San Diego / Imperial Co Regional Communications System Update Thread

bryanhendrix

persistent
Joined
Feb 3, 2006
Messages
28
Location
Imperial County
What area are you located in? North is only useful north of the 78, west handles everything south of their and down into metro SD somewhat.

And UCSD Medical Center is on the south site, or are you trying to listen to the campus or Thorton? Are you on the stock antenna indoors or something?

Paul
Greetings Paul,

as for my location - I am unfortunately located within 100 feet of the 480 kilovolt? power transmission lines in Imperial County. I am approximately 3 miles from the T-Mobile tower that also has county radio service. The San Diego Imperial county radio waves transmitting on the tower known as Salton City. The Next Gen control channel for audio P25 is 856.1125 Mhz and not the frequency listed on the RR web site. As for which tower is useful for a particular area, this topic is tricky, however, to shine an example - Imp County Sheriff and the City of Brawley are usual radio traffic on Salton City transmitter tower. With that said, occasional traffic from Calexico appears over here at Salton. If the conversation is involved, long enough, a pursuit --- the tower is occupied with Calexico. Therefore, Imp County Sheriff radio traffic and Brawley radio traffic, and even Imp Cnty Fire radio traffic are sent to West Simul, Hendrix Peak, Black Mountain, Superstition Mountain , even though , the non Calexico units are geographically closer to the Salton City tower. Once that concept is understood, the p25 system and it's abilities with be an eye opener.

As for my UCSD facilities comment, I viewed the unit identifiers while radios were in use. The 6 digit id's helped me discover that the control channels for San Bernardino and the radios being used on the San Bernardino system are being received by my scanner.

I researched that Imperial County Fire Tac 6, Calexico Fire Tac 5, and, UCSD Facilities are being received - however - I'm receiving system 37 - San Bernardino and not Imperial County or UCSD.

I am kind of suspicious and thinking, if and when San Diego or Imperial actually start to use the radios on those talk groups -- -- -- will I receive garbled reception because of San Bernardino and San Diego Nex Gen fighting over a particular shared talk group ID or channel?

Kind of sad how the frequency allocation genius decide to allow two counties close together to operate a p25 system, p25 control channels, on the same frequencies. The North Simulcast for San Diego/Imperial and San Bernardino systems are fighting for air wave/transceiver space

as for the antenna - I purchased an outdoor antenna, but, have discovered my remtronix antenna works better than the roof mount IF I walk around the house looking for that receive all sweet spot.
 

bryanhendrix

persistent
Joined
Feb 3, 2006
Messages
28
Location
Imperial County
my previous post was either edited for being to wordy, or, this forum has a character limit

I will attempt to continue my new or unknown talk group I have encountered

Imp Cnty Fire talk group id 2841 - DEC 2841 / Hex B19 -- as for the label or title of this talk group, not sure if they consider it a tactical channel or a command channel. Radio traffic is sparse and not overheard by me with those folks using a channel descriptor.

Next new or unknown talk group or 'channel' used by S.D.G.E.

talk group i.d. of: 121 - DEC 121 / Hex 79
 

bryanhendrix

persistent
Joined
Feb 3, 2006
Messages
28
Location
Imperial County
continuing with imparting what I have discovered....

a channel used by Imp Cnty Fire, maybe others here in Imp County - - - a radio channel or talk group ID used for communication to the air ambulance. A channel referred to Imp Cnty Fire team members as 'ground to air". If and when REACH or MERCY AIR are inbound to a temporary landing zone, a 'LZ', the fire unit on the ground, communicates with the helicopter. So far, I've only overheard the station captains, fire chief, and assistant chief, have access to this channel and do the talking.

so, this 'channel' or talk group ID is:

