel the radio needs to used based on the channel plan and offsets.
Most of the radios I am using only hold 1000 frequencies. And for the Sacramento frequencies I actually have all but the 4 known CCs locked out. But they are still in there for when I want to manually browse what is going on, or if there is a change to an undocumented CC. When less than 4 CCs have been ID'd in the DB, there is a better chance ANY of them could be the active CC, as you learned the hard way.
 

crucialcolin

Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2008
Messages
176
If you were talking about the Sacramento City system, then I'd agree as the closest sites are south of the American River. But if you're having troubles picking up the Sacramento County sites (not including some dead spots) in Roseville, you have a problem.
Funny you mention that I wish I separated my setup using a separate system for both Sac County & Sac City in my uniden bc246t instead of one mass SRRCS grouping. Sac County reception from Roseville for the works better and not to mention closer. Also when scanning it takes forever to go through all the talk groups.
 

gmclam

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Sep 15, 2006
Messages
5,402
Location
Fair Oaks, CA
Trnking 101

Funny you mention that I wish I separated my setup using a separate system for both Sac County & Sac City in my uniden bc246t instead of one mass SRRCS grouping. Sac County reception from Roseville for the works better and not to mention closer.
When I first programmed my scanners for the Sacramento systems, I jumped through all the hoops to program both systems in to the same bank. Sometime in late 2008 or early 2009 I decided to separate them to have better control over what I am monitoring.

For example; during the day, unless I am in the city, I don't care too much about the law enforcement traffic in the city of Sacramento. And since I am not near the city sites, I just don't scan them. In my county bank I usually have the city TGs turned off. Some traffic, such as fire tacs, are usually only on one of the two systems; but the way I am set up now I am better able to control what I hear.

Also when scanning it takes forever to go through all the talk groups.
TGs do not "scan" and do not work the same way that conventional frequencies do. As you know, to scan conventional frequencies, the scanner must stop and receive for a brief moment on each of them to see if there is a signal. I programmed my PRO-10s & PRO-77s to wait 125ms on each frequency (remember these are crystal radios). A scanner which scanns 100 channels a second will wait less than 10ms per frequency (it takes some time to switch to the next one).

With a TRS, the scanner sits on the control channel and decodes the data. When info about a TG is received, the scanner looks through your programmed list to see if you want to hear it (that is if you are in open or scan modes). If you are in closed or search modes, except in some cases, it will just track to that voice channel.

A longer TG list will simply make the scanner take longer to find the TG AFTER it has received corresponding data from the CC. This functionality is why the bank oriented scanners use sub-groups and it is a bad idea to program the same active control channel in to separate banks (and enable those banks at the same time), just for the ease of having a "hot key" to select TGs.
 

avtarsingh

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Nov 3, 2004
Messages
610
Location
Cyberspace
thats why i love uniden scanners and their temporary lock out feature

i can quickly lock out the stuff i dont want to hear for the moment

if i want them back i just turn the scanner off for a second and turn it back on and they are back in scan
 

crucialcolin

Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2008
Messages
176
When I first programmed my scanners for the Sacramento systems, I jumped through all the hoops to program both systems in to the same bank. Sometime in late 2008 or early 2009 I decided to separate them to have better control over what I am monitoring.

Some traffic, such as fire tacs, are usually only on one of the two systems; but the way I am set up now I am better able to control what I hear.
So I'm confused did you have to program both the County and City Frequency sites into both banks. I'm wondering if certain talk groups wont work in one bank like fire tacs having them separated. Of course the county talk groups would be under a county bank then city would be under a city bank. Hopefully the two systems don't overlap.

For example I'm wondering if a county talkgroup could be placed on a city freq thus it wont work properly in the county bank.
 

gmclam

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Sep 15, 2006
Messages
5,402
Location
Fair Oaks, CA
Sacramento TRS scanning

So I'm confused did you have to program both the County and City Frequency sites into both banks?
No. There are several ways you can program them. I originally had both sites programmed in the same bank. I did not like the 'randomness' of having the scanner decide which to get its signal from. It does not use something like strongest signal wins. So I separated them.

What I do now is put the city site frequencies in one bank and the county site frequencies in another bank. As mentioned previously, I don't monitor the city stuff too much unless I am in the city.

I'm wondering if certain talk groups wont work in one bank like fire tacs having them separated.
This is true. I've found that the dispatch channels (for both law enforcement and fire) are broadcast on both sites. But when it comes to other channels, that's not the case. The best example is city fire tac channels (B6 to B12), as they are usually only active on city sites. Remember it is a SmartZone system.

Of course the county talk groups would be under a county bank then city would be under a city bank. Hopefully the two systems don't overlap.
Originally these were two separate systems. A few years ago they reassigned all the TGs so that they do not overlap and intermix very well. This works better for users of the system too, as their radios can more easily roam w/o these type of issues.

For example I'm wondering if a county talkgroup could be placed on a city freq thus it won't work properly in the county bank.
The worse thing that happens is that you don't get reception. I remember a specific situation where I was monitoring Sac City PD via the county site. They switched their conversation to PD 2, and I did not hear it. When I turn on the city site, there they were.

On my scanners that have 150 TGs per bank, I have the TGs in each bank programmed identically. The same 150 TGs in the same order. The only thing I do is typically keep off the city PD sub-group on the county site, because it talks too much. On scanners that only hold 100 TGs (like the PRO-95s), I had to carefully align them with their respective site so that I have the same coverage.
 

dougr1252

Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2007
Messages
263
853.5500 is part of the system. 852.5500 is supposed to be a guard channel. Typo?

he Roseville system just changed control frequencies at 10PM local, and went to another new frequency - 852.5500. I've just submitted a ticket for a database update.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top