911 - DEC 911 / HEX 38f

not sure if it should be added to the list of talk group ID with Imp Cnty Fire or added to the list for Imp Cnty Air Mutual Aid. I'll let you guys fight over that one

submission of information complete - have a nice day
 

inigo88

California DB Admin
Database Admin
Joined
Oct 31, 2004
Messages
1,821
Location
San Diego, CA
911 - DEC 911 / HEX 38f

not sure if it should be added to the list of talk group ID with Imp Cnty Fire or added to the list for Imp Cnty Air Mutual Aid. I'll let you guys fight over that one

submission of information complete - have a nice day
Bryan, it sounds like what you're describing is a talkgroup called Imperial County Medical Air ("IM M/AIR"), which is used for air to ground comms between medical helicopters and on scene fire dept resources at the LZ. That would mean the current version we have listed in the database is wrong. Can anyone else confirm the talkgroup changed with the switch to the new NextGen system? Based on your posts it sounds like quite a few of the Imperial County talkgroups are incorrect and need to be updated.

Finally please click "Submit" on the database page for the RCS Nextgen system when you have confirmed new talkgroups. Although we try to read and participate in the local sub-forums, that is the only formal way of tracking and working updates to the database. The forums are here to collaborate and discuss new changes, but the only way to make sure your new verified talkgroup info is seen by a db admin is to create a formal submission.
 

inigo88

California DB Admin
Database Admin
Joined
Oct 31, 2004
Messages
1,821
Location
San Diego, CA
I researched that Imperial County Fire Tac 6, Calexico Fire Tac 5, and, UCSD Facilities are being received - however - I'm receiving system 37 - San Bernardino and not Imperial County or UCSD.
It sounds to me like all those talkgroups actually belonged to the San Bernardino P25 system.

Compare San Diego RCS Nextgen:
Code:
2578 - Imperial County Fire Tac 6
2651 - Calexico Fire Tac 5
2643- UCSD Facilities South
...With San Bernardino P25:
Code:
2578 - Unknown?
2651 - SBD Sheriff DCC-7 (dispatch, encrypted)
2643 - SBD Sheriff DCC-5 (dispatch, encrypted)
I agree that you were definitely hearing San Bernardino P25. For future reference you can refer to the RFSS/site number (which is the "system 37 you refer to above" actually Site 1-037, the site NAC, or the WACN/System ID on the control channel to verify which system you are hearing.

I notice the site NAC is not in the database for either the San Diego-Imperial County Nextgen RCS Salton City site 1-056, or the San Bernardino Government Peak site 1-037. Based on other site NACs on the system, I suspect the site NAC for Salton City will start with "57" and the site NAC for Government Peak will start with "37".
 

bryanhendrix

persistent
Joined
Feb 3, 2006
Messages
28
Location
Imperial County
Bryan, it sounds like what you're describing is a talkgroup called Imperial County Medical Air ("IM M/AIR"), which is used for air to ground comms between medical helicopters and on scene fire dept resources at the LZ. That would mean the current version we have listed in the database is wrong. Can anyone else confirm the talkgroup changed with the switch to the new NextGen system? Based on your posts it sounds like quite a few of the Imperial County talkgroups are incorrect and need to be updated.

Finally please click "Submit" on the database page for the RCS Nextgen system when you have confirmed new talkgroups. Although we try to read and participate in the local sub-forums, that is the only formal way of tracking and working updates to the database. The forums are here to collaborate and discuss new changes, but the only way to make sure your new verified talkgroup info is seen by a db admin is to create a formal submission.
yes, copy that - and a new 'submission' was generated ... the item submitted was not specific to one talk group - the channel/talk group known as Imperial Med Air. It now inspires me to ask if this talk group is specific for Imperial, I would guess or assume a talk group was created/labeled/titled/allocated as 'San Diego Med Air'. I believe the talk group number for that entity is correct - due to San Diego County having more 'listeners' using his/her receiver-scanner if compared to the number of people residing in Imperial County and having a hobby of using a receiver/scanner.
 

bryanhendrix

persistent
Joined
Feb 3, 2006
Messages
28
Location
Imperial County
It sounds to me like all those talkgroups actually belonged to the San Bernardino P25 system.

Compare San Diego RCS Nextgen:
Code:
2578 - Imperial County Fire Tac 6
2651 - Calexico Fire Tac 5
2643- UCSD Facilities South
...With San Bernardino P25:
Code:
2578 - Unknown?
2651 - SBD Sheriff DCC-7 (dispatch, encrypted)
2643 - SBD Sheriff DCC-5 (dispatch, encrypted)
I agree that you were definitely hearing San Bernardino P25. For future reference you can refer to the RFSS/site number (which is the "system 37 you refer to above" actually Site 1-037, the site NAC, or the WACN/System ID on the control channel to verify which system you are hearing.

I notice the site NAC is not in the database for either the San Diego-Imperial County Nextgen RCS Salton City site 1-056, or the San Bernardino Government Peak site 1-037. Based on other site NACs on the system, I suspect the site NAC for Salton City will start with "57" and the site NAC for Government Peak will start with "37".
 

bryanhendrix

persistent
Joined
Feb 3, 2006
Messages
28
Location
Imperial County
yes, quite a few talk groups/channels are being received at my location. I have checked some, but, not all options on my BCD 436 hp to decipher what it is the scanner is receiving. Apparently, I am receiving the San Bernardino transmitter located at Spirit Mountain Nevada - 853.6875 Mhz. I'm also receiving San Bernardino transmitter at Turquoise Mountain - 853.8375 ... so, with San Ber County & the RCS NexGen transmitting on 853.6875 and 853.8375 ---- I am lucky? or, I'm slightly bummed due to having to move my scanner 3 inches left or right to get NexGen RCS stronger than San Ber County
 

bryanhendrix

persistent
Joined
Feb 3, 2006
Messages
28
Location
Imperial County
I thought that only confirmed IN USE talkgroups were going to be added to the NextGen database as they migrated yet the Del Mar Fire Dispatch, CMD and TAC talkgroups that haven't been used in (ever?) are in there. Can anyone confirm if they actually use any of them or is this just a dump from the old RCS database converted?
a direct answer to your direct question. Your question being: can anyone confirm if they actually use any of them or is this just a dump from the old RCS database converted.

answer: yes, one person in particular can give any and all talk group numbers - but - will not step forward and explain his decision as to why he has not done so. The radio reference site has a person create a user name and password. Once signed in - this senior member, this premium subscriber, or whatever label is given to a person can access the regular / non forum portion of R Reference dot com.

A radio systems manager, the 'all hail the master' , the one of many on a board of directors, the one person involved in deciding what agency has access, the one person that is part of the 'what talk group number should I create today for my NexGen RCS P25 phase 2 TDMA radio system' -- this person has made contributions on this 'forum' portion of the website.

This person knows about the formula for converting the old RCS to the new RCS. This person, or his minions, have taken the time to create talk groups for agencies that intentionally do not follow the 'multiply times 16' formula.

I know surmise/guess/assume/speculate that this person, his group of equal peers (the board of directors) do not like the idea of a device being created to 'listen in' on what is on the NexGen RCS System. The one person employed by a city,county,state - whatever agency - the one person is waking up everyday with disgust and slight hatred towards the police scanner that was created to monitor P25 Phase 1 and 2. Just besides themself with frustration and probably has a story or two, a real life event, as verbal ammunition to make radio scanners illegal if it becomes a court of law issue.

with the system transmitters being tied together to process data, the RCS NexGen is more or less one computer that tells all servers, all cpu's, all equipment at every transmitter site, every control channel ---- yes or no. Go or stop. Yep, one computer at a county emergency operations center can input commands into the entire system. This person and his/her computer - can create - change - delete a talk group in a moments notice. The radio talking on the system - a portable unit or a dash mount unit - is transmitting data and not voice. The voice is converted into data and into the airwaves it goes. This 'subscriber', this radio, can be blocked entirely from the system if the RCS NexGen cpu/servers know the radio's serial number/ imei/esn/etc../ so, once a radio is authorized/affiliated with the RCS NexGen, it can be unaffiliated/unauthorized just as fast.

talk about a command and control issue, a power trip issue, a hey look at me and what I can do issue ...

are only issues if the person using the radio operates the radio in a immature manner, operates the radio in an unprofessional manner

so, etiquette and respect while using the radio ////// 98 % of the employees with whatever the agency is they work for understand the radio is a tool to use, and improper use never occurs in his her gray matter.

ooops, long winded answer ....sorry
 

bryanhendrix

persistent
Joined
Feb 3, 2006
Messages
28
Location
Imperial County
I presented the facts, as I see fit. I formulate the opinion and facts based on reading various websites. being exposed to a few repeater vaults in the late 80's early 90's. Technology that evolves from a cpu that processes ones and zero's. I have an opinion, you have yours. I - and you, Joey C., have the ability to agree or disagree. I find that disagreement done amicably - while offering actual facts - is possible. You post a question , date of posting, from Feb 16,2020. Here it is, May 25,2020. In that time frame - I see no other input, attempt to answer your question. I chime in and you spit on me with your 'thanks but no thanks' .... and you're current age is? so, please post the correct answer to your question - because I missed it. Please present facts and correct me because I'm wrong. Or, just ignore me on this topic, let it blow in the wind. I also ask you start a conversation away from the forum to not give the cheerleaders a chance to pick sides and use the 'gang up like a pack' thinking - to intimidate me.
 

Anderegg

Enter text in this field
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Mar 7, 2010
Messages
2,218
Location
San Diego
Bryan, I think what he means is your response did not contain anything that the typical scanner listener coming onto RR can use to assist them in their hobby. Please don't get our thread locked :oops:
 

Mike_G_D

Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
1,092
Location
Vista, CA
1) I've always argued for the inclusion of some SysID select ability in consumer scanners; I never thought it would be that hard to implement and could really help in situations like this (out of area site taking over). I, too, had issues with this where I used to live and it was San Bernardino as well; one thing you might check out are the various software tools out there that can allow you to decode these details when connected to an appropriate radio or SDR;

2) In regards to system managers and their perceived power - I come from a lab engineering background and not a systems one BUT I would think, with the huge complexity and user volume in today's multi-city and sometimes more systems that having as much power to remotely handle issues such as lost or rogue subscriber units would be a very desirable tool! There's more to this but to go further it should not be in this thread and should better belong in the rants forums.
 

Anderegg

Enter text in this field
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Mar 7, 2010
Messages
2,218
Location
San Diego
1) I've always argued for the inclusion of some SysID select ability in consumer scanners; I never thought it would be that hard to implement and could really help in situations like this (out of area site taking over). I, too, had issues with this where I used to live and it was San Bernardino as well; one thing you might check out are the various software tools out there that can allow you to decode these details when connected to an appropriate radio or SDR;

2) In regards to system managers and their perceived power - I come from a lab engineering background and not a systems one BUT I would think, with the huge complexity and user volume in today's multi-city and sometimes more systems that having as much power to remotely handle issues such as lost or rogue subscriber units would be a very desirable tool! There's more to this but to go further it should not be in this thread and should better belong in the rants forums.

Isn't the site NAC function basically doing that on new Unidens? I leave it off ebcause a lot of sites don't have RRdb site NACs and I don't want to miss something because its ignoring a site.

Paul
 

Mike_G_D

Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
1,092
Location
Vista, CA
Isn't the site NAC function basically doing that on new Unidens? I leave it off ebcause a lot of sites don't have RRdb site NACs and I don't want to miss something because its ignoring a site.

Paul
Hi Paul,

Possibly - I have no experience with the newer Uniden radios. But even if the site NAC could be used for this I think the SysID would be better. In your case, you want to leave it off anyway so the SysID would be a better"shield" against non-area site interference.

-Mike
 
Top